WITP routing! Chez please stay out!

[bradfordkay]

I gotta say that I am still surprised by the way that WITP routes TFs.

This panel shows the route that the game chose for my carrier TFs trying to go into Suva for refueling. The next panel shows the route given the same carrier TFs if I give them Pago Pago as a destination. Go Figure!

[bradfordkay]

Here's the other route chosen for the TFs...

[AU Tiger_MatrixForum]

The answer is obvious! The reef northeast of Suva is obviously a wonderful spearfishing location. You wouldn't expect an exalted personage such as an Admiral to pass up on an opportunity like that just because there is a war on, would you?

[Don Bowen]

ORIGINAL: bradfordkay

I gotta say that I am still surprised by the way that WITP routes TFs.

This panel shows the route that the game chose for my carrier TFs trying to go into Suva for refueling. The next panel shows the route given the same carrier TFs if I give them Pago Pago as a destination. Go Figure!

Yeah, I know. It looks funny.

But there is a reason behind it.

Task Forces, especially important TFs with Carriers, try to avoid coastal hexes. The hex that appears to be obvious between the carrier's current position and the port of Suva is a coast hex. All of the others in the path actually chosen are not (except the unavoidable destination hex). Since this is a relatively short distance, the TF can "afford" to spend the movement points to go around the horribly repugnant coastal hex.

[Don Bowen]

ORIGINAL: bradfordkay

Here's the other route chosen for the TFs...

Don't know exactly where this TF is being routed but it would seem to be some distance away. Looks like the open-ocean travel portion of the route has consumed so much of the TF's movement points that it was forced to accept passing through coastal hexes.

I have done plenty of experimenting with this and I can tell you that there is no perfect answer. No matter how complex an Al Gore Rhythm is written, it will have hole here and there that will cause problems in some circumstances. Your human eye and quick brain can instantly determine several levels of magnitude more data that a poor logic loop trying to figure a way around the map.

Also, the concept of spearfishing can not be discounted.

(edit) Note to self - Proof read before submitting.

[AU Tiger_MatrixForum]

ORIGINAL: Don Bowen

Al Gore Rhythm

[:D][:D][:D]

That took me a few seconds I will admit.
[8|]

[Ian R]

Don

Does it do this everywhere - including e/g Tasmania or Canada where there are no Japanese air zones at all, or even near there, and 2/100's of ... chance of the IJN  showing up?

[Don Bowen]

First, let me say that the following is all that I feel able to give by way of explanation on the methods of TF routing. The internal workings are, of course, proprietary anyway. So please do not bombard the forum with requests for additional information or specific "what ifs". This is it.

Second, I am away from my home computer tonight and have only my failing memory to rely on. And, as they say, memory is the second thing to go. But it gives me more time that I normally have, so:

Calculation of TF routing path involves examination of possible routes between source and destination, and assignment of a movement cost for each hex in the path and, in summary, total path. The lowest cost path that successfully routes is selected. If no acceptable path is available, the dreaded 9999 range is returned. The "cost" of each hex is determined by topography and enemy threat. Each are separate items, and are additive.

Some hexes are blocked - land, reef, etc. Others are just undesirable - shallow, coastal, bad spearfishing.

Enemy threat decreases in effect as range from the point of threat increases.

To answer the specific question, topographical considerations are still in force if no enemy threat is present. However, with no enemy threat increasing the cost, a TF may be better able to tolerate highest topographical costs.

[Ian R]

Thanks Don, I understand.  Enemy threat cost may even in some circumstances encourage the most direct route.

[Coach Z]

Al Gore Rhythm? I'm no Computer expert but does that have something to do with the end of the world as we know it? Or is it just the Sun growing cold?
 
I thought that the AI avoided coactal hexes w/Carriers b/c it messes with their air ops and the amount of CAP they will put up?

[wbm4x]

Try creating a Transport or SC TF using a DD from one of your ACTFs. Have it return to Suva, then set your ACTFs to follow. The SCTF should take the direct route and the others should follow using the same path.

Bill

[bradfordkay]

" Al Gore Rhythm? I'm no Computer expert but does that have something to do with the end of the world as we know it?"

Hmmm... did R.E.M. play on his campaign trail?


Don.. I understand what you are saying. The second screenshot has Pago Pago as a destination (the second nearest replenishment port). I think that what I did was give it the Pago Pago destination with the plan to halt the movement and return to Suva when I issue tonight's orders.

No spilling the beans to Chez!

[pad152]

ORIGINAL: Don Bowen


First, let me say that the following is all that I feel able to give by way of explanation on the methods of TF routing. The internal workings are, of course, proprietary anyway. So please do not bombard the forum with requests for additional information or specific "what ifs". This is it.

Second, I am away from my home computer tonight and have only my failing memory to rely on. And, as they say, memory is the second thing to go. But it gives me more time that I normally have, so:

Calculation of TF routing path involves examination of possible routes between source and destination, and assignment of a movement cost for each hex in the path and, in summary, total path. The lowest cost path that successfully routes is selected. If no acceptable path is available, the dreaded 9999 range is returned. The "cost" of each hex is determined by topography and enemy threat. Each are separate items, and are additive.

Some hexes are blocked - land, reef, etc. Others are just undesirable - shallow, coastal, bad spearfishing.

Enemy threat decreases in effect as range from the point of threat increases.

To answer the specific question, topographical considerations are still in force if no enemy threat is present. However, with no enemy threat increasing the cost, a TF may be better able to tolerate highest topographical costs.

Don

Why then if I give the same TF the same destination multiple times, it picks different routes?

Example:

When I see a strange route, sometimes I cancel the TF's destination, and give it the same destination again and it will sometimes pick a different route!