Movement modifiers?

[Skeleton]

After logging two solid weeks with this game, I must say I do love it. The AI is brilliant, I love the pace of this game, and I find the graphics compelling and easy to assess the state of my units. But, I am at a loss for movement modifiers, that is, I can see that units do take much longer to travel from point A to point B when they must traverse a wooded area as opposed to say moving along roads or highways, but are there no "unpassable" areas? Should armor be able to travel through wooded areas at all? Is there a bonus to attacking units that are traveling through congested (IE, smaller narrow bridges, rocky land, forest) terrain? Any info would help me out greatley and I apologise if these questions have been addressed before. Thanks in advance

[MarkShot]

Marcus,

Didn't we just talk about mixed-mode movement and COTA?

tm.asp?m=1096101 (post #6)

[Arjuna]

Marcus the leper,

HTTR does not use mixed mode movement, which means that terrain is either passable or impassable to all units. Different movement types pay different costs to enter the same terrain - eg motorised may move through woods at a very slow rate compared to foot - but if it's passable to one type then it's passable to all. Now we realise that that is not as realistic as we would like, but given the nature of the terrain in Holland it's not that much of an issue.

Our new release Conquest of the Aegean ( COTA ) will incorporate mixed mode movement. This was particularly necessary to realistically simulate operations in Greece and Crete. In COTA motorised units cannot enter woods for instance while foot can. Similarly motorised cannot cross a minor river unless at a bridge or ferry while foot units can.

[MarkShot]

The only truly impassable terrain in HTTR is water and some black areas labeled impassable. However, time and fatigue are important factor to victory or defeat. Thus, having your tanks travel across polder can still be very problematic.

[Skeleton]

Okay, got it. Thanks. I did not mean my question to sound as if it was a criticism, because it was not, rather it was just a redundent, clarification. I understand completely what you are saying, and with those "minor" tweaks, I would have to say that the engine for this game will be magnificent, if not one of the best I have stumbled upon. Looking forward to COTA. Sorry about the duplication of questions.

[simovitch]

In the scenario I did for HttR, I changed the mechanized cost to cross a minor river to 0%, but as long as there was at least one (1) crossing, the scenario didn't seem to crash.

I did this because the (Ourthe) river is not wide, but the banks are steep and virtually impossible to ford, especially in the winter. I didn't want to show it graphically as a big fatty river which it is not.

I wanted to change the forest to 0% as well, but of course I got the error when I built the movement tables (I even tried 0.1% but no-go[:-])

cheers,

[Arjuna]

ORIGINAL: simovitch

In the scenario I did for HttR, I changed the mechanized cost to cross a minor river to 0%, but as long as there was at least one (1) crossing, the scenario didn't seem to crash.

I did this because the (Ourthe) river is not wide, but the banks are steep and virtually impossible to ford, especially in the winter. I didn't want to show it graphically as a big fatty river which it is not.

I wanted to change the forest to 0% as well, but of course I got the error when I built the movement tables (I even tried 0.1% but no-go[:-])

cheers,

You may have problems with that river then if the crossing is blown.

[simovitch]

ok, hmmm... I ran some test on a saved, near-end-game file where I could witness the bridge blow before the game ends. Twice it blew without a crash, and the scenario ended normally.

Perhaps the fact that the river is crossable for foot movement (set to 5), which allows the movement table to compile, allows this anomaly[&:].

I'd be glad to send the files to anyone who wants to check this out.