Not all attacks cost 1 action point

Not all attacks cost 1 action point (Full Version)

All Forums >> [New Releases from Matrix Games] >> Strategic Command Series >> Strategic Command WWII: World at War

Message

pjg100 -> Not all attacks cost 1 action point (4/30/2020 6:12:15 PM)
The manual states that an attack always costs one AP. However, I have noticed that sometimes an attack by a land unit does not cost any APs. FREX, recently I attacked a low-strength Polish CAV with a GE army that had moved two hexes, so had one AP left. It attacked, then was able to move one additional hex. WAD? If so, what are the conditions under which an attack does not cost any AP?

BillRunacre -> RE: Not all attacks cost 1 action point (5/1/2020 2:26:18 PM)
If you're able to repeat this please could you post the occasion, e.g. if it's in the first turn, and how it can be repeated, or if you have a saved turn where it can be repeated then we would be interested to take a look.

pjg100 -> RE: Not all attacks cost 1 action point (5/1/2020 3:05:14 PM)
I've noticed it several different times at various points in the game over the past several months. Yesterday, it occurred on turn 1, GE army in Breslau moved to 107/39 (after the tanks had eliminated the Polish army there), attacked the CAV in 108/40, and lost no AP in doing so. It still had two APs, so moved up adjacent Warsaw. I did it again this morning on the same turn with the same GE army, this time moving one hex and using the attack on the Polish army, which had retreated one hex following a strike by the tanks.

HamburgerMeat -> RE: Not all attacks cost 1 action point (5/1/2020 3:53:01 PM)
I have noticed it as well, usually when the attacker takes less damage than the defender (though not always). Was not sure if this was supposed to be a "breakthrough" mechanic of some sort, but it sounds like it is unintended. However, I think it is intentional that ground and naval units who have 0 ap but have not attacked can still attack (provided they are in range) right?

Cpuncher -> RE: Not all attacks cost 1 action point (5/1/2020 7:15:45 PM)
I assume it's not the "Blitz Attack" mechanic (page 121 of the manual) that doesn't cost AP that you guys are talking about. However, the game does have AP cost issues when in bad weather. Mountain and some other terrain often cost 1 AP during bad weather and I haven't been able to track down what makes that happen.

Hubert Cater -> RE: Not all attacks cost 1 action point (5/5/2020 4:11:29 PM)
Thanks for the report pjg100, and after investigating this further, it does look like this has unfortunately been in the game right from the very first releases several years ago. We are considering options, but at the moment are more inclined to simply leave it as is. Don't get us wrong, we always want to fix inconsistencies, but amending this now could possibly change the tempo and flow of the game dramatically and that's not something we would want either, e.g. "fixing" this whereby you would now be losing an extra action point for every move and attack is not without consequence to game play. In the meantime we'll keep thinking on it.

crispy131313 -> RE: Not all attacks cost 1 action point (5/5/2020 4:21:10 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Hubert Cater Thanks for the report pjg100, and after investigating this further, it does look like this has unfortunately been in the game right from the very first releases several years ago. We are considering options, but at the moment are more inclined to simply leave it as is. Don't get us wrong, we always want to fix inconsistencies, but amending this now could possibly change the tempo and flow of the game dramatically and that's not something we would want either, e.g. "fixing" this whereby you would now be losing an extra action point for every move and attack is not without consequence to game play. In the meantime we'll keep thinking on it. I think this is the right approach. It would change the tempo entirely.

Tanaka -> RE: Not all attacks cost 1 action point (5/5/2020 5:21:11 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Hubert Cater Thanks for the report pjg100, and after investigating this further, it does look like this has unfortunately been in the game right from the very first releases several years ago. We are considering options, but at the moment are more inclined to simply leave it as is. Don't get us wrong, we always want to fix inconsistencies, but amending this now could possibly change the tempo and flow of the game dramatically and that's not something we would want either, e.g. "fixing" this whereby you would now be losing an extra action point for every move and attack is not without consequence to game play. In the meantime we'll keep thinking on it. But isn't that what most have been asking for anyway? To slow the game down with the smaller map?

Christolos -> RE: Not all attacks cost 1 action point (5/6/2020 4:20:26 PM)
If it is to be left as it is, at least for now, could we get an explanation as to what exact conditions allow it to happen, so it has some predictability that can be understood and used by both sides...or does it just happen randomly? C

pjg100 -> RE: Not all attacks cost 1 action point (5/6/2020 5:19:09 PM)
It appears to happen when the defender takes a loss and the attacker does not. However, I haven't tested whether this is consistently true or there are additional conditions that must be met in order for that proposition to be true, so you may want to test it under varying conditions. FWIW, I think it should be left as is. I think that this marginally speeds the game up under conditions approximating a "breakthrough" situation, and makes the game more fun to play.

HamburgerMeat -> RE: Not all attacks cost 1 action point (5/6/2020 6:00:01 PM)
It can happen when the attacker takes a loss as well, though it doesn't appear to be consistent. Maybe it is affected by the weather in some way?

BillRunacre -> RE: Not all attacks cost 1 action point (5/6/2020 6:56:43 PM)
It's to do with moving a unit then attacking, if you don't de-select the unit before the attack then the AP cost is not what it should be.

Hubert Cater -> RE: Not all attacks cost 1 action point (5/6/2020 8:04:49 PM)
Example #1: - Move one hex that costs 1 AP, deselect, select again and attack, total AP cost is 2 AP OR - Move one hex that costs 1 AP, do not deselect, e.g. attack while still selected, total AP cost is 1 AP Example #2: - Move one hex that costs 3 AP, deselect, select again and attack, total AP cost is 4 AP OR - Move one hex that costs 3 AP, do not deselect, e.g. attack while still selected, total AP cost is 3 AP Essentially you lose 1 AP less in these move, followed by combat examples, from what you really should be when you do not deselect. However, since it is very likely most players do not deselect prior to a purposeful move/combat sequence, if we were to introduce a "fix" to cost you an extra 1 AP, as it should cost you, it can likely have a significant effect on just how the game plays, and how it has been played so far. Thus our hesitation at the moment to change it.

DaveS -> RE: Not all attacks cost 1 action point (5/6/2020 8:58:51 PM)
A "fix" appears to be more trouble... Maybe just change the manual to account for the extra MP. It really is a risk/reward move for rushing into an attack, it could be blunted. A purposeful move/combat sequence is thinking ahead. I've played both ways during a game, deselect/continuous movement, never really noticed. I should read the manual closer.

pjg100 -> RE: Not all attacks cost 1 action point (5/6/2020 11:27:08 PM)
If it is simply an artifact of whether the player deselects before attacking then it would be my preference to have it changed, either to always cost the attacker 1 AP or to something more like a breakthrough mechanism in which the attacker only loses an AP for attacking under certain circumstances. I can see scenarios in which you would want to move a unit into attack position, then move another unit - possibly to cut off a retreat route, or to lift FOW further ahead, etc. -- then attack with the first unit. Why should this sequence be penalized? I can also see scenarios in which simple mistakes in unit movement sequencing could lead to frustration. Given that armies only have 3/4 AP to begin with, this is a non-trivial issue. Of course, this assumes that the fix would be a rifle shot not a blunderbuss - don't know how difficult or how tailored it would be. Anyway, it's good to know how the mechanic actually works. Won't hinder my enjoyment of the game.

Hubert Cater -> RE: Not all attacks cost 1 action point (5/7/2020 2:35:30 PM)
This could potentially be semantics, but moving a unit and deselecting it does not technically penalize you since this is the way it should work, e.g. this part of the mechanism is accurate and any "fix" or change that would possibly be considered is to simply have a move/attack without deselection cost you the same. Initially I wrote above you gain 1 AP, but really you lose one AP less from the error and I amended my response above to reflect that. In terms of frustration from the examples you've provided, I can halfway see the point, and I only say this as the game has literally worked this way since the first day of the War in Europe release, over 3 years ago, and has only just been caught now etc. Sure, now that we see how it works one might be counting those APs more closely, but at the same time, there have been zero complaints about this mechanic for over 3 years as no one even knew there was an issue, e.g. that's how subtle and unnoticeable it has been. The fear really is that if we change it now, it will be very noticeable in game and we are not sure that is what we really want at this point. For an example, most attacks on Poland and France are probably to the point of muscle memory for long time players. Trying that now with a purposeful move, deselect, and then attack for each unit move to use all APs as you should (e.g. to mimic what the "fix" would implement) is likely to play out very differently. Perhaps trying a game up until the Fall of France by doing this and one can have a better idea of the potential concerns here.

Christolos -> RE: Not all attacks cost 1 action point (5/7/2020 2:44:25 PM)
Interesting discussion. If we are to think of it as not gaining an AP but rather losing one if a unit is deselected, we could think of it as merely losing attack momentum/initiative. I.e., as though hesitating before an attack delays the attack long enough as to not be able to happen within the timeframe of the same turn. Of course, pjg100 makes a good point about wanting to coordinate with/move other units in place/scout ahead before attacking, but not being able to do this could perhaps also be thought of as one unit charging ahead alone and attacking alone not to lose an AP... I imagine the same thing happens in SC-WiE and in SC-WWI, right? C

HamburgerMeat -> RE: Not all attacks cost 1 action point (5/7/2020 2:54:46 PM)
If it is to remain for the time being, perhaps it would be best to remove the AP loss on attack for now while the issue is still under consideration?

Hubert Cater -> RE: Not all attacks cost 1 action point (5/7/2020 4:02:53 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Christolos I imagine the same thing happens in SC-WiE and in SC-WWI, right? Yes, this is the same for all games since day one. pjg100 definitely wins the prize here for finding this after so many years.

Tanaka -> RE: Not all attacks cost 1 action point (5/7/2020 4:18:29 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Hubert Cater This could potentially be semantics, but moving a unit and deselecting it does not technically penalize you since this is the way it should work, e.g. this part of the mechanism is accurate and any "fix" or change that would possibly be considered is to simply have a move/attack without deselection cost you the same. Initially I wrote above you gain 1 AP, but really you lose one AP less from the error and I amended my response above to reflect that. In terms of frustration from the examples you've provided, I can halfway see the point, and I only say this as the game has literally worked this way since the first day of the War in Europe release, over 3 years ago, and has only just been caught now etc. Sure, now that we see how it works one might be counting those APs more closely, but at the same time, there have been zero complaints about this mechanic for over 3 years as no one even knew there was an issue, e.g. that's how subtle and unnoticeable it has been. The fear really is that if we change it now, it will be very noticeable in game and we are not sure that is what we really want at this point. For an example, most attacks on Poland and France are probably to the point of muscle memory for long time players. Trying that now with a purposeful move, deselect, and then attack for each unit move to use all APs as you should (e.g. to mimic what the "fix" would implement) is likely to play out very differently. Perhaps trying a game up until the Fall of France by doing this and one can have a better idea of the potential concerns here. But again people complain you can capture Poland in one turn and this would slow that down. I'm all for this fix especially if it can be exploited by players. Having to learn new things for people set in their ways? People are also having to relearn not being able to reveal every unit on a coast with ships which has only made the game better. What is the difference? To me it would refresh the series and like the ship scouting change would only improve the series.

Hubert Cater -> RE: Not all attacks cost 1 action point (5/7/2020 6:04:09 PM)
quote: But again people complain you can capture Poland in one turn and this would slow that down. I'm all for this fix especially if it can be exploited by players. Having to learn new things for people set in their ways? People are also having to relearn not being able to reveal every unit on a coast with ships which has only made the game better. What is the difference? To me it would refresh the series and like the ship scouting change would only improve the series. I think in this case it is not so much about having to learn new things, or even addressing a near universal concern about exploit. It is more of an anomaly, only now discovered after 3 years of game life. So while from your end you might feel it would be a good thing, generally speaking, to slow things down, I'm not so sure this is more widely felt. Is this what players generally really want, e.g. less movement and a slowing of the game down? Keeping in mind for example, that this will potentially be a considerable change and have an impact on the entire game and well beyond Poland, which in Poland's case, arguably, could be addressed in other ways if Poland is such a concern etc.

Tanaka -> RE: Not all attacks cost 1 action point (5/7/2020 7:09:46 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Hubert Cater quote: But again people complain you can capture Poland in one turn and this would slow that down. I'm all for this fix especially if it can be exploited by players. Having to learn new things for people set in their ways? People are also having to relearn not being able to reveal every unit on a coast with ships which has only made the game better. What is the difference? To me it would refresh the series and like the ship scouting change would only improve the series. I think in this case it is not so much about having to learn new things, or even addressing a near universal concern about exploit. It is more of an anomaly, only now discovered after 3 years of game life. So while from your end you might feel it would be a good thing, generally speaking, to slow things down, I'm not so sure this is more widely felt. Is this what players generally really want, e.g. less movement and a slowing of the game down? Keeping in mind for example, that this will potentially be a considerable change and have an impact on the entire game and well beyond Poland, which in Poland's case, arguably, could be addressed in other ways if Poland is such a concern etc. Yes it is not just Poland to me it seems most think the Axis are too fast and overpowering in Poland, France, Russia, China, etc...this seems like an easy small fix that would temper things a bit. Instead of for example just adding more allied units that has been done in recent patches. Is there a way to fix this in the editor to try things out?

Hubert Cater -> RE: Not all attacks cost 1 action point (5/7/2020 7:16:19 PM)
Unfortunately no, there is no setting in the Editor for this. The only way to test this in game is to play by purposefully moving a unit and deselecting it, and then selecting it again for combat. This way it registers the full AP loss for any move/attack sequences.

stormbringer3 -> RE: Not all attacks cost 1 action point (5/8/2020 2:33:36 PM)
Does this happen in WiE too? Thanks.

Hubert Cater -> RE: Not all attacks cost 1 action point (5/8/2020 2:56:20 PM)
Yes, this is a quirk in all the games as it is the same core game engine. Addressing this, which would reduce potential unit movement/mobility by 1 AP for any move/attack sequence without deselection of the unit would then apply to all 3 games, e.g. WiE, WaW, WWI. This is truthfully why we are hesitant to rush fix this without getting a better handle on possible consequences. For example, what might possibly feel like a good fit for one game, might not necessarily be the same for another and so on.

Dalwin -> RE: Not all attacks cost 1 action point (5/8/2020 6:05:03 PM)
I really think this should be fixed, especially after hearing details of how to take advantage of this bug consistently. If there are undesired changes to tempo something could be tweaked to allow for that, e.g. take a couple of strength points away from the Polish army perhaps. Increasing mobility of the more mobile units might be a good way to go. Tanks and mech could be given one more AP. Also the mobility unit upgrade is quite expensive compared to other upgrades. The MPP cost of this could be reduced. I know that my most frequent opponents do not visit this forum, so now I either have to obsess over deselecting the unit every time I want to move and attack, or I get an unfair advantage. To me both of these are worse than the possible tempo changes from fixing the bug. I do often point out subtleties of game mechanics to my opponents out of a sense of fair play, but I fear that in this case, doing so might erode their confidence in the game in general.

Hubert Cater -> RE: Not all attacks cost 1 action point (5/8/2020 7:27:27 PM)
Just to add to the discussion here, there is one additional, and arguably key game mechanic difference in place here that differentiates between the following: A) a regular move and attack without de-selection versus B) move, deselect and then select again and attack With A), a player moves in boldly and attacks without any further FoW reveal of the map, whereas with B), once you deselect, the unit does a full visual FoW reveal. This can likely in some cases give a player pause on whether they wish to follow through on a planned attack. It is subtle, but there is a difference, and perhaps it could be argued that in this case, B), when you de-select, that extra AP cost is the price to pay for the full FoW reveal, e.g. the reveal you do not receive under A) where you only lose AP for the move you have made, same as under B) when considering just the unit movement costs alone. If this is the case, then we can reconsider whether this is truly a bug or not. I just suggest this because if we "fix" this to have it cost you the same number of AP for either A) or B), then it would actually be more advantageous to do B) whenever you plan to move and attack as it gives you the full FoW reveal prior to an attack. A) becomes fully disadvantageous even though it is more fluid in game and less tedious to constantly be deselecting a unit prior to an attack. Generally speaking, we would assume players would want less tedium, e.g. less clicks, in their game play, and right now that exists in game if we acknowledge the differences and keep everything as is.

Tanaka -> RE: Not all attacks cost 1 action point (5/9/2020 1:55:52 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Hubert Cater Just to add to the discussion here, there is one additional, and arguably key game mechanic difference in place here that differentiates between the following: A) a regular move and attack without de-selection versus B) move, deselect and then select again and attack With A), a player moves in boldly and attacks without any further FoW reveal of the map, whereas with B), once you deselect, the unit does a full visual FoW reveal. This can likely in some cases give a player pause on whether they wish to follow through on a planned attack. It is subtle, but there is a difference, and perhaps it could be argued that in this case, B), when you de-select, that extra AP cost is the price to pay for the full FoW reveal, e.g. the reveal you do not receive under A) where you only lose AP for the move you have made, same as under B) when considering just the unit movement costs alone. If this is the case, then we can reconsider whether this is truly a bug or not. I just suggest this because if we "fix" this to have it cost you the same number of AP for either A) or B), then it would actually be more advantageous to do B) whenever you plan to move and attack as it gives you the full FoW reveal prior to an attack. A) becomes fully disadvantageous even though it is more fluid in game and less tedious to constantly be deselecting a unit prior to an attack. Generally speaking, we would assume players would want less tedium, e.g. less clicks, in their game play, and right now that exists in game if we acknowledge the differences and keep everything as is. Hmm interesting are you saying the game already works this way with FOW unit deselect or that you guys would change it to do this? If it already works that way that certainly does add to the conundrum...

Dalwin -> RE: Not all attacks cost 1 action point (5/9/2020 2:38:23 AM)
It is not as simple as getting the bonus AP because you "rushed in there." You get the same effect of not having deselected the unit whether you go three hexes in one click or go one hex three times without deselecting. All that matters for the bug is that on the last hex moved you do not deselect. I reject the implied reconnaissance argument.

Simulacra53 -> RE: Not all attacks cost 1 action point (5/9/2020 7:18:46 AM)
If it has been in the game since the beginning, keep it in and call it a feature. Because it was actually a clever design that favors the bold and you just forgot about it. �Pour les vaincre, messieurs, il nous faut de l'audace, encore de l'audace, toujours de l'audace, et la France est sauv�e.� meets �Attaque � outrance� The decisive player who takes direct action after moving is provided a bonus point. Generals like the German Von Fran�ois or Patton would agree. [:D]

Page: [1] 2 next > >>

Forum Software © ASPPlayground.NET Advanced Edition 2.4.5 ANSI

0.75