Tactical Control

Matrix Games Forums

Forums Register Login Photo Gallery Member List Search Calendars FAQ

My Profile Inbox Address Book My Subscription My Forums Log Out

Tactical Control

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] >> War In The Pacific - Struggle Against Japan 1941 - 1945 >> Tactical Control

Page: [1]

Message

<< Older Topic Newer Topic >>

Tactical Control - 1/11/2001 12:57:00 AM

Doug Olenick

Posts: 91
Joined: 9/26/2000
From: ny
Status: offline

How "fine" will the player's control be during surface engagements? Will we have the ability to target specific ships, or will the computer simply determined the outcome as is done in PacWar. Also, can air units be aimed at specific targets, say to hit only the warships in a port or the CVs in a TF? I always hated watching my planes pound the ground forces instead of hitting the port, even when it was told too.

_____________________________

Post #: 1

- 1/11/2001 1:33:00 AM

brisd

Posts: 614
Joined: 5/20/2000
From: San Diego, CA
Status: offline

As fleet commander you would NOT (should not) have the ability to make those decisions. That is the scale of this game. When you select the type of task force you have options as to their use. That's why you put good commanders in charge of your forces to make those tactical decisions. With both the human player and computer player having the same tactical resolution based on forces and commanders, the combat is balanced, leaving you to plan grand strategy. Perhaps there will be an option to set targets for the HQ's and a player might decide to put his personal attention on one HQ/front and get more tactical control of the situation. I would hope that the new game's combat resolution would be smarter than PACWAR when it came to target selection. But remember FOG of War - just because one task force or coast watcher has spotted the enemy doesn't mean that your carrier TF changes its mission from attack ground troops on a certain base to intercept that enemy force. This is WWII not the Gulf War, they didn't have secure satellite communications and tactical control at the highest levels. That intelligence may not reach the commanders in the field who need it. I do like the original PACWAR's initiative routine where your TF's can launch attacks against spotted enemy forces within range. Hopefully the new game will have a refined version. [This message has been edited by brisd (edited January 10, 2001).]

_____________________________

"I propose to fight it out on this line if it takes all summer."-Note sent with Congressman Washburne from Spotsylvania, May 11, 1864, to General Halleck. - General Ulysses S. Grant

(in reply to Doug Olenick)

Post #: 2

- 1/11/2001 1:48:00 AM

Doug Olenick

Posts: 91
Joined: 9/26/2000
From: ny
Status: offline

Fog of War or not, if an airstrike is tasked to hit a port it should not hit ground units or the airfield.

_____________________________

(in reply to Doug Olenick)

Post #: 3

- 1/11/2001 8:00:00 AM

Major Tom

Posts: 525
Joined: 4/8/2000
From: Canada
Status: offline

Thats what the selection of commanders is for. Routinely, commanders on the field changed priorities of strikes (ala The Battle of Midway) without consulting the high command. Possibly they saw the AA offered by LCU's or coast defence as a larger threat than a port? With more options for commander statistics, I am pretty sure that this area will be covered more thouroughly than in PacWar.

_____________________________

(in reply to Doug Olenick)

Post #: 4