Surprise rules?

[Bromley]

More question-spam from me.

I pulled off a blinder in a MP game. I had mud on the first turn of my Benelux/France assault. So I took Benelux and lined everyone up just SW of Brussels to push on to the Paris line in my second turn.

The Paris line moved up to meet me. On balance a mistake because it allowed my upgraded panzers to hit for 6 damage, but I can see why he did it as he nearly killed an army in the Ardennes.

The second turn of the invasion started with the death from just one attack of a French army (str 6). The panzer used the three remaining movement points to slip around the line and get adjacent to Paris. This was only possible because I had not spotted the DCR in Paris, but hey, we all know it's there.

The panzer took 5 damage in the surprise encounter, reducing it to 5, but the DCR went from 10 to 4. Throw in a few air attacks and another panzer, and there was just enough room for my FSJ to land in Paris.

I had a look in the manual, but I couldn't find the surprise encounter rule. I know that it worked well for me in this case (as he was attacking I avoided the effect of his level 6 entrenchment), but what is the rule? Could/should it have gone horribly wrong for me and was I exceptionally lucky? Does it generate an attack by the surprising unit (I think yes) or the surprised unit?

[TaoJah]

I never understood the exact rules either. I do everything I can to avoid them, moving in waves (except on sea).

Generally, I don't think you deal or take less damage in a surprise encounter, you just can't pick your target.

Well, most of the time, you can't pick it. I know that sometimes even when he is surprised by a unit, he can still change targets.

[Bromley]

moving in waves (except on sea)

That must be hard .

[TaoJah]

Originally posted by Bromley:

</font><blockquote>quote:</font><hr />moving in waves (except on sea)

That must be hard . </font>

[Bromley]

Hijacking my own thread as there's no pm. TaoJah, would you mind looking at the Tech Support forum when you have a chance. I'm having the same licence problem that you had 6 months ago. Thanks.

[Agamemnon]

I had a look in the manual, but I couldn't find the surprise encounter rule. I know that it worked well for me in this case (as he was attacking I avoided the effect of his level 6 entrenchment), but what is the rule? Could/should it have gone horribly wrong for me and was I exceptionally lucky? Does it generate an attack by the surprising unit (I think yes) or the surprised unit?

Looking in the Manual was your only mistake. The main rule to remember about SC2 is that their are no rules. I had a German tank entrench to lvl 3 in one turn, on a marsh tile. The "Manual" says the their is no entrenchment on a marsh tile. Yeah Right. All you need to remember is "Their are on rules".

Oh, and before any of you start twittering about fortifications, their were no fortifications. I sure someone will anyway, so proclaim your folly.

[Hubert Cater]

Very odd, anyone else ever see this?

[ChrisND]

No, and he is most likely confusing a marsh tile with a woods tile, as some of them look very similar, and woods can entrench to level 3.

[Hubert Cater]

Ah yes that might be it

[Agamemnon]

OK, Dude, could you tell exactly where this "woods" tile is that is next to Stalingrad. Funny thing my game doesn't show any "woods" near Stalingrad, let alone next to it.

BTW, Im know what happened. A fortification was destroyed (as in not there anymore). Did you get that Dude, NOT THERE ANYMORE. Tank moves into the tile. The tank gets entrenched as if the fortification was still there. Now let me repeat something that is important (the fortification was destroyed, NOT THERE ANYMORE. Do you understand what not there anymore means. It is an important concept.

Like I said in the other post "Their are no rules." Once you understand that the rules will be followed, or not followed. That the rules are just suggestions, that may or may not be followed, it all becomes at lot more clear. Wrap your head around this concept, and it becomes a lot easier to understand SC2.

[ChrisND]

Are you done with your hissy fit yet? I don't seem to remember you mentioning any of that in the aobve post. I suppose I've got to read your mind.

Wrap your head around that concept.

[Agamemnon]

I didn't mention it because as I stated a tank in a marsh tile was entrenched to lvl 3. Your post talked of woods tiles, of which their were none. So I went into more detail. I knew someone would make up some reason why I was total ignorant of the "rules". I just didn't know the particular's of the post in advance. I did know someone would post some reason as proof that I am totally devoid of any knowledge of the "rules." I am also somewhat confident that someone will post another reason why that tank should have been entrenched. Being that I am totally ignorant of "rules" that are supposed to apply.

I stand by my statement: "Their are no rules"

Oh, and BTW this not the only instance of the "rules" not being applied.

You will have to remember though, that I am totally ignorant of the "rules" and or game play.

[ChrisND]

Well perhaps you shouldn't presume people so quickly. I wasn't "trying to prove that you are totally devoid of any knowledge of the rules." There are locations on the map where woods can be confused with Marsh, which I have done myself, like the Kiev/Minsk marshes and the Leningrad area.

Are you this unpleasant in real life?

[BioWizard]

Agamemnon, please be considerate .

Normal Dude was merely trying to explain the weird game comportment you witnessed. In the meantime, as you are a well dedicated SC2 player, I think you should report this bug of yours in the tech support forum with a very detailed look upon your "entrenchment level 3 on a marsh tile bug". Hubert will then be able to look into it for all of us to enjoy.

[Hubert Cater]

Agamemnon, while this might just be a semantic difference of opinion, I think the statement "Their are on rules" is a bit harsh and rather what you have noticed was a bug .

IIRC this was reported prior to v1.05a and fixed but I will take another look and see if I missed something.

I should mention though that I agree with BioWizard and others here... definitely feel free to report other such bugs in the Tech Support forum so I can continue to fix and improve the game for the next patch.

Thanks,

Hubert

[Canuck_TAR]

Agamemnon...............LMAO!!!!!!

pass that sh*t over bro...........I could use a hit!!!!!!

[Jeff Gilbert]

Damn, sounds like my "stealth" fortification "feature" has been found out!

:mad:

[Liam]

What good are fortifications in SC2? You people need to revert back to SC1 when entrenchment meant a damn!

1 hit from a IW3 experienced morale kicking Army/Corps will knock out what you think a defense is! and 1 level3 tank will finish the job

[Agamemnon]

Are you this unpleasant in real life?

Yes

Over the years I have learned most people are full of it, and dying to tell you about it. As time goes on, I take less and less crap.

So the answer is a resounding yes.

[Agamemnon]

Agamemnon, while this might just be a semantic difference of opinion, I think the statement "Their are on rules" is a bit harsh and rather what you have noticed was a bug

I searched the manual, and could find no rules for when a port changes ownership. I remember there was something about controlling all the adjacent tiles, or having no adjacent enemy units, to take over a port. I had a situation with UK corps XXX landing in tile 77,14, and moving into tile 79,14 taking control of the port Kiel 79,13. On the German turn, corps II moved into tile 78,13 north of the port (Kiel79, 13), and control whiched to Germany. The next turn the UK corps XXX moved into tile 80,14 taking control of the port (Kiel 79,13), with German corps II still next to Kiel in tile 78,13. The port changed hands twice while enemy units were adjacent.

Is this one of those “Surprise Rules” that are really not rules? Since the manual apparently says nothing about it, or is this a case of maybe it will, maybe it won’t rules that SC2 is so fond of?

So instead of saying “their are no rules” lets just say the “Rules are fluid.”

[jon_j_rambo]

Wow, I finally read this thread, it looked sorry at first...but I like. Some dudes coming out of the woodwork with some comments, about time.

@NormalDude --- I like your anti-Christ list, that a kid!

[Moonslayer]

Originally posted by Agamemnon:

I searched the manual, and could find no rules for when a port changes ownership. I remember there was something about controlling all the adjacent tiles, or having no adjacent enemy units, to take over a port. I had a situation with UK corps XXX landing in tile 77,14, and moving into tile 79,14 taking control of the port Kiel 79,13. On the German turn, corps II moved into tile 78,13 north of the port (Kiel79, 13), and control whiched to Germany. The next turn the UK corps XXX moved into tile 80,14 taking control of the port (Kiel 79,13), with German corps II still next to Kiel in tile 78,13. The port changed hands twice while enemy units were adjacent.

I have always assumed this was tied into the zoc rules. When a unit moves the adjacent tiles to the one it moves to become 'owned' by the moving side. This is true for all non-resource tiles afaik.