OP Fire "stealing" the targeting advantage?

[Tommy]

Matrix Guys,

I think I've finally verified what I have suspected for a while. AFV has tank1 for a target on a turn. The turn ends and the enemy moves it's units, starting the OP Fire phase. I get asked if AFV wants to fire at several units; I say NO. I wait until tank1 moves before I shoot so I can keep my high % to hit rating. Tank1 finally moves, I get asked for OP Fire. I say YES and get a lower % to hit! I cycle through more units moving; saying NO every time. Tank1 moves again and my OP fire % to hit is still low. I'm not getting any better even though the only thing AFV is doing is shooting at tank1. Some more enemy units move and then it's my direct fire phase. I go directly to AFV and he doesn't have tank1 as the designated target. AFV's target is now the last unit to move - and I said NO OP Fire to it. I shot at tank1 and the % to hit is still low. Much lower than it was on my last turn. Remember, AFV did nothing but shoot at tank1 last turn and this turn.

Somehow, the Op Fire routine has deleted the target from AFV and made all my OP fire & direct fire shots as "first shots" with low % to hit. If I say no to OP fire, I think I should maintain and even improve my % to hit. This is just basic fire control technique that all soldiers are taught to employ.

What's up?

Tommy

[Paul Vebber]

This has always been the case in the game and is a problem with the nature of IGO-UGO game systems.

There seems to be a prevelent misunderstanding about the way these games abstract time.

A "turn" in an IGO-UGO game is two (or "n") player turns. In SP:WaW we say that represents what could happen over the course of "several minutes" (like 2-4). Now the key abstraction to "IGO-UGO" is that the player turns occur seperately, but represent a single "interwoven" time interval, just decomposed into a piece where player 1 has initiative and a piece where player 2 (...to player n) was the initiative. In each case the enemy is "frozen" temporarily.

The movement rates are based on about 2min worth of movement so there is some "slop" potentially in the turn. Yet if you move each of your units individually its full movement allowance, then technically the activity in the turn unfolds as if the turn were (number of units moved)*2min long.

So to try to establish a linear sequence of events during a turn is not possible. OPfire and special opfire represent opportunites to shoot that the enemy is giving you based on his exposure. Becasue this keeps "rewinding" in time when a new unit is moved and gets quite jumbled if units are moved in an alternating fashion, its impossible to keep track of where in this mishmash shot opportunites lie, except to make them somewhat random.

To assume otherwise would mean that a given unit would "lock onto" a given enemy unit until it was dead. WHile this may be "realistic" in real world terms (where the action flows in continuous time" it would lead to serious problems in IGOUGO.

At what point does this "lock on" occur? If you shoot the first unit that approaches, then you could not engage a second that subsequently approaches until the first is dead. IF you don't engage the first target, then it can march right up next to you and kill you, while you wait for the other one to break cover. At what point is there a delay in real terms between unit actions and where is teh sequence completely artificial - an artifact of the IGOUGO sequence?

So OPfire (and special opfire) allocate shot opportunities randomly based on proximity and threat (how much he shoots at you)- the more he moves toward you and shoots at you, the more shot opportunities he presents you. The problem is you technically don't know which came first!

If the first unit described above approaches from 12 hexes away and you kill it with a special opfire shot 3 hexes away, then a 2nd unit breaks cover from the same area and you hit and kill it at 8 hexes. Well assuming that they both "really" started together (or close), then the one you shot second, was technically shot first (it was killed farther away)!

So you can see trying to keep track of what unit was "shot at last" is not possible strictly speaking, since game actions are not literally sequential.

So we allow a potentially large number of "special opfire" shots, but at lower probability because they are are occuring based on the enemy doing something, not on the crew carefully aiming and firing in sequence (that sort of fire occurs in YOUR player turn).

The reuslt of looking at the two player turns together is that there are opportunities over the course of 2-4 minutes where you have the "tactical control" to engage one or more targets in the manner of your choosing. But at other times the enemy must be cooperative to allow the shot opportunity.

OPfire shots are in some ways "virtual shots" becasue they represent a shot opportunity that only exists if the enemy acts in such a way to allow it, if the enemy does nothing, there is no Opfire, even if the enemy is sitting staring at you one hex away.

It represents the kills that rise from unexpected or serendipitous interaction with the enemy. Random battlefield events that are outside your "tactical control" but would result in kills on teh real battlefield that IGOUGO, becasue of its time warped nature, can't properly depict.

The cost of the lack of "tactical control" in choosing the manner in which the engagement takes place, is a somewhat lower hit probability, unless the enemy acts in such a way to allow you consequetive shots by the same unit at the same target, which is rare.

So if you shoot at a target , and then get triggered to opfire at a second unit, you can;t assume you are locked onto the first target waiting to shoot again, the new target, may be ata a point in its movement technically before you made the other shot!

So we allow quantity of these "potential shots" to make up for lack of quality, since there really is no way to sort it out otherwise.

[Tommy]

Paul,

Excellent answer! I'm glad you guys can keep it sorted out.

As this was happening, I couldn't help but think about that old Boogeyman; the AI cheat. This one sure gives the impression that the AI is cheating ( ), I know now it's just an accident. I could have sworn that the AI would finish up it's turn by running a trash unit by my tanks, forcing each to regard it (but decline OPFire) as it passed. This then caused every tank to "break-lock" on it's real target.

Tommy

[Larry Holt]

Paul gave a good answer. However, in game terms if you do not want to lose your lock on to OP fire, set the unit to a low OP range with the "y" key. It will then not be selected during OP fire and will keep its lock.

[timc]

Paul,
I just have to commend you on that clear and well-organized answer. Keep up the good work.

[Mikimoto]

Hello.

The "Opportunity fire" system and the "special opp fire" event are great features of SpWaW, in my humble opinion.

The lackness of this is the main reason I don´t play yet SP2, and I loved it!!!
In a turn-based game this type of feature is crytical.
Imagine my unarmed Marines seeing how the Vietcong is coming to fire at blackpoint and doing nothing to prevent it. Buaaaaaaaah!!!

This is more real and more funny.

Thanks'n'Saludos

[Gloo]

Originally posted by Larry Holt:
Paul gave a good answer. However, in game terms if you do not want to lose your lock on to OP fire, set the unit to a low OP range with the "y" key. It will then not be selected during OP fire and will keep its lock.

Sure he did! I wonder how he's able (and other Matrix crew) to respond all the questions so quickly and accurately? Are they really humans???

By the way, the "trick" you gave is really good to avoid that problem of lost acquisition bonus.

[Larry Holt]

Originally posted by Gloo:
Sure he did! I wonder how he's able (and other Matrix crew) to respond all the questions so quickly and accurately? Are they really humans???

By the way, the "trick" you gave is really good to avoid that problem of lost acquisition bonus.

Yes, it is amazing especially as most of them have "real" jobs too.

As to the "trick", yes it works but I don't think of it as a trick. I am just giving my crew an order to engage only the desired unit and not to engage other units unless they get closer than the specified range. In this manner, the game mechanics accurately simulate real life.