Simulating hedgerow fighting

[Macisle]

Thanks for the good info, Pete!

[JonS]

I'm not really thinking about QBs, but scenarios.

I think your basic approach is sound - the crossroads themselves are largely worthless, unless you control the surrounding terrain also. Generally, I try to break up terrain objs into lots of little chunks, so that players have discrete, acheivable blocks of terrain that they can go for, and many different ways to acheive a winning score. It also makes the final end-game screen more interesting, I think, if there's lots of little entries rather than a few big ones.

So, you could perhaps break each of the crossroads into an inner- and outer-objective area. For example, that southern one could be

Inner:- the cross roads and the buildings just north of it.

Outer:- the block of buildings near the south map edge.

The block between the crossroads could perhaps be broken into three discrete objectives, with each one centred on one of the three distinct blocks of buildings.

In terms of weighting, I'd tend to increase the value for the attacker, the further they get from their start line. So, from north to south you'd get something like

Obj 1 (N xrds - outer): 50pts

Obj 2 (N xrds - inner): 100pts

Obj 3 (N village): 25pts

Obj 4 (Centre village): 50pts

Obj 5 (S village): 75pts

Obj 6 (N xrds - inner): 150pts

Obj 7 (S xrds - outer): 240pts

The idea there being that further objectives are harder to acheive than closer objectives, and the furtherest crossroads is the most important thing. But against a competent defence it's probably pretty unlikely to secure the furtherest xrds. But getting the nearest xrds should be a dead certainty. The xrds are worth more than the village because, well, it's about the xrds, not the village (although the village in total is worth as much as the northern xrds in total). Or something like that, with the aim of laying a trail of sensible breadcrumbs for the player.

The defenders values would be reversed - holding the northernmost xrds would be an awesome, and valuable achievement. But pretty unlikely. Holding the nearest xrds is expected, so the defender gets relatively less for that.

Again: this is scoring for scenario thinking, not QB thinking.

[Macisle]

Okay, aside from resolving the points issue, the map is done.

JonS, I'm going to PM you a copy to look at. I've left the objectives and points as they were for now.

I don't have time for pics today.

[Vanir Ausf B]

I've run across an old thread that may explain the objective points proportioning.

I have reviewed the points of the QB.

There was an error in my conclusion, on ground targets.

Here's the new table:

Scontro (ME) unit pt 600 terrain pt 400

Probe unit pt 500 terrain pt 500

Attack unit pt 350 terrain pt 650

Assault unit pt 250 terrain pt 750

As you can see the total is still 1000.

Points of terreain are recalculated in proportion to those indicated on the map to give the desired value.

Example map ME with two obj 10pt and 30 pt, points will be counted 100 and 300.

http://www.battlefront.com/community/showthread.php?t=98983

[Steiner14]

Do VLs put into account the composition of the force and its strenght occupying it, or are VLs simply judged by checking if a friendly unit is within the borders?