Flipping hexes (Full Version)

All Forums >> [New Releases from Matrix Games] >> Gary Grigsby's War in the East Series



Message

Kielec -> Flipping hexes (10/8/2018 10:37:41 PM)

Context: Playing as Soviets, December 1941, standard settings.

Situation: Attempting a minor blizzard encirclement. Hit here, hit there, move the units as far as they go trying to close my ZOC around them Rumanians. I am one hex short to close the Kessel, but the last unit I can move on the project still has 3MPs. Not enough to move into the empty hex. There are no enemy units there, but it is within the enemy ZOC, so, say, it's contested.

Problem: If the hex I need to close the envelopment were occupied by an enemy unit (preferably weak), I could hastily attack with my 3MPs and (odds being on my side) kick the enemy unit away and flip the hex into my possession, closing the Kessel, if, perhaps, only temporarily. It (the hex) being empty, does not allow me to do much...

Suggestion: Maybe, just maybe, units could be allowed to "project" their ZOCs in a direction at a cost? As measured in MPs and, perhaps, minor attrition?

Thoughts?



thedoctorking -> RE: Flipping hexes (10/9/2018 12:35:31 AM)

It would require an engine change. The dev team for this game have moved on to WitE2, leaving Deniss and Moravel to keep up with patches. They can make some changes but I would imagine, nothing so dramatic in terms of coding required.

The explanation for this might be that the units "holding" the hex are scouting forces that are better at slowing your guys down than a weak solid line would be. Difference between mobile warfare and positional.




Aufklaerungs -> RE: Flipping hexes (10/9/2018 2:07:13 AM)

I must be missing something here. If the hex is empty and not in enemy ZOC, and your unit with 3MPs is a div-level combat unit that moves adjacent to it, hex control should automatically flip. Do blizzard rules negate ZOC extending into all adjacent uncontrolled hexes? If that were the case, it would logically follow that combat vs adjacent hexes would be restricted/prohibited as well.



ledo -> RE: Flipping hexes (10/9/2018 3:21:59 AM)

I think they mean that that unit a (sov) moves next to the hex but unit b (axis) is also next to it so it doesn't flip. Kielec's point is that the movement cost to move into the hex is higher than the cost to attack, so if there was a unit c (axis) in the hex, he could attack it and the hex would flip without him needing to move into it, whereas an empty contested hex actually makes it harder for him to flip it in terms of MP requirement.

I was thinking the same thing in my most recent game, that there is possibly some line placement that takes advantage of this, i.e. having units every second row of hexes to actually maximise the movement point costs of encirclement. Making the sequence of breaking a defensive line actually longer, while defending in depth.

XXXXXXXXXXXXX as opposed to XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX
XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX
XXXXXXXXXXXXX

To make a big encirclement(assuming all units rout) this would add additional distance to be covered before breaking out, and add an additional ZOC movement if a 30 mile wide gap isn't made in both lines. I can't seem to work out the maths as my brain is being burned by work today but I feel like this would add additional ZOC movement before breaking out into free terrain, while not seriously increasing the risk of the first line's encirclement.




xhoel -> RE: Flipping hexes (10/9/2018 11:38:40 AM)

Would be better if you showed us the screenshot so we could help.



Kielec -> RE: Flipping hexes (10/9/2018 1:33:48 PM)

There you go.

Not exactly the situation I have described in the beginning, but similar enough.

The highlighted unit cannot move to the hex, but it could attack it (hastily).

[image]local://upfiles/31040/AD2743A994664781B866971DFF2FCC1C.jpg[/image]



MarauderPL -> RE: Flipping hexes (10/9/2018 2:38:07 PM)

It is what it is, a game mechanics and design decision. A very important one though, always to have in mind when going in for the pockets and thinking about the places where to put your encircling units. I'm usually very bad at it [:D]
It does look a bit inconsistent/illogical, but many ZOC rules are "controversial" to say the least. But its how the game was designed and has to be played around. I doubt that the patch team is going to make any major mechanics changes at this point of the game's lifecycle.



Telemecus -> RE: Flipping hexes (10/9/2018 6:05:59 PM)

I can see the point actually from the other side in particular. There have been times when I deliberately withdrew a unit from a hex to give it a better chance to stay in my control - which is very counter-intuitive.

It is what it is and beyond changes in this game engine. To some extent you accept these are always abstractions not exactly representing what is on the ground. However if ever someone reading this is on the verge of writing a new game engine it is worth taking note to make something more intuitive.



Kielec -> RE: Flipping hexes (10/9/2018 10:17:38 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: Telemecus

It is what it is and beyond changes in this game engine. To some extent you accept these are always abstractions not exactly representing what is on the ground. However if ever someone reading this is on the verge of writing a new game engine it is worth taking note to make something more intuitive.


Sadly, my sentiment exactly. Makes little sense, but you have to live with it given the game's engine and it's... age.

I've started the thread more as a curio than anything else. But it would be nice to have the option, eh?



Saulust -> RE: Flipping hexes (10/10/2018 6:46:24 AM)

It might help if there were 'contested' hexes that are between flipping, like no-mans land so to speak, at least for cutting supply for pocketing or isolating enemy units, although very displeasing on the receiving end the other way around.



Page: [1]

Valid CSS!




Forum Software © ASPPlayground.NET Advanced Edition 2.4.5 ANSI
0.90625