Matrix Games Forums

Under the Battlefield Timestamp system, after all combats are resolved, the player-turn will advance to the combat round of the MEDIAN length combat. In other words, if there were seven combats that lasted 1, 1, 2, 2, 3, 3, & 6 rounds respectively then the player turn would advance only two rounds, instead of the six rounds of before.

ORIGINAL: JPJ

Suppose I had set another unit to move and use all its MPs in the same turn. Where is the icon of that unit displayed after these two rounds? Still at its starting position? In the hex at 2/totalRounds of its way? Or already at its destination?

And while that unit is still underway after round two, will I be able to redirect it or give a new command wherever it is as a reaction to (unexpected) results of the first two rounds?

ORIGINAL: Tesuji

Excellent news! Missed this because it´s hidden in the Price thread. Thanks!

ORIGINAL: Tesuji

I don´t think the specific info of Tamas was anywhere else. Battlefield Timp Stamps as such wouldn´t solve the problem I indicated at the beginning of this thread.

Combat creation of Battlefield Time Stamps: If a combat lasts longer than one round, it creates a Battlefield Time Stamp equal to the last round that combat expended.

In addition, if a defender was prevented from retreating from a combat by non-participating enemy units then the combat’s Battlefield Time Stamp is the greater of the time stamps of the blocking units and the time stamp of the last round of the combat. So, if the combat ended on round five, but there was a blocking unit that prevented the defenders from retreating and it had a time stamp of seven, then the Battlefield Time Stamp would be set to seven (and all participating units would have their time stamps increased to seven). Note that this ends the time-machine effect of blocking units that the game had endured up to this point (This part of the feature is still under development).

Well, that's not exactly realistic, is it? What we have done is that if your encircling units took X time within a turn to get to a position to block retreat, then if they DO block retreat of the defending unit, then the combat will take at least X time as well. This simulates the fact that even if they are just passive participants in the combat they are participating (by virtue of blocking routes of retreat), and thus the combat that ensues cannot start before the blocking units arrive in their position to participate in the ensuing.

ORIGINAL: Tesuji

I don´t see this as an IgoUgo Problem.

IgoUgo is more like this:

6am-9am: Atacker moves; no firing allowed.
9-12: Attacker attacks; no movement allowed.
Noon-6pm: Defender moves and fires; attacking soldiers stand politely by and wait for their turn while being shot at.

Maybe not plausible, but I don´t see a violation of the space-time continuum as in TOAW.

ORIGINAL: Tesuji

No, the Chronosoldier problem comes into play only if the phases are flexible rather than fixed.

With fixed phases, I imagine them literally happening in sequence, one after the other, like moves in Chess.

So IgoUgo as such only has a realism problem, not a logical problem. And logical problems just so happen to hurt my sensibilities more. [:)]

ORIGINAL: sPzAbt653

I wonder how OKW ran their wargames, so as to avoid the impossible and the implausible.

ORIGINAL: Meyer1

ORIGINAL: Tesuji

No, the Chronosoldier problem comes into play only if the phases are flexible rather than fixed.

With fixed phases, I imagine them literally happening in sequence, one after the other, like moves in Chess.

So IgoUgo as such only has a realism problem, not a logical problem. And logical problems just so happen to hurt my sensibilities more. [:)]

So what are you proposing is that units can move or attack in that order and in specific moments of their turn. Now imagine in a bigger scale, say weekly turns, that means that you have to wait till Thursday to attack and only can move from Monday through Wednesday. I don`t know if that presents a realism or a logical problems, but I don´t like it.