Interdiction Broken Since 2014

[Lobster]

Is this ever going to be fixed? Interdiction opportunity attacks, an undocumented event, has been bugged for five years. Also, why is this undocumented?

So now I'm wondering, is it broken or do we not understand how it works? Are interdiction opportunity attacks designed to happen after every combat round instead of at the end of a turn like Bob said? Did it get broken between the time Talon Soft had the game and Matrix put out their version?

I recalled seeing it in 3.4 so I checked and it is there also. It's more than five years old. My wayback machine refuses to run TOAW-COW so I can't check any farther back than 3.4. I'll install it on my laptop and see how that goes. But not today. Wife is sick. I have to do laundry, dishes, cook Memorial Day Feast and play nurse. [:D]

[sPzAbt653]

Also recently discussed here:
tm.asp?m=4592870&mpage=1&key=

[Lobster]

Well, I can get TOAW Volume 1 to work and there are no opportunity bombardments. I can't get COW or Elite to run. Says they won't run on NT.

So, now I have to see if I can dig up the first TOAW version Matrix released to see if the opportunity bombardments were there.

[Lobster]

Well, I don't know where the opportunity bombardment was put into TOAW but it wasn't there in Volume 1. In any event, Bob said it was supposed to occur at the end of a player turn. It isn't documented but he must have tested it since he said that with authority. In any event, it doesn't happen at the end of the turn. It happens at the resolution of combat. For instance in FitE2 one German JU88 unit will make between 1 and 12 bombardments without using any supply. Readiness does decrease. It appears the number of bombardments, or any at all, depends on the proficiency of the air unit. But that isn't the focus here. It's the fact that the opportunity attacks happen far too often, so much so that they can severely unbalance a scenario. [;)]

[larryfulkerson]

...It's the fact that the opportunity attacks happen far too often, so much so that they can severely unbalance a scenario.....

Desert Storm 91 is severly unbalanced because the Allied side can mount hundreds of INT missions per combat phase which makes the Iraqi units evaporate eventually and the game is over in about 5 turns.

There's no reason to play it with forces like that. Just the threat will do the job.

[Bamilus]

I'm relatively new so out of curiosity who are the current devs/testers? Furthermore, when did Norm stop working on the game? I'm assuming theres a lot of issues with things because hes not involved, right?

[larryfulkerson]

ORIGINAL: Bamilus

I'm relatively new so out of curiosity (1)who are the current devs/testers? Furthermore, (2)when did Norm stop working on the game? I'm assuming (3)theres a lot of issues with things because hes not involved, right?

(1) I'm not sure there's a list anywhere and I'd be surprised if very many of them are still working on anything. One of the developers had a heart attack not far in the past and it seems to have taken the wind out of his sails.

(2) As far as I know when Matrix bought the rights to TOAW Norm dropped out entirely. I'm not sure he's even still alive. When did Matrix buy TOAW? Maybe in 2005?

(3) Norm did some custom code that's astonishing because it still works. From what I understand Norm didn't go out of his way to comment any of his code to help those who come behind him so it's not easy to change things, to fix things, etc. What would be really cool is for a TOAW 5 to be code written in today's language(s) specifically for WINdoze and easy to do maintenance on. Something like Python or Rails or C#, something recent.

The way Norm wrote TOAW it has a structure that requires about 10,000 files for everything: some program files, some sound files, some configuration files and some output files ( toaw_log.txt ) and I'm hoping that it can be redesigned so that it's better organized. The idea of having a computer product spread it's files across two separate directory chains that have active dynamic files is really confusing.

There's a wish list that has about 1,000 good ideas that would make the game better. I wonder who's maintaining that and where it is.

[Bamilus]

Thanks Larry for the very helpful background. It is pretty crazy how old the base game code is (I was in elementary school when TOAW 1 came out...). Norm occasionally posts on the Computer Wargames FB group...hes a living legend.

[Curtis Lemay]

ORIGINAL: Lobster

Is this ever going to be fixed? Interdiction opportunity attacks, an undocumented event, has been bugged for five years. Also, why is this undocumented?

Let's be clear: While this problem may have existed for five years, it has only been raised to our attention for few months at best.

[larryfulkerson]

...it has only been raised to our attention for [a] few months at best....

This is only my opinion, I haven't discussed it with anyone, in fact, I just thought of it just now, and I'm thinking that the TOAW beta team might need several new and different developers. To help out a little bit.

EDIT: I remember a time when you guys did same-day fixes.

[Curtis Lemay]

ORIGINAL: larryfulkerson

EDIT: I remember a time when you guys did same-day fixes.

Sure, for simple mistakes in things that we had just been working on. Not for things that haven't even been looked at for years.

[Lobster]

ORIGINAL: Curtis Lemay

ORIGINAL: Lobster

Is this ever going to be fixed? Interdiction opportunity attacks, an undocumented event, has been bugged for five years. Also, why is this undocumented?

Let's be clear: While this problem may have existed for five years, it has only been raised to our attention for few months at best.

The fact is, interdiction opportunity bombardment was undocumented. If it had been documented and it said the interdiction opportunity bombardments took place at the end of the turn it would have been exposed by testers about a decade ago (TOAWIII). It has only persisted this long because no one knew what the heck it was and thought it was WAD. Because of this post by cathar1244 tm.asp?m=4592870 and your (Bob's) response in post #13 that this was brought to the community's attention. Only then could it be recognized by the community as bugged because then we knew how it was supposed to work. So, thanks for letting us know you are aware it is a bug.

[Curtis Lemay]

I'd still like to see some results from ACOW. That's when Norm put it in, so I expect it to be working right then.

[Zovs]

Just found this in the manual (both III and IV), I thought this used to work for ACOW (my CD is in storage, so can't test it).

The Theater Interdiction Level is not used by the game.

So if its not used what is the use?

Also in the manual in section 10.5.2:

When checking for retreats before combat, a Flanking Check is made, which is based on the quantity of “active defender” equipment in the defending and attacking units relative the Scenario Map scale. If the defender has less than the amount of equipment necessary to fully cover his frontage in the Scenario Scale, the Attacker has more equipment, and the Attacker passes a Unit Quality Check, the chance for a retreat before combat is increased by a random fraction between one and:

What is the fraction between one and: mean? One and Six? One and Ten? One and 99?

[76mm]

ORIGINAL: Zovs
...the chance for a retreat before combat is increased by a random fraction between one and:[/i]

What is the fraction between one and: mean? One and Six? One and Ten? One and 99?

I'm no mathematician, but it seems like in common usage a fraction is usually less than one...if it was talking about a fraction such as 99/45ths (or whatever), you'd think it would refer to a random number. Weird...

[Lobster]

To run COW I would have to download something like Oracle VM and read up on it. Then I'd have to find my Windows 98 manual which has the reg. numbers for 98. To find that manual I would have to go on an expedition into the unexplored depths of storage land. A journey from which many have never returned with sanity intact. Not going there. Too scary.

[sPzAbt653]

between one and: [missing equation] ? or as Bob says below !

[sPzAbt653]

Theater Interdiction Level

This number is used to give you an idea of the levels for both sides, but is not used for any in-game calculations.

[Bamilus]

ORIGINAL: Lobster

To run COW I would have to download something like Oracle VM and read up on it. Then I'd have to find my Windows 98 manual which has the reg. numbers for 98. To find that manual I would have to go on an expedition into the unexplored depths of storage land. A journey from which many have never returned with sanity intact. Not going there. Too scary.

Grogs aren't well known for their high tech computers so I bet there's a chance someone active on these forums is still using Windows 98, lol

[Curtis Lemay]

ORIGINAL: Zovs

Also in the manual in section 10.5.2:

When checking for retreats before combat, a Flanking Check is made, which is based on the quantity of “active defender” equipment in the defending and attacking units relative the Scenario Map scale. If the defender has less than the amount of equipment necessary to fully cover his frontage in the Scenario Scale, the Attacker has more equipment, and the Attacker passes a Unit Quality Check, the chance for a retreat before combat is increased by a random fraction between one and:

What is the fraction between one and: mean? One and Six? One and Ten? One and 99?

Just gotta keep reading:

between one and: Attacker Equipment Density / Defender Equipment Density