Matrix Games Forums

13.7 target density (advanced rules)
Normal Combat Loss calculations assume target densities
below a certain value based on the physical scale of the
Scenario. In many cases you can exceed this target density by
piling units into a location. This may be the only way to effectively
concentrate for an attack in some Scenarios, but there is a
cost. If you present the other Force with a dense concentration
of equipment, so that he can’t help but hit something with every
shot, you may take excessive losses. Locations with excessive target
densities are indicated on the map by a small colored light in
the west corner of the location. These indicator lights range from
yellow-green to red.
As a rule of thumb, you should avoid piling units into a location
if you see a colored light, as follows:
- No indicator means the target density is at or below the limit
for the Scenario.
- A yellow-green indicator is a caution; the target density limits
have been exceeded, and combat losses are multiplied by 1.0 to
1.4.
- A yellow indicator is a warning; the excessive target density will
result in combat losses being multiplied by 1.4 to 1.7.
- An orange indicator is a strong warning; the excessive target
density will result in combat losses being multiplied by 1.7 to
2.0.
- A red indicator is a very strong warning; the excessive target
density will result in a combat losses being multiplied by at least
2.0.

unless you have some form of traffic control in the hex.

ORIGINAL: CSL

unless you have some form of traffic control in the hex.

Which units act as traffic control?

ORIGINAL: Terminus

Military Police squads. Doesn't have to be a dedicated MP unit, just has to have some MP squads.

ORIGINAL: wolflars

quick question on density and the PO.  In the older versions of TOAW the PO never seemed to be too concerned with density and would just stack as much as possible into one hex.  At what point does the PO say this is worth the risk or this is not.  Has this changed?  I understand 'elmer' now understands when he is being flanked so presumably this causes him to spread out more.  Also one thing that used to drive me batty was when the PO disregards formation integrity--I just cant have 4 or 5 differest formations all attacking from one hex when it could have been done otherwise.  Does the PO still do this so blatantly? 

ORIGINAL: JAMiAM

ORIGINAL: wolflars

quick question on density and the PO. In the older versions of TOAW the PO never seemed to be too concerned with density and would just stack as much as possible into one hex. At what point does the PO say this is worth the risk or this is not. Has this changed? I understand 'elmer' now understands when he is being flanked so presumably this causes him to spread out more. Also one thing that used to drive me batty was when the PO disregards formation integrity--I just cant have 4 or 5 differest formations all attacking from one hex when it could have been done otherwise. Does the PO still do this so blatantly?

The PO is much better at avoiding "overstacking" in TOAW III.

A quick word on formation integrity, from a player's standpoint, is that, in most cases, it is not really the bugaboo that many assume it to be.

ORIGINAL: JAMiAM
A quick word on formation integrity, from a player's standpoint, is that, in most cases, it is not really the bugaboo that many assume it to be.

ORIGINAL: dennisb55

WHAT??? For years and years a tremendous amount of manualspace has been devoted to instilling this aspect into computer wargaming. Now you say it isn't so!!!! It's back to the beginning. Or are you saying the penalities may be worth taking in many cases?

ORIGINAL: golden delicious
It's all about co-operation levels. If all the units from the different formations have full co-operation then there is no penalty whatsoever to mixing them up. Increasingly, designers are assigning different icon colours to HQs and artillery so that co-operation with these key units is not so easy.