Adjacent Units

GLK · Post by **GLK** » Fri Sep 29, 2000 11:51 pm

Have the masterminds of SPWAW ever considered using AI to control adjacent units?

These could include friendlys that might help out and enemy that definitely would not. This would be considerably more realistic than the game board being the edge of the world. People naturally exploit this ability to creep along a map edge knowing they cannot be observed or fired on from outside the play area.

Adjacent units include those in front and behind you. You could execute a passage of lines through an AI controlled unit which would then secure the line of departure. It is a little silly how one has to cover arbitrary hex locations from small infiltrating enemy units--an unrealistic distraction.

------------------

Wild Bill · Post by **Wild Bill** » Sat Sep 30, 2000 1:02 am

Pardon my density, GLK, but I read this twice and still don't understand what you are asking for.

Give me a specific example and show in that example where the need is. Sorry, I'm interested, but I can't seem to grasp the problem.

I'm sure the "masterminds" as you say will look into it. That is why it has become a great game already.

Wild Bill

------------------
In Arduis Fidelis
Wild Bill Wilder
Coordinator, Scenario Design
Matrix Games

GLK · Post by **GLK** » Sat Sep 30, 2000 1:38 am

Sorry for the lack of clarity.

What I am suggesting is that at the edges of the game area you might have computer controlled units, both friendly and enemy, rather than the abrupt edge of the map board.

Normally, units will function within boundaries provided by higher headquarters, with friendly units of some sort to the right and the left, even if it is only a light recon unit providing security to the flank. I am suggesting that this might be replicated with a map graphic for the boundary with computer controlled friendly and enemy units operating on the other side. You may normally fire across the boundary, but not maneuver across it. For simplicity's sake, you would want to minimize the amount of interaction the terrain and scenario is likely to generate. If you wanted to go a step farther, you could have a computer controlled friendly unit through which to conduct a forward passage of lines across a line of departure into an attack. I used to be a Command & Staff College instructor, so tell me if I lapse into jargon that it is not clear.

I realize this would be tough to do, but it would be very interesting. No one has done it before, to my knowledge. It would add quite a bit to the game. If you can manage to make the computer play as an opponent, surely it is capable of playing additional roles--at least in theory.

If SP were not an facinating and fun simulation already, I wouldn't bother with the suggestion. Keep up the good work.

------------------

Fuerte · Post by **Fuerte** » Sat Sep 30, 2000 1:44 am

I guess that this is indeed too tough to implement. This problem can be minimized by making the map big enough, so that you don't have any reason to go near the edges. I used the edges in Blenheim Blunder scenario like you described, I had a line of tanks on the edge, and had a safe back that way.

Major Ed · Post by **Major Ed** » Sat Sep 30, 2000 1:46 am

Sounds like GLK is a glutton for punishment.

I can see it now... Somewhere on the stepps of Russia a German Kampfgruppe is holding a defensive line by the skin of its teeth. Suddenly a message appears saying the unit on your left (right) flank has broken and the Russian hordes (how many hordes are in a platoon anyway?) will start appearing near the victory hexes in 2 turns.

What Do You Do?...What Do You Do?

Throws a whole other light on defensive planning, doesn't it?

GLK · Post by **GLK** » Sat Sep 30, 2000 1:52 am

I think it would be realitively easy to make sure that northing decisive happens in adjacent units zones. It would simply mean that if you tried to sneak along a map edge (unit boundary), you would be subject to observation and fire from across the boundary.

Paul Vebber · Post by **Paul Vebber** » Sat Sep 30, 2000 2:40 am

Actually there is nothing to prevent you from doing this now - at least in scenario design.

Use a bigger map than you intend and the scenario designe can put some AUX units on the flanks to each side and set them to AI control and instruct the player to leave them that way.

Don't know how well it would work, but in principle there is nothing stopping you from doing this...

Of course the player could "cheat" and take control..but the assuption is that you WANT it this way...

GLK · Post by **GLK** » Sat Sep 30, 2000 2:53 am

I'll try to make that work.

Do you suppose the same method might apply to a forward or rearward passage of lines?

------------------

Paul Vebber · Post by **Paul Vebber** » Sat Sep 30, 2000 3:07 am

In principle - but tougher on the player as the AI units and his units would get mixed up as the pass through occured... flanks are easier to keep segregated.

GLK · Post by **GLK** » Sun Oct 01, 2000 1:10 am

Is there anyway to add graphic control measures to the game map? I mean things like unit boudaries, phase lines, etc. This might be a worthwhile feature that would not be in the too-hard-to-do box.

------------------

Voriax · Post by **Voriax** » Sun Oct 01, 2000 1:29 am

Originally posted by Major Ed:
(how many hordes are in a platoon anyway?)

You got it all wrong

The question should be: How many companies there are in a horde?

Voriax
(just couldn't resist...)

bravo.john · Post by **bravo.john** » Sun Oct 01, 2000 2:17 pm

To prevent a player from using the flanking forces in the main battle, use immobile forces like mines and pillboxes. If the opposing player is willing to take the casualties and time it would take to break the flanking defenses, the other player should have to deal with it.
From time to time, a commander should have to worry about his flanking forces getting smashed and having to shift/split his main units to cover the objectives.

Large minefields are fun, in one of the Heroes of the Motherland scenarios (across the thin map), I had a line of strength 50 mine hexes running all the way across the map right in front of my defensive line. Talk about a bloodbath.

Kluckenbill · Post by **Kluckenbill** » Mon Oct 02, 2000 4:03 am

I like the idea of using static units to simulate adjacent units, the only oproblem would be for the freindly player to stay away from the edge too, or he would defeat the whole purpose. I have a couple of ideas that would be cool, but probably impossible with the existing game engine.

First, have a way to set up the AUX units so that the friendly player cannot take control of them and then have the AI control them to simulate the flanking units, or the static units in the passage of lines.

Second, in order to simulate phase lines, unit boundaries etc, we should be able to give a unit a series of sequential orders. EG, this platoon moves for 6 turns to its first objective, stays there until turn 9 then moves to its next objective, and so on. This would be a somewhat more realistic simulation of how smaller units function as part of a larger unit than the current command and control system. You could still change a units orders using C&C, but operhaps it should be more difficult.

Anyway I haven't put too much thought into the mechanisms because it would probably require additional programming.

Tombstone · Post by **Tombstone** » Mon Oct 02, 2000 10:30 pm

You can always make the edge hexes very difficult terrain. That would make them too slow to be worth it?

Tomo

BA Evans · Post by **BA Evans** » Mon Oct 02, 2000 11:11 pm

Why not just stick a recon team and a sniper near the board edges? If the enemy is racing down the edge, your recon team will spot them. You can then send units to intercept them.

BA Evans

Redleg · Post by **Redleg** » Mon Oct 02, 2000 11:23 pm

For scenarios and custom maps, I try to make the "top and bottom margin boogie" impractical by use of rough/impassible terrain.......