Is hidden unit strength possible in the game?

[BuddyGrant]

To the GS modders and anyone else who has studied the CEAW source code: Do you think it is possible to hide or disguise the enemy unit strength in the game? If it is this might be an interesting optional feature to accompany fog of war. It seems to me that combat odds would not need to be changed since there are random variables involved in combat anyway, but if the displayed enemy unit strength could be hidden it might really enhance the challenge of the game.

A more complex idea would be to have a displayed enemy unit strength that becomes more accurate the closer you are to the enemy unit, but I realize that would require some serious code changes.

Not a very original idea I know, since I believe this type of enemy unit display logic was fairly common in early PC war games.

[gerones]

To the GS modders and anyone else who has studied the CEAW source code: Do you think it is possible to hide or disguise the enemy unit strength in the game? If it is this might be an interesting optional feature to accompany fog of war. It seems to me that combat odds would not need to be changed since there are random variables involved in combat anyway, but if the displayed enemy unit strength could be hidden it might really enhance the challenge of the game.

A more complex idea would be to have a displayed enemy unit strength that becomes more accurate the closer you are to the enemy unit, but I realize that would require some serious code changes.

Not a very original idea I know, since I believe this type of enemy unit display logic was fairly common in early PC war games.

It seems like this idea would make more sense in case of units that are deployed far or little far for front line so they are not in an enemy ZOC hex. And this would not work for units directly deployed at the front line in which case it would have to be shown strength number.

[BuddyGrant]

It seems like this idea would make more sense in case of units that are deployed far or little far for front line so they are not in an enemy ZOC hex.

That would be ideal, but much more complex than simply hiding unit strength.

And this would not work for units directly deployed at the front line in which case it would have to be shown strength number.

Why would it have to be a shown strength number in that case?

Subjective feelings aside, I'm mostly wondering how possible it would be. I know the GS modders have adjusted the color display of unit strength so it seems like at it's most basic level (completely hidden versus incremented accuracy based on how far away the unit is) this might be doable.

[gerones]

It seems like this idea would make more sense in case of units that are deployed far or little far for front line so they are not in an enemy ZOC hex.

That would be ideal, but much more complex than simply hiding unit strength.

And this would not work for units directly deployed at the front line in which case it would have to be shown strength number.

Why would it have to be a shown strength number in that case?

Subjective feelings aside, I'm mostly wondering how possible it would be. I know the GS modders have adjusted the color display of unit strength so it seems like at it's most basic level (completely hidden versus incremented accuracy based on how far away the unit is) this might be doable.

I meant that strength number will be only visible for the units stationed in enemy ZOC and it become invisible for units stationed in the rearguard. The same way that it happens in another wargames like TOAW 3, Decisive campaigns or Gary Grisby´s War in the East 1941-1945:

TOAW 3

• 

Decisive campaigns

• 

War in the East

• 

As you can see in the examples attached, units in the rearguard shows a (?) symbol or did not show anything at all about their strength.

[ncali]

I wouldn't want to hide the strength number in this game, considering the game mechanics and scale. There was, however, some discussion earlier about obscuring some of the other key numbers for an opponent - such as efficiency. This, I think, is more interesting. Maybe I'll try to find the old thread and attach a link here.


EDIT: Here is the link. I guess it was my suggestion and subsequent discussion was rather limited, but for what it's worth:
viewtopic.php?t=14901

[Peter Stauffenberg]

I think we will make a lot more manual work for the players if we don't show the enemy strength and efficiency. These values will be shown after combat or when the unit is in enemy ZOC. So then you have to manually write down the last known values and check the unit name. Then you know the turn after which units you have hit and depleted. I don't think having to do that would add anything to the game.

We had a similar issue with convoys moving where the Axis player had to write down where the convoy had moved just before the turn ended. In GS v2.0 you can now see the movement arrows if the convoy moved within range. That help a lot since you don't have to remember anymore where the convoy was last spotted.

Also remember that units outside spotting range are completely hidden so you can't bombard them. Sometimes you get a nasty surprise when you move your units through the hole in the front line just to end up near a strong reserve unit that was hidden. So the fog of war actually helps hiding the strength of the enemy units. Since the battle results are so varied it would be even worse for the attacker if the defender strength is actually completely different from what you see. The attacker casualties would become higher.

Most games shown here are games where the units don't have steps like in GS v2.0, but rather a printed strength and maybe a reverse side depleted strength. This means you look at the combat result table and you can get results like DR, DE, A1D2 etc. D2 = defender loses 2 steps meaning either depleting 2 units or killing one unit. With such a system the uncertaintly is in the combat results table you will roll on.

[Peter Stauffenberg]

By attacking defenders that were stronger than you believed you will attack on a worse CR column and get worse combat results.

In GS you already have the uncertainty in the dice rolls. You can have very good odds and get poor results. Since you need 10 hits to kill a unit you need to plan with multiple attacks to destroy the defender. In most games you have unit destructions in most battle results.

In GS you use airstrikes to deplete strength and efficiency so the ground attacks will lose fewer steps and inflict more damage. If you can see the strength of units in enemy ZOC anyway it means the only time you can actually benefit from having hidden unit strength behind the enemy lines is when you have a very depleted unit you retreat from the front line hoping it can be repaired before enemy bombers destroy it. But if you can see the unit name you can write down the unit you almost killed and look for it for units within air range. Then the defender needs to rename his units to cloak the weak ones. All this creates a lot of manual work that won't add anything to GS.

The only way for this to work is to only show that there is a unit in hexes not in enemy ZOC, but cloak all data of the unit. That can certainly be done, but it will alter the game completely. E. g. it won't be easy to plan amphibious landings since you don't know where the weak spots are. You don't know the strength of the enemy rear units since you only see that a unit is present.

You can have more info shown the closer you are to an enemy unit (e. g. first only a unit, then unit type, then strength, the efficiency etc.), but that means a lot of extra calculations and possibility for more bugs. That would delay GS v2.0 even further.

[Peter Stauffenberg]

The defender will have an easier time because of this and that means the game balance can be altered. So we might end up having to rebalance the game again.

I think the current Fog of War works pretty well. If you to change what you can see then you can reduce the spotting range of the air units. Spotting range of air units actually includes air recon missions, intelligence, radars etc. E. g. the Norwegian resistance movement constantly sent information to the Allies about the whereabouts of Germany units in Norway. Especially important was the location of Tirpitz and other naval ships that could attack the convoys going to Murmansk.

GS is a STRATEGIC game where command decisions are based upon units of corps size. Some of the games where you use hidden combat strength are more tactical games where hiding in forests etc. actually gave you a tactical advantage. We don't need to simulate that in GS. E. g. the Allies had pretty good intelligence about the location of the German units when Overlord was started. So they bombarded the areas they needed to make the landings easier. They got some nasty surprises like SS units being railed to the area, but it's the same in GS. The Germans will have a strategic reserve outside the Allied spotting range that can rail to the threatened area.

So I actually don't see what we gain by hiding the unit strengths. Having Fog of War turned on is what's important.

[gerones]

The fact is that in late game the germans have almost no chance to hide in nowhere. In the image below it is showed the spotting range of strategic bombers in late game: 10 hexes. I know the allies had a very good information of the german units stationed close to the coast line in the days prior to D-Day but by no means they had the same information for german units stationed in Strasbourg or in Germany mainland as it can be in CEAW.

• 

I wonder if the same way that it has been implemented a hide cargo fog of war for naval transports it could be implemented a hide type of unit so the enemy can know there´s an enemy unit but not the type. To avoid abuses (e.g. uses of garrisons for simulating huge armies) it could be distinguished between corps sized units (inf,mech or armour) from garrison or division sized units.