Capturing Objective Flags
 

Currently, an enemy unit can capture a flag the moment it enters the V-hex.

Therefore, if I am defending a V-hex on a crossroads and an enemy scout car drives onto the crossroads and is immediately destroyed, the objective is still considered captured by the scout. But it would be fairer to say that I still 'controlled' that crossroads.

This minor issue can become decisive in the last turn of games.

Then I thought that the V-hex should be captured when the unit leaves a hex. Which would solve the scout/crossroads problem. But if infantry enter an objective building and immediately 'dig in' to defend it...the objective won't be captured until they leave, which would not be right.

Additionally, if attacking infantry enter a V-hex, immediately get shot-up and routed out of the hex the objective is considered captured; but again it would be fairer to consider the objective still controlled by the defender.

Another idea is that units must sit on a hex for a whole turn before it is captured. The strength of this is that you can't just sacrifice suicide units to capture objectives in the end game without genuinely controlling/defending the objective.

The only possible weakness of the idea - that I can see - is that fast moving formations could no longer just cross a bridge or crossroads and immediately capture the flags. They would have to unload infantry, or have some units stop on the objectives for a turn.

Though this may be more realistic, because wasn't it normal practice upon capturing a bridge to unload guards or engineers to check it for explosives? And a crossroads would often have MPs or someone there giving directions.

I guess I'm saying, if it's a true objective, having a unit sit on the objective for one turn is more realistic than the current situation, and would make the 'gamey' capture of flags on the last turn difficult.

Any thoughts or ideas?



Cross

Re: Capturing Objective Flags
 

I have a variation on that I'm discussing with Andy and we'll weight the pros and cons and consider the implications to the code and that is the key. The code is stable right now and we've really pushed this far beyond anything we thought possible a few years ago as it is and ANY change made to it now needs to be considered from the "fallout" perspective as in " if we do this what could end up screwed up as a result" as some bits of code have very little impact on other bits of code but some bits of code have HUGE impacts on other bits of code

Don

Re: Capturing Objective Flags
 

I did think about the code issue when I was writing this. I was thinking about how units sit on abandoned equipment for a whole turn before the equipment is destroyed. But only you guys would know if something similar for V-hexes is feasible, and only testing would determine if it was stable.

This is not a big issue, just a possible improvement. The game is very stable and works great. And I prefer a stable game than a 'improved' game with bugs. :bug::bug:


Cross

Re: Capturing Objective Flags
 

Cross,

Interesting points and I wonder, based on Don's response if it would be possible to someday produce a list of "possible" changes that we could vote on or at least express our interest in to perhaps ease the ongoing development of the game.

All of us know that it's easy to have an idea but only the folks who "massage" the code on a regular basis have an idea of what's truly feasible and even then as Don points out there could be hidden repercussions that aren't readily apparent until someone accidentally bumps up against them and I'll second Cross's last post about "a stable game than a 'improved' game with bugs."

Steve

Re: Capturing Objective Flags
 

What use would a list be unless it only includes thoughts they have had & managed to impliment in which case they may as well tell us when the patch is imminent like now.

Coming up with an idea is part of what the forums for post them you will be told if it
A) has any merit
B) might be possible

Re: Capturing Objective Flags
 

Imp wrote:

>What use would a list be unless it only includes thoughts they >have had & managed to impliment in which case they may as well >tell us when the patch is imminent like now.

>Coming up with an idea is part of what the forums for post them >you will be told if it
>A) has any merit
>B) might be possible

Fair enough. I was thinking that by having a list it might cut down on the number of times they get pinged with the same question or questions.

Steve

Re: Capturing Objective Flags
 

I was thinking the reverse it would generate questions & comments to monitor which just shows we all think a bit diffrently which is no bad thing.

Re: Capturing Objective Flags
 

Why fix something thats really not broke?,
I mean if it's not that big a problem anyway why risk causing other problems?
If you can't recapture a grabbed hex would that make such an outcome on a battle,unless it was close still it seems a little arbitary and not a good reason to change the whole deal because of one persons gripe on losing a battle on a narrow margin.

just my 2.5 cents worth:)

Re: Capturing Objective Flags
 

Cross,my friend don't you agree just because you overwatch a VL,does not mean you own it?
You bring up bridges,a perfect example,how can one own the bridge by just having more assumed overwatch firepower on it?

Remagen, the nazi's had 88's and howitzers overwatching,albiet somewhat subdued by airtrikes but U.S captured the bridge before th gerry's could blow it up,so by capturing the bridge they disarmed the explosives,and the rest is history.
Quick grabs are not gamey,IMO only part of war;)

Re: Capturing Objective Flags
 

I talked with Andy about it and it's not going to happen for all reasons I suggested it might not. My idea was to flip them to neutral so nobody holds them until a unit has sat on them for a turn or two but then we start impacting all kinds of AI reaction code.

What we have now works equally for both sides. If one side is stronger in one part of the map they can grab a V hex on the fly but if they are too weak to defend on another it then they will lose it back when the opponent sends his own forces to grab bit back and if he isn't strong enough to hold it will switch sides again.

Yes, it's "gamey" to wait until the last turn or so then grab V hexes from your opponent not giving him the chance to respond but really how often does it happen that the stronger side gets blindsided at the end ? The whole concept of V hexes is "gamey" and not to forget.... SP is a game not a combat simulation ( though we do strive to minimize "gameyness" where possible but no matter what we do someone will find something "gamey" )

If you don't want V Hexes to influence the outcome set up the game so the V-hexes are all worth zero and just go by losses to determine who wins. It's all on how you want to play the game and there are as many opinions on how that should perfectly be as there are players. V hexes represent ground gained and held. We altered to code many releases ago to allow players edit the location of the V hexes so they can set up what they feel are" realistic" V-Hex Objectives so they don't have to rely on the auto generated ones if they don't want to.


Don

Re: Capturing Objective Flags
 

Hi Gila,

One of the reasons that this game is the best top-down wargame available, is because it has been incrementally improved over the years.

As long as improvements are tested, there's not much risk; and if an 'improvement' causes unsolvable problems it can be removed and the game taken back to the last stable release.


Yes, I agree that overwatch does not always mean ownership. But when we're talking about SP Victory Hex control, what we're trying to establish is who has the greater claim to ownership.

Whose flag should fly on a crossroads which a defender has occupied but then moved into overwatch positions, and then the attacker drives onto and is immediately destroyed? Therefore the overwatch firepower is not "assumed". Surely the defender has more control over the crossroads than the attacker? But currently the flag would switch to the attacker.

If the attacker was not immediately destroyed, and the crossroads successfully occupied for a whole turn, then I think the attacker has more claim to the crossroads than the defender, because the defender's overwatch was ineffective.

In your example of Remagen bridge, if the US had been immediately KO upon mounting the bridge, then I think the Germans have more control of the bridge than the US. However, if the US were able to sit on the bridge for a while - and search for or disarm explosives - then I believe the US have more control of the bridge than the Germans, despite German overwatch.

I'm fine with quick grabs as long as they actually grasp what they are grabbing, otherwise it was just a slap not a grab. ;)

I also think 'the benefit of the doubt' should go to the defender when it comes to V-hexes. Therefore it should be harder for the attacker to take an objective than it is for a defender to hold one, and so making attackers occupy a V-hex for a whole turn is sensible, IMHO.

1. If I have effective overwatch, I control who can cross the bridge and who can't. Just because the last person to actually be on the bridge was an enemy unit (now a smoking hulk) doesn't mean I've given up control of the bridge.

Why should I have to drive across the bridge again, just to prove my control?

2. Sometimes you just don't have time to 'recapture' a V-hex - you really shouldn't have to recapture anyway - because it's the last turn of the game.

EDIT: I had my browser open for a while and didn't see Don's answer above. I'm fine with the game the way it is, but that won't stop me suggesting improvements when I think I see them. :)


regards,
Cross

Re: Capturing Objective Flags
 

Simon why not add something to your house rules, I have no problem with losing a VH at the end if its being contested.
The silly one is players trying to sneak a lone size zero unit on meaning you use silly tactics like puting your defenders right on it or calling in your arty on what you own for the last couple of turns.
Simple rule that size zero cant take in last 2 turns would work, if you like unless supported by other units within visibility & range of the VH.
Can check the map easy enough at game end.
Other option of course is dont play them.

The good news is bigger picture its a bad tactic normaly used by people losing badly. That unit near a VH has extended the game or at least stopped it finnishing early letting you chew up whats left for longer if no other VHs are being contested.

Re: Capturing Objective Flags
 

Hi John,

No V-Hexes

I've recently played with no V-hexes (or one neutral hex just off the map edge) and really liked it.

It was a meeting engagement, and it resulted in a slightly slower start to the battle because the two sides were manouvering for position, before engaging, so there was not the normal rush to the centre and immediate clash.

But it was still an intense battle with plenty of casualties.

The biggest surprise was how it effected the map. The map features became far more important.

And I felt I had more freedom to organize my battlion in a more traditional fashion.

If you've not tried it, I recommend it for a different and probably more realistic SP experience. Especially if you are playing a PBEM campaign where force preservation is more important.

I think we may have the false assumption that without v-hexes there won't be a dynamic battle. I think this is only true for battles against the AI.


V-Hex PBEM Preferences

When playing with V-hexes I like to use prefs with a 10 hex wide 'no-mans-land' in the centre of the map and 10 v-hexes each side already set to each sides colours.

I also like to set v-hexes in 3 to 5 clumps max per side, otherwise by the end of the battle you can find yourself trying to defend 15 different locations scattered around the map; and splitting up platoons and sitting one undamaged section on each v-hex is often not enough to defend against sneaky units behind your lines.

I find the above works quite well for meeting engagements.

You can't say 'no capturing v-hexes on the last turn', because they can still get 'stolen' on the second from last turn and you're not allowed to capture them back.

Banning their capture by zero sized units may address some of the problem, but on large maps with only four or five companies (perhaps only two companies by the end of the battle ;) ) you can only stretch your battlion so thin.

You may have 'clearly won the day' in casualties and captured objectives, but a lot of this can get undone in the last two turns.

Did you have any specific ideas for other V-hex prefs?

regards,
Simon

Re: Capturing Objective Flags
 

Simon my thoughts on VHs pretty much as yours normally 3-5 clumps possibly 7 in MBT due to extra mobility but not often.
Dont leave the no mans land placement depends on terrain features just try to balance reasonably well erring on the side of player 2 for meetings. Do change all flags apart from any near the centre to controling player to stop info as change.

2 Groups also work well major & secondary objective, can either not use all flags double up or if objective is say a crossroad spread in the area around it. You dont actually need any on the road place them in places the road is vulnerable from you are securing the road or whatever against future attack.
Thats the only way scattered hexes works for me a dispersed group if you like covering an area not all over the map.

Have played meetings without flags as my thinking is often objectives are off map & they both bumped on the way or one side moved to engage the other & that is the only objective.
Found it did not make that much diffrence VHs basicly weight how you setup perhaps modifying the importance of some terrain features, does possibly allow more freedom the only reason to leave part of your force behind is to watch for flankers etc. Probably faster more cohesive as less mopping up as not so worried about missing a unit. Info or your arty park are all he can achieve without VHs
Will not work with those players that play a meeting as a delay though.

A thought here on VHs if possible the ability to choose the type either as is or give points each turn they are controlled. Not thought through but would mean capturing on last turn wont do much only suited to meetings though would think & yes I know they have these in SPWAW
For those that complain about VH values being to low in MBT might help to.