Slitherine

quote:

ORIGINAL: Baloogan
Pro tip for switching sides in Command: Alt-S quickly changes sides

quote:

Alt-S quickly changes sides

quote:

Alt-S

quote:

ORIGINAL: AlanChan

Sorry, but I have a little question, then what about ships? Should player just specify their missions and courses and let AI do the rest or micro-managing is allowed? (EG, have a backup ASW heli on stand-by and release it when a sub is found near SAG).

quote:

ORIGINAL: SeaQueen

Depends on the nature of the game, and who's playing it, I'd say. If you're working with a bunch of Air Force guys then they don't care about fiddling with ships. They might be important for the services they provide (e.g. TBMD, SAMs) but they don't have any say in the specifics of how they do it. On the other hand, if you were dealing with a bunch of Navy guys, then they won't have much say in anything other than Navy/USMC fighter. They certainly won't be dictating the details of bomber employment unless that bomber and it's crew had essentially been "loaned" to the Navy for a role like anti-shipping or mining.

quote:

ORIGINAL: AlanChan

The players are some international studies students�C the aim is not to train the next generation of tactic masters, but to evaluate the consequence of certain policies. I guess some of them might focus the air part of game while others focus commanding surface ships. Many thanks for your advice.

quote:

ORIGINAL: SeaQueen

Interesting! What sorts of policies?

quote:

ORIGINAL: mahuja

> or micro-managing is allowed? (EG, have a backup ASW heli on stand-by and release it when a sub is found near SAG).
See asw strike missions.

It really depends on what level you want the students to work at.
Therefore, some examples of the decisions they'll make would be helpful.
But from what you have said, I think this is the format you'll want:

You have a big screen in each of the two teams' rooms, and have the umpire take screenshots to be displayed on their screens.
(Just make sure the screenshots always go to the right screen, and to be empty of logs for the other side.)
In each case, they can discuss what they want to happen. Once they reach a decision, the umpire implements it, and the game continues on.
The downside is the meta-gaming part of "the game's proceeding slowly, they must be doing something".
(How much is about decisions made before the scenario starts?)
When the umpire is not doing something for either side, he may want to have an omniscient "observer" faction.

This means that the umpire is the only one who needs to know how to play the game mechanically. If a student would spend time thinking on "how can *I* do it" rather than "can this be done, and what are the consequences", you're probably doing it wrong. And, as illustrated above, people who have played for a while may still not have picked up on everything. Which could still be a problem if the umpire is in that situation.


Would love to see the After Action Reports from it!