Welcome to the LnLP Forums and Resource Area

We have updated our forums to the latest version. If you had an account you should be able to log in and use it as before. If not please create an account and we look forward to having you as a member.



Jun 3, 2015
Things I love about the Panther paradigm from: RDOA -> HTTR -> COTA -> BFTB -> CO -> CO2:

* The dimension of time via the OODA loop became a palpable part of combat. You are often faced with earlier uncoordinated attacks versus larger scale coordinated later attacks. (remember during every hour the enemy is moving into position and entrenching)

* Having to sense the flow of battle. Rarely, did I ever wait for an attack to complete and regroup defensively. You must sense what is going on, and do your best to shave off hours and get inside the enemy's OODA loop.

* This is one of the most scalable series ever produced. Most games have a sweet spot for the number of units the player may choose to command. This game can easily accommodate 50 to 300 units (one commanded side on the map). In either case, the game can flow smoothly and not become a nightmare, since you just command at a different level. The main factors which impact scalability is that it is CPU bound, and this increases with the number of units.

* A genius decision by Paul Scobell the leading architect on the code. I think at the time Paul did it, the single core hyperthreaded PC was just hitting the marketplace. Paul separated out the map/UI thread from the main simulation loop. Most games when the CPU load becomes excessive end up being laggy and irritating. But by virtue of Paul's insight, you may smoothly examine the battle despite the fact that the clock has gotten very slow due to a high unit count or the AI initiating a mega-replan.

* At the time this series was conceived, many PC wargames very much look like board games where the computer was mainly acting as the referee and accountant. This was one of the early war games to show case what a computer could bring to the hobby and gaming in general.

Disclaimer: I was a strong advocate against TBS/HEX style play. A few years ago, a fellow Matrix beta sent me the manual for WITE2. I was surprisingly impressed. WITW/WITE2 were not simply WII chess on a PC. First, the level of modeling done by Gary is just as deep as what Panther has done. Also, the TBS aspect does not look like chess, but pseudo-WEGO by the week. Finally, there are many mechanisms that are closer to WEGO than TBS. Examples: The air missions which are more WEGO and on going doing both sides turns. Interdiction which may be planned during your turn, but fires during the enemy's turn. Finally, the calling in of reserves such that the non-moving defender is not so much a static sitting duck. Finally, if you love logistics Gary has modeled this in great detail, and the level of data analysis UI rivals what is found in commercial applications selling for 10-20X the price. (It took me almost 20 years, but I stopped being such a snob.)


Dave will persevere despite entropy popping up new bugs. I am sure the final result will be a master piece. Right now I use two displays: 32" 1080p/60 TV and my older 21" 4:3 1600x1200/60 panel. Since CO2 departed from the fixed screen layout of RDOA/HTTR/COTA/BFTB, I could see playing the game with floating windows on 4 displays or more. I built a new PC last year with a 13900KS and RTX 4090. The 4090 can easily drive up to 8 displays ... man, it would be the war room!!!
Oct 20, 2014
Livonia, MI (Detroit-area suburb)
Not sure if any of that is what is happening when Dave is coding this patch. As I understand it, he is actually trying to implement one set of changes in a focussed way, throughout all this time, but each time he tweaks it the thing ends up, relatively speaking, broken (in a different way each time) such that the game would not actually be 'better' if he released it then, but actually much worse. So he continues. That's been my understanding of his reports, at any rate.
That's pretty much the situation without the technical jargon.

As far as the new bug making it worse, it's probably not the situation.

The primary issue was the staging iof the attack -- headquarters and support units leading before the line combat units got into the position, sometimes with involved units taking circutous routes to the form up point. That has largely been solved.

The problem now is when two or more forces are coordinating on the same attack point, they don't step off at the same time, right now one lagging by as much as two hours from the other's start. That isn't good tactics if it's a couple of battalions involved, but may be acceptible if it were two brigades.

In all, that issue isn't a show stopper in terms of where the effort started, but is delaying the release of all the other improvements.

Dave 'Arjuna' O'Connor

Panther Games Designer
Jul 31, 2014
Canberra, Australia
SITREP Fri 5 Apr 24

Hi all,

It's been a big week. Not so much with the programming, although I have made progress with the slippage code. But the main news is that we have terminated our publishing agreement with Lock 'n Load and are now selling direct via Steam. I'm not going to go into why we have done this, suffice to say that we have done so amicably with David Heath. This forum will be archived and kept viewable on this site. But we are in the process of setting up a Discord server for Command Ops.

Command Ops Discord Server

Here is a link:

This will be the place to get the latest info on Command Ops.

It's still very raw. I have yet to work out how we create a bot to manage new members. If anyone out there has any experience with setting up a Discord server and would like to volunteer their expertise so we can develop the server please drop me a line. (dave [at]panthergames[dot]com)

All our Command Ops apps have been transferred on Steam. You're existing links to these on Steam should still work. Over time we will update these.