* *

Translations for our friends around the world.

Click on banner for Theater of Operations website


Author Topic: Unit Persistence  (Read 496 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline choppinlt

  • Moderator
  • *****
  • Posts: 290
  • T.O.O. Developer
    • Buckeye Battle Group
Unit Persistence
« on: November 22, 2016, 07:25:24 PM »
Unit Persistence is a mechanic for players to control a unit's willingness to absorb casualties. There are 3 categories: Stubborn, Determined, and Cautious. Players are free to adjust the persistence level of a given unit during the Command Phase of the turn. Units that are actively engaged in combat may be assigned a new persistence level, however they will NOT switch to the newly assigned persistence level until their engagement is over. The persistence level of a unit may be altered for each waypoint moved as well. So a unit can be given a movement waypoint with 'cautious' persistence, and when it reaches the endpoint it can be assigned a new persistence level (e.g. Stubborn). Assigning persistence levels is part of the process of issuing movement orders. You can see it discussed in this thread http://dogsofwarvu.com/forum/index.php/topic,1224.0.html

Stubborn-On the attack Stubborn means that achieving the objective is of greater importance than long term force preservation. On the defense Stubborn is a "hold at all cost" mindset, which means that a commander is more willing to sacrifice troops than give ground. For context, the casualty threshold for this level of persistence is 10% for the attackers. What is casualty threshold you ask? It is the point at which a unit considers withdrawing from a particular engagement. If a defending unit has Stubborn persistence, it's casualty threshold is around 70%. This does not mean a unit holds ground suicidally it just means the unit won't consider casualties a reason to withdraw, and will only yield ground when faced with overwhelming force (i.e. forcibly removed). Any unit with Stubborn persistence is likely to suffer greater cohesion loss as well. So this persistence level has higher risks, and it is up to commanders to determine if it is worth the risk.

Determined-on the attack or the defensive Determined peristence is considered the typical level of commitment to battle. Units will balance gains/losses in ground with managing force preservation. The casualty threshold is around 5% for Determined persistence on both the attack and defense. As a result there will be less potential cohesion loss.

Cautious-on the attack Cautious persistence represents probing attacks or holding actions to some degree. If resistance is light enough attackers can make very good progress in terms of ground taken, but will quickly back down if resistance stiffens. This results in the least risk of cohesion loss due to combat. The casualty threshold for both attack and defense is around 2%. Just like in real life, this can lead to probing attacks being a real benefit before launching a major assault on a position, because the attacker can gain valuable information on the enemy he is facing.

It is important to remember that the % casualties sustained are calculated against the whole unit, not just bayonetstrength. E.g. An infantry battalion with 800 men*.05=40 casualties (i.e. 5% casualties sustained). The casualties in this example are probably going to be at least 90% bayonetstrength. So the supply guys take little or no casualties, but front line headcount drops. 40*0.9=36 casualties from front line guys...this is an entire platoon lost! I mention this because most games like CM and ASL only show combat troops (i.e.bayonetstrength). So the resulting tactical battle will have a noticeably higher casualty level percentage as a result. You can also see how a unit could quickly be ground down and become ineffective.

Do tactical players need to incorporate ToO peristence in to the tactical battles they play out? Right now I am of the opinion that it is open for player interpretation. ToO uses persistence as a user interface mechanic for the battle resolution system to allow players some control on how their units act during combat. If players wish to incorporate it in to their battles, they can use it for creating scenario parameters or victory conditions. E.g. once X number of troops have been eliminated, the scenario ends and results are tallied. Players can use it just as a guide, or choose to ignore it completely. Players just need to be in agreement on how to handle it prior to the particular engagement. It can vary from battle to battle, as long as players agree. My personal opinion is that ToO can give tactical results as a guide for players when setting up tactical battles, if nothing else it can help create a mindset and context as to what to reasonably expect. ToO can give results within a reasonable range and players can use this to help normalize their tactical results.

As always, ask questions and comment!  :)