Playing a scenario in France 14 I had the whole time a feeling of snail movement when I had to get up an elevation. I thought I'm in France so snail is fine but I have taken a closer look now and it seems to me that the movement points we have to pay for elevation are too high.
Currently we pay 10mp per 100meters or 5mp for each level(50meters) of elevation, that we only pay 4mp for moving infantry in travel mod one hex(1000 meters) on a primary road makes the elevation cost seem way too high. I can wrap my head around the fact that we pay less for covering 1000meters horizontal than we have to pay for covering 50 meters vertical.
I tried to compare things but that wasn't helpful, some Panzer Campaign titles use 10mp per 100meters too, but I also see some that only use 2mp per 100 meters what almost seems too low. I also took a look at the Napoleonic series and here we usually pay 2mp per elevation(3meters) while you pay 2mp for moving infantry in column on a pike for 100meters. If we take this as guidance we would end up with having to pay 3.33 per elevation level in the FWWC series.
Maybe someone has a knowledge of how marching speeds are effected by elevations in real life, that could give a clue of what values make more sense.
From a pure in-game perspective it seems strange that an infantry unit marching cross country can cover 2 hex each with one level of elevation while the same unit in travel mod on a primary road can also only make 2 hex each with one elevation. Alone from that perspective it would make a nice difference to lower the cost to 8mp per 100 meters so that a unit on a primary road can makes 3 hexes while cross country it still only makes 2 hex each with one level of elevation.
Your attention to detail is appreciated Big Duke! I was never good at math so your arguments are beyond me. I would say that a 150 foot climb (15 stories!) in 2 hours is surely going to slow down anybody, I guess? jonny
Maybe I am not fully understanding the issue, but 10 MP per 100m elevation is basically a standard amount for all FWWC, PzC and MC games since the beginning. It was a value that was decided to be sufficient enough to not be considered insignificant and it has been in use for some 15 years or so.
Also, your comparing road movement in FWWC to elevation penalty and this is not directly comparable in distance. If you have ever tried marching up 100m slope over a distance of 1000m (maybe you have!) then it will slow your forward progress. That is what the elevation modifier is for, its not a literal cost to move up 100m in height, it is simply the extra effort spent moving up that elevation that penalizes the overall distance the unit moves. Keep in mind that the elevation change in the game doesn't mean the units are stepping up an abrupt elevation change, instead on the actual map it usually means a slope across the full distance of the 1km area. So, if you march up elevation change of 100m over the distance of a 1000m hex, then I imagine that this would likely slow your overall progress by ~1000m overall. It is not unreasonable to me at least.
All that said, sure I suppose someone could argue that 10 MP / 100m elevation is too much all these years, and you can change it to 5 MPs if you like. That said, since it is has been this way all this time then I am inclined to leave it.
Regarding road speed, in the FWWC notes I explained (or I thought I explained) that primary road movement for foot units basically costs less over what it is in other games, in order to represent historical marching distances. Now this difference in the series I guess this could be justified that WW1 infantry generally had less equipment than your WW2 or MC infantry.
Johnny, not sure I understand what you mean about it taking 2 hours to go up 150 feet elevation, it only takes a portion of your MPs to do that, not your full MPs.
Is the next FWWC game going to involve a lot of marching up and down hills?
I think it's important to consider the scale of the game (operational vs. squad level). Keeping the troops in formation gives them operational validity, instead of just running up the hill with guns blazing as it would be with a squad level game.
I can't remember if there's a bonus going cross-country in column, but in a operational scenario it's probable that the enemy would be more numerous than in a squad level scenario, thus your troops would be more cautious, "hitting the dirt" often, becoming pinned for a moment, etc..
(06-23-2017, 05:09 PM)Volcano Man Wrote: [ -> ]Maybe I am not fully understanding the issue, but 10 MP per 100m elevation is basically a standard amount for all FWWC, PzC and MC games since the beginning. It was a value that was decided to be sufficient enough to not be considered insignificant and it has been in use for some 15 years or so.
As I said I saw 2mp in some PC titles, unfortunately I have cleaned up my drive in the meantime but I think it were some newer titles.
(06-23-2017, 05:09 PM)Volcano Man Wrote: [ -> ]Also, your comparing road movement in FWWC to elevation penalty and this is not directly comparable in distance. If you have ever tried marching up 100m slope over a distance of 1000m (maybe you have!) then it will slow your forward progress. That is what the elevation modifier is for, its not a literal cost to move up 100m in height, it is simply the extra effort spent moving up that elevation that penalizes the overall distance the unit moves. Keep in mind that the elevation change in the game doesn't mean the units are stepping up an abrupt elevation change, instead on the actual map it usually means a slope across the full distance of the 1km area. So, if you march up elevation change of 100m over the distance of a 1000m hex, then I imagine that this would likely slow your overall progress by ~1000m overall. It is not unreasonable to me at least.
While that is a perfect explanation for the reality I doubt it can by applied to the game because of the all artificial limitation of hexes, turns, movement points, etc..
The Problem here is that the rather harsh elevation levels of 50 meters will ignore any slight rises that occur over several kilometers and that are a small factor to the marching speed. That means instead of a slight factor that is applied over a long distance & time(means every turn a bit MP cost) there is suddenly a big factor that considerably slows the traveled distance for that turn. I doubt that the turns where I don't have to pay MP for elevations counter the turns where I barely get ahead because of the MPs for the elevation are so big that combined with the hex costs a lot of the MP are left unspent.
Besides this we can't save movement cost for the next turn and by that any big factors will impact marching speed much more in a single turn, and again I doubt that the loss in that turn is counter by any possible benefit in the other turns. Just had a unit that didn't go any further because the hex + elevation cost was 8MP but it only had 7MP left, that means almost a third of the units MP forfeit because.
Last but not least there is no benefit of moving an elevation down, while downhill surely can't be judged the same way as uphill some MP saving seems plausible especially if the uphill costs are so high.
(06-23-2017, 05:09 PM)Volcano Man Wrote: [ -> ]All that said, sure I suppose someone could argue that 10 MP / 100m elevation is too much all these years, and you can change it to 5 MPs if you like. That said, since it is has been this way all this time then I am inclined to leave it.
I had just thought about 8MP on 100 meters instead of 10 because it would make a difference between cross country and road movement in that the later could still make 4 kilometers while cross country only 3 kilometers.
Johnny, not sure I understand what you mean about it taking 2 hours to go up 150 feet elevation, it only takes a portion of your MPs to do that, not your full MPs.
Sorry, I was musing about climbing 15 stories in 2 hours on a hot August day with the high sun beating down my head as my fellows marched with fixed bayonets while eating dust. Hadn't a thing to do with careful calculations. jonny
(06-24-2017, 10:03 AM)Al Wrote: [ -> ]Is the next FWWC game going to involve a lot of marching up and down hills?
Ohhhh that would be telling..............................
