Auteur Sujet: FOW Experiment  (Lu 11926 fois)

Hors ligne JMM

  • Administrateur
  • Maréchal d'Empire
  • *******
  • Messages: 8204
    • http://www.histwar.com
Re : FOW Experiment
« Réponse #15 le: 23 avril 2010, 23:35:44 pm »
Yes.. it's here  :D

JMM

Hors ligne AJ

  • Général de Brigade
  • ****
  • Messages: 1845
  • Sir Arthur Wellesley
    • Napoleonic Battle Corp
Re : FOW Experiment
« Réponse #16 le: 23 avril 2010, 23:37:19 pm »
If anything it was worse. Napoleon does not see the massed columns topping and descending the Heights.

Incidentally, this is not a criticism of HLG's FOW system. I am rather critiquing the FOW concept and the notion that any one FOW is the "Correct" one.

Hors ligne Count von Csollich

  • Officier HistWar
  • Colonel
  • ***
  • Messages: 861
Re : Re : FOW Experiment
« Réponse #17 le: 24 avril 2010, 00:08:07 am »
If anything it was worse. Napoleon does not see the massed columns topping and descending the Heights.

Incidentally, this is not a criticism of HLG's FOW system. I am rather critiquing the FOW concept and the notion that any one FOW is the "Correct" one.

Just a little question for your understanding of Austerlitz:
1) could you show me a reference where it is stated that Napoleon actually saw these movements you're talking of?
2) for the later orders he issued during the battle he moved his position on the Pratzen heights and had a much better view of the Allied deployemnts...and thus was able to redirect his reserves consisting of Bernadotte's corps...as he had changed his plan from the initial one, which was to turn the Allied right under Bagration, to the newly developed opportunity of splitting the Allied army in half through the centre...

a big part of being CinC is understanding the "big picture" and placing trust in those  carrying out the task that they were given, without having the ability to interfere...as I understood you you are saying that you don't like the FoW system...well I think it'S very realistic...as CinC you give the order to advance to a certain place for example...and you just don't see exactly what is going to happen:
let's take a well known example: the Pickett-Pettigrew-Trimble Charge up on Cemetery Ridge: Pickett only saw a huge mass of men converging on one point...he didn't see what unit he was engaging, how his men were doing, he only saw some colours and a huge cloud of smoke...
after the attack was driven back, his men defeated...only then he realized the magnitude of his defeat...it's actually well shown in the "Gettysburg" movie...

so basically, as CinC you see very little of the field, unless you have a really dominant position, from which to issue orders, and even then, smoke will somewhat blur the picture after some time...and not even Wellington saw all of the major action, even though he rode 5 different horses until they were blown on that day at Mont St. Jean
having one of these hills at your disposal, while the enemy lacks of one, might be a winning factor, but not every battlefield provides them (obviously) -

Conclusio: if you play as realistically as possible, you have to accept the simple fact, that you have to have a plan first, which is carried out (your initial orders), and with any luck, it's a good plan...certain things can be changed during a battle, but only so many....you'll never see the entire action going on, and if the enemy uses the terrain to his advantage maybe he'll outwhit you and you'll be surprised by his appearance some place you would have never expected him to be...

a little story of Austerlitz on that: after the initial attack of Soult on the Pratzen heights, Napoleon knew very little of what was going on, and when a column of unidentified soldiers appeared on the ridge line he even asked: "could those be Russians" - being very worried that his entire corps might have been lost - as he didn't see anything of what was going on...the situation at Napoleon's HQ at Zurlan hill  was very confused...and some things were cleared up by incoming reports AND the movement of his HQ to the Pratzen Heights...

CvC
« Modifié: 24 avril 2010, 01:18:06 am par Count von Csollich »
"parcere subiectis et debellare superbos", Vergil

Hors ligne AJ

  • Général de Brigade
  • ****
  • Messages: 1845
  • Sir Arthur Wellesley
    • Napoleonic Battle Corp
Re : FOW Experiment
« Réponse #18 le: 24 avril 2010, 01:33:54 am »
Citer
Just a little question for your understanding of Austerlitz:
1) could you show me a reference where it is stated that Napoleon actually saw these movements you're talking of?
2) for the later orders he issued during the battle he moved his position on the Pratzen heights and had a much better view of the Allied deployemnts...and thus was able to redirect his reserves consisting of Bernadotte's corps...as he had changed his plan from the initial one, which was to turn the Allied right under Bagration, to the newly developed opportunity of splitting the Allied army in half through the centre...

Osprey's Battle of the three Emperors by David Chandler,is the authority, and I haven't heard it disputed.  This is the position he watched the columns from and the position from which, with Soult at his side, he gave Soult the order to attack the center

Citer
Napoleon had kept Marshal Soult at his side all this
while, and 'the foremost manoeuvrer in Europe'
found the inaction of the main part of his corps
d'armee hard to take. Both Vandamme's and Saint-
Hilaire's divisions were still concealed in the
lingering thick mist in the Goldbach valley between
Puntowitz and Jirschikowitz villages, and there was
no sign that the foe even guessed at their presence
there. The top of the Pratzen was now in sight from
the Zurlan, and the Emperor's spyglass clearly
revealed a torrent of the enemy moving south and
downwards - perhaps already as many as 40,000,
with more beginning to follow. As Napoleon
intended, the Allies were obligingly emptying their
centre of troops in order to execute their gigantic
wheel against the French right.
At length, Napoleon turned to Soult. It was now
8.45am. 'How long will it take you to move your
divisions to the top of the Pratzen Heights?' he
enquired. 'Less than 20 minutes, Sire; for my
troops are hidden at the foot of the valley,
concealed by fog and campfire smoke.' 'In mat case
we will wait another quarter of an hour.'
Napoleon's mind was working like a computer,
calculating distances and times, odds for and
against alternative courses of action, and yet leaving
space for the element of 'luck'. Timing is
everyming in war. The Allies must be given exacdy
the right amount of time to clear the centre before
Soult struck. As Napoleon knew, 'there is one drop
of water that causes the full bucket to overflow'.

As for anything that happened after this , I do not dispute.  It was only this time period that my study to date encompassed.
Also if you fight Austerlitz as realistically as possible, you would have to take into account Napoleons Signal System which he was using for receiving reports and the issuing of some of his orders (Osprey)

Hors ligne Count von Csollich

  • Officier HistWar
  • Colonel
  • ***
  • Messages: 861
Re : FOW Experiment
« Réponse #19 le: 24 avril 2010, 01:44:40 am »
you DO know that this movement was his plan all along? and that he only waited for it to happen? - otherwise he would never have given up the Pratzen heights and hidden his troops in the morning mist down in the valley?

Osprey books are fine for an introduction to the battle...I'd suggest you try to read Robert Goetz's book on Austerlitz, and get back to me on that then...which was published 2005, if I'm not mistaken

to the game: I recall putting Napoleon at exactly the same spot on Zurlan hill, and I recall seeing the allied columns when they appeared before Tellnitz and Sokolnitz - so FOW is perfectly fine in the game

CvC
« Modifié: 24 avril 2010, 01:46:30 am par Count von Csollich »
"parcere subiectis et debellare superbos", Vergil

Hors ligne Count von Csollich

  • Officier HistWar
  • Colonel
  • ***
  • Messages: 861
Re : FOW Experiment
« Réponse #20 le: 24 avril 2010, 01:50:25 am »
oh, and another thing: if I check your screens, where is the reference for your deployments?...you said you tried to play it historically...I don't recall seeing Murat's reserve cavalry around Tellnitz and Sokolnitz?

CvC
"parcere subiectis et debellare superbos", Vergil

Hors ligne AJ

  • Général de Brigade
  • ****
  • Messages: 1845
  • Sir Arthur Wellesley
    • Napoleonic Battle Corp
Re : FOW Experiment
« Réponse #21 le: 24 avril 2010, 03:10:15 am »
Count, I simply tried to move 4 Corps over the brow and down the hill, for the purpose of the experiment it doesn't matter who they are in the slightest. As for the Grand Tactic, I am not an idiot, of course I know.  This experiment wasn't about tactics or who's corps was where. It was simply to see if Napoleon could see a large body of men from Zurlan descending down the hill in "Gronard mode". You say you fought it and he saw them, in that case do my experiment and reproduce what you saw, post the results as I have. Osprey may only be an introduction, that's fine, I am not trying to pretend I am an expert on Austerlitz. I merely used a reliable source to give me Napoleons position from where he viewed the 4 columns. Now you insinuated in an earlier post that he didn't view them from there. I have quoted my source as requested by you, what is your source that says he didn't.

Please let's not let this become an unpleasant debate, calling into question my veracity. As often happens, I posted something that provoked thought and did not call into question HLG itself and I become attacked personally.

Once again I will state clearly as I did before. This topic is NOT about Austerlitz or about how well JMM has designed the FOW options, it is about the whole concept of FOW and how and which options work the most realistically in various situations.

Hors ligne Hook

  • Chevalier d'HistWar
  • Modérateurs
  • Général de Brigade
  • ****
  • Messages: 1752
Re : FOW Experiment
« Réponse #22 le: 24 avril 2010, 03:33:46 am »
You may have slightly better luck if you move Napoleon slightly south-southeast to the military crest of that hill rather than putting him on the highest point.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Military_crest

I don' t know if the trees in that direction will obstruct his view. 

This is a good example of why I always said that the final arbiter of what the commander can see is the view from the F5 camera for that commander.  Also, while I see French units fading out, I see no fading Allies in the French view.  Go to the F3 view for a few seconds, then back to the map view and see if more enemy units are visible.

Hook

Hors ligne Count von Csollich

  • Officier HistWar
  • Colonel
  • ***
  • Messages: 861
Re : FOW Experiment
« Réponse #23 le: 24 avril 2010, 13:30:17 pm »
okay, I had a little free time today  so I set myself the task to show you, aj, how FoW works with an "as close as possible" historical Austerlitz (at least up to the point where I started to lose my patience)

Thanks Hook for the nice graphic! - I find that you only position your CinC perfectly if you reposition him on the 3D map accordingly...you can roughly position him on the 2D map and then make fine adjustements (which make a huge difference!) on the 3D map!

The screens show the developement of the battle - pay particular attention to the proximity of the allied movement towards the French right - they literally marched in front of the French faces down to Sokolnitz - even closer than shown in my game screens

NOTE: as for the historical deployment: I only paid attention to the corps involved in this FoW example: the reserves such as the Guard, Oudinot's Grenadiers or Bernadotte'S Corps are not placed where they should be, as well as Lannes (due to the zone restriction) and Davout, who was still on the march with most of his troops, on a road, which is not shown on this map;
Soult's deployment is close but not entirely correct - Napoleon's HQ is in the right spot (I only used the 2D map - to avoid any argument about the EXACT place where he rested his horse!)

Last statement adressing  you personally aj: I think it's common knowledge that I usually try to avoid confrontations of any kind on the forum, because it tends to be neither intelligent nor interesting in any way.  So a just question is: Why did I attack your whole thread with an attitude a tad more aggressive than usual?
Simple answer: JMM's very busy at the moment, fixing orders as well as MP and all those other "major" things many of which you want fixed in no time - best would be a release of a patch yesterday!
I simply think that taking up JMM's precious time with new stuff coming up almost every day - makes him lose focus on the things already there...I therefore considered it my duty to take over and try to tell you that FoW works perfectly fine as it is...and any problems with a game in Grog mode are due to the "order" problem which we ALL know of by now!

therefore: here is my answer, as requested by you! - I took screens, I added text, I looked up the maps and movements, to get it as close as possible (I wasn't very patient with this, as I've got many other things to prepare)
I think the screens make it obvious that FoW works at it should work - information not shown with your own eyes - well that's where you rely on your corps commanders to send AdCs to you, or messengers with dispatches (a system already there, I know, rarely used by most of you, but if you use the information shown on a dispatch, from an area you don't see - you can really work with it! and dispatch reinforcements, if needed, accordingly)
I can't remember having ever attacked you personally aj, least having  offended you in any way with any of my written words - I might have been more direct and outspoken than usual - this happens when I consider it of utmost necessity!

CvC

« Modifié: 24 avril 2010, 13:32:33 pm par Count von Csollich »
"parcere subiectis et debellare superbos", Vergil

Hors ligne Count von Csollich

  • Officier HistWar
  • Colonel
  • ***
  • Messages: 861
Re : FOW Experiment
« Réponse #24 le: 24 avril 2010, 13:32:42 pm »

here the other screens - I tried to add enough text to explain my thoughts...if not - feel free to ask questions!

CvC
« Modifié: 24 avril 2010, 13:34:27 pm par Count von Csollich »
"parcere subiectis et debellare superbos", Vergil

Hors ligne Count von Csollich

  • Officier HistWar
  • Colonel
  • ***
  • Messages: 861
Re : FOW Experiment
« Réponse #25 le: 24 avril 2010, 13:35:25 pm »
and the last ones!

CvC
"parcere subiectis et debellare superbos", Vergil

Hors ligne AJ

  • Général de Brigade
  • ****
  • Messages: 1845
  • Sir Arthur Wellesley
    • Napoleonic Battle Corp
Re : FOW Experiment
« Réponse #26 le: 24 avril 2010, 17:51:37 pm »
Citer
I think the screens make it obvious that FoW works at it should work


Firstly thank you for at least trying to do the experiment yourself rather than just criticising, and I do appreciate the moving of  Napoleon a few feet. However your screens do not make it obvious at all.  For the experiment to be valid all screens need to be taken at EXACTLY the same time from both the Allied and French view. Your screens were all taken at different times, It is not in dispute that Napoleon would eventually see the forces descending en mass, the point is, in Gronard mode, when he sees the first sign of troops moving down, how many had already gone past undetected. This can only be shown by a screen shot of both sides at exactly the same time. However as Alfiere points out (and JMM concedes), the map elevations are not precise, so we may both be running a faulty experiment. It is a basic scientific norm, that for any experiment to be proved beyond doubt to be a fact, it must be reproducible without variation, neither of us have achieved this.

Citer
information not shown with your own eyes - well that's where you rely on your corps commanders to send AdCs to you, or messengers with dispatches (a system already there, I know, rarely used by most of you, but if you use the information shown on a dispatch, from an area you don't see - you can really work with it! and dispatch reinforcements, if needed, accordingly)

How do you know it is rarely used by most of us? In fact it was Ges and myself at nbc, who first discovered the despatch problem in pbem (posted on Redmine), that was because we were trying to use dispatches.

Citer
Last statement adressing  you personally aj: I think it's common knowledge that I usually try to avoid confrontations of any kind on the forum, because it tends to be neither intelligent nor interesting in any way.  So a just question is: Why did I attack your whole thread with an attitude a tad more aggressive than usual?
Simple answer: JMM's very busy at the moment, fixing orders as well as MP and all those other "major" things many of which you want fixed in no time - best would be a release of a patch yesterday!
I simply think that taking up JMM's precious time with new stuff coming up almost every day - makes him lose focus on the things already there...I therefore considered it my duty to take over and try to tell you that FoW works perfectly fine as it is...and any problems with a game in Grog mode are due to the "order" problem which we ALL know of by now!

I am to shoulder the blame for not having a timely fix for pbem and MP? My post had no personal comments toward anyone, just because someone posts something you don't agree with or may take up JMM's time (I don't know why it should it wasn't a bug post and I went out of my way to say that he had given us good options to use to our personal preferences), it doesn't warrant your strident tone or condescending attitude, JMM behaved like a gentleman in this matter. As for JMM fixing things "I want fixed in no time", I and many others have paid good money for this product and we are not talking minor bugs here, I bought the game to play multi/pbem, neither of which can really be done. So yes I do expect a fix pretty fast. MP is essential to receive decent press reviews, which aren't going too well right now. When was the last time you bought a defective product and didn't complain to the store?

Citer
Conclusio: if you play as realistically as possible, you have to accept the simple fact, that you have to have a plan first, which is carried out (your initial orders), and with any luck, it's a good plan...certain things can be changed during a battle, but only so many...

How in the world would you know how I plan and fight my battles? This is what I mean about condescending.

Count, I can only hope that we have miscommunication due to a language problem. My sole intention as I stated originally, was not to criticise the design of FOW in HLG, but was rather a critique of the various modes of FOW and individual players observations. As you know, I am noted for starting topics in order to provoke discussion and sharing of thoughts. (Divisional Command, Waterloo), this topic was intended to do just that. However I feel that I have been "Put in my place", as I write I can see my sheep through the window, they follow each other no matter what!!!!!
« Modifié: 24 avril 2010, 19:03:40 pm par ajlewisbrookes »

Hors ligne AJ

  • Général de Brigade
  • ****
  • Messages: 1845
  • Sir Arthur Wellesley
    • Napoleonic Battle Corp
Re : FOW Experiment
« Réponse #27 le: 24 avril 2010, 19:12:26 pm »
And what about the effect of using Signal Stations (Semaphore)to relay orders and receive dispatches from Corps.  It must have had an effect otherwise Napoleon wouldn't have used it. Wouldn't that make order delay "Historical" a little suspect for this particular battle.

New standard footnote for my posts: This post is no way meant to be provocotive or to criticise HLG or it's creation team.

Hors ligne Gunner24

  • Officier HistWar
  • Général de Division
  • *****
  • Messages: 2508
Re : FOW Experiment
« Réponse #28 le: 24 avril 2010, 20:00:05 pm »
I've not spent a huge amount of time studying this FOW subject, my prefrence is to play a "game" for enjoyment, and that means I like to see what's happening !.  The total grog FOW option in HWLG is not very much to my liking, but that's my preference, if it works as it should, then all well and good, there are other options we can use, BUT, in PBEM and MP games how many will set the full grog mode up to play - my bet is very few. It could be a lot more if it were a little more "friendly".  This is a GAME, we are not on a real battlefield 200 years ago fighting for our lives - thankfully.

JMM
Citer
I don't like the polemic and  the dialectic isn't a good way in this forum!
And believe me, if you like this game, the best is to avoid this kind of behavior!!!
EDIT by g24....whole "off topic" rant removed - sorry to cause offence.

We all want the same thing, a great game, which we have almost got, and will have soon, just because someone says "how about if you do.....this that or the other" does not mean they hate the game and are trying to cause trouble - in fact it's the oppersite, they love the game and want it to be as good as possible.

Over and out for now.
« Modifié: 24 avril 2010, 21:31:31 pm par Gunner24 »
Gunner24
NBC [Founder] 2008-19
http://napbc.freeforums.org/

Hors ligne JMM

  • Administrateur
  • Maréchal d'Empire
  • *******
  • Messages: 8204
    • http://www.histwar.com
Re : FOW Experiment
« Réponse #29 le: 24 avril 2010, 20:36:20 pm »
the problem is that we are mixing all; with this view,I can't fix any bugs...
a) First of all, visibility runs fine in solo mode!
b) Possible problem when we resume a game (pbem,solo) and I think I fix this issue
c) Execution of Orders: I am working on this problem.

Just a comment:
However as Alfiere points out (and JMM concedes), the map elevations are not precise
Sorry, I never said this, just I didn't use maps from satellite: it's not the same thing...

Another comment:
The testers can talk about the game like other guys... Because they are testers, they know a bit more the game.
That said, a lot of  present testers entered into the team 3 or 4 months ago...
I don't like the polemic and  the dialectic isn't a good way in this forum!
And believe me, if you like this game, the best is to avoid this kind of behavior!!!

Now, I must continue to work...

JMM