Early turn ends (Full Version)

All Forums >> [Current Games From Matrix.] >> [World War II] >> Norm Koger's The Operational Art Of War III >> The War Room



Message

Heldenkaiser -> Early turn ends (9/5/2006 11:53:25 AM)

I keep getting hit by early turn ends after only one or two rounds of combat, and I can't really understand what's going on.

- Yes, I know how the combat rounds system works, and I have previously been able to get as many as 8 to 10 rounds of combat per turn. I always check the attack planner to make sure that first round combats show only one square in the panel top-right, second round combats only two, and so on.
- I am using exclusively limited attack/minimize losses, which in my understanding should make sure that an attack doesn't usually last longer than 10% of the turn. - Or does it not?
- On top of everything, this is in a scenario which apparantely has an MRPB setting of 3, which should guarantee at least 3 rounds per turn if everything else goes wrong, no?

Yes, I am new to TOAW, but I've read all the stuff there is around and really have been able to control my combats before and get a high number of rounds per turn. I am sort of out of my wits now, and this is getting depressing. Is there anything, above from the things I've mentioned above, that I may have forgotten to consider that could help me understand (and hopefully solve) my problem?

Oh, and another question ... is it true that, if the END_OF_TURN... file has all units at zero MP, it was combats that ended my turn, and not a failed proficiency check? Or would they be at zero MP at turn end in any case?

Thanks for any comments.



golden delicious -> RE: Early turn ends (9/5/2006 12:36:37 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: Heldenkaiser

- I am using exclusively limited attack/minimize losses, which in my understanding should make sure that an attack doesn't usually last longer than 10% of the turn. - Or does it not?


It doesn't guarantee anything. What minimise losses does is make the units more likely to break off from combat, which can cause problems if four out of five units break off immediately but one particularly stubborn unit just keeps plugging away with no chance of causing the defender to retreat. Limited attack does something else entirely and I wouldn't recommend it as a tool to prevent early turn ending.

quote:

On top of everything, this is in a scenario which apparantely has an MRPB setting of 3, which should guarantee at least 3 rounds per turn if everything else goes wrong, no?


The setting is the maximum number of rounds that can be consumed by a battle. So if you take the precautions you outlined in the first point, you should get at least a 70% and a 40% round.

quote:

Oh, and another question ... is it true that, if the END_OF_TURN... file has all units at zero MP, it was combats that ended my turn, and not a failed proficiency check? Or would they be at zero MP at turn end in any case?


Are you refering to the special PBM save? I'm not familiar with that yet. Your statement is true for ordinary saves.

What is the scenario in question? Some scenarios just don't produce a lot of rounds. It's not actually normal to be getting eight rounds (and is technically impossible to get 10 without exploiting flaws in the game system).



Heldenkaiser -> RE: Early turn ends (9/5/2006 12:45:24 PM)

Thank you for your comments.

Regarding LA/ML, I was primarily referring to ML with respect to the round burning issue, but was also under the impression that LA, which doesn't even aim at expelling the enemy from the defending hex and halves the attack effort, would also be more likely to keep rounds to a minimum.

So you are saying that even with ML, a unit could decide to just keep attacking, at least until the MRPB limit? What would cause it to?

And yes, I mean the "END_OF_TURN_DO_NOT_SEND_(file name).SAL" file that is automatically created when a PBEM turn ends.

The scenario is the newest version of Two Weeks in Normandy (v. 2.32). I was told (at SZO) that in the earlier turns the shock setting may have helped me to get more rounds, but all the same I sharply dropped from something like 8 or 9 rounds (I believe I got 10 in T1) in the first couple of turns to just two rounds in the last two - it goes 60% after the first round, then turn end after the second. And I can't really say what I've been doing differently before.



Heldenkaiser -> RE: Early turn ends (9/5/2006 1:07:26 PM)

Don't know if this will work, but this is the scenario ...

http://www.strategyzoneonline.com/forums/attachment.php?attachmentid=16424&d=1151603598



golden delicious -> RE: Early turn ends (9/5/2006 1:25:27 PM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: Heldenkaiser

Regarding LA/ML, I was primarily referring to ML with respect to the round burning issue, but was also under the impression that LA, which doesn't even aim at expelling the enemy from the defending hex and halves the attack effort, would also be more likely to keep rounds to a minimum.


Limited Attacks can make the defender retreat. The attackers just won't advance into the gap.

quote:

So you are saying that even with ML, a unit could decide to just keep attacking, at least until the MRPB limit? What would cause it to?


Units with very high proficiency have a tendency to hold on regardless of loss settings.

quote:

The scenario is the newest version of Two Weeks in Normandy (v. 2.32). I was told (at SZO) that in the earlier turns the shock setting may have helped me to get more rounds, but all the same I sharply dropped from something like 8 or 9 rounds (I believe I got 10 in T1) in the first couple of turns to just two rounds in the last two - it goes 60% after the first round, then turn end after the second. And I can't really say what I've been doing differently before.


This sounds about right. A lot of scenarios see many rounds during a period of shock bonus (and particularly overwhelming superiority), then fall back to a more normal two to four rounds per turn.

It is entirely possible to get ten rounds in the turn- but only if you saved the game during a round and then loaded it again.



Heldenkaiser -> RE: Early turn ends (9/5/2006 2:10:12 PM)

Thank you again ... but still, the MRPB settings should control the rounds, no?

quote:


It is entirely possible to get ten rounds in the turn- but only if you saved the game during a round and then loaded it again.


I don't think I did ... may I ask how and why this would make a difference?



Anthropoid -> RE: Early turn ends (9/5/2006 3:52:28 PM)

I had the impression that the determining factor in how much of a turn gets burned is how many remaining movement points the attackers have when they attack, and that pretty much everything else is moot.

However, my own experiences with being surprised that I do not get multiple combat rounds in one turn is also making me think that it is more complicated than this.

Specifically, in the Vietnam 1965-1968 scenario. Last turn, me allies against PO. I assigned probably 30 to 35 different attacks else bombards at various points all over Vietnam. Several of them were stand off arty bombardments and plane bombardments. None of the planes had moved, and with the exception of the one arty, none of the arty had moved either. None of the attacking units had moved. All the Plan Attack windows showed low (10% to 20% of turn) use. Nonetheless, this ended my turn. This has has got me thinking of the solution:

(1) I missed a unit and included one with low movement points remaining
(2) Even when each combat only takes 10%, cumulatively, 10 or 15 of these burn up the whole turn?
(3) complex attacks involving arty, planes, and land forces use up more than is shown in the Plan Attack window
(4) standoff bombard attacks using arty only, and which do not show the Plan Attack window, are somehow accounting for it?



Heldenkaiser -> RE: Early turn ends (9/5/2006 3:59:53 PM)

quote:

(1) I missed a unit and included one with low movement points remaining


Always a good explanation, and one hard to rule out in a big scenario. Still, last turn I can say I am 99% sure this was not was caused my turn end, because I was out to track down the problem, and doublechecked every single combat in the planner.

quote:

(2) Even when each combat only takes 10%, cumulatively, 10 or 15 of these burn up the whole turn?


Yes, but MRPB should check it, or?

quote:

(3) complex attacks involving arty, planes, and land forces use up more than is shown in the Plan Attack window


Even there, it was my impression that supporting arms on minimize losses would prevent combats from taking too long.

quote:

(4) standoff bombard attacks using arty only, and which do not show the Plan Attack window, are somehow accounting for it?


Ditto. If they are on ML, they should burn only 10% of the turn each.
(Besides, I am told that pure bombardments are next to useless in terms of effectiveness ...)

But maybe I'm dead wrong on all of this ... even likely.



Anthropoid -> RE: Early turn ends (9/5/2006 4:13:54 PM)

Ah yeah. I had forgot that Limit Loses could account for it. That is probably where my problems are coming in.

If you set up an attack in the Plan Attack with Min Loss and it says 10%, it seems to me that if you set up the exact same attack with Lim Loss it will ALSO say 10%, but maybe in fact it CAN take longer, depending on how much resistance is met? i.e., if additional rounds are needed then they will be burned up, thus burning up more of the turn.



JAMiAM -> RE: Early turn ends (9/5/2006 5:01:22 PM)

If you're looking at the end of turn saves, then the MP's for units in these save files are set to zero MP's to avoid the possibility of reloading the save file, and playing on, in the hopes that your opponent doesn't see the end of turn text in the playback record.

Since that scenario (for the NPW) is set to an MRPB of 3, your two most likely causes of early turn ending is from a failed prof check, or poor attack planning. The force prof's are pretty low in this scenario, IIRC. I'm not at a computer with TOAW III installed, at the moment, but I think they are somewhere in the vicinity of only 60%. This leads to a lot of failed prof checks.

Prior to making that change of the MRPB, this scenario did have a tendency to have problems with turn burning attacks taking up too many tactical rounds due to the attrition divider, the altered scale, and the high proportion of hard targets on the map. Hopefully, you and your opponent are in fact using the specially adjusted scenario for the workshop.



golden delicious -> RE: Early turn ends (9/5/2006 5:03:38 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: Heldenkaiser

Thank you again ... but still, the MRPB settings should control the rounds, no?


In theory. I haven't had a great deal of experience with this feature, but if it works as advertised you can only get fewer than three rounds if you set up attacks with units which have already used more of their move than the amount of the turn that has been consumed.

quote:

I don't think I did ... may I ask how and why this would make a difference?


The current % of the turn is not saved with the file. So when you load a saved game the game thinks you haven't used any of the turn at all, and as such if none of your combats last more than one round you can get the same % remaining as you had on the last round. Otherwise the best you can get is nine rounds, since the game will always decrement the % of the turn remaining and will never give you another round at 10% remaining.



golden delicious -> RE: Early turn ends (9/5/2006 5:05:31 PM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: Anthropoid

(1) I missed a unit and included one with low movement points remaining


Possible. Of course, this is summarised for you in TOAW III.

quote:

(2) Even when each combat only takes 10%, cumulatively, 10 or 15 of these burn up the whole turn?


No. Never.

quote:

(4) standoff bombard attacks using arty only, and which do not show the Plan Attack window, are somehow accounting for it?


Yes. These work exactly the same way as other attacks when it comes to round consumption. If you made a direct bombardment with an artillery (or air) unit that has already moved, then you will lose part of your turn as a result.



golden delicious -> RE: Early turn ends (9/5/2006 5:07:17 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: Anthropoid

If you set up an attack in the Plan Attack with Min Loss and it says 10%, it seems to me that if you set up the exact same attack with Lim Loss it will ALSO say 10%, but maybe in fact it CAN take longer, depending on how much resistance is met? i.e., if additional rounds are needed then they will be burned up, thus burning up more of the turn.


Any loss setting can produce a turn-burning attack and any loss setting can produce an attack which last just one round. There are other factors involved.



Heldenkaiser -> RE: Early turn ends (9/5/2006 5:32:48 PM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: JAMiAM

If you're looking at the end of turn saves, then the MP's for units in these save files are set to zero MP's to avoid the possibility of reloading the save file, and playing on, in the hopes that your opponent doesn't see the end of turn text in the playback record.

Since that scenario (for the NPW) is set to an MRPB of 3, your two most likely causes of early turn ending is from a failed prof check, or poor attack planning. The force prof's are pretty low in this scenario, IIRC. I'm not at a computer with TOAW III installed, at the moment, but I think they are somewhere in the vicinity of only 60%. This leads to a lot of failed prof checks.

Prior to making that change of the MRPB, this scenario did have a tendency to have problems with turn burning attacks taking up too many tactical rounds due to the attrition divider, the altered scale, and the high proportion of hard targets on the map. Hopefully, you and your opponent are in fact using the specially adjusted scenario for the workshop.


Thanks for clarifying that! So there is no telling from the end of turn SAL file what the cause for the early turn end was.

Still, we *are* using the adjusted workshop version, so it should limit combats to 3 rounds, right? ...



Heldenkaiser -> RE: Early turn ends (9/5/2006 5:34:17 PM)

quote:


Any loss setting can produce a turn-burning attack and any loss setting can produce an attack which last just one round. There are other factors involved.


Bitter truths ... but good to know. Thanks! [X(]



Heldenkaiser -> RE: Early turn ends (9/5/2006 5:37:30 PM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: golden delicious
The current % of the turn is not saved with the file. So when you load a saved game the game thinks you haven't used any of the turn at all, and as such if none of your combats last more than one round you can get the same % remaining as you had on the last round. Otherwise the best you can get is nine rounds, since the game will always decrement the % of the turn remaining and will never give you another round at 10% remaining.


Hm ...

Q1 - if that is so, isn't it something that should be addressed? As plainly it is useful to be able to save PBEM turns that can take hours to complete, but equally plainly what you describe would be an unintended side effect. [X(]

Q2 - at SZO, a veteran told me that a shock bonus could lead to more than 10 combat rounds ... is this incorrect then?

Thanks! [:)]



golden delicious -> RE: Early turn ends (9/5/2006 8:30:05 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: Heldenkaiser

Q1 - if that is so, isn't it something that should be addressed? As plainly it is useful to be able to save PBEM turns that can take hours to complete, but equally plainly what you describe would be an unintended side effect. [X(]


This bug has just been discovered in the last couple of months. That's why it hasn't been fixed yet.

quote:

Q2 - at SZO, a veteran told me that a shock bonus could lead to more than 10 combat rounds ... is this incorrect then?


This was a widely accepted explanation but it is now known not to be true. Thing is, you usually get a shock bonus at the start of an offensive- just the sort of situation where your turn will take hours and hours to play out, and so you'll be saving and reloading perhaps multiple times in one turn.



Catch21 -> RE: Early turn ends (9/5/2006 9:49:41 PM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: golden delicious
quote:

Q2 - at SZO, a veteran told me that a shock bonus could lead to more than 10 combat rounds ... is this incorrect then?


This was a widely accepted explanation but it is now known not to be true. Thing is, you usually get a shock bonus at the start of an offensive- just the sort of situation where your turn will take hours and hours to play out, and so you'll be saving and reloading perhaps multiple times in one turn.

Are you sure about this? I believe Mantis at SZO holds the world record for number of rounds in a turn- certainly over 10- though I'm not sure what that is. I'll see if I can locate him for confirmation.



golden delicious -> RE: Early turn ends (9/5/2006 10:05:02 PM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: General Staff

Are you sure about this? I believe Mantis at SZO holds the world record for number of rounds in a turn- certainly over 10- though I'm not sure what that is. I'll see if I can locate him for confirmation.


As I recall his total was 27.

The bug was first reported here;
http://www.tdg.nu/cgi-bin/yabb2/YaBB.pl?num=1153165723

It was discussed on WHQ here;
http://www.strategyzoneonline.com/forums/showthread.php?t=42949

Jarek quotes JAMiAM on the second page acknowledging that this is a bug.



Mantis -> RE: Early turn ends (9/5/2006 10:25:00 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: General Staff

Are you sure about this? I believe Mantis at SZO holds the world record for number of rounds in a turn- certainly over 10- though I'm not sure what that is. I'll see if I can locate him for confirmation.


As I recall his total was 27.

The bug was first reported here;
http://www.tdg.nu/cgi-bin/yabb2/YaBB.pl?num=1153165723

It was discussed on WHQ here;
http://www.strategyzoneonline.com/forums/showthread.php?t=42949

Jarek quotes JAMiAM on the second page acknowledging that this is a bug.


It was 28 rounds, and it was in Europe Aflame (what else?) I was under the impression that it was due to shock as well, but James said he was able to replicate it in Arracourt, so I really have no idea. And I still have to wonder if shock plays a part in this caluclation (wherever it is made), as non-round-bruning combats are quite common in EA when you aren't having a monster turn.



hank -> RE: Early turn ends (9/6/2006 4:00:26 PM)

The bottom line is:   Will this bug be put up at the top of priority list for a fix?

IMHO its a big bug. 

... along with my peeve, the inaccurate prediction at the bottom of the attack planning window and the (recently mentioned) inaccuracy of the turn usage % blocks at the top of the attack planning window.




golden delicious -> RE: Early turn ends (9/6/2006 4:18:37 PM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: hank

The bottom line is:   Will this bug be put up at the top of priority list for a fix?


I believe so.

quote:

... along with my peeve, the inaccurate prediction at the bottom of the attack planning window and the (recently mentioned) inaccuracy of the turn usage % blocks at the top of the attack planning window.


a) is a shame but really the player needs to get to grips with figuring out combat odds anyway, since very often this information won't be availabe.
b) is not inaccurate. It just gives different information from what you thought it gave.



hank -> RE: Early turn ends (9/8/2006 3:24:52 PM)

Hmm ... what to say ...

... I suppose 1st, if something is displayed in a game that indicates a prediction of results in an attack it should be accurate and/or display a disclaimer saying its not reliable
... Regarding calculating odds; to calc odds in toaw you have to not only add up your attack / defense numbers then make "correction" (not meaning fixing errors but factoring in terrain / entranchment / armor-infy factor / artillery / proficiency / etc etc) ... to the ratio of attack vs defense.  ... am I right here?  for each attack you need a pad of paper and do some fairly simple yet time consuming math to determine if an attack has a good or bad chance of success.  For most new players this is somewhat daunting IMHO.  Plus, isn't there a factor of random chance added in?

... Please correct me if I'm wrong in the above statements  (as I was typing this I jumped over to the manual and it doesn't go too deep into how all this works ... mostly a rough overview and a simple example)
... the attack planning window should do that for you yet when I make a comment that if that prediction is not reliable and it needs fixed; I get a reply that I basically need to get a grip on odds of success or failure ... I guess I don't see the reluctance to accept that if this is not a reliable prediction it needs fixed.  ... and you're right I do need to get a better grip on calc'ing odds

If I need to spend over two or more hours to make it through one turn the game's not for me (and especially if I play pbem where I don't want to make incremental saves to prevent opponents from thinking I'm cheating).  Even in a more simple game line SSG's BiN or BiI, they've included a combat advisor to help determine the success or failure of an attack to help the player (and its not perfect either).

IS there some secret way to help those who are not long time toaw players to get a better handle on calculating success of an attack WITHOUT using the attack planning window?

please advise

Hank



golden delicious -> RE: Early turn ends (9/9/2006 12:44:40 AM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: hank

Hmm ... what to say ...

... I suppose 1st, if something is displayed in a game that indicates a prediction of results in an attack it should be accurate and/or display a disclaimer saying its not reliable


It should probably be taken out, yeah.

quote:

... Regarding calculating odds; to calc odds in toaw you have to not only add up your attack / defense numbers then make "correction" (not meaning fixing errors but factoring in terrain / entranchment / armor-infy factor / artillery / proficiency / etc etc) ... to the ratio of attack vs defense.  ... am I right here?


No. No arithmetic should be envolved. It's about gut feeling. You've played other wargames? Then you should have an idea of what will work and what won't. This will be refined over time as you play TOAW. As I've said, Rommel didn't have an "attack planning advisor" and nor should you.



Telumar -> RE: Early turn ends (9/9/2006 3:19:15 AM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: golden delicious

As I've said, Rommel didn't have an "attack planning advisor" and nor should you.


Definitely! IMO, the whole issue should be seen as a feature of the game.

My two cents.



hank -> RE: Early turn ends (9/9/2006 4:28:22 PM)

OK, is the general rule for odds of winning an assault 3:1 as in most games I've played ?

Then what do I do to factor in terrain?  ... proficiency?  ... anti-armor?  ... shock?  ... quality of attacking/defending units?  ... entrenchment?  ... is there anything else I need to consider? 

(do i have to look at the text in the bottom of the screen and other screens or boxes to get all the info I need to calc (in my head) odds of success or failure?)

This is not a smartass question its a sincere attempt at finding out how to calculate my odds of winning or losing an attack without using the attack planning dialog box.

If I simply add up the attack/defense values on the map counters, Is that good enough?

based on the replies, this game definitely has a huge upward learning curve.  No aids to the newbie obviously that can be trusted.

hank

ps-I'm going to start practicing using nothing to calc success of an attack ... I'll keep you informed as to my progress



a white rabbit -> RE: Early turn ends (9/10/2006 4:51:13 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: Mantis


quote:

ORIGINAL: General Staff

Are you sure about this? I believe Mantis at SZO holds the world record for number of rounds in a turn- certainly over 10- though I'm not sure what that is. I'll see if I can locate him for confirmation.


As I recall his total was 27.

The bug was first reported here;
http://www.tdg.nu/cgi-bin/yabb2/YaBB.pl?num=1153165723

It was discussed on WHQ here;
http://www.strategyzoneonline.com/forums/showthread.php?t=42949

Jarek quotes JAMiAM on the second page acknowledging that this is a bug.


It was 28 rounds, and it was in Europe Aflame (what else?) I was under the impression that it was due to shock as well, but James said he was able to replicate it in Arracourt, so I really have no idea. And I still have to wonder if shock plays a part in this caluclation (wherever it is made), as non-round-bruning combats are quite common in EA when you aren't having a monster turn.



..depending how you define rounds, it is possible to have min loss/not moved artillery shoots go on for ever, (at least until you lose your nerve)as a recent turn in Rommel in NA showed me..the 10% expected turn use just didn't happen until i added aircraft..

..a one off so far but it happens



a white rabbit -> RE: Early turn ends (9/10/2006 4:59:44 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: golden delicious


quote:

ORIGINAL: Anthropoid

If you set up an attack in the Plan Attack with Min Loss and it says 10%, it seems to me that if you set up the exact same attack with Lim Loss it will ALSO say 10%, but maybe in fact it CAN take longer, depending on how much resistance is met? i.e., if additional rounds are needed then they will be burned up, thus burning up more of the turn.


Any loss setting can produce a turn-burning attack and any loss setting can produce an attack which last just one round. There are other factors involved.



..such as any units on combat support, aircraft / ranged artillery, which are not counted in the attack planner in the time-used calc but do extend the combat phase if on a higher setting than the involved ground units




golden delicious -> RE: Early turn ends (9/10/2006 11:07:06 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: hank

OK, is the general rule for odds of winning an assault 3:1 as in most games I've played ?


It varies a great deal. Unentrenched troops in open terrain can be beaten with only marginal superiority.

quote:

If I simply add up the attack/defense values on the map counters, Is that good enough?


The numbers on the counters help, but they're not the full answer. A unit showing strength 20 might actually be less effective than one showing strength 18, but it'll almost certainly be more effective than one showing strength 12.



hank -> RE: Early turn ends (9/11/2006 4:29:49 AM)

I played through 21 moves of Korsun this morning without using Attack Planning dialog (APD) ... none at all was it used.

Its getting easier but using a dialog box as an aid in seeing all the available units for an attack helps me.  However, after about 10 or 12 moves without using the APD, putting together attacks started to get easier to handle.  I can see some advantages just winging it with the pop up menus. 

The biggest thing you got to watch without the APD is the circle of stars.  Its the only way I know of to gauge how much of the turn your attacks are taking up.

Thanks for the help.



Page: [1] 2   next >   >>

Valid CSS!




Forum Software © ASPPlayground.NET Advanced Edition 2.4.5 ANSI
0.765625