Jump to content
Mogwa

Meeting Battle / Movement to Contact

Recommended Posts

An absolute prerequisite IMO would be to disable map updates in such a scenario. Only then can you slow down BlueFor to a more realistic pacing of decision making and how commands are slower to be executed. Sadly, only few players in Steel Beasts accept this as a precondition to network games.

Second, we at eSIm Games still have to work on the engine too and replace certain 1998 simplifications with more elaborate processes to

  1. improve the (constructive level) effects of camouflage
  2. to visualize camouflage better
  3. to separate identification from detection - it must be "detection", "categorization", and only at shorter ranges or with the help of other observers, "identification"

If identification could be implemented with taking into account also the behavior of a unit, it might be possible to create infiltration (...or exfiltration) scenarios. Steel Beasts must have the possibility for the user to influence the likelihoods for false-positive and false-negative identification by computer-controlled units.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
An absolute prerequisite IMO would be to disable map updates in such a scenario. Only then can you slow down BlueFor to a more realistic pacing of decision making and how commands are slower to be executed. Sadly, only few players in Steel Beasts accept this as a precondition to network games.

If you add a tool like this, it would be easier to work with no map udate, to keep track and share player detection (and wrong ID!)

http://www.steelbeasts.com/sbforums/showpost.php?p=206940&postcount=69

Second, we at eSIm Games still have to work on the engine too and replace certain 1998 simplifications with more elaborate processes to

  1. improve the (constructive level) effects of camouflage
  2. to visualize camouflage better
  3. to separate identification from detection - it must be "detection", "categorization", and only at shorter ranges or with the help of other observers, "identification"

If identification could be implemented with taking into account also the behavior of a unit, it might be possible to create infiltration (...or exfiltration) scenarios. Steel Beasts must have the possibility for the user to influence the likelihoods for false-positive and false-negative identification by computer-controlled units.

Do you know what Scipio Brigade level simulator is?

http://www.masagroup.net/solutions/customer-cases/scipio.html

http://www.masagroup.net/images/services/customer-projects/scipio/scipio-brochure.pdf

Edited by Froggy

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

DrDevice, I'd also be interested in getting involved with the "recce battle." If the planets align, I might even have time to do so this term.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
An absolute prerequisite IMO would be to disable map updates in such a scenario.

Rather than disabled all the time can we script it such that the “radio” works say every 30mins (or whatever the designer sets as the SOPs are for providing SITREPs) and if fired on / firing (this would reflect the passage of “Contact Reports”)?

This would reflect the infrequent updates of a non digitised battlespace but would provide information updates on a reasonably “realistic” basis?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I love the idea of no map updates at all, everybody working off paper maps, TeamSpeak radio SITREPS and contact reports only.

The down side is that to pull this off, you really need somebody in the Battle Captain (if recce) or Coy 2IC (if inf or combat team) seat to pull this off - meaning a guy with no units who just runs the radio net and manages the battlespace. That's a pretty specialized skillset and a tough sell - no shooting for you!

Plus radio procedure and drills become paramount.

It's crazy how much the F5 map changes things. Radio traffic drops to nothing when you can just see the whole battle at a glance.

Maybe the Yank BFT works this well for Blue SA. But Red SA I doubt very very much.

DG

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The Soviets and Russians have no comparable system to the Magic F5 Key. It's the ideal that all "battle-net" system designers aim for, basically - perhaps some nations in the West have achieved it.

Russo-Soviet C3I technology is primarily about passing information from the recce elements up to commanders, and passing orders down to manouevre units. That's about the extent of it; requests for fire or anything else are handled by specialists with their own systems.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.


×
×
  • Create New...