The most frustrating feature of TOAW engine

Norm Koger's The Operational Art of War III is the next game in the award-winning Operational Art of War game series. TOAW3 is updated and enhanced version of the TOAW: Century of Warfare game series. TOAW3 is a turn based game covering operational warfare from 1850-2015. Game scale is from 2.5km to 50km and half day to full week turns. TOAW3 scenarios have been designed by over 70 designers and included over 130 scenarios. TOAW3 comes complete with a full game editor.

Moderators: JAMiAM, ralphtricky

Post Reply
User avatar
Emx77
Posts: 453
Joined: Mon Mar 29, 2004 11:12 am
Location: Sarajevo, Bosnia and Herzegovina
Contact:

The most frustrating feature of TOAW engine

Post by Emx77 »

As I can see that many other people expressing their opinions about TOAW improvements I would also like to see if something can be done with a way in which engine decides how much turn can be used after the attack is executed? Many times I was frustrated by fact that some minnor battles ended turn too early.

For example let say that your primary objective is to take a well defended hex X. During previous turn you made preparations and moved necessary units to adjacent hex. You know that would be impposible to take it in just one attack but your units have full amount of action points and there is a big chance to take that objective during the same turn with multiple attacks. However you have forces accross a map and with some distant unit you want to probe a enemy line at hex Y. You set your units on min losses tolerance, in attack planning dialog time expanded pane shows that all attack will take approx. 10% of turn time, but after resolving attacks your probe attack take much more then 10% resulting in early turn end. Pretty frustrating as you have just used one attack for main objective and you lossed a whole turn becouse a sideshow battle. This situation is not a rare case, it happenes often (maybe you not losse your whole turn but much of it).

What is problem here is that this two battles are completily INDEPENDENT! Why then we have to losse a whole turn because one of them take more time then it is predicted?! It make no sense. In reality commander of operation would be informed that probing attack at loaction Y is not going as planned and will issue order even to stop attack or to countinue it, but this wouldn't interfere with attack on main objective X. These attacks are far away one from another and they are completily independet of each other.


I wonder if would be possible to avoid this? My suggestion would be to somehow "freeze" all units where attack need more rounds to be resolved. Engine can put them in "melee" state or something like that, so players can't issuing order to them until attack is resolved but can move or give orders to other units which have unused action points during a same turn.
User avatar
steveh11Matrix
Posts: 943
Joined: Fri Jul 30, 2004 8:54 am
Contact:

RE: The most frustrating feature of TOAW engine

Post by steveh11Matrix »

This has been discussed both here and at the Strategy Zone forums. Try, for example, here. It's an interesting discussion.

Steve.
"Nature always obeys Her own laws" - Leonardo da Vinci
User avatar
Pippin
Posts: 652
Joined: Sat Nov 09, 2002 8:54 pm

RE: The most frustrating feature of TOAW engine

Post by Pippin »

I wonder if would be possible to avoid this?

When I did play TOAW ladder rated games, the whole point was to exploit this. People would take a totaly useless unit, and sacrific it in the middle of the opponent's path/road. Thus ensuring his turn would end instantly and giving the defender a free round.

Not very fair, but that's how it was done.

Nelson stood on deck and observed as the last of the Spanish fleets sank below the waves…
Image
User avatar
steveh11Matrix
Posts: 943
Joined: Fri Jul 30, 2004 8:54 am
Contact:

RE: The most frustrating feature of TOAW engine

Post by steveh11Matrix »

Keywords/phrases: "Not very fair" and "exploit". In general, I find this to be a good idea, but I'm dismayed at the exploitation of it. Just another reason NOT to play MP.

But it's very fully discussed over at the SZO forum.

Steve.

<Edited for Typo>
"Nature always obeys Her own laws" - Leonardo da Vinci
User avatar
JJKettunen
Posts: 2289
Joined: Tue Mar 12, 2002 6:00 pm
Location: Finland

RE: The most frustrating feature of TOAW engine

Post by JJKettunen »

ORIGINAL: Pippin

When I did play TOAW ladder rated games, the whole point was to exploit this. People would take a totaly useless unit, and sacrific it in the middle of the opponent's path/road. Thus ensuring his turn would end instantly and giving the defender a free round.

Not very fair, but that's how it was done.


What?! Now could you tell me in detail how useless units when put to the path of the attacker can ensure instant turn ending?

(or are you just making random guesses about the game engine?)
Jyri Kettunen

The eternal privilege of those who never act themselves: to interrogate, be dissatisfied, find fault.

- A. Solzhenitsyn
ColinWright
Posts: 2604
Joined: Thu Oct 13, 2005 6:28 pm

RE: The most frustrating feature of TOAW engine

Post by ColinWright »

ORIGINAL: Pippin
I wonder if would be possible to avoid this?

When I did play TOAW ladder rated games, the whole point was to exploit this. People would take a totaly useless unit, and sacrific it in the middle of the opponent's path/road. Thus ensuring his turn would end instantly and giving the defender a free round.

Not very fair, but that's how it was done.


As described, your example sounds a lot like the Spartans at Thermopylae (or wherever). I suppose they weren't useless but they certainly weren't very numerous, and they did cause 'early turn ending' for the Persians, giving the rest of the Greeks time to assemble.

There certainly is a problem with early turn ending -- but I don't think this is it. On the whole, I think the idea proposed to confine early turn ending to the formation concerned is the way to go. Aside from the other advantages mentioned, formation-specific turn ending would encourage players to avoid unnecessarily combining units from more than one formation in an attack, which would be a good thing.
I am not Charlie Hebdo
User avatar
Pippin
Posts: 652
Joined: Sat Nov 09, 2002 8:54 pm

RE: The most frustrating feature of TOAW engine

Post by Pippin »

What?! Now could you tell me in detail how useless units when put to the path of the attacker can ensure instant turn ending?

(or are you just making random guesses about the game engine?)

Take a weak Italian scout car, and place it in the midst of the entire British 9'th Amry. What happens? The army should steamroll over it. But thanks to a cleaver player setting fight to death on the scout-mobile, the entire turn is burned off for brits, buying the Italians another turn.

Nelson stood on deck and observed as the last of the Spanish fleets sank below the waves…
Image
User avatar
JJKettunen
Posts: 2289
Joined: Tue Mar 12, 2002 6:00 pm
Location: Finland

RE: The most frustrating feature of TOAW engine

Post by JJKettunen »

ORIGINAL: Pippin

Take a weak Italian scout car, and place it in the midst of the entire British 9'th Amry. What happens? The army should steamroll over it. But thanks to a cleaver player setting fight to death on the scout-mobile, the entire turn is burned off for brits, buying the Italians another turn.

The scout car would be overrun by any decent size unit of the 9th Army without any loss of combat turns.
Jyri Kettunen

The eternal privilege of those who never act themselves: to interrogate, be dissatisfied, find fault.

- A. Solzhenitsyn
ColinWright
Posts: 2604
Joined: Thu Oct 13, 2005 6:28 pm

RE: The most frustrating feature of TOAW engine

Post by ColinWright »

ORIGINAL: Pippin
What?! Now could you tell me in detail how useless units when put to the path of the attacker can ensure instant turn ending?

(or are you just making random guesses about the game engine?)

Take a weak Italian scout car, and place it in the midst of the entire British 9'th Amry. What happens? The army should steamroll over it. But thanks to a cleaver player setting fight to death on the scout-mobile, the entire turn is burned off for brits, buying the Italians another turn.


The only thing I can think of is that you are not selecting the unit to attempt an RBC with care. You want to hit it with something BIG. If you try something small first and fail, it seems to confer an immunity against further attempts unless you manage to achieve an RBC somewhere else. When an RBC fails, I often find myself hunting around the battlefield for another RBC to perform so that I can take another whack at the Italian scout car or whatever it is. Not exactly realistic -- but your problem does have a solution.
I am not Charlie Hebdo
User avatar
steveh11Matrix
Posts: 943
Joined: Fri Jul 30, 2004 8:54 am
Contact:

RE: The most frustrating feature of TOAW engine

Post by steveh11Matrix »

ORIGINAL: ColinWright

ORIGINAL: Pippin
What?! Now could you tell me in detail how useless units when put to the path of the attacker can ensure instant turn ending?

(or are you just making random guesses about the game engine?)

Take a weak Italian scout car, and place it in the midst of the entire British 9'th Amry. What happens? The army should steamroll over it. But thanks to a cleaver player setting fight to death on the scout-mobile, the entire turn is burned off for brits, buying the Italians another turn.


The only thing I can think of is that you are not selecting the unit to attempt an RBC with care. You want to hit it with something BIG. If you try something small first and fail, it seems to confer an immunity against further attempts unless you manage to achieve an RBC somewhere else. When an RBC fails, I often find myself hunting around the battlefield for another RBC to perform so that I can take another whack at the Italian scout car or whatever it is. Not exactly realistic -- but your problem does have a solution.
Again, keywords are "Not exactly realistic".[:-]

Steve.
"Nature always obeys Her own laws" - Leonardo da Vinci
User avatar
Grisha
Posts: 273
Joined: Thu May 11, 2000 4:00 pm
Location: Seattle

RE: The most frustrating feature of TOAW engine

Post by Grisha »

The only thing I can think of is that you are not selecting the unit to attempt an RBC with care. You want to hit it with something BIG. If you try something small first and fail, it seems to confer an immunity against further attempts unless you manage to achieve an RBC somewhere else. When an RBC fails, I often find myself hunting around the battlefield for another RBC to perform so that I can take another whack at the Italian scout car or whatever it is. Not exactly realistic -- but your problem does have a solution.
Again, keywords are "Not exactly realistic".

Not quite true, since this was how the Red Army mired the German offensive, Zitadelle. The continuous counterattacks on German flanks really put a dent into German planning cycles. This in combination with very formidible defenses took the wind out of the German offensive.
Best regards,
Greg Guerrero
User avatar
JJKettunen
Posts: 2289
Joined: Tue Mar 12, 2002 6:00 pm
Location: Finland

RE: The most frustrating feature of TOAW engine

Post by JJKettunen »

ORIGINAL: Grisha
Not quite true, since this was how the Red Army mired the German offensive, Zitadelle. The continuous counterattacks on German flanks really put a dent into German planning cycles. This in combination with very formidible defenses took the wind out of the German offensive.

Or one could say that in the situation where the defender had all the advantages, including manpower, he threw his reserves to the battle in piecemeal fashion, which only slowed down the Germans who didn't have enough troops to cover the flanks of any breakthroughs, but it didn't result in nothing decisive like would have been possible with a well concentrated effort (note I speak of the southern part here only).

Also these continous counterattacks have nothing to do with insignficant attacks burning down the whole turn in TOAW nor the imaginary problem of ant units stopping big offensives.
Jyri Kettunen

The eternal privilege of those who never act themselves: to interrogate, be dissatisfied, find fault.

- A. Solzhenitsyn
ColinWright
Posts: 2604
Joined: Thu Oct 13, 2005 6:28 pm

RE: The most frustrating feature of TOAW engine

Post by ColinWright »

ORIGINAL: steveh11Matrix

ORIGINAL: ColinWright

ORIGINAL: Pippin



Take a weak Italian scout car, and place it in the midst of the entire British 9'th Amry. What happens? The army should steamroll over it. But thanks to a cleaver player setting fight to death on the scout-mobile, the entire turn is burned off for brits, buying the Italians another turn.


The only thing I can think of is that you are not selecting the unit to attempt an RBC with care. You want to hit it with something BIG. If you try something small first and fail, it seems to confer an immunity against further attempts unless you manage to achieve an RBC somewhere else. When an RBC fails, I often find myself hunting around the battlefield for another RBC to perform so that I can take another whack at the Italian scout car or whatever it is. Not exactly realistic -- but your problem does have a solution.
Again, keywords are "Not exactly realistic".[:-]

Steve.

On the other hand, I can think of several examples of very small forces significantly delaying much larger ones -- admittedly under specialized circumstances. Rauss, in his mmoir of the Eastern Front, recounts what I recall as about a full day of delay imposed on his panzergrenadier brigade by one KV obstinately sitting atride the only usable road through a swamp. In Market Garden, I think the British armor was held up for some time in its final rush to Arnhem by one German assault gun.

So one wouldn't always want small units just brushed aside. They can indeed hold up the parade.
I am not Charlie Hebdo
lancerunolfsson
Posts: 257
Joined: Mon Feb 07, 2005 11:56 am
Contact:

RE: The most frustrating feature of TOAW engine

Post by lancerunolfsson »

So one wouldn't always want small units just brushed aside. They can indeed hold up the parade.

Yes Collin but what we are talking about here is the sturm gun in Belgium that holds up the army in the Philipines:^)
If you are near Medford Oregon Check out,

http://lancerunolfsson.googlepages.com/home
(Also some free Downloadable Miniature Rules and a Free Downloadable 7YW Board Game)
ColinWright
Posts: 2604
Joined: Thu Oct 13, 2005 6:28 pm

RE: The most frustrating feature of TOAW engine

Post by ColinWright »

ORIGINAL: lancerunolfsson
So one wouldn't always want small units just brushed aside. They can indeed hold up the parade.

Yes Collin but what we are talking about here is the sturm gun in Belgium that holds up the army in the Philipines:^)

That is indeed the problem. I'd be proud to come up with a rationalization for that -- even a lame one.

Personally, I liked some of those ideas about early turn ending being decided for each formation -- if one of its combats drags out, its turn ends. What I particularly liked about the concept is that it would encourage players to maintain some formation integrity. You'd be a fool to use one battalion for division 1 and two from division 2 if three battalions all from division 1 could be used and only division 1 need risk early turn ending. I realize cooperation levels are intended to encourage this behavior, but these can be hard to manipulate in design.
I am not Charlie Hebdo
User avatar
Oleg Mastruko
Posts: 4534
Joined: Sat Oct 21, 2000 8:00 am

RE: The most frustrating feature of TOAW engine

Post by Oleg Mastruko »

ORIGINAL: lancerunolfsson
So one wouldn't always want small units just brushed aside. They can indeed hold up the parade.

Yes Collin but what we are talking about here is the sturm gun in Belgium that holds up the army in the Philipines:^)

No that is a problem of bad scenario design. TOAW was never NEVER intended to cover "campaigns" stretching from Phillipines to Belgium. Some designers chose to do it anyway, but then ridicolous results are to be expected occassionally.

Oleg (founding member of "Keep TOAW Operational Level Game" club)
User avatar
Emx77
Posts: 453
Joined: Mon Mar 29, 2004 11:12 am
Location: Sarajevo, Bosnia and Herzegovina
Contact:

RE: The most frustrating feature of TOAW engine

Post by Emx77 »

ORIGINAL: Oleg Mastruko
ORIGINAL: lancerunolfsson
So one wouldn't always want small units just brushed aside. They can indeed hold up the parade.

Yes Collin but what we are talking about here is the sturm gun in Belgium that holds up the army in the Philipines:^)

No that is a problem of bad scenario design. TOAW was never NEVER intended to cover "campaigns" stretching from Phillipines to Belgium. Some designers chose to do it anyway, but then ridicolous results are to be expected occassionally.

Oleg (founding member of "Keep TOAW Operational Level Game" club)

I wouldn't agree with you Oleg. Situation in which one independet marginal attack stops whole operation elsewhere and results in early turn end often happened in every regular scenarios (scenarios which comes with a game). As far as I remeber if there was armor unit involved in combat (as attacker or defender) chanches were bigger for an early turn ending.

Emir
User avatar
Oleg Mastruko
Posts: 4534
Joined: Sat Oct 21, 2000 8:00 am

RE: The most frustrating feature of TOAW engine

Post by Oleg Mastruko »

ORIGINAL: Emir Agic

I wouldn't agree with you Oleg. Situation in which one independet marginal attack stops whole operation elsewhere and results in early turn end often happened in every regular scenarios (scenarios which comes with a game).

What's "marginal attack"? If it's really so marginal then leave it for the last phase in your turn, for when you are sure there will be no other phases, or you don't really need more phases. Otherwise it's *bad operational planning* and you deserve to be punished. There is a reason why all good offensive operations had to stick to very precise timetable, otherwise they would turn into shambles real fast. If you miscalculate, and turn ends sooner than you expected - well, too bad, war is hell, grind your teeth and soldier on [:D] (or whine on the boards, choice is yours).

As all IGO UGO games TOAW is far too kind to the attacker anyway. You may plan your attacks with total freedom, no fear of SNAFUs, smart enemy reactions and such. All you have to worry about are enemy units with zombiefied tac defense orders which - compared to the real world - is next to nothing.

So yes, even if some small unit ocassionaly screws up your perfectly planned attack (which was, apparently, NOT so perfectly planned after all) I think it's fair, and realistic (within the scope this game was *intended* to work).

O.
User avatar
JJKettunen
Posts: 2289
Joined: Tue Mar 12, 2002 6:00 pm
Location: Finland

RE: The most frustrating feature of TOAW engine

Post by JJKettunen »

So Oleg, you're totally happy with a sudden turn ending without a proper reason after a first set of (recon) attacks in either GiO or DnO? [;)]

(it has happened to me [:@])

(in both scenarios I should add [:@])
Jyri Kettunen

The eternal privilege of those who never act themselves: to interrogate, be dissatisfied, find fault.

- A. Solzhenitsyn
User avatar
Oleg Mastruko
Posts: 4534
Joined: Sat Oct 21, 2000 8:00 am

RE: The most frustrating feature of TOAW engine

Post by Oleg Mastruko »

GIO and DNO... if I got a dollar every time those two get mentioned... I'd have couple dollars now I guess [:D]

GIO and DNO are extreme examples in any case. Incredibly huge scenarios, pushing the envelope of TOAW engine further than many, including Norm himself, ever planned, or thought possible. The fact that they, kinda, work, and that we (myself included) love them, should not be mis-used to have them two appear in every argument on this board. They are simply extremes, and lets leave it at that.

Having said that...

What's "recon attack" anyway? It's either "recon" or "probing attack". If it's recon - then there is no combat, and your turn will not end prematurely. If its "probing attack" then yes, there should be possibility of "probing attack gone wrong" which will screw up your day - please take apologies from STAVKA that your SS uebermensch got stopped by unexpectedly fierce defense of some "marginal" Soviet unit, or, in case of GIO, accept apologies from OKH because some German unit decided to... you fill in the rest [;)] Of course, it never happened in real war, right? [:D]

Personally, I never trigger any "marginal" attacks and/or attacks that took many MPs for units to get there, in first, or even second round of fighting in my turns. Thats what I call "operational planning". Of course, sometimes my "important" attacks take too long so there is no second or third phase at all - which is what happens on the battlefield in real life, and I can live with that.

O.
Post Reply

Return to “Norm Koger's The Operational Art Of War III”