AA/First Strike Unit Enhancements

  • Back 🙂
    There is a problem with units, that do not have any attack and/or defence value, those that only have AA attack/defense.

    1. In purchasewindow it is 0/0/X (attack/defense/movement), but that reads as a unit with zero attack/defense value, only when moving the cursor over it, it will be displayed. Much better would be IMO, when it would displayed as 2-0/1-0/X, meaning the unit has a first strike/AA attack of 2, but 0 normal attack...
    2. Combatwindow has the exact same problem, or even worse, these units are just listed above 0, much better would be a second row, with AA units in the first one, above their AA attack/defence value and the normal attacking units in the second one. If a unit has both, AA attack and a normal attacking value, it should be displayed in both rows.
    3. Autosuggestion for casualties is a horror, pure AA units are taken first always, just attack/defense are taken into consideration it seems, while pure AA units are much stronger with the same value - in most cases-, as they simply hit first.
    4. The AI is probably just picking up the autosuggestion for casualties and does get rid of their stronger (AA units) first, or there hasen´t been set anything yet.

    For checking this request on a map with pure AA units, Feudal Japan Warlords works, it has Archers and Teppos with just an AA value.

  • Admin

    @rolflasson At a high level, I totally agree and the only reason it probably has been tackled yet is the limited number of maps that use it extensively. Feedback:

    1. Agree though I'm not a fan of the format you suggest as the "-" can be misinterpreted as "subtraction". We also need to decide on a common term for AA/first strike rolls as the XML refers to it as AA but that is a terrible term since it can be used for anything. First strike may be ok though that kind of conflicts with a sub's attack. You also need to consider AA that is just round 1 vs every round vs only limited rounds. Something like for your example: 0/0/X FS 2/1. Other examples:
      Revised AA gun: 0/0/1 FS1 0/1 (has 1 first strike @ 1 on defense)
      TWW 2.7 AA gun: 0/0/0 FS1 0/2 (has 1 first strike @ 2 on defense)
      TWW 2.8 AA gun: 0/0/0 FS 0/1 (has every round first strike @ 1 on defense)
      Fake skirmisher: 1/2/1 FS2 2/2 (has 2 first strikes @ 2 on attack/defense)

    2. Hmm. Having it appear in both rows may be confusing. There is a thread on combat window improvements already where I think continuing this discussion would fit better: https://forums.triplea-game.org/topic/338/possible-game-interface-suggestions/2

    3. Yeah, casualty selection logic is very difficult (at least the engine takes into account support attachments now as it didn't for a long time). AA/FS units are even more complex since you probably want to determine if their are enemy units that their AA/FS roll can hit. Also do you value AA/FS the same as regular if there is? You could argue the AA gun's roll against air is worth more than regular attack. So this isn't super straightforward.

    4. The AI doesn't understand AA rolls at all. The only thing it handles is strategic bombing AA and position them over factories. This has been low priority so far given the number of maps that use AA rolls.

    All good suggestions but probably need to discuss them a bit and potentially break this thread up into multiple.

  • @redrum

    1. Since we have so many maps with so many different mechanics, I think it is unreasonable to assume that any single format is going to fulfill its purpose with every map - which is to give a very rough idea of a unit's value/capabilities at a glance. I would suggest a configurable text, similar to the configurable unit tooltips, so that the map maker can decide what is important enough to display without having to hover over the unit with the cursor. What this configurable text defaults to still is a question, but not one worth worrying too much about.

  • Admin

    Welcome Back!!! 🙂

  • Admin

    @alkexr Not a bad idea. Do you have any thoughts/examples of how you would propose the configuration would look? Would it be per unit? Per game?

  • Well, purchase window is just not comfortable, could be A/B/C/D/E with A for FirstStrike value, B for normal attack, C for FirstStrike value defense, D for normal defense and E for movement, maybe the number of rounds in brackets like : 2(1)/3/3(2)/4/1 but that looks at bit much info, colour could be used maybe.
    Any text popup beeing configurable would be good, probably needs to be per unit, maybe within xml under unit attachments.
    For engine casualties selection and AI it is not so easy to set. 2 attackers with 3, one FS, one normal and 2 defenders with the same values, for example is hard to judge, as it really depends on the hits your opponent scores. If both FS miss, but you get a hit in normal round, you sure want to keep your FS unit and the same situation when a FS unit scores a hit, but when the FS values are lower, say 1 or 2 with 6 sided dice, it is much harder to tell and more gambling, while I would say a FS unit with 2 is still better than a normal unit with 3...