Core dynamic a bit ahistoric

[lotharr51]

Love the game. Going to recommend to my friends.

That said, I find it amusing that a visit from U.S. or ARVN forces creates positive relations. In actually, green forces visiting a village would fall between annoyingly invasive (round up the people, dig through their stuff) to making hostile contact of some kind and its subsequent destruction e.g. Bwe Tre...and all the horror in-between. From what I've read, the only real exception to this was the Marines who did a really good job in one AO until they were ordered to more so called important duties by Westmoreland.

Edit - From reading more of the forum, it looks like there will be an Afghanistan version. This dynamic would make more sense in that context where US forces behave in a much more respectful fashion.

2nd edit - Well, I may have been off base here. It looks like contact with blue or green forces can cause a drop in support. I've observed that a village which was full American support revert to South Vietnam after a visit from a US company. The advanced tutorial says this will always have a positive impact, so that was a bit confusing. Acutally, this seems like it might be due to an intel update when troops revisit a village that has been influenced by red.

[ErissN6]

Love the game. Going to recommend to my friends.

Sure.

That said, I find it amusing that a visit from U.S. or ARVN forces creates positive relations. In actually, green forces visiting a village would fall between annoyingly invasive (round up the people, dig through their stuff) to making hostile contact of some kind and its subsequent destruction e.g. Bwe Tre...and all the horror in-between. From what I've read, the only real exception to this was the Marines who did a really good job in one AO until they were ordered to more so called important duties by Westmoreland.
- From reading more of the forum, it looks like there will be an Afghanistan version. This dynamic would make more sense in that context where US forces behave in a much more respectful fashion.

Yes, this is the military translated concept of political H&M. It has to impact H&M so people are compelled to smile to us.
It's like the mafia friendship: Your friend is who is compelled to befriend with you.

I've observed that a village which was full American support revert to South Vietnam after a visit from a US company. This seems like it might be due to an intel update when troops revisit a village that has been influenced by red.

That's it.

[Nijis]

I'd think H&M represents willingness to cooperate and provide intel - not as simple as just affection.

A visit from foreign troops is likely to create new grievances, as huts are searched, etc. People sensitive to humiliation and with less to lose, like young men without families, might find new motivation to join the guerrillas. But at the same time, pro-government village chiefs might see their clout boosted, heads-of-households who just want peace might feel more confidence in the government's ability to provide order, etc. In Iraq (where I worked as a reporter for several years), one big reason why US troops tried to get out as much as possible is that it simply gave people an opportunity to pass on information that they might otherwise not have had.

For the theory of counterinsurgency, and how troop presence sometimes counterintuitively raises local support, I'd recommend Stathis Kalyvis.

[Every Single Soldier]

Interesting line of conversation, remember the model applied in V'65 is an abstract counter-insurgency fiction, and what is at the core of the model is that insurgents go to the village and intimidate the villagers and the counter forces try prevent them gaining access, this is the primary construct. When the counter forces enter a village there is only a small increase in HM, representing a presence and giving security to the villagers. The way to really increase the HM is to destroy insurgents, sweep mines and just basically prevent them from entering the villages. This being said, when the NVA units are destroyed it has a much lesser impact on the village HM than a local VC cadre, the NVA being non local and also ultimately seen as a type of 'invader'.

In the V'65 model there is no chance of negative impact on village HM resulting from a counter visit, the enemy must of gained access to the village between visits in order to effect the HM negatively.

So with the Afghanistan adaption, the player will have more options to increase the village HM other than by pure combat, they will be able to improve infrastructure (roads, water works, IED demolition etc) and by so doing increase the HM.

So, having said all this, the COIN model is evolving with every title published and conversation (such as this) been had, so many thanks for taking the time to express these views, it all goes into my folder (which is pretty fat already) and ultimately ends with a very sophisticated COIN model going forward.

[Every Single Soldier]

Another point I need to mention, in my original game design I had an option for a positive AND a negative interaction for the counter troops when visiting the villages, Propaganda vs Interrogation so to speak, but decided against it as having US troops with an interrogation action icon could prove controversial, so admittedly took the low road and just made it a generic positive experience, the way it 'should be' in a COIN war fought properly

[ErissN6]

It reminds me the Loyalty concept in Ageod games.
Example in Revolution Under Siege, the Tcheka is here to keep the loyalty high.
http://www.ageod.net/agewiki/Loyalty

[Every Single Soldier]

[lotharr51]

Another point I need to mention, in my original game design I had an option for a positive AND a negative interaction for the counter troops when visiting the villages, Propaganda vs Interrogation so to speak, but decided against it as having US troops with an interrogation action icon could prove controversial, so admittedly took the low road and just made it a generic positive experience, the way it 'should be' in a COIN war fought properly

I get it. I think it's really hard to make a game about Vietnam that is enjoyable to play as the US since the overall policy was attrition warfare vs true counter insurgency and nation building...the last being the only real foundation for S.Vietnam to have survived....minus an invasion of the north.

I also noticed after playing a lot more that the relation bump is pretty small and that works for me.

Will future titles in this series allow playing the insurgents? Is multiplayer in the works / being considered?

[ErissN6]

- We're here to free you from the Commies.
- Thanks, but for now we want to be freed from the riches. We know the Commies are only supposed to help us; won't you actually help us, you americans?
- We're here to free you from the Commies. They're your true enemy.
- Yes we know, like the bourgeoisy here that we are fighting against, they steal all.
- You don't like democracy?
- We love it, that's what we fight for, for the freedom of working neither for the Party nor for the riches, just for ourselves... You like democracy and bourgeois, you mean in America all the people are rich?
- Yes, all can be rich if they really want.
- So it's like in my country: if you want to, the law allows you to gather the wealth, so you're able to pay high prices and are able to make others paying high prices. It increases poverty as we're humble and simple people.
- But that's democracy!
- Sure not. Go for the foreign Commies if you want and stop killing our boys.
- Sorry they're all commies for us.
- We've not invited you, go home if you add to our woe.

[Every Single Soldier]

Will future titles in this series allow playing the insurgents? Is multiplayer in the works / being considered?

Multiplayer is a tough proposition, unless you have an expansive community, the development costs outweigh the benefits by a big margin, having said that I would dearly love to see this game played multiplayer and it will be a consideration for Afghanistan, depending on the take up of course.

Playing either side is a much more viable proposition and that is on the cards for future development.

[Every Single Soldier]

We've not invited you, go home if you add to our woe.

Haha , exactly !!

[lotharr51]

Multiplayer is a tough proposition, unless you have an expansive community, the development costs outweigh the benefits by a big margin, having said that I would dearly love to see this game played multiplayer and it will be a consideration for Afghanistan, depending on the take up of course.

Playing either side is a much more viable proposition and that is on the cards for future development.

Understood. Well, good luck with the next release! This is a great game at at an amazing price for Slitherine/Steam.

[ErissN6]

Hearts&Minds can be gained by doing the things that people would want to do (then people will do with you),
or by terrorizing them.
Doing both is the better, that's why true democratic organizations are less efficient (they avoid scaring own people),
and so people are often wedged between imperialist forces.

In Vietnam, US goal was both to forbid the take of the country by communists (to not reinforce USSR), and to keep a corrupt government (to permit advantageous economical deals, against vietnam people if needed).
Not all viet people fighting against their government were 'Commies', but US government didn't care as all revolting against corruption had to be eliminated: body count first.

In foreign countries, it is said 'corruption'. At home, it is said 'the Law'.
The americans first know it well (or they should), and I know it well too, in second, as I'm french:
the French revolution (2nd in time after the American one) legalized the corruption, for bourgeoisie could continue fill their pockets without being ennoyed by the people (The american efficiency of the riches' Law against the people: see how the US prisons are filled...):
In March 1794, the just born french democracy was forbidden, by Robespierre, for good, who takes the excuse of eliminating the 'hébertists' to remove the power of the people 'sections'. Three months later there will be no much people left willing to protect Robespierre from his competitor mates and the guillotine...
Nowadays, the elections (without the people to actually control the elected) is the soft guillotine, so the bourgeois don't kill each other. But, to help the bourgeoisy to survive against people is not democracy, it's a big lie Stalin-style.
[ American didn't use 'guillotine' for they mainly fought against english royalists that they could send home (France couldn't send home the french royalists...), and for americans kept the royal structure with their men (they had mainly removed the link with england kingdom; french made anew the state power structure, which made far more battles for it). ]

To make short: H&M is really not in the game the carebear concept many would believe, if this game wants to keep some historical mood.

[Every Single Soldier]

Not all viet people fighting against their government were 'Commies', but US government didn't care as all revolting against corruption had to be eliminated: body count first.

The enemy of my enemy is my friend

The local vietnamese mostly saw the US and NVA as both invading forces...

To make short: H&M is really not in the game the carebear concept many would believe, if this game wants to keep some historical mood

Ouch, carebear !!

I take your point though, I did take a little of the 'carebear' route, particularly in respect of interrogation/intimidation, everything is so PC these days

[ErissN6]

Ouch, carebear !!
I take your point though, I did take a little of the 'carebear' route, particularly in respect of interrogation/intimidation, everything is so PC these days

Yeah it's a game, we don't want to go in the details, but here we can only play one side, and usually then we play the good side.
I know this is neutralized (now) for you, for you thought about since long, but H&M is nowadays still a not neutralized concept
(Insurgency is a planned right at home that we must not use, and in foreign countries it's even a not recognised right by our governments, it's rather at best a tolerated thing, people seen as weird as they don't like a government).
As I already said I was shocked at first as the trailer seems agree, find that normal, that foreign military could visit homes.

Oh, it reminds me the treath of American invasion of my country (12 years ago) I felt when 'my' french government emit doubts about Irak last invasion. It was the strongest feeling of war I had in my life, even more than when I was in ex-Yugoslavia in 1993 as it was not my country (even when I had feared being machinegunned here), even when USSR still existed at the door with nuclear threath (relaunched at now by Syria war..).

[Every Single Soldier]

War is not pretty, that's for sure...

[LoyalSoldier]

Yes, the game seems to assume a very specific point of view, that:

1) The villagers (at least in that region) are generally positively pre-disposed towards the US and SV govt)

2) The US and their ARVN allies are generally the good guys

3) The VC and the the bad guys

Of course, the war would have not worked out like that. The US troops were not all angels and there were undoubtedly good people fighting for the VC and NVA. That is the same in any side. I am sure both sides used both cruelty and kindness to gain support of the locals, with both using mainly intimidation.

The H&M score seems to infer a measure of affection for the US troops. However, it probably more reflects the local view as to who is most likely to win. It's probably a matter of picking the winning side. And like all communities, there will be informants for both sides. And some will give information to both.

So the game does feel biased, especially as Western actions in the Middle East can feel ambiguous at best.

However, it is a really good game and I have enjoyed it immensely. It would be good if there were alternative forces to play.

[Every Single Soldier]

However, it is a really good game and I have enjoyed it immensely. It would be good if there were alternative forces to play.

Very much on the cards to be able to play both sides, the H&M mechanic is actually quite neutral, it just depnds what side you are playing to determine good/bad guys

Me, personally, would really like the opportunity to play both sides and even a multiplayer somewhere in the future. right now focussing on the Afghanistan adaption, then we can move our attention to the option to play either side etc .

Thanks for the support !

[LoyalSoldier]

I wasn't really thinking of playing as the insurgents, although that would be an interesting addition.

I was more thinking of playing the Galactic Empire pacifying an area of a planet with rebel influence.

I realise you don't have the franchise, but you get my meaning.

[Every Single Soldier]

There is no reason why we won't be able to do a furturistic version of the game, just so many COIN wars on the go and in history to focus on... (Don't forget the Angolan Bush War )