Matrix Games Forums

Forums  Register  Login  Photo Gallery  Member List  Search  Calendars  FAQ 

My Profile  Inbox  Address Book  My Subscription  My Forums  Log Out

RE: Basic Unit Movement

 
View related threads: (in this forum | in all forums)

Logged in as: Guest
Users viewing this topic: none
  Printable Version
All Forums >> [Current Games From Matrix.] >> [World War II] >> Norm Koger's The Operational Art Of War III >> Scenario Design >> RE: Basic Unit Movement Page: <<   < prev  1 [2]
Login
Message << Older Topic   Newer Topic >>
RE: Basic Unit Movement - 11/13/2007 9:23:21 PM   
Curtis Lemay


Posts: 10174
Joined: 9/17/2004
From: Houston, TX
Status: online

quote:

ORIGINAL: golden delicious
I have adjectives for Bob (intelligent, inventive, often mistaken, unbelievably stubborn). I wouldn't say they're names.


Translation: I disagree with Ben from time to time.

(in reply to golden delicious)
Post #: 31
RE: Basic Unit Movement - 11/13/2007 9:29:26 PM   
Curtis Lemay


Posts: 10174
Joined: 9/17/2004
From: Houston, TX
Status: online

quote:

ORIGINAL: Curtis Lemay

Instead of ZOCs you'll have actual units that would have to be cleared. Hardly "blindingly obvious" that it would be easier - especially in light of my counter example of "Kaiserschlacht 1918".


I want to add to this: There will be the same 10 combat rounds in each case. So you'll have 10 rounds to destroy that one division-sized unit, and those same 10 rounds to plow through 15 units deployed in depth. And there are issues with hex conversion. That will be much more debilitating at 5km/hex than at 25km/hex. Extra recon can address it somewhat, but combat losses and supply/readiness drops will undo that.

It really is debatable which situation will be better or worse for the defenders.

(in reply to Curtis Lemay)
Post #: 32
RE: Basic Unit Movement - 11/13/2007 9:38:56 PM   
Curtis Lemay


Posts: 10174
Joined: 9/17/2004
From: Houston, TX
Status: online

quote:

ORIGINAL: golden delicious
Not exactly at extreme scale combinations, then. Movement rates can't get particularly high in either scenario.


They are definitely higher in the 2.5km version than in the 5km version. Yet it had no impact on the results. It's a clear counter example.

quote:

Because in CFNA the movement rates are so high that motorised units can swing very rapidly through enemy forces which remain paralysed until after the action is complete.


As would a 25km/hex, division-scale simulation. CFNA really is explosive - as was the historical desert war. That explains why CFNA works pretty well.

quote:

Ah- so scenarios outside the scope of TOAW.


The 50km/hex, 6-hour turn environment is, by definition, within the scope of TOAW. What would anyone use that environment for but to focus on some naval and/or air subject? And, if so, wouldn't they want historical movement allowances?

(in reply to golden delicious)
Post #: 33
RE: Basic Unit Movement - 11/14/2007 11:15:04 AM   
golden delicious


Posts: 4750
Joined: 9/5/2000
From: London, Surrey, United Kingdom
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: Fungwu

Well what if I make a unit with 200 cannons and 200 horses, and 199 horses get killed, should that last horse really be able to pull all of the cannons at once?


Fortunately, this will never happen unless you have loads of replacements for artillery but none for horse teams.

In your other example, 200 guns could be pulled more slowly by 150 teams (try it, it is slower than 200 teams), presumably by having six horses instead of eight on each gun, or whatever.

quote:

Also the same problem exists if you use trucks instead of horse teams, but I guess no one ever said how many trucks were in a "truck" right?


Actually this is truer than you meant. In TOAW 200-300 trucks is plenty for a division. A 1940 US infantry division had over 1,000 trucks and numerous other vehicles- and the infantry were expected to walk. The TOAW truck is a tool for changing the movement rate of the divisions. It's not one actual truck.

< Message edited by golden delicious -- 11/14/2007 11:16:51 AM >


_____________________________

"Event 902: Bob Cross slays dragons!"

http://www.savemstateathletics.com/tdg/

(in reply to Fungwu)
Post #: 34
RE: Basic Unit Movement - 11/14/2007 11:37:54 AM   
golden delicious


Posts: 4750
Joined: 9/5/2000
From: London, Surrey, United Kingdom
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Curtis Lemay

They are definitely higher in the 2.5km version than in the 5km version. Yet it had no impact on the results. It's a clear counter example.


But as I've said, you're still operating with TOAW's norms because the move rates never get that high.

quote:

As would a 25km/hex, division-scale simulation. CFNA really is explosive - as was the historical desert war. That explains why CFNA works pretty well.


Sure- except that the British player can do just the same thing.

quote:

The 50km/hex, 6-hour turn environment is, by definition, within the scope of TOAW.


In about the same way that I could use my wheeled office chair as a road vehicle. You'd get much better performance from a different approach.

quote:

What would anyone use that environment for but to focus on some naval and/or air subject? And, if so, wouldn't they want historical movement allowances?


It seems a moot point, as everything else will be wrong as well, due to problems with other parts of TOAW.

_____________________________

"Event 902: Bob Cross slays dragons!"

http://www.savemstateathletics.com/tdg/

(in reply to Curtis Lemay)
Post #: 35
RE: Basic Unit Movement - 11/15/2007 2:44:51 AM   
Fungwu

 

Posts: 161
Joined: 8/22/2007
Status: offline
"TOAW truck is a tool for changing the movement rate of the divisions. It's not one actual truck"

Huh? So divisions have phantom trucks that only exist in the 7th dimension? Man, you blew my mind.



(in reply to golden delicious)
Post #: 36
RE: Basic Unit Movement - 11/15/2007 2:57:32 AM   
Szilard

 

Posts: 275
Joined: 1/3/2001
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Fungwu

"TOAW truck is a tool for changing the movement rate of the divisions. It's not one actual truck"

Huh? So divisions have phantom trucks that only exist in the 7th dimension? Man, you blew my mind.





It's true, though. You have to design the rest of the unit first, then add in just enough transport to give the "right" result.

Dunno why things were designed this way (something to do with behavior on the defense?), and I've never been sure how it squares with traffic congestion. Eg in a France 40 scenario I'd want German infantry divisions to be relatively clumsy formations on the move, with long road-clogging waggon trains, major obstacles to panzer formations if allowed to get in front of them. But I'm not sure if they will actually behave that way, if they're designed with just enough transports to give the right mobility.

Anyway, it's one of those things which should be talked about in the manual, but isn't. IIRC, it actually took quite a while before scenario designers twigged to it, back in the day.

(in reply to Fungwu)
Post #: 37
RE: Basic Unit Movement - 11/15/2007 3:09:39 AM   
Szilard

 

Posts: 275
Joined: 1/3/2001
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Szilard


quote:

ORIGINAL: Fungwu

"TOAW truck is a tool for changing the movement rate of the divisions. It's not one actual truck"

Huh? So divisions have phantom trucks that only exist in the 7th dimension? Man, you blew my mind.





It's true, though. You have to design the rest of the unit first, then add in just enough transport to give the "right" result.

Dunno why things were designed this way (something to do with behavior on the defense?), and I've never been sure how it squares with traffic congestion. Eg in a France 40 scenario I'd want German infantry divisions to be relatively clumsy formations on the move, with long road-clogging waggon trains, major obstacles to panzer formations if allowed to get in front of them. But I'm not sure if they will actually behave that way, if they're designed with just enough transports to give the right mobility.

(And unit weights, for sea transport - could be wrong but from things I've tinkered with it seems very difficult to arrange sea transport levels which will work reasonably; if you set it at the "right" level for so many waggon-transport inf divisions, it will be way below the level you'd expect for armored divisions, and so on.)

Anyway, it's one of those things which should be talked about in the manual, but isn't. IIRC, it actually took quite a while before scenario designers twigged to it, back in the day.


(in reply to Szilard)
Post #: 38
RE: Basic Unit Movement - 11/15/2007 4:46:48 AM   
Curtis Lemay


Posts: 10174
Joined: 9/17/2004
From: Houston, TX
Status: online
quote:

ORIGINAL: golden delicious


quote:

ORIGINAL: Curtis Lemay
As would a 25km/hex, division-scale simulation. CFNA really is explosive - as was the historical desert war. That explains why CFNA works pretty well.


Sure- except that the British player can do just the same thing.


As did his historical counterpart in O'Connor's Raid, Crusader, and El Alamein. It was a see-saw campaign.

And, note that at least one designer out there thought CFNA was too stodgy. He took my map and redesigned the forces at the Regimental scale. Got rid of a lot of the sand terrain too, just to speed things up. This scenario went on to become part of the TOAW III scenario collection. It's called "Rommel in North Africa 1941-42".

< Message edited by Curtis Lemay -- 11/15/2007 4:47:59 AM >

(in reply to golden delicious)
Post #: 39
RE: Basic Unit Movement - 11/15/2007 3:49:35 PM   
golden delicious


Posts: 4750
Joined: 9/5/2000
From: London, Surrey, United Kingdom
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Szilard

Dunno why things were designed this way


I'd say it's because a lot of the trucks in the TO&E aren't moving anything which appears in the unit. Hauling supplies a lot of the time, moving wounded, field kitchen, etc.

quote:

(something to do with behavior on the defense?), and I've never been sure how it squares with traffic congestion. Eg in a France 40 scenario I'd want German infantry divisions to be relatively clumsy formations on the move, with long road-clogging waggon trains, major obstacles to panzer formations if allowed to get in front of them. But I'm not sure if they will actually behave that way, if they're designed with just enough transports to give the right mobility.


In this case I'd advise putting vast numbers of horse teams in the artillery units.

quote:

Anyway, it's one of those things which should be talked about in the manual, but isn't. IIRC, it actually took quite a while before scenario designers twigged to it, back in the day.


Well, the system changed between Volume I and COW. In Volume I, you needed about three times as many trucks (still less than in real life, though)

_____________________________

"Event 902: Bob Cross slays dragons!"

http://www.savemstateathletics.com/tdg/

(in reply to Szilard)
Post #: 40
RE: Basic Unit Movement - 11/15/2007 3:56:33 PM   
golden delicious


Posts: 4750
Joined: 9/5/2000
From: London, Surrey, United Kingdom
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: Curtis Lemay

As did his historical counterpart in O'Connor's Raid, Crusader, and El Alamein. It was a see-saw campaign.


The British efforts to out-German the Germans were notable for their lack of success. In fact the success at Alamein was in forcing the Germans to fight a set-peice battle, which destroyed their advantages.

_____________________________

"Event 902: Bob Cross slays dragons!"

http://www.savemstateathletics.com/tdg/

(in reply to Curtis Lemay)
Post #: 41
RE: Basic Unit Movement - 11/16/2007 1:20:00 AM   
a white rabbit


Posts: 2366
Joined: 4/27/2002
From: ..under deconstruction..6N124E..
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Szilard


quote:

ORIGINAL: Fungwu

"TOAW truck is a tool for changing the movement rate of the divisions. It's not one actual truck"

Huh? So divisions have phantom trucks that only exist in the 7th dimension? Man, you blew my mind.





It's true, though. You have to design the rest of the unit first, then add in just enough transport to give the "right" result.

Dunno why things were designed this way (something to do with behavior on the defense?), and I've never been sure how it squares with traffic congestion. Eg in a France 40 scenario I'd want German infantry divisions to be relatively clumsy formations on the move, with long road-clogging waggon trains, major obstacles to panzer formations if allowed to get in front of them. But I'm not sure if they will actually behave that way, if they're designed with just enough transports to give the right mobility.

Anyway, it's one of those things which should be talked about in the manual, but isn't. IIRC, it actually took quite a while before scenario designers twigged to it, back in the day.



..you could try Bioeding an infantry squad that needs transport and add that as part of the division, the additional porters/horses/trucks would add to the div size..

_____________________________

..toodA, irmAb moAs'lyB 'exper'mentin'..,..beàn'tus all..?,

(in reply to Szilard)
Post #: 42
RE: Basic Unit Movement - 11/16/2007 6:05:37 AM   
ColinWright

 

Posts: 2604
Joined: 10/13/2005
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: Curtis Lemay


quote:

ORIGINAL: golden delicious
I have adjectives for Bob (intelligent, inventive, often mistaken, unbelievably stubborn). I wouldn't say they're names.


Translation: I disagree with Ben from time to time.


'Often mistaken,' 'unbelievably stubborn.' Somebody said that about you?

Nahh...you're the soul of compromise and conciliation. I should know: I can recognize a kindred spirit.


< Message edited by ColinWright -- 11/16/2007 6:06:57 AM >


_____________________________

I am not Charlie Hebdo

(in reply to Curtis Lemay)
Post #: 43
RE: Basic Unit Movement - 1/19/2014 3:47:17 PM   
Sertorius1


Posts: 274
Joined: 5/3/2008
From: Georgia, USA
Status: offline
Congratulations, Bob.

I've developed a search system based on you. When it comes to certain functions pertaining to the editor that either aren't covered or are done so in a superficial way I simply type in the term and "Curtis LeMay" in the appropriate search engine boxes. This saves me time because the odds are heavily in my favor that you have written about what I'm looking for.

(in reply to Fungwu)
Post #: 44
RE: Basic Unit Movement - 1/20/2014 2:26:52 AM   
Curtis Lemay


Posts: 10174
Joined: 9/17/2004
From: Houston, TX
Status: online

quote:

ORIGINAL: Sertorius1

Congratulations, Bob.

I've developed a search system based on you. When it comes to certain functions pertaining to the editor that either aren't covered or are done so in a superficial way I simply type in the term and "Curtis LeMay" in the appropriate search engine boxes. This saves me time because the odds are heavily in my favor that you have written about what I'm looking for.


Glad to be of assistance. Would work if you were interested in Thermoslutular bombs, too.

(in reply to Sertorius1)
Post #: 45
Page:   <<   < prev  1 [2]
All Forums >> [Current Games From Matrix.] >> [World War II] >> Norm Koger's The Operational Art Of War III >> Scenario Design >> RE: Basic Unit Movement Page: <<   < prev  1 [2]
Jump to:





New Messages No New Messages
Hot Topic w/ New Messages Hot Topic w/o New Messages
Locked w/ New Messages Locked w/o New Messages
 Post New Thread
 Reply to Message
 Post New Poll
 Submit Vote
 Delete My Own Post
 Delete My Own Thread
 Rate Posts


Forum Software © ASPPlayground.NET Advanced Edition 2.4.5 ANSI

0.148