This is just an attempt at an explanation.
For me, and others, large scenarios with hundreds and hundreds of units are a pain. For others it's sheer delight. But for those who don't like it, why?
This is my thought. I can't stand micromanaging an entire battalion. It takes forever to go through one turn. Hey, it takes me forever just to do a turn in Elbe River of The Victors campaign. But I have just so many units there and I am really loving the thought process at that scale.
I think the correlating truth "in reality" - always such a touchy, but interesting subject - is that no successful battalion leader micromanages his command. It just can't be done. "2nd Lt, get 3rd squad over there, and place the mortar crew over there." No way. That is what delegation is for; hence, the entire staff of commanders from COs down to NCOs. And so, I think personally my desire for battles that are more manageable on a company or company+ level stem from that.
Now I know someone will make an argument against this, but I just wanted to state my thoughts on this. Having gotten out of ROTC early, I am interested to hear what current and former US Army personnel have to say on this, please.
Why some don't like LARGE scenarios
Moderator: MOD_SPWaW
-
generalrichmond
- Posts: 177
- Joined: Mon Oct 15, 2001 8:00 am
- Location: richmond, va
- Contact:
-
RichardTheFirst
- Posts: 460
- Joined: Wed Oct 17, 2001 8:00 am
- Location: Algés, Lisbon - Portugal
- Contact:
Well, I wasn't in the US Army, not even in the Portuguese Army and I'm just the opposite: I love big scenarios and micromanagement. This world would be a bore if we all have the same tastes.
But I think SPWaW have all the tools for those who like to delegate tasks and assume the role of the commander (I guess I prefer the role of god <img src="biggrin.gif" border="0"> ): Command and Control and Waypoints are just some of those.
"Vini, vidi, vinci" - Iulius Cæsar
But I think SPWaW have all the tools for those who like to delegate tasks and assume the role of the commander (I guess I prefer the role of god <img src="biggrin.gif" border="0"> ): Command and Control and Waypoints are just some of those.
"Vini, vidi, vinci" - Iulius Cæsar
-
generalrichmond
- Posts: 177
- Joined: Mon Oct 15, 2001 8:00 am
- Location: richmond, va
- Contact:
I tend to like the big scenarios, and here is why. if the units are few, you fight part of a larger battle in a 'bubble'. you can often run around the flanks to the rear of an enemy with impunity, and know that - with play balance - what the forces are ahead of time and how to aviod them.
If the entire operation being played is on company scale, ie. a commando raid against a bridge, then i like that scale. But those operations weren't common in ww2.
So, i like lots of units so a defense can stretch from map edge to map edge, and have depth to it. That way, i know the attack can't be dumbed down by going for the flanks. You'll find in the battles i am building for the GPW, that even though there are a lot of units in play, most of the real action is in one sector. Which sector that is, or whether what is happening in the first ten turns is part of it or merely a feint, will be for me to know and you to find out. <img src="smile.gif" border="0">
If the entire operation being played is on company scale, ie. a commando raid against a bridge, then i like that scale. But those operations weren't common in ww2.
So, i like lots of units so a defense can stretch from map edge to map edge, and have depth to it. That way, i know the attack can't be dumbed down by going for the flanks. You'll find in the battles i am building for the GPW, that even though there are a lot of units in play, most of the real action is in one sector. Which sector that is, or whether what is happening in the first ten turns is part of it or merely a feint, will be for me to know and you to find out. <img src="smile.gif" border="0">
Unconventional war requires unconventional thought
-
Gen.Hoepner
- Posts: 3636
- Joined: Tue Sep 04, 2001 8:00 am
- Location: italy
I like them both,the large and the small ones,for different reasons,even if i agree that in a scen with 100 or plus units the time wasted is too much(it's never wasted if u have fun,but anyway....).
But in the large scen u can divide your forces in 2 or 3 groups with different aims....one covers the flank,the other takes that hill,while the armored one makes a deep penetration!!!That's defenetly cool,but to do that in the right way the best should be to play something like a cooperative scenario(like my friend Ruxius uses to call it)where you lead a company,or something bigger and tour friend leads the other group under the same flag!!!That's gonna be awesome!!!I never tried that but we're managing to do it in few weeks!!
But in the large scen u can divide your forces in 2 or 3 groups with different aims....one covers the flank,the other takes that hill,while the armored one makes a deep penetration!!!That's defenetly cool,but to do that in the right way the best should be to play something like a cooperative scenario(like my friend Ruxius uses to call it)where you lead a company,or something bigger and tour friend leads the other group under the same flag!!!That's gonna be awesome!!!I never tried that but we're managing to do it in few weeks!!
Interesting reading here, too. Great stuff.
Biggies are very, very tough and time-consuming to test. Wow!
You lovers of large battles will be pleased to know that I just tested a great battle by Warrior entitled "Taskforce Butler". I won't tell you anything about it except when it shows up at the Raider or Arsenal site, grab it. It gave me 3 hours of gaming pleasure.
Biggies are very, very tough and time-consuming to test. Wow!
You lovers of large battles will be pleased to know that I just tested a great battle by Warrior entitled "Taskforce Butler". I won't tell you anything about it except when it shows up at the Raider or Arsenal site, grab it. It gave me 3 hours of gaming pleasure.
Well, US Army doctrine is that the commander fights two levels down--although this is often misunderstood. What he actually does is commands one level down and manages two levels down.
For example, a Task Force/Battalion Commander (TF Cdr) will actively command companies and manage platoons (location, activity, status, strength, etc.)
For instance, if Delta Company is getting it's butt kicked (not an unusual occurance in my old battalion), the TF Cdr could tell Alpha Company to send a tank platoon to reinforce Delta--he would not (actually, should not--the commander can actually do about anything he likes) tell Alpha Company to send Delta 3 M1A1 tanks, 2 M2 IFVs, and an infantry squad with 4 Javelin ATGMs.
The Bn Cdr could also tell Delta that he wants a tank platoon to cover the left flank--but it is (or, again, should be) up to the Delta Cdr which tank platoon he puts there--the new one from Alpha or one he already controls.
This all breaks down a little with support elements which often are managed at a lower level since you generally have so few of them.
------------------------------------------------
Another concept is 'span of control'. A person can only control a limited number of elements in combat--generally, about 2-5.
The US Army is fairly loose about this while the USMC is fairly strict.
In the USMC a Fireteam Leader controls three men, a Squad Leader controls three Fire Teams, a Platoon Leader controls three squads, a Company Commander controls three platoons, a Battalion Commander controls three companies, etc. Again, support elements make this a bit more complicated, but the general theory is sound.
------------------------------------------------
How does all this apply to SPWAW? Well, your guess is as good as mine. <img src="rolleyes.gif" border="0">
Generally, turn-based wargames make it easy to avoid the problems of micromanaging all available elements and eliminates the span of control problems.
With the scale of SPWAW (individual vehicles and infantry squads) the most real world option would be a single battalion of no more than five companies with C&C turned on.
However, having said that let me make a very important point:
We play games for fun--play the game however you like it !!!
For example, a Task Force/Battalion Commander (TF Cdr) will actively command companies and manage platoons (location, activity, status, strength, etc.)
For instance, if Delta Company is getting it's butt kicked (not an unusual occurance in my old battalion), the TF Cdr could tell Alpha Company to send a tank platoon to reinforce Delta--he would not (actually, should not--the commander can actually do about anything he likes) tell Alpha Company to send Delta 3 M1A1 tanks, 2 M2 IFVs, and an infantry squad with 4 Javelin ATGMs.
The Bn Cdr could also tell Delta that he wants a tank platoon to cover the left flank--but it is (or, again, should be) up to the Delta Cdr which tank platoon he puts there--the new one from Alpha or one he already controls.
This all breaks down a little with support elements which often are managed at a lower level since you generally have so few of them.
------------------------------------------------
Another concept is 'span of control'. A person can only control a limited number of elements in combat--generally, about 2-5.
The US Army is fairly loose about this while the USMC is fairly strict.
In the USMC a Fireteam Leader controls three men, a Squad Leader controls three Fire Teams, a Platoon Leader controls three squads, a Company Commander controls three platoons, a Battalion Commander controls three companies, etc. Again, support elements make this a bit more complicated, but the general theory is sound.
------------------------------------------------
How does all this apply to SPWAW? Well, your guess is as good as mine. <img src="rolleyes.gif" border="0">
Generally, turn-based wargames make it easy to avoid the problems of micromanaging all available elements and eliminates the span of control problems.
With the scale of SPWAW (individual vehicles and infantry squads) the most real world option would be a single battalion of no more than five companies with C&C turned on.
However, having said that let me make a very important point:
We play games for fun--play the game however you like it !!!
A66
1st MRB
1st MRB
Most scenarios have some sort of _general_ description for the size of the units. Maybe we could formalize a system? With a MC it might be different because it's a series of scenarios put together at once. But even then, IIRC, if you choose a small core force, the battles themselves will be smaller.
ZoomBoy
Developing a iso-tile 2D RPG with skills, weapons, and adventure. See my old Hex-Tile RPG GAME, character editor, diary, 3D Art resources at Check out my web-site
ZoomBoy
Developing a iso-tile 2D RPG with skills, weapons, and adventure. See my old Hex-Tile RPG GAME, character editor, diary, 3D Art resources at Check out my web-site
-
RockinHarry
- Posts: 2344
- Joined: Thu Jan 18, 2001 10:00 am
- Location: Germany
- Contact:
Actually I like really big battles (although my PI200 doesn´t <img src="biggrin.gif" border="0"> ), but I don´t like to be thrown into these battles unprepared. I often have the impression to be the new commander of a 100+ unit battle force, given no really useful information about what to do and where to go with all these units placed all over a big map..and I find this pretty unrealistic! (..ok, often it was the case that just this happened,..but..) I very often lack overview while starting these scenarios, I have to guess why the scenario designer placed a company of tanks at this place and a company of infantry at that place and and and... (on many occasions I would deploy much different..)
Also I have to look if there are reinforcements available and at what time and place they will arrive...can be very awkward to plan with, as you first have to look where all the reinforcement hexes are. I think the SPWAW engine as it is now, simply is not appropriate for really big battles.
I would prefer an additional "planning" map, where I can put labels on the map, mark front lines and enemy positions and the like. Also an "in game" notepad would help sometimes.
My solution, not only for big battles, would be to "externalize" some of this stuff,..means make printable maps and briefings. I found many scenario description files (scenXXX.txt) to be highly inappropriate, as they tell you nice and at times very long backround/historical information, but once the game started...no use anymore (if any). Why not externalizing this info or briefings into a nice Word- (...or whatever format) document, supplemented with a scenario map (ectizens "mapthing", edited screenshot...ect.), print it and have it handy during game play?
At least I will do this in my next scenarios to come. (..and more)
Also making scenarios as "1 battle" campaign would be a solution for different things. For example the player has some choice what to buy or where to place the stuff. Also one can make use of the campaign "audio" files: Give player a spoken version of his orders from higher HQ (like in Mega campaign). Redleg mentioned a multiple scenario one day campaign. I say: Way to go!
...
_________
Harry
Also I have to look if there are reinforcements available and at what time and place they will arrive...can be very awkward to plan with, as you first have to look where all the reinforcement hexes are. I think the SPWAW engine as it is now, simply is not appropriate for really big battles.
I would prefer an additional "planning" map, where I can put labels on the map, mark front lines and enemy positions and the like. Also an "in game" notepad would help sometimes.
My solution, not only for big battles, would be to "externalize" some of this stuff,..means make printable maps and briefings. I found many scenario description files (scenXXX.txt) to be highly inappropriate, as they tell you nice and at times very long backround/historical information, but once the game started...no use anymore (if any). Why not externalizing this info or briefings into a nice Word- (...or whatever format) document, supplemented with a scenario map (ectizens "mapthing", edited screenshot...ect.), print it and have it handy during game play?
At least I will do this in my next scenarios to come. (..and more)
Also making scenarios as "1 battle" campaign would be a solution for different things. For example the player has some choice what to buy or where to place the stuff. Also one can make use of the campaign "audio" files: Give player a spoken version of his orders from higher HQ (like in Mega campaign). Redleg mentioned a multiple scenario one day campaign. I say: Way to go!
...
_________
Harry
-
RichardTheFirst
- Posts: 460
- Joined: Wed Oct 17, 2001 8:00 am
- Location: Algés, Lisbon - Portugal
- Contact:
Rockin Harry, i totally agree with you. For the Great Patriotic War campaign we are giving detailed 5 paragraph operations orders before each battle. Here is an exampleOriginally posted by RockinHarry:
Actually I like really big battles (although my PI200 doesn´t <img src="biggrin.gif" border="0"> ), but I don´t like to be thrown into these battles unprepared. I often have the impression to be the new commander of a 100+ unit battle force, given no really useful information about what to do and where to go with all these units placed all over a big map..and I find this pretty unrealistic!
Harry
=========================================
Battle One Briefing Notes
Commanders Intent
Take command of the defense in the Dubno Sector. Reestablish a line of defense in front of any German breakthroughs. If possible, counterattack the Germans as necessary to reestablish the original defensive positions. However, do not sacrifice your command in the execution of a counterattack, as there are no additional forces to support you.
Situation
General Situation
The German Blitzkreig has caught us completely unawares. German armored columns are making deep penetrations through our lines. So for, our own forces seem incapable of stopping them. Overall the situation is very confused.
Enemy Situation
The Battalion Commander in charge of the defense of Dubno reported that the Germans started to shell the city 1 hour ago, and launched an attack shortly after this. His men put up brief resistance, before fleeing or being overrun. We have not heard from him for the last twenty minutes, which is why you are being dispatched to the area. The enemy is known to have infantry and armor involved in this attack. How much, we do not know. The enemy also has complete control of the sky, and is attacking our vehicle columns at will. This may be your greatest threat.
Friendly Situation
No word from the defenders at Dubno for the last twenty minutes. Based on their last communications, we assume they have been overrun. The line appears to be holding to the South of Dubno, but we can’t be sure of that. We have no word from the forces to the north of Dubno. We are attaching one light artillery battery to support your mission with indirect fire. There is no air support available. From what I understand, the Soviet Union no longer owns an air force.
Mission
Comrade, your mission is critical. Your first priority is to establish a new, secondary line of defense. The expected location of this defense is marked on your map. Once this line is secure, conduct a counter attack to drive the enemy from Dubno. If you are able, reestablish the original defensive line, which is marked on your map as ‘primary defensive line’. But comrade … do not sacrifice your command. Your force is the only mobile force left in the entire army group. Once you have established the secondary line of defense, the infantry, which is marching in behind you, will relieve your force. Once this occurs you will move back into a reserve position.
Execution
Move your command forward at the greatest speed that prudence dictates. Link up with any remaining forces in the area, and conduct your mission. The details will be left up to you.
Service and Support
A supply dump is located in your area of operation (AO), near the brigade commanders tent. These are both marked on your map.
We have attached two platoons of super heavy tanks to your unit. Use them wisely, and protect them from air attack. An additional platoon of medium tanks is on the way as well. We expect them to arrive approximately one hour after your forces.
Command and Signal
I have instructed the local brigade commander, who is incompetent, to report to you for orders. When he does this, put him under arrest and hand him over to the NKVD. Do not question this - it is an order. Once this is done, take command of any remaining units in the area, and use them as you see fit to accomplish your mission.
Standard radio and signal procedures remain in effect.
Commrade ….. Good luck, and may the God of War smile upon you this day.
End of Brief.
===========================================
Also, we are not relying on the computer to count points to establish the level of victory (althought this still happens), rather, we are providing text information that a player can use to evaluate thier performance, ie; terrain controled vs. losses.
This is especially valuable in very hard scenarios, where the computer will call what should in reality be a decisive victory, a marginal victory or a draw.
Unconventional war requires unconventional thought
I have been plotting a single battle "campaign" as well.
I have the historical battle picked out. It would start with a small battle on a section of the map. After sucess, the human player would move to objective 2 which would be another small action. Then, on to the next.
The battle I have in mind would have about 6 of these small engagements and be about 60 turns long. But it could be saved after each of the small engagements and resumed at the player's convenience.
The force I have in mind would be gradually attrited and the goal would be to survive better than the real guys did.
Inputs? Worthwhile?
With respect to text files. Again, I personally differ with most, I guess. I almost never do more than scan them looking for recommended settings, number of turns, size of battle. Much prefer to make my own battle plan and do as I want to. I guess 20+ years of taking orders was enough!
This and the other discussions have helped me reconsider several things related to scenarios.
My favorite right now is scenarios where the player can start with a quasi- core force provided in the scenario but he call call for reinforcements of his own choosing if he wants.
The system has been thoroughly tested and really does work. So in my scenarious, you will be seeing the human-chosen reinforcement option appearing pretty regularly now. Not always, though. Depends upon the battle.
I have the historical battle picked out. It would start with a small battle on a section of the map. After sucess, the human player would move to objective 2 which would be another small action. Then, on to the next.
The battle I have in mind would have about 6 of these small engagements and be about 60 turns long. But it could be saved after each of the small engagements and resumed at the player's convenience.
The force I have in mind would be gradually attrited and the goal would be to survive better than the real guys did.
Inputs? Worthwhile?
With respect to text files. Again, I personally differ with most, I guess. I almost never do more than scan them looking for recommended settings, number of turns, size of battle. Much prefer to make my own battle plan and do as I want to. I guess 20+ years of taking orders was enough!
This and the other discussions have helped me reconsider several things related to scenarios.
My favorite right now is scenarios where the player can start with a quasi- core force provided in the scenario but he call call for reinforcements of his own choosing if he wants.
The system has been thoroughly tested and really does work. So in my scenarious, you will be seeing the human-chosen reinforcement option appearing pretty regularly now. Not always, though. Depends upon the battle.
You 'graduate' from recruit to veteran on this forum when you reach 50 posts.Originally posted by RichardTheFirst:
General Richmond: Cool! <img src="cool.gif" border="0"> But how come you have a lower number and you are still a recruit???? <img src="eek.gif" border="0"> (and a General... <img src="wink.gif" border="0"> )
Jim NSB 
-
BryanMelvin
- Posts: 1048
- Joined: Fri Jul 28, 2000 8:00 am
- Location: Colorado, USA
Please check out the Merderet River campaign - it is in the single campaign format.
http://www.militarygameronline.com/steelpanthers/
http://www.militarygameronline.com/steelpanthers/
-
RichardTheFirst
- Posts: 460
- Joined: Wed Oct 17, 2001 8:00 am
- Location: Algés, Lisbon - Portugal
- Contact:
In big battles I tend to move units with less care than I would in smaller scenarios. I get tired of micromanaging, and with C&C on you have to keep platoons together. However, like someone earlier posted, you make 'mega' chunks that are all devoted to some goal and it's like you're playing a few smaller scenarios on the same map at the same time, except the outcomes of each little scenario affect the others significantly... I love big battles, a lot.
I think the single mission campaign idea rules Redleg. The scenarios NEED a method of posting information to the player on specified turns tho. That way the scenario could involve surprises that had some complexity to them... I resorted to naming reinforcing units to things like "Tanks South!" but it doesn't work all that well...
Tomo
I think the single mission campaign idea rules Redleg. The scenarios NEED a method of posting information to the player on specified turns tho. That way the scenario could involve surprises that had some complexity to them... I resorted to naming reinforcing units to things like "Tanks South!" but it doesn't work all that well...
Tomo
If you like large battles, I've got a few in the works. Personally, I like them, so I guess that's why I make them. <img src="smile.gif" border="0"> I've tried to make nice, small, squad level fights like Redleg does so well (BTW Redleg, thanks for the nice comment about Task Force Butler.), but they always seem to grow. I will generally, but not always, mention in the text if it's a large scenario. And speaking of the text, I try to not only give the operation objectives, but also historical background (even if it's imaginary in a hypothetical scenario, like the one I'm doing now with the Marines vs. the Nazi's) and anything else I think they player could use to have a grip on what's happening as the fight opens. I never design specifically for C&C play, but I do try to keep units together. My stuff is usually posted on the Wild Bill's Raider's or Raider's Arsenal pages, but I'll also be posting on Fabio's page soon. Up to now, I've only gotten feedback from the people who test my stuff, so if you try one and have comments, I'd love to hear them. If you're looking for BIG battles, keep mine in mind. <img src="biggrin.gif" border="0">
And I don't consider moving each unit to be unrealistic or "micromanaging." As far as I see it, the orders come from above and then each squad carries them out.
[ November 06, 2001: Message edited by: Warrior ]</p>
And I don't consider moving each unit to be unrealistic or "micromanaging." As far as I see it, the orders come from above and then each squad carries them out.
[ November 06, 2001: Message edited by: Warrior ]</p>
Retreat is NOT an option.
-
RockinHarry
- Posts: 2344
- Joined: Thu Jan 18, 2001 10:00 am
- Location: Germany
- Contact:
Lots of interesting ideas and opinions here, seems SPWAW scenarios evolve to more and more advanced levels. To be honest, I already started to loose interest in the ordinary style scenarios, so I only play few..if ever. As mentioned before, SPWAW can be improved much with the use of external programs like multimedia apps and others.
For example I used Winzip and the windows notepad for an implemented orders system. Tomo might want to check this:
http://members.surfeu.de/ug2010/SPWAW/AFTERCASSINO44.zip
During the course of the game, the player receives orders from time to time. I use enemy reinforcements that I renamed to something like: "M1-code:xyz",...where M1 is a "zipped" text message that tells you new orders or intelligence information. "xyz" is the password to open the Winzip file as the zip files should only be opened when needed.
This "messenger" unit appears directly in front of a human players command post at 1 hex range. The (AI) messenger unit has following unit stats: Class (norway flatcar/tarpin (for looks)) = assault gun (for 90° LOS), EXP+MOR=0 (so the AI has no chance to "spy" with this unit), SPEED/RADIO/FC/RF/VALUE = 0, Size = 5-10 (so our Command post never overlooks the "messenger") and of course....is completely unarmed (or has 0 ammo).
The "messengers" also receive their appropriate reinforcement arrival time and appear in an AI reinforcement hex directly in front of our command (communication) post. Also this AI reinforcement hex is labeled with map text ("Message Hex" in "After cassino 44").
Procedure: The human player needs to check this special "Message hex" for "Messages" (AI reinforcement unit) during the course of the game regularly. As it is an enemy unit, you never know when some arrives (if ever!).
Example: At human turn 5, a "Messanger" unit with name: "M1-code:xyz" appears in our "Message hex". Human player reads its name and after task-switching (CNTRL+ESC) out of SPWAW, he looks for a zip file named "M1" in the attached "Radio Com Messages"-Zip file. Open M1.zip, then double click M1.txt+. (the "+" means, the file is password secured) . Guess what follows? "xyz" is the needed password! Enter password and now you can open the file which might have new orders, intelligence information, a map..or whatever.
Maybe you receive order to attack a new map location? (..colonel..attack enemy positions at hex x,y...) Then you might want to place a Victory Hex which is activated on certain turn also! Or Intelligence information? " colonel....our air reconnaissance reports enemy movements from "wherever"...be prepared for local counter-attack from direction of "Tilly sur Seulles"! ---- Does not mean, that an enemy counter attack really starts from that direction, you can also use it as deception! <img src="biggrin.gif" border="0"> Maybe none is coming or maybe it comes from completely other direction?? Another topic is the number of "Messages" in the "Radio Com Messages" Zip file. If you place 10 "Message" files in the Zip, then the player might expect to receive 10 "Orders" during the course of the game! Some or most of this "Messages" might be a "dummy" and the player only receives 2-3 (or any)! This keeps uncertainty...
I think this system worked pretty well in the "AfterCassino44" scenario, maybe other designers will use similar stuff.
___________
Harry
For example I used Winzip and the windows notepad for an implemented orders system. Tomo might want to check this:
http://members.surfeu.de/ug2010/SPWAW/AFTERCASSINO44.zip
During the course of the game, the player receives orders from time to time. I use enemy reinforcements that I renamed to something like: "M1-code:xyz",...where M1 is a "zipped" text message that tells you new orders or intelligence information. "xyz" is the password to open the Winzip file as the zip files should only be opened when needed.
This "messenger" unit appears directly in front of a human players command post at 1 hex range. The (AI) messenger unit has following unit stats: Class (norway flatcar/tarpin (for looks)) = assault gun (for 90° LOS), EXP+MOR=0 (so the AI has no chance to "spy" with this unit), SPEED/RADIO/FC/RF/VALUE = 0, Size = 5-10 (so our Command post never overlooks the "messenger") and of course....is completely unarmed (or has 0 ammo).
The "messengers" also receive their appropriate reinforcement arrival time and appear in an AI reinforcement hex directly in front of our command (communication) post. Also this AI reinforcement hex is labeled with map text ("Message Hex" in "After cassino 44").
Procedure: The human player needs to check this special "Message hex" for "Messages" (AI reinforcement unit) during the course of the game regularly. As it is an enemy unit, you never know when some arrives (if ever!).
Example: At human turn 5, a "Messanger" unit with name: "M1-code:xyz" appears in our "Message hex". Human player reads its name and after task-switching (CNTRL+ESC) out of SPWAW, he looks for a zip file named "M1" in the attached "Radio Com Messages"-Zip file. Open M1.zip, then double click M1.txt+. (the "+" means, the file is password secured) . Guess what follows? "xyz" is the needed password! Enter password and now you can open the file which might have new orders, intelligence information, a map..or whatever.
Maybe you receive order to attack a new map location? (..colonel..attack enemy positions at hex x,y...) Then you might want to place a Victory Hex which is activated on certain turn also! Or Intelligence information? " colonel....our air reconnaissance reports enemy movements from "wherever"...be prepared for local counter-attack from direction of "Tilly sur Seulles"! ---- Does not mean, that an enemy counter attack really starts from that direction, you can also use it as deception! <img src="biggrin.gif" border="0"> Maybe none is coming or maybe it comes from completely other direction?? Another topic is the number of "Messages" in the "Radio Com Messages" Zip file. If you place 10 "Message" files in the Zip, then the player might expect to receive 10 "Orders" during the course of the game! Some or most of this "Messages" might be a "dummy" and the player only receives 2-3 (or any)! This keeps uncertainty...
I think this system worked pretty well in the "AfterCassino44" scenario, maybe other designers will use similar stuff.
___________
Harry