Required range when units follow after a failed turnblock

Hi,

Units failing to turnblock an enemy unit will follow the latter to its destination if they have the required range.
But ... what is the required range, exactly: the distance from the starting point of my unit to the destination of the enemy unit, or the distance from my unit to the enemy unit's initial position PLUS the distance from the enemy unit's initial position to the enemy unit's destination?

For example, in the following picture:

Let's say my unit is at point A. I want to turnblock a unit at point B, but I miss. The unit B goes from B to C.
How much range should my unit have to catch up with the enemy unit at point C? AC or (AB + BC)?

Thanks

EDIT Solved: AC

Doesn't matter I think,it will go anyway.

Ok, I did some experiments, it's pretty clear now.

Consider the following picture (turn x):


The distance from Esfahan to the end of the blue array is the maximum range of my Infantry.
Clearly, the distance from Esfahan to the 8 iraqi troops PLUS the distance covered by the blue array is more than the maximum range of my Infantry.
So I will try to see if one infantry in Esfahan will follow the 8 iraqi troops North, after missing the turnblock.

• If it does, it means that the required range to follow troops after missing a turnblock is the distance between the initial position of the unit trying to turnblock and the destination of the enemy units (answer AC above).
  
• If it does not, it means that the required range to follow troops after missing a turnblock is the distance between the initial position of the unit trying to turnblock and the initial position of the enemy unit PLUS the distance traveled by the enemy unit (answer AB + BC above).

See by yourselves (turn x+1):


Answer: AC.


----------------

And just to make sure the units can't go beyond their own maximum range after missing a turnblock (turn x):

Here, clearly the blue array is longer than the maximum range of my infantry.

And we clearly see here (turn x+1):


... that the unit does not go beyond its own range.

PS: in those experiments, I made sure that the turnblock really misses, by playing many other units before attacking the iraqi troops.

If 100 reps dose that mean im r100

Написано Noir Brillant, 23.01.2017 at 12:49

Ok, I did some experiments, it's pretty clear now.

Hang on, Noir.

Before adding my remarks let me congratule you for taking that extra inch into the game mechanics. Commonly competitive, sometimes scenario players, but I never expected a casual player to show enough interest into exploring the game mechanics. Mechanics like this, which are not wrote in the game's FAQ.

Speaking about it: the following picture comes directly from my unpublished FAQ and summarizes my research into the " interception" mechanics:



The rest of the mechanic is irrelevant for this case: however, the "Interception circle" which I named is equal to AB + BC in your example.

You just concluded that the distance required is AC.

What's going on, you may wonder?

In some post-experiment that I made with El Creyente we tried to test the Interception theory with destroyers and land units. We first tried to make the destroyers follow the land units into Ankara (which is deep in-land) but the theory failed there (destroyers did not follow the land units to Ankara). We made several tests and concluded that the mechanics were different as for cities as outside of them. Not limited to this though, we concluded that the type of units (more specifically the terrain, land/sea/air units), the destination and the remaining units (did you moved all the troops or made a split?) and the walling condition (was there a wall? Which position occupied the stack in that wall?) also influences in the interception mechanics.

The topic is pretty big, and reveals the yet unexplored TB mechanics that the game has. Sadly, I've lost the motivation to continue my research on it.

Part of the interception mechanics related to walls were discovered and documented in my investigation thread about walls. Feel free to look at, if you're interested: http://atwar-game.com/forum/topic.php?topic_id=17714

The stack merge theory is also related to interception. Lao's theory is wrong, but it should give you a nice hint from where to start. I've no access to the thread but you sure can find it on your own.

Conclusion

Написано Noir Brillant, 22.01.2017 at 18:23

Let's say my unit is at point A. I want to turnblock a unit at point B, but I miss. The unit B goes from B to C.

AC is true if the location A is a city.
Else, AB + BC happens.

[All of this assuming a control in the aforementioned factors. Particularly we're assuming that all stacks are made of land units, and you're moving all the units of the stack in any move].

Написано clovis1122, 28.01.2017 at 19:05

Wow, thank you for showing interest, and for all the details (in particular, telling me my conclusion was good only when my units are in a city. I would have assumed my theory was right for ALL circumstances, and l would have lost many battles because of it).

You also answered another question I had, about turnblocking chances after you intercepted (if you miss to turnblock move 1, can you intercept and then turnblock a subsequent move of the same unit/stack on move 2 or more? the answer being yes)

Thanks again for sharing your knowledge, and putting all the research efforts in the first place. I hope this game comes back from the (almost) dead so we don't lose contributors like you!

Написано clovis1122, 28.01.2017 at 19:05

Before adding my remarks let me congratule you for taking that extra inch into the game mechanics. Commonly competitive, sometimes scenario players, but I never expected a casual player to show enough interest into exploring the game mechanics. Mechanics like this, which are not wrote in the game's FAQ.

... and for the record, I am not the only casual player interested in deepening our understanding and skills. To be honest, I consider ourselves as competitive players. The problem is, even if the will is there, it's hard to be a casual competitive player. Without the turn 0:

• duels are fully based on trust - that the player starting the game will not reinforce on turn 1, and
  
• a 5v5 Coalition War implies that the 10 chosen players meet at the same time online to join the CW, which is hard when the 10 required players are located all over the world in different time zones, and as the casual nature often implies, with small period of consecutive time to allow to the game.
  

I don't know if the admins did not invest much in the casual gameplay BECAUSE the casual player base was small, but I personally think we should look at it the other way around: that the small player base is the CONSEQUENCE of a deficient casual gameplay.

Until the turn 0 gets implemented (and ideally the "save before end turn" feature), we competitive casual players will remain few, and in the shadows...

Написано clovis1122, 28.01.2017 at 19:05

Написано Noir Brillant, 23.01.2017 at 12:49

Ok, I did some experiments, it's pretty clear now.

Hang on, Noir.

Before adding my remarks let me congratule you for taking that extra inch into the game mechanics. Commonly competitive, sometimes scenario players, but I never expected a casual player to show enough interest into exploring the game mechanics. Mechanics like this, which are not wrote in the game's FAQ.

Speaking about it: the following picture comes directly from my unpublished FAQ and summarizes my research into the " interception" mechanics:



The rest of the mechanic is irrelevant for this case: however, the "Interception circle" which I named is equal to AB + BC in your example.

You just concluded that the distance required is AC.

What's going on, you may wonder?

In some post-experiment that I made with El Creyente we tried to test the Interception theory with destroyers and land units. We first tried to make the destroyers follow the land units into Ankara (which is deep in-land) but the theory failed there (destroyers did not follow the land units to Ankara). We made several tests and concluded that the mechanics were different as for cities as outside of them. Not limited to this though, we concluded that the type of units (more specifically the terrain, land/sea/air units), the destination and the remaining units (did you moved all the troops or made a split?) and the walling condition (was there a wall? Which position occupied the stack in that wall?) also influences in the interception mechanics.

The topic is pretty big, and reveals the yet unexplored TB mechanics that the game has. Sadly, I've lost the motivation to continue my research on it.

Part of the interception mechanics related to walls were discovered and documented in my investigation thread about walls. Feel free to look at, if you're interested: http://atwar-game.com/forum/topic.php?topic_id=17714

The stack merge theory is also related to interception. Lao's theory is wrong, but it should give you a nice hint from where to start. I've no access to the thread but you sure can find it on your own.

Conclusion

Написано Noir Brillant, 22.01.2017 at 18:23

Let's say my unit is at point A. I want to turnblock a unit at point B, but I miss. The unit B goes from B to C.

AC is true if the location A is a city.
Else, AB + BC happens.

[All of this assuming a control in the aforementioned factors. Particularly we're assuming that all stacks are made of land units, and you're moving all the units of the stack in any move].

is this the principle rewalling works on?

Написано LukeTan, 02.02.2017 at 15:58

is this the principle rewalling works on?

Good question.

Yes they do. Particularly understanding them makes possible to prevent rewalling and break a wall at the same time with one unit. Itd all about applying knowledge

Написано clovis1122, 02.02.2017 at 17:09

Написано LukeTan, 02.02.2017 at 15:58

is this the principle rewalling works on?

Good question.

Yes they do. Particularly understanding them makes possible to prevent rewalling and break a wall at the same time with one unit. Itd all about applying knowledge

so why is rewalling considered a bug, when attacking a unit after a failed turnblock is a feature?

Написано LukeTan, 03.02.2017 at 23:08

Написано clovis1122, 02.02.2017 at 17:09

Написано LukeTan, 02.02.2017 at 15:58

is this the principle rewalling works on?

Good question.

Yes they do. Particularly understanding them makes possible to prevent rewalling and break a wall at the same time with one unit. It's all about applying knowledge

so why is rewalling considered a bug, when attacking a unit after a failed turnblock is a feature?

Well......

There are many different opinion in regards of rewall. Some players and the admins doesn't consider it as a bug. Particularly Amok consider it to be a tactic:

Написано Acquiesce, 02.09.2015 at 20:07

Some players [like me!] do consider it as a bug though, because when breaking a wall you would want your unit to not "try to intercept" the other unit but to stay around where the old unit was....

The fact that admins didn't officially document the rewall mechanics doesn't adds up either.

---

Nonetheless that's another yet big extensive topic (prob not fully related to this). I'll leave it to you to decide but remember that, regardless of being a bug or not, it is pretty frowned upon by the community (so you'll win some enemies if you use it). You won't get punished by mods or anything similar though.