two questions (Full Version)

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



Message

bevilacqua -> two questions (12/6/2010 3:12:31 PM)

1. I remember reading in the manual that units will dig in at the end of the turn automatically. Is this thrusthworthy? Will units dig in when an early turn ending happens?

Digging in and changing losses tolerances are two extremely painful things to do in Toaw. I think that the game would benefit a lot from a way
to 'program' units to repeat the same actions along future turns, until players define a new setting. I hate going through units which retreated to set
their losses tolerance again, going through units to see which are dug in before a combat, just to avoid them not being dug in the case of an early turn ending etc.

2. Does the unit strength (on the counter) reflect the unit proficiency, too? I know that the strength will change depending on supply, but what about
proficiency?




toawfan -> RE: two questions (12/6/2010 4:09:16 PM)

This would help immensely on unnecessary micro-management. I know you strive for as much realism as possible. I really doubt that the commander has to tell every unit at the end of every day to dig in. This should happen automatically.



Curtis Lemay -> RE: two questions (12/6/2010 4:14:11 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: bevilacqua

1. I remember reading in the manual that units will dig in at the end of the turn automatically. Is this thrusthworthy? Will units dig in when an early turn ending happens?


Only if they are already in either a Defending or Entrenched deployment and the turn doesn't end early. That means you end the turn without any attacks scheduled.

quote:

2. Does the unit strength (on the counter) reflect the unit proficiency, too? I know that the strength will change depending on supply, but what about
proficiency?


Yes.



bevilacqua -> RE: two questions (12/7/2010 11:34:20 AM)

Thanks Curtis.

I like micro-management. I like to have control of each bit of decision. I don't like games in which you just set the direction and the computer does the rest. But I think that pointless micro-managing is the problem. Relevant micro-managing is welcome. If digging in was an important decision I would say: let it as it is. But it isn't. The only decision is if you should dig in this or that unit earlier, since (I think) remaining movement points affect the efficiency of the act. But its not something that will make a huge difference and it isn't a very difficult decision to take, also. Most of the time, one is just going after units still not dug in and taking the painful care of not changing the deployment of those few units which shouldn't be dug in. That happens with losses settings too, when you have a huge stack and one lonely unit wich should have a different setting, which prevents you from changing the whole group at once or changing it and going after this single unit to change it back.

Every single aspect of micro-managing that affect the outcome is part of the game and valid. Every aspect of micro-managing that doesn't is a game spoiler.



toawfan -> RE: two questions (12/7/2010 2:39:09 PM)

Bevilacqua, you raised a question that I had not previously thought about as a rookie and I'd like the veterans to expand on this:

If digging in uses up my movement points, what are the strategic decisions to hold on to some movement points for your round on defense vs. digging in? Which is better for the defense if digging in uses up the MP? Better to be dug in or better to have some MP?



samba_liten -> RE: two questions (12/7/2010 3:11:53 PM)

If you are defending it is far better to be dug in. MP serve no purpose in defending against an attack, unless you have designated the unit in question as tactical reserve, in which case it can't be dug in any way.



larryfulkerson -> RE: two questions (12/7/2010 4:01:48 PM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: toawfan
Bevilacqua, you raised a question that I had not previously thought about as a rookie and I'd like the veterans to expand on this:

If digging in uses up my movement points, what are the strategic decisions to hold on to some movement points for your round on defense vs. digging in? Which is better for the defense if digging in uses up the MP? Better to be dug in or better to have some MP?

In my games in round 1 I almost never dig anybody in ( who isn't already dug in ) because I like the option to move the unit should changing conditions on the ground dictate it should be moved. If you dig in the unit thinking you aren't going to move it and then later wish you hadn't dug it in so early..........You can always dig it in in a later round ( presuming you HAVE a later round ). In those games ( say as the Soviet player in FITE ) where you almost never get a second round you might want to consider digging in one unit in the hex and leave the others ( if there are others ) free to attack / move / etc. I've heard it said that on the front line it's sometimes a good idea to have at least one unit in each hex dug in even if the others aren't just in case of an attack. That way at least SOMEBODY will be dug in and ready for it. I'm not leaning in that direction myself, as you might be able to tell from my gameplay. I'm more the kind of guy that digs 'em all in if anybody digs in and leave 'em all mobile if even one of them needs to move. Until the later / last round of course.



Andriko -> RE: two questions (12/7/2010 4:58:33 PM)

I wouldn't mind a universal button for loss tolerences (All on Ignore losses, for example), though this wouldn't work for digging in, I think. And besides, I agree with Larry on this point; either I am in a mobile situation, so nobody digs in, or I am at my stop line or in retreat, in which case, they all dig in. Though to be honest, in practical terms, whther or not a unit is dug in doesn't always make a difference when facing a strong and well thought out attack, good terrain seems more important in those situations.



Page: [1]

Valid CSS!




Forum Software © ASPPlayground.NET Advanced Edition 2.4.5 ANSI
2.092773