Matrix Games Forums

Forums  Register  Login  Photo Gallery  Member List  Search  Calendars  FAQ 

My Profile  Inbox  Address Book  My Subscription  My Forums  Log Out

Range increments don't match map scale

 
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 >> Range increments don't match map scale Page: [1] 2   next >   >>
Login
Message << Older Topic   Newer Topic >>
Range increments don't match map scale - 4/16/2019 11:37:26 PM   
BigDuke66


Posts: 1879
Joined: 2/1/2001
From: Terra
Status: offline
Hi
shouldn't the range increment in hexes be similar to the map scale?
For example on a map with a 10km per hex scale, a unit with a range of 20km has currently a range of 3 hexes, but if the scale is 10km/hex why isn't the range 2 hexes?

_____________________________

Post #: 1
RE: Range increments don't match map scale - 4/17/2019 12:00:43 AM   
Curtis Lemay


Posts: 11247
Joined: 9/17/2004
From: Houston, TX
Status: online

quote:

ORIGINAL: BigDuke66

Hi
shouldn't the range increment in hexes be similar to the map scale?
For example on a map with a 10km per hex scale, a unit with a range of 20km has currently a range of 3 hexes, but if the scale is 10km/hex why isn't the range 2 hexes?

Two hexes (20km) between the units.

_____________________________

My TOAW web site:

Bob Cross's TOAW Site

(in reply to BigDuke66)
Post #: 2
RE: Range increments don't match map scale - 4/17/2019 12:44:04 AM   
BigDuke66


Posts: 1879
Joined: 2/1/2001
From: Terra
Status: offline
The range given in hexes is surely not the amount of (empty)hexes between the units.

_____________________________


(in reply to Curtis Lemay)
Post #: 3
RE: Range increments don't match map scale - 4/17/2019 1:06:17 AM   
larryfulkerson

 

Posts: 37652
Joined: 4/17/2005
From: Tucson, AZ
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: BigDuke66
The range given in hexes is surely not the amount of (empty)hexes between the units.

+1 I always understood the range as the number of hexes to the target's hex. ???

_____________________________

Apparently there are three levels of brain activity. Level 1 is the lowest level - the amount of concentration required to, say, delete emails or serve in congress.
- Bruce Cameron

(in reply to BigDuke66)
Post #: 4
RE: Range increments don't match map scale - 4/17/2019 1:19:02 AM   
Curtis Lemay


Posts: 11247
Joined: 9/17/2004
From: Houston, TX
Status: online

quote:

ORIGINAL: BigDuke66

The range given in hexes is surely not the amount of (empty)hexes between the units.


That's exactly what it is. The front lines must be assumed to be at the forward edges of the hexes by the game. Assuming the units are positioned in the exact center of the hexes would obviously be presumptuous.

_____________________________

My TOAW web site:

Bob Cross's TOAW Site

(in reply to BigDuke66)
Post #: 5
RE: Range increments don't match map scale - 4/17/2019 2:12:01 AM   
BigDuke66


Posts: 1879
Joined: 2/1/2001
From: Terra
Status: offline
When I say between I mean between, obviously you count the target hex with and then it isn't just the hexes between the unit & the attacking unit. So a range of 3 hexes means the target unit can be as far away as 3 hexes not including the hex the attacking unit is in.

Anyhow why is a range of 20km 3 hexes and not 2? 10km is 1 hex, 2 hexes are 20km, so why has a unit with a range of 20km a range of 3 hexes and not 2?

_____________________________


(in reply to Curtis Lemay)
Post #: 6
RE: Range increments don't match map scale - 4/17/2019 2:16:10 AM   
Curtis Lemay


Posts: 11247
Joined: 9/17/2004
From: Houston, TX
Status: online

quote:

ORIGINAL: BigDuke66

When I say between I mean between, obviously you count the target hex with and then it isn't just the hexes between the unit & the attacking unit. So a range of 3 hexes means the target unit can be as far away as 3 hexes not including the hex the attacking unit is in.

Anyhow why is a range of 20km 3 hexes and not 2? 10km is 1 hex, 2 hexes are 20km, so why has a unit with a range of 20km a range of 3 hexes and not 2?


No. It is not "obvious" that you count the target hex. The units can be anywhere in the hex. The game must assume the minimum. It doesn't count the target hex.

_____________________________

My TOAW web site:

Bob Cross's TOAW Site

(in reply to BigDuke66)
Post #: 7
RE: Range increments don't match map scale - 4/17/2019 2:23:01 AM   
Lobster


Posts: 2579
Joined: 8/8/2013
From: Third rock from the Sun.
Status: online

quote:

ORIGINAL: Curtis Lemay


quote:

ORIGINAL: BigDuke66

The range given in hexes is surely not the amount of (empty)hexes between the units.


That's exactly what it is. The front lines must be assumed to be at the forward edges of the hexes by the game. Assuming the units are positioned in the exact center of the hexes would obviously be presumptuous.









Attachment (1)

_____________________________

http://www.operationbarbarossa.net/

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

(in reply to Curtis Lemay)
Post #: 8
RE: Range increments don't match map scale - 4/17/2019 2:26:43 AM   
BigDuke66


Posts: 1879
Joined: 2/1/2001
From: Terra
Status: offline
Bob, your post make less and less sense when I compare it to the game.
My game(not sure if yours is different) has hexagonal range rings that are drawn along the center of hexes and a 3 hex range is draw along the 3rd hex center so the game obviously includes that 3rd hexes aka the target hex, it does not exclude the target hex.
If you want to nitpick here, 1/2 hex from the center of the attacking units hex + 2 hexes between attacking & target hex + 1/2 hex to the center of the target hex, makes 3 hexes.
That is 3 hexes or 30km for a unit with 20km range.

PS Or what Lobster posted, picture says it better than words.

< Message edited by BigDuke66 -- 4/17/2019 2:28:13 AM >


_____________________________


(in reply to Curtis Lemay)
Post #: 9
RE: Range increments don't match map scale - 4/17/2019 2:30:20 AM   
Lobster


Posts: 2579
Joined: 8/8/2013
From: Third rock from the Sun.
Status: online
5km per hex






Attachment (1)

_____________________________

http://www.operationbarbarossa.net/

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

(in reply to Lobster)
Post #: 10
RE: Range increments don't match map scale - 4/17/2019 2:44:46 AM   
BigDuke66


Posts: 1879
Joined: 2/1/2001
From: Terra
Status: offline
Well with 12km that seem what it should be. But what range do you get when having equipment with a range of 15km, I guess 4 but I don't know why when the range is 15km what equals 3 hexes and not 4.

It seems to me that on a map scale of 10km/hex only less that the actual hex scale will keep the range where it should be. So 2 hexes would mean tha range can only be up to 19km and not 20km, what makes no sense to me.

_____________________________


(in reply to Lobster)
Post #: 11
RE: Range increments don't match map scale - 4/17/2019 2:56:38 AM   
Lobster


Posts: 2579
Joined: 8/8/2013
From: Third rock from the Sun.
Status: online
It looks to me like the game rounds up. So 12km is same as 15km. 17km is same as 20km.

_____________________________

http://www.operationbarbarossa.net/

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

(in reply to BigDuke66)
Post #: 12
RE: Range increments don't match map scale - 4/17/2019 3:02:00 AM   
Curtis Lemay


Posts: 11247
Joined: 9/17/2004
From: Houston, TX
Status: online

quote:

ORIGINAL: Lobster


quote:

ORIGINAL: Curtis Lemay


quote:

ORIGINAL: BigDuke66

The range given in hexes is surely not the amount of (empty)hexes between the units.


That's exactly what it is. The front lines must be assumed to be at the forward edges of the hexes by the game. Assuming the units are positioned in the exact center of the hexes would obviously be presumptuous.









The unit icons are an abstraction. Real unit locations can be anywhere in the hex.

The game does not count the target hex in the ranges. But, because of the abstraction, it adds one to the range - for display purposes.

_____________________________

My TOAW web site:

Bob Cross's TOAW Site

(in reply to Lobster)
Post #: 13
RE: Range increments don't match map scale - 4/17/2019 3:39:49 AM   
r6kunz


Posts: 1012
Joined: 7/4/2002
From: near Philadelphia
Status: offline
Ok, Guys. Sounds a bit like how many angels can dance on the head of a pin? Or rivers on or through hexes? Oh, wait, we have already settled that.

Some where these arbitrary things have to be settled - arbitrarily. Norm did that. Moving on...

_____________________________

Avatar image was taken in hex 87,159 Vol 11 of
Vietnam Combat Operations by Stéphane MOUTIN LUYAT aka Boonierat.

(in reply to Curtis Lemay)
Post #: 14
RE: Range increments don't match map scale - 4/17/2019 4:03:50 AM   
sPzAbt653


Posts: 8405
Joined: 5/3/2007
From: east coast, usa
Status: online
Yeah, but it doesn't exactly present itself as being proper, as seen below. Personally, if the situation pictured below [or anything similar] bothered me, I would go into the editor and make the subject guns' range = 29km instead of 30km. Issue averted and no coding time required.

It is much easier these days to edit equipment since the Equipment Editor was placed in the Editor. It gives us another file to manage but that is offset because things are so much easier.

EDIT: Maybe it's not obvious, but the 30km range guns [in the blue square] can target the enemy unit [the blue unit with the target cross on it] that is definitely over 30km's away by most people's eyesight.




Attachment (1)

< Message edited by sPzAbt653 -- 4/17/2019 4:10:25 AM >

(in reply to r6kunz)
Post #: 15
RE: Range increments don't match map scale - 4/17/2019 6:06:19 AM   
cathar1244

 

Posts: 451
Joined: 9/5/2009
Status: offline
quote:

EDIT: Maybe it's not obvious, but the 30km range guns [in the blue square] can target the enemy unit [the blue unit with the target cross on it] that is definitely over 30km's away by most people's eyesight.


I agree, that is counter-intuitive.

Cheers

(in reply to sPzAbt653)
Post #: 16
RE: Range increments don't match map scale - 4/17/2019 7:18:41 AM   
Curtis Lemay


Posts: 11247
Joined: 9/17/2004
From: Houston, TX
Status: online
quote:

ORIGINAL: sPzAbt653

EDIT: Maybe it's not obvious, but the 30km range guns [in the blue square] can target the enemy unit [the blue unit with the target cross on it] that is definitely over 30km's away by most people's eyesight.




Not if the art unit is on the NW hexside and the target is on the SE hexside.

(And imagine if there was a front line between the two units - that's just the deployment you would expect them to be in.)

< Message edited by Curtis Lemay -- 4/17/2019 7:30:35 AM >


_____________________________

My TOAW web site:

Bob Cross's TOAW Site

(in reply to sPzAbt653)
Post #: 17
RE: Range increments don't match map scale - 4/17/2019 12:22:05 PM   
76mm


Posts: 3536
Joined: 5/2/2004
From: Washington, DC
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: Curtis Lemay
Assuming the units are positioned in the exact center of the hexes would obviously be presumptuous.


quote:

ORIGINAL: Curtis Lemay
Not if the art unit is on the NW hexside and the target is on the SE hexside.


But surely it is just as presumptuous to make these assumptions? Seems like if you have to make a presumption it would be better to presume an average value than an extreme value (both units precisely on hexsides)?

(in reply to Curtis Lemay)
Post #: 18
RE: Range increments don't match map scale - 4/17/2019 1:20:36 PM   
Lobster


Posts: 2579
Joined: 8/8/2013
From: Third rock from the Sun.
Status: online
When you start pretending a unit is in a particular place in a hex then you start plunging into the world of craziness. Center of the hex to center of the hex eliminates all of the pretend craziness. But like Steve said, more programming and with a little crew the bugs are escaping. But I think people really need to informed of this little nugget. There are an insane number of things like this that should be in the manual or at the very least an addendum.


_____________________________

http://www.operationbarbarossa.net/

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

(in reply to 76mm)
Post #: 19
RE: Range increments don't match map scale - 4/17/2019 1:42:26 PM   
Zovs


Posts: 2848
Joined: 2/23/2009
From: United States
Status: offline
So I posted this in another thread but want to make sure this makes sense and seems right:

Okay, I think I got it figured out with the help of both Larry and BigDuke and the actual settings. So this is the deal for range band colors:

This is the in game defaults for range bands with regards to Air/AA/Naval and what they mean:



For this particular scenario for this Air Unit, this is what the colors mean:



I think that ground is pretty straight forward per the manual (but it seems to be missing for Air/AA/Naval), i.e., white, red and black for ground support.

_____________________________


War in the East/War in the East II - Alpha Test Teams
DG CWIE2 tester/SPWW2 and SPMBT playtester/scenario creator

(in reply to Lobster)
Post #: 20
RE: Range increments don't match map scale - 4/17/2019 1:44:15 PM   
Lobster


Posts: 2579
Joined: 8/8/2013
From: Third rock from the Sun.
Status: online
Yes, some of the lines are missing in the manual description. I wondered about that too. Checking the 'What's New' now.

_____________________________

http://www.operationbarbarossa.net/

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

(in reply to Zovs)
Post #: 21
RE: Range increments don't match map scale - 4/17/2019 1:55:46 PM   
Lobster


Posts: 2579
Joined: 8/8/2013
From: Third rock from the Sun.
Status: online
quote:

ORIGINAL: Curtis Lemay


quote:

ORIGINAL: BigDuke66

The range given in hexes is surely not the amount of (empty)hexes between the units.


That's exactly what it is. The front lines must be assumed to be at the forward edges of the hexes by the game. Assuming the units are positioned in the exact center of the hexes would obviously be presumptuous.


So, the only place I've found this mentioned is in the 'What's New' document under APPENDIX ONE: NAVAL COMBAT PROCEDURE. Is that when this was introduced?:

Note that Range is the number of hexes between the attacker and defender – not including their hexes – times the hex scale in kms. So adjacent combat would be point-blank range (=0). However, in that adjacent case, there is a random check as follows:

Range = random (minimum (max range of all units involved, hexscale/2)


< Message edited by Lobster -- 4/17/2019 1:56:31 PM >


_____________________________

http://www.operationbarbarossa.net/

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

(in reply to Curtis Lemay)
Post #: 22
RE: Range increments don't match map scale - 4/17/2019 2:05:24 PM   
Curtis Lemay


Posts: 11247
Joined: 9/17/2004
From: Houston, TX
Status: online

quote:

ORIGINAL: Lobster

When you start pretending a unit is in a particular place in a hex then you start plunging into the world of craziness. Center of the hex to center of the hex eliminates all of the pretend craziness. But like Steve said, more programming and with a little crew the bugs are escaping. But I think people really need to informed of this little nugget. There are an insane number of things like this that should be in the manual or at the very least an addendum.


So, in other words, if two units are adjacent to each other then the "no man's land" between them is an average of 10km wide! And units are bunched together in a point within the hex!

Of course that is absurd. No man's land was no wider than sniper range - a few hundred yards. Units have to be thought of as snug against the hexsides.

_____________________________

My TOAW web site:

Bob Cross's TOAW Site

(in reply to Lobster)
Post #: 23
RE: Range increments don't match map scale - 4/17/2019 2:06:30 PM   
Lobster


Posts: 2579
Joined: 8/8/2013
From: Third rock from the Sun.
Status: online
quote:

ORIGINAL: Curtis Lemay


quote:

ORIGINAL: Lobster

When you start pretending a unit is in a particular place in a hex then you start plunging into the world of craziness. Center of the hex to center of the hex eliminates all of the pretend craziness. But like Steve said, more programming and with a little crew the bugs are escaping. But I think people really need to informed of this little nugget. There are an insane number of things like this that should be in the manual or at the very least an addendum.


So, in other words, if two units are adjacent to each other then the "no man's land" between them is an average of 10km wide! And units are bunched together in a point within the hex!

Of course that is absurd. No man's land was no wider than sniper range - a few hundred yards. Units have to be thought of as snug against the hexsides.


We are actually talking about artillery. I thought.

_____________________________

http://www.operationbarbarossa.net/

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

(in reply to Curtis Lemay)
Post #: 24
RE: Range increments don't match map scale - 4/17/2019 2:07:44 PM   
Curtis Lemay


Posts: 11247
Joined: 9/17/2004
From: Houston, TX
Status: online

quote:

ORIGINAL: Lobster

quote:

ORIGINAL: Curtis Lemay


quote:

ORIGINAL: BigDuke66

The range given in hexes is surely not the amount of (empty)hexes between the units.


That's exactly what it is. The front lines must be assumed to be at the forward edges of the hexes by the game. Assuming the units are positioned in the exact center of the hexes would obviously be presumptuous.


So, the only place I've found this mentioned is in the 'What's New' document under APPENDIX ONE: NAVAL COMBAT PROCEDURE. Is that when this was introduced?:

Note that Range is the number of hexes between the attacker and defender – not including their hexes – times the hex scale in kms. So adjacent combat would be point-blank range (=0). However, in that adjacent case, there is a random check as follows:

Range = random (minimum (max range of all units involved, hexscale/2)


Naval combat ranges just continued the existing method for land ranges. But that is one place where it is made clear.

_____________________________

My TOAW web site:

Bob Cross's TOAW Site

(in reply to Lobster)
Post #: 25
RE: Range increments don't match map scale - 4/17/2019 2:28:03 PM   
Lobster


Posts: 2579
Joined: 8/8/2013
From: Third rock from the Sun.
Status: online
I don't suppose we will ever get an updated manual with all of the new information and the old obscure information. Maybe someone could volunteer to do it?

_____________________________

http://www.operationbarbarossa.net/

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

(in reply to Curtis Lemay)
Post #: 26
RE: Range increments don't match map scale - 4/17/2019 3:10:17 PM   
sPzAbt653


Posts: 8405
Joined: 5/3/2007
From: east coast, usa
Status: online
I've made a few attempts over the years, it's quite a chore and I've lost interest quickly each time. Here is my latest thought on the matter. We need to make a new PDF, copy and paste relevant passages from the original manual, add in new rules, add in clarifications, keep the manual graphics where appropriate, eliminate fluff and repetitions where possible. It wouldn't be officially distributed by Matrix [but would need their consent due to use of original parts of the manual and consent from Bob for use of his What's New], that way it wouldn't be necessary for Bob to proof read every passage [he can if he wants and it would be nice, but we don't want to go into anything expecting it]. Someone would need to maintain it, most likely on a thread here. Everyone could suggest clarifications/additions and obviously we would have no problem reaching a consensus on all matters

So, somebody with PDF talents start a thread and let's get to it !

(in reply to Lobster)
Post #: 27
RE: Range increments don't match map scale - 4/17/2019 5:33:33 PM   
Zovs


Posts: 2848
Joined: 2/23/2009
From: United States
Status: offline
You could make the font red or blue or something showing the new/old whatever parts. I think that WitE did this at one time or maybe it's just what I recall (vaguely).

_____________________________


War in the East/War in the East II - Alpha Test Teams
DG CWIE2 tester/SPWW2 and SPMBT playtester/scenario creator

(in reply to sPzAbt653)
Post #: 28
RE: Range increments don't match map scale - 4/17/2019 7:04:35 PM   
sPzAbt653


Posts: 8405
Joined: 5/3/2007
From: east coast, usa
Status: online
It's a good idea to some extent, but how long do things stay red or blue? How do we know the last time someone read it?

I think that the main use of the manual is for new players to read and for veteran players to scan. New players won't know the difference and veterans wouldn't really care, would they? This is what I mean by getting everyone to agree [impossible]. However, if we are re-creating a new Manual, then everything would be new, so no reason to differentiate ? Also, if some folks like different colors, what would I care ? And, someone needs to accept the assignment before we start in on all of this, right

(in reply to Zovs)
Post #: 29
RE: Range increments don't match map scale - 4/17/2019 8:30:16 PM   
Zovs


Posts: 2848
Joined: 2/23/2009
From: United States
Status: offline
Good points Steve. As long as I can Ctrl+F to find what I am looking for and I'll be good to go.

_____________________________


War in the East/War in the East II - Alpha Test Teams
DG CWIE2 tester/SPWW2 and SPMBT playtester/scenario creator

(in reply to sPzAbt653)
Post #: 30
Page:   [1] 2   next >   >>
All Forums >> [New Releases from Matrix Games] >> The Operational Art of War IV >> Range increments don't match map scale 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

0.152