Matrix Games Forums

Since entrenching at the end of a turn is fairly standard procedure, has any thought been given to auto entrenching all units that are able, at the end of their turn? Are there any downsides to this? I have only played a few turns of Tannenberg to get my feet wet and may be missing something. Damn those Germans sure tear into my poor Russians.[X(]

So long as it's only done if the player ends his turn voluntarily- that is, presses "end turn" without setting up any attacks.

I surely would like to have an "Auto dig-in feature" for units with movement points left. I would say that at least 40% of every turn is only time to go through every unit to set dig-in. It is too easy to miss one.

be nice if the hot key for digging in did the whole stack too(with a pop up question of course or a seperate hotkey)....and didn't then transport you to somewhere else on the map (sometimes)

maybe it is already in there , but i haven't seen it yet

a global dig in for anything not already listed as L or T would be awesome in the bigger scenarios. bloody clickfest otherwise.

cheers

IIRC, from the early Op Arts, being Entrenched lowered your chances to 'engage' and enemy unit nearby and pin him. Is that still the case in TOAW3. I tend to proceed under that assumption and leave some of my forward units unentrenched for that purpose.
 
Does that still apply? If not, should it (to make it a decision instead of a no-brainer)?

ORIGINAL: Uncle_Joe
Does that still apply?

No. Not quite sure what you meant by the "should it" question.

ie, Should it be made to work that way?
 
If it no longer applies, then it pretty much makes sense to dig-in at the end of every turn, right? IIRC, that reduction of ability to 'grab onto' nearby units made it a strategic choice. IMO, more decisions are better than just having a blanket 'better' option. *shrug*

ORIGINAL: Uncle_Joe

ie, Should it be made to work that way?

If it no longer applies, then it pretty much makes sense to dig-in at the end of every turn, right? IIRC, that reduction of ability to 'grab onto' nearby units made it a strategic choice. IMO, more decisions are better than just having a blanket 'better' option. *shrug*

I wouldn't think whether you were in your foxhole or not would affect whether you could take pot shots at passing or disengaging enemy. If anything it might make you more effective at it. imho anyway

Its a difference between an offensive and a defensive posture is all. Regardless of what it exactly represents, I believe giving the player more options is better than simply having a 'best' option to pick every time.

ORIGINAL: 82nd Airborne

I wouldn't think whether you were in your foxhole or not would affect whether you could take pot shots at passing or disengaging enemy. If anything it might make you more effective at it. imho anyway

Even at 2.5km/hex, exercising a ZOC means more than just taking shots at passers by from inside a trench. I can see Uncle Joe's point. Certainly his "interesting decisions" argument will appeal to Ralph.

Well, the Transport Asset Sharing rule gives one a reason not to burn those unused move point in useless entrenching, would it not?

ORIGINAL: jimwinsor

Well, the Transport Asset Sharing rule gives one a reason not to burn those unused move point in useless entrenching, would it not?

Depends on how and when those points are counted.

OK, you lost me there. How does digging in (or not digging in) affect Transport Asset Sharing? Are you saying that only units with movement points remaining can participate in transport asset sharing?

PaladinSix

ORIGINAL: PaladinSix

OK, you lost me there. How does digging in (or not digging in) affect Transport Asset Sharing? Are you saying that only units with movement points remaining can participate in transport asset sharing?

PaladinSix

The question is "How does TAS count movement points "expended"?"

If the answer is "Sum movement points used during hex-to-hex movement," then that differs from "Sum movement points remaining at end of turn".

I don't know for sure which it is, but I suspect that it is the former, as that would be the more logical choice.

[/quote]
I don't know for sure which it is, but I suspect that it is the former, as that would be the more logical choice.
[/quote]

You're damaging my normally profound respect for your knowledge of this system. I didn't realize there was anything (about TOAWIII) you didn't know. And so, the search for enlightenment continues.....

PaladinSix

ORIGINAL: PaladinSix
You're damaging my normally profound respect for your knowledge of this system. I didn't realize there was anything (about TOAWIII) you didn't know. And so, the search for enlightenment continues.....

PaladinSix

Oh...there's plenty I don't know about TOAW III. I just usually do a better job of masking it behind a facade of authoritative bluster.

And pay no attention to that man behind the curtain![:D]

ORIGINAL: JAMiAM

ORIGINAL: PaladinSix
You're damaging my normally profound respect for your knowledge of this system. I didn't realize there was anything (about TOAWIII) you didn't know. And so, the search for enlightenment continues.....

PaladinSix

Oh...there's plenty I don't know about TOAW III. I just usually do a better job of masking it behind a facade of authoritative bluster.

And pay no attention to that man behind the curtain![:D]

That's because it was a trick question...

The real formula is if the unit hasn't moved, and isn't in a reserve status, it will participate. How far it moved doesn't matter...

So, clarify, would a unit that doesn't move at all, but does dig in, thereby expending its entire movement allowance, be eligible for Transport Asset Sharing?

PaladinSix

ORIGINAL: PaladinSix

So, clarify, would a unit that doesn't move at all, but does dig in, thereby expending its entire movement allowance, be eligible for Transport Asset Sharing?

PaladinSix

Yes, as long as you don't then change its deployment from the D, E, or F that it is in, to a L, or R, before the end of the turn.

So I don't get the point.
1) Is there any reason not to entrench at the end of the turn (penalty in movement, combat, TAS)?
2) If not, wouldn't it be better to implement an auto-entrench function at the end of each turn?
3) In terms of realism, wouldn't it be better to penalize units that entrench (in terms of movement, combat, TAS)?