Skip to Content

A new way to manage fog of war with recon units

8 replies [Last post]
larienna
larienna's picture
Offline
Joined: 07/28/2008

I made a quick playtest for a modern tactical war game where the job of the recon units was to make enemy units target-able for longer range units like artillery. The problem is that recon units are not that much useful since besides targeting there is no real fog of war because both player know the location of their opponent's.

So I had an idea during the playtest that gave a different function to recon units. First I reduced the movement and attack range of all units. Most vehicle move 3 hex instead of 5.

Now each unit has a detection radius of 1 hex except recon units which has 2. As before, recon units makes unit target-able for artillery. But the new rule is that a unit cannot move adjacent to another unit and attack it unless it was already detected by another unit

In other word, if you have no recon, the first unit will move adjacent to the target to detect it And the second unit will move in to attack. But if you use a recon unit, since they have a detection range of 2, you could detect multiple units with a single unit allowing more units to attack instead losing units for detection.

questccg
questccg's picture
Offline
Joined: 04/16/2011
More on Fog Of War (FOW)

I am thinking about Starcraft and how that video game approaches FOW. One, if you are "attacking" anything that belongs to your opponent (buildings or units), the game SHOWS the type of unit and it's location. So if you have a long-range artillery and you attack an opponent's unit from afar, you would need to *reveal* the unit.

So for FOW, you could have 2 sides to each unit. One side would keep the unit HIDDEN and the other would show the unit. Flipping when units come close or are in-range of another unit, is the mechanic I am proposing. You can use "recon units" which have an extended range (and force the opponent to flip some of his unit cards).

It's still not as good as Starcraft, because in that game you don't get to see the units moving (unless they are within range of another of the opponent's units).

But what is GOOD about my FOW is that units which are DEFENDING artillery are not known until they are within proximity of those units... And there could be surprises!

Another idea is FAKE units. You could have DUMMY cards which are not units at all... Just some form of "radar" glitches (False Positives). "False Positives" are a good way to keep the number of real units on the battlefield a secret. This could keep the opponent guessing as to how many real units you have on the battlefield.

larienna
larienna's picture
Offline
Joined: 07/28/2008
The problem is that in my

The problem is that in my game, I dod not want to flip units fog FOW because it is how I keep track of HP. It's also annoying to play with, else I would need blocks. So all units must be visible.

talmorgoth
talmorgoth's picture
Offline
Joined: 02/03/2011
Numbered hexes?

If you are on a numbered hex board you could use smaller hex pads that players can mark where units are or a movement sheet to track hidden movement. Once recon paints the target hex you put the figures on the board. Once the target is obscured you remove it.

http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/ASIN/B004I67ZI2/ref=nosim/waynesworldo...

questccg
questccg's picture
Offline
Joined: 04/16/2011
Interesting...

talmorgoth wrote:
If you are on a numbered hex board you could use smaller hex pads that players can mark where units are or a movement sheet to track hidden movement. Once recon paints the target hex you put the figures on the board. Once the target is obscured you remove it.

The only problem I see with this is player could cheat... Not knowing where the unit is (opponent) can lead to unscrupulous playing.

But if you mini hex board/pad is laminated well you could use a marker to write the positions of the units and then wipe it off when the unit moves.

I think this is an *interesting* approach... And provides pretty much *REAL* (as real as it gets) FOW.

The only *downfall* I see is the SIZE of the pad versus the original game board. If your board is TOO BIG, your mini pad will also be BIG...

Another *idea* I have is units moving in a GARRISON! The units MUST move together with the commanding officer of that garrison. What this does is allows for a mini hex map on which the units can be configured and then only ONE token in the real board get's played... So it's like an army formation and then it gets a LOT EASIER to remember ONE POSITION for the leaders than a bunch of individual units...

Using this with like four (4) "mini" hex pads (for the army configuration) could be a good way of having FOW. You can use smaller hexes on which you place UNITS on the mini-pad. And on the game board you place only ONE token per garrison. So you could have like four (4) garrisons and implement a simpler FOW...

larienna
larienna's picture
Offline
Joined: 07/28/2008
I find it very annoying to

I find it very annoying to play with hidden pieces, or having to take note on pen and paper. This is why I prefer to see units all the time.

questccg
questccg's picture
Offline
Joined: 04/16/2011
Contradiction

larienna wrote:
I find it very annoying to play with hidden pieces, or having to take note on pen and paper. This is why I prefer to see units all the time.

Well the idea of having *garrisons* is neither of these. You can *configure* your troop on one scale and use only one token to control that army. This is simplified FOW. Seeing "all units all the time" is the opposite of FOW... Not sure how you want to achieve a realistic FOW and also be able to see the units. These are two opposing statements.

In the OP, seeing all units, this isn't a FOW mechanic, it is more of *rules of engagement* (Combat rules: you must detect the enemy first using the adjacent unit and then attack with another...)

pelle
pelle's picture
Offline
Joined: 08/11/2008
spotting

What OP describes is usually called spotting in wargames, and is separate from fog of war (that the same game can also have, or sometimes not). It is quite common to have rules requiring that a unit is spotted before it may be fired upon.

A good example that comes to mind is the Tactical Combat Series:
http://www.gamersarchive.net/theGamers/archive/tcs.htm
(See second page of Charts & Tables. Lots of modifiers for how far away a unit can be spotted.)

larienna
larienna's picture
Offline
Joined: 07/28/2008
Yes, I think spotting would

Yes, I think spotting would be a better definition. But from a mechanic point of view, it shares similarities with fog of war in the way that players will play (scout first, then attack).

Syndicate content


forum | by Dr. Radut