Questions for Steve (General PBEM) #7

[Big Time Software]

At the tail end of the last thread, Henri had three very good questions...

<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>Leading with his infantry would have been suicide as they would have been mowed down by machine guns, and getting his MGs close enough to make a difference would have been chancey at best. So what should he have done?<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

VERY tough call here. In my tests of the game I figured that there would be no significant bazooka threat in the first bit outside of the woods. Therefore I advanced my Panther towards the area and successfully took out the lead tanks (including the Jumbo). I then kept the halftracks advancing in a slow and spread out manner as they exited the safety of the woods with the Panther as protector. The force in the North lost its two vehicles to bazooka fire (one on each road), but advanced the infantry to the edge of the woods intact. Same thing happened in the south as happened to Fionn, so I only managed to get infantry to the edge of the woods.

This took about 5 turns or so. The mass of Halftracks laid down a decent amount of covering fire and I assaulted in bounds. I concentrated the ENTIRE central force on the wall line in the middle. The SS in the south took the petty positions in front of it and the VGs bolted towards the woods on the northern map edge, leave a couple of squads in the houses to get crossfire in on the wall line. I lost a couple of HTs and some infantry, but overall the attack went well.

What Fionn did wrong was he launched his main attack in two different directions AND without regard to C&C. This meant he didn't have enough men attacking Martin's central position, and they were hampered by delays. He didn't have enough men to do what I did, and that was deposit the first batch of grenadiers in the houses and then assault with a second batch. By the time his VGs got into supporting positions the battle was over and his forces were chewed to pieces. He also didn't wait to assault the southern defenses with the SS in the woods, but instead went in again with too few men and poor C&C.


<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>it is generally considered that a ratio of 3/1 in forces is required to attack a defensive position. Did Fionn ever have such an advantage, or could he have maneuvered to obtain it, taking into account fog of war?<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

The 3:1 force ratio is generally against troops in prepared positions. Martin's were in ad hoc positions, so 2:1 would probably have been fine. Yes, Fionn easily had this and a whole lot more. I think his attack on Martin's initial positions could have been as high as 4:1, but as stated above he didn't go in at once so it was more like 1:1 in reality.


<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>How should Fionn have scouted the position, given his lack of time? The Puma? Or should he have waited to have his whole force together (giving Martin time to prepare) and launched an all-out attack on the town? I doubt it, but who knows?<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

In this type of a situation recon is VERY tough to do. The forces were only separated by a couple hundred meters. He assumed correctly that not much stood inbetween him and the river, and acted on that assumption. This was the correct thing to do. After taking the initial positions some time could be spent reorganizing and sending a small force ahead to see what surprises might be in store for the advance (bazookas were all over the place!). This would have been right around the time of the village falling. Harassing artillery fire would have kept Martin off balance for a few more turns, and then an assault could have been mounted in one concentrated push up the middle with all vehicles and the bulk of the infantry working the more protected flanks.

Steve

[Bil Hardenberger]

<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>an assault could have been mounted in one concentrated push up the middle with all vehicles and the bulk of the infantry working the more protected flanks.<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

Funny, when I saw the halftrack dash down the center and survive, my first thought was, "...now that would have been something if that had been done by all, or close to all of the halftracks..." would have scared the s*** out of Martin too I'll bet. Sure Fionn would have lost a couple of tracks, but the majority most likely would have made it. He would have then been in a commanding situation. The trick though, would have been not getting half of them cut off in the woods, like he did http://www.battlefront.com/discuss/smile.gif

I take it that your playtest was against the computer AI? How would you rate it as compared to what Martin has done?

[This message has been edited by Bil Hardenberger (edited 09-23-99).]

[Big Time Software]

Actually Bil, the Strategic AI was not hooked up at that point. I was playing both sides and making very careful decisions based on the information and tasks at hand for each side. Not the same as playing against another human or the AI, but close enough to see the general way things would go. Oh, and there was a bug at the time that had Bazookas neatly picking off anything that moved at 200+ meters, so I lost quite a few Halftracks more than I should have http://www.battlefront.com/discuss/smile.gif

I would love to tell you how the AI would play as either side, but the scenario is no longer works with the new build. We will probably recreate it for the final release (I have screenshots of the map in the editor as well as unit lists).

Steve

[Lokesa]

That would be a good thing, I'm sure a lot of us would like to play with that scenario. Please include it http://www.battlefront.com/discuss/smile.gif

[Brian Rock]

Some thoughts on repackaging the scenario for the final release, prompted by wondering how long would it have taken Fionn's infantry to reach the west edge if they walked through the woods on the north.

Reason for asking: at present it's pretty difficult for the German player do much other than a central attack. Any vehicles from the south or centre moving north would expose their flanks to any US armor along the wall. So it largely comes down to how well the Germans conduct central attack. At least that's how it looks to me - might seem different if playing the scenario.

It might be interesting to give the German the option of taking a route with more cover at the expense of losing time. Eg add a few patches of woods and maybe even a few trails along the northern and eastern edge to provide some cover to allow a German approach along the north.

It could make life even more interesting for the US player as well. They can deploy against a central attack, deploy to cover against a northern push, try to cover both, screen both but hold a defensive reserve, and so on.

[Doug Beman]

Steve, a few days ago I sent some posts to Steve's Questions#6, but I think they didn't get in before you closed up #6 and started #7.

Is this possible? I can't remember what I said, so is there somewhere the posts might be? I don't even know how important or intelligent they were.

DjB

[Lokesa]

I wonder how much the the game will have changed, will the map Fionn and Martin have the same challenges with the fixes?

One glaring difference will be the ability to push vehicles, Fionn lost a decent chunk of his firepower due to the version he was playing.

I had wanted to play the same map but I can see how it might not be the same game.

Nevertheless, considering that with the editor we will be able to change the maps and scenarios to our hearts content, I vote for putting the current scenario in with the only modifications being those made to the game itself.

[Big Time Software]

Doug, if they aren't in #6 then you must have posted them someplace else http://www.battlefront.com/discuss/smile.gif

Brian, there are all sorts of things that could be done to this scenario. The editor will allow you to play around with it as you suggest http://www.battlefront.com/discuss/wink.gif

Lokesa, no two games will ever play exactly the same, so it is hard to say if the fixes would do much. For example, right now a replay might have Fionn's southern force not being hit at all by anything, or he might not have used up so much AP if he hadn't used Area Fire so much, etc. Not sure if vehicle pushing would have helped Fionn out too much as he had 3 HTs blocking that road by the time the artillery was through. The StuG would have taken a long time to clear them.

[Highlander]

Steve,
Question about fog of war with regard to number of men in an enemy unit. When you click on an enemy unit that you have been observing for awhile, do you get an estimate of how many men it contains?
My thoughts go back to the German advance across the river towards the southern hills. Fionn I believe had split his units into half squads to give the apperance of a bigger force. I know each squad had 3 men which is reduced as they take casulties, but when you split squads, how many figures does each have? If a force is observed for several turns advancing across the open, you should be able to get a reasonable count (taking into account incoming fire of course as to how much 'watching' you are doing). In this way, Martin should have been able to realize he was only facing two platoons instead of 4, and Fionns ruse should not have worked. Thoughts?

Scott

[Big Time Software]

Hi Scott,

The circumstances for getting the correct headcount are dependent on the situation. But basicially, the more you look the more chance you will have of knowing what is what. In real life 4 or 5 men might be taken for 9 at a distance, or in dense terrain. But it won't stay that way for long. Your guys also do make some sort of guess as to the type of unit. So when Martin clicked on Fionn's half squads he most likekly first saw "Infantry Squad?", but fairly soon there after saw exactly what it was.

Fionn tried to pull some FoW tricks to fool Martin into thinking that he had more stuff than he in fact did. I followed their game from their perspective and Martin wasn't fooled http://www.battlefront.com/discuss/smile.gif Worse than that, for Fionn, the tricks he tried to pull actually caused him great numbers of casualties. That is a big disincentive and I have assurances from Fionn that he won't be trying such tricks again as he knows they don't work http://www.battlefront.com/discuss/wink.gif

Steve

[Highlander]

Thanks Steve,
That sounds like exactly what I wanted to hear. You guys are really on the ball.

Scott

[Darstand]

Has there been any unit behavior that has suprised you? I guess what I am trying to ask is; has there been any times that you have leaned back in you chair and said "Wow, that was really cool, I didn't expect the AI to do that!"

[Big Time Software]

Hmmm... not for a while at least. When the TacAI was first programmed (ohmygoshayearago!) there was lots of that. Now we simply see things we expect, but never until after the unit does it. In other words, we know what the possible reactions will be, but never when the unit might take one course of action or another. The StratAI is a whole 'nother kettle of fish http://www.battlefront.com/discuss/smile.gif Since it actually ACTS instead of REACTS (that is all the TacAI is allowed to do) there are all sorts of surprises in store!

Steve

[Ssnake]

Could you please post more about the strat AI?
I consider it extremely challenging to have a high level AI for ground combat for all the possible variables that need to be considered.
Fuzzy logic as well ?
What are the basic principles, how do you get it to be CREATIVE ?

------------------
PGP key ID: 0xBCD59BA1
I strongly recommend the use of encryption software for e-Mail contacts. Ensuring privacy makes people feel better :o)

[Big Time Software]

I would post more about the StratAI, but I don't have time to play the game much http://www.battlefront.com/discuss/frown.gif A little later we'll get something posted.

Yes, the StratAI is fuzzy. It basically works on a battlegroup concept. Depending on the mission and force allocation it chooses what it wants to do, assigns forces to it, keeps some in reserve (or able to be a reserve) and then goes about trying to do its job. It also has the ability to alter its starting positions based on the "plan" it comes up with. The OperationalAI moves units around depending on the mission and the unit iteself. Er... something like that http://www.battlefront.com/discuss/smile.gif

Steve

[Ssnake]

Hi Steve,

what I wanted to know is since pathfinding seems to be such a pain for many games, how would the StratAI plot a course for vehicles as well as humans that make a bit of sense ?

Will it learn - like Fionn, not to relocate forces amidst an arty barrage and the like, how does is select appropriate spots for ambushes etc etc... ????

[SimonFox]

"Will it learn - like Fionn, not to relocate forces amidst an arty barrage"

One would hope that it already "knows" this otherwise it would be some dumbass AI hehe, oops sorry Fionn http://www.battlefront.com/discuss/smile.gif

[Big Time Software]

Yeah, plotting units sucks. Thankfully Charles has many years of experience (aided by super math skills) doing Best Path stuff. I don't understand all the stuff that goes into it (and don't want to!!), but units do plot very good paths. As for the artillery thing, the AI isn't able to learn on the fly. This stuff has to be programmed in ahead of time. Beta testing should shake out stuff that we forgot.

Steve

[tgra]

Is it possible to lower the morale of an opponent by scaring the poo out of them?
Fionn seems to be trying it...

[Big Time Software]

Hehe... we would love to have some device hooked up to measure the player's heart rate and to record how many swear words he avergaes in a minute http://www.battlefront.com/discuss/wink.gif That would be a riot!

In the game the Global Morale goes down as you take losses. This makes the surviors more likely to Panic, or at least not do exactly as you tell them. Individual units can be spooked, but nothing global.

Steve

[Ben Galanti]

Are the only things that affect a squads morale the global morale and what is happening directly to that squad? Does what the squad "see's" affect it's morale? I guess the example I'm thinking of is if two squads are in close proximity, and one gets routed and/or annihilated will the second squad be more likely to break? Or will this just be factored in to the global morale and all that sides units will be slightly more likely to break?

[This message has been edited by Ben Galanti (edited 10-04-99).]

[Bamse]

Moving units over the map edge !

If you realize that you cant win can you move over the mapedge to save your forces for the next map ?

Commander : Hold your fire boys they have crossed the edge (74 m away) we have too let them go and fight them anouther day !

THAT IS SO GAMEY

Their should be rulez for disengaging of the map (no enemy unit in 100m), no LOS,
Not everyone Should make it (Rear guards covering the retreat)

[tgra]

Steve...

The votes for Fionn and Martin are very akin to their current morale figures within the game.... weird coincidance or a reflection on
how 'human' the game can judge a situation?

If so, then is morale REALLY settled by casualties or is there something, more scrarey, going on under the covers?

[Bobb]

Looking at the background sky in Martin's 33turn pictures, the first one looks very dark while most of the rest look sunny (the last one is white). What is behind the different looks?

It has been a while since anyone commented on the looks of the soldier figures, probably due to the nice improvements there. I think that one thing that remains is that the heads are a little too large in porportion to the rest. It gives them the look of younger kids whose heads do fit that porportion. I think it also affects the look of the helmets, which seem a little off to me. In the end who cares if the so in sos will fight!

This is the sort of comment to expect when we are watching someone else giving the orders.
Sorry about that.

[Highlander]

What is the current status of the AAR game?
Have they completed it? And when might we be likely to see some more AARs?

Thanks,
Scott

[Big Time Software]

They are all done. Problems with the changes at TGN have caused delays. We kept thinking they would be resolved quickly, but despite best efforts they haven't been. We are doing something different now and you should see more very shortly. A lot more http://www.battlefront.com/discuss/wink.gif

Steve