Just a little thank you

[RedDevil]

JD,

I really don't like the defend type objective. For the Allied it is sufficient to park a well battered unit somewhere on the edge of the objective perimetre to get the whole objective points: this is totally unfair. Well, maybe it is me, since I find also unfair the 10:1 ratio particularly when the objective perimetre is wide enough to allow some stragglers to deny you those juicy victory locations.[:-]

Since the last thing the Axis has is forces to spare, asking the Axis commander to ship his Bn units around to see where the enemy is hiding is impossible.

As I wrote above, with "secure" instead of "defend" it is fairly easy to win as the Axis player. To improve the situation you should probably activate the Akritiri objective from the very beginning since I found that the Allied AI tends to keep it virtually unprotected.

Cheers,

RedDevil

... BTW: re the 10:1 and objective perimetre, one of my very first posts in the HTTR wish list was to ask for rectangular shaped objective perimetres for the checkpoins along Hell's Highway... never got at TT ID [:(]

[RedDevil]

ORIGINAL: Arjuna

Billy,

I would councel against having each side with same objective location but one with Secure and the other with Defend. What this will mean that the game will be severely biased in favour of the side with the Defend objective, as all they have to do is maintain a unit within the perimeter, while the other side must ensure thay have at least a ten to one majority within the perimeter.

The wise man spoke [&o][&o]

Actually, more than a 10:1 I would say infinity:1 since for as long as there is an enemy unit within the perimetre you get 0 VPs

[Arjuna]

RedDevil,
 
I don't recall seeing that request. mmm...not a bad idea...would require some data changes to tasks though and a fair a rewrite of the code - ie rather than a simple range check we would need to check if it was within a specified area ( more processing ). But I could see that it would allow for some interesting uses. Don't know when we will get to it but here is a TaskTracker item, just for you. [:)]
 
TT3209 - AI - UI - Option for defining Task Perimeters as polygons/rectangles

[Arjuna]

ORIGINAL: RedDevil
Actually, more than a 10:1 I would say infinity:1 since for as long as there is an enemy unit within the perimetre you get 0 VPs

Not so. If the Germans had a Secure and the Allies had a Defend, then the Allies would get points so long as they had a unit within the perimeter. The Germans would get points whenever they had a unit within the perimeter AND the force ratio was 10:1 in their favour. So the Germans could get points even if the Allies have a unit in there, provided the Germans are ten times stronger.

[Arjuna]

Billy,
 
Just to add that you are certainly at liberty to have the Germans using a Secure and the Allies a Defend. This will bias it in favour of the Allies. So you may need to use other means to achieve your overall play balance. Eg by adding more units to the Germans, taking some away from the Allies, adjusting air strikes, supplies etc.

[RedDevil]

Does it mean that in some circumstances both sides get points for the same objective?

How strange [X(].

Re the post I mentioned above, I managed to dig it out:
fb.asp?m=705701

Regards,

RedDevil

[JudgeDredd]

mmm

Well it's very hard to fight this request, especially coming from the developer of the game and the person who has played the scenario the most times! But I do rue doing it for this one main reason...managing to get a draw, I can see a balance at the end of the tunnel whereas if I change the objectives, as RedDevil has already shown, the play balance has swung in the other direction.

Unfortunately, this will mean going back to the drawing board, when I was getting so close, too. Secure objectives are going to make it too easy for the Axis, I feel. I managed to get a draw, and I am not the best player at the game (where the hell is Markshot when you need him!!)

If I now make it Secure objectives for the allies, then I am back to square one, as RedDevil has already shown, it's very easy to get a decisive victory for the axis when having Secure objectives for the allies.

On the other hand, managing a draw with the scenario as it is, there is room for some tweaking to make that elusive victory appear for the Axis and, at the same time, reduce the effectiveness of the Allied forces. I take on board the point about a minor unit upsetting objectives, but if the objective is close to being balanced, then does this matter? I was thinking about adding a 4th battalion or adding an extra company to each of the current  battalions...I don't know if that's accurate or not, I'm no historian and have absolutely no idea of the make up of a British unit, let alone a FJ Battalion.

RedDevil
Making Akritiri available earlier makes no odds, as the objective points are all completion points. So Are you suggesting I make them occupation points and start them from the start of the scenario.

Ok...well I think I'll hold fire on any changes until Eddy comes back with his points and then I'll need to take a long look at it.

[RedDevil]

Hello,
 
I have never designed a scenario but the other day I browsed through the manual and I understood you can give the AI some zero-victory points objectives just to steer its actions in the right direction.
 
I have noticed that since the Akritiri obj becomes available late in the scenario the Allies concentrate their forces around Moniatis making very easy for the Axis to make a right hook with a reinforced II Bn setting up a strong defensive perimetre from Episkopi to Limassol cutting off the airport which can then be taken during day 2 with a single FJ coy.
 
Now, if the allies were guarding some of these bridges East and/or the woods North of Episkopi it would be quite a different story. 
 
I will edit this post and add a map some time tonight or tomorrow.
 
Cheers,
 
RedDevil

[JudgeDredd]

That is correct, and something I looked at very early on, but it made the push to Moniatis and Para Chorios very easy for the Axis.

However, I have noticed that it's all too easy to through a FJ battalion down the left flank and take and hold Akritiri...and the scenario has changed considerably over time, so it's worth revisiting. I will look at it tonight when I get home.

BUT...I have noticed that even though it's easy for the Axis to fo down the left flank, when it gets to Akritiri, the Allies send troops down to cover the airport and therefore remove troops from Moniatis and Kofinou...hence allowing them a breathing space which allows them to steal these objectives. Also, it gives the user two options, I think. Sending a FJ battalion down the left, thus drawing troops away from Moniatis and Kofinou OR leaving Moniatis with 2 FJ battalions to push through, thus making it easier for them to take. So as it stands at the moment, there are a few ways the Axis could get the objectives.

Also, moving an FJ battalion down the middle to the back of Moniatis, or sending it on through to Akritiri to sit pretty...moving it down the middle and to the right to come in behind kofinou!

This is the first time I've really analysed the options for the Axis...and there are a few.

Of course, the idea is to find a balance...and that's the point of the thread...so I am open to all suggestions.

Cheers again RedDevil

[sterckxe]

ORIGINAL: JudgeDredd
Ok...well I think I'll hold fire on any changes until Eddy comes back with his points and then I'll need to take a long look at it.

Eh, I did post my comments somewhere in here already. I can get a marginal victory with the Germans relatively easy - some tweaking should get me a decisive but that's not the issue. The issue is play balance, so I'm going to try the Allies tonight and see if it's easier to win with them or not.

I'm having fun with this little scenario, thanks for creating it.

Greetz,

Eddy Sterckx

[JudgeDredd]

Yes you did, Eddy...my apologies. I got all wrapped up in the following discussion.
 
...and thx. Glad you enjoy it.

[Arjuna]

Billy,
 
Re AI objectives. Ensure that their priority is set to minimum. Otherwise you will distort the amount of forces allocated to them vis a vis other victory objectives. The distortion being greater the more victory objectives there are.

[JudgeDredd]

Will do Dave.

[RedDevil]

the pic I mentioned above is finally here.

It is taken at D1-1300 and tries to describe the issue with the AI leaving the airport unprotected.

As you can see I sent the 2nd Bn to Episkopi bypassing moniatis and elements of the 3rd Bn to Limassol while the rest of the 3rd Bn is placed in reserve (actually I will then send them to Kofinou double time, but my inability to maintain a reserve is a different story...)
At the same time I am probing Moniatis drawing all the Allies there (only active objective in the area at the time).


I was able to establish a perimeter indicated by the broken red line almost undisturbed with the bulk of the Allied forces busy making sure they held Moniatis. On the night between D1 and D2 I mopped up the base and other support units in the airport area with a couple of coys... no good.

My suggestion then is either
a) to create an AI objective around the inner red line just North of the airport, or even in the small village of Sotira and around the Limassol bridges.
b) create a secure objective in Akritiri (no VP) so that the allies keep some rearguard there.

I hope it explains better what I meant in the previous post.

Cheers,

RedDevil

[sterckxe]

ORIGINAL: RedDevil
My suggestion then is either
a) to create an AI objective around the inner red line just North of the airport, or even in the small village of Sotira and around the Limassol bridges.
b) create a secure objective in Akritiri (no VP) so that the allies keep some rearguard there.

I'll second that - take a look at the picture below - it's D1-21:00 and Akritiri is mine - still didn't manage a decisive victory - that 51 point difference you need for it is a tough one - I'm up to 36 points difference now (66-30) - another 15 points needed.

Greetz,

Eddy Sterckx

[JudgeDredd]

Eddy, RedDevil

This is what I am trying to work out.

I'm listening and thinking "Change objectives, add more AI objectives" etc, but I rue doing it because it's soooo hard to get a decisive victory...it may not even be possible.

You can skip down the side all you want...and grab the 40 points for Akrotiri...but as long as you leave the rest of the objectives, or don't assign enough troops to the other objectives, then you aint gettin' the decisive victory.

I think the fact that the Axis cannot get a decisive and seldom can get a marginal is showing a tough mission...which is good. No?

Question is...how easy/tough is it from the Allied side (too easy I expect).

[Arjuna]

There is nothing wrong with designating your scenario as best played by the Axis and making it a good challenge. For your first cut, you have done a fine job.

[sterckxe]

ORIGINAL: JudgeDredd
This is what I am trying to work out.

I'm listening and thinking "Change objectives, add more AI objectives" etc, but I rue doing it because it's soooo hard to get a decisive victory...it may not even be possible.

You can skip down the side all you want...and grab the 40 points for Akrotiri...but as long as you leave the rest of the objectives, or don't assign enough troops to the other objectives, then you aint gettin' the decisive victory.

Proposition : put a static coastal battery in Akritiri - that way it won't be undefended as it is now - which to be honest looks a bit iffy. That way you don't have to recalibrate the existing
victory locations.

ORIGINAL: JudgeDredd
I think the fact that the Axis cannot get a decisive and seldom can get a marginal is showing a tough mission...which is good. No?

Well, it keeps me entertained [;)] - Plan B last night worked a bit better, but I'm already thinking about plan C to bag me that elusive decisive victory. Making players rethink their plans and having alternate ways/routes to achieve victory is mighty fine - there's not much more you can ask of a scenario really. See also the thread about replayability.

ORIGINAL: JudgeDredd
Question is...how easy/tough is it from the Allied side (too easy I expect).

Yeah, but I wouldn't worry about that - see Arjuna's comment.

Greetz,

Eddy Sterckx

[RedMike]

Hey Judge,

I looked at your scenario and I love the map etc. but one thing immediately popped out at me. It looks to me as if the Germans have a Battalion sized organization but the unit symbols show Corps and Divisional sized HQs units.

Is that correct or do they need to be tweeked accordingly ??

Yours truly,
RedMike

[JudgeDredd]

RedMike....I guess you've spotted my severe lack of structural knowledge of the armed forces.
 
I took a scenario already created and chopped about with the forces, so ended up with the wrong size heads!
 
I will try and fix soon.