Command and Control

SPWaW is a tactical squad-level World War II game on single platoon or up to an entire battalion through Europe and the Pacific (1939 to 1945).

Moderator: MOD_SPWaW

ktierney
Posts: 2
Joined: Fri May 04, 2001 8:00 am
Location: Toronto, Canada

Post by ktierney »

Originally posted by Redleg:
Now I groan and reluctantly agree to C/C off games (sometimes).
If C&C was implemented well, I would agree to use it. But it is not a good implementation. For instance, the only way to describe an objective is to move a flag... a single flag does not describe "Invest that ridge, intelligently"

Most often, I find that C&C eliminates almost all tactical doctrine except for the dumbest and most rigid. The objective is good, but the implementation is not up to the game.

sez eye.
Cona
Posts: 135
Joined: Sat Sep 09, 2000 8:00 am
Location: Penco, Chile
Contact:

Post by Cona »

Does anybody have a good idea about a better implementation of C&C ?
We need to stop complaining and start contributing.
I've thinking of a better system for C&C but knowing nothing about this i can't help.

Saludos a todos,
Cona.
"War is much too serious to be entrusted to the military." - Tallyrand
User avatar
Reg
Posts: 2793
Joined: Fri May 26, 2000 8:00 am
Location: NSW, Australia

Post by Reg »

Originally posted by Freeway:
If C&C was implemented well, I would agree to use it. But it is not a good implementation. For instance, the only way to describe an objective is to move a flag... a single flag does not describe "Invest that ridge, intelligently"

Most often, I find that C&C eliminates almost all tactical doctrine except for the dumbest and most rigid. The objective is good, but the implementation is not up to the game.

sez eye.
Everyone agrees that it's not perfect but it's the best we have and I still believe that it is one of the central concepts in the game.

I think that many players may have the wrong expectations of C&C. It is not a tool intended to micro-manage your troops but to represent the inherent inertia of a large organisation.

In the instance you describe above, the intention is simply to keep your forces attacking toward the ridge. As long as you keep moving in the general direction of the objective, C&C will not have a great affect on your troops.

Where it really has an an effect is if your force is suddenly attacked from the rear!! Without C&C your entire force is aware of the danger within a single game turn 'of a few minutes' and begins to react immediately.

With C&C on, the commander, if he still has orders, will turn his units to face the treat (by moving the objective flags) but there are limitations of what can be achived in three minutes (one turn). He will eventually get all of his forces aligned to face the new threat but it will take time!!!
Disorganised forces will descend into chaos if elements are out of contact.

This sounds pretty much like what I would expect to happen in the real thing. It also gives a flanking attack the disruptive effect they historically had on a formation.

If you find the objectives too constrictive and you are changing objectives every couple of turns, perhaps you should be picking objectives that are more long term and will not be achieved in the next couple of turns.

Stick with C&C as I feel that it will give a greater appreciation of history than a game played without it.

My 5c {- 33% (tax) x 0.49 (exchange rate) = 1.6c} worth.

Reg.

[ May 05, 2001: Message edited by: Reg ]
Cheers,
Reg.

(One day I will learn to spell - or check before posting....)
Uh oh, Firefox has a spell checker!! What excuse can I use now!!!
Post Reply

Return to “Steel Panthers World At War & Mega Campaigns”