Matrix Games Forums

Playing a campaign game, having lots of fun, game is moving along fairly well then bamm, hey where the heck did they come from.

Curious, has anyone ever been playing a game, and then the start of the process where the computer begins resolving the portion of the turn where it does stuff, you notice that suddenly forces (armour in this case) start appearing out of thin air.

I had a full column of shermans drive down this road eh. Followed by infantry mop up. I have had armour drive on the left and armour drive by on the right. Now I can see not seeing things a bit....The terrain is built up. Went down a road bordered by buildings and woods admittedly. But sheeeshh I just had 5 crappy french renaults pop up between two shermans (that shot all manner of stuff at them naturally). Now just how the heck did those tanks so wonderfully get missed by all those previous shermans???

I am thinking I am sitting in or around an entry hex perhaps. But dang it. In ASL if you are sitting in an entry hex, reinforcements arent allowed to enter. They get dumped in the next most logical location.

I intend to just waste the renaults and not lose a lot of sleep over it. But that aspect of the game sure makes no sense.

Any comments? Have I missed some detail?

A designed campaign or Long? The scenario designer (especially if its WB) may have wanted to show some sort fo confusion by putting a reinforcement hex in the middle fo somewhere he thought you might be. You can't occupy reinforcement hexes and delay them.

Did they all appear in one hex? or were tehy spread out. If its a reinf hex then they all appear in the same hex.

I'm totally against this type of gimmick in campaign design, nothing personal guys, but that's total BS to have things 'materialize' from a previously scouted area, particularly armor!!! I've run into this manyu times in various designed scenario's, and campaigns, and does no more than piss me off, and quit playing it!! I can understand things coming in from the edge of the map, that's fine, but appearing in villages, tree clumps, etc, nooooooo waaaay!! I tend to thoroughly scout an area, and to have a previously scouted tree copse suddenly erupt with platoons of tanks is a load of crap!! Especially with the movement rates of everything being doubled from the old 2.3 version, there is NO excuse for this type of tactic, you can have things come, and traverse the whole of a 100x240 map in practically no time. Please folks, stop this crap, it's a sad way to force the human player to react, there's many more reasonable ways to do things, with delay times, waypoints, etc., to portray surprise. <img src="wink.gif" border="0">

I play nothing but campaigns, and yes this does happen (Long, self created, and other wise), reason unknown,including my own campaigns, just have always put it down to the Fog'o'War and deal with it. Seems to happen in after 10 to 20 scenarios and usually when I almost have the enemy broke. In my own designed campaigns it has happened, at times, with units I didn't buy for the enemy, so I've always thought, Cool! Nothing like having to deal with Jagdpanthers G2 didn't have a clue about. My only complaint is I've lost some pretty strong heroes this way and almost bought the farm myself once. Oh well War is Hell!!!

I have never had this happen. However, if you want to know if its a reinforcement hex just save the game with a scenario name then open it in the editor. You can see all the reinforcement hexes in it. If you look at the beginning of the game (you'd have to have a save) you can see if any AIP units are set to reinforcement and their turn also.

I've got to agree with Warhorse here, I myself have experienced this many times, and it it a major frustration. Hopefully, new scens can be designed with re-inforcements coming from map edge in the future, just my $.02. Take care - Joe

Hmmmm.... judguing from the response then it is as I assumed, a nasty design feature that can be dealt with if the game is played more than once, or it a person does what amounts to a save the game then look sort of cheat.

Thats to bad.

As I see it, it is essentially something that has to be planned in advance. That amounts to poor design in my opinion.

I would rather reinforcements behaved as reinforcements. I noticed a truck entering the map. Moved a sherman to intercept what turn out to be a coloumn. Sure enough it was a column of vehicles. I dispatched other shermans to bring it under fire. Next turn some shermans I had staying back with the legs have renaults sprouting up like weeds in a spot I have under comprehensive observation for several turns.

This is entirely unrealistic. Trying to get this effect in ASL would only get my friend laughing at my obviously moronic request. But I cant argue my case with the computer.

I hope this aspect is done a bit more rationally in Combat Leader.

I have to say I strongly disagree with Warhorse and BAR.

IMO, using reinforcement hexes in this way is a good thing.

I think the problem here is the way we use - and think - of the word 'reinforcements.' When most of us hear it, we think 'extra troops sent, from the rear, to help.' And, yes, that is a way of viewing it.

However, it's not the only way.

What about the units who may be in the area, hear the movement or fire, and 'march to the sounds of the guns.'?

What about units - and the Soviets did this alot - who were *ordered* to hide, wait until the recon and part of the main body advanced - and then pop up from sewers/basements/hidden bunkers/spiderholes, etc, etc.?

What about smart platoon leaders of the enemy, who prepared urban combat positions carefully so that they could pull off ambushes - which is something nearly impossible to do, in SP:WaW without the R-hex trick.

Lastly, who says that even though freindly forces pass through an area, they spotted anything. The enemy armor may be sitting in woods - or garages - with engines off (noise control) - and a single crewman watching the road.

Now, the above said, it can be overdone - but, so can 'beaming' Rangers in from the Enterprise - or using paradrops when none were really used - or moving along the edge of the map, cause you know no badguys can be on the flank - and human players do all of that a lot!

Alex

I will concede that sometimes reality has to burn alive on the alter of concession to the fact its a game and there are limitations in a game.

What I wont concede though is agreeing the manner of depiction is not clearly poorly executed.

True a tank can hide in woods unseen if totally inactive. Or in a building. Well actually let me drive my tank into your livingroom and see if no one can tell I did it. Or into a finite copse of trees and see if the guys walking past it miss it. Remember we are talking about a substantial piece if machinery being hidden from searching eyes on the ground. Not a pilot scimming past at 400 mph at x100 feet.

And this is a concession to one tank. 5 tanks is asking for the credibility factor to get raped. Hey did I tell you all the girls in your neighbourhood secretly dream of me. No I guess you wont buy that either eh. It stretches the matter a bit far.

In ASL concealment is achieved and lost based on proximity. But concealment doesnt confer hidden status. The opponent is still aware "something" is there, just not "what". Apologies for always comparing SPWaW to ASL, but if SPWaW wasnt like ASL, I would never have wanted to play SPWaW in the first place.

When all 5 tanks appear in a single location, credibility has been brutally thrown away with little concern for anything beyond convenience.

We currently have version 7 because some players thought such and such tank's armour thickness was poorly represented at such and such an angle when shot at by such and such a round and such and such a distance in such and such a year.
Now you cant tell me we can get that picky on that sort of level, and then say "well its to much to ask the game to get any more accurate with reinforcement hexes.

Now this is a design issue. I intend to continue playing, and wont expect anything to be done. Its past due time for radical changes to Steel Panthers. I am looking forward to Combat Leader now. I would say that Combat Leader will have to go farther with where reinforcements enter though.
To merely make a new game, solely to be in a legal position to sell it, while not really making the game better, will be unsatisfactory of course.
I am not saying this will be done naturally.
I make my point here in Steel Panthers land solely to get a response as to whether it is desired to alter this way of thinking in Combat Leader.

I think it comes down to judicious use of this tool as a design tactic. Certainly it has often been used in an out of hand manner.

But I have no problem with spec ops forces appearing with this tool against me. Perhaps not en masse (which would be not spec ops style anyways). But that is just one example.

It does come down to the designer, and there are just a lot of poor designers out there.


Something to think about - what if the computer could have a forum and bitch about player's tactics that are unrealistic? LOL! I think we'd dump a brick if we could read that stuff!

Well...with columns of trucks n´tanks popping out of "nowhere" I have to agree with warhorse ect.
With infantry it´s different, as it´s known fact that japanese appeared in "cleared" areas. Same with german Paras, who enjoyed to let bypass the enemy troops and then show up in their back! There are many more examples of this....

In fact I already managed to simulate this with "fake" dug-outs who spit out their occupants after a given time (reaction turn) and then show up at any place you want! <img src="eek.gif" border="0">

If someone wants to check this out, try the AFTER CASSINO44 scenario:

http://geocities.com/rockinharry/SPWAW/AFTERCASSINO44.zip

(right click/save target as..)

Have fun
_________
Harry

[ December 14, 2001: Message edited by: RockinHarry ]</p>

Originally posted by Les the Sarge 9-1:
I will concede that sometimes reality has to burn alive on the alter of concession to the fact its a game and there are limitations in a game.

What I wont concede though is agreeing the manner of depiction is not clearly poorly executed.

**Is it poorly executed?


True a tank can hide in woods unseen if totally inactive. Or in a building. Well actually let me drive my tank into your livingroom and see if no one can tell I did it. Or into a finite copse of trees and see if the guys walking past it miss it. Remember we are talking about a substantial piece if machinery being hidden from searching eyes on the ground. Not a pilot scimming past at 400 mph at x100 feet.

*** The Germans were famous for hiding tanks inside building on the west front. It's easy to do if you have time.

And this is a concession to one tank. 5 tanks is asking for the credibility factor to get raped. Hey did I tell you all the girls in your neighbourhood secretly dream of me. No I guess you wont buy that either eh. It stretches the matter a bit far.

***Again, does it? I can, from my living room, plot the exact locations I'd hide a tank platoon, to ambush your guys coming over the brigde I live next to. I'd use 4 buildings - to include my own house, and, if I had a 5th tank, some woods. And, all of those locations are within one 50 meter 'hex'. Would you spot them? Maybe - maybe not. 50 meters is a lot of space. I'd agrue that 10 to 12 meters/yards a tank is quite enough space to camo one.

In ASL concealment is achieved and lost based on proximity. But concealment doesnt confer hidden status. The opponent is still aware "something" is there, just not "what". Apologies for always comparing SPWaW to ASL, but if SPWaW wasnt like ASL, I would never have wanted to play SPWaW in the first place.

**ASL *had* to do that. It had the same limitation as every other board wargame ever - the opponene can see you move your cardboard stacks around. There's no real way to hide them from the opponents 'god like' view. In real life, though, it's not that easy to spot things.

When all 5 tanks appear in a single location, credibility has been brutally thrown away with little concern for anything beyond convenience.

**Is it? Are you telling me that at no time in the Second World War a tank platoon managed to set itself up in ambush positions - and had the other sides recon and infantry elements miss it? I think, often, because the unit and vehicle icons on screen are as large as the hexes, people forget how big an area 50 yards is, especially when it's not just 50 yards long, it's 50 yards deep as well. There's lots of space in one of those 'hexes'

We currently have version 7 because some players thought such and such tank's armour thickness was poorly represented at such and such an angle when shot at by such and such a round and such and such a distance in such and such a year.
Now you cant tell me we can get that picky on that sort of level, and then say "well its to much to ask the game to get any more accurate with reinforcement hexes.

**I agree on the armor stuff, I personally think it's silly. But, I don't see a 'lack of accuracy' in this issue. I see a 'thingy is overused' issue - but so are 88s, Tigers, and many other things <img src="smile.gif" border="0"> To remove the ability to set things like that up, because it gets overused, would be to detract from the game. IMO, in fact, it keeps you on your toes, because, as IRL, you never know *where* the enemy is coming from.

Now this is a design issue. I intend to continue playing, and wont expect anything to be done. Its past due time for radical changes to Steel Panthers. I am looking forward to Combat Leader now. I would say that Combat Leader will have to go farther with where reinforcements enter though.
To merely make a new game, solely to be in a legal position to sell it, while not really making the game better, will be unsatisfactory of course.
I am not saying this will be done naturally.
I make my point here in Steel Panthers land solely to get a response as to whether it is desired to alter this way of thinking in Combat Leader.

---

There are many improvements that can be made, of course, to CL *cough - Infantry smoke!*. To me, though, this is not one of them. There should be an element of the unexpected on the field - it's how battle really are! Should designers plan how to use it better, or use it less often? Yes! Should the ability to keep us guessing be removed? No! Like any other feature, it should be used properly, with moderation, and with an eye on the actual battle you're trying to create the simulation for.

Alex

Originally posted by RockinHarry:
Well...with columns of trucks n´tanks popping out of "nowhere" I have to agree with warhorse ect.

---

yoohhh just yesterday severall t34 and kv´s appearing beneath my marder and pz.IV.

the sceneria name is "mice vs. marshall".

till this point i had quite good succes in the scen,but this heavy tanks appearing unseen directly beneath my lighter armor which was too attack the enemy from behind gave me quite a shock...

but in "stalingrad" campaign the same happened. seems russians had found a way to use other dimensions......

Alexandra, I agree that the feature not be removed, just not overdone so much as it is! I was in the Marine Corps, and walked through many a jungle in the South Pacific, on recon, and I assure you, a tank would not remain hidden in a 50 meter area, just covered by my squad!! Troops, fine, I have no problem with an occasional infiltrator SQUAD, or hidden SQUAD, but vehicles no, and definitely not a whole platoon!!! <img src="wink.gif" border="0"> In the campaign where it's post WW2, and the US is fighting Russia (Victors?), there was one scenario in particular, where in the South, hordes of cavalry, taks and infantry miraculously appear in the middle of a clump of trees I just had passed some units through, entirely!! Not that that was bad enough, but they also got to fire FIRST, and since some units were in the hex with them, made my squads surrender!! What???!!! This is what I mean, suffice it to say, that was the end of that campaign, too bad... The edge of the board was a lousy 6 hexes away, no excuse.

To me the singular reason computers are handy to the running of games, is the computational power of the machine.

Artificial Intelligence is just that "artificial". It is not by any means "intelligent". A computer can calculate, that when it gets its 5 tanks on turn 5. If it can't put them here, does here qualify. If not there then the next eligible location (and so on). A computer can thusly dedicate several seconds (which should be like forever to todays computing power) to determining where the eligible hex is to be. It is possible that the hex must meet entry requirement standards or default to responding, sorry get them next turn on turn 6 (and wait yet again, if no hexes qualify).

Thats the way its done in ASL. And I dont mind saying that the rules are written down for a human being to employ, and I get to make all the calculations at the speed a human being is capable of. Heck if I can do it this computer dang well better be able to match me (or the computer isnt worth the table space it occupies).

I play almost all my Steel Panthers games cold. I have never seen the game before, and have no previous idea where and when anything will appear. Only the games scenario designer has this information. To know in advance is just wasting the thrill of using my judgement and experience and hoping I am making good choices.

If I have two tanks sittng on a road, that are stationary, separated by one hex. And then five tanks appear on the space between shooting all hell bent for leather. Well you can assume that I will assume the game designer dropped the ball.

I could of course use a nice option. Save every turn. And if I dont like a turn say hmmmm nope going to do that turn again. And move those two tanks to ambush the new arrivals. But that is an admission that cheating is accpetable. And that sure wont wash with another person when I try to laud how great I am in playing the game.


Fortunately I have never walked in harms way. Closest I ever got was silly bugger with the guys. We carried actual rifles (just never had any ammo, a load shout of bang was adequate). I have walked right on top of people I didnt see eh (actually stood on a hidden person). But you can camouflage a 35 ton vehicle all you want, I wont miss it. And it sure wont be getting the privilege of spring out of the woods like a predatory animal to surprise me (tank engines are no that quiet).

This is precisely why anyone saying, the mechanics as they currently stand depict battlefield conditions as they are. To say so brings reasonable doubt, on the person ever having experienced those conditions. Yes I am willing to occasionally call the bluff on a person claiming to have experienced the battlefield. I am not saying that at this moment. But I have experienced persons in my life that need to have large blarney stones surgically removed from their butts hehehe.