So, what about the MODs?

Major Snails
Sergeant Major of the Army
Posts: 381
Joined: Tue 29 May 2012 20:54

Re: So, what about the MODs?

Postby Major Snails » Tue 17 Jul 2012 03:11

Bastables wrote:
Realism in Sudden strike mods
Rome TW
Panzer General 3d.

........... These being used a touchstones for "realism" along with the utterly asinine argument that in the era of ATGM's Helo's and fully mechanised infantry Wargame should play exactly like it was 1942/43/44 utterly discredits you.

Not even knowing what sort Leo 1's were around during the time frame and then trying to exclude them because you have no clue . . .

You are the poster boy for the Dunning- Kruger effect
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dunning%E2 ... ger_effect


What descredites you is the fact that you have no arguments at all brought up in your posts apart from personally attacking me.

Also you are completly wrong with all you write there.

- I never said I want W:EE to be like a WW2 game. That was interpreted as my oppinion by some ppl who cannot read.
- I defined "Realism mod" as something that is "more realistic" than vanilla version. But you, ofc, did not read that too.
- I did not say that those realism mods of the other games are by any means a "touchstone" for anything. that is your, false interpretation and your wish to find something within my posts to twist it against me.
- Leopards 1 timeframe was just an example. I stated before that I just began deeper research when I started playing W:EE. Not everybody dedicates his life totally to all eras of warfare in such detail. At least I dont lack some general understanding in warfare mechanims unchanged throughout the ages, in opposite to many ppl here who lack one basic, important thing: perception

User avatar
OpusTheFowl
General
Posts: 6660
Joined: Sun 26 Feb 2012 19:52
Location: White Rock, Canada
Contact:

Re: So, what about the MODs?

Postby OpusTheFowl » Tue 17 Jul 2012 03:49

Getting off-topic here and the sniping need to stop.

Remember the golden rule: Attack the strategy, not the person.

Thanks!

Bastables
Warrant Officer
Posts: 447
Joined: Fri 30 Mar 2012 05:49
Contact:

Re: So, what about the MODs?

Postby Bastables » Tue 17 Jul 2012 05:31

Really, so it's everyone else fault that your contradictory statements about realism within RTS's have no internal consistency or logic and therefore come across a blither?

Let us look at your contention that adding: - Implement a visible sight range effect (like Fog of War). would be part of adding realism.

Really a fog of war mechanism used in rts during the 90s onwards to inform people playing a game where their units/army sight line is at all realistic?

Look at Combat Mission Battle for Normandy with all it's implementation of relative spotting, communication through radio, voice and sight between units while using things like a real world command structure. This is a RT game where they model the individual interaction of APC/BC, HVAP, HEAT verses FH, RHA, cast armour, impact angle hardness of shells, shatter gap and host of other reasons for penetration or not. Do you see unit fog of war in this game, do you see a fog war when you were in the military, or just walking down the street in your civilian life.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OZ6dDlqye9Q
or distant guns for early 20th century naval warfare
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CqtkXhlUidA
Or 1940s battalion level war-games (download the zip file in the media section)
http://cota.matrixgames.com/downloads/
No RTS style "fog of war" because it is not considered a realistic implementation by people constructing wargames on the niche side of the spectrum.

Because if you think fog of war is realistic based on your own life (or games that attempt to be more simulation like) You are probably in the town of silent hill and have much larger issues than factiously aggregating game concepts with reality because you prefer them in games you've played before.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ApsKF5cnSZ8

Allow me to be clear; Just because you like game concepts elsewhere does not mean they are REALISM tm.

User avatar
Wolve_NZ
Corporal
Posts: 32
Joined: Mon 9 Jul 2012 13:44
Contact:

Re: So, what about the MODs?

Postby Wolve_NZ » Tue 17 Jul 2012 06:00

I think the point with Fog of war is having some way of showing where you can See, so Often to I find myself wondering the LOS of my Vehicles on the edge of a Forest to the Left and right. Rarther than just using the Fire on Position to find out where they can see it would be good to Have some sought of filter like the Show Objective zones that we already have. Allowing not a "Fog" but a kind of way of seeing units LOS with maybe a Transparent shape being projected onto the Enviroment.

Summery:
- Interpret 'Fog of War' as a Metaphorical statement based on Line of Sight
- Add in a 'Filter' like the 'Show Obj.Zones' we already have
- Transparent shapes for showing LOS Projected onto Enviroment
- Would add allot more 'Polish' to the game, Due to removing need to improvise LOS Checks

Bastables
Warrant Officer
Posts: 447
Joined: Fri 30 Mar 2012 05:49
Contact:

Re: So, what about the MODs?

Postby Bastables » Tue 17 Jul 2012 06:10

Wolve_NZ wrote:I think the point with Fog of war is having some way of showing where you can See, so Often to I find myself wondering the LOS of my Vehicles on the edge of a Forest to the Left and right. Rarther than just using the Fire on Position to find out where they can see it would be good to Have some sought of filter like the Show Objective zones that we already have. Allowing not a "Fog" but a kind of way of seeing units LOS with maybe a Transparent shape being projected onto the Enviroment.

Summery:
- Interpret 'Fog of War' as a Metaphorical statement based on Line of Sight
- Add in a 'Filter' like the 'Show Obj.Zones' we already have
- Transparent shapes for showing LOS Projected onto Enviroment
- Would add allot more 'Polish' to the game, Due to removing need to improvise LOS Checks

This is not realism, this is making it easier through the UI for the player to micromanage units in a video game. And that's cool, but for the sake of babyjeasus/allah/budda/ahura mazda please do not equate things one likes, as superior by applying ones own misperceptions of realism.

Seriously Major Snail argued the video game based in the 60s-85 was more realistic when it played more like a wwII rts . . . :roll:

User avatar
Wolve_NZ
Corporal
Posts: 32
Joined: Mon 9 Jul 2012 13:44
Contact:

Re: So, what about the MODs?

Postby Wolve_NZ » Tue 17 Jul 2012 06:19

Well, in RL If im working with someone, I can tell them where I can see and cant see cant I? Yes I can!

So in short, having a way of Checking LOS would be very Realistic. As being the Commander, why Cant I ask my units to tell me where they have a LOS to Further evaluate the situation.

now, when I dont care what MajorSnails said, but im basing my opinion on my own Facts, not one some other Game as that stops a progressive addutide when in Development due to the back referencing rather than looking and finding something that would improve the realism without stepping out of the engines capability.

Now, while I do want a fully, 100% Realistic game, we cant due to the fact that it would be less of a Game, and more of a Radio simulator.

Bastables
Warrant Officer
Posts: 447
Joined: Fri 30 Mar 2012 05:49
Contact:

Re: So, what about the MODs?

Postby Bastables » Tue 17 Jul 2012 07:32

Wolve_NZ wrote:Well, in RL If im working with someone, I can tell them where I can see and cant see cant I? Yes I can!

So in short, having a way of Checking LOS would be very Realistic. As being the Commander, why Cant I ask my units to tell me where they have a LOS to Further evaluate the situation.

now, when I dont care what MajorSnails said, but im basing my opinion on my own Facts, not one some other Game as that stops a progressive addutide when in Development due to the back referencing rather than looking and finding something that would improve the realism without stepping out of the engines capability.

Now, while I do want a fully, 100% Realistic game, we cant due to the fact that it would be less of a Game, and more of a Radio simulator.

In real life, Military templates for LOCSTATS do not include exact metre by metre descriptions of what a call sign can see, so no you can't.

That's why Battalion has copies of drawing of terrain (if anyone can still draft in the unit) or photos, which take a bit of time collect and are really only available on fairly static situations. It's also why since and even during WWI the mortality of commonwealth/dominion officers is high due to the need to actually look at the ground themselves. An interesting anti progressive evolutionary pressure where competent officers are more likely to be killed.

User avatar
urielventis
Sergeant Major
Posts: 258
Joined: Wed 28 Mar 2012 08:34
Location: Equestria/Region parisienne
Contact:

Re: So, what about the MODs?

Postby urielventis » Tue 17 Jul 2012 08:38

[EUG]MadMat wrote:
urielventis wrote:
Major Snails wrote:- remove all the units that would not have been participants in a fictional WW3 (like MBT70 and maybe other stuff. I dont know if there was even one leopard1 left in 1985, but that needs research still).


In 1989, the West German Army still posses 1845 Leo 1A1s, 232 Leo 1A2, 110 Leo 1A3 and 250 A4. 1365 were being upgraded with thermal sight, so their designation will change. West German Army still posses 650 M48A2GA2 in it's territorial tank battalion.
source: Osprey, Tank War - Central Front NATO vs. Warsaw Pact, Steven Zaloga

Obsolete units are not to be dismissed because of their old ages: Leopards 1A1/1A3 remained the mainstream tank in many NATO armies (especially the "minor" armies we didn't included, such as Netherlands, Canada, Greece, Denmark, ...) at the end of Wargame's timeframe.

Let's take the oldest of them all as example: the T-34/85 was still in service in some Polish frontline units up to 1989. The Polish army still had more than 700 of them in 1983! Of course, it won't be used as breakthrough tanks, and those Category C mechanized division still equiped with them wouldn't be the first ones thrown against NATO forces ... but nonetheless, they hadn't disappeared completely.
The Czechoslovakian army was still scrapping some old T-34/85 in the mid-80's, while receiving more modern replacements (T-72, which were given in priority to Category A divisions, which in turn passed on their T-55 to the lesser divisions, allowing the latter to give up their T-34).

The same was true on NATO side, especially "minor" members or home guard/territorial units.
As mentionned above, the West-Germans themselves still had (upgraded) M48 in their territorial units, but other nations (Turkey, Norway, ...) had M48A1/A5, or even older tanks, dating back from the last days of WW2 (or close): Norwegian M24 Chaffee, Turkish M8 Greyhound, Danish M41 Walker Bulldog, ...

My favorite being the Finnish "Sturmi": nothing else than a WW2 German StuG ... with logs attached on its side as additional armor!
http://www.andreaslarka.net/ps531033/53103302.jpg


In the Osprey book I'm citing, they say that Belgium use M-47 in instruction bataillon and that Portugal tank force use some upgraded M4 Sherman in 1989.

The three tank generation existing in the Warsaw Pact army are explained by the enormous number of tank to upgrade or replace, and even with the Soviet Union industrial power, such a case (replacing every old tank by new tank) will take almost 10 years.

East german and Czeckoslovakian tank army have almost 80% of T-55, just upgrading them with laser rangefinder (so the increase precision of T-55 gun in wargame on later version).

I would have appreciated a more realist game but we must place a limit of what to do for the sake of playability.
The game is good, no need to make major change.
Only one in my opinion will be a good addition: two armor value for each side of vehicule, one against kinetic aggresion, one against chemical energy. Later version of tank with reactive, chobman, stillbrew, horseshoes armor will have a clear reason to be one the field.
http://collinsj.tripod.com/protect.htm


If you want more realism, play Close Combat modern war, or wait for DCS Combined Arms.
ImageImage

User avatar
Wolve_NZ
Corporal
Posts: 32
Joined: Mon 9 Jul 2012 13:44
Contact:

Re: So, what about the MODs?

Postby Wolve_NZ » Tue 17 Jul 2012 09:08

Bastables wrote:In real life, Military templates for LOCSTATS do not include exact metre by metre descriptions of what a call sign can see, so no you can't.

That's why Battalion has copies of drawing of terrain (if anyone can still draft in the unit) or photos, which take a bit of time collect and are really only available on fairly static situations. It's also why since and even during WWI the mortality of commonwealth/dominion officers is high due to the need to actually look at the ground themselves. An interesting anti progressive evolutionary pressure where competent officers are more likely to be killed.



Yea, but in RL we cant see a Birds eye View of a Battle either, so sacrificing Realism for Playable is still a major concern. Neither do we see outlines of Sectors of Importance either, so having a filter does not effect realism in the area of UI as all the information on LOS Area's can be found though using the Fire on Position command and moving the target around, showing the directions they can see in. Now, adding a filter will remove a reason for this work around. As I previously stated.

Major Snails
Sergeant Major of the Army
Posts: 381
Joined: Tue 29 May 2012 20:54

Re: So, what about the MODs?

Postby Major Snails » Tue 17 Jul 2012 12:47

Thx for the valuable updates on some points.
Yet this is not the right topic or thread to discuss this matter in more detail (at least for me).
Once mod tools are implemented I will be back for this discussion for sure.

Also it makes no sense for me to argue with ppl like Bastables who may bring up some more "substance" in their posts now and then, but cannot stop twisting other ppls words and try to attack them personally. I am not a therapist for ppl who have problems with their reallife and therefor have to rampant in the internet. So please, Bastables, try to be 1. fair 2. perceptive 3. mature 4. reasonable. Thx.

As for the discussion:
Fog of war is an abstract concept based on the fact, that the point of view of an RTS player is very much "artificial". No officer or general has the chance to view a combat life from top of the battlefield. Maybe some modern concepts allow that lately, but I dont know for sure and dont care because it does not touch W:EE timeframe.

Fog of war is nothing else than a simulated "horizon" for the units on the battlefield. So when I walk in my everyday life, ofc, I dont see the FOG OF WAR. Because only the player who would control me would see the Fog of war in all that areas that I cannot see directly.

@Bastables: I would definatly take a look at those examples and games you brought up here (1 played 1-2 of them already, but long time ago I think) and measure their mechanics for a "mod" ofc.

Return to “Wargame : European Escalation”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 10 guests