Scenario VP settings for Deny Crossings
Posted: Thu Dec 20, 2007 8:03 pm
I was wondering if there was a way to manipulate the possibility of the AI blowing bridges in particular cases. I believe that you get the Completion VPs for a deny crossing task either at the time the task runs out (if you still own it of course), or sooner, upon sucessful blowing of the bridge.
Occupation points run for duration of the VP location timer, thus, to maximize the points, it behooves the player (or AI) to keep possession of an intact bridge for as long as possible. I don't believe, and I'm asking for clarification, that a side gets the balance of the occupation points once a bridge is blown.
If that's the case, would making all of the VP's for a deny crossing Completion VPs make it any more likely for the defending units to blow the bridge? Or does that not enter into the calculation to determine whether to make a demolition attempt?
Also I still have a question from Simovitch's Combat & Supply thread concerning supply allocation:
I apologize for all the questions, but I'm in the grip of my COTA obsessive-compulsive disorder. I'm also developing the mack-daddy scenario that will either blow everone's socks off, or choke your machine...umm...how big can the battles be? Thanks to all at Panther for the responsiveness you all have shown in addressing all the questions from everyone. Best wishes for the Holiday Season as well!
Occupation points run for duration of the VP location timer, thus, to maximize the points, it behooves the player (or AI) to keep possession of an intact bridge for as long as possible. I don't believe, and I'm asking for clarification, that a side gets the balance of the occupation points once a bridge is blown.
If that's the case, would making all of the VP's for a deny crossing Completion VPs make it any more likely for the defending units to blow the bridge? Or does that not enter into the calculation to determine whether to make a demolition attempt?
Also I still have a question from Simovitch's Combat & Supply thread concerning supply allocation:
While we're talking about supply, I'd like a clarification of concept of "expected requirements". Is this based upon offensive or defensive "expected requirements", or is it maybe dynamically calculated based upon current usage/orders? In other words, if the scenario sets supply at 75%, would this be 75% of a unit's expected needs to conduct offensive operations, and would thus be experiencing a shortfall should it attack at such a level of logistic support, BUT that same 75% might be sufficient for a unit defending in place. (Although it seems the guys defending in place have to go on a diet as their basics ration reduces in proportion to the ammunition/fuel allotment.)
Also, the Scenmaker manual states the baseline "expected requirements are based on at start forces plus expected reinforcements and ignore any losses or exits". Couple of questions/request for clarification:
1. Do the supplies step up with the arrival time of the reinforcement (assume no particular manipulation of the SEPs has taken place- just a single SEP active the entire time @100% w/ no interdiction issues), or are the 'expected required' supplies set to cover all the forces regardless of whether they are on map or not. If the latter, the units originally on map would, in effect, be over supplied until the additional demand in the form of reinforcements is present. To offset that, a scenario designer would have to manipulate the %age of expected requirement to correspond to the % of forces actually on-map.
2. Since the 'expected requirements' calculations ignores losses and exits, does the same principal apply in reverse? Say I have two equal-sized regiments A and B, and my supplies are at 50%. Unit A then withdraws from the map. Will unit B now be effectively fully supplied (half the expected supplies, but only half the expected units, so it should be a wash). Is this correct?
I apologize for all the questions, but I'm in the grip of my COTA obsessive-compulsive disorder. I'm also developing the mack-daddy scenario that will either blow everone's socks off, or choke your machine...umm...how big can the battles be? Thanks to all at Panther for the responsiveness you all have shown in addressing all the questions from everyone. Best wishes for the Holiday Season as well!