Rebuilding bridges: a suggestion. (Full Version)

All Forums >> [New Releases from Matrix Games] >> The Operational Art of War IV



Message

Rescue193 -> Rebuilding bridges: a suggestion. (6/18/2020 8:53:47 PM)

When an Engineer unit capable of repairing a bridge enters a river or canal hex containing a blown bridge, and is ordered to repair that bridge, that unit looses the remnant of its movement allowance for that turn, which is fair enough because it takes time to do the job.

However, as soon as the order has been given the Game Engine does it sums and (if the repair is successful) the bridge is available for immediate use by other units. That’s not really military engineering, its Harry Potter’s Magic Sappers at work. It seems to me to me that a much better - and by that I mean realistic - way of doing things would for the Game Engine to perform the calculation at the end of the turn so that (if successful) the bridge would be reinstated at the beginning of the following turn.

For rebuilds over ‘normal’ rivers and canals the Engineering unit could still provide minor ferry support (I also think ‘fording’ rather than ‘ferrying’ might be better terminology but that’s another can of worms) to other units crossing the obstacle at whatever movement cost applies because the Engineering unit doesn’t have to move to do that anyway.

When it comes to Super Rivers and Suez Canals however - where it would be ‘ferrying’ rather than ‘fording’ - by delaying the reinstatement of the bridge until the beginning of the following turn other units would have to wait before they are able to cross the obstacle which does reflect reality. Improvising a ferry service is a slow, cumbersome and inefficient way of moving men and materiel across a major water obstacle.

True, in scenarios with multi-day+ turns this could be a serious handicap and maybe the ‘rule’ as it is written had that sort of scenario in mind. But if an army lacks the bridging and ferry resources it needs to achieve its objectives surely delay is the price it should have to pay? Bending reality is an ugly way to ‘fix’ the problem.

So, rebuilding bridges at the end of a turn rather than during a turn - any thoughts?



Lobster -> RE: Rebuilding bridges: a suggestion. (6/18/2020 10:19:06 PM)

Since a unit consumes it's entire remaining movement points to repair a bridge then it took them the entire turn to do it since movement points = time. So yeah, no one should be able to use the bridge until next turn. Unfortunately bridge repair and minor/major ferrying are abstract and don't represent the real world. Might as well leave it as it is.



TheeWarLord -> RE: Rebuilding bridges: a suggestion. (6/18/2020 11:42:23 PM)

I understand your rationale, but does seem to falter when you game with scenarios that are multiday, weekly even monthly. Some bridge building can also be improvised, as well. Capturing a blown bridge hex after a good fight, throwing up a bridge, and resuming your advance is realistic as well.



sPzAbt653 -> RE: Rebuilding bridges: a suggestion. (6/19/2020 5:49:50 AM)

quote:

But if an army lacks the bridging and ferry resources it needs to achieve its objectives surely delay is the price it should have to pay?

Most often the chances of repair are less than 100%. That reflects that a repair could occur at any time, but as you point out it will actually happen on what ever round that it is successful. Moving it from that point to the end of the turn might be too harsh. Maybe the genius developers can invent a Build Stamp similar to the Battle Time Stamps. Example: Unit with 50% chance to build takes 5 Rounds off movement of units crossing that rebuilt bridge that turn.



TheeWarLord -> RE: Rebuilding bridges: a suggestion. (6/20/2020 12:14:11 AM)

A decent compromise to mull over.



Simon Edmonds -> RE: Rebuilding bridges: a suggestion. (6/20/2020 3:16:35 AM)

If you change bridge repair from a chance event to a movement points related task that would make the use of a time stamp easier.



Lobster -> RE: Rebuilding bridges: a suggestion. (6/20/2020 3:40:29 AM)

The more movement points you have the better chance there is to repair the bridge.



Rescue193 -> RE: Rebuilding bridges: a suggestion. (6/20/2020 8:21:31 AM)

Thank you all for your thoughts and comments. I'm pleased you didn't find the idea too whimsical!

I rather like the "time stamp:movement points ratio" suggestion (could the boffins pull that one off I wonder?)

Also, I agree that moving the result of a successful rebuild to the end of a turn would be a tad harsh for scenarios with 'day+ turns'. But another thought did occur to me.

Might it be be possible to to put something in the "Designer Game Option Preferences" window that enable the designer to opt for bridge repair events to be moved to the end of the turn?

If it were possible the option could be selected for scenarios with shorter turn periods of, say, 3, 6 and 12 hours (and maybe day turns?) but it would be at the designers discretion and wouldn't have any impact on scenarios with day+ turns.

I don't have the faintest idea if adding such an option to the DGOP would be possible or would be any more, or any less, complex than implementing the time stamp:movement point ratio thing but I thought it might be a way to approach the problem.


Rescue193



Lobster -> RE: Rebuilding bridges: a suggestion. (6/20/2020 12:05:56 PM)

As I see it this is what needs fixing first:

12.1. Demolition / Bridge
repair (Advanced Rules)
Any unit can blow bridges. This can be done at any
time and at no cost.

It takes time to blow up a bridge to the point where it is useless and not just any Sadsack squad member can do it. Even I can dig a hole and put logs over it and then cover that with dirt. But I'd be hard pressed to place explosives and wire them all to take down a bridge. I might be able to do a fair job on a wooden bridge but steel and concrete, no way.




Rescue193 -> RE: Rebuilding bridges: a suggestion. (6/20/2020 1:21:49 PM)

Back in the good old days, when I did reckless stuff for a living, there used to be a saying that went something like: "In the time it takes you to see and think "bridge", I'll assess its size, note the type of construction, count the number of spans and estimate the volume and type of traffic, the direction of travel... and then... fly into the damned thing!"

I take your point about needing time and expertise to demolish a bridge, I always impose a 'house rule' on myself to only use engineers to do the job but I'm not sure how the game engine handles the task for the PO.

It seems to blow bridges at random and without regard for the presence, or otherwise, of "its own friendly units". Of course, the fact that I can't see them may be due to the 'fog of war' coupled to the fact that the bridge in question gets blown as a unit crosses it and I don't notice it. And, quite honestly, my interest has never been piqued sufficiently to find out what does happen on such occasions.

Quite some time a go (TOAW IIII vintage) I did enquire about the possibility of being able to put a "blow bridge" option in the Event Editor. The fantasy was that, a shell engineering unit could sit on a pre-wired bridge and, when opposition came within a given number of hexes, there'd be a given probability that the bridge could be blown. The beauty of it was - to my way of thinking - that it offered the possibility that the attacking side could rush the bridge and destroy, or drive off, the engineers before they could make a Big Bang. Once their work was (or wasn't) done the shell unit would simply be withdrawn. Well, I thought it was a neat idea but, sadly, it wasn't possible.

I might argue the toss with you as to whether your mod should come before mine (although I suppose rank hath privilege) but I think it'd be one of those 'chicken and egg' debates. If the boffins can fix one I doubt it'd be too much trouble to fix the other at the same time eh?

Rescue193








Lobster -> RE: Rebuilding bridges: a suggestion. (6/20/2020 1:49:04 PM)

Neither will happen so it's just for entertainment purposes. [;)]



Rescue193 -> RE: Rebuilding bridges: a suggestion. (6/20/2020 2:12:43 PM)

Whaaaat!!

Honestly. You mean there isn't a crack team of highly trained software boffins straining every sinew and synapse to implement these ideas even as I write?

C'mon, don't crush my fond and innocent imaginings under the cold hard steel of brutal logic - please.

Mutter mutter... just what you'd expect from a ruthless Shakespeare-quoting lobster that thinks he's an Irish squirrel... whinge whine... do they even have squirrels in Ireland?... grumble grumble... No I'm not crying... sob sob!... I've got something in my eye that's all.

Ho Hum!




rhinobones -> RE: Rebuilding bridges: a suggestion. (6/20/2020 5:49:42 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: Lobster

As I see it this is what needs fixing first:

12.1. Demolition / Bridge
repair (Advanced Rules)
Any unit can blow bridges. This can be done at any
time and at no cost.

It takes time to blow up a bridge to the point where it is useless and not just any Sadsack squad member can do it . . .


Would like to see this extended to include destruction of ports, airfields, fortifications, roads, supply depots and R/Rs. Conversely engineering units should be able to build all of these facilities. Proficiency, supply and unit size critical in accomplishing these tasks in a timely manner. Maybe this is being saved for TOAW CLXIII.

Regards



larryfulkerson -> RE: Rebuilding bridges: a suggestion. (6/20/2020 9:42:28 PM)

Expanded missions for TOAW aircraft units
As it happens I have a game of WITP-AE going on and that game has a plethera of missions for it's aircraft. Even night missions of every variety. I expecially like the "training" missions. Where the pilots can slowly increase their proficiency in a multitude of skills: straffe, ground bombing, escort, naval bombing, recon, etc. And you can move pilots from one squadron to another. Getting as a result the death star squadrons like the AVG in Burma. I like to move my best pilots to the best models of aircraft. Right now, early '42, my best plane is the P-38's and I need to move some of them to Australia. And the WITP-AE game engine also has a TRACOM group that contains the pilots that have over 80% experience and are masters in a number of skills to be instructor pilots in that they accellerate the training squadrons in their efforts to train their students. The students gain proficiency faster. You just assign one or more of the TRACOM pilots to the squadrons that need to be accellerated. There's a reserve of the various kinds of pilots: fighter pilots, bomber pilots, recon pilots, naval search pilots, ASM pilots, transport pilots, etc. These pilots can be moved to the squadrons that need them ASAP. They usually arrive at their new squadrons in a week or less. I have at least a dozen squadrons in the continental United States that do nothing but training. Some of the squadrons have over a hundred students in them. I consider a pilot "trained" when he reaches 70% proficiency. It usually takes almost a year to go from 24 to 70. And I'm churning out qualified pilots by the handfull.

Expand the missions for aircraft units
I'd like to see TOAW aircraft to be able to hit some of the targets that Steve mentioned: railroads, city factories, city manpower, ports, airfield infrastructure, etc. I'd like to see "night missions" to bypass the enemy CAP. There's so much more that can be done to make the game engine more realistic. And before I sign off let me just say that the "naval model" in TOAW needs more work to be more realistic.



Page: [1]

Valid CSS!




Forum Software © ASPPlayground.NET Advanced Edition 2.4.5 ANSI
0.765625