Flag rush avoidance

[Fate]

The concept of having a variable number of game turns (which I'm sure CM2 will have) is an excellent concept for avoiding the proverbial flag rush.

The question is how to do this in a 2 person game.

Obviously you need the 2 people to agree on the number of variable moves, but how to implement it and where to get the randomization is beyond me.

Suggestions?

Fate

[Leonidas]

As you might guess, this one has been discussed at length. Here's the thread I'm familiar with, though I'm sure there are many more:

http://www.battlefront.com/discuss/Forum1/HTML/016431.html

Here's my contribution to the topic, copied from that thread:

The problem is not about defensive perimeters or determining what pops a flag. The problem is that when the battle ends is unrelated to what's happening on the battlefield. Having a fixed or random ending turn doesn't fix this. It's still jarring and silly when there's a raging battle going on, and the game ends.

The end of the battle should be when the fighting stops. CM is full of complex formulas, so I propose another: battle termination.

Actually, we already have a little of this. If both sides have morale below a certain point, the battle automatically ends. BTS should expand this idea. I would give the attacker a set number of turns to start the fighting - maybe half or three quarters of the normal battle length. After that 'safe zone,' the game calculates battle termination at the end of each turn, with rules like:

-If anybody died in the last turn, the battle will continue.

-If infantry units are within X meters of each other and one side has ammo, the battle is more likely to continue.

-If one player is calling for a cease fire, the battle is less likely to continue.

-If a player still has a FO with ammo and a cool head, the battle is more likely to continue.

-If a player has a mobile AFV with HE ammo (blast value > 30), then the battle is more likely to continue.

-As time wears on, the battle is less likely to continue.

The players would have some information on the battle termination score each turn, but only based on information within their knowledge.

I know we could disagree about the specifics of a formula like this. But what about the general idea of ending the battle once the fighting is mostly over?

[Abbott]

An interesting thought Leonidas, I like it.

I played a game a 2 weeks ago when looking over the map I planned the following;

(I had the Axis forces and purchased a company of Motorized Infantry supported by 2 Stug IIIg’s, a 75mm Artillery observer, Sdkfz251/9 and 2 panzershreck teams).

The map:

Consisted of a small hilly village, uphill to my forces to secure one of the two small victory flags. A small victory flag off to my left flank a few hundred meters from the village. A large victory flag 2oo meters from the village on my right flank with a 2-floor building beyond the road from my position with a patch of woods on my side of the road.

My plan;

I planned to advance 2 platoons of infantry supported by heavy weapons into the village in the center to pin my opponent’s forces. The Assault guns would also support this thrust. I realized I could not take the center of the village before my opponent as he had a full covered route of advance (defilade) as I was advancing uphill with little cover. On my right flank 400 to 500 hundred meters from the large victory flag there was a covered stand of woods (located to the rear of the main fighting line). Here I placed my third platoon hiding in reserve. The reserve platoon was to advance on the large victory flag across open ground after I had pinned the main Allied force. The small victory flag to the left of the village I ignored, I felt I did not have the resources to contest it.

The battle;

The battle brewed up right where I thought it would. My opponent occupied the center of the village (one small victory flag) and heavily engaged my main force at a range of 150 to 200 meters. I noticed 2 infantry markers advancing to the 2 story building (large victory flag location) but was unable to identify what units they were. On my left 3 infantry units advance and occupied the other small victory flag’s position.

The firefight for the center of town was extreme and heavy casualties were being taken on both sides. My artillery fire had some effect on the allied infantry. My 251/9 was killed on my left flank on turn 3 after missing 4 shots at an M-8 armored car. The M-8 landed a kill and advanced on my left flank, now un-opposed. I lost a Stug to a flank shot from it two turns later. In the center I was starting to get beat up badly by the allied infantry and two tank destroyers when a Stuart charged out and killed my remaining Stug with a frontal shot. One of my platoons was running low on ammo and I had to start withdrawing it from the fight. The battle for the center was going badly for me when the thought occurred to me that my opponent must be running low on ammo himself.

I would not be able to advance my reserve platoon over the open ground they needed to traverse towards the main objective flag with the allied tank destroyers holding the center as they were. I was becoming desperate and losing. The platoon I had withdrawn from the center was my only hope. I reformed them to the rear, and started to move them through a large patch of scattered trees to assault the previously ignored small victory flag on my left flank. This had the desired effect and pulled one of the allied tank destroyers to that location.

I then advanced my reserve platoon towards the large victory flag. Two turns to traverse the open ground they entered the patch of woods there and caught the allied infantry (which had been engaged in the center) moving in open ground towards the large victory flag. By this time the allied infantry platoons had suffered heavy casualties and were low on ammo. My fresh platoon tore into them and carried the day. The tank destroyer on my left returned through the center of the village to support the fight at the large victory flag however it arrived to late to influence the outcome. Also when it left its position on my left I was able to advance my platoon that had been withdrawn from the center (with low ammo) and take that position as well, killing a crew, forward observer and bazooka team.

All this took place from turn 31 to turn 35. A flag rush at the end? I didn’t think so as my reserves were un-able to advance on the large victory flag until I was able to remove some of the threat while they crossed the open ground. This wasn’t accomplished until turn 31 out of 35. I actually held the large victory flag and one small flag at the end of the battle and won a tactical victory.

Conclusion;

My opponent congratulated me for the win and after speaking with him said “Good plan”. However it did cause me a bit of concern that it may have been seen as a flag rush.

Thoughts, comments?

[This message has been edited by Abbott (edited 03-22-2001).]

[Fate]

I actually did search on it and found it mentioned in a few threads, but none answered my question. I'm not too concerned for how BTS does victory conditions in the future (I'm sure they will take our many ideas under consideration), but how to implement a variable length 2 person game right now for myself.

Ideally for me, it would be something like in a 30 move game, on the 25th move, you have a 10% chance of it ending, 26th 20% etc. So on the 29th, there'd be a 50% chance of it ending. What I'd like to know is if anybody has any ideas on how to implement this?

My only concept so far is after the player who was first to send a move starts the 27th move, they consult a web page with a quasi random number (last digit in the worth of some currency or predicted hi temp somewhere) .

If it's the 27th move and the random is a "1", send off the pre-agreed web page info and a ceasefire, On the 28th, if the random is a 1 or 2, ceasefire. Etc.

Fate

[Fate]

Oops, I missed some stuff in that thread, namely this nifty dice server in which you can roll and have it automatically send results to you and your bud.

http://www.irony.com/mailroll.html

Fate

[tss]

Leonidas wrote:

The end of the battle should be when the fighting stops. CM is full of complex formulas, so I propose another: battle termination.

An interesting idea but I fear that it would be quite difficult to implement properly. How could the computer distinguish between ended fighting and a brilliant flanking manouver via cover?

In the pre-beta days, Steve wrote that they were considering adding that particular feature. However, because it hasn't materialized, it seems that there are some serious coding (and modeling) troubles for that approach.

In a few games that I've played, the attacker has lost pretty much all momentum and at the same time defender's losses have been too heavy for mounting a counter attack. In those cases we have agreed on a cease fire. Of course, this approach doesn't solve the problem of battle ending when the fighting still rages.

And on the same subject. I usually attack quite carefully, trying to recon the enemy positions before committing my main thrust. This usually means that in a 30 turn game I'll almost certainly use all available time and most of the time in a 40 turn game. There have been few games when I've reached the objective flags literally in the last few turns.

- Tommi

[Warmaker]

Call me crazy but here's something dirty I like to do on the defensive. If there's a big objective (large flag) for the attackers to take I will have it set up with a TRP right on the sucker or several nearby where they can be "hiding places" for the attackers. Next, place my supporting arms (HMGs/Inf.Guns/ATGs) in their stationary positions overlooking the objective. Give minimal to light resistance with small ambushing units as you withdraw them to secondary fighting positions. When the attackers arrive and begin to consolidate the sighted in objective, rain artillery, ATG/MG/etc. fire upon the happless souls. If they want the objective they will need to have units in/near it, so keep pummeling them. 105mm howitzers and 150mm Inf.Guns do wonders here. Keep a small mobile force (panzers preferred) in reserve to react to an attack targeted on your supporting arms and stall them to concentrate fire on this new attack. I know it sounds weird, but I've been experimenting with this with some delight.

------------------

"Uncommon valor was a common virtue"-Adm.Chester Nimitz of the Marines on Iwo Jima

[Doug Beman]

I disagree with a couple of your parameters, Leonidas:

If anybody died in the last turn, the battle will continue.

So if half your force gets annihilated by an arty barrage, the remainder should be even more eager to keep fighting?

If one player is calling for a cease fire, the battle is less likely to contiue

If one player wants a ceasefire, but the other player doesn't, then that battle continues until both agree, or one is wiped out/retreats off a map edge. Simply asking for a cease fire should not end the battle, because it would allow players losing badly to escape further punishment.

If a player still has a FO with ammo and a cool head, the battle is more likely to continue.

If your infantry is being massacred and your armor support is burning merrily, your global morale is going to force your loss; the guys getting shot to pieces don't much care that there's an FO "out there somewhere," waiting for the right moment to save the day.

If a player has a mobile AFV with HE ammo (blast value > 30), then the battle is more likely to continue.

Same rebuttal as the FO question.

As time wears on, the battle is less likely to continue.

I'm not clear on this one; at what point does "time wear on" in a 30 minute battle? Should the battle suddenly end at minute 20?

DjB

[Guest Andrew Hedges]

I kind of like the "random ending" idea, but it occurs to me that it would probably be most appropriate for ME's. Not just because that's where most of the flag-rush gameyness occurs, but also because, of all the QB types, MEs would be least likely, IMO, to have a tight time requirement.

By contrast, many battles at CM level *would have*, historically, had some sort of time constraint, along the lines of, "you need to clear this village so that other units supporting the main battle can move through this area without their trucks getting shot up, and they need to come through here in 30 minutes." Or, from the defender side, "You need to hold this village for about 30 minutes so that our troops can finish pulling out of the pocket."

There are plenty of examples of timetables like that in Normandy; one reason that the Germans held off the Allies for so long there was because they kept being able to disrupt these timetables by stubbornly refusing to give up smaller areas (or by counterattacking to retake them).

Because timeliness does matter in some scenarios, it might be a good idea to either (1) limit flexible time limits to MEs; or (2) have differing treatment of time limits for different battle types. Perhaps the range should be +/- 15% in MEs (25 to 35 turns in a 30 turn game), but +/- 5% in attacks (28 to 32, approx).

Alternatively, the range could remain the same, but the chance that a particular result would occur would vary depending on the type of battle. So the range for a 30 turn ME would be 25 to 35, with each of these results being equally likely (i.e., roll a D100, on 01-09, the game ends on turn 25; on 10-18, the turn ends on turn 26, etc.).

In an attack, the 25 to 35 range would be the same, but the chance of the game ending on a particular turn would look more like a bell curve, with, say, a 30% chance that the game would end on turn 30, a 20% chance that the game would end on turn 29 or on turn 31, etc.

Scenario designers should be able to have fixed or variable turn endings.

And maybe other variations are possible too. There is the ever-popular SL variant ending (aka SSR): if reinforcements enter on turn 4, the game ends on turn 12. If reinforcements enter on turn 5, the game ends on turn 13, etc.

[GriffinCheng+]

This is requested before, but that doesn't make it irreverent. I am for the idea of random turn. I think BTS has it in their wish list.

OTOH, in normal PBEM QB ME environment, people nowadays do not rush to the flags at the last turn.

Griffin.

------------------

"When you find your PBEM opportents too hard to beat, there is always the AI."

"Can't get enough Tank?"

Get the CMSOD at Combat Missing Command Post (CMCP) at http://www.angelfire.com/games3/CMCP/

[Leonidas]

Originally posted by Doug Beman:

I disagree with a couple of your parameters, Leonidas:

Doug, I think you're looking for a different kind of determination. I'm suggesting ways to test for whether the fighting has stopped. You're talking about global morale and whether it's clear which side has won. They're different things.

I don't do meeting engagements very often, so I was thinking mostly in terms of an attack/defense situation. As I see it, time favors the attacker; if the attacker enters the battlefield, then turns around and goes home, the defender wins. The attacker has a responsibility to press the attack. When the attacker stops pressing the attack, either because he's taken the objectives or lost his ability to attack, then the battle is over unless the defender is counterattacking.

So if half your force gets annihilated by an arty barrage, the remainder should be even more eager to keep fighting?

If people are still dying, then the battle hasn't stopped yet. It's simple.

If one player wants a ceasefire, but the other player doesn't, then that battle continues until both agree, or one is wiped out/retreats off a map edge. Simply asking for a cease fire should not end the battle, because it would allow players losing badly to escape further punishment.

The ceasefire thing would be a little complicated, and maybe isn't a good idea. To make it more accurate, you would need to determine if either side still seems to have the means to fight (as discussed below). But if a side has called a ceasefire, they are indicating that, even though they seem to have the means to fight, they don't plan on doing so. This would be a per-side calculation. If either side has the means to fight and hasn't called a ceasefire, then the battle should continue.

If your infantry is being massacred and your armor support is burning merrily, your global morale is going to force your loss; the guys getting shot to pieces don't much care that there's an FO "out there somewhere," waiting for the right moment to save the day.

Again, you're talking about morale, but that isn't the point. The commander doesn't poll the men in the trenches on whether he should keep fighting. The idea behind having live arty or AFV forces is that these forces can take a few minutes to reposition late in the battle, during a few turns in which no one is getting killed.

Suppose that the attacker has trounced the defender on the left side, but the attacking infantry on the right side are routed. The attacker may need a few minutes to move his arty and AFVs from one side of the battlefield to the other. The attacker still has the means to fight, and he still intends to fight, but there a gap of a few minutes during which nobody is getting killed. The battle should continue until the attacker has had a chance to regroup and redeploy, even though no one is getting killed or even shooting during that time.

I'm not clear on this one; at what point does "time wear on" in a 30 minute battle? Should the battle suddenly end at minute 20?

The idea is to prevent the attacker from abusing the above-described 'no-kill' period in which to redeploy his surviving forces. After a few minutes the attacker is under an obligation to start killing people again, or the battle ends.

There were concerns about how hard this would be to implement, so here's a simpler approach that does the same job:

At the beginning of the battle the attacker would get an Initial Phase of several minutes in which to maneuver and get his men into position. This would be maybe the first 10-15 turns of a typical 30 turn battle. After that, the attacker is expected to start killing people.

After the first 15 turns, people are supposed to start dying. There is an End of Battle counter, known to both players (no randomness in this system). In a typical 30 turn battle, the counter might be 5. Every turn past the Initial Phase in which no one dies reduces the End of Battle counter by one. When the End of Battle counter reaches zero, the battle ends.

[This message has been edited by Leonidas (edited 03-23-2001).]

[Doug Beman]

That solution is even more gamey IMHO than the problem it sets out to fix. When did the attackers ever have 10 minutes at the start of the battle to swan about until they were in the perfect position? Because there's no fighting going on, by definition, those maneuvers would have taken place before the CM turns started. CM simulates the start of fighting, not a set period of hustling through trees and then fighting.

Plus I'm having a **** night. Something's wrong with my car, so I had to stop at my sister's house which is way far from my home, so I can't go home tonight, so I won't be home tomorrow, so Meagan can't come over and spend the day with me, and I'll probably wind up spending a wad of cash fixing whatever is wrong with my car, so my schedule for buying a NEW car gets reamed, so I keep driving the car I have now, so starting a vicious cycle of spend to keep what you have so you can't save to get what you want/need.

I think I'll see if there's any beer in this house.

DjB