Matrix Games Forums

Survey for coding of the WarPlan 2 engine.

ANSWER THE POLL QUESTION AT THE TOP OF THE POST

You mean Strategic region, Alvaro?


https://hoi4.paradoxwikis.com/Strategic_region

Areas are a much better way to simulate strategic naval warfare. Hexes are fine for localized land combat, but naval warfare, abstracted with uncertain encounters, etc., is (in my opinion) MUCH more accurate with a zone rather than hexes.

The current system I have is a hybrid of hex/area as your fleet creates the area around it basically.

Do you mean Naval boxes similar to WiF?

Whichever has the bigger area. I don't want thousands of either. I much prefer HOI model over the current WP hexes for that reason, but I'm not really interested in naval matters as opposed to what happens on dry land.

Not that I am in the beta but what is being tested?

I used to love the board game Bismark where you had to search and search to find the ship.
Giant areas leave it all up to chance...but if the areas are not that giant...something like a current hex and all surrounding that would not be to bad.

As the poll says areas like HoI3 which are small areas.

Sorry don't play HOI...
No worries...more hexes the better for me. The ocean is a big place.

I would actually prefer a hybrid system: hexes for coastal areas (perhaps 5-10 hexes out from shore?), and areas for the high seas.

This would allow for more detailed planning and operations of shore areas (mining, blockade, shore support etc), while representing warfare on the high seas in a less micromanaged fashion.

I thought about that also.

Hexes would make sense if you had actual ability to throw out search planes and had to patrol areas of the ocean to find enemy fleets, as opposed to always being able to see where enemy fleets are, yet having a random roll tell you that your forces can't see or do anything about the carrier fleet that just rolled up off the coast and started bombing your port because you Failed a Spot Check, neener neener. Naval combat in WarPlan seems to take place completely without you, going on in between turns with little to no input on your part, which is rather unsatisfying. (Also, the only time carriers can launch planes against submarines now is to monkey-guard their home ports and bomb them when they should be at their most safe...) It's not that escorts don't work, but there is no feedback on their effectiveness unless I look up the combat log - even the reports don't bother to tell you if you sunk a submarine, the token just disappears from the map with no explanation between rounds. I hope WarPlan: Pacific will make naval combat a little more involved.

Regardless, if naval combat is largely the same hands-off affair, it might as well be naval areas, since the only difference between one general North Atlantic area and hexes would just be the range of land-based aircraft. I'd personally rather the game go towards more control over things like reconnaissance and make naval hexes make more sense, however.

Loss of tactical influence(strategic command series would have hexes that would dominate the game) it's more micro. It's more macro to have a HOI like model. I like the abstraction!

Sea areas rather than hexes for me definitely.

Much, much better way to represent the strategies and realities of this side of the conflict.

Having fleets inhabit a single 'hex' during a game with fortnight-long turns is rather absurd really. As is chasing submarines around a map.

ORIGINAL: squatter
Having fleets inhabit a single 'hex' during a game with fortnight-long turns is rather absurd really. As is chasing submarines around a map.

Those two reasons are exactly why I am in favor of zones over hexes.

I MIGHT change my mind if convoys where abstracted to "convoy duty" boxes - eliminating the chasing around of subs/raiders (let assigned convoy resources fight it out off map in the boxes).

Another improvement (in my opinion) would be the ability to toggle naval units to a mode (like air units) that they should/should not intercept, and that includes in port naval units. With 2 week turns, British fleets in port in Alexandria should be able to intercept an invading Italian fleet if within some hex range. Eliminates some micro-management. Perhaps fleets in "intercept mode while in port" still use oil?

A 3rd would be that units marked for intercepting should intercept until their effectiveness or strength are below a certain level, so small "soak off" moves don't remove all intercepts.

I like the WiF method of sea movement intercept with boxes within areas that allow for differing types of intercepts. How will invasions work in your new system? Is the English Channel a sea area?
I haven't played HOI so I don't know how it works. Still haven't voted yet, but I really don't like the sub/escort/convoy system as it is now and would like something different at least in the Pacific Theater.

Alvaro, with regard to sea zones, could you please elaborate a little more of what you were planning? How they would work? Is programming the AI easier with sea zones?

Haven't figured it out yet. I just tossed this out there.

Hi,

Although I voted "hexes", my real preference if possible would be hexes when close to land (the med, the Baltic, North sea etc...) but sea zones in the open seas such as the Atlantic; a hybrid sysntem as Rattbag55 mentioned (ETO was a little like that; the best board wargame I ever played). Both systems can have bizarre consequences, but I remember that in WiF it was so annoying to be attacked by planes with short range that would never have been in range in reality. If the UK wanted to protect Gibraltar, it needed ships at sea in the Western Med that could be under Italian fighter CAP from... Sardinia... In a situation like that I would prefer hexes (or very very small seas, but that would almost come back to hexes) to be able to stay close to Gibraltar and avoid the enemy planes from Sardinia. I also remember how we foudn it very amusing to see the Axis invading Syria but with bf 109 fighter cover from... Crete (well, some chances of cover anyway depending on the roll).

I haven't thought this completely through, but what about a system of coastal hexes, areas(island chains) with hexes and for the open ocean an area without hexes.

The idea being that it cost different movement points to traverse from one area to another and also dependent on the assets in each area a level of detection dictates whether combat takes place or not.

OK so like for coastal hexes, the ones adjacent to land areas, it cost 1 MP, unless of course mines or some other obstruction exists then the cost goes up. These would also be the hexes of greatest intel so combat(intercepts) are highly likely.

If a fleet moves from a coastal hex into a more open ocean area, the areas with hexes, then it will cost an additional amount of MPs, say like 10. These areas with hexes would be configured with the island chains on the borders of each area so that island chains could control the intel of the area dependent upon the assets deployed. This also means that there could be conflicting islands chains on the border of a single area, say opposite each other, like the Marshalls and Gilberts.

Now if a fleet or naval unit transits to an open sea area(without hexes) which simulates the vast areas of ocean then it would cost additional MPs, like 20 as an example and it would occupy an hierarchy of status(as in WiF) for future operations.

Obviously this can get a little complicated for fuel usage and various interactions of intercepting air and naval fleets, not to mention subs but it could be worked out with a good programmer and the right coding language.

All this is loosely based upon a game by SPI I used to play called "Pacific Theater of Operations". Don't remember it really well, don't know where it is, but perhaps some of you can recall some of the aspects that could be pertinent to this conversation.