|
IronManBeta -> (8/27/2002 3:12:03 AM)
|
[QUOTE]Originally posted by Mac
[B]I served in brigade and army corps level signal corps (network command and surveillance) and EW duties. I hope this game would be the first one to model those aspects as well. At least to some extent as they are pretty much neglected as it is :).
[/B][/QUOTE]
Just caught up with the forum again and saw this. We would definitely love to pick your brains, and in a way that would not require you to kill us!
As usual, I have read a lot of conflicting info as to the ins and outs of electronic warfare. It has to be of extreme importance and I don't doubt a huge amount of attention was focussed on it behind the scenes. Translating that gracefully into game terms is the tough part.
For beginning players the game will essentially let them turn off the EW rules. For better players increasing the 'intensity of EW' will result in an increasing number of HQ stonks (the more orders you send out and reports received, the more radio traffic you generate. The more you generate, the easier you are to find. When they find you, they promptly blast you with off-map arty). The idea is to create a dilemma: be a control freak and run the very real risk of having all your positions given away early in the game, or stay stealthy but only barely in control of your forces. Tough call... Losing your HQ is not the end of the game since a subordinate unit will inherit the job fairly quickly, but it does cause a command disruption and can leave you powerless for a key interval.
On the other hand, no one has made the mistake of leaving their radio transmitters anywhere near their HQ since at least 1942, (well 5th Panzer Armee in June 44 in Normandy but they are just the exception to the rule, and they got completely trashed from the air because of it) and there are always spare radio sets to activate if the first set get clobbered - so how real is HQ suppression anyway? (I have this inquiring mind, you see...)
I worry that active measures like jamming might make much more of a practical effect than HQ stonks. It could significantly reduce the ability to issue orders and collect reports and bring the whole plan of combat into a shambles. Or is that anticipated in the real world, and everyone is trained to just carry on and do their job regardless? I believe this is why the WP forces prefer the rote implementations and try to minimize changes on the fly. A defending 'maneuver warfare' force suddenly without any communications in contrast would be an utter shambles. Were we setting ourselves up for defeat?
I had also worried that effective EW could all but shut down a modern army's logistical capabilities, but Byron kindly set me straight on that. There is a lot more face-to-face and SOP where the rubber meets the road then I knew about. On balance there is enough redundancy in the system to keep the battle going for the scale and timeframes this game is about.
Those who have played the original SimCan MBT games will remember the near chaos that EW could creat. Messages garbled, HQs disappearing, the player being told that he personally is dead - sometimes on the first or second turn! You were constantly wondering if you were in too close contact with your units or not close enough. Great fun but hard to understand at the beginning what with everything else that was going on. This time around we want to make it more detailed but also more understandable and somewhat more flexibile in application.
In a followup edition I would like to really expand it and make the game something of a testbed for EW ideas, but that is gleam in the eye stuff right now....
I just remembered I have a book on the subject that I had forgotten about on a bookshelve back home. But this is the internet age. Know any good websites? I was just reading the one that discusses nothing but modern combat ops in urban terrain (a whole other can of worms for a hard working designer) at http://www.urbanoperations.com/ Maybe there is a good one for EW too.
Lots of fun! Sorry to be gone the last few weeks but I'm back in the saddle again.
Cheers all, Rob.
|
|
|
|
