RE: Range by hex (Full Version)

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



Message

rhinobones -> RE: Range by hex (5/19/2021 7:56:56 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: golden delicious

Your "simple test" has an extremely small sample size.


Well, duh . . . that’s why it was called ‘simple”.

A couple of critical things you didn’t mention 1) scale and 2) whether the observed units clustered near the observer or were randomly dispersed. A picture of the test set up, and results, would be nice.

Regards



golden delicious -> RE: Range by hex (5/20/2021 8:31:35 AM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: rhinobones

A couple of critical things you didn’t mention 1) scale and 2) whether the observed units clustered near the observer or were randomly dispersed. A picture of the test set up, and results, would be nice.

Regards



The scale is irrelevant. The units were arranged in concentric rings around a single observer. Observed units tended to cluster.

I'd need to post eleven screenshots to show everything, what matters is the data. Feel free to repeat the test yourself, it took me about five minutes.



golden delicious -> RE: Range by hex (5/20/2021 8:35:19 AM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: Lobster

That make sense. The more units there are the higher probability you will observe something.


That's not what the results are showing at all. The probability of observing any single unit went up with distance.

Like I said, that is likely a data artefact. I have a fairly high degree of confidence that theatre recon gives the force an equal % chance to observe each hex on the map.

If your force is doing its recon by interrogating POWs, then you'll want theatre recon at zero. The player would then be advised to take notes as to what units are spotted on the frontline, their condition etc.



jmlima -> RE: Range by hex (5/20/2021 9:02:16 AM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: golden delicious


quote:

ORIGINAL: Curtis Lemay


Never heard of it. Can such games be devised? Sure. Have most Napoleonic games foregone such factors? Yep.


I'm sure they have- because they're not interested in being accurate simulations.


Actually, most Napoleonic miniature sets of rules still have rules for aide-de-camp. Most boardgames either have them, or abstract them into other mechanisms thus keeping the principle present (Zucker's games for ex). Even in PC games this is recognized as an issue. HPS latest patches for Napoleonic game introduce a very rough mechanism to prevent units from doing certain types of operations outside a theoretical orders range.



Lobster -> RE: Range by hex (5/20/2021 3:12:24 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: golden delicious

That's not what the results are showing at all. The probability of observing any single unit went up with distance.



All things being equal it's easier to observe something that's far away then something closer? That makes zero sense. Are you saying that is how the game works?



rhinobones -> RE: Range by hex (5/20/2021 4:49:25 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: golden delicious
The scale is irrelevant.


The question wasn’t about relevancy, it was about scale.

quote:


The units were arranged in concentric rings around a single observer.


For one who is so adamant about historical accuracy, seems odd that you would construct such an unrealistic test.

quote:


Observed units tended to cluster.


They cluster near the observer; this makes my point. Take a look at some of the Eastern Front AARs. Can the Germans see Russian units equally from the front all the way to the Urals, no. They can see units close to their front, decreasing the further east they look. Observation is not based on recon value alone but adjusted for a distance component. Recon operates much like supply. Also note that distance decreases the observer’s intelligence regarding unit size, strength, supply and entrenchment.

quote:


I'd need to post eleven screenshots to show everything


One representative screenshot would be sufficient.


In my test observed probability decreased with distance. Scale 2.5 km/hex, Theater Recon 10. For fun in the future, I might add a recon squad to the observer or place the observer on high ground just to see if a difference exists.




[image]local://upfiles/5722/E43B500E272A4C7CA75825AB718F0475.jpg[/image]



golden delicious -> RE: Range by hex (5/20/2021 5:43:17 PM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: rhinobones

For one who is so adamant about historical accuracy, seems odd that you would construct such an unrealistic test.


I'm concerned with how the game works- and that's a scientific question which requires a scientific test.

quote:

They cluster near the observer; this makes my point.


No- they clustered at a distance. But this is anecdotal, I might have just been seeing a pattern in randomness.

quote:

One representative screenshot would be sufficient.


Attached. Note that the visibility of units adjacent to a friendly unit is irrelevant as this is guaranteed regardless of theatre recon. I've colour-coded the rings so you can easily see without counting the distance of each unit.

[image]local://upfiles/1060/1DDD97972BAC499DAB64FB36E3CFA5D4.jpg[/image]



golden delicious -> RE: Range by hex (5/20/2021 5:48:40 PM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: Lobster


All things being equal it's easier to observe something that's far away then something closer? That makes zero sense. Are you saying that is how the game works?


I'm saying that's my data. I think if you ran the test 100 times instead of 10 times this variation would disappear and you'd get uniform results at any distance. That's why it's called "theatre recon".

This is instructive (from the manual):
Theater Reconnaissance is more likely to observe locations with Roads, Anchorage locations, Airbas­es, or large concentrations of Motorized equipment. Airfields with Air units will almost certainly be observed. Theater Reconnaissance is less likely to observe locations with Hills, Badlands, Mountains, Dense Urban, Light Woods, Jungle, or Forest terrain, as well as locations with hazy or (especially) overcast visibility conditions. Theater Reconnaissance is also less effective during night Turns

Says nothing about distance- except that adjacent units are observed using a different mechanism.



governato -> Recon levels (5/20/2021 6:12:44 PM)

Rhinobones I really appreciate bringing the scientific method to this issue.
Test scenarios are the way to go and yeah it always starts with a small sample.

I will send you a PM and maybe we can trade scenarios for tests I'd be happy to help on this topic. ( ad I have one on tank vs infantry AT tests I am working on).

Having a common base makes for constructive discussions :)



rhinobones -> RE: Range by hex (5/20/2021 7:12:18 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: golden delicious
This is instructive (from the manual):
Theater Reconnaissance is more likely to observe locations with Roads, Anchorage locations, Airbas­es, or large concentrations of Motorized equipment. Airfields with Air units will almost certainly be observed. Theater Reconnaissance is less likely to observe locations with Hills, Badlands, Mountains, Dense Urban, Light Woods, Jungle, or Forest terrain, as well as locations with hazy or (especially) overcast visibility conditions. Theater Reconnaissance is also less effective during night Turns

Says nothing about distance- except that adjacent units are observed using a different mechanism.


You’re saying the manual not stating definitively that “distance” impacts observation, is proof of your position. Really?

In your example the numbers are what they are, however, in the outer ring only 4 of 24 units are spotted and the space between spotted units increases proportionally. Certainly, appears that the ability to identify targets thins out as you go from the observer.

Regards




rhinobones -> RE: Range by hex (5/20/2021 7:14:43 PM)

deleted



jmlima -> RE: Range by hex (5/21/2021 8:09:52 AM)

...



jmlima -> RE: Range by hex (5/21/2021 8:14:19 AM)



quote:

ORIGINAL: rhinobones
... Certainly, appears that the ability to identify targets thins out as you go from the observer.

Regards




In % yes, in absolute numbers, no. Think therein lies the issue. Should it be easier to identify one unit close or 10 afar? One test show it's easier to identify 10 afar.

What's more interesting is that your two tests provide different results. Now that is what I would like to see explained. One provides a logical decrease of recon with distance, the other does not.



golden delicious -> RE: Range by hex (5/21/2021 3:21:38 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: rhinobones

In your example the numbers are what they are, however, in the outer ring only 4 of 24 units are spotted and the space between spotted units increases proportionally. Certainly, appears that the ability to identify targets thins out as you go from the observer.



What?

It's not a statistically significant sample, but the screenshot shows:
1 out of 12 units at 2 hexes
2 out of 18 units at 3 hexes
4 out of 24 units at 4 hexes

These resolve quite happily to 1/12th, 1/9th and 1/6th. It shows the opposite of what you say it shows.



golden delicious -> RE: Range by hex (5/21/2021 3:24:10 PM)

Incidentally, the manual also says peaks give a boost to detection of units up to 40km away from the unit sitting on the hex. So, if you fudge the map scale a bit (let's say say 40km actually means 5km, for example) you could cover it in peaks and get a good result- provided the battlefield is flat and featureless.



Page: <<   < prev  1 [2]

Valid CSS!




Forum Software © ASPPlayground.NET Advanced Edition 2.4.5 ANSI
0.5957031