Slitherine

quote:

ORIGINAL: jzardos

Has anybody else had this symptom?

Seems my pool of tiger tanks sitting in the warehouse by 100's is a bit nutty? For reference, it's early 43 and I have only one su using them and another hvy pz su coming in a few turns that has tigers too. Do the TOE of Pz Div (SS?) use these in 44? I don't think any nation would keep such a potent weapon collecting dust when the battles raging on the front require all they can to just hold the line. I'm not going to have the Soviet streamroller in Berlin by 44 and have 2k Tiger tanks in my pool? Why can't the game allow the axis player to build some su to use equipment in the pools for APs? How badly will that hurt the play balance?

I'd also like to take this opportunity to thank ComradeP for all his help. I've used him as a resource for some of my questions in the past and the guy is a stud at promptly getting back to me with terrific advice and insight into WitE. He's given me x100 more playing satisfaction with WitE from what I've learned from him.

Kudos to you ComradeP!

quote:

ORIGINAL: jzardos
I'm not going to have the Soviet streamroller in Berlin by 44 and have 2k Tiger tanks in my pool?

quote:

ORIGINAL: Klydon

Something like this highlights some of the issues in the game between the two sides.

Germans changed ToE's many times in response to the overall casualties they were taking. Would have those changes taken place if casualties were not as heavy?

Russian player can take advantage of any stockpiles of equipment that build up in simply building more support units that use those particular items.

Germans are stuck with a fixed force structure and can't take advantage of less than historical losses to build more units to take advantage of their fewer casualties. If the Germans had a couple hundred Tiger tanks laying around, they would have formed more support units to use them and/or put them in certain ToE's (probably SS divisions first).

quote:

ORIGINAL: Franklin Nimitz

Also, the game simplifies production by simply taking the total number built and dividing it by the amount of time in production and arriving at an average production rate. Production sent to other fronts, and rebuilds are then factored out as I understand. Using a constant average production rate ends up with a situation where the production rate overestimates production early in a given equipment's production run, and underestimating it later, during it's (historical) peak production periods.

So in reality, those early 1943 Tigers don't "really" exist, so having the ability to create SU's that do use them would be more ahistorical. I'm willing to bet the Germans tried to get as many Tiger units into action as soon as they could feasible (sort of) support at the time. That's why they didn't make them organic to all but a few favored divisions, but left them in separate battalions.

If the game replicated the actual, variable production rates attained, you wouldn't have those Tigers sitting in the pool, because they wouldn't be getting built at that time in the first place. But I doubt the records exist that would allow the devs to duplicate the varying production rates for all the equipment in the game, so the averaging of production rates is a tactic of necessity.

quote:

ORIGINAL: abulbulian

Jaw,
Sure, but from what I know about the game production in WitE is an approximation of how much a given piece of equipment (non A types) was produced historically and used on the eastern front. Currently, and correct me if I'm wrong, but WitE penalizes the axis player that is doing better than historical as they will accumulate more tanks and such in the pools that they can't use on the front. Why? IMO that's ridiculous.

FYI: I suspect Tiger production might be a tad higher than historical, but that's not my concern ATM since most players will probably end the game with Tigers in the pool anyways.

Please explain why the *bleep* the Soviets can produced as much arty as they want (given armaments avail), but the axis player is always set to a ceiling even if they have the armaments and manpower available? How does that make any sense? One is confined to something historical and the other is not? I will always hate this aspect of WitE because it's just not rational.

I dare anybody to even hint that play balance would be effected on any scale if the axis player were allowed to build some su (limited in scope and #'s) for high APs to take advantage of surplus vehicles/tanks in the pool. As far as I know, it's difficult to prove if the game is 100% balanced right now.

quote:

ORIGINAL: jaw

quote:

ORIGINAL: abulbulian

Jaw,
Sure, but from what I know about the game production in WitE is an approximation of how much a given piece of equipment (non A types) was produced historically and used on the eastern front. Currently, and correct me if I'm wrong, but WitE penalizes the axis player that is doing better than historical as they will accumulate more tanks and such in the pools that they can't use on the front. Why? IMO that's ridiculous.

FYI: I suspect Tiger production might be a tad higher than historical, but that's not my concern ATM since most players will probably end the game with Tigers in the pool anyways.

Please explain why the *bleep* the Soviets can produced as much arty as they want (given armaments avail), but the axis player is always set to a ceiling even if they have the armaments and manpower available? How does that make any sense? One is confined to something historical and the other is not? I will always hate this aspect of WitE because it's just not rational.

I dare anybody to even hint that play balance would be effected on any scale if the axis player were allowed to build some su (limited in scope and #'s) for high APs to take advantage of surplus vehicles/tanks in the pool. As far as I know, it's difficult to prove if the game is 100% balanced right now.

Fixed Production (AFVs & aircraft) is fixed for both sides. The Soviet player can vary the number of formations he fields (more tank corps, fewer rifle corps, etc.) but he can't change the amount of fixed production in total. Given that the Red Army fielded a huge number of formations historically, I think Soviet players would be more inclined to field fewer rather than field more formations than historical but I'd prefer to have the more experience Soviet players weight in on that. Most of the games I've played as the Soviet were late war games and I never bother to build anything new in them.

quote:

ORIGINAL: jaw
One of the historical parameters of the game is that the Axis player is limited to the units actually sent to the Eastern Front. In short, it is a design decision and that is above my pay grade.

If you don't think additional Axis formations would effect play balance why would you want them? People are frustrated that they are exceeding historical performance and are limited by the game system from exceeding it even faster. Maybe I'm just showing my age but when I see that a game as become that askewed I just start over.

quote:

ORIGINAL: jaw

If you don't think additional Axis formations would effect play balance why would you want them? People are frustrated that they are exceeding historical performance and are limited by the game system from exceeding it even faster. Maybe I'm just showing my age but when I see that a game as become that askewed I just start over.

quote:

ORIGINAL: abulbulian
For a few reason, first it's what I consider more accurate to allow the use of produced equipment that was slated for the eastern front. We both know the Germans were scrounging for all vehicles they could to stop the Soviet hoards after they lost so much in the retreats of 41 and in general to keep up with Soviet production. It makes for good logical sense to allow the Germans to use the pools somewhat for critical tanks and vehicles.

I think you're missing my point about what the Soviets can do in WitE and what they did historically. My example with arty was that they can build more than they did historically (each year) and PUT it in the field. Sure they did have a lot by the end of the war. But most AAR games I see the Soviets with more arty in 42 then historically. As the axis it's even worse then getting your historical production to use. Case and point, an axis player does well to protect his tanks and builds up some nice pools. Is he rewarded and able to use THAT STOCK HISTORICAL production? NO. Why not? In terms of the way WitE works, the axis need to have units depleted in the right type of tank to pull from the pools. Nobody has come close to even giving me a reason why this would make any rational sense? So WitE basically penalizes an axis player for doing better than historical, since he will never be able to utilize the production that took place between 41-45. These surplus tanks/vehicles just sit in the pool until the TOE of a unit in the fields is reduced and can pull them in.

quote:

ORIGINAL: abulbulian

Jakerson,

I understand the mechanics of how this works in WitE. I'm not sure if you're responding to me or just making some random statements about how production works.

Once again I think I just need to make my question to people and the forum T)rue or F)alse.

1)Soviets have the ability to produce more artillery (sappers, etc) then they actually had year to year historically?

2)Axis are confined to a ceiling of tanks, artillery, pioneers, etc. that can be in the field based on units TOE that are on fixed entry and withdraw schedule?

3) Axis players that do well in terms of lighter than historical loses to tanks (let's say) will accumulate the historical tank production that was utilized on the eastern front in pools. These tanks will never be release for use on the map unless unit TOEs fall below 100% for said tank type.

4)Based on #3, Axis players that do better than historical will never be able to utilize the historical production.

5) Soviet players that do better than historical will be able to utilize their production (i.e. more manpower centers under control, more factories moved to safety)? (given the Soviet player creates proper units to use production pools).

Let me know if I need to clarify any of these questions.

quote:

ORIGINAL: abulbulian

FYI: I suspect Tiger production might be a tad higher than historical, but that's not my concern ATM since most players will probably end the game with Tigers in the pool anyways.

quote:

ORIGINAL: abulbulian

Jakerson,

I understand the mechanics of how this works in WitE. I'm not sure if you're responding to me or just making some random statements about how production works.

Once again I think I just need to make my question to people and the forum T)rue or F)alse.

1)Soviets have the ability to produce more artillery (sappers, etc) then they actually had year to year historically?

2)Axis are confined to a ceiling of tanks, artillery, pioneers, etc. that can be in the field based on units TOE that are on fixed entry and withdraw schedule?

3) Axis players that do well in terms of lighter than historical loses to tanks (let's say) will accumulate the historical tank production that was utilized on the eastern front in pools. These tanks will never be release for use on the map unless unit TOEs fall below 100% for said tank type.

4)Based on #3, Axis players that do better than historical will never be able to utilize the historical production.

5) Soviet players that do better than historical will be able to utilize their production (i.e. more manpower centers under control, more factories moved to safety)? (given the Soviet player creates proper units to use production pools).

Let me know if I need to clarify any of these questions.

quote:

ORIGINAL: jaw

Jon,

I agree with you; there is definitely something wrong with the production display. I've noticed the same thing with other equipment - the amount produced seems way too low for the production rate. I'll mention it to Gary and see if he or Pavel can check it out.

Prior Preparation & Planning Prevents Pathetically Poor Performance!

A & B: WitW, WitE, WbtS, GGWaW, GGWaW2-AWD, HttR, CotA, BftB, CF
P: UV, WitP, WitP-AE