Matrix Games Forums

I really enjoy the friction the game simulates when it comes to exhaustion.
Yesterday I played the "Tempe gorge crisis" online and had a very good time. The massive German onslaught, mainly the tanks, managed to cut through on of my battalion rather early, and effectively cutting them of from the rest of my forces. They soon ran out of basic supplies (food/water) and had a real hard time making their way back home across the rugged mountain trails.
They frequently took time to rest [:-] , and the outlook for them to be able to exit the map in time looked rather grim.

I also had another battalion that during the later stages of the scenario had a habit of slacking on the job. Of course they where tired, but you dont just lay down on the wrong side of a hill when a german Panzer regiment is heading towards you at full speed.
I know fro own experience that you (almost)always have energy left in you to keep going, especially if you have a good reason, for example saving your life.

This got me thinking about maybe there should be implemented a sort of "forced march" command. A sort of move command that ignores current exhaustion, but when the goal is reached adds alot of negative effects to the unit (cohesion, exhaustion and maybe losses from stragglers) and requires it to rest a long period of time, before doing anything with some kind of quality again. It would be very usefull for those instances where you just want to get a unit from A to B and dont care what happens to it next, for example during an evacuation.

Maybe the order should not be an automatic success (like the demolition of bridges), but instead the troop and leader qualites will determine if the soldiers keep going or just give up.

So what do you all think?

ORIGINAL: Pergite!

I really enjoy the friction the game simulates when it comes to exhaustion.
Yesterday I played the "Tempe gorge crisis" online and had a very good time. The massive German onslaught, mainly the tanks, managed to cut through on of my battalion rather early, and effectively cutting them of from the rest of my forces. They soon ran out of basic supplies (food/water) and had a real hard time making their way back home across the rugged mountain trails.
They frequently took time to rest [:-] , and the outlook for them to be able to exit the map in time looked rather grim.

I also had another battalion that during the later stages of the scenario had a habit of slacking on the job. Of course they where tired, but you dont just lay down on the wrong side of a hill when a german Panzer regiment is heading towards you at full speed.
I know fro own experience that you (almost)always have energy left in you to keep going, especially if you have a good reason, for example saving your life.

This got me thinking about maybe there should be implemented a sort of "forced march" command. A sort of move command that ignores current exhaustion, but when the goal is reached adds alot of negative effects to the unit (cohesion, exhaustion and maybe losses from stragglers) and requires it to rest a long period of time, before doing anything with some kind of quality again. It would be very usefull for those instances where you just want to get a unit from A to B and dont care what happens to it next, for example during an evacuation.

Maybe the order should not be an automatic success (like the demolition of bridges), but instead the troop and leader qualites will determine if the soldiers keep going or just give up.

So what do you all think?

Couple of quick points

1) demolition of bridges is not automatic, you can capture bridges intact - I might have misunderstood your statement though

2) You can "nudge" your tired units into action again - at the cost of them getting *really* tired and taking that much longer to recover - by jiggling/moving the order location icon somewhat after they've stopped moving. This is not a gamey trick, it simulates HQ giving them the proverbial kick in the rear behind. But it only works up to a certain limit, which is as it should be.

Conversely if their resting place gets overrun by a company of panzers they will gather their last strength and put up a defence, even manage to flee away to a relatively safe spot.

Greetz,

Eddy Sterckx

ORIGINAL: sterckxe

Couple of quick points

1) demolition of bridges is not automatic, you can capture bridges intact - I might have misunderstood your statement though

Yes I belive you did, but thats probably due to my poor grammar in the post above [:-]

2) You can "nudge" your tired units into action again - at the cost of them getting *really* tired and taking that much longer to recover - by jiggling/moving the order location icon somewhat after they've stopped moving. This is not a gamey trick, it simulates HQ giving them the proverbial kick in the rear behind. But it only works up to a certain limit, which is as it should be.

Conversely if their resting place gets overrun by a company of panzers they will gather their last strength and put up a defence, even manage to flee away to a relatively safe spot.

Yes, I tried moving around the waypoints but it didnt create much excitement in the sleepy ranks. But thanks for the advice, I will be more persitent next time around.

As I said, I really enjoy the frictions the game simulates, but I am also really missing that "proverbial kick in the rear" as you put it. Some situations yesterday almost looked like mutiny, or at least very poor AI in my subcommanders.

While on the subject, do anyone have any info on if and how the command functionality of the game will be changed for the next game?

Setting move rate to fastest will reduce the probability of units resting. However, moving fast does tire them quicker - so it's a double edged sword.
 
BTW for BFTB one of the new task options will be to "ignore stragglers". Currently if one of a Bn's companies gets tired and rests there is a good probability the whole Bn will follow suit before too long. This new option will see the Bn HQ ignoring the resting subordinate and ploughing on with its mission regardless. This may or may not be a good thing, but you, the player, will have the option.

ORIGINAL: Arjuna

Setting move rate to fastest will reduce the probability of units resting. However, moving fast does tire them quicker - so it's a double edged sword.

BTW for BFTB one of the new task options will be to "ignore stragglers". Currently if one of a Bn's companies gets tired and rests there is a good probability the whole Bn will follow suit before too long. This new option will see the Bn HQ ignoring the resting subordinate and ploughing on with its mission regardless. This may or may not be a good thing, but you, the player, will have the option.

Sounds great to be able to get rid of some of the solidarity that now exists in formations.[;)]

Pergite! played a great delaying action and my flank move with the tanks was too late to prevent his well deserved victory. Good game.

I've sometimes found that units with low fatigue, high cohesion, even with individual unit movement commands, just sit tight and won't budge for DAYS, whatever you try to do. Not sure if it has any baring but that's playing with painfully realistic delay.

Some other points regarding arty and routing-

In online play, arty responds so much slower than solo, it's virtually impossible to hit a moving target. While I'd allow for a significant delay between an initial request and an FFE (I think arty responds a bit quick in solo) the system doesn't seem to allow for an observer correcting a battery's fire, something that would take significantly less time.

Routing units can move very fast, even fatigued units going uphill. Also I've even seen them rout litterally THROUGH larger, good condition encircling units with minimal losses and live to fight again. This strikes me as quite unrealistic and, given the random direction of a rout and the orders delay, makes mopping up, I suspect, an overly time consuming and labour intensive operation. The reluctance of tired, unsupplied straggler units to move somewhat compensates for this, but I can't help thinking a tweek or two might improve things here.

Routing units also move through FFEs incurring relatively few casualties. I suspect routing units would be as likely to hit the dirt as would good order units. Running through an FFE would be fairly suicidal.

Units seem to be able to rout without loss of heavy support weapons. Limbering/hooking up guns was a time consuming process, and particularly dangerous when in enemy LOS and under fire. Surely such a unit should abandon a portion of its weapons when forced to move.

A lot of criticism, but a great game nevertheless. Just looking to improve it.

Mehring,
 
Welcome.
 
re Routing and Hvy Wpns. There is high probability that when a unit retreats it will lose a percentage of its heavy guns/mortars. The exact percentage depends on a range of factors. Typically a 10 gun arty unit would lose 1 or 2 guns each time it was forced to rout. The closer it is to enemy the higher the probability and the greater the percentage lost.
 
re units not moving. Well that doesn't sound like it has anything to do with fatigue. Have you checked their supply status - maybe they have run out of fuel? If you have a saved game, send it to me and I'll take a look.
 
re arty responding slower in multi-player mode. This is an illusion. Both are governed by the same code.
 
re arty tracking moving units. This in real life in WW2 rarely occured. Ammo was precious ( max of 45 minutes of fire per day ). Commanders were reluctant to waste it trying to hit a moving target. The exception being where an initial Final Protective Fire ( FPF ) was placed down on assaulting enemy and dropped a little closer as the enemy assault progressed. But even so we are talking of adjustment here of maybe 100m or so in 15 minutes ( the usual rate of progress for an infantry assault against a dug in enemy ). Given that on-call fire support is done in 5 minute barrages, this is affected by three different bombardments each of which can have a different location.
 
BTW subsequent shifts of on-call fire suffer less registration time if the old and new locations are close by ( ie within 1km ). Otherwise there will be a delay between the request and the fall of fire for effect shot. this maybe what you are experiencing in your multi-player game.
 
re routing units. Yes they do move fast. There is a distinct difference here between retreat and rout. A retreat is an organised move by a unit. Sure they are under pressure but the commanders are maintaining control and hence these move at normal speeds. A rout is uncontrolled, where the troops are no longer responding to directiions from their commanders, where fear overrides duty and where individuals decide to bolt and save their own skins. This not a cohesive movement. The unit no longer moves as a unit, but as a mob of individuals or small groups, each fleeing for their lives in a direction they think is best.
 
In reality they spread out and then over time coalesce back into the one location. To simulate this we should in fact create a large number of small sub0units and manage them all individually. But this would chew up the cpu and slow the game down. So we abstract this process by retaining one unit. So it is not appropriate that they should be considered a concentrated target for arty. In fact they have dispersed and few commanders would waste their precious ammo on trying to hammer a lot of small groups.

re Routing and Hvy Wpns. There is high probability that when a unit retreats it will lose a percentage of its heavy guns/mortars.
Haven't seen it yet but will keep looking [;)] What I have noticed is that a routing unit will show what turns out to be a temporary loss of heavy weapons, the return of lost weapons not being dependent upon re-occupying the abandoned position. Is this related to the routing unit's disintegration and coalescing you described?

re units not moving. maybe they have run out of fuel? If you have a saved game, send it to me and I'll take a look. I'm afraid I don't have the files saved but will save them if it happens again. I thought it might be a game feature. Italian guns in a solo game of "charge of the centaurs" was where I noticed it most. Fuel was ok too.

What happened was the guns showed as "dug in" and also "moving," their planned paths (quickest rout/fast movement)clearly showing on the map. Although they didn't move during at least two days, probably three, they did fatigue with time.

re arty responding slower in multi-player mode. This is an illusion. Both are governed by the same code.It may be an illusion in theory but for whatever reason, it is very real in practice. I was hosting the game too.

Unlike solo, in which, even at slow game speed an FFE is fairly rapid, I experienced a delay of 30+ real time seconds between placing a request and getting an FFE. Sometimes the bombardment would time out before a shot was fired. Ammo and fuel were fine. Meanwhile, enemy units were moving at the same speed they would in solo play. Much of the FFE correction occured because the request which was in the path of advancing units was far behind them by the time the FFE arrived. Could it be that the computer procesor prioritises its workload in favour of moving units?[&:]

re routing units.I generally agree with your rout rationale but think that however desperate, fear of being blown to pieces would counterbalance flight instinct. Wouldn't this cause many a fleeing individual or group to hit the dirt or, if caught between a rock and a hard place (like nearby enemy units), to surrender? While I recognise the similarity, at present isn't routing too much like going berserk, at least where arty's concerned?

In solo play I found that although I expected a higher casualty yield given its movement, actually nothing destroys a unit faster than (massed) FFE's on its rout path, regardless of its distance to enemy units. In CotA, then, it pays to target routers.

ORIGINAL: Mehring
[
In solo play I found that although I expected a higher casualty yield given its movement, actually nothing destroys a unit faster than (massed) FFE's on its rout path, regardless of its distance to enemy units. In CotA, then, it pays to target routers.

Welcome, Mehring
I would not pass up an opportunity to bombard defeated units, unless there were undefeated enemy units still pestering me-this is usually the situation.
Another method to force surrender, rather than FFE, is the use of direct fire weapons-close in with infantry and MG's. Granted, there are times when this is too risky, but generally it is a useful method.

Mehring & Pergite, come in, Mehring & Pergite

BTW, Gentelmen, there is a ladder for mutiplay gamers located at the wargamers. It's new and rather small, but has great potential. It's a quick and painless registration-and only the looser can report the game (unless draw).

Not only do your record your effort for all posterity,[8D] but you are also increasing the player pool. When the player list gets large enough (100+) it should be possible to find an opponent within minutes, rather than posting and waiting.

Wargamers ladder http://www.wargamer.com/battleleagues/L ... sp?lid=168

Thanks Maestro, that's me with Battle HQ installed and ready to go. Nobody else there yet, but I live in hope[:D]

Another method to force surrender, rather than FFE, is the use of direct fire weapons-close in with infantry and MG's. Granted, there are times when this is too risky, but generally it is a useful method. What mechanism do you use? Do you set them to "defend" with rapid fire or to "fire"?

I've hardly used "fire" comands as in all but the smallest scenarios such micro-management is really cumbersome and as enemies move away you tend to leave your guys shooting up empty space. Maybe a tactics lesson please?

ORIGINAL: Mehring

I've hardly used "fire" comands as in all but the smallest scenarios such micro-management is really cumbersome and as enemies move away you tend to leave your guys shooting up empty space. Maybe a tactics lesson please?

All it takes is a few simple moves, and presto, you have recreated the Old Gaurd on the slope at Waterloo.[;)] (with all due respect for those great soldiers-true heroes)

Seriously though, it is difficult, but that's what I love about this game; the enemy just does not sit there while you casualy surround them. I think the point to concentrate on is surrounding by "kill zones". The "encircling" units need to be well supplied and not exhausted with the primary weapons well within range. I assure you, direct fire will cause units to surrender-I really can.

Mehring
 
I have not tried the Battle HQ at the Wargamer site.  It may be something very useful-but don't know.  What I was refering to in my earlier post was the ladder,which can be used to contact other online players.  It is still at 8 Players-you and Pergite will make it ten.
After regeristing, you need to report a game-only a loss.  Pergite can report a loss to anyone on the ladder (me, me[:D]) and you report the loss to him-or how ever it's convenient for both of you.
 

OK, I couldn't figure out how the ladder enabled player contact.

Battle HQ looks good though, apart from nobody being there. It's like Gamespy only it hosts CotA which is quite a plus [;)] When it's installed, you just hang in the lobby hoping someone with the same games as you turns up. After that... well I haven't got there yet.
It also has a link to the ladders.
Thanks for the advice, I'll try it at the soonest opportunity.[:D]

Pergite
 
Sorry about hi-jacking your thread, but it was just too convenient.
 
Regarding the CotA ladder, there is a thread with some pointers here-  
tm.asp?m=1307974

Pergite! wasn't registered for the ladder, Maestro, so my loss was your gain.

Thanks for regeristing-
 
About your "loss"; I'm sure you will settle the score some day.
 
Pergite! can report a loss to you for registration purposes, and then you can give him his victory report.
 
It's a slightly odd way to start off on a ladder, but it works.