A needed fix for allied production

Matrix Games Forums

Forums Register Login Photo Gallery Member List Search Calendars FAQ

My Profile Inbox Address Book My Subscription My Forums Log Out

A needed fix for allied production

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] >> Gary Grigsby's Eagle Day to Bombing the Reich >> A needed fix for allied production

Page: [1] 2 3 4 5 next > >>

Message

<< Older Topic Newer Topic >>

A needed fix for allied production - 10/21/2009 1:09:19 PM

Lanconic

Posts: 260
Joined: 7/1/2008
Status: offline

The allies are locked into historical replacement rates.
That is unfair, because the German is NOT.

The truth is that the allies could have easily quadrupled ALL their plane production.
They didnt need to. So they didnt.

The game should allow the players to boost their production.

Post #: 1

RE: A needed fix for allied production - 10/21/2009 1:40:01 PM

jomni

Posts: 2827
Joined: 11/19/2007
Status: offline

Looks like the same complaints with WitP production system.
Japan has a fully manageable economy while the US uses historical replacement.

But the game is all about bombing a country and damaging economy and production.
So the production of the defender should be modeled to see the effects.
The attacker doesn't get bombed so he just gets historical replacement, i've gotten used to this concept in WitP.

(in reply to Lanconic)

Post #: 2

RE: A needed fix for allied production - 10/21/2009 1:45:10 PM

sprior

Posts: 8596
Joined: 6/18/2002
From: Portsmouth, UK
Status: offline

Plus, if the allies HAVE to boost production then in games turn they should lose.

_____________________________

"Grown ups are what's left when skool is finished."
"History started badly and hav been geting steadily worse."
- Nigel Molesworth.

(in reply to jomni)

Post #: 3

RE: A needed fix for allied production - 10/21/2009 2:10:52 PM

Lanconic

Posts: 260
Joined: 7/1/2008
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: sprior

Plus, if the allies HAVE to boost production then in games turn they should lose.

Really =)

Well in one game it is 1/44 All the German units except night fighters are
TA152C The good one. All the night fighters are HE219-5
again the good ones.

The allies have no bombers left. When they try they get shredded.

So tell me....how did the allies 'deserve' to lose?
What exactly, did they do wrong?

(in reply to sprior)

Post #: 4

RE: A needed fix for allied production - 10/21/2009 2:35:00 PM

kaybayray

Posts: 424
Joined: 6/1/2007
Status: offline

My thoughts on this topic...

Yeah I was a bit surprised in the original game that the Allies were not able to control production in the same way the Axis is. However the Allies do have some ability to modify the Aircraft of squadrons. You can change the Airframe of any squadron to fill it with that of your choice. But then you are limited by the quantities being produced and deposited into the pool. So you cant really build the Air Force from the Allied perspective that you can from that of the Axis.

I didnt realize that WITP was modeled the same way. I dont really understand that. It seem intuitive that both sides of a Strategic game would have overall similar capabilities with respect to control of Economy, Production, R&D and Force building. Unless of course that was the major point of the game that a particular side had to overcome a particular set of constraints. Perhaps this was the mindset of the original developers. The idea that the Allies overall production plan with Mandatory Targeting constraints was the obstical that had to be overcome to defeat the Axis.

But I dont know....

Later,
KayBay

_____________________________

It's all Mind Over Matter....
If you dont mind... It dont matter

(in reply to Lanconic)

Post #: 5

RE: A needed fix for allied production - 10/21/2009 2:40:14 PM

Hard Sarge

Posts: 22741
Joined: 10/1/2000
From: garfield hts ohio usa
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Lanconic

quote:

ORIGINAL: sprior

Plus, if the allies HAVE to boost production then in games turn they should lose.

Really =)

Well in one game it is 1/44 All the German units except night fighters are
TA152C The good one. All the night fighters are HE219-5
again the good ones.

The allies have no bombers left. When they try they get shredded.

So tell me....how did the allies 'deserve' to lose?
What exactly, did they do wrong?

so, somebody is gaming the system, why should the other side have to follow along ?

on the list of things I want, is to be able to add start dates to different devices, somebody is reseaching planes, with engines and parts, that are not "made" yet

but, part of that is already taken care of

_____________________________

(in reply to Lanconic)

Post #: 6

RE: A needed fix for allied production - 10/21/2009 2:43:53 PM

Kriegsspieler

Posts: 205
Joined: 12/3/2006
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: kaybayray

My thoughts on this topic...

Yeah I was a bit surprised in the original game that the Allies were not able to control production in the same way the Axis is. However the Allies do have some ability to modify the Aircraft of squadrons. You can change the Airframe of any squadron to fill it with that of your choice. But then you are limited by the quantities being produced and deposited into the pool. So you cant really build the Air Force from the Allied perspective that you can from that of the Axis.

I didnt realize that WITP was modeled the same way. I dont really understand that. It seem intuitive that both sides of a Strategic game would have overall similar capabilities with respect to control of Economy, Production, R&D and Force building. Unless of course that was the major point of the game that a particular side had to overcome a particular set of constraints. Perhaps this was the mindset of the original developers. The idea that the Allies overall production plan with Mandatory Targeting constraints was the obstical that had to be overcome to defeat the Axis.

But I dont know....

Later,
KayBay

Personally, I think the reason is pretty obvious. In both this game and WitP, Allied production for the theatre in question is but one aspect of a global war. For Germany in this game and Japan in WitP, however, this WAS the war. Germany had to devote production to fighting the Russkies, of course, but once one factors in the proportion of the overall economy devoted to that theater, pretty much everything else is present in this game. So giventhose circumstances, it makes sense to let the Germans have more control over their production for some interesting alternatives.

And anyway -- it's not as if giving the Germans control over production really tips the balance very much.

(in reply to kaybayray)

Post #: 7

RE: A needed fix for allied production - 10/21/2009 3:32:29 PM

Golden Bear

Posts: 190
Joined: 3/27/2006
Status: offline

Part of it is also that the Germans tried out many different sorts of experimental planes and then could almost immediately get them into combat. So the possibilities exist in the first place for the LW player or AI to distort things to an extreme "what if" situation.

OTOH, the Allies were generally winning the war - I know it can be debated - from '43 on and, beyond the need for a long range fighter that generated the P51, didn't put strong emphasis on new innovations. They concentrated on bulk. This led them to being caught in bad positions - an example being their armor where they realized when it was too late to change things that the Sherman was a bad liability to German armor.

But when they needed to generate solutions they did. Sticking to aircraft, they developed the Hellcat and Corsair because of the pounding they took from the Japanese.

My feeling/opinion is that if the air war over Europe got uglier they would have come up with a response. We just can't know what it would have been because they were not exploring the alternatives.

...back to the LW side having the capability to distort production steeply from historical... I feel that the difficulties of working withing the German bureaucracy of the time is not modeled strongly enough. The LW player should see a promising build up of super fighters suddenly stopped as all the planes get converted to bombers or get scrapped because one of the many competing layers of bureaucrats had a different idea and more "pull" than the LW player.

Is the "what if?" for the LW side thus based upon the assumption that the German bureaucracy will not interfere with plans? It seems that way to me. That is an enormous benefit to the Axis side!

Carlos

(in reply to Kriegsspieler)

Post #: 8

RE: A needed fix for allied production - 10/21/2009 5:15:06 PM

KenchiSulla

Posts: 2948
Joined: 10/22/2008
From: the Netherlands
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Lanconic

quote:

ORIGINAL: sprior

Plus, if the allies HAVE to boost production then in games turn they should lose.

Really =)

Well in one game it is 1/44 All the German units except night fighters are
TA152C The good one. All the night fighters are HE219-5
again the good ones.

The allies have no bombers left. When they try they get shredded.

So tell me....how did the allies 'deserve' to lose?
What exactly, did they do wrong?

Lanconic, this is something that will get fixed in a future patch, I am sure.

Also, why would you want to do that? Because you can? Because you need to win? I approach the game semi-historical, meaning I restrict myself in ability to boost research. Ofcourse I tweak production and at the moment I am working to move forward the deployment of JU88G and the FW190D. Also I plan on NOT researching the ME262 and just build a limit number of them to fill a historical number of Groups.

It would be nice to be able to fiddle with allied production in a limited way though. Perhaps something like that is possible. But then again, I dont believe the allied need that......

(in reply to Lanconic)

Post #: 9

RE: A needed fix for allied production - 10/21/2009 5:18:48 PM

Dixie

Posts: 10303
Joined: 3/10/2006
From: UK
Status: offline

The thing is that as the German player you KNOW that certain aircraft types are going to be great. There was no guarantee of that during the war, especially for types that were still in the early stages.

_____________________________

Bigger boys stole my sig

(in reply to KenchiSulla)

Post #: 10

RE: A needed fix for allied production - 10/21/2009 5:28:08 PM

Howard Mitchell

Posts: 449
Joined: 6/3/2002
From: Blighty
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Dixie
The thing is that as the German player you KNOW that certain aircraft types are going to be great.� There was no guarantee of that during the war, especially for types that were still in the early stages. �

Me 210 and He 177 anybody?

The Allies especially tended to order multiple designs where possible in case one was a dud. The Halifax and Manchester were ordered close together, and given the doubts about the Vulture engine the former changed to Merlins before the design was even finished as a means of risk reduction. The USAAF developed not only the B-29 but also the less revolutionary B-32 in case the Superfortress failed.

As Dixie says, in the game you know exactly what an aircraft is capable of, no chance that you will put all your effort into the Ta 152 only to find that crippling engineering difficulties mean it's delivered two years late and isn't particularly good when it finally arrives.

_____________________________

While the battles the British fight may differ in the widest possible ways, they invariably have two common characteristics � they are always fought uphill and always at the junction of two or more map sheets.

General Sir William Slim

(in reply to Dixie)

Post #: 11

RE: A needed fix for allied production - 10/21/2009 5:58:03 PM

Nikademus

Posts: 25684
Joined: 5/27/2000
From: Alien spacecraft
Status: offline

Any time you can manipulate production in a wargame...bad things usually result. It sounds like the dev team though has a handle on it.

_____________________________

(in reply to Howard Mitchell)

Post #: 12

RE: A needed fix for allied production - 10/21/2009 6:17:55 PM

Nicholas Bell

Posts: 549
Joined: 4/10/2006
From: Eagle River, Alaska
Status: offline

It would seem to be a fairly simple task to code a random chance for a German aircraft's deployment time to be INCREASED occasionally to reflect the many inefficiencies of the Reich. A well-oiled machine it was not....

quote:

Is the "what if?" for the LW side thus based upon the assumption that the German bureaucracy will not interfere with plans? It seems that way to me. That is an enormous benefit to the Axis side!

IMO all of GG's games over the years have had a definite Axis "slant" to them. He's a pretty reclusive guy - I have not seen anything directly attributable to him since around 1993 when he participated in the Pacific War Genie newslist (or whatever it was called) - so it is really impossible to know exactly what is going on in his head. I've read everything from being accused of being a closet Nazi, a panzer-pusher (boardwargamers know what I mean - and I don't know if being one of these or a closet Nazi is worse

!) to a more recent apologist thread about Gary wanting to more "explore the possibilities of what might have been", than what happened. While there certainly is no argument about their being plenty of room for improvement in the Axis camp, it seems the possibility of improved Allied performance/decision making of it's own accord or in response to better Axis performance does not exist for the Allies in GG's mind - or at least his programs.

(in reply to Nikademus)

Post #: 13

RE: A needed fix for allied production - 10/21/2009 6:48:19 PM

Lanconic

Posts: 260
Joined: 7/1/2008
Status: offline

All of you have completely missed my point. Why are there no MORE allied planes?
Because they were NOT needed. If they HAD been needed they would have gotten them.
Including if needed the B-29.

If they needed 15k more escorts, they could have been provided.
It was within the allied capability.

THAT is my point.

(in reply to Lanconic)

Post #: 14

RE: A needed fix for allied production - 10/21/2009 7:22:06 PM

KenchiSulla

Posts: 2948
Joined: 10/22/2008
From: the Netherlands
Status: offline

What do you mean? Was that your point...

You lost me bud..

(in reply to Lanconic)

Post #: 15

RE: A needed fix for allied production - 10/21/2009 7:30:16 PM

Golden Bear

Posts: 190
Joined: 3/27/2006
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Cannonfodder

What do you mean? Was that your point...

You lost me bud..

He's just trying to say that if the LW had continued with greater level of resistance, the Allies could/would have put in more resources - more units, newer aircraft, etc. This doesn't happen within the game.

What does happen is that if the Allied player doesn't keep increasing their points they will suffer a sudden loss at the end of the month. For the player this could mean that more resources are being allocated but you aren't going to get to use them!

The potential difficulty comes for the LW player. If they are doing well, they (based on readings of action reports in the past) can just crush the Allied bombing efforts and the AI doesn't have any solution. More interesting would be for the Allied AI to swarm them with yet more units and better equipment.

Based on history, it is a war that the Axis is going to lose. If I had done it (hah!) the goal would be to see how long the LW player can prolong the battle since they are doomed ultimately to being overwhelmed.

Playing as Allied vs. AI I'm fine with how things work out. The new weapons of the LW arre a challenge and it is up to me to be clever about countering a changing situation.

Carl

(in reply to KenchiSulla)

Post #: 16

RE: A needed fix for allied production - 10/21/2009 7:38:57 PM

KenchiSulla

Posts: 2948
Joined: 10/22/2008
From: the Netherlands
Status: offline

Alright, thanks for that. I understand the point. I still wonder about the allied ability to bring in more forces. This would have weakened them at the pacific front and the war there was still raging.

In game the allies don't really run out of planes and pilots, right? (I don't play allied)

(in reply to Golden Bear)

Post #: 17

RE: A needed fix for allied production - 10/21/2009 8:11:50 PM

Nikademus

Posts: 25684
Joined: 5/27/2000
From: Alien spacecraft
Status: offline

Replacement airframes was never an issue. Replacement pilots, life expectancy and morale were the issue. Is he saying that the Allied side is running out of B-17's? Never saw that in the original game, and i'm legendary for my lack of thorough raid planning. Ask Speedy.

_____________________________

(in reply to KenchiSulla)

Post #: 18

RE: A needed fix for allied production - 10/21/2009 9:46:18 PM

Nicholas Bell

Posts: 549
Joined: 4/10/2006
From: Eagle River, Alaska
Status: offline

Maybe Harley could have an Allied option to say, double the US aircraft replacement rate at the cost of victory points. Sudden death would have to be loosened up a bit for that, but I'm not keen on having the game end and not being able to finish it off anyway - even if I've lost on points.

There's no doubt that the US had plenty of production capacity. By 1944 they were cutting back on pilot training because they had 10,000's more than they could use. How many thousands of aircraft never left CONUS - thousands upon thousands. Morale, that's another story. Truman was very worried about support for the war against Japan by the summer of 1945, which may have played a part in the decision to use the atomic bomb. And I have no doubt it would have been used against Germany if it had been holding out. And why the game ends in 1945 not 1946. (not to say a non-nuclear optional extension wouldn't be interesting!)

(in reply to Nikademus)

Post #: 19

RE: A needed fix for allied production - 10/21/2009 10:30:21 PM

bigmilt

Posts: 50
Joined: 8/17/2004
Status: offline

I don't know where you guys get production could be doubled or quadrupled - all the plants were going 24/7 with
workers being required to work 48 hours in a week. there was a labor shortage you know even with all the rosie the
riveters going strong.

(in reply to Nicholas Bell)

Post #: 20

RE: A needed fix for allied production - 10/22/2009 12:00:48 AM

TechSgt

Posts: 306
Joined: 9/19/2008
From: Los Angeles
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Lanconic

quote:

ORIGINAL: sprior

Plus, if the allies HAVE to boost production then in games turn they should lose.

Really =)

Well in one game it is 1/44 All the German units except night fighters are
TA152C The good one. All the night fighters are HE219-5
again the good ones.

The allies have no bombers left. When they try they get shredded.

So tell me....how did the allies 'deserve' to lose?
What exactly, did they do wrong?

When I first read this I thought Jan '45! Heck, by then it is GAME OVER!

But looking at Jan '44, (Forty-Four!)! I'm thinking a little creative editing is going on.
If I'm playing someone who has to win that bad, fine I resign!

TS

BTW: I play as Allies, I have enough to do now. Don't force production. General Arnold in Washington is doing quite well.

(in reply to Lanconic)

Post #: 21

RE: A needed fix for allied production - 10/22/2009 12:17:29 AM

kaybayray

Posts: 424
Joined: 6/1/2007
Status: offline

Hey TechSgt,

Wow I ddint notice that. Please correct me if I am wrong. The TA-152 was a Hight Altitude "Super Fighter" correct and the HE-219 was a Twin Engine night interceptor that had the latest onboard Elint gear for bomber intercept correct?

There is a scenario in this game where the entire Luftwaffe Air Units are comprised solely of these 2 Aircraft?

Yeah I would expect the Allies not to be able to keep up with a50+ Knot speed advantage at high altitude grouped with superior manuverablility at alt..... jeez louiz...

And Night Bombing would be a bloodbath if faced by formations of AC that all have the ultimate in AC detection gear.

Please tell me that there is some serious modding goin on here.....

Later,
KayBay

_____________________________

It's all Mind Over Matter....
If you dont mind... It dont matter

(in reply to TechSgt)

Post #: 22

RE: A needed fix for allied production - 10/22/2009 3:46:09 AM

Lanconic

Posts: 260
Joined: 7/1/2008
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: kaybayray

Hey TechSgt,

Wow I ddint notice that. Please correct me if I am wrong. The TA-152 was a Hight Altitude "Super Fighter" correct and the HE-219 was a Twin Engine night interceptor that had the latest onboard Elint gear for bomber intercept correct?

There is a scenario in this game where the entire Luftwaffe Air Units are comprised solely of these 2 Aircraft?

Yeah I would expect the Allies not to be able to keep up with a50+ Knot speed advantage at high altitude grouped with superior manuverablility at alt..... jeez louiz...

And Night Bombing would be a bloodbath if faced by formations of AC that all have the ultimate in AC detection gear.

Please tell me that there is some serious modding goin on here.....

Later,
KayBay

No it can easily be done within the established game rules
You just need to JUNK all the wasted resources devoted to the ME109 series.
I converted ALL production to the FW190 series and used 40 engines for the HE219 series.
The TA152c uses the same engine as the HE219-5
SO it simplifies everything.

(in reply to kaybayray)

Post #: 23

RE: A needed fix for allied production - 10/22/2009 4:40:29 AM

harley

Posts: 1700
Joined: 10/13/2005
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Lanconic

No it can easily be done within the established game rules
You just need to JUNK all the wasted resources devoted to the ME109 series.
I converted ALL production to the FW190 series and used 40 engines for the HE219 series.
The TA152c uses the same engine as the HE219-5
SO it simplifies everything.

There are about 100AC prod points per day. You currently need 100 points to advance by one month. If you convert all prod to the 2 new types, allowing for time to change over it would only take about 30 - 35 days to complete the research. Remember the size one sites are ready in 10 days, but there's 2 or 3 size 6 sites that take 2 months to retool, so that's 12 or more points of prod that can't be put into research.

After the patch, however...

The amount of research required to save a month is directly tied to how long before that type is due. Presently something that is due in Jan 1945 requires 1600 units to research - about 16 days prod. In the version we have in test at the moment, it requires around 6500 to produce - 65 days prod. For the defender to forgo all replacements for over 2 months, it would be a difficult proposition, especially in a PBEM game. You'd really have to pick your defensive lines carefully, and hope he didn't put a hole in your AFACs for too long. To get something from May 45 into prod, you would need over 11,000 units of research.

To get something due in the next month you only need 100 units, that's always the minimum.

this isn't final, either. It feels right, but we won't know without some real playtesting.

_____________________________

gigiddy gigiddy gig-i-ddy

(in reply to Lanconic)

Post #: 24

RE: A needed fix for allied production - 10/22/2009 6:29:44 AM

KenchiSulla

Posts: 2948
Joined: 10/22/2008
From: the Netherlands
Status: offline

Hey Harley, glad to hear you are working on the research and production part!

(in reply to harley)

Post #: 25

RE: A needed fix for allied production - 10/22/2009 8:12:16 AM

TechSgt

Posts: 306
Joined: 9/19/2008
From: Los Angeles
Status: offline

Harley & Lanconic;

What I'm having a hard time with is, what were the Allies doing during this time?
Axis loses not being replaced should elevate the AS. Therfore, the Allies should push even harder, advancing the "Big Week". That means bombing AFAC, EFAC, & CFAC's!

While thinking of what to reply, I get a nagging feeling...

What you are doing is cutting out all the "historic" beauracracy that hindered the Axis war effort, hmmm...

1) The Allies can lose by not having enough points, to withstand the D-Day mandatory bombing phase. (There is an exploit around this)
2) The Allies can lose by not having the points at the end of 700 turns. (The exploit here is OLD AGE!)

I have to think some more about this...

What I'm having a hard time with is, what were the Allies doing during this time?

TS

(in reply to Lanconic)

Post #: 26

RE: A needed fix for allied production - 10/22/2009 1:00:06 PM

Hard Sarge

Posts: 22741
Joined: 10/1/2000
From: garfield hts ohio usa
Status: offline

well, shouldn't the Allies be bombing the enemy Aircraft plants ?

most of my games, I can bleed the 109s unit dry be losses, and most of the 190 units dry by killing off there production

people who want to game the system to beat the AI, and then brag about it, just cause the system to be changed, I would like to see either of these two guys who can get 152 C's into production in Jan of 44, go against somebody like Swift in a PBEM game, and see what the real cost this idea is

_____________________________

(in reply to TechSgt)

Post #: 27

RE: A needed fix for allied production - 10/22/2009 2:04:10 PM

kaybayray

Posts: 424
Joined: 6/1/2007
Status: offline

Hey Guys

I am trying to wrap my head around this so bare with me as I only have 3 functioning brain cells.

Am I correctly interpreting what Harley and Sarge are saying about Production units being used to fund Research and Re-tooling to new Aircraft? When this is going on those points being spent on Research or Re-tooling or whatever is required to develop the new design and implement it into production are not going to production of current models? Is this correct?

If that is correct or somewhat correct then the AC being delivered to the Replacement Pool for the Axis is being directly effected in the overall total number of aircraft being delivered? So active line units are not receiving the maximum number of replacement units during this time?

Some questions come to mind.....

How large are the Luftwaffe units? They are similar in size to the Allied units correct... like 25-45 aircraft max depending on model?

Losses to a squadron effect Morale correct?

Front line units will encounter unreplaced losses if this is happening correct?

The time frame we are talking about here is much greater then what.. 30 days, 60 days, 90 days? Which is the expected case?

Yeah man... so TechSgt is all over this... what the heck are the Allies doing during this Vacation?

Am I that far off here? I mean there is no way that this endeavor could be sustained to victory against anything other than the AI right? Or can even the AI destroy this?

What ever the case may be, Sarge and Harley please do not change this game significantly due to the play style of a few. Keep in mind I am a novice and dont really know all the interlated effects of all we are discussing here.

Later,
KayBay

_____________________________

It's all Mind Over Matter....
If you dont mind... It dont matter

(in reply to Hard Sarge)

Post #: 28

RE: A needed fix for allied production - 10/22/2009 2:22:10 PM

Lanconic

Posts: 260
Joined: 7/1/2008
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: harley

quote:

ORIGINAL: Lanconic

No it can easily be done within the established game rules
You just need to JUNK all the wasted resources devoted to the ME109 series.
I converted ALL production to the FW190 series and used 40 engines for the HE219 series.
The TA152c uses the same engine as the HE219-5
SO it simplifies everything.

There are about 100AC prod points per day. You currently need 100 points to advance by one month. If you convert all prod to the 2 new types, allowing for time to change over it would only take about 30 - 35 days to complete the research. Remember the size one sites are ready in 10 days, but there's 2 or 3 size 6 sites that take 2 months to retool, so that's 12 or more points of prod that can't be put into research.

After the patch, however...

The amount of research required to save a month is directly tied to how long before that type is due. Presently something that is due in Jan 1945 requires 1600 units to research - about 16 days prod. In the version we have in test at the moment, it requires around 6500 to produce - 65 days prod. For the defender to forgo all replacements for over 2 months, it would be a difficult proposition, especially in a PBEM game. You'd really have to pick your defensive lines carefully, and hope he didn't put a hole in your AFACs for too long. To get something from May 45 into prod, you would need over 11,000 units of research.

To get something due in the next month you only need 100 units, that's always the minimum.

this isn't final, either. It feels right, but we won't know without some real playtesting.

So what you are doing is preventing good play by the Axis.
You punish the player who is good. But you dont punish HS for example
for bleeding the 109's and bombing the plants he knows produce the fw190.

So the Axis get penalized for using hindsight, but oddly NOT the allies.
That is so very fair. That isnt a simulation any longer, its a game.

The correct way to approch this is the way I suggested. If in reality the allies had needed more resources, they WOULD HAVE USED MORE.

That is the realistic approach.

(in reply to harley)

Post #: 29

RE: A needed fix for allied production - 10/22/2009 2:24:34 PM

Lanconic

Posts: 260
Joined: 7/1/2008
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: kaybayray

Hey Guys

I am trying to wrap my head around this so bare with me as I only have 3 functioning brain cells.

Am I correctly interpreting what Harley and Sarge are saying about Production units being used to fund Research and Re-tooling to new Aircraft? When this is going on those points being spent on Research or Re-tooling or whatever is required to develop the new design and implement it into production are not going to production of current models? Is this correct?

If that is correct or somewhat correct then the AC being delivered to the Replacement Pool for the Axis is being directly effected in the overall total number of aircraft being delivered? So active line units are not receiving the maximum number of replacement units during this time?

Some questions come to mind.....

How large are the Luftwaffe units? They are similar in size to the Allied units correct... like 25-45 aircraft max depending on model?

Losses to a squadron effect Morale correct?

Front line units will encounter unreplaced losses if this is happening correct?

The time frame we are talking about here is much greater then what.. 30 days, 60 days, 90 days? Which is the expected case?

Yeah man... so TechSgt is all over this... what the heck are the Allies doing during this Vacation?

Am I that far off here? I mean there is no way that this endeavor could be sustained to victory against anything other than the AI right? Or can even the AI destroy this?

What ever the case may be, Sarge and Harley please do not change this game significantly due to the play style of a few. Keep in mind I am a novice and dont really know all the interlated effects of all we are discussing here.

Later,
KayBay

The correct answer is that the Allies are not strong enough to deal a decisive blow
before the conversions come online. The bomber formations simply get tired, even ignoring losses. Tired bombers attrit quickly.

(in reply to kaybayray)

Post #: 30