WaW Revised Suggestions Need Feedback

Matrix Games Forums

Forums Register Login Photo Gallery Member List Search Calendars FAQ

My Profile Inbox Address Book My Subscription My Forums Log Out

WaW Revised Suggestions Need Feedback

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

Logged in as: Guest

Users viewing this topic: none

Printable Version

All Forums >> [New Releases from Matrix Games] >> Advanced Tactics Series >> Mods and Scenarios >> WaW Revised Suggestions Need Feedback

Page: [1]

Message

<< Older Topic Newer Topic >>

WaW Revised Suggestions Need Feedback - 8/6/2009 11:33:35 PM

explorer2

Posts: 465
Joined: 11/30/2007
Status: offline

A few recent players have noticed changes in Revised that have caused what could be "imbalances" that should be addressed.
Here are the concerns along with proposed solutions. Let me know what you think:

1. a. Imbalance? Now that occupying cities no longer gives the occupier the city's full production, (more historically accurate) GE cannot build a sufficiently large army to defeat SU.

.....b. Solution: Give GE Infantry II to start the game. This would reflect GE infantry superiority in the early years of the war and allow the smaller numbers to be more effective.

2. a. Imbalance? Now that level bombers have historically accurate to this map greater range, GE can begin war vs SU by bombing them to the point of no production before they ever have the chance to build AA or fighter defenses.

.....b. Solution: part 1. Separate dive bomber tech from level bomber tech for GE. Historically, they hugely focused on dive bombers, not level bombers.
............................part 2. Give SU 2AA that are immobile in each producing city when they first wake up, and 2 more at start of Eastern Blitz.
...........................part 3. To prevent the "gamey" tactic of surrounding SU cities without conquering them, while destroying their production through the air, start bringing in the Soviet Siberian Factories automatically at maybe 4 month intervals (5 total) starting with January 1942 (only IF they're at war) which is when if I recall correctly, they first started producing. This would be only IF the 5 relevant cities were not actually conquered.

Comments? Are these really imbalances? Are the solutions good ones? Do you have better ideas?

< Message edited by explorer2 -- 8/7/2009 2:13:24 AM >

Post #: 1

RE: WaW Revised Suggestions Need Feedback - 8/7/2009 6:31:59 AM

coxville

Posts: 87
Joined: 4/12/2009
From: Birmingham UK
Status: offline

I have played around quite a bit with your Mods (although I keeping playing with yours rather than sticking with my own because I generally like your improvements better!) it seems to me that people play this type of game for two main reasons:

1) to recreate a historically accurate replay
2) to test out the "what if scenarios"

I am definitely the latter and therefore normally alter Japanese and german fighters to level 2 and add a couple of level 1 level bombers to the german arsenal to start with (condor legions). Now aircraft cannot upgrade these changes make a big difference in Poland, slight in France and very little elsewhere but the fighters do reflect the initial superiority of the Zero and the Bf109.

I already make German infantry level II and also upgrade the staff for Axis and Japan to HQ level II. Effectively both nations produced tough soldiers, even at the end of the war but at the beginning most victories were down to imaginative and forward thiking generals. At the beginning Panzers were no better than British and French tanks, indeed some of the latter were regarded as superior, it was just the Germans used them properly!

I also have found the complete tie of production to research frustrating (Game not your Mod) as the Germans ended the war as they started it, technically ahead. Although as victors we like to forget this, the fact is we out produced them, we didn't out think them. After all they ended with rockets, snorkel submarines, king Tigers and Jet fighters etc To that end I have resurrected the random powerpoints event from the Russia 41 scenario and have a version giving 100pp to japan, West and Axis but with likelyhood weighted so japan rarely gets it, west more often and germany about 10% of the time. Again big effect at the beginning of the game but far more limited later.

Last but not least I leave your AI reinforcements of the western front in but deal the western blitz card in October. Hitler always had the option of going early and I have never understood why the allies can lose 50% preparedness in May but can kick butt in April?

All the above creates a campaign where the Axis in particular can reproduce a version of the campaign without dodgy leadership but still face the peril of the worlds productive powers.

iam also playing around with the concept of pioneers, Axis super hard urban/engineer type fighters combining SMg and engineers with superb urban assault modifiers but costing a mint.

Oh and i think your suggestions are grand.

Keep up the good work

Chris

(in reply to explorer2)

Post #: 2

RE: WaW Revised Suggestions Need Feedback - 8/7/2009 5:31:24 PM

HamburgerHill

Posts: 152
Joined: 6/30/2009
Status: offline

1...I noticed the loss of production right away and was concerned of how it would effect the balance. Seems like the general concensus in recent versions of WAW has been that the game slighly favors the allies. And since the Axis are more dependant on captured production...
Better starting tech for the Axis maybe a solution. I like coxville's suggestions: Germany staff2,fighter2,infantry2, Japan: infantry2,fighter2,staff2 (maybe even long range fighter for Japan. Since the Zero pretty much was a long range fighter.)
My only concern with higher tech is the increased cost to produce. Since that has been added I often find myself not upgrading things I used to always upgrade just to avoid the increased cost.

2. Hmmm. I think you should be careful with how much air defence you start soviets with. I don't think many German players are going to pick a fight with Soviets in 40' and as long as Soviets activate in jan 41' the Soviet player can build AA guns in critical cities if they are concerned about a large scale bombing campaign by the Germans.
If the Soviets start with the ability to defend against level bombers then the German player will never build them and the "what if scenario" has just been eliminated. The Germans were fully capable of building large formations of level bombers had they chosen that path.
IMHO the long range bomber(LRB) and the long range fighter was one of the best additions made to WAW. I use the LRB in my games a lot because it can be a powerful weapon, as it was in reality as well. It is not a game clincher since interceptors and AA guns can shut down any successful bombing campaign.

(in reply to coxville)

Post #: 3

RE: WaW Revised Suggestions Need Feedback - 8/8/2009 12:05:17 AM

Tufkal2

Posts: 834
Joined: 12/31/2008
From: Germany
Status: offline

As I said I think this is a very fun scenario. Looking forwar to see how things balance.
One thing I found which might profit from some thought is the zero cost of creating new units. I think this allows a little bit too much gamey tactics. So dont know what the reason was this was set to 0 but I actually liked it when this costs 1...

_____________________________

(in reply to HamburgerHill)

Post #: 4

RE: WaW Revised Suggestions Need Feedback - 8/8/2009 6:54:33 PM

Appren

Posts: 179
Joined: 6/5/2008
Status: offline

Assuming the Soviets activate in January 41, they will probably be OK without any big changes, assuming the factories work as promised. Plenty of time to set up defenses, assuming the Germans don't invade before winter is over. I can't see any problems with the 0pp unit cost either, what kind of "gamey" tactics would that create?

The 2 range on the immobile AA might be a bit much, since they are also cheaper than regular AA, but lets see when our game actually get to the point where someone try to bomb something

_____________________________

Appren's Guide to Advanced Tactics (Outdated)

Appren's Guide to fast exploration in random maps

(in reply to Tufkal2)

Post #: 5

RE: WaW Revised Suggestions Need Feedback - 8/9/2009 5:12:42 AM

82ndtrooper

Posts: 1083
Joined: 12/19/2008
From: tennessee
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Lunaticus

As I said I think this is a very fun scenario. Looking forwar to see how things balance.
One thing I found which might profit from some thought is the zero cost of creating new units. I think this allows a little bit too much gamey tactics. So dont know what the reason was this was set to 0 but I actually liked it when this costs 1...

this was put in due to the increased partisan activity ( I think) if you had to pay 1 pp every time you had to make a unit to garrison a captured town it would drain your PP.

the germans had a lot of level bombers they where just all medium range. they never devoleped a heavy long range bomber, which hurt them in the battle of britian.

I would also suggest making the poleste (SP?) supply resource 2000 instead of 1000.

I like the suggestion of staff II and fighter II for both germany and japan. also maybe consider bomber II for germany since the stuka was the best divebomber in the war. thats a hard one though since their long range bombers where sub par but their dive bombers where excellent. so something to think about.

I do think the axis needs a little boost but not too much and the infantry II along with the staff and fighter might just do the trick.

as for the SU AA gun thing, the german player cant really afford to sink much into making level bombers if he wants a successful ground campaign especially when that tactic is easily countered with units any smart russian player will be making anyway.

< Message edited by 82ndtrooper -- 8/9/2009 5:19:46 AM >

_____________________________

HHC 302nd Engineer Battalion
82nd Airborne Division
Honorably Discharged Jul/80

(in reply to Tufkal2)

Post #: 6

RE: WaW Revised Suggestions Need Feedback - 8/9/2009 10:57:15 PM

explorer2

Posts: 465
Joined: 11/30/2007
Status: offline

Excellent, Excellent, Excellent responses all

Very helpful.
I'll give a more detailed response later, as I want to get this new version out ASAP.
I have one remaining question --
I agree fully with Coxville's comment, echoed by all, that GE had superior infantry, fighters, dive bombers, and staffing than others, and historically should be given all these techs at game start.

BUT....to do so they will have a HUGE combat advantage in early game. They already have a huge XP advantage and huge numerical advantage. If I give GE these extra 4 historically warranted techs, wouldn't that hugely affect game play, making it MUCH easier for GE to role over France and SU?
Yes, I took away some of their production, but this seems like it might way overbalance it in Germany's favor.
At the strategic level of the game, if it really is to have historical "plausibility" it should be very difficult, but still possible, for GE to win.

Better perhaps to give the extra techs but remove, or emasculate, the Blitz cards? Or maybe just staff II?

Give me your best thoughts please.

< Message edited by explorer2 -- 8/9/2009 11:03:09 PM >

(in reply to 82ndtrooper)

Post #: 7

RE: WaW Revised Suggestions Need Feedback - 8/9/2009 11:22:23 PM

HamburgerHill

Posts: 152
Joined: 6/30/2009
Status: offline

IMHO... I'd say drop any combat bonuses for the western blitz card. Which will make the French prepare for war card void I suppose.

The Eastern Blitz card is not so easy. Most Axis players would have upgraded their land forces before they attacked the soviets anyway. My guess is removing the bonuses here might upset the balance possibly in favor of Soviets.

In fact you mentioned that some Axis players were complaining they were not able to build a large enough army to invade Soviets with the loss of production. Perhaps the jump up in tech for Germany will help here since players can spend some of the production they would be spending on tech for building a larger army for Soviet capaign.

Those are my thoughs anyway.

(in reply to explorer2)

Post #: 8

RE: WaW Revised Suggestions Need Feedback - 8/10/2009 12:06:34 AM

Appren

Posts: 179
Joined: 6/5/2008
Status: offline

I would not change the western blitz. As it is now, the Allied player has a choice, spend some PP and defend France...or don't. I'd also be careful to change the Germans much at this stage, giving them Rifle II OR staff II (not both) might make sense, but not sure how much it would change the balance.

_____________________________

Appren's Guide to Advanced Tactics (Outdated)

Appren's Guide to fast exploration in random maps

(in reply to HamburgerHill)

Post #: 9

RE: WaW Revised Suggestions Need Feedback - 8/10/2009 4:21:43 AM

82ndtrooper

Posts: 1083
Joined: 12/19/2008
From: tennessee
Status: offline

give them all three techs but dont change any starting forces. in other words give them the tech so what they build would be the t2 but the starting army would remain all t1 just like it is now. I doubt the german player could upgrade all his units before he invaded france. and i doubt he would worry about upgrading that early in the game since what he has is enough to take france.

planes arnt upgradeable so he will have to build new planes. he might have enough supply to upgrade his staff to t2 before france but that would prolly be it.� I dont see this really chaging much in the early game but would be a big help later on.

or try it in steps.

start with the inf II tech. and lets see how that goes

or give the staff II and fighter II techs and lets try that.

after thinking about it, if you give the infantry and staff II. that will free up PP and allow the german player to tech the fighters and dive bombers earlier in the game which would be a big help.

so my suggestion is this.

leave the starting armys all t-I but give the staff and infantry T-II techs for all new units built.

this would prolly do the trick nicely and not overpower germany early in the game.

< Message edited by 82ndtrooper -- 8/10/2009 4:30:32 AM >

_____________________________

HHC 302nd Engineer Battalion
82nd Airborne Division
Honorably Discharged Jul/80

(in reply to Appren)

Post #: 10

RE: WaW Revised Suggestions Need Feedback - 8/10/2009 6:38:19 AM

explorer2

Posts: 465
Joined: 11/30/2007
Status: offline

Here's where it stands right now: Based on your feedback/suggestions, hoping/planning on releasing next version Monday 8/10 with following changes-

France Frozen at Start Option Added
1. If chosen at game start, France begins the game asleep and will not wake up until attacked. France is given extra units to fill in the northern coastal and Ardennes region gaps in their defense, and units start with more XP than previously. Advantage: GE

2. Germany given 200 PP to start game Advantage: GE
This way you get to choose what you want to use it on. Almost enough for 1.5 levels of tech.

3. Ploesti changed from Resource 2 to Resource 4

4. Bomber Research divided into 2 categories: Dive Bomber and Level Bomber, each costing half of the original total Advantage: neutral? (GE will not start with Level Bomber tech though)

5. 2 Flak Immobile Level I added to all SU producing cities at game start. Advantage: SU
This will not have much of an effect against a serious bomber attack. Remember when SU wakes up now, it only initially gets 55% of production and slowly ramps up. Basically, SU has to spend most of its initial production before the war on supply.

6. After war with Germany begins, if Kiev, Kharkov, Dnepropetrovsk, Sevastapol, or Rostov are not occupied by GE by 6, 9, 12, 15, 18 turns after Eastern Blitz begins, their corresponding Siberian factories are created anyway. Advantage: SU
This is just in to avoid a "gamey" tactic.

Overall I believe this greatly enhances the GE position, hopefully not overly much.

All these values of course can be tweaked as required if they prove to cause imbalances.

NOW, one final question before I put this version out there:
Coxville's comment about why not give GE West Blitz card earlier?
Historically, there's no reason not to, so I have many inclinations to do so.

BUT, my fear is this would make it pretty easy to have a GE victory over France much earlier than historically, which would allow a GE invasion of SU much earlier than historical, which would make an ultimate GE victory much easier than currently. Also with the added benefits to GE this version (S) will have, would also giving GE Western Blitz earlier (after fall of Warsaw) have enough of a chain reaction to cause a significant change in the balance towards GE?

What do you think?

(in reply to 82ndtrooper)

Post #: 11

RE: WaW Revised Suggestions Need Feedback - 8/10/2009 6:42:51 AM

82ndtrooper

Posts: 1083
Joined: 12/19/2008
From: tennessee
Status: offline

Giving them PP instead of a tech is a great idea.

i think we should try these changes for now and not mess with the eastern blitz card yet if at all.

_____________________________

HHC 302nd Engineer Battalion
82nd Airborne Division
Honorably Discharged Jul/80

(in reply to explorer2)

Post #: 12

RE: WaW Revised Suggestions Need Feedback - 8/10/2009 7:40:16 AM

Tufkal2

Posts: 834
Joined: 12/31/2008
From: Germany
Status: offline

I am looking forward to give this new version a test run, too.
I think a lot of the balance will depend on how you set up the "Frozen France". If it is setup to a level comparable to the French army in spring '40 this will make for a much more interesting defense of France (although tougher probably). This way I do not think the GE is overly strong if they get to play the Western Blitz early as to do this in Winter while their army is still building up might just lead to waking up France early without gaining much headway in winter. If it were feasible for GE to start the Blitz before March '40 against a competent opponent then this might disturb the balance of the game. However likely needs some playtesting.

_____________________________

(in reply to 82ndtrooper)

Post #: 13

RE: WaW Revised Suggestions Need Feedback - 8/16/2009 12:09:46 AM

Tufkal2

Posts: 834
Joined: 12/31/2008
From: Germany
Status: offline

Having gotten some play experience let me be more precise: If the setup is in a way that Germany can win in France end of 39 then the scenario balance will probably be gone. The reason is that then Japan, Italy and French production will be added to the West starting early 40 and this will very likely not be playable for the West. So I think it makes sense to think about freezing France as this avoids the unhistorial tactic of moving all of the units from the Maginot line to defend Northern France or even to heavily fortify Northern France but the setup must still be that France is not successfully conquerable before June 40...

_____________________________

(in reply to Tufkal2)

Post #: 14