RE: German fighter production discussion (BTR)

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: German fighter production discussion (BTR)

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 >> RE: German fighter production discussion (BTR)

Page: << < prev 1 2 3 [4]

Message

<< Older Topic Newer Topic >>

RE: German fighter production discussion (BTR) - 10/11/2009 7:58:08 AM

2ndACR

Posts: 5665
Joined: 8/31/2003
From: Irving,Tx
Status: offline

bump for the new guys

(in reply to GoodGuy)

Post #: 91

RE: German fighter production discussion (BTR) - 1/28/2010 3:48:02 PM

kaybayray

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

Greetings

Thought I would bump this as I am looking in the German Production and there are some excelent points and information among this threads posts.

After reading through it I did learn a lot about German Production and how you manage it. Still a lot of questions on the nuts and bolts of how to do it but this thread IMHO is a great start. Nicholas linked it to me and I want to make sure others can take a look at it.

Some of the discussion from Sarge and Harley were centered around instituting limits to what the German player could do to avoid overwhelming the Allied player with advanced AC very early in the game. I am very much against this and for several reasons.

What I gathered was that you have to dedicate Production Points to R&D and have to actually build so many AC of a new type before they can come online. At first glance seems easy to do and would appear easy for the German player to overwhelm the Allied player with advanced AC in early 44 and even in late 43. If I am not mistaken this requires a significant proportion of you overall AC Production Capacity to be shut down from actual production of current models in action and dedicated to R&D efforts toward the new AC.

Still sounds pretty easy right? At the start you have tons of capacity. But I believe that the pertinent question is, Will the Allied player leave the German AC industry alone long enough for the German player to be able to develop and put into production the more advanced AC to a level that may actually effect the war? I dont know the answer to that one. So I think that to react to this too harshly without some compelling evidence would hurt the game.

One idea to limit the German players ability to too easily do this I believe put forth by Harley, was to force the development of intermediary AC types along the path to the advanced model. I kind of like this one. Having worked as an R&D Engineer in multiple industries it makes sense and I believe it follows suit with the historically accurate basis for this games mechanics. I cringe at the thought as the Allied player of engaging Ta152's or Me262's in late 43 when I can just barely escort my Strategic Bombing forces to the western most edge of the continent.

I dont worry about what the AI "might" do or "can" do because I am runing AI Vs AI games and man the AI is stupid in many ways. In a Human Vs Human game like PBEM setting I dont think you are going to get too far because Humans are smart. They are not going to let you have a free hand in your AC Production or Development. But there are some things that hinder the Allied players ability to intedict your efforts.

Yes you have a map that tells you where all the German AC production facilities are. However I dont believe that running Recon to AC Fabs will tell you exactly what is being made there. IE: if you Recon an Engine Fab I dont believe the Recon you get tells you what model of engine is being worked. So you're playing a "Shell" game with respect to hitting the particular facility that is working up the Development on the new AC. However features could be added to the Recon routine that might enable the Allied player to have some potential of gleaning more in depth Intel of what is going on at a particular fab. This also allows for some intrigue with Fog of War, which might be interesting when played out.

Just some thoughts I had after reading this thread. I would really like to hear more about the nuts and bolts of how you actually change production in a way as to be successful in actually producing the models you want.

Regards,

KayBay

_____________________________

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

(in reply to 2ndACR)

Post #: 92

RE: German fighter production discussion (BTR) - 1/28/2010 4:33:13 PM

Tuk

Posts: 117
Joined: 10/20/2009
Status: offline

One of the problems in attempting to recreate production is we have the benefit of hindsight. There is no way that a country in the middle of a collosal war would turn over all its production facilities to the production (development) of an untried aircraft. In game, we are allowed to do that. There is no way, either, that turning over all your production facilities to R&D would advance R&D. Production and R&D are seperate processes even if there is some overlap.

It would be good if there were options, as who's to say attempting simulation is better than a pure fantasy game, just I prefer the former.

In the game as is, I'd prefer to seriously restrict German R&D, but what I'd really like to see is R&D given it's own layer, it's own specific resources and minimal need for potential mass production facilities. Rather than naming projects historically, they could be disguised until finished. Players could be provided with snippets of more or less accurate performance information as testing progressed, allowing them to put more or less R&D resources behind each project.

(in reply to kaybayray)

Post #: 93

RE: German fighter production discussion (BTR) - 1/28/2010 5:38:01 PM

Hard Sarge

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

Kay

one thing, we didn't do this or that, to "hurt" the LW player, we did it because the program wasn't working as intended, and the player could get the Ta 152 in 43 (because the program wasn't doing what it was suppost to)

then when that was fixed, we found out later, that it wasn't going into delay like it was suppost to (it was telling you it was on delay, while it was really making stuff)

which in the long run, we were testing it to see if it worked, not testing it to see how it worked (it worked)

so if anything, that is my bad, I tested it to see what it did, not what it could do (which, some of the changes we have added, would of made it a whole lot easier to spot it then)

one of the what if's that always gets floated around, is what if the He 280 had been made instead of the Me 262, it was ready, a lot earlier then the 262 was

hassle is, it wasn't, yes a test plane flew early, but the plane wasn't ready, and as the work went along, when it started to get close, so was the 262, and the 262 was going to be the better plane, so in the end, the 280 was stopped, as the the 262 was going to be better, the 280 was never ready (now, if they had wanted it, and started when the test model first flew, maybe so, but they didn't)

the Ta 152, needed the work that was going on, with the 190C, or there never would of been a 152, and again, we get to the point, that, after all the work, we can make this, but the 152 is going to be better, so the C was dropped (too much trouble with the TurboCharger)

_____________________________

(in reply to Tuk)

Post #: 94

RE: German fighter production discussion (BTR) - 1/28/2010 5:55:46 PM

kaybayray

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

Tuk,
I Agree. I dont want to play a Fantasy game either. But I dont know if it is possible to actually turn production over and deliver the most advanced AC within just a few months. If that is the case then yes I could see how that could be a problem.

I also agree with your other point. It's easy to look back 75 years and see what was a good AC and focus on that. These are both Meta-Gaming issues. There will always be those that will push things as far as they can. I dont want the minimum freedom of movement or level of options for 90% of the players to be controlled by efforts to shut down that 10% that always go over the top. I want to maintane the freedom to be able to control production. I dont like when my world is limited because of 25 people that want to play Fantasyland Air Combat. Let them.

For me a game loses its' luster when it is easy to defeat your opponent. So I dont want to be the Allies with B-52's in 44 or the Luftwaffe with Ta152's and Me262's in 43. I think that is playing a Fantasy game. So when I encounter a player that pushes things over the top I just dont engage them in the game. Nobody is putting a gun to your head and forcing you to play a PBEM game with somebody that wants to play Fantasyland Air Combat.

That is why Harley's idea of forcing R&D to progress through the intermediary models to the more advanced, I like it. It makes sense. Part of the major attraction to this game is the "What if". For most of us that is "What if I were in Command?". I liken much of this to this, if a Kid is playing a WWII Armored Fighting Vehicle game and he looks at the German inventory he sees things like the Tiger, Panther, etc... So an immature player will conclude that the best strategy would be to have all Tiger tanks.... Fantasyland. But nobody is forcing anybody to play a game against that Kid. So I dont see a problem.

Now if there were an online mass multi player game where we were all engaging in the game format simultaneously and that was the predominant way it had to be played. Then you got a serious point and drastic measures must be taken to control the "Fantasyland Kid". But some of the players on this thread IMHO, appear to perhaps want to play Fantasyland Air Combat. Hey I dont have to play against them. I garuntee you that if you and I were playing a PBEM game and in October 43 I see Ta152's engaging my Strategic Air Stikes.... it would be Game Over. I am done.

I want to play around with Production. I have a lot of ideas I want to try. They dont however include introducing the most advanced AC before the end of 43. I want to get to some of the more advanced AC in 44. I want to see if the He162 and Me163 can be used for a Point Defense system for Critical industy facilities. I want to see if the Luftwaffe can operate some squadrons of Do335's, Ta152's and Me262's against my Strategic forces and what they can do and what can I do to deal with them. I mean can this game even go on to mid-late 45? I dont know. that seems like a long time down the road for Germany to me in this game.

Check out my thread in the War Room. KayBay's Allied Strategic & Tactial Doctrine. I have been playing this game getting close to 3 years now and I am just scratching the surface of what can be done in it. I want to really get down into the nuts and bolts of it. I want to build variants of the 109 and 190 to be used along with the Ta's and the Me jets/rockets. I want to build out variants of the Ju's and Me NJG AC. I want to work them all together in an overall system. I want to build a multi-layered Air Defense system around Germany and see if I can still break through it and destroy German Industy.

I have a lot of questions about Production. That is why I bumped this thread so that those of you that have the experience can fill in the blanks for the rest of us. All aimed at accomplishing my goals in this game. And I can assure you that those goals do not include Fantasyland Air Combat.

Regards,
KayBay

_____________________________

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

(in reply to Tuk)

Post #: 95

RE: German fighter production discussion (BTR) - 1/29/2010 9:44:45 AM

Tuk

Posts: 117
Joined: 10/20/2009
Status: offline

Kaybayray, I'm not suggesting you want to play fantasyland aircombat. So what if you do? I loath war, but I love war games so however you dress it up within historical parameters or not, the game's all fantasy for me. But if like me you want to work within historical parameters, you have to try to simulate what could have happened if different but plausible choices had been made. That means imposing restrictions on what players can do.

Everyone will want to balance simulation with alternative histories to a different extent. That's why I think realism options would be a good idea.

For the game I'd enjoy most, I agree that having to follow stages of R&D is a useful mechanism, I'm all for it, but I'd argue that the current production system is too far removed from reality to yield an historical result or to feel like the player is making plausible historical choices. Taking dozens of production facilities out of line to research new products is a gamey solution to an inbuilt lack of detail in the program. If R&D can be set to follow stages of development, why not re do the whole thing? I love making work for other people, sure, but at least I'm prepared to pay for it. Am I excused?

(in reply to kaybayray)

Post #: 96

RE: German fighter production discussion (BTR) - 1/29/2010 11:37:20 AM

Hard Sarge

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

Taking dozens of production facilities out of line to research new products is a gamey solution to an inbuilt lack of detail in the program.

the trouble here, is, it is the player doing this, those are suppost to be making product for the war, the player, and to a lesser intent, the AI, pulls them from production

if you don't do it, you get the stuff when your suppost to

_____________________________

(in reply to Tuk)

Post #: 97

RE: German fighter production discussion (BTR) - 1/29/2010 2:36:20 PM

kaybayray

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

Hey Tuk, <S>

I was never upset at you. Or anybody for that matter. I completely agree with you on this topic.

I agree with Sarge as well. I am just worried that the ability to manipulate the historical path of AC development will be shut down in order to deal with the handful of players that "will" abuse it. This was my primary reason for posting my thoughts. So I am sorry if you or anybody else (Sarge maybe?) thought I was upset at them. I am not.

I just think that having the ability to manipulate AC R&D is a tremendous feature for this game. As I posted in one of my replys, I want to do just that in an attempt to build a different Luftwaffe for the Allies to contend with. My observations are that the AI is pretty stupid in comparison to a Human. So I want modify its teeth so to speak to make it more of a challenge. I also want to explore the aspects of this game with respect to the Luftwaffe. Which I am fairly ignorant of in comparison to the Allies.

At any rate, I want to learn how to go about manipulating the Production so that I can work to meet my goal within the game. Any instructions, advice, observations or thoughts from those of you that have done so are greatly appreciated.

Later,
KayBay

_____________________________

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

(in reply to Hard Sarge)

Post #: 98

RE: German fighter production discussion (BTR) - 1/30/2010 11:13:17 AM

Noon Gatherer

Posts: 6
Joined: 1/30/2010
From: Finland, Finland, Finland..
Status: offline

I think this game needs some pilot pools also. Like in War In the Pacific has..

(in reply to kaybayray)

Post #: 99

RE: German fighter production discussion (BTR) - 1/30/2010 4:31:12 PM

pompack

Posts: 2582
Joined: 2/8/2004
From: University Park, Texas
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Hard Sarge

Taking dozens of production facilities out of line to research new products is a gamey solution to an inbuilt lack of detail in the program.

the trouble here, is, it is the player doing this, those are suppost to be making product for the war, the player, and to a lesser intent, the AI, pulls them from production

if you don't do it, you get the stuff when your suppost to

While I was opposed to it at first, I rather like the way the AE approach has worked out: R&D facilities can shift to other R&D products, and production facilities can shift to other production products, but you can't switch facilities from R&D to production or vice versa.

(in reply to Hard Sarge)

Post #: 100

RE: German fighter production discussion (BTR) - 1/30/2010 8:40:05 PM

ezzler

Posts: 863
Joined: 7/4/2004
Status: offline

The Germans DID turn over their aircraft production to untried aircraft. That was how they planned to defeat the quantity production of the Allies with Quality production of advanced planes by the Axis.

It was a complete failure. The ME 210 and HE177 stand out. The Me 210 was changed from a 4 year development cycle to a three year one and suffered accordingly. The Ju 88 nearly suffered the same fate. Goring had put in orders for 3,000 of them, almost off the drawing board on the strength of the promises of what the plane could do. Luckily for the Luftwaffe the JU 88 was an exceptional design but early teething problems had left crews very wary of it. Production was delayed drastically with developmental problems. Although planned for a service introduction in 1938, the Ju 88 finally entered squadron service (with only 12 aircraft) on the first day of the attack on Poland in 1939. Production was painfully slow with only one Ju 88 manufactured per week instead of the 300/month promised.

It seems that something should be done to address the problems of turning out 1,000's of TA 152's. We know the reason there were 1,000s of obsolete Me 109s in the air in 1943 was because production was already running and had been for 5 years. There should be a really massive delay for changing types. An initial 6-12 month loss of anything in the factory, and then production at 1/10 1st month - 2/10th second month etc.

I have yet to play my copy of this game so just a thought.

(in reply to Tuk)

Post #: 101