AI forces me to surrender?? This shouldn't be possible!

SPWaW is a tactical squad-level World War II game on single platoon or up to an entire battalion through Europe and the Pacific (1939 to 1945).

Moderator: MOD_SPWaW

GrinningDwarf
Posts: 90
Joined: Fri Nov 03, 2000 10:00 am
Location: Payne's Creek, CA USA

Post by GrinningDwarf »

Originally posted by Tommy:
This time, by luck I knocked off one more Jap squad and stopped a squad from taking the last hex. The game did not end and I went on to a good marginal victory.

Only I should have the right to surrender my side!! After all, the objective was NOT to hold all hexes by turn 9. It was to hold most of the hexes by turn 12.
That had to have been it...letting the Japanese get all the victory hexes.

Has anybody won in less than 12 turns by capturing all of the victory hexes early?

Sergeant to new replacements on the line: I may not have time to tell you to duck, but if you see me dive for the ground you might want to think about why I'm doing it.
Tommy
Posts: 232
Joined: Wed May 31, 2000 8:00 am
Location: In that brush, behind you; raising a PIAT to my sh

Post by Tommy »

GD

Great scenario, wasn't it? I was on the edge of seat the whole time. After my 3rd restart, when I picked up again from turn 8 and got the luck of not losing the last victory hex, I finished up just like you did. I got a slightly better kill ratio to push me just over into the marginal victory. But that was just due to more conservative play ( as everyone above seems to point out). But after all, I was the Brits!

So, I agree, the "forced surrender" is due to the loss (even if temporary) of all of the VH in an Attack vs. Attack scenario like this. I still think we should be the one who decides the surrender, not the AI. What would have happened to Gen MacArthur if he had to surrender the first time the Japs "asked" him to?

Tommy
GrinningDwarf
Posts: 90
Joined: Fri Nov 03, 2000 10:00 am
Location: Payne's Creek, CA USA

Post by GrinningDwarf »

I think we have to also bear in mind that great as it is, it's only a game and therefore a shadow of reality. I've read enough history to know that if my sit-rep states that I've got the enemy fleeing back through the town, all other objectives secured and the town will be secure in 10-15 minutes of mop up that I'd get better than a draw result.

This works both ways...sometimes in my favor as well as against me. I played the "Raiders Ride to Work" scenario and got a marginal victory result even though, in my opinion as the commander on the scene, the issue was still very much in doubt and I had an extremely tentative hold on the objectives...in fact I had just lost the northern victory hexes and only had the crew of a knocked out Sherman on the southern objectives. I think the reason I got the win was because the victory hexes were worth points for every turn held and I rushed my troops out and had all of the objectives occupied in the first three turns or so. It didn't matter that I got blasted off the northern hexes almost as soon as I was on them...the Germans didn't physically occupy them until the last turn of the game, so I was collecting points for a long time.

I think the designers need to make arbitrary decisions that 'at this minute, the issue is decided one way or the other'. I don't intend this as a slight in any way and I truely appreciate their work, but it's enough to break through my 'suspension of disbelief'.
Sergeant to new replacements on the line: I may not have time to tell you to duck, but if you see me dive for the ground you might want to think about why I'm doing it.
Grumble
Posts: 413
Joined: Tue May 23, 2000 8:00 am
Location: Omaha, NE, USA

Post by Grumble »

Not to flog a dead horse, but you "really" aren't surrendering. "Real World" again, what's happening is you are breaking contact, falling back and regrouping. However, you "lose" because you didn't fulfill your mission objectives: securing the village and LZ. One may abstract that in this case "Decisive" or "Marginal" Japanese victories are indicative of how much they delayed or cancelled British plans for that sector.
"...these go up to eleven."
Nigel Tufnel
marklaker
Posts: 38
Joined: Tue Sep 26, 2000 8:00 am
Location: Puerto Rico

Post by marklaker »

Ahhh, the Flying Chindits! I really enjoyed this scenario, but then again it was a WBW scenario and I always enjoy those.

Much like Grinning Dwarf, I immediately advanced on the victory hexes and procured all but the village hex. I lost the southeastern hex for a turn, but quickly reclaimed it by shifting squads.

The 40mm AA was my salvation. Every time it appeared my defense was about to rupture, the the 40mm came to the rescue.

The village hex proved another matter. In retrospect, it appears I waited too long to bring reinforcements from pacified areas and had to slug it out with inadequate forces. Still, when the clock struck 12 (turn 12), I was one hex away from claiming the village from two suppressed rifle squads. That was painful!

Because the village hex weighed-in at 1000 pts., I could only claim a 3639-1342 draw.
A helluva lot of fun, though! Thanks Wild Bill.



------------------
Pillbox
Posts: 16
Joined: Thu Sep 21, 2000 8:00 am
Location: Pa

Post by Pillbox »

Is it possible to play this scenario with C&C on? Forces are so spread out I seem defeated before I begin since no one has any orders! I really like scenarios when I can play with C&C on Image
GrinningDwarf
Posts: 90
Joined: Fri Nov 03, 2000 10:00 am
Location: Payne's Creek, CA USA

Post by GrinningDwarf »

You can switch C&C on from the preferences screen at any time. However, I think the units land kind of scrambled up and you'd spend more time getting the "battlefield tidied up", as BLM would say! I usually see it recommended that C&C be turned off in airborne scenarios.

Actually, my understanding is that airborne troops were trained to operate that way, anyway.
Sergeant to new replacements on the line: I may not have time to tell you to duck, but if you see me dive for the ground you might want to think about why I'm doing it.
Wild Bill
Posts: 6428
Joined: Fri Apr 07, 2000 4:00 pm
Location: Smyrna, Ga, 30080

Post by Wild Bill »

I concur with GD on this one. Any special forces, Rangers, paras, etc, were specially trained to operate alone, in small unit groups. Of course all of you know that.

In that light, C&C should not be required for these types of troops. I think they should be allowed to act independently, or at least until they can be united with the parent unit of the formation.

Personal thinking, anyway.

Wild Bill

------------------
In Arduis Fidelis
Wild Bill Wilder
Coordinator, Scenario Design
Matrix Games
Image
In Arduis Fidelis
Wild Bill Wilder
Independent Game Consultant
Post Reply

Return to “Steel Panthers World At War & Mega Campaigns”