L.Tankersley Posted June 26, 2000 Share Posted June 26, 2000 I'll keep this generic to avoid spoilers. I'm wondering whether the algorithm that determines the setup areas for subsequent battles in an operation is different for night battles as opposed to daytime battles. I've played several battles of an operation, and in the night battles my setup area is set back considerably from that of the daylight battles, when I'm pretty sure I occupied essentially the same area at the end of the prior battle. Just curious as to whether this is by design, and if so, why? (It was disconcerting to be pushed back like that with a night attack coming, but then for the next daylight battle I was back up at the front again.) ------------------ Leland J. Tankersley Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
argie Posted June 27, 2000 Share Posted June 27, 2000 top Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Count Sessine Posted June 29, 2000 Share Posted June 29, 2000 I too would like an answer to that question... /CS Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
L.Tankersley Posted June 29, 2000 Author Share Posted June 29, 2000 Well, I'm not positive but I think that perhaps what I observed was coincidental to the next battle being a night battle. After the first battle, I was pushed back for #2 (a night battle). It's possible some hostiles pushed forward enough on my flank without being spotted to force the start line back. During battle #2 I advanced back up to near my original start line, and then inflicted a LOT of losses on the enemy without taking many in return. I also had flank outposts posted that didn't encounter any hostiles, and which in fact advanced a goodly distance. For battle #3, my start line was forward again. In battle #3, I don't think the enemy penetrated very far (again I had flank outposts) but they did manage to advance close to my start line. Battle #4 (another night battle) I'm pushed back to where I was in battle #2. This battle was more chaotic - the enemy didn't manage to advance past my MLR, but I did spot some vehicles that infiltrated on the flanks near the end, and so for battle #5 (daylight again) I was pushed back further than I had been before. A pitched battle ensued but I kept the foe in front of me, and now for battle #6 I have pretty much the same start line as for #5. It _would_ be nice to get some confirmation about how the start line is calculated - is the furthest penetration by any unit (vehicle, squad) used, or does it need to be a significant force? And _does_ night (or weather) play a role? ------------------ Leland J. Tankersley Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Scott C Posted July 13, 2000 Share Posted July 13, 2000 Just bringing this back to the top and adding some comments. Basically, it seems to me that the start line determination greatly penalizes the defender. Suppose the defender sets up his MLR across the map, and has his units wait in ambush. Further suppose the attacker advances to just before the ambushes would trigger (I was running this experiment hotseat, so I do in fact know exactly where all forces were, and deliberately placed the attackers there.) and stops - or equivalently, runs into the ambushes, gets chewed up, and is repulsed, but the defender does not counterattack. The result will be the defender moving back a hundred meters or so for the next battle. This is obviously wrong, since the defender held his positions - the startup lines for the next battle should be identical. It looks to me like the "no man's land" between the setup zones is taken equally out of the defender's territory and the attacker's, where it should be just taken out of the attacker's. As is, the defender has to take ground each battle just to stay in the same place. ------------------ Questions, comments, arguments, refutations, criticisms, and/or sea stories? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Talenn Posted July 13, 2000 Share Posted July 13, 2000 I've found that the Ops are a WHOLE lot better if you go in and adjust the size of 'no-man's land' to 0 or 80m. This tends to give both sides the terrain they actually took and not kick people back half a klick for no apparent reason. Most of the Ops I've played have had the default 400m 'no man's land'. To me this is REALLY high for the size of the some of the maps. The attacker really doesnt have to push that hard and the defender is thrown back 300-400m almost every time. Try adjusting it down to 80m and see how it plays. Talenn Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Michael emrys Posted July 13, 2000 Share Posted July 13, 2000 In regard to the nighttime pullback, it might be interesting to see if both sides do that as it was common in many cases to do that at the approach of night. It was called breaking off the battle. Usually each side would retire to more defensible ground, to straighten lines, make resupply easier, etc. Michael Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mikester Posted July 31, 2000 Share Posted July 31, 2000 Pushing this back to the top of the list. Would also like to hear from BTS on this. Thanks. Mike D aka Mikester Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
L.Tankersley Posted July 31, 2000 Author Share Posted July 31, 2000 Re-topping. <BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>It _would_ be nice to get some confirmation about how the start line is calculated - is the furthest penetration by any unit (vehicle, squad) used, or does it need to be a significant force? And _does_ night (or weather) play a role?<HR></BLOCKQUOTE> ------------------ Leland J. Tankersley Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mikester Posted July 31, 2000 Share Posted July 31, 2000 Back to top. Still looking for answers. Thanks. Mike Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mikester Posted August 1, 2000 Share Posted August 1, 2000 Up again. M Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
This Todd Posted October 17, 2000 Share Posted October 17, 2000 <punt> Just ran into this same problem tonight while playing a PBEM Ardennes-Team DeSobry campaign. As Allies, I'd narrowly but successfully held off the Axis advance from three different directions in the first battle. Some of the Axis troops advanced to close to Noville from the Southeast, but they were held in check or repulsed by a firmly entrenched Engineer squad, a light machinegunner, and some light tanks. Next comes nighttime and snowfall and I find all of my troops/tanks/reinforcements BEHIND Noville, forcing me to make a mad dash for the city to reestablish my previous defensive positions. The result? I get ambushed by a bunch of Germans who've now occupied the buildings I had, just a turn earlier, filled with Allied troops. This was an unpleasant turn of events considering I'd just spent the entire previous battle sacrificing troops and tanks PREVENTING the Axis from taking the city. Seems almost like a wasted effort in retrospect. Is this typical of campaigns where someone must play defender? Would higher ups have somehow called for a general withdraw to reorganize troops despite the surviving troops maintaining excellent defensive positions? In other words, is there a good reason for CM giving up this territory to the Axis, or is this some wackiness in how it figures out boundaries for campaigns? Inquiring minds want to know. -- Todd Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kitty Posted October 17, 2000 Share Posted October 17, 2000 <BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by This Todd: I'd narrowly but successfully held off the Axis advance from three different directions in the first battle. Some of the Axis troops advanced to close to Noville from the Southeast, but they were held in check or repulsed by a firmly entrenched Engineer squad, a light machinegunner, and some light tanks.<HR></BLOCKQUOTE> Yeah, but I also managed to sneak a few platoons and armor pretty close to the town on the opposite end of the map. I also disengaged the majority of my armor thingies in the same spot and withdrew a few meters back to hide and wait for nightfall. <BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR> The result? I get ambushed by a bunch of Germans who've now occupied the buildings I had, just a turn earlier, filled with Allied troops. This was an unpleasant turn of events considering I'd just spent the entire previous battle sacrificing troops and tanks PREVENTING the Axis from taking the city. Seems almost like a wasted effort in retrospect.<HR></BLOCKQUOTE> Hehe "sacrifice." "Wasted." Yeah, die! Die! lol <BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>Is this typical of campaigns where someone must play defender? Would higher ups have somehow called for a general withdraw to reorganize troops despite the surviving troops maintaining excellent defensive positions?<HR></BLOCKQUOTE> Given the fact that you seem to perhaps have been unaware of the lurking hidden danger on your other flank, it wouldn't have been an unreasonable decision to pull back your forward elements lest the salient they occupied be snipped off and annihilated. If CM AI models this, I have no idea. In all seriousness (but that can't last more than 5 minutes) I've experienced the same thing vs. computer in a different scenario. I stopped the computer cold at a crossroads that was maybe 10m behind their original starting postition. Not ONE unit made it past this point and lived more than a turn that I'm aware of. Yet, next battle I was given positions WAY far behind the ones I successfully held in the first battle. No idea why other than that maybe there was something occurring elsewhere that maybe I wasn't aware of . . . (shrug) CM, please answer. =( Kitty =^..^= ------------------ ICQ 8273286 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Count Sessine Posted October 17, 2000 Share Posted October 17, 2000 I still think this warrants either an explanation or an adjustment. I played Carentan as german in a PBEM game. Even though we agreed on setting the no-mans land to 80 meters, I still got pushed way too far back... as it works now its practically impossible to defend in an operation. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Madmatt Posted October 17, 2000 Share Posted October 17, 2000 Tod, be sure you are playing the new version of Team Desorby available from CMHQ in our Scenario/OPerations area (NOT the Scen. Depot). There were a great many changes made to it including the No-Man's Land setting. Madmatt Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
This Todd Posted October 17, 2000 Share Posted October 17, 2000 D'oh! I'm not sure which version we're playing. Kitty, do you remember where we got this scenario? -- Todd Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kitty Posted October 18, 2000 Share Posted October 18, 2000 <BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Madmatt: Tod, be sure you are playing the new version of Team Desorby available from CMHQ in our Scenario/OPerations area (NOT the Scen. Depot). There were a great many changes made to it including the No-Man's Land setting. Madmatt<HR></BLOCKQUOTE> We're playing the new version. That still doesn't explain why this is happening in other scenarios too though. K Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
This Todd Posted October 18, 2000 Share Posted October 18, 2000 Well, there you have it, MadMatt. Kitty and I are playing the latest version of the Team DeSobry operation, and we're still running into strange start lines. As well, Kitty seems to be running into this problem quite a bit in almost all defensive operations, not just this one. Is this a bug? Or an undocumented feature which can be explained? It's a real bummer to successfully defend what the operation instructions told you to defend, only to be penalized for not having aggressively expanded territory by recklessly attacking superior numbers. -- Todd Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kitty Posted October 20, 2000 Share Posted October 20, 2000 Hello? Anyone home? =( Kitty Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts