A compliment: Hey MATRIX

[mdiehl]

Nice screen shots of the maps.

HEY MATRIX GUYS --- I *really* like the generic Allied symbol for bases. One really irritating thing about PW was that my human Japanese opponent always knew, to a certain extent, which of my various bases was attached to which HQ, because they'd get the flag of the nationality of the controlling HQ. It was a huge intel giveaway.

Please do not let anyone talk you into reverting to the PW base-symbol system.

[mogami]

Hi, OK I'll bite. In Pac War How is a base Icon an intell give away
Icons are assigned by the capturing (top) unit. So there might be multi national forces at a base but it is awarded to the top units country. Then they can be reassigned to ANY!!! HQ no matter how distant even if that nation has no units at the base.

In pure AI games ( jeez location might be a hint) In PBEM (where jeez your opponent might be Dutch and assign every base to them) Or just yank your chain.

icons don't mean anything that you can react to soundly, you might just fool yourself (do recon and see what is there)

[mdiehl]

Hi Mo, glad you asked. In PW, if a base was assigned to a US HQ it appeared with a US Flag. If with Anzac, an Anzac flag. ABDA and UK had roundels. To a degree, I was pretty successful in reading the Allies' 1942 strategy against human opponents by watching how the flags changed from turn to turn. In effect, coming close to the "Sigint HQ" function available to the Allies, albeit, not being given the explicit objective of the HQ.

Usually I could run down Asiatic Fleet HQ and destroy it before an Allied opponent copped to my tricks. As the Allied player I was usually pretty concerned that my opponent would do the same to me, so I'd blow some smoke by shifting base controls around a bit, thereby changing the flags in basically irrelevant ways. But that is wasteful of prep points, and it should not be necessary given that the Allies have to burn a Sigint point to obtain essentially the same information.

[mogami]

Hi, In Pacwar supply is given to bases with HQ deployed there. To increase supply arrival you vcould change a base to any HQ move it there and get more supply. Reading future intentions from what HQ controlled what base could get you into deep trouble,
The intell gleaned from looking at the icon was dubious at best. (against a human, I'll conceede the AI would not used this tactic)

[mdiehl]

You had to do it with caution, never forgetting that your don't let your opponent drive your strategy. Always mindful of ability to project power and protect assets. But in the early part of the war when all the Allied bases had very low Prep Point scores (hence could not do much relocating or base ownership changing) it was valuable intel.

[Jeremy Pritchard]

My understanding is that these early screenshots show just a generic allied symboling, but later national symbols will appear.

Actually, intelligence about what HQ was where was pretty good, even with the Japanese.

They even knew which HQ was in which region, not just nationality, so I don't see the use of multinational HQ's to be that big of a problem.

However, you might ask for a specific fog of war that requires significant action between HQ's to figure out better detail.

First you notice it is allied.
Then you notice it is British.
Then you notice it is 14th Army.
Then you notice it is XV Corps from 14th Army.

[mogami]

Hi, Ok first I'll refer to my Pacwar days and then I'll give some ideas for WITP. In PACWAR I aways moved HQ out of danger as soon as I could (HQ's and leaders captured were VP's)

On turn one I moved Hart to Darwin giving this base to his HQ
this placed it on a priority for supply convoy. Mac to Cooktown
And the ABDA I reassigned to the Dutch Lt. Gen (and then I moved it to Timor) all this only for supply. The attached units were not doing anything the Japanese could use to plan with.

PP are only important if the player is actually planning something.

In WITP I can see how some intell might be gleaned and would suggest (as you are) that a general icon be given to any enemy base where the player has not more detailed intell. (as you preform recon and have contact with) Then the icon can change to a more defined one. In fact I think this would be a good idea.
It would be a source of info to the player to see enemy icon reflect how much knowledge he has of what is located at a base.
Prehaps size and flag could be combined to reflect such knowledge? (poor programmers) Since we are mainly posting wish list items. Have several flags for the Japanese. One unknown, one army and one navy. As intell on a base changes the icon could reflect this. The allies would require 3 flags per nation (and one general/unknown)
This would let the opposing players know where their recon/intell was sound and where it was lacking (and speed up assignment of recon/intell gathering orders). Prehaps instead of size, brightness could be used. Or even assign all HQ their own icon.
On friendly displays the icon would be used. And on enemy bases the other icons (and if you had solid recon/intell the same icon seen on the enemy players map used.)

[Mike Wood]

Hello...

Adding flags for ANZAC, the British, the Chinese, the Soviets and the Dutch is on our coding list.

I might add that I was the guilty party in adding the extra flags for PacWar: The Matrix Project. I thought they would be neat and the play testers liked them.

It is true that the flags could offer some intelligence on the base. We will monitor this thread for other opinions.

Bye...

Michael Wood
Lead Programmer,
Michael Wood

[mdiehl]

Actually, intelligence about what HQ was where was pretty good, even with the Japanese.

Right, I agree. The US routinely tracked fleet and HQ movements as well, and both sides had very good success at low levles (mainly in antidipating when an enemy move was imminent) via traffic analysis.

My point is that PW gave the Japanese intel for free, for which the USN player had to burn a Sigint Function query. I've no qualms about either of the players tracking intel at a low level as long as both players can do it. SIGINT should be reserved for higher level intelligence details and available exculsively to the Allies.

[Jeremy Pritchard]

I really like the new flags in PacWar, but understand what problems it arises.

However, as much as it can give away your intentions, it can also be used to fool your enemy.

Using ABDA HQ's later in the game (if you save them) could be a good way in hiding an invasion force (keep ABDA at Northern Australia, increase forces and attack with them, as nobody expects ABDA!).

Realistically, the Pacific is 'divided up' by mid 1942 into spheres of influence for the Allies. There is intelligence being given away, but it is fairly limited to time and scale (the only real 'problem' there could be that I see is with the US CBI HQ, North CAC, and possibly if you use British/Dutch HQ's in SW Pacific).

As much as it gives your opponent info, it can also give them equal disinformation. Should you put a lot of SW Pacific Bases to Celebes, Ambon and Timor, the Japanese might think that the US is supplying and reinforcing these bases (when it really is just the US Asiatic fleet, not SW Pacific!).

[mogami]

Originally posted by mdiehl


Right, I agree. The US routinely tracked fleet and HQ movements as well, and both sides had very good success at low levles (mainly in antidipating when an enemy move was imminent) via traffic analysis.

My point is that PW gave the Japanese intel for free, for which the USN player had to burn a Sigint Function query. I've no qualms about either of the players tracking intel at a low level as long as both players can do it. SIGINT should be reserved for higher level intelligence details and available exculsively to the Allies.

Greetings, Duh, your point was so simple I think i missed it. You acknowledged every thing concerning allies only you werepointing out a Japanese icon is aJapanese icon is aJapanese icon and the allies must burn Siginit points to get any more then that. My bad

[mdiehl]

Right. No sweat. That's the thing about language. It seems clearly written until it seems unclear.

I truly liked the look of the various Allied map icons and they were useful to me as a management tool when playing the Allies. They were cool. It was free intel to the Japanese opponent, though, and I'd rather have blando generic Allied map symbols and more managerial work if it meant not giving away info.

Perhaps the Allied map symbols could look generic when viewed from the Japanese player's screen and look HQ specific when viewed from the Allied player screen. Something like that might work for helping the Japan player manage his bases as well.

Whetever "Intel" becomes, perhaps traffic analysis, signit or whatever could switch enemy symbols from generic to known as information becomes available.