Matrix Games Forums

A new update for Piercing Fortress EuropaNew screenshots for War in the West!Pike & Shot is now available!Server Maintenance Battle Academy 2 gets updated!Deal of the Week: Advanced Tactics Gold Ask Buzz Aldrin!Pike & Shot gets Release Date and Twitch Session!Deal of the Week Espana 1936War in the West coming in December!
Forums  Register  Login  Photo Gallery  Member List  Search  Calendars  FAQ 

My Profile  Inbox  Address Book  My Subscription  My Forums  Log Out

TOAW Scenario Sizes

 
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 >> TOAW Scenario Sizes Page: [1]
Login
Message << Older Topic   Newer Topic >>
TOAW Scenario Sizes - 11/22/2008 4:38:46 PM   
Curtis Lemay


Posts: 7107
Joined: 9/17/2004
From: Houston, TX
Status: offline
The attached zip contains my two spreadsheets that list the scenario sizes of the TOAW III scenarios (TOAW III Scenario sizes.xls) and most ACOW scenarios (ACOW Scenario sizes.xls). They were last updated June 07, so anything that's come out after that would be omitted.

Size is defined as number of units X number of turns / 1000.

Attachment (1)
Post #: 1
RE: TOAW Scenario Sizes - 11/22/2008 4:42:58 PM   
Curtis Lemay


Posts: 7107
Joined: 9/17/2004
From: Houston, TX
Status: offline
For example, here's a screenshot of the top of the TOAW III list.




Attachment (1)

(in reply to Curtis Lemay)
Post #: 2
RE: TOAW Scenario Sizes - 11/22/2008 4:44:51 PM   
Curtis Lemay


Posts: 7107
Joined: 9/17/2004
From: Houston, TX
Status: offline
Whereas here's a screenshot of the top of the ACOW list. Some of these may be hard to find copies of now.




Attachment (1)

(in reply to Curtis Lemay)
Post #: 3
RE: TOAW Scenario Sizes - 11/22/2008 8:46:40 PM   
rhinobones

 

Posts: 660
Joined: 2/17/2002
Status: offline
What information about a scenario is “Size” intended to provide? As an example, if you were told that a scenario has a Size of 150 what could you definitively tell a person about the scenario?

Think you would be better served if you divided total land units by the total land hexes and called the result unit density. At least that number would define a real characteristic of the scenario.

Regards, RhinoBones

(in reply to Curtis Lemay)
Post #: 4
RE: TOAW Scenario Sizes - 11/22/2008 9:34:29 PM   
Curtis Lemay


Posts: 7107
Joined: 9/17/2004
From: Houston, TX
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: rhinobones

What information about a scenario is “Size” intended to provide?


Relative effort required to play the scenario.

(in reply to rhinobones)
Post #: 5
RE: TOAW Scenario Sizes - 11/22/2008 10:15:43 PM   
rhinobones

 

Posts: 660
Joined: 2/17/2002
Status: offline
Relative ease . . . I can accept that as an explanation, however, we both know that there are plenty of exceptions to the general case.

Suggest you consider changing the name from Size to something more descriptive of the intent, such as Complexity or REP Factor, i.e. Relative Ease to Play Factor.

Regards, RhinoBones

(in reply to Curtis Lemay)
Post #: 6
RE: TOAW Scenario Sizes - 11/24/2008 5:17:12 PM   
ColinWright

 

Posts: 2600
Joined: 10/13/2005
Status: offline
I'd be inclined to add map size as a consideration in complexity -- perhaps not as heavily weighted as number of units and number of turns. Then, too, the event count would be a good indicator. A lot of events is going to correlate very positively with a lot of material to track and keep in mind.

We might wind up with a formula along the lines of a*w+b*x+c*y+d*z, w, x, y, and z being unit count, scenario length in turns, map size in hexes, and number of events respectively. a,b,c, and d would be the coefficients for these variables.

Naturally, the fact that scenario length in turns and number of events are inherently small values while map size in particular is an inherently huge number would have to be taken into account. For example, if we want map size and event count to be weighted equally and we determine that the average scenario has a map covering 50,000 hexes and has one hundred events, we'd want the coefficient for event count to be five hundred times that of map size.

_____________________________

"...this country belongs to us, to the white man."

-- Israeli Interior Minister Eli Yishai, interview published on 6/3/2012. Interesting world.

(in reply to rhinobones)
Post #: 7
RE: TOAW Scenario Sizes - 11/29/2008 1:11:53 AM   
golden delicious


Posts: 4675
Joined: 9/5/2000
From: London, Surrey, United Kingdom
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: ColinWright

We might wind up with a formula along the lines of a*w+b*x+c*y+d*z, w, x, y, and z being unit count, scenario length in turns, map size in hexes, and number of events respectively. a,b,c, and d would be the coefficients for these variables.


More complicated than that, even. All else being equal, is a scenario with 10,000 hexes 100 times more complex than one with 100 hexes? I'd say not; in most scenarios, the active area will be a long, thin line. So you'd almost want the square root of the map size.

< Message edited by golden delicious -- 11/29/2008 1:12:46 AM >


_____________________________

"Event 902: Bob Cross slays dragons!"

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

(in reply to ColinWright)
Post #: 8
RE: TOAW Scenario Sizes - 11/29/2008 5:49:13 AM   
rhinobones

 

Posts: 660
Joined: 2/17/2002
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: golden delicious
. . . in most scenarios, the active area will be a long, thin line.


Long thin line? Sounds boring. Surely scenario designers can do better than that!

Regards, RhinoBones

(in reply to golden delicious)
Post #: 9
RE: TOAW Scenario Sizes - 11/29/2008 5:52:02 AM   
ColinWright

 

Posts: 2600
Joined: 10/13/2005
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: rhinobones


quote:

ORIGINAL: golden delicious
. . . in most scenarios, the active area will be a long, thin line.


Long thin line? Sounds boring. Surely scenario designers can do better than that!

Regards, RhinoBones


Why am I not surprised?


_____________________________

"...this country belongs to us, to the white man."

-- Israeli Interior Minister Eli Yishai, interview published on 6/3/2012. Interesting world.

(in reply to rhinobones)
Post #: 10
RE: TOAW Scenario Sizes - 11/29/2008 6:01:06 AM   
rhinobones

 

Posts: 660
Joined: 2/17/2002
Status: offline
Yes, why aren't you suprised? We are all just dying to know.

Regards, RhinoBones

< Message edited by rhinobones -- 11/29/2008 6:23:45 AM >

(in reply to ColinWright)
Post #: 11
RE: TOAW Scenario Sizes - 11/29/2008 11:26:35 PM   
golden delicious


Posts: 4675
Joined: 9/5/2000
From: London, Surrey, United Kingdom
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: rhinobones

Long thin line? Sounds boring. Surely scenario designers can do better than that!


I'm sorry, but if I'm simulating most battles in the real world in the 20th century, I would be remiss if I didn't simulate it as occuring over a long thin line.

Your preferences are not everyone else's preferences. You need to come to terms with this and move on.

< Message edited by golden delicious -- 11/30/2008 2:50:48 AM >


_____________________________

"Event 902: Bob Cross slays dragons!"

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

(in reply to rhinobones)
Post #: 12
RE: TOAW Scenario Sizes - 11/30/2008 10:35:40 PM   
rhinobones

 

Posts: 660
Joined: 2/17/2002
Status: offline
Sorry. I didn't mean to hurt your feelings.

Regards, RhinoBones

(in reply to golden delicious)
Post #: 13
RE: TOAW Scenario Sizes - 11/4/2013 12:14:13 PM   
Falcon1


Posts: 82
Joined: 4/30/2012
From: US
Status: offline
How does someone even approach playing a scenario with thousands of units??

(in reply to rhinobones)
Post #: 14
RE: TOAW Scenario Sizes - 11/4/2013 12:26:19 PM   
Oberst_Klink

 

Posts: 1311
Joined: 2/10/2008
From: Germany
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Falcon1

How does someone even approach playing a scenario with thousands of units??

One step at a time. Compared to all the decisions, micro-management let's say at WitP AE, even FitE is a piece of cake. I prefer scenarios with about 200-300 counters max, but others just love 1,000+ units on the map. Personal preference, really. ;)

Klink, Oberst

_____________________________

Ceterum censeo Carthaginem esse delendam
(Marcus Porcius Cato Censorius)

Visit the Gefechtsstand!

(in reply to Falcon1)
Post #: 15
RE: TOAW Scenario Sizes - 11/4/2013 2:13:51 PM   
Lobster


Posts: 187
Joined: 8/8/2013
From: Third rock from the Sun.
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Falcon1

How does someone even approach playing a scenario with thousands of units??


Study the map. Plan ahead where each division will be needed so you can send them on the proper routes. Plan where your main thrusts will be, where supply will be most difficult, where the best places for your air units will be. Plan, plan, plan.

Then after turn one realize all the plans are now worthless and throw all the plans in the trash and wing it.

(in reply to Falcon1)
Post #: 16
RE: TOAW Scenario Sizes - 11/11/2013 12:14:09 PM   
USXpat

 

Posts: 352
Joined: 8/26/2010
Status: offline
First, it starts with a cup of coffee, then turning up the volume with your favorite WWII music or modern hard rock equivalent thereof. After some SOS with a side order of bacon, and a fresh refill, one loads the scenario - skips the turn replay because all of the good stuff is at the end. Smart opponents always start moving units in areas other than the important areas. Watching the 8,000 movement replay has a low return -- one therefore assumes the worst case is happening everywhere. If it didn't happen this turn... it'll certainly be next turn.

From there, it is mainly a matter of continuous lines and zones of control, force preservation where possible, prioritizing reinforcements and concentrating force as needed. Same as smaller games.

Everyone has their own preferences. There are lots of smaller games out there, not quite as many monsters. TOAW's awesome because it has something for everyone.

I tend to like the monsters, for much the same reason as the Campaign series has linked campaigns in addition to scenarios, or perhaps from a different angle - why people like World of Warcraft, the long-term evolution of things.

The monsters then are like lots of small scenarios wrapped up into one - interconnected, where what happens in one area can impact another. Within these kinds of frameworks, taking an objective -- Warsaw, Kharkov, Moscow, Baku, Paris or Berlin is somewhat less important than being able to "survive the experience".

But it is the somethin' for everyone thing that makes TOAW + 15 years a lot more than perhaps it was intended to be and with some extra effort - perhaps CAN be. The original TOAW was a lot like a great double cheeseburger. Now... it's like a great double chili cheeseburger with lots of onions and a heaping side order of jalapenos with a frosty mug of beer - and a keg or two of that waiting behind it. TOAW may never be perfected, by the time it is, our standards for it will have changed.

AUM.


(in reply to Falcon1)
Post #: 17
Page:   [1]
All Forums >> [Current Games From Matrix.] >> [World War II] >> Norm Koger's The Operational Art Of War III >> Scenario Design >> TOAW Scenario Sizes Page: [1]
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

0.086