IMHO

Matrix Games Forums

Forums Register Login Photo Gallery Member List Search Calendars FAQ

My Profile Inbox Address Book My Subscription My Forums Log Out

IMHO

View related threads: (in this forum | in all forums)

Logged in as: Guest

Users viewing this topic: none

Printable Version

All Forums >> [Current Games From Matrix.] >> [World War II] >> Steel Panthers World At War & Mega Campaigns >> SP:WaW Training Center >> IMHO

Page: [1]

Message

<< Older Topic Newer Topic >>

IMHO - 11/1/2003 11:42:35 PM

Buzzard45

Posts: 364
Joined: 1/11/2003
From: Regina, Canada
Status: offline

I'm good with that also.

If IRL an enemy couldn't tell one from the other, why should it in the game? But on the other hand if there is an obvious difference. Naming 120mm motars as 60mm FI or vice-versa, then that would be an unfair deception.

The Sherman VC firefly should not be changed because it has a noticeably different weapon. They were known as a kill-me-quick target. However, It could be called a 17pdr gun. It would be obvious once it is spotted that it is a 17pdr tank but until it is spotted it is only an ATG, unless of course it also fires its CMGs or the like. Smarter spotters will pick up on this and it is part of the bonuses of being a veteran.

Different weapons have distinctive sounds which make it more likely that a unit being fired apon could ID it. The 75L70 of the Panther would sound the same as the same gun on a Jagpanther but I'm not sure that a 75L43 would have the same shell-whistle when firing. Someone please correct me on this.

Different infantry types have different uniforms and different organic equipment, making IDing a FJ unit from a Volk-grenedier unit not all that unlikely. However, who is to say which squad is the HQ squad. That being said, the AO squad IS likely to look different in all armies during that time period.

A common sense approach is needed and also disclosure of the possibility at game's start or when it is appropriate. I think it appropriate that we add this to "Gary's Rules of Engagement". I try to play all my games under these rules and it has saved un-countable discussions and hard feelings.

_____________________________

" Look alive!! Here comes a Buzzard"
POGO

(in reply to Capt. Pixel)

Post #: 1

- 11/3/2003 11:33:35 PM

Vathailos

Posts: 346
Joined: 5/13/2003
From: In a van, down by the river.
Status: offline

[QUOTE=Capt. Pixel]I discussed this issue with a regular opponent. He told me that he didn't care what I did with my unit's names.

"If it has your flag on it. I'm gonna kill it!" That's pretty straight forward. :D

He recently renamed his IT Flamthrowers "Poopengassen", "Flingerflamers", and "K9 Troops".

He's right though, if it's got his flag on it - I still shoot to kill. :cool:

My major issue with IDs still remains the distinctions made in platoon units such as the UK infantry squads. I fail to see how the enemy can determine which fellows are the Platoon HQ as opposed to any other regular tommy. Do they wear special khaki shorts and all smoke pipes (or play the pipes?) I regularly rename units such as these to match the other IDs in the platoon. Without reservation, excuses or apologies. :cool:[/QUOTE]

**drags out dead horse** **grabs mallet**

Hi there CPT :)

Wanted to address this point and bring up one point that I think still remains unclear.

I play by the same general rules that you do, I believe. Namely, that if it's the enemy's, it's a target.

However, consider a circumstance where shots are limited (in this particular battle, one SF squad in a cluster of 4-5 "trucks" and a couple of rocket launchers). Now, assume they'd had time to observe, which they had. It doesn't matter if the trucks all looked the same, the ones that the rocket launcher crews were unloading ammo from would have been my targets. Unfortunately, the ammo loading procedures are not observable in SP. Therefore, they remained "unknown".

I think my main point bears repeating. I don't mind "subterfuge" or "psy-ops" or whatever you call it by re-naming units, as long as it's agreed upon by both sides as a pre-condition to battle (like mines, arty limits, etc.).

Otherwise (and if you can factually pick this apart/disagree with the following, please do so, no offense taken), by renaming your units when the enemy hasn't renamed his, you have just automatically given yourself an advantage that his troops don't have. That of "unerring ID-ability". Your troops will ID his (because that's the default game mechanic) with 100% accuracy. If you see a Pz IIIe, it is indeed a Pz IIIe. His T-34 is a T-34, not a T-34/85. However, his units now can't ID yours with 100% accuracy.

We can get down into the weeds about historical tendancies to mis-ID, difficulty in ID-ing, etc. I agree that it would add to realisim to do this for all those reasons. But the fact remains that if you rename your units unbeknownst to your opponent, and he doesn't rename his, then you've unilaterally given yourself an advantage over your opponent (unerring ID-ability). That is what I contend is wrong. One player should not (because it's not addressed/mentioned specifically beforehand, whatever) take it upon himself to grant himself any advantage over his opponent, regardless of the justification, without agreeing beforehand. In this case, then it's just another level of detail (misinformation) that both sides are practicing. And as I've said, I don't disagree with the practice if both sides at least are aware that their opponent may be exercising this option.

IMO, it's just gamesmanship to do it unilaterally. I don't think it's proper to give myself an advantage. That's akin to saying "we didn't talk specifically about a limit on infiltrators or pre-laid mines, so I'm going to do both because I can have an historical justification for such". It, again IMO, is a separate issue from force composition or anything else only because of the way in which you affect the change. One example I could liken it to (were it possible in to do so, if the preferences were not locked for example), to change the toughness of AFVs, or the effectiveness of artillery after your opponent's purchase. I know you won't see it as this radical, but I point it out because it's changing an assumed equality, that of unerring ID-ability. While not nearly as devistating as altering troop toughness, etc. it is an advantage if done unilaterally, and can confuse/disadvantage newer players.

(in reply to Capt. Pixel)

Post #: 2