Matrix Games Forums

Forums  Register  Login  Photo Gallery  Member List  Search  Calendars  FAQ 

My Profile  Inbox  Address Book  My Subscription  My Forums  Log Out

The mobile immovable object

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

Logged in as: Guest
Users viewing this topic: none
  Printable Version
All Forums >> [New Releases from Matrix Games] >> The Operational Art of War IV >> The mobile immovable object Page: [1] 2   next >   >>
Login
Message << Older Topic   Newer Topic >>
The mobile immovable object - 2/12/2019 6:06:28 PM   
cathar1244

 

Posts: 277
Joined: 9/5/2009
Status: offline
So I'm wondering about air interdiction strikes. Do they only strike units on the move?

I ask because I have a situation in which a non-mobile SAM battery gets hit by air interdiction strikes.

But this one may be down to an equipment database glitch. Here is how the unit looks:


Note the "motorized movement" comment about the unit.

Yet the equipment cannot move by itself:



No movement type is selected. Should the box "static" be checked?

I'm wondering, if because "static" is not checked, the game attempts to move the unit but cannot because the equipment has no defined movement mode (horse, motorized, etc.) And if that failed movement attempt identifies the SAM battery as a "target of opportunity" for an interdiction strike.

Cheers
Post #: 1
RE: The mobile immovable object - 2/14/2019 5:12:32 PM   
cathar1244

 

Posts: 277
Joined: 9/5/2009
Status: offline
In another thread, the idea was advanced that a unit had to move to be hit by an air interdiction strike. After some testing, I can confirm this is not the case. In a simple scenario with an infantry unit on one side and an air unit on the other side, the infantry unit was subjected to an interdiction strike without having engaged in any activity. This explains why the SAM unit mentioned above was hit by interdiction strikes as well. Essentially what happens that is the computer looks for "targets of opportunity"; any such targets will (or, perhaps, only may) be subject to an air interdiction strike. This sequence can be seen in the TOAW log file.

quote:

AIRCombat:
AIRCombat:Target of opportunity: Air Defenders 1st Formation, ADA Battery.
.
.
.
AIRCombat:Interdiction attack (bombardment): Air Defenders 1st Formation, ADA Battery.
AIRCombat:bombard:26900,defend:310
Combat :
Combat : Smite: Air Defenders 1st Formation, ADA Battery, (bombardment), attrition%= 9.
Combat : Air Unit weapons firing on Air Defenders Rifle Squad.
Combat : Potentially effective hit on Air Defenders Rifle Squad by Air Unit weapon.
Combat : Rifle Squad destroyed. (specificAttrit=10)


... and so on. I want to do more testing to see if interdiction attacks directed by the computer, and bombardment strikes directed by a human player, result in differing effects against a target in given conditions.

Cheers

(in reply to cathar1244)
Post #: 2
RE: The mobile immovable object - 2/14/2019 9:03:26 PM   
Lobster


Posts: 2282
Joined: 8/8/2013
From: Third rock from the Sun.
Status: offline
Looks to me like it says the target of opportunity was the ADA Battery. Isn't that true? Without knowing anything more than the little snippet it's hard to say what happened.

_____________________________

http://www.operationbarbarossa.net/

"Getting back to reality...I'll only go as a tourist!"

(in reply to cathar1244)
Post #: 3
RE: The mobile immovable object - 2/14/2019 9:18:19 PM   
Lobster


Posts: 2282
Joined: 8/8/2013
From: Third rock from the Sun.
Status: offline
This is all I know concerning interdiction.

9.1.4 Air Superiority and Interdiction
Units assigned Interdiction Missions will attempt to intercept enemy Land units when those
Land units move and also impair your opponent’s ability to supply his Force. Units performing
Interdiction Missions are subject to Interdiction by enemy Air units with Air Superiority missions
and are protected by friendly units with Air Superiority missions.
Interdiction is less effective in poor weather and on night Turns.

10.4.8 Interdiction Missions
If your opponent has any Air units flying Interdiction Missions, it is possible that your unit may
come under Air Attack during Movement. The chance for this is proportional to your opponent’s
Local Interdiction Level. Units on Roads or using Rail Movement are particularly vulnerable to
Interdiction Missions. Enemy Air units striking your units might be intercepted by your Local Air
Superiority effort, which in Turn are subject to attack by your opponent’s Local Air Superiority.

16.7 The Air Briefing
The Air Briefing gives a brief rundown of the current situation in the air over the Theater. It can
be accessed by clicking View and selecting Air Briefing.
Current Turn aircraft losses are listed in the Aircraft Losses pane. Only aircraft actually destroyed
are listed. You will always know your own losses exactly, but enemy losses are subject
to misinformation. Pilots are notorious for inflating and double-reporting enemy planes shot
down. Damaged aircraft (those sent to the Replacement Pool) are not included in the Loss
Report.
The Air Superiority pane shows the Theater Air Superiority levels, a general indicator of who
controls the air over the Theater.
The Interdiction pane shows both Forces’ Theater Interdiction Levels, a general gauge of each
Force’s efforts to impair enemy supply distribution and land unit movement.

Use the Control Bar Exit button to exit the window.



_____________________________

http://www.operationbarbarossa.net/

"Getting back to reality...I'll only go as a tourist!"

(in reply to cathar1244)
Post #: 4
RE: The mobile immovable object - 2/15/2019 1:19:47 AM   
larryfulkerson


Posts: 37329
Joined: 4/17/2005
From: Tucson, AZ
Status: offline
quote:

I want to do more testing to see if interdiction attacks directed by the computer, and bombardment strikes directed by a human player, result in differing effects against a target in given conditions.

I think that strikes directed by the player use their full strength but that a game engine generated strike uses only half it's strength. But that memory had a long way to go to surface in my brain...I could be wrong.

_____________________________

"When you're dead you don't know you're dead. All the pain is felt by others. The same thing happens when you're stupid."

(in reply to Lobster)
Post #: 5
RE: The mobile immovable object - 2/15/2019 6:04:49 AM   
cathar1244

 

Posts: 277
Joined: 9/5/2009
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: Lobster

Looks to me like it says the target of opportunity was the ADA Battery. Isn't that true? Without knowing anything more than the little snippet it's hard to say what happened.


Lobster,

Bad use of naming on my part. The "ADA Battery" in that snippet of log file is actually an infantry battalion with the infantry unit symbol and rifle squads -- nothing else. So the target of opportunity was an infantry battalion that did nothing, no movement, etc.

(New topic) Perhaps the game does some kind of SAM suppression ... but I wonder. There is nothing in the equipment definition, apart from interpreting the range of an anti-air weapon, that indicates use of radar by a SAM unit.

In two runs of the scenario with the air unit set to interdiction as a mission, it struck the infantry unit once on turn 2 and in the other run on turn 3 or 4. This could be a question of "is a spotted enemy unit a target of opportunity?" ... and it may be that units moving are higher on the strike priority list than those remaining in place. But yeah, units not moving can get hit by air interdiction as well. I don't see this as problematic behavior by the game, but it is a point of information that players should be aware of.

Cheers


The badly named "ADA Battery" of the log file snippet

< Message edited by cathar1244 -- 2/15/2019 6:15:21 AM >

(in reply to Lobster)
Post #: 6
RE: The mobile immovable object - 2/15/2019 11:45:08 AM   
Lobster


Posts: 2282
Joined: 8/8/2013
From: Third rock from the Sun.
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Lobster

This is all I know concerning interdiction.

9.1.4 Air Superiority and Interdiction
Units assigned Interdiction Missions will attempt to intercept enemy Land units when those
Land units move and also impair your opponent’s ability to supply his Force. Units performing
Interdiction Missions are subject to Interdiction by enemy Air units with Air Superiority missions
and are protected by friendly units with Air Superiority missions.
Interdiction is less effective in poor weather and on night Turns.

10.4.8 Interdiction Missions
If your opponent has any Air units flying Interdiction Missions, it is possible that your unit may
come under Air Attack during Movement. The chance for this is proportional to your opponent’s
Local Interdiction Level. Units on Roads or using Rail Movement are particularly vulnerable to
Interdiction Missions. Enemy Air units striking your units might be intercepted by your Local Air
Superiority effort, which in Turn are subject to attack by your opponent’s Local Air Superiority.

16.7 The Air Briefing
The Air Briefing gives a brief rundown of the current situation in the air over the Theater. It can
be accessed by clicking View and selecting Air Briefing.
Current Turn aircraft losses are listed in the Aircraft Losses pane. Only aircraft actually destroyed
are listed. You will always know your own losses exactly, but enemy losses are subject
to misinformation. Pilots are notorious for inflating and double-reporting enemy planes shot
down. Damaged aircraft (those sent to the Replacement Pool) are not included in the Loss
Report.
The Air Superiority pane shows the Theater Air Superiority levels, a general indicator of who
controls the air over the Theater.
The Interdiction pane shows both Forces’ Theater Interdiction Levels, a general gauge of each
Force’s efforts to impair enemy supply distribution and land unit movement.

Use the Control Bar Exit button to exit the window.





_____________________________

http://www.operationbarbarossa.net/

"Getting back to reality...I'll only go as a tourist!"

(in reply to Lobster)
Post #: 7
RE: The mobile immovable object - 2/15/2019 12:00:49 PM   
cathar1244

 

Posts: 277
Joined: 9/5/2009
Status: offline
Lobster, check, I saw the passages you quoted. And they are probably accurate, but they do not seem to be a complete list of situations in which air interdiction can occur.

It is also possible that in most scenarios the program behavior I observe would not occur because there will only be so many air units assigned interdiction missions, and probably quite a few more enemy units moving that attract the attention of the interdiction missions.

My guess at this point is that any spotted unit is liable to suffer interdiction attack, but it may be that moving units have a higher priority to be attacked by interdiction strikes. That notion could be tested, but there won't be any indication in the TOAW log file to indicate why a particular unit was struck and another not. Might be interesting, though, to see if a moving unit gets ignored while a unit at rest is struck by air interdiction.

Cheers

(in reply to Lobster)
Post #: 8
RE: The mobile immovable object - 2/15/2019 3:07:16 PM   
larryfulkerson


Posts: 37329
Joined: 4/17/2005
From: Tucson, AZ
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: cathar1244

Lobster, check, I saw the passages you quoted. And they are probably accurate, but they do not seem to be a complete list of situations in which air interdiction can occur.

It is also possible that in most scenarios the program behavior I observe would not occur because there will only be so many air units assigned interdiction missions, and probably quite a few more enemy units moving that attract the attention of the interdiction missions.

My guess at this point is that any spotted unit is liable to suffer interdiction attack, but it may be that moving units have a higher priority to be attacked by interdiction strikes. That notion could be tested, but there won't be any indication in the TOAW log file to indicate why a particular unit was struck and another not. Might be interesting, though, to see if a moving unit gets ignored while a unit at rest is struck by air interdiction.

Cheers

It's been my experience that moving units passing through a hex that has an airfield almost always gets struck.

_____________________________

"When you're dead you don't know you're dead. All the pain is felt by others. The same thing happens when you're stupid."

(in reply to cathar1244)
Post #: 9
RE: The mobile immovable object - 2/16/2019 3:54:10 AM   
Lobster


Posts: 2282
Joined: 8/8/2013
From: Third rock from the Sun.
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: larryfulkerson


quote:

ORIGINAL: cathar1244

Lobster, check, I saw the passages you quoted. And they are probably accurate, but they do not seem to be a complete list of situations in which air interdiction can occur.

It is also possible that in most scenarios the program behavior I observe would not occur because there will only be so many air units assigned interdiction missions, and probably quite a few more enemy units moving that attract the attention of the interdiction missions.

My guess at this point is that any spotted unit is liable to suffer interdiction attack, but it may be that moving units have a higher priority to be attacked by interdiction strikes. That notion could be tested, but there won't be any indication in the TOAW log file to indicate why a particular unit was struck and another not. Might be interesting, though, to see if a moving unit gets ignored while a unit at rest is struck by air interdiction.

Cheers

It's been my experience that moving units passing through a hex that has an airfield almost always gets struck.


Aye, almost a sure thing if the other guy has interdiction assigned.

You know you can ask Bob about whether or not non moving units are victims of interdiction.

< Message edited by Lobster -- 2/16/2019 3:55:23 AM >


_____________________________

http://www.operationbarbarossa.net/

"Getting back to reality...I'll only go as a tourist!"

(in reply to larryfulkerson)
Post #: 10
RE: The mobile immovable object - 2/16/2019 6:27:57 AM   
cathar1244

 

Posts: 277
Joined: 9/5/2009
Status: offline
quote:

You know you can ask Bob about whether or not non moving units are victims of interdiction.


Lobster, heck, half the fun with TOAW is poking and prodding it to see what it is capable of.

(in reply to Lobster)
Post #: 11
RE: The mobile immovable object - 2/16/2019 12:24:32 PM   
Lobster


Posts: 2282
Joined: 8/8/2013
From: Third rock from the Sun.
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: cathar1244

After some testing, I can confirm this is not the case.


But if you are posting things that say what the manual describes is entirely untrue you give people a false picture of the game and it's mechanics. What you are telling people in the statement above is that the game does not function as they are told and there is some secret or unknown operation. Before you post things like that you should confirm it with the people who would know so an addendum can be made for the manual. You need to bring this up with Bob or Ralph, not post rumors.


< Message edited by Lobster -- 2/16/2019 12:28:47 PM >


_____________________________

http://www.operationbarbarossa.net/

"Getting back to reality...I'll only go as a tourist!"

(in reply to cathar1244)
Post #: 12
RE: The mobile immovable object - 2/16/2019 3:02:38 PM   
Curtis Lemay


Posts: 11129
Joined: 9/17/2004
From: Houston, TX
Status: offline
Guys, you know this: At the end of the player-turn, if the interdiction force hasn't done enough interdicting in the player-turn, they are used to attack static targets of opportunity.

_____________________________

My TOAW web site:

Bob Cross's TOAW Site

(in reply to Lobster)
Post #: 13
RE: The mobile immovable object - 2/16/2019 5:32:59 PM   
cathar1244

 

Posts: 277
Joined: 9/5/2009
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Curtis Lemay

Guys, you know this: At the end of the player-turn, if the interdiction force hasn't done enough interdicting in the player-turn, they are used to attack static targets of opportunity.


Thanks Bob, that clarifies what I was seeing. And makes sense from a game function perspective.

Cheers

(in reply to Curtis Lemay)
Post #: 14
RE: The mobile immovable object - 2/16/2019 5:49:50 PM   
cathar1244

 

Posts: 277
Joined: 9/5/2009
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Lobster

quote:

ORIGINAL: cathar1244

After some testing, I can confirm this is not the case.


But if you are posting things that say what the manual describes is entirely untrue you give people a false picture of the game and it's mechanics. What you are telling people in the statement above is that the game does not function as they are told and there is some secret or unknown operation. Before you post things like that you should confirm it with the people who would know so an addendum can be made for the manual. You need to bring this up with Bob or Ralph, not post rumors.



Lobster,

Bob has kindly explained what is happening. But to be clear, I did -not- say what the manual describes is "untrue"; I stated the text quoted from the manual was not a complete list of what could trigger an interdiction attack. No rumor involved as I verified multiple times that the program was behaving in that manner.

This is a forum to discuss TOAW and that is what I did. My comments were just observations. If any of my comments or probes of TOAW behavior go in a direction that Bob or Ralph do not wish to see in these forums, I will of course respect their wishes. If my comments gave the impression that I am trying to undermine Matrix customer confidence in TOAW as a product, I can honestly state that is not the case. I enjoy TOAW as much as anyone, but also enjoy testing the software to see how it behaves and of what it is capable. So why comment about what I find? Because what I find may be of interest to players and/or scenario designers.

Cheers

(in reply to Lobster)
Post #: 15
RE: The mobile immovable object - 2/16/2019 7:53:36 PM   
larryfulkerson


Posts: 37329
Joined: 4/17/2005
From: Tucson, AZ
Status: offline
quote:

I enjoy TOAW as much as anyone, but also enjoy testing the software to see how it behaves and of what it is capable. So why comment about what I find? Because what I find may be of interest to players and/or scenario designers.


I for one would be querious to know what the game engine really does rather than what is thought to happen. I want him to keep going with his tests. Think I'll do some myself.

_____________________________

"When you're dead you don't know you're dead. All the pain is felt by others. The same thing happens when you're stupid."

(in reply to cathar1244)
Post #: 16
RE: The mobile immovable object - 2/16/2019 8:35:19 PM   
Lobster


Posts: 2282
Joined: 8/8/2013
From: Third rock from the Sun.
Status: offline
I'll say this and that's all. In every case the manual says a moving unit is subject to interdiction. You said that is not true. "After some testing, I can confirm this is not the case." That says the manual is not giving us the correct information. I need say nothing more. Your statement says it all.

What would be clarifying is if you would let us know how Bob explained it to you. I'm sure many would be interested in knowing what had happened.

_____________________________

http://www.operationbarbarossa.net/

"Getting back to reality...I'll only go as a tourist!"

(in reply to larryfulkerson)
Post #: 17
RE: The mobile immovable object - 2/17/2019 6:00:07 AM   
cathar1244

 

Posts: 277
Joined: 9/5/2009
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Lobster

I'll say this and that's all. In every case the manual says a moving unit is subject to interdiction. You said that is not true. "After some testing, I can confirm this is not the case." That says the manual is not giving us the correct information. I need say nothing more. Your statement says it all.


Lobster,

There are misunderstandings here.

To put my "not the case" statement in full context:

quote:

ORIGINAL: cathar1244

the idea was advanced that a unit had to move to be hit by an air interdiction strike. After some testing, I can confirm this is not the case.


And in fact, my statement is true. Furthermore, it does not imply that the manual is providing incorrect information; from what I see, the manual's descriptions are accurate. All I did is point out an additional situation in which a unit could suffer an interdiction attack. And I believe players and scenario designers might be interested in knowing that.

quote:

ORIGINAL: Lobster

What would be clarifying is if you would let us know how Bob explained it to you. I'm sure many would be interested in knowing what had happened.


I don't understand your comment. Bob's explanation is in this thread for everyone to see:

quote:

ORIGINAL: Curtis Lemay

Guys, you know this: At the end of the player-turn, if the interdiction force hasn't done enough interdicting in the player-turn, they are used to attack static targets of opportunity.


To bring this back to the results I saw in the game -- the infantry battalion that had not moved was hit by an interdiction strike. Bob's comment makes it clear why this occurred, because there were no other units, moving or otherwise, for the air interdiction mission to strike (the battalion was a "static target of opportunity").

Cheers

(in reply to Lobster)
Post #: 18
RE: The mobile immovable object - 2/17/2019 6:28:54 AM   
cathar1244

 

Posts: 277
Joined: 9/5/2009
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: larryfulkerson

quote:

I enjoy TOAW as much as anyone, but also enjoy testing the software to see how it behaves and of what it is capable. So why comment about what I find? Because what I find may be of interest to players and/or scenario designers.


I for one would be querious to know what the game engine really does rather than what is thought to happen. I want him to keep going with his tests. Think I'll do some myself.


Larry,

I think it would be great if you tested as well. If you do so, please let us know what you find.

In general, TOAW is not so much a wargame as a system that allows us to model the interaction of various elements. The more we grasp about what happens under the hood, the more we can do with the model. I believe, given the tools that already exist, use of the TOAW model to simulate 20th century warfare is tapping maybe about 50 to 75% of software's potential. With the ability to modify counters, hex terrain appearance, and the equipment database, it may be possible to create really "out of the box" scenario designs. This is all opinion, of course. In the detail work of actually turning out such a scenario, one might encounter obstacles that can't be surmounted.

Cheers

(in reply to larryfulkerson)
Post #: 19
RE: The mobile immovable object - 2/17/2019 11:40:46 AM   
Lobster


Posts: 2282
Joined: 8/8/2013
From: Third rock from the Sun.
Status: offline
Thanks for posting Bob's explanation. I have seen this. It is not interdiction at all. It is merely bombardment. Interdiction is when moving units are attacked. Just like it says in the manual.

in·ter·dic·tion Dictionary result for interdiction
/ˌin(t)ərˈdikSH(ə)n/Submit
nounNORTH AMERICAN
1.
the action of prohibiting or forbidding something.
"the interdiction of the slave trade"
2.
the action of intercepting and preventing the movement of a prohibited commodity or person.
"the interdiction of arms shipments"

_____________________________

http://www.operationbarbarossa.net/

"Getting back to reality...I'll only go as a tourist!"

(in reply to cathar1244)
Post #: 20
RE: The mobile immovable object - 2/17/2019 12:16:41 PM   
cathar1244

 

Posts: 277
Joined: 9/5/2009
Status: offline
Lobster,

Define it as you wish. In terms of a game experience, one side will put an air unit on an interdiction mission. That air unit will attempt to complete its mission. If it does not complete the interdiction mission by attacking moving units, it -may- (not guaranteed) attack what Bob calls a "static target of opportunity".

Lesson for the targeted side is, not moving a unit is not proof against attacks by enemy air units placed on interdiction missions. How much value one places on such information is in the eyes of the beholder.

Cheers

(in reply to Lobster)
Post #: 21
RE: The mobile immovable object - 3/4/2019 4:27:39 PM   
Lobster


Posts: 2282
Joined: 8/8/2013
From: Third rock from the Sun.
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: Curtis Lemay

Guys, you know this: At the end of the player-turn, if the interdiction force hasn't done enough interdicting in the player-turn, they are used to attack static targets of opportunity.


Just wanted to contradict this. The opportunity attack during my game of FitE 5.0 takes place every time the resolve battles button is pushed. Not just at the end of turn push. This tells me interdiction is well broken. The German player was able to make 128 'end of turn' opportunity attacks before three different resolve battle sequences and then another at the end of turn push. That's over 170 bombardments!!! (Bob's quote bolded by me)

BTW, all of these bombardments were against static targets, not moving targets. It these opportunity attacks take place before all movement is completed, that is, before end of turn is activated, then how can they be opportunity attacks when there are still potential interdiction attacks?

< Message edited by Lobster -- 3/4/2019 4:31:30 PM >


_____________________________

http://www.operationbarbarossa.net/

"Getting back to reality...I'll only go as a tourist!"

(in reply to Curtis Lemay)
Post #: 22
RE: The mobile immovable object - 3/5/2019 7:03:53 AM   
gliz2

 

Posts: 349
Joined: 2/20/2016
Status: offline
Also can confirm what Lobster posted on FITE2 bombardments.

@Cathar
Keep up the good work and don't bother with the grumpy folks (Bob and Lobster). Since the game is a sandbox it has a lot of simplifications, shortcomings and iterrations on the very old code. For me handling of time and space or air support is worse than at many old boardgames or V for Victory series. This does not mean the game is bad. It means people play it and question the the in-game solutions and wish it could be better. And that is a quite encouraging thought on an old title.
In the end everyone is protective of their children and the maker of the game (Norm) had some ****ty approach to criticism himself.

< Message edited by gliz2 -- 3/5/2019 7:13:49 AM >


_____________________________

Plans are worthless, but planning is essential.

(in reply to Lobster)
Post #: 23
RE: The mobile immovable object - 3/5/2019 8:35:16 AM   
cpt flam


Posts: 2046
Joined: 1/16/2011
From: caen - France
Status: offline
Lobster, it could be good too to follow incentive from designer of FITE.
He clearly tell to don't do interdiction of any sort.
I tried it myself and saw HQ unit arriving as reinforcement moving few hexes by rail and then interdicted and no more move possible.
If you are moving a full division, HQ will stay there and units continue until other INT occur.

_____________________________


(in reply to gliz2)
Post #: 24
RE: The mobile immovable object - 3/5/2019 12:10:16 PM   
Lobster


Posts: 2282
Joined: 8/8/2013
From: Third rock from the Sun.
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: cpt flam

Lobster, it could be good too to follow incentive from designer of FITE.
He clearly tell to don't do interdiction of any sort.
I tried it myself and saw HQ unit arriving as reinforcement moving few hexes by rail and then interdicted and no more move possible.
If you are moving a full division, HQ will stay there and units continue until other INT occur.


You are talking about FitE2. There is no such rule in FitE5.0. These are two different scenarios. Interdiction is fine. It's the opportunity attacks that need to be fixed. They are supposed to only take place at the end of the turn. Not before every attack resolution.

_____________________________

http://www.operationbarbarossa.net/

"Getting back to reality...I'll only go as a tourist!"

(in reply to cpt flam)
Post #: 25
RE: The mobile immovable object - 3/5/2019 12:14:43 PM   
Lobster


Posts: 2282
Joined: 8/8/2013
From: Third rock from the Sun.
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: gliz2

Also can confirm what Lobster posted on FITE2 bombardments.

@Cathar
Keep up the good work and don't bother with the grumpy folks (Bob and Lobster). Since the game is a sandbox it has a lot of simplifications, shortcomings and iterrations on the very old code. For me handling of time and space or air support is worse than at many old boardgames or V for Victory series. This does not mean the game is bad. It means people play it and question the the in-game solutions and wish it could be better. And that is a quite encouraging thought on an old title.
In the end everyone is protective of their children and the maker of the game (Norm) had some ****ty approach to criticism himself.


If you are saying I like this game yes, I do. If you are saying I never criticize anything about this game...I'll let that go because you are a rookie here and have not been around longer than a two day old baby so how can you possibly know what has gone on before.


_____________________________

http://www.operationbarbarossa.net/

"Getting back to reality...I'll only go as a tourist!"

(in reply to gliz2)
Post #: 26
RE: The mobile immovable object - 3/7/2019 6:09:48 AM   
sPzAbt653


Posts: 8153
Joined: 5/3/2007
From: east coast, usa
Status: offline
10.4.8. InterdICtIon mIssIons
Interdiction only affects over-land movement of ground units.


Based on that Rule, I thought maybe there should be something added because there is no mention of Interdiction affecting units that do not move. I also could find no instance of 'targets of opportunity' in the Manual, nor of anything stating that these attacks take place at the end of the turn, when in fact they occur at the beginning of each combat round.

I needed to run tests in III and IV to confirm consistency. Using the Normandy 44 scenario [one of the worst cases of Interdiction] - with III there were 49 to 75 Air Unit attacks on non-moving units at the beginning of every combat round [not at the end of the turn]. The pop-up says 'Air Strike' so no way of knowing what aircraft and which mission triggered it. I switched over to IV and got a shock as Interdiction was calculated differently and was barely effective. Note the screen shots from III below, compared to the screen shots from IV in the next post.




Attachment (1)

(in reply to Lobster)
Post #: 27
RE: The mobile immovable object - 3/7/2019 6:10:53 AM   
sPzAbt653


Posts: 8153
Joined: 5/3/2007
From: east coast, usa
Status: offline
So it seems that Interdiction is not working properly in IV, or it didn't work properly in III. Or I am missing something. Either way it does appear that the Manual should be amended to read:
10.4.8. InterdICtIon mIssIons
Interdiction affects over-land movement of ground units during the movement phase. Interdiction affects static targets of opportunity at the beginning of each combat round.





Attachment (1)

(in reply to sPzAbt653)
Post #: 28
RE: The mobile immovable object - 3/7/2019 10:23:33 AM   
cathar1244

 

Posts: 277
Joined: 9/5/2009
Status: offline
quote:

Based on that Rule, I thought maybe there should be something added because there is no mention of Interdiction affecting units that do not move. I also could find no instance of 'targets of opportunity' in the Manual, nor of anything stating that these attacks take place at the end of the turn, when in fact they occur at the beginning of each combat round. --sPzAbt653


Agree the documentation could be better.

About these 'opportunity' air strikes, my take is that striking "static" units is not so bad, but priority for strikes should be for entire units moving. I write "entire" because even with the "static" units, in reality, there is plenty of small scale movement occurring even if the entire unit isn't on the move. Beyond that, real air-ground missions don't strike only units on the move. I also think it would be better if the strikes on static units occurred at the end of each combat round as that would tend to strike moving units more unless the targeted side was deliberately not moving units for some reason.

Cheers

(in reply to sPzAbt653)
Post #: 29
RE: The mobile immovable object - 3/7/2019 1:25:31 PM   
Lobster


Posts: 2282
Joined: 8/8/2013
From: Third rock from the Sun.
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: Curtis Lemay

Guys, you know this: At the end of the player-turn, if the interdiction force hasn't done enough interdicting in the player-turn, they are used to attack static targets of opportunity.


1) As the Soviet player I had four combat rounds. It was simply two units attacking a German recon unit. Before each combat round there were 43+ opportunity attacks. That's 172 air bombardment attacks. Then there were another 40+ air attacks at the end of the turn for a grand total of over 212 air bombardment attacks. I have no idea what the effect on the German air units were. If they were treated as air interdiction (no use of supply) or if they were treated as bombardment attacks. If I were the German player I would never have my aircraft on anything but interdiction especially if the opportunity attacks were treated as interdiction instead of bombardment.

2) If you want to avoid interdiction attacks don't enter a hex that has an airfield. That simple thing will dramatically affect the number of interdiction attacks.

3) The only 'documentation' concerning opportunity attacks is the blurb by Bob. Even that is incorrect.

4) Given 1 and 2 I would say interdiction is well broken and has been for some time. Not only broken but not even well understood. We just took it like a man and never said anything.

The game code needs to be examined to determine exactly what it going on and how to make it right, whatever right is. Personally I feel these huge numbers of free air bombardments are very wrong. If supply isn't used then where do the bombs and petrol come from? If it isn't treated as bombardment by air units then why don't the attacking air units suffer the same kind of AAA as your typical air bombardment mission? Why is there air?

BTW, thanks Cathar for starting this thread and making us take a closer look at opportunity attacks.

< Message edited by Lobster -- 3/7/2019 1:26:57 PM >


_____________________________

http://www.operationbarbarossa.net/

"Getting back to reality...I'll only go as a tourist!"

(in reply to Curtis Lemay)
Post #: 30
Page:   [1] 2   next >   >>
All Forums >> [New Releases from Matrix Games] >> The Operational Art of War IV >> The mobile immovable object Page: [1] 2   next >   >>
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

0.162