Is it possible to influence the evade roll of submarines

[_Flin_]

Hi community,

i am currently playing "Hunters in the Atlantic" against a friend, and really like the scenario. There is, however, a sore point. Evasion of submarines. How does this work? And can I influence it somehow?

There were multiple occurences of my best destroyers hitting the blank sea. And large swings in the percentage of evasion. So, when there are back to back turns in the beginning with around 60% evasion of subs (5 of 8 attacks evaded), this puts one at a severe disadvantage in the scenario based solely on luck. That turns the whole affair into less of a strategy game and more into Pachisi/Ludo/Mensch ärgere Dich nicht.

So the question is: Can I influence the evasion roll of my opponent? By surrounding? Diminishing returns? Anything?

[huertgenwald]

No, it's the same like in combat outcome.
It's determined by random.
So hit Ctrl L (reload). Make a move involving random numbers (mostly attacks)
and try again one turn later with a "fresh" random number.

Hope that explains it.

[_Flin_]

No, it's the same like in combat outcome.
It's determined by random.
So hit Ctrl L (reload). Make a move involving random numbers (mostly attacks)
and try again one turn later with a "fresh" random number.

Hope that explains it.

Thanks for the answer, huertgenwald.
That wasn't, however, what I meant. That the result is random, isn't something that bothers me. I just wanted to know whether I can influence the probability of an evasion.
In your combat analogy, I can influence the outcome e.g. by surrounding the unit, or suppressing it, lower entrenchment, etc.

Furthermore there is no loading in multiplayer, so this solution is not possible

If it is just one roll with a fixed probability, then this is... well... very luck based instead of skill based. I didn't see anything on the detailed predicition screen, either.

[huertgenwald]

As far as i know, the probability to evade is 50%, determined by a dice roll (random number).

Probably only programmers know that random numbers are anything but random
They are "generated" via a mathematical method.
To get a sequence of random numbers you start with a "seed" (starting point).

Every number following in the sequence will ALWAYS be the SAME using the same seed.

Hope that explains your "bad fate".

[Xerkis]

_Flin_, I think you bring a good point to the table.

Something that would reduce the evade probability. Like multiple ships adjacent to the sub – or something like that.

[_Flin_]

As far as i know, the probability to evade is 50%, determined by a dice roll (random number).

Probably only programmers know that random numbers are anything but random
They are "generated" via a mathematical method.
To get a sequence of random numbers you start with a "seed" (starting point).

Every number following in the sequence will ALWAYS be the SAME using the same seed.

Hope that explains your "bad fate".

Thanks again. I am a programmer myself, so the tendency of random results to "clump" together (and being generated by a long and repeating function of pretended randomness) is well known to me.

So it is 50% flat? Too bad. No modification depending on strength? None on weather? None on experience?

While this is usually not that much of an issue (Norway, Sealion, USA all have a limited number of subs), in "Hunters in the Atlantic", with it's more than 10 submarines, this is a big issue.

[Xerkis]

So it is 50% flat? Too bad. No modification depending on strength? None on weather? None on experience?

Oh my yes – after thinking about it for a bit, these you would think would have a definite effect on the outcome.
...... one way or the other.

[Rudankort]

I know that we could make the rules in this aspect a lot more advanced, but naval rules in general were intentionally made simple in PzC, because this game is mostly ground and air centric. So, evade rules fit in this overall simplified approach.

I do agree that naval-based scenarios, like Hunters, suffer from this. That's the reason why we did not repeat this experiment in any other scenarios (at least not yet).

[Xerkis]

I know that we could make the rules in this aspect a lot more advanced, but naval rules in general were intentionally made simple in PzC, because this game is mostly ground and air centric. So, evade rules fit in this overall simplified approach.

I do agree that naval-based scenarios, like Hunters, suffer from this. That's the reason why we did not repeat this experiment in any other scenarios (at least not yet).

After all, it is call Panzer Corps – not Sub Attack or something like that.


….Maybe in version 10.02 then.

[_Flin_]

I know that we could make the rules in this aspect a lot more advanced, but naval rules in general were intentionally made simple in PzC, because this game is mostly ground and air centric. So, evade rules fit in this overall simplified approach.

I do agree that naval-based scenarios, like Hunters, suffer from this. That's the reason why we did not repeat this experiment in any other scenarios (at least not yet).

Thank you for your answer. I will have to take this into account then.

The British carrier and the tacticals just got a lot more important.