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: Strat movement & game balance

 
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 War in the East Series >> RE: Strat movement & game balance Page: <<   < prev  4 5 6 [7] 8   next >   >>
Login
Message << Older Topic   Newer Topic >>
RE: Strat movement & game balance - 1/22/2011 11:18:57 PM   
pompack


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

(in reply to Reconvet)
Post #: 181
RE: Strat movement & game balance - 1/22/2011 11:23:28 PM   
Zort

 

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

">Hi,
>In moving division sized units around on the eastern front, how many trains
>would it typically take to move an armor division and an infantry division?

1 flatcar per tank, tank destroyer, or SP gun

1 flatcar per 2 halftracks, scout cars, or heavy trucks

1 flatcar per 3 towed guns, light trucks, or horse-drawn wagons

1 boxcar per 40 men or 6 horses

plus additional box cars for food, ammo, fuel, fodder, and gear;
probably 1 such for each car required above.

(Remember that even panzer units used horse-drawn transport as
much as possible, due to the shortage of fuel.)

In areas of partisan activity, additional flatcars would
be rigged with sandbagged gun positions.

>How many engines and cars would it be on each train?

That would depend on the locomotives. There were (and are)
many different types of locomotive, from switch engines
that shuttle around in yards moving a few cars at a time,
to express locos which haul a modest number of cars at
high speed, to massive freight engines for pulling up to
100 laden coal or ore cars at a time.

If the route had any uphill grade segments, extra locos
could be required. Even in Russia there are hilly areas
and river valleys.

>Was moving a German division by train much different than
>moving a Soviet division?

German divisions were larger than Soviet divisions when
at full strength. Both sides had many understrength
divisions, but German formations were nearly always
less depleted."

Also found that it took 300 trains (not sure of the length) to move a panzer division.

(in reply to Mynok)
Post #: 182
RE: Strat movement & game balance - 1/22/2011 11:24:45 PM   
Reconvet

 

Posts: 355
Joined: 1/17/2011
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: alfonso

My suggestion: 60, because having no idea myself I would tend to trust the developers.

I was pretty sure that I was not going to get an answer from you.

Anyhow, I have found this, for those interested.

"Railroads made the evacuation possible. As the railroads moved 2.5 million men to the front in June, July, and August, they moved industrial machinery on their return journeys. For example, on August 7, 1941, 3,000 rail cars per day evacuated iron and steel manufacturing equipment from the Dnieper area--1,000 cars per day for the electrical industry, 400 cars per day for the chemical industry, and others. From August 8 to August 15, 1941, 26,000 rail cars evacuated industries in the Ukraine. In Moscow, 80,000 cars transported 498 factories, including 75,000 lathes, leaving only 21,000. Production by many factories resumed by December."

Anyone knows how many railcars are needed to move a Division?


Interesting data. Something to start with, even if you mention no source.

2,5mill men in 10 weeks. Let's suppose they travelled combat ready, with equip etc., that's 250'000 per week. Automatic replacement is how much per month? Average of 200'000? Let's round down to 100'000 per week? Leaves 150'000 guys for new units, that's 10 to 15 combat ready Divisions per week. Do I miss something?







_____________________________

The biggest threat for mankind is ignorance.


(in reply to alfonso)
Post #: 183
RE: Strat movement & game balance - 1/22/2011 11:24:52 PM   
FredSanford3

 

Posts: 567
Joined: 6/23/2007
Status: offline 		Ok, how many rail points is that?

(in reply to Zort)
Post #: 184
RE: Strat movement & game balance - 1/22/2011 11:26:31 PM   
Reconvet

 

Posts: 355
Joined: 1/17/2011
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: Mynok


quote:

ORIGINAL: Aurelian

As previously stated, it's playable and easily understood. If I want to worry about timetables, which trains go where, how far they move, single vs double track, well, I have all three Railroad Tycoons and Rails across America.

I just want to tell my Minister of Transport "Move the 5th Guards Tank Army to here." And all I want from him is to click his heels and say "Yes Comrade." Or the 2nd Panzer Army as it were.

And the system allows that.

In all the Russian Front games I've played, the Russians do have a far greater ability to move units by rail. And until now, that was never a problem.



It's only a problem in one person's head.


Is there a gun at your head forcing you to get envolved in this thread? Or do you feel compelled to defend a holy cow?



_____________________________

The biggest threat for mankind is ignorance.


(in reply to Mynok)
Post #: 185
RE: Strat movement & game balance - 1/22/2011 11:30:14 PM   
Reconvet

 

Posts: 355
Joined: 1/17/2011
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: pompack

whatever


Brilliant, this really enriches this discussion. Thank you for showing your potential.



_____________________________

The biggest threat for mankind is ignorance.


(in reply to pompack)
Post #: 186
RE: Strat movement & game balance - 1/22/2011 11:33:03 PM   
alfonso

 

Posts: 470
Joined: 10/22/2001
From: Palma de Mallorca
Status: offline 		Source
http://answers.yahoo.com/question/index?qid=20070910111356AAlkQJI

(in reply to Reconvet)
Post #: 187
RE: Strat movement & game balance - 1/22/2011 11:34:33 PM   
Zort

 

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

(in reply to Reconvet)
Post #: 188
RE: Strat movement & game balance - 1/22/2011 11:39:08 PM   
Reconvet

 

Posts: 355
Joined: 1/17/2011
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: Franklin Nimitz

Ok, how many rail points is that?


Combat ready Inf Div is about 1800 points right now, about 2400 for Tank Divs.

If we take an average of 2100 (probably too high because there were less Tank Divs than Inf) and calculate with 15 Divs per week: pool use of 31'500. Double it for factory evacs? This would add up to a rail pool size of about 60'000 to 65'000. In contrast to a pool size of well over 120'000 (after a few turns) at the moment...





_____________________________

The biggest threat for mankind is ignorance.


(in reply to FredSanford3)
Post #: 189
RE: Strat movement & game balance - 1/22/2011 11:45:44 PM   
Mynok


Posts: 12108
Joined: 11/30/2002
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: Reconvet


quote:

ORIGINAL: Mynok


quote:

ORIGINAL: Aurelian

As previously stated, it's playable and easily understood. If I want to worry about timetables, which trains go where, how far they move, single vs double track, well, I have all three Railroad Tycoons and Rails across America.

I just want to tell my Minister of Transport "Move the 5th Guards Tank Army to here." And all I want from him is to click his heels and say "Yes Comrade." Or the 2nd Panzer Army as it were.

And the system allows that.

In all the Russian Front games I've played, the Russians do have a far greater ability to move units by rail. And until now, that was never a problem.



It's only a problem in one person's head.


Is there a gun at your head forcing you to get envolved in this thread? Or do you feel compelled to defend a holy cow?




Discussion? This is just whining. Enjoy. I'll not interrupt your little pout fest anymore.

_____________________________

"Measure civilization by the ability of citizens to mock government with impunity" -- Unknown

(in reply to Reconvet)
Post #: 190
RE: Strat movement & game balance - 1/22/2011 11:46:15 PM   
TulliusDetritus


Posts: 5521
Joined: 4/1/2004
From: The Zone™
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: Aurelian

If I want to worry about timetables, which trains go where, how far they move, single vs double track, well, I have all three Railroad Tycoons and Rails across America.



With all due respect to everyone interested in this tchouk tchouk thing, this is one of the funniest things I have ever read on these forums

_____________________________

a nu cheeki breeki iv damke

(in reply to Aurelian)
Post #: 191
RE: Strat movement & game balance - 1/22/2011 11:47:53 PM   
Reconvet

 

Posts: 355
Joined: 1/17/2011
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: Mynok

Discussion? This is just whining. Enjoy. I'll not interrupt your little pout fest anymore.




What you see (read) is what you get. We got your potential now. Thank you very much for outing yourself. Hopefully in more than one way. Godspeed.



_____________________________

The biggest threat for mankind is ignorance.


(in reply to Mynok)
Post #: 192
RE: Strat movement & game balance - 1/23/2011 12:26:29 AM   
Aurelian

 

Posts: 3916
Joined: 2/26/2007
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: TulliusDetritus


quote:

ORIGINAL: Aurelian

If I want to worry about timetables, which trains go where, how far they move, single vs double track, well, I have all three Railroad Tycoons and Rails across America.



With all due respect to everyone interested in this tchouk tchouk thing, this is one of the funniest things I have ever read on these forums


Lulz trumps all

(in reply to TulliusDetritus)
Post #: 193
RE: Strat movement & game balance - 1/23/2011 12:30:11 AM   
pompack


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

ORIGINAL: Reconvet


quote:

ORIGINAL: pompack

whatever


Brilliant, this really enriches this discussion. Thank you for showing your potential.




Zort has contributed and properly enriched this discussion by bringing real numbers and some level of analysis into this discussion. My contribution was earlier when I agreed with you that I felt the Soviet rail model is too generous, at least in 41, and brought the Soviet factory evacuation burden into the discussion. I did not bring it out in detail because it has been discussed in great detail with hard numbers in another thread.

My concern now is that it is difficult for anyone to contribute due to the high level of whine that is drowning out any reasonable discussion of the problem (and yes, I will say it again: I THINK THERE IS A PROBLEM). The fact that I happen to agree with you in no way changes my opinion of how unproductive this thread has become (with the exception of Zort of course)

(in reply to Reconvet)
Post #: 194
RE: Strat movement & game balance - 1/23/2011 12:36:15 AM   
alfonso

 

Posts: 470
Joined: 10/22/2001
From: Palma de Mallorca
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: Zort

Found this:

">Hi,
>In moving division sized units around on the eastern front, how many trains
>would it typically take to move an armor division and an infantry division?

1 flatcar per tank, tank destroyer, or SP gun

1 flatcar per 2 halftracks, scout cars, or heavy trucks

1 flatcar per 3 towed guns, light trucks, or horse-drawn wagons

1 boxcar per 40 men or 6 horses

plus additional box cars for food, ammo, fuel, fodder, and gear;
probably 1 such for each car required above.


Thanks for the info!!

I am in my first game as Soviet against AI, and in 8/28/1941, my crack infantry unit is 237th RD, with 14468 men, 229 guns and 16 tanks.

This makes 14468/40 + 229/3 + 16 Cars.
As Reconvet explained before, food, ammo, fuel etc is performed by the computer in an invisible manner. We only have to transport troops, the computer will send additional trains to feed them.

This makes aprox 450 cars to transport my best Rifle Div, which has a transport cost of 2020. 1 car=4 or 5 transport points?

Edit: Well, the division also has 108 vehicles, about 50 additional cars. 500. 1 car=4 transport points?


< Message edited by alfonso -- 1/23/2011 12:45:19 AM >

(in reply to Zort)
Post #: 195
RE: Strat movement & game balance - 1/23/2011 12:46:40 AM   
Aurelian

 

Posts: 3916
Joined: 2/26/2007
Status: offline 		http://forum.axishistory.com/viewtopic.php?f=66&t=150435

http://www.country-data.com/cgi-bin/query/r-12761.html

FWIW

(in reply to pompack)
Post #: 196
RE: Strat movement & game balance - 1/23/2011 12:57:47 AM   
Aurelian

 

Posts: 3916
Joined: 2/26/2007
Status: offline 		In caee alfonso's post was overlooked:

Railroads made the evacuation possible. As the railroads moved 2.5 million men to the front in June, July, and August, they moved industrial machinery on their return journeys. For example, on August 7, 1941, 3,000 rail cars per day evacuated iron and steel manufacturing equipment from the Dnieper area--1,000 cars per day for the electrical industry, 400 cars per day for the chemical industry, and others. From August 8 to August 15, 1941, 26,000 rail cars evacuated industries in the Ukraine. In Moscow, 80,000 cars transported 498 factories, including 75,000 lathes, leaving only 21,000. Production by many factories resumed by December.

2.5 million in a bit more than two months. Or maybe 9-10 turns. PLUS, moving factories east.

That is alot of trains.

(in reply to Aurelian)
Post #: 197
RE: Strat movement & game balance - 1/23/2011 1:19:28 AM   
pompack


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

ORIGINAL: Aurelian

http://forum.axishistory.com/viewtopic.php?f=66&t=150435

http://www.country-data.com/cgi-bin/query/r-12761.html

FWIW


Thank you Aurelian . That is some incredible data; I found this part especially interesting:

"As a general rule in last months of 1942 the number of trains per division was 10-14. Obviously it depended on the unit strength. Another example relating to the same 64th Army - that is the plan of Army's transfer from the Stalingrad area reported by the deputy chief of the General Staff Karponosov in the telegram of 3 March 1943:
HQs of the 64th Army with units - 20 trains
15 Guards Rifle Division - 10 trains
38 Rifle Division - 7
29 Rifle Division - 6
27 Guards Tank Brigade - 3
1111 Cannon Artillery Regiment - 2 trains
156 Cannon Artillery Regiment - 2
500 AT artillery regiment - 1
186 AT artillery regiment - 1
493 AT artillery regiment - 1
838 Artillery observation battalion - 1
245 Tank regiment - 2
230 Tank Regiment - 2
204 Rifle Division - 6
36 Guards Rifle Division - 7
422 Rifle Division - 6

One can see that the number of trains per division was rather small - between 5 and 10. I suppose it was becuase all units were far below authorized strength."

where a train was defined as 120 axles or about 40-50 cars.




(in reply to Aurelian)
Post #: 198
RE: Strat movement & game balance - 1/23/2011 1:19:28 AM   
alfonso

 

Posts: 470
Joined: 10/22/2001
From: Palma de Mallorca
Status: offline 		Ok, we have the following data..

According to Zort data and my calculation post above, one powerful Rifle Div needs 500 cars.

According to http://forum.axishistory.com/viewtopic.php?f=66&t=150435 one less powerful Rifle Division needs 750 cars, although here the calculations vary (it is a forum, too). I think supply is included in this calculation, and according to Zort data, the transport of the equipment should be about 375.

According to http://answers.yahoo.com/question/index?qid=20070910111356AAlkQJI ,
26000 cars evacuated industry from Ukraine during a week. This seems equivalent to 52 Divisions assuming 500 cars for each division.

According to http://www.country-data.com/cgi-bin/query/r-12761.html , “From July to November 1941, some 1.5 million carloads of freight were moved eastward”. If we divide by aprox 25 weeks, we arrive at 60.000 carloads each week. About 120 Divisions?

Here I would like to recall this affirmation from FlaviusX: "There aren't 60 available full strength rifle divisions in reserve that you can just magically rail somewhere". It seems as if rail capacity was not an important limitation in Russian troop deployment, but lack of properly trained units was.


< Message edited by alfonso -- 1/23/2011 1:30:41 AM >

(in reply to Aurelian)
Post #: 199
RE: Strat movement & game balance - 1/23/2011 1:24:16 AM   
Jakerson

 

Posts: 565
Joined: 8/15/2006
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: TulliusDetritus
Abulbulian, I have nothing against players using different strategies. It's part of the fun. All I'm saying is that IF this game is well designed and made (and I am pretty certain it is), the Germans CANNOT win (just like the Japanese will not win in WitP). Ok, maybe the red flag won't be over the Reichstag, but the Soviet hordes will be at 5-10 hexes of Berlin. Whatever.

In fact, if the German player could hold Moscow (against a competent Soviet player) on let's say 1945, I doubt I would be buying this game... That's what I mean when I say I want a REALISTIC game. Give me the tools and let's see what can I do.


I must say that I kind of agree with you. I think Germans could have won but their chances where a lot smaller than Soviet chances to win. This is reason that if you respect historical accuracy at all German chances to win will be smaller than Soviet chances to win.

Just think about it after initial suprice Soviet Union deployed virtually 3 times more troops, guns and tanks at every front that Germans could deploy. Even after all of the Soviet losses. When years progressed Germans had to deploy more and more troops and war production to serve other fronts than eastern front while Soviet Union could deploy everything they had just to beat Germans. Germans would have been a lot of problems even without other front wars and need to move equipment and troops there.

(in reply to TulliusDetritus)
Post #: 200
RE: Strat movement & game balance - 1/23/2011 1:26:39 AM   
pompack


Posts: 2582
Joined: 2/8/2004
From: University Park, Texas
Status: offline 		Your quote about trains carrying troops and supplies to the front and evacuated workers and factories to the east is especially pertinent I think. My original concern about evacuating the factories not tying up enough rail capacity sounds more and more like a non-issue since if the trains were NOT evacuating things to the east, they would be deadheading anyway.

(in reply to alfonso)
Post #: 201
RE: Strat movement & game balance - 1/23/2011 1:44:00 AM   
TulliusDetritus


Posts: 5521
Joined: 4/1/2004
From: The Zone™
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: Jakerson

When years progressed Germans had to deploy more and more troops and war production to serve other fronts than eastern front while Soviet Union could deploy everything they had just to beat Germans. Germans would have been a lot of problems even without other front wars and need to move equipment and troops there.


Don't forget the Soviet forces in the Russian Far East (facing the Japanese in Manchuria and Inner Mongolia). Quite many forces there. When the Germans attacked the Soviet Union, the Japanese said they would respect the pact, but of course the Soviets kept many forces there... The only thing which really stopped the Japanese (and the Turkish) from attacking the Soviet Union was the Moscow counter-offensive. And the fact that the Japanese Army truly feared the Russians And of course Pearl Harbor. But even after the winter counter-offensive and the Pearl Harbor attack, there were many troops in the Russian Far East.

I already said the Germans had zero chance of winning (if the 1941 Blitzkrieg failed that is) so I will not repeat that again

_____________________________

a nu cheeki breeki iv damke

(in reply to Jakerson)
Post #: 202
RE: Strat movement & game balance - 1/23/2011 2:21:01 AM   
Aurelian

 

Posts: 3916
Joined: 2/26/2007
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: pompack


quote:

ORIGINAL: Aurelian

http://forum.axishistory.com/viewtopic.php?f=66&t=150435

http://www.country-data.com/cgi-bin/query/r-12761.html

FWIW


Thank you Aurelian . That is some incredible data; I found this part especially interesting:

"As a general rule in last months of 1942 the number of trains per division was 10-14. Obviously it depended on the unit strength. Another example relating to the same 64th Army - that is the plan of Army's transfer from the Stalingrad area reported by the deputy chief of the General Staff Karponosov in the telegram of 3 March 1943:
HQs of the 64th Army with units - 20 trains
15 Guards Rifle Division - 10 trains
38 Rifle Division - 7
29 Rifle Division - 6
27 Guards Tank Brigade - 3
1111 Cannon Artillery Regiment - 2 trains
156 Cannon Artillery Regiment - 2
500 AT artillery regiment - 1
186 AT artillery regiment - 1
493 AT artillery regiment - 1
838 Artillery observation battalion - 1
245 Tank regiment - 2
230 Tank Regiment - 2
204 Rifle Division - 6
36 Guards Rifle Division - 7
422 Rifle Division - 6

One can see that the number of trains per division was rather small - between 5 and 10. I suppose it was becuase all units were far below authorized strength."

where a train was defined as 120 axles or about 40-50 cars.






My pleasure. To make a reasonable arguement either for or against, we need as much data as possible.

(in reply to pompack)
Post #: 203
RE: Strat movement & game balance - 1/23/2011 2:30:45 AM   
Aurelian

 

Posts: 3916
Joined: 2/26/2007
Status: offline 		http://www.o5m6.de/RussianRail.html Might be of interest.

This too: http://forum.axishistory.com/viewtopic.php?f=66&t=132150 A thread about Lend Lease and Soviet rails. "11,000 railroad cars and 1200 locos - but set against 600,000 railcars and 28,000 locos from Soviet stocks"

< Message edited by Aurelian -- 1/23/2011 2:31:57 AM >

(in reply to Aurelian)
Post #: 204
RE: Strat movement & game balance - 1/23/2011 4:02:57 AM   
abulbulian


Posts: 1047
Joined: 3/31/2005
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: BigAnorak

quote:

This thread was opened to deal with the strat movement situation in '41. Please refrain here from discussing later situations when both sides fight with the same tools. '41 is when only one side has overblown strat movement capabilities.


Ummmm... 1941 is not mentioned in the initial post. The campaign game lasts 4 years, and for the SU to win they need to capture Berlin, and they will need all the rail capacity they can lay their hands on to achieve that.

The WITE "engine" has to attempt to recreate 4 years of warfare between 2 armies that evolve in two completely different directions, and it has to deal with some "Spikes" that happen over very short periods out of the full 200+ turns. 12 Turns of Blizzard in 1941/42 is one spike, and industry relocation is another that occurs over the first 15-20 turns. It is important that changes in the rules to deal with these spikes does not unbalance the remaining turns.

IMHO.



FYI, not that I'm trying to pick on BigAnorak, but it's not 12 turns of blizzard but 13! if playing with non-random weather.

Blizzard starts T25 Dec 4 and goes will T37 Feb 26th. That is 13 (use inclusive rule) turns, not 12 like people have been mentioning. I might have even got this wrong the first time too.

(in reply to karonagames)
Post #: 205
RE: Strat movement & game balance - 1/23/2011 4:11:51 AM   
abulbulian


Posts: 1047
Joined: 3/31/2005
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: Reconvet


quote:

ORIGINAL: dlazov66

Technically in this game both sides never have the same tools, one has to use the Germans one way and the Soviets another way, each sides 'tools' must be used differently and I think this game portrays those differences quite well.


I love this game, really, developers and testers and AI designers have done an outstanding job. My problem is that I don't see any AAR in which Axis could develop working tactics against a capable Soviet player's fast pace of shifting around significant reserves to hotspots in '41. This is what this discussion is all about: Soviet strategic mobility in '41 pbem, when Axis have zero railing capabilities within useful distance of front regions.





I think in the latest release that's because there are no successful strategies for an axis player vs a capable sov player. Given that anybody with any sense will just retreat the sov masses leave some token units in swamp and other areas to make these incredible defensive stands. The axis player will out run supply lines as they pursue (don't get caught in mud with bad supply lines.. R.I.P) and when 1st turn blizzard hits... it's all over. Just went through a blizzard and my axis army was in the best shape to withstand it: rested, supplied, dug-in, high moral, high TOE, high exp. But forget any of that as WitE factors none of that in. Unless units in basically a urban or city they will be smacked around by attrition and any sov units t hat can attack them. My loses went from 500k end Nov to 1.7 million starting March. Yeah, loses were 1.2 million in 3 months of blizzard. All documented. So my 1942 will be crap even though my 1941 was much better than historical for loses and did manage to take Leningrad with some luck before winter. At this point I won't be starting anymore axis games until some changes are made. Axis player in a 41-45 campaign has maybe 17-24 turns of ability... then it gets tanked. That's my opinion from playing against a decent human opponent.

And before somebody is going to reply with the old remark of "well don't you know sov are suppose to win". Save it. I know the history better than most. The problem I have is the inability for the Axis player to mount any sort of decent (sure limited) offensive in 42. Sure I can still attack and go against a sov player with 3 months of digging in (march, April, part May) and and army 2x the size of mine. My opponent already has lines of 3 (avg) units deep all along the front and reserve behind. Already this by March and I can't attack until sometime in May. The other thing that the blizzard did was to reduce the exp and moral of my men (replacements) .. so low that I'm guessing sov units almost equal to my German units.

All I'm saying is if the axis player is able to have a good 41, he should have the POSSIBILITY to have some decent attacking in 42. Remember the initiative didn't really change until 1943. All though some could argue it could very well have changed after the Stalingrad fiasco.

< Message edited by abulbulian -- 1/23/2011 4:31:55 AM >

(in reply to Reconvet)
Post #: 206
RE: Strat movement & game balance - 1/23/2011 4:22:39 AM   
randallw

 

Posts: 2057
Joined: 9/2/2010
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: Zort

Found this:

">Hi,
>In moving division sized units around on the eastern front, how many trains
>would it typically take to move an armor division and an infantry division?

1 flatcar per tank, tank destroyer, or SP gun

1 flatcar per 2 halftracks, scout cars, or heavy trucks

1 flatcar per 3 towed guns, light trucks, or horse-drawn wagons

1 boxcar per 40 men or 6 horses

plus additional box cars for food, ammo, fuel, fodder, and gear;
probably 1 such for each car required above.

(Remember that even panzer units used horse-drawn transport as
much as possible, due to the shortage of fuel.)

In areas of partisan activity, additional flatcars would
be rigged with sandbagged gun positions.

>How many engines and cars would it be on each train?

That would depend on the locomotives. There were (and are)
many different types of locomotive, from switch engines
that shuttle around in yards moving a few cars at a time,
to express locos which haul a modest number of cars at
high speed, to massive freight engines for pulling up to
100 laden coal or ore cars at a time.

If the route had any uphill grade segments, extra locos
could be required. Even in Russia there are hilly areas
and river valleys.

>Was moving a German division by train much different than
>moving a Soviet division?

German divisions were larger than Soviet divisions when
at full strength. Both sides had many understrength
divisions, but German formations were nearly always
less depleted."

Also found that it took 300 trains (not sure of the length) to move a panzer division.


300 trains sounds like too many; maybe more like 300 railcars?

(in reply to Zort)
Post #: 207
RE: Strat movement & game balance - 1/23/2011 4:22:42 AM   
abulbulian


Posts: 1047
Joined: 3/31/2005
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: Reconvet


quote:

ORIGINAL: pompack

whatever


Brilliant, this really enriches this discussion. Thank you for showing your potential.




Lol, Reconvet. It's funny cause I've dealt with this in my threads before. You give them historic facts or REAL game experiences and when they nothing to counter with, they give you that type of reply. Or better yet they will throw in an 'axis fanboy' remark and have nothing of any value to say. Just ignore them. I think you're on to something myself. But if you get close to something that will look as if a change is needed, these same people will just start to get frustrated and their remarks become even more delusional and unrelated to the subject.

(in reply to Reconvet)
Post #: 208
RE: Strat movement & game balance - 1/23/2011 5:10:16 AM   
Aurelian

 

Posts: 3916
Joined: 2/26/2007
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: abulbulian

quote:

ORIGINAL: Reconvet


quote:

ORIGINAL: pompack

whatever


Brilliant, this really enriches this discussion. Thank you for showing your potential.




Lol, Reconvet. It's funny cause I've dealt with this in my threads before. You give them historic facts or REAL game experiences and when they nothing to counter with, they give you that type of reply. Or better yet they will throw in an 'axis fanboy' remark and have nothing of any value to say. Just ignore them. I think you're on to something myself. But if you get close to something that will look as if a change is needed, these same people will just start to get frustrated and their remarks become even more delusional and unrelated to the subject.



What historical facts has he given?

Complaining that the Sovs have the ability to move some 60 full strength or near full strength divs? What facts has he presented that shows that they coild not?

"As the railroads moved 2.5 million men to the front in June, July, and August, they moved industrial machinery on their return journeys." How many divisions does that make? Where are the facts that refute that?

Real game experience? Flaviusx's real game experience is being ignored. Why? In my own game, I would just love to have these 60 divisions to rail around, but I don't have them. I just railed all the KV-1 factories out of Leningrad. That took a huge chunk out of my rail cap.

(in reply to abulbulian)
Post #: 209
RE: Strat movement & game balance - 1/23/2011 6:27:04 AM   
wildweasel0585

 

Posts: 60
Joined: 12/31/2010
Status: offline 		+1
I don't see the need for 7 pages of discussion.
Reconvet already thinks after years of hard work the devs screwed up horribly. no need trying to convince him otherwise.

(in reply to Aurelian)
Post #: 210
Page:   <<   < prev  4 5 6 [7] 8   next >   >>
All Forums >> [New Releases from Matrix Games] >> Gary Grigsby's War in the East Series >> RE: Strat movement & game balance Page: <<   < prev  4 5 6 [7] 8   next >   >>
Jump to:





New Messages No New Messages
Hot Topic w/ New Messages Hot Topic w/o New Messages
Locked w/ New Messages Locked w/o New Messages
 Post New Thread
 Reply to Message
 Post New Poll
 Submit Vote
 Delete My Own Post
 Delete My Own Thread
 Rate Posts


Forum Software © ASPPlayground.NET Advanced Edition 2.4.5 ANSI

1.219