RE: Buzz's Fite Mod

Matrix Games Forums

Forums Register Login Photo Gallery Member List Search Calendars FAQ

My Profile Inbox Address Book My Subscription My Forums Log Out

RE: Buzz's Fite Mod

View related threads: (in this forum | in all forums)

Logged in as: Guest

Users viewing this topic: none

Printable Version

All Forums >> [Current Games From Matrix.] >> [World War II] >> Norm Koger's The Operational Art Of War III >> RE: Buzz's Fite Mod

Page: << < prev 2 3 [4] 5 6 next > >>

Message

<< Older Topic Newer Topic >>

RE: Buzz's Fite Mod - 5/9/2007 9:44:43 PM

larryfulkerson

Posts: 39932
Joined: 4/17/2005
From: Tucson, AZ
Status: offline

When I went to bed last night the PO v PO contest was on turn 8. I got up this morning and the game had advanced to turn 15. Here's the first 14 turns:

(in reply to sPzAbt653)

Post #: 91

RE: Buzz's Fite Mod - 5/9/2007 10:33:49 PM

Karri

Posts: 1137
Joined: 5/24/2006
Status: offline

Larry, have you tried turning the unit counters invisible? Through my experience this should make the turns run faster(as there's little to no need for following the movement).

(in reply to larryfulkerson)

Post #: 92

RE: Buzz's Fite Mod - 5/9/2007 11:10:33 PM

larryfulkerson

Posts: 39932
Joined: 4/17/2005
From: Tucson, AZ
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Karri
Larry, have you tried turning the unit counters invisible? Through my experience this should make the turns run faster(as there's little to no need for following the movement).

No, I haven't tried turning the unit counters invisible. And I'm using 1 second for the delay between frames. I could shorten that period and make it run faster but then it might be hard to follow. I'll have to try that.

Attachment (1)

(in reply to Karri)

Post #: 93

RE: Buzz's Fite Mod - 5/10/2007 12:58:42 AM

SMK-at-work

Posts: 3396
Joined: 8/28/2000
From: New Zealand
Status: offline

I think he meant for the game proper - not for the situation maps.

(in reply to larryfulkerson)

Post #: 94

RE: Buzz's Fite Mod - 5/10/2007 4:41:24 AM

larryfulkerson

Posts: 39932
Joined: 4/17/2005
From: Tucson, AZ
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: SMK-at-work
I think he meant for the game proper - not for the situation maps.

Yeah, I figured that out after about a 1/2 hour of thinking about it. And I did turn the units invisible and set them in motion again. I'm thinking they ARE moving faster.

(in reply to SMK-at-work)

Post #: 95

RE: Buzz's Fite Mod - 5/10/2007 5:31:46 AM

sPzAbt653

Posts: 9511
Joined: 5/3/2007
From: east coast, usa
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: sPzAbt653

quote:

ORIGINAL: sPzAbt653
I'll try that rail repair thingy soon, it should only take 3-4 turns to see if it is working properly.

Ok, my second rail repair test had the expected effect. The new 'rail movement only' rail repair units can be moved along the intact lines only, and they 'automatically' repair the broken lines ahead of them. There was one instance where the broken line adjacent to the repair unit did not auto-repair for two turns. However, there were ten more broken rail lines on the other side that were repaired over those two turns. So it worked out in the end, although I can see how some players might not like this amount of 'uncontrolable uncertainty'. With the original 30 'bautrupps' in the game operating at an average 90% rail repair value, and the original pre-set 8 auto repairs, you get 32-35 possible repairs per turn. This can be handled solely by the auto-repair, with the exception that the player cannot load up on a particular line to guarantee repair. I intend to keep it in my mod so the next game I start I can monitor it over the long haul.

(in reply to sPzAbt653)

Post #: 96

RE: Buzz's Fite Mod - 5/10/2007 5:37:10 AM

sPzAbt653

Posts: 9511
Joined: 5/3/2007
From: east coast, usa
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: larryfulkerson

When I went to bed last night the PO v PO contest was on turn 8.� I got up this morning and the game had advanced to turn 15.� Here's the first 14 turns:

It looks like the german artillery, engineers and rail repairs were left behind in Poland on yours too.

(in reply to larryfulkerson)

Post #: 97

RE: Buzz's Fite Mod - 5/10/2007 5:55:34 AM

larryfulkerson

Posts: 39932
Joined: 4/17/2005
From: Tucson, AZ
Status: offline

I just got up from my nap and checked on the game and it's on turn 17 and the Germans own Leningrad and the German aircraft never left Poland. It's a mess of mistakes and oversights. A cornucopia if what not to do.

Attachment (1)

(in reply to sPzAbt653)

Post #: 98

RE: Buzz's Fite Mod - 5/10/2007 6:00:06 AM

larryfulkerson

Posts: 39932
Joined: 4/17/2005
From: Tucson, AZ
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: larryfulkerson

quote:

ORIGINAL: SMK-at-work
I think he meant for the game proper - not for the situation maps.

Yeah, I figured that out after about a 1/2 hour of thinking about it. And I did turn the units invisible and set them in motion again. I'm thinking they ARE moving faster.

The problemo with leaving the units invisible and letting the game run is that the movies you are left with are just blank terrain....no little blue and red dots anywhere. So frames 16 and 17 are blanks. I've decided to stop the experiment.

(in reply to larryfulkerson)

Post #: 99

RE: Buzz's Fite Mod - 5/10/2007 6:09:48 AM

Zort

Posts: 684
Joined: 7/19/2004
From: Colorado Springs, CO
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: sPzAbt653

Ok, my second rail repair test had the expected effect. The new 'rail movement only' rail repair units can be moved along the intact lines only, and they 'automatically' repair the broken lines ahead of them. There was one instance where the broken line adjacent to the repair unit did not auto-repair for two turns. However, there were ten more broken rail lines on the other side that were repaired over those two turns. So it worked out in the end, although I can see how some players might not like this amount of 'uncontrolable uncertainty'. With the original 30 'bautrupps' in the game operating at an average 90% rail repair value, and the original pre-set 8 auto repairs, you get 32-35 possible repairs per turn. This can be handled solely by the auto-repair, with the exception that the player cannot load up on a particular line to guarantee repair. I intend to keep it in my mod so the next game I start I can monitor it over the long haul.

(in reply to sPzAbt653)

Post #: 100

RE: Buzz's Fite Mod - 5/10/2007 6:39:07 AM

sPzAbt653

Posts: 9511
Joined: 5/3/2007
From: east coast, usa
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Zort

My question is how many repair units did you have in one hex? Does more then one help with repair the line as you have set? If not then you really don't have 30 units but just 6 or 7 on the main lines of advance, so this could be a real handicap to the germans. Will be interesting to see the results of your next game.

I was using one unit per hex, if more than one has an effect is something I will have to try to monitor in my next game. So to try to clarify, I have 10 'rail movement' only rail repair units, I deleted 20 of the original 'bautrupps' and raised the auto-repair in the editor to 34 (based on the original number of 32-35 probable repairs each turn). Now the 10 units I have cannot actually repair a rail themselves, as they cannot move onto the broken line, but as we discussed earlier, by moving these units to a players 'priority' areas, the auto-repair would repair lines nearest these first (I think), but this is not guaranteed. In my COW Barbarossa experiment with this it worked well, I kept the initial auto-repair low to reflect the Germans difficulty in rail transport, and in the editor increased it in August and again in September so things got better.

(in reply to Zort)

Post #: 101

RE: Buzz's Fite Mod - 5/11/2007 7:12:03 PM

Guesclin

Posts: 2
Joined: 4/24/2007
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: LLv34_Snefens

We hadn't discussed other than all german units would be able to get the AT- squads, so it's 100% a bug. Looking back it's easy to figure out what have happend.
The editor is a dangerous equipment, so if a unit has 24 types of equipment and you add an extra it simply deletes the type at the bottom. At some point in one of the version we must have added new equipment to the PzG regs without checking if we had reached the limit and the Hvy Rifle AT- "fell off the table" so to speak.

It's a pity, and it means that late in the game the PzG regs will suffer a slow withering death. There still remains 27780 slots in the units (regular Inf regs)that DO have the AT- squads. With an replacement rate of 308/turn starting at turn 265, theoretical the Germans can run out of free slots on turn 355. But that's if they don't take any casualties at all. In practise it's not gonna matter that much.

Thanks for the clarification. I guess this kind of problem is bound to happen in a scenario of this magnitude.

The AT squads should definitely be added though. I've personally allowed 60 squads (0 assigned of course) in place of the 2x37mm AT guns. This doesn't change the unit initial stats.

< Message edited by Guesclin -- 5/11/2007 7:14:03 PM >

(in reply to LLv34_Snefens)

Post #: 102

RE: Buzz's Fite Mod - 5/16/2007 1:37:18 AM

Zort

Posts: 684
Joined: 7/19/2004
From: Colorado Springs, CO
Status: offline

Hey guys a question. Karri and I have been discussing reducing the cease fire in FITE to just a couple of turns. But to recreate the mud situation we are thinking of reducing supply to a very low number (15 maybe) and increase pestilance.

What effect has anyone seen with an increase in pestilance? Is it something we should do?

(in reply to Guesclin)

Post #: 103

RE: Buzz's Fite Mod - 5/16/2007 2:06:30 AM

Telumar

Posts: 2236
Joined: 1/3/2006
From: niflheim
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Zort

Hey guys a question. Karri and I have been discussing reducing the cease fire in FITE to just a couple of turns. But to recreate the mud situation we are thinking of reducing supply to a very low number (15 maybe) and increase pestilance.

What effect has anyone seen with an increase in pestilance? Is it something we should do?

No experience with pestilence level in a scenario, but it affects personel more than vehicles. Don't know if this is desired.

I think you should also lower the force supply radii for the mud season.

_____________________________

http://thetoawbeachhead.wordpress.com

(in reply to Zort)

Post #: 104

RE: Buzz's Fite Mod - 5/16/2007 7:57:55 AM

sPzAbt653

Posts: 9511
Joined: 5/3/2007
From: east coast, usa
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Zort

Hey guys a question. Karri and I have been discussing reducing the cease fire in FITE to just a couple of turns. But to recreate the mud situation we are thinking of reducing supply to a very low number (15 maybe) and increase pestilance.

What effect has anyone seen with an increase in pestilance? Is it something we should do?

I have no experience with pestilence either, and I hope I never do.

I'm thinking the effect of lowering overall supply might not be desired. Because of the mud the line troops experienced severe supply problems but the supplies being generated and delivered to the railheads were not affected. The strategy of both sides was planned around these mud periods, and the delivery of the railhead 'stocks' after the mud was the priority, determining when offensive operations would resume. So I think lowering and then raising wouldn't be as accurate as Telumar's suggestion of decreasing the supply radius. Still, I like the cease fires, without them I would never get any sleep.

(in reply to Zort)

Post #: 105

RE: Buzz's Fite Mod - 5/16/2007 7:07:49 PM

Telumar

Posts: 2236
Joined: 1/3/2006
From: niflheim
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: sPzAbt653

quote:

ORIGINAL: Zort

Hey guys a question. Karri and I have been discussing reducing the cease fire in FITE to just a couple of turns. But to recreate the mud situation we are thinking of reducing supply to a very low number (15 maybe) and increase pestilance.

What effect has anyone seen with an increase in pestilance? Is it something we should do?

I have no experience with pestilence either, and I hope I never do.

I'm thinking the effect of lowering overall supply might not be desired. Because of the mud the line troops experienced severe supply problems but the supplies being generated and delivered to the railheads were not affected. The strategy of both sides was planned around these mud periods, and the delivery of the railhead 'stocks' after the mud was the priority, determining when offensive operations would resume. So I think lowering and then raising wouldn't be as accurate as Telumar's suggestion of decreasing the supply radius. Still, I like the cease fires, without them I would never get any sleep.

Agree with sPzAbt653. Where there is rail there should be supply, dropping the supply radius would much more reflect the difficulties of motorized (and horse drawn) movement across muddy roads than simply lowering the supply level.

_____________________________

http://thetoawbeachhead.wordpress.com

(in reply to sPzAbt653)

Post #: 106

RE: Buzz's Fite Mod - 5/16/2007 7:19:00 PM

Karri

Posts: 1137
Joined: 5/24/2006
Status: offline

I think that's a good idea. The problem with ceasefire is, that while it represents the unability to fight, it still allows both sides to move at will behind the frontlines. And with 7 turns(or is it 8?) long mud period, you can reorganise the entire front....I'm pretty sure it's not ment to represent that.

(in reply to Telumar)

Post #: 107

RE: Buzz's Fite Mod - 5/17/2007 1:26:47 AM

SMK-at-work

Posts: 3396
Joined: 8/28/2000
From: New Zealand
Status: offline

IIRC the ceasefires are there because TOAW doesn't give a good enough weather model for mud aren't they? Ie there's only relatively minor effects on movement from the existing "mud" weather options.

So until this is fixed anything is going to be a bit of a compromise.

However shorter supply distances are at least logical. Possibly lowered rail allowances too, to at least slow down deployments - yes rail would not be as badly affected, but there's still troop assembly, loading and unloading areas that would be!

(in reply to Karri)

Post #: 108

RE: Buzz's Fite Mod - 5/17/2007 6:14:23 PM

Karri

Posts: 1137
Joined: 5/24/2006
Status: offline

Historically Soviets destroyed as much as they could when retreating. So I was thinking, if the Soviet player withdraws much faster, ie. abandons everything and builds a line in Mother Russia, perhaps the Germans could receive
1)supply increase
2)extra RR unit
3)increase in replacements
4)extra units?

Personally I would choose supply increase. This would represent the fact that the railroads would be in better condition, depots etc. Soviets retreating faster would mean they can't destroy as much.

(in reply to SMK-at-work)

Post #: 109

RE: Buzz's Fite Mod - 5/18/2007 2:47:27 AM

SMK-at-work

Posts: 3396
Joined: 8/28/2000
From: New Zealand
Status: offline

Perhaps assume that more industry gets captured - increase replacment rates by (some small)% for each of:

Kiev captured before T12
Kharkov captured before...
Minsk...
Riga....
Odessa....

(in reply to Karri)

Post #: 110

RE: Buzz's Fite Mod - 5/18/2007 3:55:41 AM

Zort

Posts: 684
Joined: 7/19/2004
From: Colorado Springs, CO
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: SMK-at-work
Perhaps assume that more industry gets captured - increase replacment rates by (some small)% for each of:
Kiev captured before T12
Kharkov captured before...
Minsk...
Riga....
Odessa....

Good idea but since personnel is tied to production then you will increase people too. I like the idea of giving the Germans some incentive in the Ukraine. Similar to DNO in one respect. Take all the cities/towns in the Urk, give them values and give the Germans points for capturing them. If the total points within a certain period of time equal a range of X, then the Germans get something. I am thinking of either a bunch of personnel via units to be disbanded or Urk units over the course of the game. Now I just have to figure out if this can work and how to do it.

Another idea is to take more % from the Sovs if the cities fall before the historical times (except for kiev and smolensk, I would reverse their dates). Again not sure if this can be done with the current event editor.

I don't think the Germans should get anything special for Minsk. Kiev and Smolensk are a wash since their captured dates are usually reversed compared to what really happened. That leaves the production cities in the south.

(in reply to SMK-at-work)

Post #: 111

RE: Buzz's Fite Mod - 5/18/2007 8:22:32 AM

sPzAbt653

Posts: 9511
Joined: 5/3/2007
From: east coast, usa
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Zort

Another idea is to take more % from the Sovs if the cities fall before the historical times (except for kiev and smolensk, I would reverse their dates). Again not sure if this can be done with the current event editor.

Let's try this, using Zaporozhe (historical capture on turn 17) as an example:
In the editor currently event 98 = Soviets -5%, triggered by event 97 (the capture of Zaporozhe).

1. Add a turn activated event for turn 1, canceling event 98 (this makes the -5% event inactive).
2. Add an event #x the same as event 98 but make it Soviet -10% (or whatever you think will gain the desired effect).
3. Add a turn activated event for turn 18, 'cancel event' #x (as the Germans haven't captured Zaporozhe by this time, they get no -10% to the Soviet).
4. Add another turn activated event for turn 18, 'enable event' 98 (restoring the original -5%)

I know I don't have to say it, but these must be added after the last existing events, or babies will start flying from your ears.

Four events for each instance, how many cities do you want to do this for?

(in reply to Zort)

Post #: 112

RE: Buzz's Fite Mod - 5/19/2007 6:12:20 AM

Zort

Posts: 684
Joined: 7/19/2004
From: Colorado Springs, CO
Status: offline

There are 16 cities that were captured that are scenario production cities. Not sure how many, will have to discuss this. This is a good way of doing this, thanks.

(in reply to sPzAbt653)

Post #: 113

RE: Buzz's Fite Mod - 5/21/2007 12:29:04 AM

SMK-at-work

Posts: 3396
Joined: 8/28/2000
From: New Zealand
Status: offline

Wouldn't it be simpler jsut to put in 1 event with a 5% loss that is cancelled on T18?

However there's also major structural problems with the production system - mainly in that not all soviet cities had major armament plants. Eg AFAIK there were 4 (FOUR) cities with tank factories - Kharkov, Leningrad, Moscow and Stalingrad. Taking any other sity should have zero effect on tank production. Kharkov's factories were successfuly evacuated to "the Urals", and Stalingrad's destroyed in the fighting. The others remained intact.

There were simlarly limited production facilities for aircraft, artillery and trucks/tractors.

(in reply to Zort)

Post #: 114

RE: Buzz's Fite Mod - 5/21/2007 1:16:10 AM

Zort

Posts: 684
Joined: 7/19/2004
From: Colorado Springs, CO
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: SMK-at-work
However there's also major structural problems with the production system - mainly in that not all soviet cities had major armament plants.� Eg AFAIK there were 4 (FOUR) cities with tank factories - Kharkov, Leningrad, Moscow and Stalingrad.� Taking any other sity should have zero effect on tank production.� Kharkov's factories were successfuly evacuated to "the Urals", and Stalingrad's destroyed in the fighting.� The others remained intact.

There were simlarly limited production facilities for aircraft, artillery and trucks/tractors.

What would be nice if the game engine allowed for separating different types of equipment and personnel. Then for the large scenarios like this one where production matters more the game designers would have another tool. But for now it works.

(in reply to SMK-at-work)

Post #: 115

RE: Buzz's Fite Mod - 5/21/2007 3:16:51 PM

Karri

Posts: 1137
Joined: 5/24/2006
Status: offline

Yes, a future wish certainly. I would assume that making a proper event engine would make the game much better than some tweaks on AI or something else.

Anyways, personally with how TOAW currently is, I would give the germans extra supply until the Soviet Winter Counter-Offensive.

(in reply to Zort)

Post #: 116

RE: Buzz's Fite Mod - 5/21/2007 10:08:53 PM

Karri

Posts: 1137
Joined: 5/24/2006
Status: offline

Btw. Regarding the auto-repair. It seems to concentrate first on the hex the Railroad Repair units are in. Ie. if there are 20 unrepaired hexes, autorepair is 10 and 10 RR units are in 10 of those unrepaired hexes, the hexes where the RR units are get repaired.

(in reply to Karri)

Post #: 117

RE: Buzz's Fite Mod - 5/22/2007 6:57:14 AM

will5869

Posts: 17
Joined: 10/23/2006
Status: offline

Where can I get the latest mod at?

(in reply to Karri)

Post #: 118

RE: Buzz's Fite Mod - 5/22/2007 7:02:01 AM

larryfulkerson

Posts: 39932
Joined: 4/17/2005
From: Tucson, AZ
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: will5869
Where can I get the latest mod at?

I've got a version 5.0 that may be the latest version. I'm not sure. Zort ( Buzz ) is working on another version I'm sure. But I'd be glad to send you a copy of the one I have. Just gimme an email at larryfulkerson2002 (at) yahoo (dot) com and I'll attach the files and send them on their way. There's the scenario file and then there's the equipment file that goes with it. Both of them are too big to post here. Well, I guess I could zip up the equipment file and rename it as a *.txt file and post it here but it'd not be of much use without the scenario to go with it.

(in reply to will5869)

Post #: 119

RE: Buzz's Fite Mod - 5/22/2007 6:20:27 PM

will5869

Posts: 17
Joined: 10/23/2006
Status: offline

Thanks. sent you an e-mail

(in reply to larryfulkerson)

Post #: 120