rhinobones > RE: Scenario Complexity (10/26/2018 11:57:42 PM)

Appreciate the explanation. However, the explanation just reinforces my original observation. Four unrelated values have been mashed together with the result labeled as a complexity value. This is like multiplying bananas by mangos, there is no common denominator that gives the result a meaningful output. What is the common denominator for “Total Turns X Total Events” or “Total Turns X Total Units”? The function yields a numerical result but has no practical meaning. I suspect that the reason values of 21 million and 0.01 have meaning for you is that you already know the attributes of the scenarios. You know the East Front scenario is huge, hence 21 million makes sense. You know the Denmark scenario is very small, therefore 0.01 makes sense. But, if you were given no information other than that a scenario has a complexity value of 10,000 what do you actually know for certain? Complexity value tells you nothing about events, turns, units or map geometry. It just tells you that a mathematical function performed on four variables yields a meaningless output labeled “complexity”. My suggestion is that a scenario’s complexity is best expressed by real values extracted such as “Total Formations and Total Units”. This gives the player a true sense of the number of the formations and combat units engaged, the absolute number of units to push about the battlefield and therefore, complexity of the scenario. If desired, the HQ unit size, era and prime transportation can be added for additional clarity. As I see it, the number of events, map geometry and turns has no significant impact on scenario complexity. Maybe what needs to be done first is define scenario “complexity” and then identify those scenario attributes which define complexity. As is, I believe the current calculation does not define complexity. com·plex·i·ty/kəmˈpleksədç/noun: complexity, the state or quality of being intricate or complicated. For your consideration. Regards, RhinoBones



