Special Ops

Talk and Learn about the military aspects of the game.

Moderators: Legend, Balthagor, Moderators

Post Reply
Message
Author
JT
Corporal
Posts: 7
Joined: Jul 30 2002

#1 Post by JT » Jul 31 2002

First off, great job combining so much into what looks to be a great game! About SOF...Outside of the standard SEAL/ Ranger direct action missions, there are 2 big SOF missions (mostly Army SF).

First, teaching combat related skills to foreign soldiers (friendly nations) or resistance groups (in "other" nations). It would be great to have the ability to deploy a SF unit to another country to help train another force (friendly or otherwise) or maybe "spawn" a partisan unit behind enemy lines. I think the "spy system" you implemented is great, but also having a SOF mission available would be awesome. Training friendly forces, covertly infiltrating and training resistance groups in other countries... I think it would really add to the game. Dropping in a team of SF guys is just so much cooler than a faceless system of general spy activities. If you lose "spy points" and money... whatever. I'd definitely give more thought to risking a team of SF guys (represented by a unit marker) that I just spent a ton of money and time training. That also leads to the possibility of capture... that might be a little too complex for the game though. Think about the political effects though- both at home and abroad. (the pressure from the citizens to "bring our boys home"!!!)

If not possible, then maybe another SOF role- Long Range Recon (for scouting out the enemy strength) and also missions to increase the effectiveness of bombing missions (as actually seen during the Afghan war). If you want to go in and take out somebody's power plant with an airstrike, it will have a much higher chance of success with an SF team on the ground lighting up the target with a laser.
Just a couple of suggestions. You guys are doing great with the "little things" in other departments, I would love to see you guys implement a solid SOF role that matches its real world importance. Thanks and good luck with the rest of the development!

User avatar
Balthagor
Supreme Ruler
Posts: 19951
Joined: Jun 04 2002
Human: Yes
Location: BattleGoat Studios

#2 Post by Balthagor » Aug 13 2002

I must apologize for how long it has taken me to get back to you on this. I didn’t want to reply until I had done some research on the subject. I’m still reading a few threads but came across a website that spawned an idea. In case you’d like to read the article as well, it was http://www.ashbrook.org/publicat/onprin ... ucker.html and was an interesting read. The idea it gave me was based on the fact that the SOF unit you’re asking for needs to be a little more independent than most other units. It needs an inherent experience value. Needs to affect ally morale. Should have a low supply usage (can survive cut off for much longer) and have a good line of sight spoting range for reconnaissance. Clearly this is a far more valuable infantry unit than you would usually see. My thought was to have this as a “refit” of an experienced infantry unit. We already offer the ability to do specialized training for units you have. The choices are “Tropical”, “Alpine” and “Desert”. If an infantry unit achieves a high enough experience, these would be replaced by (would also include?) the option for “S.O.F. Training”. This would make the unit have a lower supply consumption, higher spoting range and have the ability to boost allied unit morale if given to an ally who puts them in the same regiment/division.

Would this cover what you’ve been looking for?
Chris Latour
BattleGoat Studios
chris@battlegoat.com

JT
Corporal
Posts: 7
Joined: Jul 30 2002

#3 Post by JT » Aug 16 2002

Wow, that article pretty much hit the nail on the head describing the Army SF. I think your ideas are great. However, there might be a problem with unit size as it relates to the rest of the game. While a SF battalion might deploy as a whole to an area of operations, like the article mentioned, the operational unit is a 12 man team (or more often 8 or 9 with guys in schools or just shortage). From what I read from your website, you can control units from bat. to corps. That does not really fit my idea of dropping in a couple of teams behind the lines. That's OK, if it doesn't fit, it doesn't fit. Maybe you could work out something to relect SFs role behind the lines somehow though (LRRS and training partisans, for example).

Oh, when I say SF, I mean the Army Special Forces specifically- who the article refers to as "green berets".

Even if the Army SF idea does not fit too well, elite infantry would be great. One suggestion- in addition to your specialties is a "shock" type unit. That might reflect the Ranger Bats and would be a great addition that would fit into the game system better. Rangers have many jobs, but they all boil down to 2 things- killing people and blowing things up. They don't have a great deal of long term supply considerations because they don't need them. For example, they might parachute onto an enemy airfield, take it, and then fly out on the planes that bring in other units who then push the offensive off the airfield. (a very realistic scenario). To reflect this in game terms, I would definitely give the "shock troops" (like Rangers) the highest attack rating against facilities and soft targets of any infantry unit (by far). However, they are just not built for extended combat like the regular or even standard light infantry. You use the Rangers, pull them out and use them somewhere else. Also, even though they can go kill every living thing near an airbase within 20 minutes (really), they aren't built to take on a tank battalion.
So, I guess my opinion boils down to this... I would love to see a SF mission that can somehow put an actual unit behind the lines with a very low profile and low chance of detection. I'm not sure if it can work, but it would be great if you could work it in. More realistically in terms of the game design, I would love to see a shock type unit to represent the Ranger Bats. A unit for when you want to send a message along with completing a mission. This unit would be expensive and require a lot of training, but it should be the king of taking airfields and destroying facilities. As for price and training? Think of it this way, the whole United States Army only has 3 Ranger Bats (not counting the training bats). So, that should say something. (but don't make them SO expensive that I can't build them! :smile:

OK, OK... sorry so long. But one more thing. If you guys REALLY want to go realistic, add some Special Operations aircraft (it will get your closer to the "over 1000 unit" box cover too!!). There are special aircraft tasked out to the SOF units- MC-130s instead of the regular C-130s. MH-53's from the Air Farce.. (just a little joke, those pilots and crews are actually really amazing)... etc. For the country that has the bucks to kick in, buying those type of aircraft, or upgrading from the standard models will greatly increase the SOF units ability to get in undetected and out alive. (If you want some info on this, look up the Army's Task Force 160 (160th Special Operations Aviation Regiment or the Air Forces "Air Commandos"). A couple of other nations have a little of the same system also, so it is not totally USA specific.
That's my say. Sorry so long, but thanks for being open to input. I'm not an expert on Army organization or gaming, but I spent 6 of my 9 years in the Army under SOCOM- Special Operations Command (and the other 3 in the 82nd ABN. Div). So, I am just excited to see the possibility of SOF units in such a good lucking game. Thanks again.

JT
Corporal
Posts: 7
Joined: Jul 30 2002

#4 Post by JT » Aug 16 2002

Oh yeah, that would be a "good looking" game and not "good lucking". Oops. I think I was half way to a coma after writing such a long reply. :smile:

User avatar
Balthagor
Supreme Ruler
Posts: 19951
Joined: Jun 04 2002
Human: Yes
Location: BattleGoat Studios

#5 Post by Balthagor » Aug 16 2002

Well, thanks again for the feedback. For now I'm likley to just file this info away till we get a little deeper into the program and start unit balancing. If we can fit in your Green Berets and Rangers we will give you both but, as you suggest, our focus will be playability first. If nothing else, our Special Forces unit that already exists will have a very low profile so that you could airdrop them behind enemy lines and cause some havoc. You could even assist them by investing in foreign intelligence in the hopes of knowing your opponents troop movements after the insertion of you special forces.
Chris Latour
BattleGoat Studios
chris@battlegoat.com

User avatar
Hellfish6
Lt. Colonel
Posts: 217
Joined: Jun 17 2002
Location: Seattle WA

#6 Post by Hellfish6 » Aug 16 2002

On 2002-08-16 13:26, Balthagor wrote:
Well, thanks again for the feedback. For now I'm likley to just file this info away till we get a little deeper into the program and start unit balancing. If we can fit in your Green Berets and Rangers we will give you both but, as you suggest, our focus will be playability first. If nothing else, our Special Forces unit that already exists will have a very low profile so that you could airdrop them behind enemy lines and cause some havoc. You could even assist them by investing in foreign intelligence in the hopes of knowing your opponents troop movements after the insertion of you special forces.
I reallyt, really like the idea of assigning special forces to foreign intelligence. There are two types of environments that the SF operates in - overt and covert.

Overt, to me, would be like active participation in a conflict - training, raids, patrols, etc.

Covert, on the other hand, is observations, intel gathering, sabotage, espionage, etc. in either a conflict or in peacetime.

I'm reasonably sure that SF-type units (SAS, Breen Berets, Spetznaz, etc.) are capable of all of this. I spent my six years in the Army in an air assault infantry unit.

Maybe if you could right click on an SF unit to assign it to the Foreign Intelligence service, and right click again to make it an operational unit like the rest of the army?

User avatar
Balthagor
Supreme Ruler
Posts: 19951
Joined: Jun 04 2002
Human: Yes
Location: BattleGoat Studios

#7 Post by Balthagor » Aug 16 2002

Unfortunatly, we've fairly much nailed down the "Spies" element and although Covert Ops is different, we handle it the same way. I'll still try and do something interesting with the SF units. I remember in Peoples General being very disappointed in how plain the SF unit was. Only real advantage it had was airdrop. Hopefully we can do something more exciting.
Chris Latour
BattleGoat Studios
chris@battlegoat.com

User avatar
Hellfish6
Lt. Colonel
Posts: 217
Joined: Jun 17 2002
Location: Seattle WA

#8 Post by Hellfish6 » Aug 16 2002

Is it even possible to get People's General anymore? I gave my copy to an Army buddy back in 1998 or so. I wouldn't mind playing it again. I did really like it.

JT
Corporal
Posts: 7
Joined: Jul 30 2002

#9 Post by JT » Aug 17 2002

That's cool. Thanks for doing what you can. I knew some things might not fit into the game. However, even if there is only a 1% chance of a suggestion being worked in, it is better than the 0% chance if we don't try. Hmmm.... maybe after this game takes off and is successful, you can keep our ideas in mind for your next game.

On a closing note, even if the SF doesn't work out to scale, I would still love to see the availability of "schock troops"/ Ranger units. They can be used as a batt. level unit to take airfields and take out facilities. Just a thought... thanks.

User avatar
Hellfish6
Lt. Colonel
Posts: 217
Joined: Jun 17 2002
Location: Seattle WA

#10 Post by Hellfish6 » Aug 17 2002

I think something was mentioned on a development diary about there being paratroopers, elite paratroopers and commandos (SF). I imagine Rangers would be classified under elite paratroopers.

I'd suggest adding a 'mechanized paratrooper' to the collection as well, to be able to model Soviet-style airborne units.

Post Reply

Return to “Military - Defense and Operations Departments”