Quote:I can understand these ideas for the game as a game. I do not see them as doing anything for the simulation side of the series. That was the point of my first post in this thread.
I see what you are saying but remember this:
Non phased play exists ONLY for the fact that most people do not want to tolerate sending > 1 emails for each turn, which is what phased play does. Non phased play attempts to combine all phases into one single turn to make it more PBEM friendly, it has nothing to do with simulating lack of control at the operational level. The Achilles heel of non phased play has always been that you give up control over defensive fire since it is being conducted on the opponents turn.
That said, giving some manner of control to the user to specify when and how his units should fire during the opponents turn merely attempts to close the gap and at least allow the user to give preferences to how the AI conducts defensive fire in a manner close to which how they would conduct defensive fire during phased play.
The fact remains, currently a user can sap defensive fire using an armored car, or by declaring and canceling assaults that they have no intent on executing. Gaming the game exists regardless of what is done, but giving some manner of control of what happens will at least allow the defender to blame their own defensive fire settings and change them to something else.
Quote:VM does have a creative idea. I would think it is a set and forget setting he is proposing. Set it once at the beginning of the scenario. The only down side I can see is the attacker would soon be able to discern the extreme settings and adjust tactics to take advantage of them since they are extreme.
It is NOT a set and forget idea, it is simply an option to specify how and when the AI should fire defensive fire which could be changed at any time during play as the situation changes. You could change the settings a thousand times during one turn but none of them matter until you end your turn, at which point the settings are saved for the opponents turn. It could be set from turn to turn if the enemy player is adapting to it or because the situation changes and you want maximum firepower directed to something. It would basically be exactly the same to an old John Tiller game series, Campaign Series, where the user can specify similar defensive fire parameters (although it had greater control allowing you to specify exact ranges to open fire, which makes sense for a tactical game).
Anyway, most people would leave the settings at default and it should play no different that it already does. It would also, by no means, give "total control" to what the AI does during defensive fire anyway so it really has nothing to do with the rationale that there should be some lack of control for the defense. As a matter of fact, it is illogical to grant total offensive control of units but have no control whatsoever over defending units. To properly "simulate" lack of control at the operational level then you should be playing automatic AI and just give AI orders to formations.
Oh well, it is not like anything would be done about it, unless it is brought up at the next Tillercon. ;)
Archived Forums
Help
Calendar
Member List
Search
){kind=link}