Noob Question Regarding "Realism"

Matrix Games Forums

Forums Register Login Photo Gallery Member List Search Calendars FAQ

My Profile Inbox Address Book My Subscription My Forums Log Out

Noob Question Regarding "Realism"

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

Logged in as: Guest

Users viewing this topic: none

Printable Version

All Forums >> [New Releases from Matrix Games] >> Command: Modern Operations series >> Noob Question Regarding "Realism"

Page: [1]

Message

<< Older Topic Newer Topic >>

Noob Question Regarding "Realism" - 6/19/2014 8:53:09 AM

tango4

Posts: 52
Joined: 6/19/2014
Status: offline

Hi everyone,
I don't own the game at the moment but I am considering buying it.
As it is quite expensive, I try to get some information on what exactly it simulates.
Here comes my question:
If I understand correctly, you are basically playing as a commander of a sort of "task force", basically every unit on your side.
I just wonder how are handled comms.
The example that comes to my mind is that of submarines. I have the feeling that you can micro manage every unit if you wish, which would not be possible in real life. To make my question a bit clearer just imagine a quick scenario with an attack sub and an ASW frigate under your command, hunting an enemy sub.
In real life, once I have ordered the sub to dive below commms depths, I won't be able to communicate with him, at least not frequently.
I have the feeling that in "command" , if my attack sub sees the enemy sub and gets a firing solution, I'll be able to share it with my frigate immediately.
Perhaps I am wrong but I am not sure I understood correclty how this would be treated and if that is realistic.
If someone has the time to just quickly enlighten me, that would be great.
And please don't hesitate to tell me if my post was not really clear !

Best regards everyone.

Charles MOULIN

Post #: 1

RE: Noob Question Regarding "Realism" - 6/19/2014 9:28:41 AM

poaw

Posts: 107
Joined: 12/17/2001
From: Houston, Texas
Status: offline

You're allowed to actively command units and share information between them even in situations when it would be impossible in real life, like the example you mention and others.

(in reply to tango4)

Post #: 2

RE: Noob Question Regarding "Realism" - 6/19/2014 9:45:30 AM

Pergite!

Posts: 546
Joined: 6/7/2006
From: The temperate climate zone
Status: offline

The submarine comms issue has extensively been discussed in an older thread that I am currently are unable to find. In it the developers give their view on the current design choice regarding subs in particular. Try searching for it.

(in reply to poaw)

Post #: 3

RE: Noob Question Regarding "Realism" - 6/19/2014 11:03:13 AM

thewood1

Posts: 6529
Joined: 11/27/2005
Status: offline

If you feel there is too much communications between units, you can choose to make them friendly, non-hostile, neutral, etc. There are a hundred things you can do in postures to make it so realistic that you'll rage quit every time you fire it up.

(in reply to Pergite!)

Post #: 4

RE: Noob Question Regarding "Realism" - 6/19/2014 11:45:31 AM

Mgellis

Posts: 2054
Joined: 8/18/2007
Status: offline

One really easy way to handle the submarine issue is to make surface units and the submarines (or each submarine) separate sides. You can control how much information they share, without making them hostile to one another, by setting side postures as either friendly (shares location and treats anyone attacking you as hostile) or neutral (is not hostile but does not share information, etc.). You get some interesting results by setting side A as friendly to side B but setting side B as neutral to side A.

Regardless, the player only controls one side. So, if you have a surface action group, but the submarines are a separate side, you may know where they are, if they are allies, but you have no control over what they do in the scenario.

(This is also a good way to create "rogue" units in both player and computer sides that will do things the rest of the side would not do, like fire on a target before it is clear that the target is actually hostile.)

Anyway, I hope this helps.

< Message edited by Mgellis -- 6/19/2014 12:46:41 PM >

(in reply to thewood1)

Post #: 5

RE: Noob Question Regarding "Realism" - 6/19/2014 11:49:40 AM

tango4

Posts: 52
Joined: 6/19/2014
Status: offline

Thanks a lot for all your (very fast !) answers.
They are most useful.
Pergite!, I'll try to locate this topic and apologies for not having searched well enough.

I'll try to investigate the solutions you all offer using separate sides.

Once again thanks a lot for all your answers, and not calling me stupid right now !

Charles

(in reply to Mgellis)

Post #: 6

RE: Noob Question Regarding "Realism" - 6/19/2014 11:58:11 AM

tango4

Posts: 52
Joined: 6/19/2014
Status: offline

And I just found the topic !!
thanks a lot once again.

Charles

(in reply to tango4)

Post #: 7

RE: Noob Question Regarding "Realism" - 6/19/2014 12:23:39 PM

Pergite!

Posts: 546
Joined: 6/7/2006
From: The temperate climate zone
Status: offline

No problem what so ever!

Friendly fog-of-war is like a wet dream in war-gaming for me so I would certainly be all for it (as an painfully realistic option). Throw in a little electronic warfare and effects of order delay and even the most simple scenario could become totally unplayable.

(in reply to tango4)

Post #: 8

RE: Noob Question Regarding "Realism" - 6/19/2014 12:47:05 PM

thewood1

Posts: 6529
Joined: 11/27/2005
Status: offline

Command has one the best capabilities for friendly FOW around. But it is optional and dependent on the scenario designer. You also have to have faith in the AI.

(in reply to Pergite!)

Post #: 9

RE: Noob Question Regarding "Realism" - 6/19/2014 2:42:46 PM

Pergite!

Posts: 546
Joined: 6/7/2006
From: The temperate climate zone
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: thewood1

Command has one the best capabilities for friendly FOW around. But it is optional and dependent on the scenario designer. You also have to have faith in the AI.

I would not go that far, since all units need to be pre-programmed (you actually do not command them) and then you still know where they are as allies. To me that is not fog of war at all, its just units not under your direct command.

The only true computer wargame friendly fog of war I have ever witnessed was in POA2 (Point of Attack 2). You gave your orders to your companies and platoons that then headed out to meet the enemy. They reported their position when in contact or on the intervals you specified. Little communication means low probability of intercept from enemy surveillance (communication needs for different tasks where actually calculated and handled in data bits IIRC) If however enemy jamming starts up, then you could lose contact with your units completely and get a very scarce picture of how the battle is unfolding. It was not for the faint of heart, and also sadly quote a bug ridden game at the time.

If the allied (simulated sub) side in command could have their own position hidden and just report their contacts would in my opinion improve the current set-up a lot. As it is now you can from the simulated subs movement and positions also tell where the enemy likely isn't located. An option for hidden position of allied units would prevent this and to my understand increase the realism within the current game mechanics.

(in reply to thewood1)

Post #: 10

RE: Noob Question Regarding "Realism" - 6/19/2014 2:51:24 PM

thewood1

Posts: 6529
Joined: 11/27/2005
Status: offline

Don't make them allies...treat them as neutrals. That gives real FOW. It is only an issue with older scenarios where comms are not as good. If a sub is going to provide enemy position info, it will also provide own location info. It is sop.

I beta-tested POA2 until it got wrecked by the 2.5 upgrades. It's friendly FOW looked good, but didn't function well because there was no AI to control it outside communications.

(in reply to Pergite!)

Post #: 11

RE: Noob Question Regarding "Realism" - 6/19/2014 3:23:29 PM

tango4

Posts: 52
Joined: 6/19/2014
Status: offline

Well, I do agree with what was said before, a good comms simulation would be a great feature, although I do understand it might be very difficult to implement without making things unplayable.
I'll keep reading about this game before making a decision, but it clearly looks very intersting, and the community in those forum really looks educated and friendly (which is always a good point because forums are really a good help source in such complicated sims).

Charles

(in reply to thewood1)

Post #: 12