Matrix Games Forums

Does anybody know how "Set Future Objective" works? Are there any benefits (like intell, training, etc.) or is it just a method of bookkeeping to keep track of your deployment plans for these units?

The units train for objective X, then when the eqations for attack and defend roll through, along with who is fighting supply fatigue, there is modifications for if they are prepared... So for a successfull read quick, asault one should have a well supplied, in preparation attacking force, with coordinated HQ, against a well disrupted bombed and ill supplied defender.. ata least thats the goal.
So, in a nutshell you use "set obj." to ttack, or conversly to defend better.
please ask if this is unclear.. there used to be some handy threads about all this minutae... good luck

ORIGINAL: freeboy

The units train for objective X, then when the eqations for attack and defend roll through, along with who is fighting supply fatigue, there is modifications for if they are prepared... So for a successfull read quick, asault one should have a well supplied, in preparation attacking force, with coordinated HQ, against a well disrupted bombed and ill supplied defender.. ata least thats the goal.
So, in a nutshell you use "set obj." to ttack, or conversly to defend better.
please ask if this is unclear.. there used to be some handy threads about all this minutae... good luck

In addition to this, they suffer less casualties (damaged squads) and disruption from landing at the prepared objective!

One question I have had is how much does a partial prep help in attack or defense? I know for landings against an occupied base not having full prep is a bad idea, but for attacking a base on land that the unit has walked to, does a partial prep help at all?

ORIGINAL: obvert

One question I have had is how much does a partial prep help in attack or defense? I know for landings against an occupied base not having full prep is a bad idea, but for attacking a base on land that the unit has walked to, does a partial prep help at all?

Yes it does. I do not know the exact numbers (look at the manual) but preperation for bases has a massive influence in combat power of a unit. Same goes for the differnt HQs (Corps, Army, Area). Their preparation influences the bonus they give and only some have to be in the actual combat hex.

ORIGINAL: jhilliardp61

Does anybody know how "Set Future Objective" works? Are there any benefits (like intell, training, etc.) or is it just a method of bookkeeping to keep track of your deployment plans for these units?

It's essential when doing amphibious assaults on atolls. Otherwise your force (unless totally superior) will take massive casualties and disruption. It's also good for low-experience troops, since after reaching 100, they start to train exp up to national limit.

I consider prep to be a percentage since the maximum prep is 100.

right with you mike, I was taking that as a given, which is one aspect, we create a ae culture with our own lexicon...
There should be aguide to life in ae .. glossery etc
lol
In my experience prep is not too critical... UNLESS  .. you are facing stubborn well supplied and lead troups which have high  fortifiction.. then you are looking at getting bad results if not prepped.. remember not only the unit but there parent or HQ

How does prep help in defense?

I beleive in the same way it helps offense ...

Japanese forces CAPTURE Cagayan !!!

Combat modifiers
Defender: terrain(+), leaders(+), preparation(-), fatigue(-)
experience(-)
Attacker: shock(+)

I'm not so sure I can agree PaxMondo. Wouldn't that penalize those units within a hex for planning an attack in the future? I don't see that as a good concept.

Well, only can state, as posted above, that it shows in the combat results.

My opinion: makes perfect sense. If you want to prep for a new target, you don't do that at the front, you do that in rear areas.

I see the "-" sign in your example for sure... but I still don't buy it. Planning is largely staff work, units have a lot of those folks (remember this is not Squad Leader!) and they should be able to walk and chew gum at the same time... But in the game engine you might be right... I hope not... Any one else have any other input??? Hal

ORIGINAL: dr.hal

I see the "-" sign in your example for sure... but I still don't buy it. Planning is largely staff work, units have a lot of those folks (remember this is not Squad Leader!) and they should be able to walk and chew gum at the same time... But in the game engine you might be right... I hope not... Any one else have any other input??? Hal

Yep. Back when I played against the AI, prepping units for a defensive stand seemed to help quite a bit when the base was attacked. I'm not sure how the game code weighs offensive vs. defensive preparedness, but it has been my experience that prepping a unit for its task helps in both cases wrt casualties and disruption. I think of prepping a unit as planning and training for a particular task, a useful excercise in both offense and defense.

Thanks Paul but it still seems counter intuitive...

Dr.hal,

You are quite correct that a staff can consider more than one future action at a time.  However, I think the game's "preparation" factor is supposed to represent actions that go beyond staff planning.  A unit cannot "prepare" for much more than one operation at a time if "preparation" means specific training and actions focused on the specific mission.  For instance, a unit "preparing" its own hex would have reserve units planning and rehearsing counter-attacks, units devoting serious time and attention to coordinating fires, etc.  A unit "preparing" for a future action could be engaged in rehearsals and sometimes even reorganization. 

The preparation feature recognizes a unit should be better able to perform a mission if the bulk of the unit, not just the some of the staff, has spent time and attention on that specific mission.  That seems right to me.

Yes I can see your point OldGuard1970 (and agree that it is more than just staff planning, which is really what I was saying but failed to clearly delineate) yet I still think that a unit stationed in a location would KNOW the lay of the land and its defense while still being able to practice for an offensive thrust in the future. A practice amphib landing doesn't mean that you forget what land you are already standing on. But I also recognize that the game engine has it limits. So I would concede that it is what happens in the game, you give up some of your ability to defend if you plan for an attack else where. Thanks. Hal

dr.hal,

I suspect that philosophically speaking, the mechanism of preparing for targets, serves to promote one of the main aims of the devs.

One of the main concerns the devs had of classical WITP was the too rapid tempo of operations. They are on record as saying on occasion that certain AE features serve to slow down the tempo of operations. I don't recall them ever saying that preparing for targets was linked to slowing down the tempo of operations. Partly their reluctance to say so could be attributed to the howl of protests which some players would make if that were the case. Nonetheless a byproduct of preparation is that the tempo of operations is slowed down to a more realistic real world level. I rather suspect the devs are quietly pleased with that secondary outcome.

Alfred

As regards partial prep, if a unit is 50% prepped vs 100% prepped, what is the difference in fighting capability?

If the unit is prepped 100% and there is an HQ also prepped 100% for the target, but is not from the same higher level HQ, does this HQ still benefit the units capability attacking?

In China there are so many HQs for both sides that often many are present. I have usually just made sure one is close enough to influence the action. But am I losing the attack benefit for the units if the HQ and the units are from different parent HQs?

One more thing. A high level HQ, like the IJA Southern Army HQ, prepped for Singapore 100%, for instance, will this still help units attacking capabilities within its long range but somehow help more with Singapore? Multiple attacks might be going on at once in many theaters, so how does a long range influence parent HQ help for these multiple attacks?

From Page 187 in the manual:

" 8.2.1.4 OBJECTIVES
The Set Future Objective command has to do with Planning for action at an Objective (or
Planning points). When the Set Future Objective button is pressed, the map will appear and
you must click on a base/beach hex. This will set the unit’s future objective. The number in
parenthesis next to the objective is reset to 0 if the objective set is a new objective. This
number will increase 1 or 2 points per turn, with a maximum value of 100. The higher the
value, the greater the benefit the unit will receive when the unit participates in combat in the
objective hex (whether attacker or defender)."