RE: Intel, do you use it? (Full Version)

All Forums >> [New Releases from Matrix Games] >> War in the Pacific: Admiral's Edition



Message

witpqs -> RE: Intel, do you use it? (2/17/2011 6:51:30 PM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: themetalcrow

im thinking about buying this game, but $90 is no joke for me. i really like that intelligence isn't completely accurate, but is there any way in game to make it more accurate? or is it always completely unreliable?
if it's never reliable, doesn't that make it a pointless feature?

thanks garrett


There is a SigInt report that you get each turn. As far as I know there is no way for you to influence the contents of that report. There are Coast Watcher reports. As far as I know there is no way to influence those.

However, I have seen some other things. I have seen in (I think it was) the Operations Reports messages indicating that a certain search plane had detected radio transmissions in a somewhat nearby hex. The same might occur with subs and ships, I just don't recall seeing it.

When you get either SigInt reports or search plane radio intercepts like the one I described above, there will usually be an icon placed on the map. Not the large overview map, just the regular map. That will show you the hex location.

So, the answer to your question is yes, you can put out more search assets and give yourself a little bit better chance of picking up Intel. Definitely use planes, but I feel sure the same applies to ships and subs as well.



Canoerebel -> RE: Intel, do you use it? (2/17/2011 6:53:15 PM)

Certain aspects about intel are always reliable, some are vague, and some are subject to manipulation by a cagey enemy. I don't think there's anything you can do to make it more reliable, but with experience you'll become more adept at reading it.

Here are some examples:

1. Always reliable (as far as I know): (a) There are xxx troops at yyy; (b) XXX Unit is aboard YYY Maru bound for Port ZZZ; XXX Unit is prepping for YYY Base.

2. Vague: Major radio transmissions at hex xx/yy. It's hard to know whether that's the KB, a combat TF, or a delusion.

3. Subject to manipulation: See Item 1(b) above, that is supposedly always reliable? Well, a cagey player can load a unit aboard a Maru, set the target as some distant and deceiving port, and then unload at a waypoint somewhere else. Cagey, cagey, and difficult to unravel, but great fun.

Anybody can read SigInt and get good information from it, but with experience you'll get better at using it and using against your opponent. It's a really fun part of the game, at least if you're the Allied player.



themetalcrow -> RE: Intel, do you use it? (2/17/2011 7:11:02 PM)

so it can be reliable, and effected by the player?

when i say intel, im also talking about recon.

is recon worthwhile, or is it other intel stuff this thread is talking about as being pretty unreliable?

garrett



Canoerebel -> RE: Intel, do you use it? (2/17/2011 7:15:52 PM)

Reconnaissance and patroling are important aspects of the game. You can influence them through the quality and quanitity of the forces committed, size of the area patrolled, weather effects, etc.

Reconnaissance can be done by a variety of aircraft, but the actual recon units are best at it. Patroling can likewise be done by a variety of types of aircraft, but those trained to do the job are the best at it.

So, a squadron well-trained in the mission and flying the type of plane suitable for the mission and flying said mission repeatedly at reasonable distances and in good weather will provide far more reliable info than would a poorly trained squadron flying occasionally.



Cap Mandrake -> RE: Intel, do you use it? (2/17/2011 7:58:00 PM)

The appearance of a Val dive bomber over your carrier force is a highly reliable indicator of enemy carriers about.


Dedicated photo-recon aircraft (like the P-38 recon version) build highly reliable intel very quickly in only a few days worth of sorties.


PBY drivers still wearing pull-ups will take MUCH longer.

Jap Glen-equipped subs seem to be a little too good.



Mynok -> RE: Intel, do you use it? (2/17/2011 8:09:20 PM)


Glens might very well be much better than in real life, but they also die in droves when doing recon missions. It is essentially kamikaze recon.



Cap Mandrake -> RE: Intel, do you use it? (2/17/2011 8:12:41 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: Mynok


Glens might very well be much better than in real life, but they also die in droves when doing recon missions. It is essentially kamikaze recon.


I am filled with a warm glow. Presumably it is the good news about the Glens. I hope I didn't eat another Polonium 210 sandwich.



bradfordkay -> RE: Intel, do you use it? (2/17/2011 8:22:05 PM)

Sometimes the intel is spot on - at least for the allies. Part of teh game is deciding which intel you want to put stock in.


If you are playing against the AI, you can be assured that "Unit X is planning to attack location Y" is spot on. Against a human it could mean that your opponent has given one of his units that location as its "planning target" but has no intentions whatsoever to actually attack that place. Consider that a "The Man Who Never Was" type intel trick.

If you receive a message "Unit X is on ship Y headed for location Z" you can be assured that this is good intel. Uhnfortunately you do not have any idea of where that ship is in its trip to that location, so it can be a crap shoot if you try to intercept that shipment.

Those above discussed types of messages are for the allied player only. The Japanese player gets "radio transmissions are detected at Pearl Harbor" type messages.



bradfordkay -> RE: Intel, do you use it? (2/17/2011 8:24:50 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: Canoerebel

Certain aspects about intel are always reliable, some are vague, and some are subject to manipulation by a cagey enemy. I don't think there's anything you can do to make it more reliable, but with experience you'll become more adept at reading it.

Here are some examples:

1. Always reliable (as far as I know): (a) There are xxx troops at yyy; (b) XXX Unit is aboard YYY Maru bound for Port ZZZ; XXX Unit is prepping for YYY Base.

2. Vague: Major radio transmissions at hex xx/yy. It's hard to know whether that's the KB, a combat TF, or a delusion.

3. Subject to manipulation: See Item 1(b) above, that is supposedly always reliable? Well, a cagey player can load a unit aboard a Maru, set the target as some distant and deceiving port, and then unload at a waypoint somewhere else. Cagey, cagey, and difficult to unravel, but great fun.

Anybody can read SigInt and get good information from it, but with experience you'll get better at using it and using against your opponent. It's a really fun part of the game, at least if you're the Allied player.



BTW Dan, our mutual opponent is good at playing those games. fair warning...



AcePylut -> RE: Intel, do you use it? (2/17/2011 9:38:44 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: bradfordkay

Sometimes the intel is spot on - at least for the allies. Part of teh game is deciding which intel you want to put stock in.


If you are playing against the AI, you can be assured that "Unit X is planning to attack location Y" is spot on. Against a human it could mean that your opponent has given one of his units that location as its "planning target" but has no intentions whatsoever to actually attack that place. Consider that a "The Man Who Never Was" type intel trick.

If you receive a message "Unit X is on ship Y headed for location Z" you can be assured that this is good intel. Uhnfortunately you do not have any idea of where that ship is in its trip to that location, so it can be a crap shoot if you try to intercept that shipment.

Those above discussed types of messages are for the allied player only. The Japanese player gets "radio transmissions are detected at Pearl Harbor" type messages.


This is where 'you, yourself' need to be... cagier. You may receive that message, and alone, it means nothing. But if you could combine that with other intel reports over various days... it may add up to something.

For example:

Assume the Japs have Rabaul, PM, Lunga, but not Noumea, and it's early-mid 42, and these are the intel reports I see.

Day 1 (filtering out the other 20-30 nothings): Heavy radio xmissions reported (120 m S of tokyo - I forget the hex)

Day 3: radio xmissions at a location to the south, that matches an approximate transport travel distance of the day-1 sighting

Day 4: 2nd Snlf is planning an attack on Noumea

Day 5: 1024 men located at Rabaul

Day 6: unit xxxx (Jap division) in planning an attack on Noumea (and lets say the allies know that these two units are together, perhaps from a previous combat a couple months ago or such)

Day 9: Coastwatchers spot 5 ships at Rabaul

Day 13: Japanese Infantry Division is on a ship heading to Port Moresby.

Day 20: 45,000 men located at rabual
Coastwatchers spot 45 ships at Rabaul.

What do you make of that? To me, it tells me that a large amount of japanese troops have moved into the Solomons in force, and he is thinking about going after Noumea.

Or maybe he's just messing with me, and those are reserve troops that are feinting towards Noumea, when he's really going to NE Oz.



themetalcrow -> RE: Intel, do you use it? (2/17/2011 10:26:10 PM)

so it is useful and can be effected by the player?

this is probably the wrong forum but it's about intel/recon. im also looking into "Eagle Day to Bombing the Reich" and "War in the east"

is there an intel/recon system in those games as well? how does it compare?

overall are they pretty similar types of games, with regard to depth and options and details?

thanks garrett



witpqs -> RE: Intel, do you use it? (2/17/2011 10:53:11 PM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: themetalcrow

so it is useful and can be effected by the player?

this is probably the wrong forum but it's about intel/recon. im also looking into "Eagle Day to Bombing the Reich" and "War in the east"

is there an intel/recon system in those games as well? how does it compare?

overall are they pretty similar types of games, with regard to depth and options and details?

thanks garrett


First buy this game. You will then be assimilated, resistance being futile. It will then be unnecessary to spend money on other games. Put the extra money into a retirement account.



Schanilec -> RE: Intel, do you use it? (2/18/2011 7:31:38 PM)

Damn there went $60.00. "Eagle Day to Bombing the Reich", Happy President's Day to me!



Bald Michael -> RE: Intel, do you use it? (2/19/2011 2:20:13 AM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: themetalcrow

im thinking about buying this game, but $90 is no joke for me. i really like that intelligence isn't completely accurate, but is there any way in game to make it more accurate? or is it always completely unreliable?
if it's never reliable, doesn't that make it a pointless feature?

thanks garrett



Garrett, I understand your concern about the money. I had the same problem. I finally decided to go for it two months ago -- absolutely no regrets here. I know the the intelligence was accurate the time I used it (described above). I've taken similar action on intelligence and no TFs showed up. I see the ambiguity as reflecting the realities of war.



Mac Linehan -> RE: Intel, do you use it? (2/19/2011 7:29:14 PM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: Canoerebel

The more I play the game, the more enjoyable I find intel and information gathering.

...and the more useful I find that information - critical even.

...and the more I learn how the other side can use it to create misinformation.

Man, it's a blast and it's rich and it adds an incredible element to the game (and I don't even use Tracker or any other device).

witpqs is right - the Allies get much less useful information in the game than they got in real life. In real life, they usually knew where the KB was, or at least where it wasn't, for instance. You don't get that very often in the game, unless your opponent discloses his carriers through ignorance or an important mission.


Canoerebel -

I can only agree with your assessment. The intell and Sigint reports are full of important (and often critical) information - and are very useful.

Mac



Mac Linehan -> RE: Intel, do you use it? (2/19/2011 7:40:25 PM)

themetalcrow -

AE is worth every penny - literally an investment for a lifetime's worth of playing.

Do hope that you will join us,

Mac



V22 Osprey -> RE: Intel, do you use it? (2/20/2011 6:42:38 PM)

I almost never look at intel. Current enemy ships being sighted is shown on map as the red Japanese ship icons, and usually just rely on that. The only thing actually care to read(atleast in my current PBEM Campaign) is combat reports.

quote:

ORIGINAL: themetalcrow

so it is useful and can be effected by the player?

this is probably the wrong forum but it's about intel/recon. im also looking into "Eagle Day to Bombing the Reich" and "War in the east"

is there an intel/recon system in those games as well? how does it compare?

overall are they pretty similar types of games, with regard to depth and options and details?

thanks garrett


WitP:AE > WitE > EGtBTR (I have all three games)

IMO



themetalcrow -> RE: Intel, do you use it? (2/20/2011 8:00:44 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: V22 Osprey

I almost never look at intel. Current enemy ships being sighted is shown on map as the red Japanese ship icons, and usually just rely on that. The only thing actually care to read(atleast in my current PBEM Campaign) is combat reports.

quote:

ORIGINAL: themetalcrow

so it is useful and can be effected by the player?

this is probably the wrong forum but it's about intel/recon. im also looking into "Eagle Day to Bombing the Reich" and "War in the east"

is there an intel/recon system in those games as well? how does it compare?

overall are they pretty similar types of games, with regard to depth and options and details?

thanks garrett


WitP:AE > WitE > EGtBTR (I have all three games)

IMO


good to know, now do you like all 3 and are all 3 fun and worth their price?



V22 Osprey -> RE: Intel, do you use it? (2/21/2011 4:14:18 AM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: themetalcrow


quote:

ORIGINAL: V22 Osprey

I almost never look at intel. Current enemy ships being sighted is shown on map as the red Japanese ship icons, and usually just rely on that. The only thing actually care to read(atleast in my current PBEM Campaign) is combat reports.

quote:

ORIGINAL: themetalcrow

so it is useful and can be effected by the player?

this is probably the wrong forum but it's about intel/recon. im also looking into "Eagle Day to Bombing the Reich" and "War in the east"

is there an intel/recon system in those games as well? how does it compare?

overall are they pretty similar types of games, with regard to depth and options and details?

thanks garrett


WitP:AE > WitE > EGtBTR (I have all three games)

IMO


good to know, now do you like all 3 and are all 3 fun and worth their price?


IMO, WitP:AE and WitE are EASILY worth the price. I'm having a blast with both games and their is nothing like the excitement of a WitP:AE PBEM. Eagle Day on the other hand....it's great game but it needs a pretty decent sized patch. And at being $60 I would wait until the next patch comes. All in all though it is a fun game, and my Battle of Britain fix.



zace -> RE: Intel, do you use it? (2/21/2011 4:21:38 AM)

This system is an AMD one but I do have an Intel laptop.



themetalcrow -> RE: Intel, do you use it? (2/23/2011 10:26:24 PM)

one last thing. reading all these forums it seems like most think the AI is useless and no fun to play. i don't really do multiplayer so i do need a good fun AI. is the AI actually that bad, or is it just too easy for the real experienced players? im just looking for a challenging fun play experience that is dynamic and replayable. also, ive never actually played these types of wargames before, so i don't need a real hard unbeatable AI opponent.

So does the AI provide a fun, dynamic, and at least challenging opponent?

garrett



Chickenboy -> RE: Intel, do you use it? (2/23/2011 10:38:17 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: themetalcrow

one last thing. reading all these forums it seems like most think the AI is useless and no fun to play. i don't really do multiplayer so i do need a good fun AI. is the AI actually that bad, or is it just too easy for the real experienced players? im just looking for a challenging fun play experience that is dynamic and replayable. also, ive never actually played these types of wargames before, so i don't need a real hard unbeatable AI opponent.

So does the AI provide a fun, dynamic, and at least challenging opponent?

garrett

Sounds like you'd be fine with the AI in AE.



BigDuke66 -> RE: Intel, do you use it? (2/24/2011 12:52:45 AM)

And if you are good enough to beat the AI start a PBEM, playing against a human player is simply the best.



Rainer -> RE: Intel, do you use it? (2/24/2011 1:48:51 AM)

Not sure what it counts for but I play WitP and Witp/AE since they were released - Allied against AI only.
If time permits every day.
Meaning (including the early version of PacWar) about 20 years.
Only against AI.
Convinced ?



Zigurat666 -> RE: Intel, do you use it? (2/24/2011 1:54:19 AM)

Second cockroach analogy tonight but where there's one theres a million. Jap intel may not tell you who's picking their nose at the Green Geisha bar in Maizaru like the allies does but something like "radio transmissions detected at 34,78" in the middle of nowhere can be a jackpot if you send the right TF.



crsutton -> RE: Intel, do you use it? (2/24/2011 3:31:07 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: themetalcrow

im thinking about buying this game, but $90 is no joke for me. i really like that intelligence isn't completely accurate, but is there any way in game to make it more accurate? or is it always completely unreliable?
if it's never reliable, doesn't that make it a pointless feature?

thanks garrett



No my earlier point is that it is "sometimes" accurate and helpful (for the Allies mostly). You have to learn how to read it.

Anyways, you should buy the game. For $90 bucks you go downtown and get a cheap hooker for about an hour-or buy the game and get hundreds of hours of entertainment. And if you are an Allied fanboy you can usually expect a "happy ending".[:D]



CaptDave -> RE: Intel, do you use it? (2/24/2011 8:28:37 PM)

IIRC, and that certainly is not guaranteed, some time back one of the people-who-should-know pointed out that the "Radio transmissions detected..." message indicated extra intelligence was available when hovering the cursor over the hex in question.  I've found this to be the case about half the time on a normal message, a higher percentage when a heavy volume is reported.  However, the hovering technique is almost never helpful in an ocean hex because the TF that may or may not be there has already moved on and is now undetected.



Schanilec -> RE: Intel, do you use it? (2/24/2011 10:00:22 PM)

Any intel at all is useful. Whether the task force is there or not. There several options. Increased air searches, vectoring subs, task forces, Increase CAp in possible threatened areas, etc. It's a crap shoot. And that is only one aspect of all the enjoyment I get from WitP-AE.



Alpha77 -> RE: Intel, do you use it? (2/26/2011 1:07:33 PM)

I dont read it, not enough time - it is more crucial for me to move forward in game time a.t.m. You should note that putting together decent and huge enough invasion fleets+armies takes massive amount of time :( So I need to skip some of the game features (as well some of the micromanagement like training etc.)

Also ca. the half of the Jap carriers are sunk anyway and the rest seem to be scattered near New Guinea anyway.



Alpha77 -> RE: Intel, do you use it? (2/26/2011 1:29:06 PM)

@ Canoerebel: "Reconnaissance and patroling are important aspects of the game. You can influence them through the quality and quanitity of the forces committed, size of the area patrolled, weather effects, etc. "

I would even say THE MOST important aspect. But the intel reports are not part of that neccesary, the flyboys are still THE recon asset in the game. The other one would be recon by battle (or force).


@ witpqs: "First buy this game. You will then be assimilated, resistance being futile. It will then be unnecessary to spend money on other games. Put the extra money into a retirement account. "

I would agree, except the retirement account. Think of the inflation to come.....maybe invest in raw materials and energy but not "paper" money (OT yes)



Page: <<   < prev  1 [2]

Valid CSS!




Forum Software © ASPPlayground.NET Advanced Edition 2.4.5 ANSI
0.9375