WMD's?

[Marines]

Does anyone have any info on how tactical nuclear and chemical weapons will be implemented in the game as well as will there be short/long term effects i.e. troops and armor will have to go around if they have no NBC protection.

"Well I actually voted for it before I didn't vote for it."

John Kerry on his no vote for increased funding for troops in Iraq to include body armor.

[Greyshaft]

ORIGINAL: Marines
Does anyone have any info on how tactical nuclear and chemical weapons will be implemented in the game as well as will there be short/long term effects i.e. troops and armor will have to go around if they have no NBC protection.

Well yes I do... so does raydude, pkpowers & the other testers but you know that only official Matrix types (RobertC, BartK etc) can release details like that. You really need to address those questions directly to them. Us poor betatesters are kept locked in a Pentium and fed through the floppy drive slot. Our discussion privileges regarding this game were revoked a long time ago [:(]

(But I can tell you its a great game [:)])

[JudgeDredd]

ORIGINAL: Greyshaft

ORIGINAL: Marines
Does anyone have any info on how tactical nuclear and chemical weapons will be implemented in the game as well as will there be short/long term effects i.e. troops and armor will have to go around if they have no NBC protection.

Well yes I do... so does raydude, pkpowers & the other testers but you know that only official Matrix types (RobertC, BartK etc) can release details like that. You really need to address those questions directly to them. Us poor betatesters are kept locked in a Pentium and fed through the floppy drive slot. Our discussion privileges regarding this game were revoked a long time ago [:(]

(But I can tell you its a great game [:)])

Yeah - it sounds really painful having to play this game light years before anyone else!

I only asked for a few screenshots - you get the full product!!

[Catgh_MatrixForum]

Hey, we are not all locked into a Pentinum, some of us are locked inside an AMD. [:)]

[Greyshaft]

ORIGINAL: Catgh

Hey, we are not all locked into a Pentinum, some of us are locked inside an AMD. [:)]

Is that you Catgh? <uh... I can't see through this CD-Rom slot> hey can you slide a peanut-butter sandwich through this USB port? Bart didn't feed me last time he came into this Server room... something about Robert not liking that last bug I found...

[IronManBeta]

ORIGINAL: Marines

Does anyone have any info on how tactical nuclear and chemical weapons will be implemented in the game as well as will there be short/long term effects i.e. troops and armor will have to go around if they have no NBC protection.

"Well I actually voted for it before I didn't vote for it."

John Kerry on his no vote for increased funding for troops in Iraq to include body armor.

The game is typically 12 hours max and played on a 20 km x 15 km map. That sets some of the basic criteria for what kinds of nuclear weapons should be in the game. These are my notes:

"I know that many artillery / air / unconventional weapons systems were capable of nuclear delivery but in game terms one is pretty much as good as another, and I don't necessarily want them all to have it all the time. Accordingly I have somewhat arbitrarily picked the NATO Lance surface-to-surface missile (SSM) and the WP Frog-7 and SS-21 (both SSM) to be the flag bearers for this particular capability. If you have either of these weapons systems in the game then you have nuclear weapons and permission to use them, otherwise you do not. It costs a flat 75 victory points (deducted from your starting VP handicap) each time a nuclear weapon is used.

Ordering a nuclear strike is functionally the same as ordering an artillery barrage. The Waypoint / TRP Inspector is invoked afterwards to fine tune the exact arrival time.

A nuclear event is resolved as a series of individual attacks against all units caught within the blast range. Most nuclear warheads have a yield that can be set within wide limits at time of launch. For the purposes of this game we are assuming approximately a 10kt yield with a 1 km blast radius - but that is pretty arbitrary. All units at ground zero will be eliminated and that nearly all in the surrounding 8 locations will also be eliminated depending on what they are and what their posture is. Those at a range of 2 will suffer perhaps 50% depending on the situation. Survivor morale worsens by 3 and fatigue by 1. All bridges, smoke clouds, minefields and chemical contamination within the blast zone will be destroyed / dispersed. The ground will be contaminated for the rest of the game and will cost each unit one morale point to traverse each location. Units (other than helicopters) without NBC capability will also lose 10% strength per location traversed. "

Because of the VP cost, carpetting the enemy with nuclear strikes won't actually win any of the games for you. If more than 75 VPs worth of targets (75 steps / vehicles within lethal range) concentrate though in a location or two then it can be devastating. This forces the players to keep their forces spread out more than they otherwise would. When they do, the nukes stay out of play. This is a fairly realistic expectation from what I have read....


Artillery chemical attack is also allowed since gas rounds are just another type of artillery munition to be used. Their effect is to (mission) kill 50% of all non-NBC capable steps in the impact zone, degrade the morale of the survivors by two and fatigue by one. Chemical effects can persist for a little while (in this game anyway) and there is a 15% chance of dispersal every 5 minutes or so. Until it disperses, every unit that wanders into the location will suffer a 'gas attack' as described above. Helicopter units flying through the location are exempted.

In practice darn near all the units in 1989 had NBC protection and I have long since stopped using gas when I play the game. Maybe I am missing a bet, but conventional HE (automatically spiced up with ICM depending on the nationality) is usually more effective against the guys you really want to get.

Hope this answers your question.

Note to playtesters: My recollection of the NDA is that you are indeed allowed to discuss this sort of thing to your heart's content. The only real prohibition was against trash talking the game outright. You are free to discuss what it looks like and how it plays and some of the design issues we have talked about elsewhere if you like. Oh, and you are not allowed to have an opinion on when it will ship - that is up to David and Bart and they guard that perogative jealously! Even I am not allowed to have an opinion - David shot me three times last time I opened my mouth!!!

Cheers, Rob.

[byron13]

Right. So you playtesters start talking . . . without trashing the game.

[Greyshaft]

I'm currently writing a walkthrough of the first Tutorial. If it's OK with the Powers-that-Be (as opposed to the Powers-PK) then I'll post that walkthrough here in about a week

aaaargh! I gave a deadline!!! Nooooooooo...

[Oleg Mastruko]

ORIGINAL: Greyshaft

I'm currently writing a walkthrough of the first Tutorial. If it's OK with the Powers-that-Be (as opposed to the Powers-PK) then I'll post that walkthrough here in about a week

aaaargh! I gave a deadline!!! Nooooooooo...

Yes!

Please give us walkthrough! From time to time I occasionally visit forums of "games in development" at Matrix and I noticed two things:

a) Of all Matrix games currently in beta FPG interests me the most (except for Grigsby projects WITP and WAW) as I'd love to see good WW3 wargame after a loooong time (my first computer wargame was Theatre Europe on C=64)

b) Of all Matrix games currently in development - FPG is the one I understand the least. Judging from screenshots and very scarce info on this forum and FPG website, I don't have the slightest idea as to what kind of game is this going to be. Most of the other Matrix games are pretty well explained on their respective sites and forums, and it's easy to get the "feel" of any particular game. Not so for FPG which remains complete mystery for me.

So bring it on!

Oleg

[IronDuke_slith]

ORIGINAL: RobertCrandall

ORIGINAL: Marines

Does anyone have any info on how tactical nuclear and chemical weapons will be implemented in the game as well as will there be short/long term effects i.e. troops and armor will have to go around if they have no NBC protection.

"Well I actually voted for it before I didn't vote for it."

John Kerry on his no vote for increased funding for troops in Iraq to include body armor.

The game is typically 12 hours max and played on a 20 km x 15 km map. That sets some of the basic criteria for what kinds of nuclear weapons should be in the game. These are my notes:

"I know that many artillery / air / unconventional weapons systems were capable of nuclear delivery but in game terms one is pretty much as good as another, and I don't necessarily want them all to have it all the time. Accordingly I have somewhat arbitrarily picked the NATO Lance surface-to-surface missile (SSM) and the WP Frog-7 and SS-21 (both SSM) to be the flag bearers for this particular capability. If you have either of these weapons systems in the game then you have nuclear weapons and permission to use them, otherwise you do not. It costs a flat 75 victory points (deducted from your starting VP handicap) each time a nuclear weapon is used.

Ordering a nuclear strike is functionally the same as ordering an artillery barrage. The Waypoint / TRP Inspector is invoked afterwards to fine tune the exact arrival time.

A nuclear event is resolved as a series of individual attacks against all units caught within the blast range. Most nuclear warheads have a yield that can be set within wide limits at time of launch. For the purposes of this game we are assuming approximately a 10kt yield with a 1 km blast radius - but that is pretty arbitrary. All units at ground zero will be eliminated and that nearly all in the surrounding 8 locations will also be eliminated depending on what they are and what their posture is. Those at a range of 2 will suffer perhaps 50% depending on the situation. Survivor morale worsens by 3 and fatigue by 1. All bridges, smoke clouds, minefields and chemical contamination within the blast zone will be destroyed / dispersed. The ground will be contaminated for the rest of the game and will cost each unit one morale point to traverse each location. Units (other than helicopters) without NBC capability will also lose 10% strength per location traversed. "

Because of the VP cost, carpetting the enemy with nuclear strikes won't actually win any of the games for you. If more than 75 VPs worth of targets (75 steps / vehicles within lethal range) concentrate though in a location or two then it can be devastating. This forces the players to keep their forces spread out more than they otherwise would. When they do, the nukes stay out of play. This is a fairly realistic expectation from what I have read....


Artillery chemical attack is also allowed since gas rounds are just another type of artillery munition to be used. Their effect is to (mission) kill 50% of all non-NBC capable steps in the impact zone, degrade the morale of the survivors by two and fatigue by one. Chemical effects can persist for a little while (in this game anyway) and there is a 15% chance of dispersal every 5 minutes or so. Until it disperses, every unit that wanders into the location will suffer a 'gas attack' as described above. Helicopter units flying through the location are exempted.

In practice darn near all the units in 1989 had NBC protection and I have long since stopped using gas when I play the game. Maybe I am missing a bet, but conventional HE (automatically spiced up with ICM depending on the nationality) is usually more effective against the guys you really want to get.

Hope this answers your question.

Note to playtesters: My recollection of the NDA is that you are indeed allowed to discuss this sort of thing to your heart's content. The only real prohibition was against trash talking the game outright. You are free to discuss what it looks like and how it plays and some of the design issues we have talked about elsewhere if you like. Oh, and you are not allowed to have an opinion on when it will ship - that is up to David and Bart and they guard that perogative jealously! Even I am not allowed to have an opinion - David shot me three times last time I opened my mouth!!!

Cheers, Rob.

Rob,
I presume nuclear weapons will be scenario specific? Ever since a bad experience with a TOAW scenario, I've tended to shy away from scenarios with Nukes. Particularly at your scale, I agree with your making their use prohibitive for the player. I'm sure some players will want to have them, but I've never seen the point to be honest. The heart of the game will presumably be manouevre and combat, and I always find nukes a bit easy, and too much of a leveller.

Best of luck with the final weeks of development, testing and everything else that goes into one of these things. I look forward to the walkthrough, as well.

Regards,
Ironduke

[Greyshaft]

Question to Robert:
Is it OK to post the Walkthrough with screencaptures ? It will be pretty confusing unless there is a map to go with the commentary.