|
Jimmer -> RE: Cav/LightInf auto-foraging? (8/27/2009 9:26:12 PM)
|
quote:
ORIGINAL: NeverMan
NO, mine doesn't ignore it, try reading my posts please... I've already said above that if the computer is paying for normal supply and a corps is out of range/supply then the computer should forage that unit. Why should the computer try to forage a unit BEFORE it checks to see if it can be paid for by normal supply????? THIS MAKES NO SENSE!!
Exactly how should said units be foraged? Using movement points? Or, not? And, which corps should get paid for, and which should forage (unless the player has $0 at the time this is checked, in which case all forage -- provided it is in the model).
Your model says don't forage anything, until you run out of money. But, the question still remains, "Use movement, or not?" Marshall simply chose to have his model deal with that last question first.
If done in the other order, players would be faced with a huge amount of randomness in choosing which of their corps forage when. And, they would lose a lot more troops if the auto-forage option isn't available.
How about an example: France is attacking with 6 corps. He has $6 to spend, and there is a depot 2 spaces from the attack site. The army consists of his guard, artillery, I cavalry, and I - III corps. Guard, and I corps each have 3 movement points remaining. Artillery has 2MP available. I Cav has 4 MP available. II and III have none. The attack is into an enemy's 5 forage area.
France has failed to manually deal with this whole stack, so the game must decide what to do.
Your model pays for 3 corps at random. The rest forage. We do not know whether movement points will be used or not, because your model doesn't address that. But, since this whole exchange is about avoiding using auto-forage with movement, I will assume that the other three all forage without using their movement points.
Congratulations! You just lost between zero and 9 factors from randomly-chosen corps that you didn't need to lose:
Marshall's model says guard, I cav, and I corps will auto-forage. The remaining 3 corps will be paid for. No corps will forage. And, because of the foraging having occurred, any siege attempt must wait until next turn.
Now, I grant that this example is contrived to put your model in a bad light. However, if you object, come up with a situation where Marshall's model loses more factors than your model (using the same die rolls for each corps in both models, and assuming no movement will be used for foraging).
Marshall made the right choice. But, there was an unforeseen situation: One can be prevented from besieging a city after a field combat, unless one is very careful (and, in rare circumstances, even if one IS careful). This problem needs to be solved, IMO. But, not by changing the model, since it's the best one ("best" = spends the least money and loses the least # of factors).
|
|
|
|
