Matrix Games Forums

Whoops, you've won.
 
Hmmm..... If I was the German player, I think I would be a bit miffed at this point.
 
As you rightly say, the result doesn't really reflect the reality of that situation. Is it possible to continue playing beyond a scenarios' end?
 
If not, do you think that the 'meters' could do with a little tweaking. This ending seems a bit premature to me.

Not too sure about the minefields - a bit 'in your face' for my taste but I'm not really sure what else could be done to replace all those floaty coins.

They are what they are.

Is it possible, when generating a random battle, not to see what the oposition has, so as to really have maximum fog-of-war?

Do you mean in terms of force mixes, or actual OOB? I set the force mixes to what I wanted (these could have been randomized however). The actual OOB I had no idea on unitl I saw the actual units in action.

It is also possible to randomly select a preset, so yeah you can have total fog of war if you like.

Despite your losses, the Soviets seem to be near winning at this point; is this because of the defenders bonus?

Actually I would have to look at the time bonus in the xml or the scenario editor to see when that kicks in. If you are on the attack against an enemy with a time bonus you are sometimes told when (or near when) you should complete the battle by, before bonuses kick in. I could check it you like ....

Turn 28, so no it wasn't due to the bonus, just pure carnage [;)]

Seriously though, those 38s I would not have been able to stop. The computer would have almost certainly won (as it would get a nice juicy vic flag bonus) if the battle lasted a few turns longer.

ORIGINAL: James Crowley
Is it possible, when generating a random battle, not to see what the oposition has, so as to really have maximum fog-of-war?

Yes, you can set every parameter of the opposing side to be random so that you don't know what you'll get. However, this has some risks too if you randomize the points for example. I'd suggest keeping the points where you want them and randomizing the rest if you want a really unknown battle.

Despite your losses, the Soviets seem to be near winning at this point; is this because of the defenders bonus?

German units are worth quite a few points in 1941. From what I've been reading (Stridor can confirm), it looks like he did a good job killing quite a few squads of German infantry and several German armored vehicles. The point in this scenario is to hold the encirclement and repel the attack, effectively making it too costly for the attacker to continue (assuming they still want to keep the encirclement outside this battle). So in that respect he did well.

Regards,

- Erik

ORIGINAL: Stridor
Turn 15, so no it wasn't due to the bonus, just pure carnage [;)]
Seriously though, those 38s I would not have been able to stop. The computer would have almost certainly won (as it would get a nice juicy vic flag bonus) if the battle lasted a few turns longer.

Well, you start out in control of the objective, which is a nice bunch of victory points. The attacker has to take it without taking losses that are too severe. I have to assume you bloodied the German attacker quite badly given that you won through casualty VPs.

While you may not have been able to stop the remaining 38s, the German commander also could not have known that, he'd just know that he took way too many losses trying to crack this on this attack and would regroup, reinforce and try again later. The VP system is not intended to require a side to inflict or take 100% casualties to win. On the next attack you'd probably be toast, hence the Marginal Victory I'd say.

ORIGINAL: James Crowley

Whoops, you've won.

Hmmm..... If I was the German player, I think I would be a bit miffed at this point.

As you rightly say, the result doesn't really reflect the reality of that situation. Is it possible to continue playing beyond a scenarios' end?

If not, do you think that the 'meters' could do with a little tweaking. This ending seems a bit premature to me.

I think it all depends on what you see as victory conditions. Germany lost because it lost too much of its force in attempt to secure the victory objectives. If the game had played a little longer then perhaps they would have won, but much like a gambler who is in a huge debt, perhaps the next hand will salvage me, or perhaps not. A line has to be drawn somewhere, otherwise the game would play until every single last enemy unit was dead.

It is not possible to play beyond the scenarios end. That is what random campaigns are for [:D]

Fair points, Erik and Stridor. Getting the 'victory point' balance is tricky.

Perhaps that 'point' could be a variable, to some extent, so that, given the same set of circumstnces as the AAR, the battle may have gone on for another turn or two? Yet another random factor?

What would be really good and to be fair, not in any other tactiacl game AFAIK, would for that 'point' not to finish the game as such but to trigger a potential withdrawal for the Germans. Probably a bit complicated to implement though.

Still and all, this enterprise is looking mighty impressive. Keep up the good work [:)]

I like that there is a mission briefing even for random battles.

Michael,

The briefing which you get varies depending on a whole lot of factors, plus some randomness thrown in for good measure (so no two briefings should be the same). For interest sake here is the the whole briefing for the above AAR.



(21) Date: 07/17/1941 (Summer)

Human: Russian vs AI: German.

Russia defends against a German Assault.

--- Situation ---

A major road and rail crossing on the outskirts of a town. Orchards, small fields and tree-lined roads offer cover and embankments make for good hull down positions. The many roads make for quick movement.

The railroad itself runs east to west, slightly raised above the fields. A station house and two warehouses stand nearby. A lone church has a commanding view from the northwest.

Your force which is under strength with veteran forces, is setup as an isolated pocket in the middle of the map.

Enemy sighted ahead.

--- Orders ---

You are ordered to hold off the incoming enemy force. Defend the Village House at all costs.

It is important that you delay the enemy control of the battlefield for as long as possible. Your victory will be more favourable if you can hold until after about turn 28.

--- Intelligence ---

Expect a heavy enemy resolve. Our recon assets have detected enemy artillery and air support.

Our engineers have had little time to mine likely avenues of enemy attack.


Óäà÷è Êîìàíäèð (NOTE: can't get cyrillic to display in this bbs)

Hi Stridor,

Great stuff, thank you!

Regards,

Grell

Stridor,

Brilliant stuff! I can't wait for this game. I bought PC OWS because of the Kharkov previews. However, after looking at the Kharkov screenshots I can't bring myself to 'go back' to playing OWS.

Fingers crossed for a release next week.

Regards

kam

ORIGINAL: James Crowley

Whoops, you've won.

Hmmm..... If I was the German player, I think I would be a bit miffed at this point.

As you rightly say, the result doesn't really reflect the reality of that situation. Is it possible to continue playing beyond a scenarios' end?

If not, do you think that the 'meters' could do with a little tweaking. This ending seems a bit premature to me.

I agree it reads as if the Germans weren't given enough time/turns to accomplish their goals which by Stridors own statements he should have lost. He won by a time element not by tactics or strategy. This was something I noticed in the TS:JC game is that the time element determines the victor moreso than the play. In TS:JC the player is RUSHED to reach his/her objectives and in the case of this AAR I think the AI was RUSHED to meet its, but, AI's are methodical and so it didn't know it needed to RUSH to a victory by the TIME element. So, either the time limits should be longer or the AI needs to be programmed to know when the game is going to end and calculate what it needs to do to reach the objective before that time limit arrives.

Nice AAR just the same Stridor I enjoyed reading it and was looking forward to the AI kicking your butt. But, because of time limits that didn't happen now did it?

On the next attack you'd probably be toast, hence the Marginal Victory I'd say.

Sorry, but, we differ in observation here. I wouldn't have given him more than a draw or a minor victory at most. You guys give waaaaayyy too much to the human player in victory points after a battle.

ORIGINAL: ravinhood
I agree it reads as if the Germans weren't given enough time/turns to accomplish their goals which by Stridors own statements he should have lost. He won by a time element not by tactics or strategy.

I have to disagree with this.

He won precisely _because_ of his tactics. He managed to hold onto the objective VPs and cause enough casualties to the German forces to deter them from further assault. He did the latter through intelligent use of his own forces, from moving his T-26s to rushing the ATGs and at the end wiping out half the Panzer 38ts and most of the assaulting German infantry.

There was no "time bonus" at work - he got no VPs due to time. He hit the victory point because of how hard he had hit the attacking forces. Perhaps those remaining 38ts could have pushed through to victory, but frankly I'm not so sure. Infantry in close assault situations can be pretty nasty and the Soviet defender knows the objective the German attacker has to take.

Regards,

- Erik

Sorry but I still disagree with you. It was all a TIME element that won the battle for him not strategy or tactics. You overly give the human player too much of an advantage to time and victory points I can already see that in the MARGINAL victory outcome. Need to readust or it's just going to be another romper room type game..

ORIGINAL: ravinhood
Sorry but I still disagree with you.

Sorry but facts are otherwise. No points were awarded due to time. The Soviets would have to hold out until turn 28 to get any bonus points for TIME. All point totals at turn 15 would have to be snapshots of losses and VP flag points. It doesn't take into account any would-of, could-of factors.

ORIGINAL: ravinhood
Sorry but I still disagree with you. It was all a TIME element that won the battle for him not strategy or tactics. You overly give the human player too much of an advantage to time and victory points I can already see that in the MARGINAL victory outcome. Need to readust or it's just going to be another romper room type game..

You haven't played the game, Ravinhood. You're digging in your heels based on info in a AAR you just read. Unlike Winterstorm, Kharkov doesn't have time bonuses for the defender in all battles. In this case, Stridor created a battle that did have a time bonus, BUT it wouldn't have kicked in until Turn 28.

No VPs whatsoever were awarded for time. There is no advantage given to the human or AI player, I don't know what this is coming from, but it's your imagination. The Soviet side started with VPs for the objective, ALL other VPs were due to the losses caused to the German attacking force, which in this case was 500 points vs. the Soviet 350 points, a ratio of only 1.4:1 which is a pretty tough job for the attacker. Still, had Stridor not used any tactics (from his initial placement adjustments to his later choices during the battle), it's entirely likely that he would have lost.

Regards,

- Erik

I think it's important to remember that many historical battles ended with the defender convinced they were about to be overrun, but the attacker was also convinced that their forces were spent and withdrew just before they could actually secure victory. Having played many of these random battles, I think our VP balance overall is great in that it allows victories for the defending side without entirely wiping out the attacking force but also makes you work pretty hard when you're on the attack and in meeting engagements, as it should be.

Regards,

- Erik

Your victory point allotment from this AAR is in my opinion waaaay to high. This should not have been more than a draw or minor victory. And the TIME element is still there you yourself said that if there had been one more turn he would have been "toast". Thus TIME played the deciding role of this scenario moreso than tactics or strategy. Hell anyone can sit back entrenched and wipe out a chitload of infantry what kind of strategy and tactics is that other than placement in the beginning. Stridor only showed he did a couple of things to thwart the enemy and even those he showed weren't enough to keep the Germans from advancing and only needing one more turn for their own MARGINAL victory.

It's not so much the outcome, it's the VICTORY POINTS allocated that I say are unfair an unrealistic. A MARGINAL victory for this? Sorry, I just can't see it or accept that. Those points need to be toned down to a more realistic outcome it was hardly MARGINAL.

Also in comparison look at what it takes just to get a MINOR victory in TS:JC this is what I'm talking about. This is why I LIKE TS:JS because I feel I really had to work for that minor victory. In this aar it merely appears all Stridor had to do was just sit back in his cozy entrenchments and send a few piecemeal units out as a delaying action and he gets a MARGINAL VICTORY??!! I'm just opposed to such a high level of victory for few actions as he represented in his AAR. A minor victory or a draw and I would have been smiling like a cheshire cat. )

I think it's important to remember that many historical battles ended with the defender convinced they were about to be overrun, but the attacker was also convinced that their forces were spent and withdrew just before they could actually secure victory.

Also it's real easy to toss in an analogy like this when you weren't there or can prove that 100%. Show me the details of "many historical battles ended with the defender convinced they were about to be overrun" I'd like to read that book of statistics. You've been watching too many reruns of "Gettysburg" and the battle of little roundtop methinks".

I thought Stridor's AAR was very well made and I see nothing wrong with the objectives and victory condition. [:)]

Regards,

Grell

I used to think you were an OK guy Grell, but, now.......you're starting to remind me of someone named JD.

ORIGINAL: ravinhood
Your victory point allotment from this AAR is in my opinion waaaay to high. This should not have been more than a draw or minor victory.

Um.. that's what it was - a marginal victory.

And the TIME element is still there you yourself said that if there had been one more turn he would have been "toast".

I don't believe he said that. I think he said that he didn't think he would be able to stop the remaining Panzer 38ts if they kept coming.

Thus TIME played the deciding role of this scenario moreso than tactics or strategy. Hell anyone can sit back entrenched and wipe out a chitload of infantry what kind of strategy and tactics is that other than placement in the beginning. Stridor only showed he did a couple of things to thwart the enemy and even those he showed weren't enough to keep the Germans from advancing and only needing one more turn for their own MARGINAL victory.

<sigh> Whatever. How you can be so sure of yourself with such limited knowledge is beyond me. Fine, I clearly have no idea what I'm talking about when it comes to Panzer Command. I bow before your superior insight.

Regards,

- Erik