Dabbs
Posts: 72
Joined: 6/13/2006
Status: offline
|
quote:
ORIGINAL: ralphtrick
Nope. He's saying that given time, ELmer may evolve enough to be able to kick you from one side of the map to the other <g>
Which map? 
My testing of Elmer only reiterates what is stated in the manual - on the Attack/Advance and Secure/Screen orders.
1. Units move in the most direct path toward their objectives per strict sequential order, sometimes taking advantage of roads even if doing so is slighter longer but costs fewer MP's.
2. Units generally will not go around enemy units en route to their objectives, but will ignore enemies not blocking the route to their objective.
3. Upon taking their objectives, they respond to enemy units in their vicinity according to their Strategic Bias:
a. Very Cautious - units will tend toward hex conversions in an arc/circle around their last defined objective.
b. Neutral - the formation will divide its efforts between hex conversions and responding to the nearest enemy.
c. Beserk - the formation will seek out the nearest enemy units typically starting the turn after securing its last objective.
4. Units assigned to Secure do break down/divide after securing their last objective - and begin to screen - convert ownership of hexes. If one of their objectives is taken, units will sometimes recombine in pressing an attack.
5. Units assigned to Attack may break down a small portion of their formation, but tend to keep units whole.
6. Formations and units appear 100% oblvious to the presence of other objectives not defined in their list.
Nothing really new - but the tests did tend to demonstrate that if you want formations to continue to be active even after its taken possession of the last objective defined in its list, then the Secure and Screen orders appear best; whereas if you want them to be inactive then the Attack and Advance Orders are best. Of these, the Attack Order reacts to threats in rear areas while the Advance Order does not.
In total though, it is very much a matter of having formations with overlapping objectives and different sets of orders, relative to terrain and all other battlefield conditions. The Screen Order is good for formations probing along the extreme flanks; while Secure is better for formations following behind the heavy/primary formations dedicated to Attacking. Advance order sets might be best given to recon elements, cavalry, partisans and the like.
These are issues good to keep in mind even when developing the OOB - The PO may look at the combat values of its individual units, it does not appear able to distinguish which of its units is a tank unit or a headquarters....so it has a distinct tendency to rush its HQ's into exposed positions when it has the chance - without protection. That tends to advocate reducing the movement allowance of the HQ grouping it with a few other appropriate units (artillery, air defense and some kind of infantry for protection or local reserve), and assigning that formation objectives 1-2 hexes behind the true front line units. Or, it may mean assigning the HQ icon to a front line unit.
Basically, we have to do the majority of the thinking for the PO making use of its logic. Leastwise, understanding its logic enables us to get it to behave closer to our designs. That starts with giving it units that it can work with, assigned to formations with orders matching their purpose.
Just as long as Elmer doesn't become Hal...we should be safe. Right Dave?
|
Printable Version
Optimizing Elmer's Current Capabilities - 
) behavior is 'Strategic bias 1 or 2'. This effect can be set to the values: 'Very cautious', 'Cautious', 'Neutral', 'Aggressive', and 'Berserk'. There are very clear differences in the PO's behavior depending on how this event effect is set -- you should test it to see. 
New Messages
No New Messages
Hot Topic w/ New Messages
Hot Topic w/o New Messages
Locked w/ New Messages
Locked w/o New Messages
Post New Thread