Matrix Games Forums

In the deployment editor, the Edit menu includes the following choices:
Set Attrition Divider (10)
Set Max Rounds Per Battle (99)
Set AAA Lethality Level (100)
Set Engineering Build Rates (100)
Set Enemy-Hex Conversion Costs (100)
Set Entrenchment Rates (100)
Set Density Combat Penalty Rates (100)
Set Supply Costs of Movement Rate (100)
Set Readiness Costs of Movement Rate (100)

(1) Is the number that the editor opens at the default result (i.e. the number in parenthesis)?

(2) If the number in the parenthesis is the default number is that a standard to be used?

(3) If not, what would be considered as a standard setting for each of the above?

Thank you for your support.

Those are the defaults, there are no standards, you change them to get a desired result for each scenario.

ORIGINAL: Mark Breed

Set Attrition Divider (10)

The Attrition Divider affects the lethality of combat. Be aware that TOAW makes no lethality adjustment for time-scale. That means that, all else being equal, a scenario that has 6-hour turns will be 28 times as lethal as a scenario with full-week turns. The AD allows you to adjust this appropriately.

Set Max Rounds Per Battle (99)

MRPB can blunt the impact of something slangily referred to as "turn burn". Turn burn is the term used when one combat lasts a huge number of combat rounds, "burning" up your player turn. The setting is the max number of rounds that can be consumed in any given combat. So, any setting above 10 has no further effect. Most designers use a setting of 3, unless they just want there to be a high chance of early turn ending.

Set AAA Lethality Level (100)
Set Engineering Build Rates (100)
Set Enemy-Hex Conversion Costs (100)
Set Entrenchment Rates (100)
Set Density Combat Penalty Rates (100)
Set Supply Costs of Movement Rate (100)
Set Readiness Costs of Movement Rate (100)

The remaining parameters are used when the design is outside TOAW's norms. For example, a Napoleonic scenario might set the Entrenchment Rate to 0 and greatly reduce the Density Combat Penalty Rate, etc. If you were doing a corps-level scenario but with a short turn interval, you might reduce the Engineering Build Rate. Some of the movement vs. hexscale combinations were poorly modeled by Norm. The Enemy-Hex Conversion Costs, Supply Costs of Movement Rate, and Readiness Costs of Movement Rate can be adjusted to overcome that.

Thank you very much. I appreciate the time that you are taking in assisting me.

Gen Lemay,

After researching more on scenario design on other forums as well as this one, I have noticed that you have answered my questions many times. I thank you for your patience and willingness to help out a new player/designer with this game.

Regards,
Mark

ORIGINAL: Mark Breed

Gen Lemay,

After researching more on scenario design on other forums as well as this one, I have noticed that you have answered my questions many times. I thank you for your patience and willingness to help out a new player/designer with this game.

Regards,
Mark

You might want to check out the articles index thread, too.

Many of these values depend on the scenario settings of course, but the defaults are not particularly 'sacred' and most recent scenario designers alter them to some level to suit the particular situation. As an example on a weekly scale, Corps level scenario, 25km/hex, I increase the *AAA lethality* to say 120 (as TOAW does not account for equipment failure) and lower the *entrenchement rate* down to 20-30%, so it takes longer for units to dig in. This because large units with 1000+ squads tend to dig very fast (3-4 turns if in good supply) while historically it should take a few weeks to get to 'Fortfied' status. In other words, the 'typical' speed at which units recover supply and readiness vs the time it takes to dig in, set the pace of the scenario and the balance between attacker and defender. Also, I have run a sandbox scenario and increasing the *Engineering Build Rate* boost the effect of units with engineering capabilities.

I have a question. How is production modeled in TOAW III? I would like to know as if this is possible, then that would be awesome. Thanks

ORIGINAL: lion_of_judah

I have a question. How is production modeled in TOAW III? I would like to know as if this is possible, then that would be awesome. Thanks

You can modulate replacement multiples via the event system. I use this in Soviet Union 1941, for example. I also modulated squad replacements via manpower levy disbandments.