Matrix Games Forums

I took the complexity values from the briefing prefixes and sorted them by size. Here's how they tumble out:



My scenarios are in bold

I've attached the spreadsheet the above shot was generated from.

Hi Everyone,

With 4.1.0.4 you can notice that each scenario starts with a summary... number of units, events, and a complexity value. The table above shows this relative value for each scenarios.

problem solved

ORIGINAL: Curtis Lemay

I took the complexity values from the briefing prefixes and sorted them by size. Here's how they tumble out:

How are these "complexity" values computed, what do they mean and what is the importance?

As I recall, computed complexity is nothing more than total units divided into map size. If so, you are not computing complexity, but rather density.
Density really has nothing to do with complexity.

Seems to me that "complexity" should have more to do with military difficulty, maneuver or strength of opposing forces.

Looking at the excel file I see an East Front scenario at the top that has a scenario "complexity" of over 21 million. What the heck does 21 million mean?
Suggest you dump this “complexity” value and do something meaningful.

Maybe give scenarios difficulty ratings (by side) from payer input. Maybe give a win probability based on starting force levels.
There must be something better than a “complexity” calculation which scores a 1941 Denmark scenario as 0.010.

Regards, RhinoBones

ORIGINAL: rhinobones

How are these "complexity" values computed, what do they mean and what is the importance?

From the "What's New 4.1":

Complexity is calculated from a scaled product of the Total Units, Total Turns, Total Events, and Total Map Boundaries.

Looking at the excel file I see an East Front scenario at the top that has a scenario "complexity" of over 21 million. What the heck does 21 million mean?

It means that its complexity value is 21 million times the complexity value of the St Mihiel 18 scenario.

There must be something better than a “complexity” calculation which scores a 1941 Denmark scenario as 0.010.

That's not a Denmark scenario, it's a Denmark Strait scenario - Bismarck vs. Hood. Really simple.

Appreciate the explanation.

However, the explanation just reinforces my original observation. Four unrelated values have been mashed together with the result labeled as a complexity value. This is like multiplying bananas by mangos, there is no common denominator that gives the result a meaningful output. What is the common denominator for “Total Turns X Total Events” or “Total Turns X Total Units”? The function yields a numerical result but has no practical meaning.

I suspect that the reason values of 21 million and 0.01 have meaning for you is that you already know the attributes of the scenarios. You know the East Front scenario is huge, hence 21 million makes sense. You know the Denmark scenario is very small, therefore 0.01 makes sense. But, if you were given no information other than that a scenario has a complexity value of 10,000 what do you actually know for certain? Complexity value tells you nothing about events, turns, units or map geometry. It just tells you that a mathematical function performed on four variables yields a meaningless output labeled “complexity”.

My suggestion is that a scenario’s complexity is best expressed by real values extracted such as “Total Formations and Total Units”. This gives the player a true sense of the number of the formations and combat units engaged, the absolute number of units to push about the battlefield and therefore, complexity of the scenario. If desired, the HQ unit size, era and prime transportation can be added for additional clarity. As I see it, the number of events, map geometry and turns has no significant impact on scenario complexity.

Maybe what needs to be done first is define scenario “complexity” and then identify those scenario attributes which define complexity. As is, I believe the current calculation does not define complexity.

com·plex·i·ty/kəmˈpleksədç/noun: complexity, the state or quality of being intricate or complicated.

For your consideration.

Regards, RhinoBones

I'm sure there are many other plausible ways to calculate complexity, but this is the one we have built into the game by Ralph. I just made a list from it. I think it does tell the players something useful about how much of a task each scenario will be to play.

Thanks for this list - it gives an idea of how far I have to go beyond Arracourt.

I actually visited Arracourt earlier this year to see what all the fuss had been about and I would post a photo or two if I knew how to.

There you go:

tm.asp?m=4455010&mpage=1&key=post%2Cpicture&#4455010

Err Ok

Well it seems to have failed twice, so I'll try again tomorrow.


Arracourt delayed. Incidentally, nearby is a small monument to the first US soldiers killed in WW1.

Err, now it seems it's blown up. Sorry guys, don't let me near live ammo.

If you have nothing else but Windows Paint, go to the home tab and use the resize command in the image section. I think that 25% of the size you posted would be enough. Create a new thread, however, since this is off-topic here.

Is it a linear scale ?

As an amateur to war games (and totally new to TOAWIV), I wanted to say thank you for this list of scenarios by complexity rating--it's helpful to be able to start with scenarios that are roughly smaller scale and work my way up.

I've never seen the list before, very useful thanks.

Thanks very much for the list Bob, but I tend to agree with Steve ( Rhinobones ) about the "meaning" of the numbers generated. The numbers we have right now are indeed helpful but I'm pretty sure FITE isn't 21 Million times more "complex" than the least of the scenarios. Are the numbers inflated too much due to the length ( number of turns ) of the scenario, or the size of the map? Maybe a "weighted factor" could be used in place of the raw number when calculating the total number, the "complexity" of the scenario? With the most weight going to the number of units involved maybe.

As a complete beginner at TOAW myself, I actually find that list super useful to get me into the game.

It might not be perfect but tells me, in a single place, exactly what I need to know at a glance: which scenarios are going to be easiest for me to play? At this stage, I don't actually care how it's calculated or whether the scale looks pleasing to a mathematical mind (which I don't have!).

Thanks, Curtis

I appreciate this post. Also, I can say I beat one of the easiest scenarios...I will try to not let it get to my head!

Thanks for this
Unvaluable info for newbies