Preparedness for War – Information for Players on How to Avoid its Rising

[Ludi1867]

The Strategic Command system has some very innovative diplomacy models that can alter the entry of neutrals into the war by causing reactions to excessive or inadequate garrisoning of certain regions by an active nation. While this is innovative, it is often difficult for a player to understand what actions (or inactions) are causing the preparedness for war (PFW) of a neutral to rise. Sometimes the reason is buried somewhere in a script. In SC2PT there are at least two pop-ups mentioning Japanese garrison requirements to avoid undue Russian PFW increases. This pop ups only stay on the screen a short while, and then cannot be found while in the game. Hubert Cater commented in one thread that the pop ups could be found in one of the folders. True enough, they can, but getting out of the game, searching through folders for the information, and then figuring out what to do with it (one of the pop ups is not explicitly clear) is hardly conducive to immersive game play.

PFW factors often seem to be a little hard to understand when a new SC variant appears. Over time a rule of thumb or guideline is often posted by players who work through and figure out how to deal with the PFW situations that appear in the game. However, the SC engine does not currently provide a very good method for informing players on how they can avoid (if they want to and/or are able to free the forces) PFW from rising.

One option might be to adjust the Diplomacy screen to provide this information. At present the screen provides an indication of current PFW among neutral powers, and options for buying influence chits to affect this PFW. There is quite a bit of room for more information on this screen. A section that might be entitled “Preparedness for War” with a list of “Situations” or “Factors” that would show appropriate information when different neutrals are selected might provide a means of showing garrison or excessive force situations.

As a player of all these games I have been frequently frustrated when PFW in a key neutral starts to rise, and it is not clear why. The Diplomacy part of the engine is integral to the SC model, but at present it is far more opaque than it should be. More information needs to be made available to the player, and the occasional pop up is simply not good enough.

[scottsmm]

For the most part Ludi I think this has already been addressed.

[Happycat]

For the most part Ludi I think this has already been addressed.

Maybe it would be nice, for those of us who aren't psychic, to elaborate on this?

Although I have a thorough grounding in the history of the era, and can reasonably predict what actions might, say for example, tick off Mao Tse Tung, I do think that the question as posed deserves a slightly more responsive answer.

In a recent game, I was surprised to see Mao get all hot and bothered over "Japanese successes", and enter the war the following turn. Since none of my successes were in China (the only thing I had done was move an HQ), I was a bit baffled over such a bellicose posture on the part of the Reds, so early in the game (January '41).

Does "already addressed" mean it has been answered elsewhere? It's being fixed in the patch? Clearly, it sounds like you know something that some of the rest of us don't, so be a nice scottsmm and share with us

[scottsmm]

Okay First off guys I wasn't trying to imply that anyone told me anything. In fact I haven't been told anything by anybody. I'm just going off of what other people say, and forming my own opinion. I thought this was mainly about the Russian garrison popup problem in which it wasn't clear enough. As it seems to me like it is going to be fixed when the first patch comes out. Which I doubt will be a very long wait, but I haven't been told anything, and I apologize if I implied this in any way. I also would like to apologize for those of you who aren't psychic .

[Happycat]

I also would like to apologize for those of you who aren't psychic .

LOL

[AZGungHo]

Apology accepted!! ;-)

[Ludi1867]

Hi Scottsmm

You make a valid point, and perhaps I should elaborate a bit. The Russian prep for war pop up is certainly one of the situations I am referring to. There are certainly quite a few similar problems in earlier SC2 WaW campaigns: Italian prep for war being affected by Allied garrisons in the Med; Spanish prep for war potentially being affected by the USN operating too close to Spain; and Russian prep for war if the eastern German border is not garrisoned PROPERLY (ie neither too few units nor too many). In other words this type of problem seems to be a repititive one in the SC system.

You may be correct in that the pop up issue in SC2PT might be corrected in the next patch. However, that raises the question of how it will be addressed. More precise pop ups would help. Perhaps the pop ups will return each turn until the situation is addressed or the player turns them off. Or perhaps a dedicated place to check for this information could be created in the diplomacy screen, which is what I am suggesting.

I am not that concerned with which solution is put in place, but my view is that there seems to be a consistent vagueness in the SC engine when it comes to this type of information. Therefore I am suggesting a response that might be more broadly applied to all types of SC games, that would give players more information with which to make their decisions. (without their being psychic!)

[SeaMonkey]

Actually Ludi, I see this as more of an asset than detrimental to the game. How else would you like to simulate the "unknown" consequences for decision making that the original WW2 participants felt?

Decisions in life can never be fully predicted, there is always an unexpected intangible at work no matter how definitive the odds have been calculated.

Even though I know that the results from actions or inactions of the players of SC can be ascertained with ultimate certainty, humans still have the ability to forget and so they will recommit mistakes of the past gameplay they may have known at one time or the other.

In this instance I believe the complications, undocumented or not, assist in a more accurate presentation of WW2 conditions.

[Timskorn]

I understand what you're saying Seamonkey but there is a way to still do this without keeping players completely in the dark. Player's like to make informed decisions even if the outcome is unpredictable. At least they are given a chance to do something about it.

The SC2 series of games has always given advantage to those who know the scripts. This should never be necessary to know and means it could be designed into the game better, that's all. Nobody has to read the scripts of course, and can keep guessing (or simply memorize over repeatedly plays), but when playing head to head against competitive players you have to know them. Not knowing how to prevent Russian partisans from popping up, for example, gives a big advantage to your opponent and vice versa if you're playing an Axis player who does know.

[SeaMonkey]

I agree Tim, but usually when I'm playing an H to H game, I run another game in duplicate. Of course not knowing my opponents moves, I try to model what I think he would do and mirror his prior moves that I have observed.

Using this strategy I can move forward a few turns into the future to see what may develop or may not which ultimately dictates what my real move would be.

I also am able to conclude what the game scripts will present me with.

I guess you could say I'm wargaming the wargame.

[Ludi1867]

Hi SeaMonkey and Timskorn

I appreciate both of your comments on the issue. I understand the concern SeaMonkey raises, and there is validity to his perspective – the unknown is an important part of a game, and being surprised can be a good thing. On the other hand, it can be difficult to grasp why some things happen even after they happen, and then how to prevent them happening again in the future can also be challenging. Repeated play, studying the scripts and reading the forum for clues are the only options available at the moment. The pop up from Japanese HQ regarding Soviet concerns in Manchuria is actually an innovative effort to address this problem, in a way. I think the information could be presented a little better perhaps, but it is at least acknowledging that this kind of information should at least sometimes be made available to a player.

Perhaps a blended approach might be possible. Before some action or inaction triggers a rise in prep for war, or causes partisans to appear (I hadn’t thought of that example, Timskorn, but it is rather similar), perhaps little or no information is available. But once something happens – prep for war of a neutral starts to rise, a partisan appears, etc – then information on what happened, why, and what might be done to either prevent its recurrence or reduce the probability of recurrence could then be made available. In other words, once an event is triggered, the information display would then be triggered. For diplomatic events, the diplomacy screen provides a good potential spot to place the information, perhaps. I am not sure how partisans might be handled, but there is probably a way there too.

[scottsmm]

To be honest Ludi, You'll find out that eventually you will know the scripts pretty good as after a few games on each side you will be forced to master them without being physic . This will occur before any patch is released although it can't be too much longer as the game has been out there for about two months give or take a week. Usually that's a normal time period for the first patch to be released. Which usually fixes all the various bugs, and problems players have reported to Hubert and Co.

[Mithel]

In my opinion this is a weak point in SC2 (and other games). A player shouldn't need to study and be an expert on the scripts to understand what is going on in the game. We could argue the information should be in the manual, but manuals never stay up to date (and aren't as handy as info in the game). I love "Fog of War" but not "Fog of Rules".

[Nupremal]

I tried to do the following on my mod:

1) Documentation - Excel spreadsheet shows diplomacy

2) Pop-Ups

3) Under Decisions, shown in the decision, so you have time to view it, whenever that applies, for instance, if you annex baltics what must be garrisoned?

4) If there is an activation, a pop-up that says something like "Soviet troop maneuvers on Polish border" are the warning

[carverrt]

By the way Nupremal, I really like the way you organized your notes in the Excel document.

Thank you!

[Hubert Cater]

In my opinion this is a weak point in SC2 (and other games). A player shouldn't need to study and be an expert on the scripts to understand what is going on in the game. We could argue the information should be in the manual, but manuals never stay up to date (and aren't as handy as info in the game). I love "Fog of War" but not "Fog of Rules".

Hi Mithel,

For a quick explanation on scripts and rules, essentially we've tried to make the results as intuitive as possible as well as within the historical context.

For one example, and this goes all the way back to SC1, if you abandoned the Soviet border with your German troops the USSR activation values would slowly increase indicating a readiness to go to war, i.e. presumably because Stalin viewed the German player as weak.

This of course was a hypothetical in game situation, Germany did the opposite on the Soviet border in real life culminating with Barbarossa, but it was included nonetheless because it was felt there could be some historical justification for such a move as well as the much needed penalty for German recklessness.

Either way, there was a learning curve and at the same time a little mystery to the game as there was something to learn from each time you played the game and players quickly learned that they needed to be on their toes and play appropriately.

Now, this is not to say it was without criticism and so what we started to do was add in pop ups or other messages to keep players a little better informed and of course reduce the overall mystery by pointing players at least in the right direction.

Beyond that the game is very open, i.e. in the sense that players can now review the scripts, which they could not do in SC1, and determine the exact causes and effects a particular action will illicit from the game engine.

This is of course a double edged sword implementation because now there is no longer any mystery for those that really want to know while for those that don't care to read the scripts they may feel that, let's say in a multiplayer game, that they won't know every detail (as much as an opponent) unless they are forced to read the scripts sort of thing.

In this case there is unfortunately not much we can do without taking away all of the mystery out of the game which is something we are a little hesitant to do as some players do like the idea of playing the game somewhat blind and only armed with their historical knowledge and expectations for the game to somewhat play out close to real life. The idea that things may not go exactly as planned, i.e. diplomacy gone awry, or the unexpected DoW is what makes the game exciting for some, or a complete pain in the rear for others.

But like I said above, at least now there is the option to go under the hood and see exactly what makes the game tick which was not an option before.

Hope this helps,

Hubert

[Mithel]

Aye, but the player doesn't know if they need units physically on the Soviet border or if they need to garrison Warsaw and Konigsberg. I love the mystery but at the same time I don't want my time "wasted" because some obscure script did something that didn't make sense and I wasn't aware of.

The goal should be to make sure the players respect realistic limitations. In the case of Germany and USSR there existed a lot of political animosity even while they had diplomatic agreements worked out. Nobody knew if or when one side might break their agreements, thus both needed to keep at least a token force on the border for defense.

[Hubert Cater]

As mentioned this is why we included more information such as the popups in the WaW release moving forward. For your example above we actually included two popups that report on the need to exactly Garrison Warsaw and Konigsberg as well as the border positions later in the game. For reference please refer to the Media folder in the Fall Weiss and Storm of Steel campaign subdirectories as all the popups are included in there including the ones I've mentioned above.

Hope this helps,

Hubert

[Mithel]

Ah very good, I hadn't seen the "Increase military presence along the Eastern front" note.