Looking at the opponent’s forces ?

[LaPalice]

It’s a question about what people do when they are going to play a TOAW scenario in PBEM, just before the start of the game.

During the elaboration of his plan, can a player study and look at the enemy forces, their locations ? Can he collect all the information he wants on his opponent and about the scenario ? Or is it something that he must avoid ? Personally I don’t know if it is cheating or not, but I don’t look my opponent’s forces before the start of a scenario, even against the PO.

Well, at least, it’s something I thought until now, and I can see it’s only a point of view. Because I have the impression there can be some arguments to the fact that a player may examine the forces of the other side, or some infos hidden in the Editor about the scenario. You can simply have the desire to study all the aspects of a scenario for example.

So I would like to know what other players think about that. Do you take a look at the opponent’s forces before the beginning of a game ? Do you study everything ? Are there and what are the information which can be considered “forbidden” when you elaborate your plan ?
Personally, now, I would put water in my wine, and explain to my opponent what I’m going to do, what I want to examine, to know if he is right or not.

La Palice.

[JAMiAM]

I always hotseat the scenario first, to find out what the two sides initial force dispositions are, their reinforcement schedules, etc. Sometimes, I will dive into the editor to figure out some of the more arcane settings.

It may be more "interesting" or "challenging" crossing the street with your eyes closed, and ears plugged. But, it generally isn't the smart thing to do, if you want to get across alive.;)

[Eric Weider]

if it is a tournament game then i look at the other side pretty carefully because i feel that i should do my best to perform for the team. if i am playing solo 9 out of 10 times i don't look because i really enjoy the surprises of playing with limited intel and i find it actually forces me to think more about my moves.
:clown:

[Brevet]

It's my impression that [historically] most commanders (McClellan excluded) had a pretty good idea of the forces they were facing on the battlefield. Where and when the opposing forces would show up have always been variables. I think it would be rare (and foolhardy) for a commander to give battle without knowing at least what he is facing (and may face) on his immediate front. While playing 'blind' may be exciting, I don't think it is very 'realistic'.

I usually hot seat the first turn of a scenario to get a feel for the numbers and general direction that reinforcements will arrive. I don't memorize troop strengths or locations.

Failure to do this in one scenario resulted in an entire Corps arriving directly behind my front line. That was exciting, but rather surreal. :o

I think the beauty of this game is the variety of scenarios (bless all scenario designers) and ways to play the game.

Peace my brothers and sisters.

[Eric Weider]

My assumption has always been that the enemy forces you can see at the scenario's start reflects the sum total of your availble intel/recon and therefore is realistic. Either way makes sense. It's just a matter of personal prefernece!
Example...I am playing Israel 48 and recon is set at 0%. To me that means that neither side had good intel about what the enemy was up to other than what they could see. Believe me, it has made for a fun game full of surprises. and it has forced me to keep units in reserve rather than what we usually see which is every unit committed to the fight.
:bandit:

[John Paul]

Personally,unless i've played the scenario before i won't look at the other sides forces.But hey to each thier own.

[LaPalice]

Apparently it’s something very subjective, there are good arguments for each side. Now I would have the tendency to drift toward the complete study of the scenario, i.e. even the opponent’s forces or some hidden information.
I don’t want to cross the street with my eyes closed, especially where I live. Here people are completely crazy when they are in their car, even with eyes open it’s dangerous (but it’s another problem).

Two things could stop myself from taking a look at the opponent’s forces : the particular background of the scenario, for example if I play the French/American in Indochina/Vietnam, or if my opponent think that it’s not fair play. Anyway, I think I will prevent my opponent before, to know his opinion.

La Palice.

[CyberGeneral]

In basketball, cheating is why the last 2 minutes of the game take forever........Fouling the opponent is a must.

In baseball, cheating is sliding into the 2nd baseman to spike him before he completes the double play.

In war, cheating is counter intelligence and espionage.......It worked at Midway as one example.

All above examples are fair (though perhaps not ethical?)
If you play as a novice (or with blinders on) against an opponent who knows the game well (as well as knows the ways to manipulate the game) ......You lose, they win.
Two players who know the scenario, know each others forces and know how to play (and yes, manipulate(you know your out there)) the game, make for the best battles.

It's why in football I'd rather see the Super Bowl before watching 2 teams that have yet to win a game after 3/4 of the season.

BTW.....I don't know anything about soccer......Do they cheat in soccer?

____________________________________________


"A good body with a dull brain is as cheap as life itself".....From Movie SPARTACUS

[tigersqn]

I know they cheat in hockey:surprise: :banana: :surprise:

I usually hotseat the first turn or two and take a quick peek at the reinforcement squedules if I've never played the scenario. If I've already had a go at the scenario before, I don't bother; I already know what's out there.

[Chuck?]

It's really up to the individual player. If you are playing just for fun and want some surprises don't look before you start. However if you need a win then better starting studying the scenario before you send the first turn.

[Palantir]

I open up a scenario and glance at the map & both sides initial setups. And consider that reasonable "recon/intel" But I don't go into the game beyond that turn for turn to check out exact entry hexes etc for my opponet or any "internal info."

Tourney play is a different animal altogether.

I want to play a competitive and fun game and choose not know every single speck of information about the otherside unless I've already played that side before.

If I have to know everything about my opponents side to gain an "edge" before we play to "get that win" at any cost I might as well play a hotseat vs myself. Gaining any win like that for me would be a hollow victory.

Maybe that's why I'm so picky about who I play and their own philosophy about gaming before we start.

Kerry :cheeky:

[Bob Cross]

I think if you were going to try to impose a rule against looking at the scenario before playing it then you would also have to impose a rule against reading any history about the situation too.

Some people are better read than others. Should they have an advantage? It would be nice if we could turn off all 20:20 hindsite, but since we can't, I think it's better for it to be equally distributed between opposing sides.

[a white rabbit]

..i only look at my own side, play a bit with my forces to get an idea of movement 'n stuff , study repl figures & ThOps, then play the thing, hind-sight's a bugger and spoils the game altho if the period's new i'll read up on technical stuff, troop types etc..,

[LaPalice]

Originally posted by a white rabbit
..i only look at my own side, play a bit with my forces to get an idea of movement 'n stuff , study repl figures & ThOps, then play the thing, hind-sight's a bugger and spoils the game altho if the period's new i'll read up on technical stuff, troop types etc..,

(If I understand you) yes, playing some few turns against the PO, to look how the scenario works is a good idea : at the same time you can still keep a veil on the opponent’s force, at least on the most part. Preserving a doubt on your opponent and on what can happen during the course of the game is an important part of the pleasure to play.

La Palice.