Brainstorming scenario winning conditions

[Akjosch]

I'd like to gather up your ideas on which scenario winning conditions you'd like MegaMek to support and automatically recognise. If you want, you can be as specific or as general as you like. This is both for scenarios created in and started from MekHQ, and scenario (MMS) files.

Here are two I had in mind, to get this started.

AtB fight: Force A needs to destroy 50% (by BV) of Force B while suffering less than 70% losses for a victory. In reverse, Force B needs to destroy 70% of Force A while suffering less than 50% themselves for a victory. If both dip below their respective values in the End Phase of the same round, it's a tie. Fleeing units count as destroyed (but can't be salvaged by the winning party).

Rescue mission: There's a designated (infantry-carrying) DropShip landed on the map. Force A's job is to rescue the innocent civilians (unarmed infantry units). Force B's job is to stop the dirty rebels by all means necessary. The scenario ends when the DropShip leaves the map or is destroyed. A civilian unit counts as "rescued" when it leaves the map on board the DropShip. Force A wins an overwhelming victory if they manage to rescue 80% or more of the civilian units (by trooper count) and a marginal one if they manage 50% or more. Force B manages a marginal victory if less than 50% of the rebels make it out alive, and an overwhelming one if they manage to destroy the DropShip.

[pheonixstorm]

For AtB I would not use BV as a basis for victory/defeat as the BV of units can vary wildly. In some cases where victory is destroy half the enemy force then you can actually gain a victory by taking out the highest BV units which may only account for a fraction of the actual force number. Remember AtB was not design as an integrated HQ product originally. There have been trade offs trying to get AtB into HQ to begin with. Some things just don't translate well  :-\

Also, if I have an overwhelming amount of firepower I tend to leg or destroy everything for salvage if it isn't already in retreat.

As for scenarios... Will have to think about that, but the usual destroy unit X or building Y or even keep X from being destroyed, hold location Y for X amount of turns.
I see this as allowing for scenarios such as convoy protection. Convoy vehicles A, B, C, D, E, F are targets and 50% must survive and flee off board to win.
Hold location X could be to keep a communications building from being captured (infantry entering building would be a capture) or some other strategic target.

Another item going back to the good ol days of Mechwarrior 2 Mercs. Set objectives. Primary and secondary win conditions. Blowing up the ammo dump (a feature I would like to see) might be your primary objective while a secondary might be to destroy the infantry/armor unit sent to reinforce said dump.

It has been awhile since I have looked at how scenarios are supposed to be set up so I don't recall what is or was possible.

[Kentares]

Not going to quote you (here) or me in another post so that this topic stays clean but:

BV scenarios = All BV % winning conditions could be supported (it doesnt matter if its AtB or not). Also wouldnt hurt if it could track 3 or 4 opposing forces (like the Big Battle free for all in AtB - got one of those yesterday). Also unit count would be nice instead of BV. Also "X" units destroyed in "Y" turns for example.

Rescue = Extraction but maybe instead of counting % of destroyed opposing forces should be counting the number of starting units minus those destroyed of the extracted force. Did I make sense in this?

Target objective = Destroy something (somewhere) in map and retreat in "X" turns. Could be a unit, a building/bridge or a hex (or row of hexes for those scout scenarios).

Taking items = I know that MM doesnt support (yet) items but it could already be a thing to think about. Like Rescue/Extraction but instead of units is one or more items.

Finding something = Since Hidden Units is getting done one winning condition that could be interesting is a mix of scouting and destroy/rescue.

Traitor Unit = One or more units changes sides after a specific event or turn (dont know if this is possible in MM).

Is there a flag in MM that distinguishes a retreated unit (force withdrawal) from a fleeing one (extracted) or its the same for the program?

Ill add more here as I come up... (yeah... Im the scenario idiot of my gaming group).

[Sir Chaos]

"Reverse" BV victory: One team (you´d had to specify which one) wins by still having X% of the starting BV on the maps after a certain number of rounds.

Destroy Targets: Specify a number of target hexes; victory is determined by how many of these hexes still contain buildings after a certain number of rounds.

Withdrawal: Victory is determined by what proportion of its force (in terms of BV) Team A can withdraw across the map edge opposite to its starting zone within a certain number of rounds.

Delaying action: basically a combination of Reverse BV and Withdrawal - you must preserve your own force, but also prevent the enemy from advancing for as long as possible.

[BLOODWOLF]

Search & destroy/patrols Destroy all or % of BV or % of total units round down.  If reinforcements arrive later in the game (turn 17 for example) end game if %BV/total units is achieved before reinforcements arrive.

Objective Raid Destroy all or % of designated buildings on map round down (MM decides buildings so it will work if map is random).  I could make some kind of hex outline-like reticule (MW2 missle lock reticule) to designate the buildings on map.  I can make the images for ammo/weapon/generic crates that would also need to be destroyed.

Diversionary/Recon Raid Same as "above" but, second vic condition would be to then withdraw your units off the map after first objective is accomplished to win scenario.

Extraction Raid Using images for crates or whatever needs to be extracted and returned to the employer, Tacops pick up all or % of total objectives and withdraw them off the map.  Could also make it to where you can place the mechwarrior pilot units on the board so that they could be picked up or just use transports to get personnel out of there in the case of POWs.

Intercept/Extraction intercept Bot will be set to immediate withdraw and auto flee.  Intercept and destroy all or % BV/total units before they flee the board round down.  Failure if units flee and player cannot accomplish objective.  For extraction raid intercept missions capture all or % of units (/traitor in second window connected as computer player is how I have been doing it) and then extract them off the board.  I use the AtB civi vehicles RAT to generate the convoy.

EDIT: Can only capture a vehicle during the physical attack phase instead of a physical attack and only if an enemy mech/unit is not within one hex of target you are trying to capture.  /roll 7(or something i dont know) TN +/- weight difference modifier to check if it surrenders or attempts to flee.

Escort/Relief duty escort Allied unit/convoy either under player control so they dont act stupid or as the bot set to immediate withdraw and auto flee, must successfully flee all or % BV/total units off the board or to a dropship/dust off site (round down) while player's force escorts and protects them from attack.  Relief duty the allied unit will be facing 2x its number in enemy units at CTR while players deploys at an edge and has to rescue and protect allied force while it withdraws.

Defend/Relief duty defend/Planetary assault defend All or % of buildings must survive (MM designates buildings), player starts CTR.  Relief duty the allied unit will start CTR and will be defending against 2x its number while players deploys at an edge and has to reinforce the allied garrison.  Planetary assault defend missions will be defending your dropship(s) from attack while trying to establish a planethead.

[Vampire_Seraphin]

The ability to have mismatched victory conditions for each team would be incredibly useful. That is a good starting point.

In addition to what others have suggested,

- KOTH:control designated zone on the map for X rounds
- Kill all units of X type (aero, infantry, vee, mech)
- Control more than X % of map by round Y

The "destroy target buildings" option should be set so you choose how many buildings, then specify them on the map similar to artillery presighted hexes. The current iteration requires you to call specific hex numbers for princess, which is a pain, especially if playing on random maps since there might not even be anything in the hex you designate. You probably want a setup where the host chooses targets for all bots.

[Kentares]

- Control more than X % of map by round Y

Thats a good idea but Im thinking of what would define that % (and in reverse... like holding a beachhead)...

[pheonixstorm]

It might be possible to define that as no units within X coords by using the central deployment zone coords or use deep deployment zones as the line that can't be crossed for a breakthrough scenario (such as a beachhead)

[BLOODWOLF]

The ability to have mismatched victory conditions for each team would be incredibly useful. That is a good starting point.

In addition to what others have suggested,

- KOTH:control designated zone on the map for X rounds
- Kill all units of X type (aero, infantry, vee, mech)
- Control more than X % of map by round Y

The "destroy target buildings" option should be set so you choose how many buildings, then specify them on the map similar to artillery presighted hexes. The current iteration requires you to call specific hex numbers for princess, which is a pain, especially if playing on random maps since there might not even be anything in the hex you designate. You probably want a setup where the host chooses targets for all bots.

Or incorporate the ability to give princess targeting commands /target -b:0000(building hex) or /target -u:00 (unit ID#) while in game.

[scJazz]

Initial Response: The ideas being presented are wonderful... this post is about the issues or features required to make it happen.

NOTE: Only down to Kentares so far... Edits no doubt in future.

AtB fight: *SNIP* Fleeing units Units that have fled count as destroyed (but can't be salvaged by the winning party).

Rescue mission: There's a designated (infantry-carrying) DropShip landed on the map. *SNIP*

For the BV %/kill count make sure to adjust it for Leadership. AtB 2.31 rules Campaign System A428.

Each point of Leadership on the battle commander (highest ranked officer) increases in 5% the need numbe of Merc+Allied forces that need to be destroyed for the OpFor do win the scenario.               

There is an outstanding RFE to show BV % on the End Turn Info this might help everyone...
Show BV https://sourceforge.net/p/megamek/feature-requests/1312/
Perhaps even expand it by showing the current status of Victory Conditions. Kills = N (N = Kills, ejects, fled)

There is currently no way to get Spheroid DSs off the map. There is an RFE outstanding for allowing them to Climb to X altitude thereby leaving the map.
https://sourceforge.net/p/megamek/feature-requests/1247/

For AtB I would not use BV as a basis for victory/defeat as the BV of units can vary wildly. In some cases where victory is destroy half the enemy force then you can actually gain a victory by taking out the highest BV units which may only account for a fraction of the actual force number. Remember AtB was not design as an integrated HQ product originally. There have been trade offs trying to get AtB into HQ to begin with. Some things just don't translate well  :-\

Strongly disagree! Many Princess forces in AtB use a lot of tanks (depending on options and Level) Killing the 4 light tanks shouldn't be a win when there are still 4 Medium Mechs on the field.

As for scenarios... Will have to think about that, but the usual destroy unit X or building Y or even keep X from being destroyed, hold location Y for X amount of turns.
I see this as allowing for scenarios such as convoy protection. Convoy vehicles A, B, C, D, E, F are targets and 50% must survive and flee off board to win.
Hold location X could be to keep a communications building from being captured (infantry entering building would be a capture) or some other strategic target.

Issue... right now there is no way to designate building X, Y, or Z... all maps are Random Generated in AtB and don't exist until everyone DONES out of the Lobby. There would need to be a new feature... generate objectives which would link to the MapGen and Mission Type. Hold Location X is the same problem. The Random Map generator would need an upgrade. Not the least of which is being able to Generate the Random Map and fix it in place in the Lobby. Then display the map as normal and select the Objective or Generate an intelligent objective.

There needs to be a way to tag units in the lobby as well as buildings.

*SNIP* Primary and secondary win conditions. Blowing up the ammo dump (a feature I would like to see) might be your primary objective while a secondary might be to destroy the infantry/armor unit sent to reinforce said dump.

This would make little or no difference in AtB 2.31 as written. +1 for win... -2 for loss. If it is a Player Campaign they would know Primary and Secondary win conditions. Which could be so widely variable as to not be definable in code. At the risk of being rude... why bother?

BV scenarios = All BV % winning conditions could be supported (it doesnt matter if its AtB or not). Also wouldnt hurt if it could track 3 or 4 opposing forces (like the Big Battle free for all in AtB - got one of those yesterday). Also unit count would be nice instead of BV. Also "X" units destroyed in "Y" turns for example.

Again runs into the totally Min/Max ahah! I will kill the 4 Skulkers and leave the Assault Lance of mechs alone issue. The Race thing... Kill X in Y turns could be neat. Shock and Awe FTW!

Target objective = Destroy something (somewhere) in map and retreat in "X" turns. Could be a unit, a building/bridge or a hex (or row of hexes for those scout scenarios).

See above for the need to load a map and select such stuff in the Lobby. Even if the Map is Random.

Taking items = I know that MM doesnt support (yet) items but it could already be a thing to think about. Like Rescue/Extraction but instead of units is one or more items.

There is currently no THING that can be picked up except for Limbs and Trees. If there was... we go back to AtB Random Map needs to be fixed/saved in lobby. If map is selected then need placement for said item. Then we need to talk about the nature of the object being carried. Does it require 2 hands on a Mech, Vee with cargo/infantry space, 1 hand Mech? How many turns to load? A turn is 10 seconds so... things could get complicated. Does the object have HPs? The Unit carrying it takes some damage... how to resolve? How resistant is the object to damage.

Traitor Unit = One or more units changes sides after a specific event or turn (dont know if this is possible in MM).

It could be done but there is nothing in any code to support it. There are no event triggers. Could be done on Turn Count.

Is there a flag in MM that distinguishes a retreated unit (force withdrawal) from a fleeing one (extracted) or its the same for the program?

If it gets off map there is nothing distinguishing between the two. Fled off map is fled.

[scJazz]

"Reverse" BV victory: One team (you´d had to specify which one) wins by still having X% of the starting BV on the maps after a certain number of rounds.

This is the same as saying Kill X% by Turn N only in reverse. A separate rule isn't needed.

Destroy Targets: Specify a number of target hexes; victory is determined by how many of these hexes still contain buildings after a certain number of rounds.

See Comments regarding Maps and Target IDs.

Withdrawal: Victory is determined by what proportion of its force (in terms of BV) Team A can withdraw across the map edge opposite to its starting zone within a certain number of rounds.

This is the same thing as saying Kill X in N Turns.

Delaying action: basically a combination of Reverse BV and Withdrawal - you must preserve your own force, but also prevent the enemy from advancing for as long as possible.

See above.

[scJazz]

*SNIP*

BW, AJ isn't looking for new mission types... he is looking for new mission Victory Conditions.

How would Control of Area X% work? I can imagine some fiendishly complicated formula where N unit has ability to project Y damage over area Z. Then add up these values for Player A. Do the same for Player B and subtract contested area. Or just Spam the Map with AC/2 units and say the hell with it.

- KOTH:control designated zone on the map for X rounds
- Kill all units of X type (aero, infantry, vee, mech)
- Control more than X % of map by round Y

Kill all X type units is a good condition. Otherwise see above for, what is control?

It might be possible to define that as no units within X coords by using the central deployment zone coords or use deep deployment zones as the line that can't be crossed for a breakthrough scenario (such as a beachhead)

I think if we pursue this CONTROL concept then we need something more concrete and complicated. Player A can't possibly control N (spot on map) or A (area % of Map) if Player B can hit aforementioned with Artillery, Snipers, Aircraft.

So Control gets complicated and given the number of variables might even be a very tediously long thing for MM to calculate. Kind of like Princess moves of 10/15 (8/12/8) units.

I think I'm current now...

[scJazz]

AJ + Thread,

Please forgive me if I seem to be shooting items down, etc.

These conditions have been written about many many many times.

I just wanted to give AJ the list of things required to make it work. I'm not even certain that I covered the required items list at all but... good start.

As for incorporating any of this into Princess Behavior well that is quite another thing entirely.

[BLOODWOLF]

Maybe I think it does need new mission types trigger-happy :P.

[Davout73]

I dont go by bv,  or control,  but by a morale check made whwn certain unit thresh holds are crossed.   Its very similar to what Flames of War does for morale,  with a couple of modifiers thrown in.

Short summary,  its a question of active units vs inactive units.   Units that cannot move a hex count as in active.  When a force has more mechs destroyed / immobile than active,  they make a morale roll.   If they pass they keep fighting on.   They have to make a roll everytime they conditions are met.

So,  say your fighting 8 units.   If you have 2 enemy units destroyed and 2 down and not able to move,   logged, knocked out,  etc,  roll 2d6 against a target number.   Roll equal or greater than the target number,  and keep fighting.   Roll less and you have to retreat or becomes the loss.

Theres a few more details I use,  but that's it for broad terms.

Dav

[scJazz]

I dont go by bv,  or control,  but by a morale check*SNIP*

This would be another excellent Victory Condition. We don't have a Team (Player A and B on Team 1, Player C and D on Team 2) Morale Value though. If we did, should the morale be weighted? Player B wiped out, Player A 100%, equals Weighted BV against Morale? Should each Player use their own Morale? (Player A = GREAT, Player B = RUNAWAY)

Once we do, we would need Princess to respect it and Players forced into it.

[Kentares]

This would be another excellent Victory Condition. We don't have a Team (Player A and B on Team 1, Player C and D on Team 2) Morale Value though. If we did, should the morale be weighted? Player B wiped out, Player A 100%, equals Weighted BV against Morale? Should each Player use their own Morale? (Player A = GREAT, Player B = RUNAWAY)

Once we do, we would need Princess to respect it and Players forced into it.

I would like to be per team... but thats me.

[scJazz]

Although at this time we don't have things like Dragon's Teeth, https://www.google.com/search?q=dragon%27s+teeth&espv=2&biw=1212&bih=568&tbm=isch&tbo=u&source=univ&sa=X&ved=0ahUKEwi93tDB4vXLAhUJsIMKHbW7AM4QsAQIMg,

Or Caltrops...
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Caltrop

Or Hedgehogs...
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Czech_hedgehog

It would be great if there was a Victory Condition: Clear Static Defenses.
Any Mine Fields and Turrets would count. Getting the above as actual features would also be great.

Having actual Engineer types available and usable even more awesome!

[Davout73]

Bv discrepancy can lead to odd situations.   Better to. Use number of units imo.

Dav

[scJazz]

Bv discrepancy can lead to odd situations.   Better to. Use number of units imo.

Dav

I don't think this is correct. I just looked at my Current AtB fight... Kill 50% for Stand Up. If I count by units I could just take out all the 20 tonners, 1 UrbanMech, and a Scorpion Tank. All of these are very soft kills. That would be all 50% of the enemies force 9/18. However, it would be less than 1/3rd of the BV. A force of 5 Medium Mechs along with 4 more Mechs/Tanks would still be operational.

[Akjosch]

AJ + Thread,

Please forgive me if I seem to be shooting items down, etc.

These conditions have been written about many many many times.

I just wanted to give AJ the list of things required to make it work. I'm not even certain that I covered the required items list at all but... good start.

As for incorporating any of this into Princess Behavior well that is quite another thing entirely.

No worries.

To give a quick overview of what support is already in and upcoming:

Scenario loader is fixed again (it can 100% load every shipped scenario instead of just like half of them ...) with a few slight improvements to what you can set (altitude, ammo types).

The landscape generator got an upgrade which will make it way easier to implement things like "create a hill, mark it as target area for king-of-the-hill" and other "decorators". One visible thing that'll come out of it is a new generator type (3), that will be usable in the next dev build and is based on a modern Simplex procedural noise field. Creates beautiful hilly landscapes even at large height ranges.

We're hashing out an event system, which among other things will make complex scenario victory conditions easy. For those who can read Java code, there's one example in the comments. This won't be in the next dev build, but let's hope it'll work soon.

And this is where I'm reaching out to the players for inspiration.

[Kentares]

Scenario loader is fixed again (it can 100% load every shipped scenario instead of just like half of them ...) with a few slight improvements to what you can set (altitude, ammo types).

The landscape generator got an upgrade which will make it way easier to implement things like "create a hill, mark it as target area for king-of-the-hill" and other "decorators". One visible thing that'll come out of it is a new generator type (3), that will be usable in the next dev build and is based on a modern Simplex procedural noise field. Creates beautiful hilly landscapes even at large height ranges.

We're hashing out an event system, which among other things will make complex scenario victory conditions easy. For those who can read Java code, there's one example in the comments. This won't be in the next dev build, but let's hope it'll work soon.

And this is where I'm reaching out to the players for inspiration.

What do you mean with those improvements about the altitude on the scenario loader?

Those "decorators" could be a building (or a non-unit) in a hex?

Do you feel inspired so far? :)

[pheonixstorm]

@scjazz This is not about JUST AtB

Issue... right now there is no way to designate building X, Y, or Z... all maps are Random Generated in AtB and don't exist until everyone DONES out of the Lobby.

Who cares if atb can't handle it. I don't care, don't really play atb that much and I would love to see this happen for non generated maps.

I think if we pursue this CONTROL concept then we need something more concrete and complicated. Player A can't possibly control N (spot on map) or A (area % of Map)

Actually it doesn't have to be complicated. You can use the coords to set conditions. If player A can keep player B from crossing point C in X number of turns you win. With the proper tactics and firepower you can deny an area from your opponent. Would it be difficult? Yes, but still possible.

Strongly disagree! Many Princess forces in AtB use a lot of tanks

and a handful of mechs. So what if the force is 12 units and killing 3 of them gets you the 50% BV destroyed? I see this a lot in atb. In order for BV to work atb needs to be fixed up to stop rolling such odd forces. The bv oddity gets worse once you account for skill.

There is a lot that can be added to scenarios that won't work for atb and a lot of stuff that will work for both.

[PurpleDragon]

This would be another excellent Victory Condition. We don't have a Team (Player A and B on Team 1, Player C and D on Team 2) Morale Value though. If we did, should the morale be weighted? Player B wiped out, Player A 100%, equals Weighted BV against Morale? Should each Player use their own Morale? (Player A = GREAT, Player B = RUNAWAY)

Once we do, we would need Princess to respect it and Players forced into it.

I kindof like this idea.  I say kindof because I can see how you don't have control over your entire force.  However, I think you should maintain control over the main character, who will usually be the force commander. 

A couple of things to consider if y'all try to implement something like this:  The main books already have existing rules for morale.  You then would have to start looking at things like exhaustion (how long has the fight been going, how many times in the past so many days has this unit been in a fight,...), and leadership (kindof like avalon hill's squad leader) as well as force comparisons, intelligence; and ongoing losses. 

One thing I can see this leading to is a scenario in which the smaller force tries to bluff the enemy into a morale break by making itself seem more than it is. 

[Kentares]

@scjazz This is not about JUST AtB
 Who cares if atb can't handle it. I don't care, don't really play atb that much and I would love to see this happen for non generated maps.
...
There is a lot that can be added to scenarios that won't work for atb and a lot of stuff that will work for both.

In my opinion MM should catter for table top options first and AtB second not the other way around.

[Davout73]

I don't think this is correct. I just looked at my Current AtB fight... Kill 50% for Stand Up. If I count by units I could just take out all the 20 tonners, 1 UrbanMech, and a Scorpion Tank. All of these are very soft kills. That would be all 50% of the enemies force 9/18. However, it would be less than 1/3rd of the BV. A force of 5 Medium Mechs along with 4 more Mechs/Tanks would still be operational.

Doesn't matter if they are soft kills, they count. You don't earn extra points for killing an atlas, should you earn less points for killing a locust? Plus, when you consider the BV discrepancy between units just based on G/P skills alone, you can get the same results above just based on BV, if you kill the right mechs. 
You have a lance with  2/3 phx-1, and a 4/5 Valkryie, Javelin N and Locust thats 3644 BV.  You knock out the PXH and you've passed 50% BV.  You kill the other 3 and not the Pixie, and you haven't crossed the 50% threshhold.

You could count vehicles as 1/2, and I've never counted infantry, but for me, number of operational units with some modifers to the roll, based on skill level and other modifiers, has worked out pretty well for me.

Dav

[Vampire_Seraphin]

Easy there killers, remember, all victory conditions in MM are optional and can be set as you desire. Right now AtB only supports it's base rules.

Akjosch, if you are coding more advance victory types, can you drop in some lines that let you choose to use or to disallow them in AtB scenarios? It would be nice if when an AtB mission is generated you could right click on it and tweak the victory conditions the same way you can configure the bot.

[pheonixstorm]

Back on the BV/Unit kill thing. Since this is already part of MM, I think for both to work for atb there should be an option in the atb tab to choose one or the other as a victory condition. This way when the victory conditions are sent to MM it will allow the user to choose which type of victory condition should be considered. Which should end this particular heated debate. So a checkbox for use BV with unit count as the default or the other way around.

[scJazz]

OK your right Storm... enough of the BV/Kill.

The crates "objects" should be available in the Lobby. Probably in a Units Equipment tab. That way it would support a kind of Reverse Extraction.

"Get these crates of ammo to those units over there!"

[Kentares]

The BV/Kill units is a subject that both could be wrong and right at the same time (both can be exploited). It all depends on what units are being used in a given scenario so the ideal would be to have both options (not sure if it would be an option in MHQ campaign setting options or in MM victory conditions so one can choose the particular condition according to the needs). The choice is a matter of taste and/or roleplay.

AtB gives a lot of vehicles (at least in the campaign Im playing) which are easier for either Kills/BV winning condition than mechs. When theres a good mix (or more mechs than vehicles) its harder to go for BV win - I tend to see if I can win by units killed just counting vehicles.

Edit = grammar corrections and elaborate a bit more on wheres the best option...