Re: Stealth (was: Basic strategies for winning almost every map)

[Dave Fancella <davidfancella@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>]

On Monday 11 April 2005 01:19 pm, Jonathan Koren wrote:
> I don't know about this.  I like the idea of submarines pretty much
> determining when to reveal themselves.  I also like the idea of submarines
> slipping through armadas. In game terms I have too concerns.

That is kind of their purpose, after all.  :)  Also, keep in mind that 
submarines are used in the real world (and have been) now for three basic 
missions:

1.  To attack an enemy's supply lines
2.  To attack commercial shipping
3.  To tote nuclear missiles around (I don't know how many of these are still 
around, afaik there are no treaties that cover them)

The only one of these missions that is generally applicable here is the third, 
toting around some large missile.

Otherwise, while submarines battle with one another, they're not typically 
part of a battle group (even if they are classed in a battle group).  They 
usually work solo missions.  Maybe I'm outdated in this information, but very 
much submarines are not generally used in pitched battles.

> 1.  With this "detect subs in adjacent hexes", all you need to do is place
> your ships every two hexes to create an impenentrable submarine net.
> Granted there aren't many maps (if any) that use subs now, but given the
> size of the maps we've seen so far, 3 or 4 ships would be sufficient to
> cover most of the map.  Basically, this is a question of balance.  I'd
> prefer to see this rule not implemented at first, and if subs are too
> powerful, then have this rule added later.

I would be interested in a detect subs in adjacent hexes only if the sub is in 
that hex at the end of a turn.  So you can have your net, but a sub could 
move up close, wait a turn, then quickly penetrate the net, and wait another 
turn before resuming normal movement.  I don't know how fast they go right 
now, so that may not be practical.

> 2.  How would this "detect subs in adjacent hexes" work for a moving ship?
> They why you have it the rule described, it seems like you're primarily
> thinking about the end of movement.  What happens if you have a torpedo
> boat that moves across the board and somewhere in inits movement it passes
> by a submarine.  Does it detect it?  If so does the torpedo boat stop just
> as if it tried to move into the submarine's hex?  If it doesn't, does the
> sub stay on the map even after the torpedo boat moves past?  (I think it
> should, since it would simulate radioing the position of the sub to the
> rest of fleet.)

What I'd like to see, and I can almost guarantee Jens saying "no" for this :) 
is that the sub's hex should be grayed as a regular movement hex, but if you 
try to pass through it, then the sub immediately becomes active and you 
*must* fire on it.  Neither player gets the choice.  I think that would 
effectively balance all outstanding issues with subs, movement, and the fact 
that only one unit can occupy a hex at any point in time.

> Here's a more interesting possibility.  Remember that a player doesn't see
> their opponents actually move.  The screen goes black, and after some

Um, check your preferences?  You can chose to view opponent's movements.  I 
have mine disabled too, and it's easy to forget that you have that option, 
but it's there.

> I like the radar idea, and it's pretty much what I was trying to get at
> with the idea of antistealth sensors.  I really like the idea of having
> radar effectiveness fall off at long distances, but something like that
> would should be saved until "fog of war" is implemented, if/when that ever
> happens.

All this radar stuff is cool, but until there's a fog of war in the game, 
whatever decisions are made have to be made in the game as it is now.  :)

On a slightly different note, one thing about the fog of war that always 
irritates me in other games is that stationary bases, cities, and so forth, 
can't see very far.  Realistically, what with satellite technology and all, I 
think we can reliably expect certain traits.  Basically, I want stationary 
units that can't defend themselves (but possibly have mines) that extend the 
visible radar range of a side.  So your territory on the map, when the enemy 
is attacking stationary positions like cities, bases, labs, and so forth, you 
should be able to see all of it, not just where you have units nearby.  
However it's implemented, anyway.  I have serious issues with every 
implementation of the fog of war I've seen so far.

Dave

-- 
Awright, which one of you hid my PENIS ENVY?