WITP II-The Red Line.

[Brady]

A big want of mine for WiTP II, is the Blank map. back in the 80's when I was lost in ASL, the best games were the Blank Map Games, My aponent hid everyhting, it was intimadating sitting their looking at that blank map but those were the best games.

Thoese dam red lines indicting whear the Air Strikes are comming from realy kinda iratate me, espichaly the ones showing the Cap origanation locations. the Recon Flights as well. A big hope for WiTP II is that these go away.

A big hope as well is, their are no more updates of enemy base expanshion, if you want to know how big a base is fly over it and take a picture.

[Andy Mac]

On this we do agree

[Brady]

It would be cool as well, if we did not always know we had been pictured, most recon flights (and those conducted at night) went compleatly unkown to the enemy.

[pauk]

not a bad idea (about air strikes)... however i would like to see indication from where they come (this indication doesn't to be correct 100 %).

This should be incoporated in CR, for example:

AFTER ACTION REPORTS FOR 10/13/42


Day Air attack on Yunan , at 38,32

Japanese aircraft
Ki-49 Helen x 20 approaching from south

No Japanese losses

Airbase hits 1
Airbase supply hits 1

Aircraft Attacking:
11 x Ki-49 Helen bombing at 9000 feet
9 x Ki-49 Helen bombing at 9000 feet

So you would have a hard guess at least (were they coming from Kweiyang, Hanoi, Kwelin...etc)

[Grotius]

Excellent idea. If you think about it, the game doesn't give us a "red line" about where a naval bombardment came from. It just appears out of nowhere, which is cool. I especially like Pauk's suggestion that the CR would say "enemy planes approaching from the south." And yeah, we shouldn't "see" enemy recon aircraft as often as we do.

While we're at it, I'd like a little less free intelligence about other enemy dispositions, too. E.g., the "airfield" icon appearing the moment your opponent moves in one aircraft; and of course the magic mines with transmitters. I also wish the "fog of war" extended to the daily summary of aircraft losses, perhaps the way it does with sunk ships.

I don't mind hearing about an enemy airfield growing in size, though; I would imagine that's rather "public" info that's not so easy to conceal. But even this info could perhaps arrive after a delay.

[witpqs]

ORIGINAL: Brady

Thoese dam red lines indicting whear the Air Strikes are comming from realy kinda iratate me, espichaly the ones showing the Cap origanation locations. the Recon Flights as well. A big hope for WiTP II is that these go away.

Yes! Absolutely right!

A big hope as well is, their are no more updates of enemy base expanshion, if you want to know how big a base is fly over it and take a picture.

'Maybe' on this one. I very much appreciate that some Intel is automatically integrated into the display. Let's face it, this game takes enough tiem already. Elminating player grunt work should be one big goal of WITP-2. Where I definately agree with you is: If there is no intel on it, don't show it! BTW, pre-war maps do constitute intel, so the map should not literally be blank until 'explored' game-style.

[pauk]

We shouldn't forget that removing air balance is a MUST too. If air balance is still visible by moving arrow on the base than all above mentioned suggestions are pointless.

[Grotius]

Agreed, Pauk. Not only do I dislike the free intel from air balance, but I find it sort of decreases "immersion" a bit. It reminds me that I'm playing a computer game rather than standing next to Mac and Nimitz arguing about what target to hit next...

[Damien Thorn]

This thread proposes the wrong 'solution' to a perceived problem. The "solution" (and I put that in quotes because I LIKE the lines) is to make sure the game is moddable enough so that players can remove the line as simply as changing the color define to make it transparent or, at worse, replacing the graphic file that the line is contained in to one that is identical without the line.
It would have been nice if WitP had this ability because someone made a mod to change the colors of land units for people who are red-green color-deficient. Unfortunately, he couldn't change the red line because it was built into to exe.
It is ironic that I want to see the red line but I have trouble seeing it over land (green) where as you don't want to see it but you can see it fine. Care to trade eyes? [8D]

Damien Thorn

[Mike Scholl]

ORIGINAL: Brady


A big want of mine for WiTP II, is the Blank map. back in the 80's when I was lost in ASL, the best games were the Blank Map Games, My aponent hid everyhting, it was intimadating sitting their looking at that blank map but those were the best games.

Thoese dam red lines indicting whear the Air Strikes are comming from realy kinda iratate me, espichaly the ones showing the Cap origanation locations. the Recon Flights as well. A big hope for WiTP II is that these go away.

A big hope as well is, their are no more updates of enemy base expanshion, if you want to know how big a base is fly over it and take a picture.

Agree 100%. One of the most interesting experiances I ever had with a game was my first NMGS "double blind moderated version" of SPI's WITP. Those huge expanses of empty map could really be intimidating. One thing I would add is that such a map should be "editable" so that as a player aquired information he could "post it" to his map as a reminder. Even be fun later on comparing your "intel picture" with post-game reality.

[pasternakski]

ORIGINAL: Mike Scholl
Agree 100%. One of the most interesting experiances I ever had with a game was my first NMGS "double blind moderated version" of SPI's WITP. Those huge expanses of empty map could really be intimidating. One thing I would add is that such a map should be "editable" so that as a player aquired information he could "post it" to his map as a reminder. Even be fun later on comparing your "intel picture" with post-game reality.

I, too, completely agree with Brady on this point.

But, you point out the core problem with "fog of war" in computer wargames. WitP is particularly susceptible to it. You frequently get some kind of graphic depiction of sightings and so on, but you never have the means of sitting back and putting together the comprehensive intel picture in a way that allows you to make sound decisions.

I know you can put a big old map on the wall, cover it with Plexiglas, buy yourself some grease pencils, and go to town, but I don't think that's what we all were after when we decided that computers were going to make our gaming more fun because less work and physical components and space would be needed.

Somebody forgot to mention that we would be gazing into that miniature window on the game's reality known as a "monitor." Further, little effort has been expended by designers on going beyond "okay, your plane saw what the crew thought were these ships at this approximate location." Is anyone other than me disgusted with the "radio, raise command. We've spotted Heinie Manush" way of telling you whether enemy carriers or battleships are apparently present somewhere? Besides, you hear that after the phase has moved on three or four units, so you can never be sure what in the world or where in the world it was.

I can't think that there is an area of computer wargame design that has suffered more neglect than AI, but comprehensive presentation of intelligence information has to come pretty close.

[Mike Scholl]

Would be a nice feature if your "intel" data would show up on the screen (report that the 55 Division is in Bangkok would put a 55th Division icon there on the map...., which could gradually fade away unless "reinforced" by additional spotting data. Ought to be some means of implementing a feature like this.., at least if WITP II comes into being.

[juliet7bravo]

xxx

[rtrapasso]

ORIGINAL: Brady


It would be cool as well, if we did not always know we had been pictured, most recon flights (and those conducted at night) went compleatly unkown to the enemy.

i agree that there is generally too much detail given, but at least some of it is warranted. Both sides had human intel that supplied a lot more information than we like to think - and there was info supplied by interviewing neutrals, spies, captured documents, and signals intel. This is SUPPOSED to be modeled in WITP (according to some, anyway). But to know exactly what air base the planes raided from is a bit much - until maybe you might get intel from a pilot that was shot down, or details from the plane wreck.

WITP would have to somehow model this to get the details right (x percent chance of getting intel from a wreck, y percent from a captured pilot, z percent chance that some scout aircraft backtracks the enemy units (it happened more than once).)

At least one time in the war, the Japanese managed to construct a hidden airbase, and they conducted one good raid from it. It was then immediately bombed to oblivion, but hey, at least the chance of something like this should be possible in the game.[8D]

[saj42]

While we're on this subject, how about, during air combat animations, we DON'T get free intel on the squadron/chutai involved[:@]

With FOW on its a big give away when you can tell exactly how many Jap CVs are attacking from an unscouted KB, by the air unit names. PLEASE amend the text displayed.

[saj42]

ORIGINAL: juliet7bravo

Or have a pull down intelligence menu that (amongst other things) has a map you can put stickies on and annotate. And a enemy OOB showing what your radio intercepts have indicated and recon has shown.

You know, all that "strategy" type stuff...

Just take Bodhi's excellent work as a starting point and incorporate it into WITP II - but take it to the next level

[AirGriff]

I hate to sound like a softy, but this game is hard enough and detailed enough that I really don't feel like spending hours upon hours sending repetitive recon missions out to see if every little Buna still has aircraft parked there. I kind of like to look at it as those kinds of recon missions/intel gathering are built in. If you want more than cursory info, you gotta dedicate a bona fide recon mission for it. I know, I know, it's not realistic, but it sure saves a lot of mouse clicking and micromanaging that would otherwise take a lot of fun out of the game.

I do see the point about the red line thing, though.

[Mike Scholl]

ORIGINAL: AirGriff

I hate to sound like a softy, but this game is hard enough and detailed enough that I really don't feel like spending hours upon hours sending repetitive recon missions out to see if every little Buna still has aircraft parked there. I kind of like to look at it as those kinds of recon missions/intel gathering are built in. If you want more than cursory info, you gotta dedicate a bona fide recon mission for it. I know, I know, it's not realistic, but it sure saves a lot of mouse clicking and micromanaging that would otherwise take a lot of fun out of the game.

Shouldn't be necessary..., once a week and allowed to repeat if the weather was poor should be more than adaquate. Though idealy it would be nice to break "reccon" squadrons into 3 plane elements which could be more or less permanantly assigned to a single target. Watching 30 or 40 A/C perform the exact same "reccon" mission is boring and silly.

[Sonny]

But recon planes only recon the hex thay are told to recon. You get no info on the 4 other bases they pass over on their way to and back from the appointed hex.

[witpqs]

If you don't give the recon group a target - leave it as commander's discretion - they will fly missions against various bases. In fact it seems like they send a plane along with most bombing missions run from the same base. I can't be sure, but I think they might recon more than one enemy base per turn this way.