A ZOC anomaly?

[shadowblack]

Can someone explain how the cavalry unit faced up against my warband with another cavalry unit of mine behind (the before shot) managed to end up in the position shown in the after shot.

Before.png (565.94 KiB) Viewed 1586 times

After.png (594.82 KiB) Viewed 1584 times

[rbodleyscott]

This is WAD.

As per the tabletop rules, a unit that is ZOCd by more than one enemy unit only obeys one of the ZOCs. (In the tabletop game, the ZOC'd player can choose which, in FOG2 the computer chooses).

[Morbio]

Surely the logic should be that the unit be subject to all ZOC? It seems really anomalous that it is better to be subject to multiple ZOCs rather than a single ZOC? I appreciate this is probably to be aligned with the TT, but this really doesn't make sense.

[SnuggleBunnies]

I also am curious as to why this is implemented this way, it can lead to some very weird situations.

[rbodleyscott]

I also am curious as to why this is implemented this way, it can lead to some very weird situations.

It was in the tabletop rules so that it wasn't possible to completely paralyse an enemy unit with ZOCs in a rather gamey way.

This is probably also valid for the computer version, but another issue is that taking into account all applicable ZOCs would significantly complicate the coding for "in-ZOC" behaviour.

Currently the code just looks for the first applicable ZOC it finds, rather than looking for several and then either prioritizing them or iterating the legal move code for each of them in turn.

[shadowblack]

You learn something new every day. Thanks.