|
Mickrocks201 -> RE: Strategic movement (9/17/2008 1:31:07 PM)
|
quote:
ORIGINAL: comrade
quote:
ORIGINAL: mickrocks
I would suggest that strategic movement not be allowed for units that are surrounded. In fact it should only be allowed for units that can trace a path that is free of adjacent enemy units regardless of whether the hexes used are friendly.
It tends to piss one off when you surround an enemy only to have it whisked away like magic.
This is because the map 'topography' (i.e. pockets etc) are calculated after all countries finish their turns. This topography is calculated along with the supply.
So if Germans cut off polish unit in turn one and hit end turn, this polish unit won't suffer effectivity penalty until the whole cycle is finished. The same for strategic deployment - it will act as if it had connection to all the cities it had at the beginning of the cycle.
Although this may seem not intuitive at first glance, the reason for this is that this seems the only way to model a simultaneous moves in a turn-based game. Turns are just a simplification - in real life you can imagine polish and german units moving at the same time. So the german unit tries to cut off polish unit but at the same time this unit is strategically re-deployed elsewhere.
While I can appreciate what you are trying to accomplish with "simultaneous move" simulation, it really ends up being very arbitrary since it never benefits the Axis since they move first (i.e. it truly IS a turn based game after all). Seems like there are some holes in the implementation - german units that get cut off are cut off, Russian units are only sort of cut off???? [:@]
In real life the allies always carry enough supplies with them for a breakout attempt when surrounded while the axis always just wither and die?
It is nice that the developers only had to worry about "topography" at the end of the turn but it certainly does not make for a better game.
|
|
|
|
