Weather Conditions in a replay?

[Indragnir]

Must be a glitch. My weather condition last two game days was mud. Well, this day is mud again.

I totally agree with your thoughts about Bridge demolishing and DDR while digging in.

As I told you on turn 70 your replayed turn did really weird things so I just skipped it.

Yes the turn replay showed it as mud but the replay also shows units assaulting into Forest then firing after the assault. I also see motorised units moving one forest hex then firing? Thats not possible in MUD turns? Maybe we are playing on different maps? 

I've also experienced wierd replays where I watch my units take losses then when I look at the unit at the start of my turn the losses and fatigue do not tally. In most cases I have more men and lower fatigue than I should have? 

I'll delete the pbm file and make sure I don't have more than one Bulge open. I normally only have two versions open when I'm trying to write up the AAR. Its sometimes quicker to check losses by comparing the copy of my end of turn (saved before pressing Next Turn) with the new file just received back. Checking losses from replay can be tedious even with screenpresso.

Ian, since the assault target hex is a forest, unit will check against forest MP cost, mud is not a factor in that case. Also since assault takes 2/3 IIRC MPs from B/A quality units , it's quite usual you can assault and then fire once.

I was experiencing the same you described with casualties and fatigue! It's weird, I never play with more than one game open.

[Plain Ian]

Must be a glitch. My weather condition last two game days was mud. Well, this day is mud again.

I totally agree with your thoughts about Bridge demolishing and DDR while digging in.

As I told you on turn 70 your replayed turn did really weird things so I just skipped it.

Yes the turn replay showed it as mud but the replay also shows units assaulting into Forest then firing after the assault. I also see motorised units moving one forest hex then firing? Thats not possible in MUD turns? Maybe we are playing on different maps? 

I've also experienced wierd replays where I watch my units take losses then when I look at the unit at the start of my turn the losses and fatigue do not tally. In most cases I have more men and lower fatigue than I should have? 

I'll delete the pbm file and make sure I don't have more than one Bulge open. I normally only have two versions open when I'm trying to write up the AAR. Its sometimes quicker to check losses by comparing the copy of my end of turn (saved before pressing Next Turn) with the new file just received back. Checking losses from replay can be tedious even with screenpresso.

Ian, since the assault target hex is a forest, unit will check against forest MP cost, mud is not a factor in that case. Also since assault takes 2/3 IIRC MPs from B/A quality units , it's quite usual you can assault and then fire once.

I was experiencing the same you described with casualties and fatigue! It's weird, I never play with more than one game open.

I don't understand why mud is not a factor? I'm at work and will go home and look at the pdt file but I can tell you that an A morale Paratrooper unit has 28 movement points and when it moves into a Forest hex during Mud it uses 24. It has 4 left. It costs 24 to move and thats without terrain level changes.

In a Mud turn you cannot move in Forest and fire.

Now assault I'm not sure of because I have only made one recent assault and it was a C Morale unit. But if the normal cost of moving into terrain is > 2/3rd then this should be the assault cost and not 2/3? That makes sense. Otherwise its easier to move into a hex using assault than it is by marching into it?

I don't want to prolong this discussion. I'll check and post the pdt for 16.1s and then just get on with the turn. I'll delete pbm files and make sure that only one game is running.

[ComradeP]

Ian, since the assault target hex is a forest, unit will check against forest MP cost, mud is not a factor in that case.

That's not how it works in the most recent PzC game, Moscow '42, or how it works in Panzer Battles. It may work like that in Bulge '44, though. The manual should clarify it.

If you assault a forest hex with a foot movement unit in 200% modifier frozen conditions in Moscow '42, you pay 24 MP's.

As per the most recent manual:  

 The assault costs a unit the maximum of the following two values:
• 2/3 of its movement allowance.
• The movement cost to move into the defending hex.

So, Ian is correct: if you could move and fire when assaulting a forest hex in mud conditions with a 200% modifier, that's a glitch as the assault cost is 24 MP's (the movement cost is higher than the assault cost in this case).

[Plain Ian]

Ian, since the assault target hex is a forest, unit will check against forest MP cost, mud is not a factor in that case.

That's not how it works in the most recent PzC game, Moscow '42, or how it works in Panzer Battles. It may work like that in Bulge '44, though. The manual should clarify it.

If you assault a forest hex with a foot movement unit in 200% modifier frozen conditions in Moscow '42, you pay 24 MP's.

As per the most recent manual:  

 The assault costs a unit the maximum of the following two values:
• 2/3 of its movement allowance.
• The movement cost to move into the defending hex.

So, Ian is correct: if you could move and fire when assaulting a forest hex in mud conditions with a 200% modifier, that's a glitch as the assault cost is 24 MP's (the movement cost is higher than the assault cost in this case).

Or it must be that the weather was Normal and not Mud for Indragnir's turn? Despite Mud weather showing. This is what Dog Soldier said at the start. I suspect that MUD terrain showed during your turn (as it did in the replay) but you had Normal movement allowances. But because it was Night you did not notice this as you were conservative with your moves?

It doesn't matter now however. I'll get home and start my turn. Normal weather movement allowance will make a BIG BIG difference to the game now. I will have to be very very careful as Indragnir will be able to move distances and still assault/fire.

[Indragnir]

Ian, since the assault target hex is a forest, unit will check against forest MP cost, mud is not a factor in that case.

That's not how it works in the most recent PzC game, Moscow '42, or how it works in Panzer Battles. It may work like that in Bulge '44, though. The manual should clarify it.

If you assault a forest hex with a foot movement unit in 200% modifier frozen conditions in Moscow '42, you pay 24 MP's.

As per the most recent manual:  

 The assault costs a unit the maximum of the following two values:
• 2/3 of its movement allowance.
• The movement cost to move into the defending hex.

So, Ian is correct: if you could move and fire when assaulting a forest hex in mud conditions with a 200% modifier, that's a glitch as the assault cost is 24 MP's (the movement cost is higher than the assault cost in this case).

Or it must be that the weather was Normal and not Mud for Indragnir's turn? Despite Mud weather showing. This is what Dog Soldier said at the start. I suspect that MUD terrain showed during your turn (as it did in the replay) but you had Normal movement allowances. But because it was Night you did not notice this as you were conservative with your moves?

It doesn't matter now however. I'll get home and start my turn. Normal weather movement allowance will make a BIG BIG difference to the game now. I will have to be very very careful as Indragnir will be able to move distances and still assault/fire.

Mmm, I moved few units last turn, only assaults and by road IIRC, so it's possible I didn't realised about MP costs. I will pay closer attention next turn.

[Buffaloes]

ComradeP Wrote:

The assault costs a unit the maximum of the following two values:
• 2/3 of its movement allowance.
• The movement cost to move into the defending hex.

If you assault a forest hex with a foot movement unit in 200% modifier frozen conditions in Moscow '42, you pay 24 MP's.

---

---

Comrade P,

I used to interpret the section of the user's manual you quoted above the same way you did in your post.  I've since discovered that that interpretation is not entirely correct.

A couple of weeks ago, I was on the receiving end of an assault that should not have been able to happen according to the assault MP costs listed above.  In our Salerno '43 campaign, my opponent's British foot infantry was able to first enter a clear hex (6MP) and then assault a hex that would have cost him 31 MP to enter.  My assaulted unit occupied a vineyard hex 150 meters above the British assaulters.  I watched the replay of his move three times to make sure that my observations were correct.

Because my understanding of the rule was obviously in error, I set about running some tests to figure out exactly how that rule did, in fact, work.  Coincidentally, the archived turn that I dug out of my files to experiment with was from a Moscow '42 scenario - Volokalamsk.  My test reflects exactly the conditions you speak of in your Moscow '42 observations.

Test situation:  Two D-quality Russian infantry battalions (21 MP) start their turn in a hex adjacent to a pair of small German units - neither disrupted - in a TRENCH.  Both forces occupy forest hexes.  Current weather is frozen.

I select one Russian battalion and order him to assault.  Result: 1 man/1 gun, assault fails without anyone disrupted.  The Russian battalion has zero MP left, so all 21 MP were expended in the assault.

I now select the other Russian battalion and order a direct fire attack.  Result: 1 man, no disruption, and the Russians still have 14 MP left.  I now order the just-fired Russian battalion to assault the hex, and despite the target terrain requiring 24 MP to enter, they dutifully make the assault.  Result: two men/2 guns, assault fails, again with no disruptions on either side.  Obviously, the Russian battalion is now out of MP.

I repeated the experiment a handful of times and the second Russian battalion always assaulted the 24 MP forest hex despite having just 14 MP remaining - except the two times they were disrupted by German opportunity fire.

My conclusions:  Having 2/3 or more of your MP remaining will always allow an assault, even if the target-hex terrain has a higher MP cost to enter.  But the target-hex terrain cost will apply to any and all of your unit's MP allowance.

So to my thinking, the rule is at least partly wrong or written so poorly I can't get my mind around it.

Regards,
Billie

[Plain Ian]

ComradeP Wrote:

The assault costs a unit the maximum of the following two values:
• 2/3 of its movement allowance.
• The movement cost to move into the defending hex.

If you assault a forest hex with a foot movement unit in 200% modifier frozen conditions in Moscow '42, you pay 24 MP's.

---

---

Comrade P,

I used to interpret the section of the user's manual you quoted above the same way you did in your post.  I've since discovered that that interpretation is not entirely correct.

A couple of weeks ago, I was on the receiving end of an assault that should not have been able to happen according to the assault MP costs listed above.  In our Salerno '43 campaign, my opponent's British foot infantry was able to first enter a clear hex (6MP) and then assault a hex that would have cost him 31 MP to enter.  My assaulted unit occupied a vineyard hex 150 meters above the British assaulters.  I watched the replay of his move three times to make sure that my observations were correct.

Because my understanding of the rule was obviously in error, I set about running some tests to figure out exactly how that rule did, in fact, work.  Coincidentally, the archived turn that I dug out of my files to experiment with was from a Moscow '42 scenario - Volokalamsk.  My test reflects exactly the conditions you speak of in your Moscow '42 observations.

Test situation:  Two D-quality Russian infantry battalions (21 MP) start their turn in a hex adjacent to a pair of small German units - neither disrupted - in a TRENCH.  Both forces occupy forest hexes.  Current weather is frozen.

I select one Russian battalion and order him to assault.  Result: 1 man/1 gun, assault fails without anyone disrupted.  The Russian battalion has zero MP left, so all 21 MP were expended in the assault.

I now select the other Russian battalion and order a direct fire attack.  Result: 1 man, no disruption, and the Russians still have 14 MP left.  I now order the just-fired Russian battalion to assault the hex, and despite the target terrain requiring 24 MP to enter, they dutifully make the assault.  Result: two men/2 guns, assault fails, again with no disruptions on either side.  Obviously, the Russian battalion is now out of MP.

I repeated the experiment a handful of times and the second Russian battalion always assaulted the 24 MP forest hex despite having just 14 MP remaining - except the two times they were disrupted by German opportunity fire.

My conclusions:  Having 2/3 or more of your MP remaining will always allow an assault, even if the target-hex terrain has a higher MP cost to enter.  But the target-hex terrain cost will apply to any and all of your unit's MP allowance.

So to my thinking, the rule is at least partly wrong or written so poorly I can't get my mind around it.

Regards,
Billie

Nice analysis. When I play I usually just play by moving things with a rough plan in my head eg move adjacent and fire or assault if the game engine allows me. I tend to assault when sitting adjacent at the beginning of a turn. It really is too difficult sometimes to work out how much a move will cost in advance unless your name is Einstein? 

This isn't a negative comment about PzC though. It makes the game less of a game of chess and more of a game of gut feeling and good instincts backed by some knowledge.

Having said that against Indragnir I've been a bit more pedantic and now that the weather has changed to Normal and movement allowances are huge again (except its NIGHT so I still have to be careful) I find that the number of potential moves a bit more difficult to handle......hence why I'm still trying to finish my turn. 

By the way if we change The assault costs a unit the maximum of the following two values to The assault costs a unit the minimum of the following two values......then this might make a bit more sense?

[ComradeP]

Billie, what you describe for a situation where you fire and then assault is correct.

One of the other common examples of this is firing into a Rubble hex and then still being able to assault it, even though it should technically take you all MP's to do so. This is something I encounter fairly regularly in Panzer Battles. In the PzC titles with difficult weather conditions combined with difficult terrain, like Bulge '44 or Moscow '42, the example you mention will be more common.

However, Ian described a situation where a unit assaulted and then fired, so the other way around to what you tested and what I just mentioned.

That shouldn't be possible in this case.

An assault should always consume the required MP's or all (remaining, in case of 2/3) MP's, depending on how many MP's the unit has.

[Ricky B]

It is the maximum not minimum from my experience and that mostly matches the examples given. With an exception however. A unit can always assault if it retains at least 2/3rds of its movement when attempting the assault. So normally 1 shot is allowed before an assault even if the cost to move into the hex would take all movement normally.

Easy enough to test. Assault in bad conditions where it should take more than 2/3rd movement and the unit will have less than 1/3 movement left.