RE: Realism discussion

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: Realism discussion

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: Realism discussion

Page: << < prev 1 [2] 3 next > >>

Message

<< Older Topic Newer Topic >>

RE: Realism discussion - 8/17/2013 1:34:50 PM

SigUp
Matrix Elite Guard

Posts: 1062
Joined: 11/29/2012
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Marquo

"There is a problem with that explanation: The German replacement/manpower system already takes into account how many 'generic replacement' Germans are sent to other theaters. So for example when, in 1942, the 20% of generic manpower that goes to other theaters is theoretically going into any fresh division mustered out of the theater considered in WitE.

The Stalingrad divisions are removed, while the generic replacements represented by the reconstituted/recruited(/possibly renumbered) divisions already account for that. Germany nevertheless sees a counter, its contents, and its precious, precious experience (assuming it's high) disappear from the East."

The problem is the war was multifront for the Axis and unidimensional for the Soviets. Unless the entire Theater of Operations is depicted, with every country and historical pressure modeled (what about the Brazilians, the Turks...). perhaps the safest assumption is historical progression of WITW/Africa with related pressure/constraint on WITE.

I think a well thought out East-Front-Box like the one they are implementing in WITW (with the option to get historical arrival / withdrawal) is a pretty good way to handle this. With progress being determined by the strength of the units you send there. This also leaves strategic options for the Axis player. For example, does he send more units (but with inferior quality) East (or West in WITE2), or does he send fewer units, but stronger ones.

(in reply to mmarquo)

Post #: 31

RE: Realism discussion - 8/17/2013 1:40:28 PM

loki100
Matrix Legion of Merit

Posts: 10920
Joined: 10/20/2012
From: Utlima Thule
Status: offline

well stepping a long way from the bounds of what WITE can be developed to do, my ideal is:

a) 1941 the Soviets pushed to the edge of destruction but due to logistics there is no way (even if a Soviet player enacts all of Stalin's mistakes) that the Germans can finish them off
b) an inept but brutal counterstroke where the Soviets lack the logistics and operational tools to lever a counterattack into victory - worth remembering how much Soviet planning in the Winter offensive went into capturing German supplies - for their own use and need;
c) 1942 either as a strategic stalemate (Stavka's expectation) or an exceptionally dangerous last ditch German blow;
d) 1943 slowly mounting Soviet pressure (I'm assuming almost any German player would shift to a mobile defense) constrained still by flaws in their OOB and logistics
e) 1944 the capacity of the Soviets to launch massive offensives on one sector of the front, again logistics means you keep the Ukraine static while doing a Bagration etc

the fun is then around those broad dynamics, can you execute this or that better, can you come up with an effective defence. Against the AI a-e is yours for the organising but of course you lack the sport of dealing with an opponent who is also thinking and planning more than one move ahead.

Within WiTE as it is, I'm intrigued at what would happen in PBEM if you set the logistics at say 80%. If anyone wants to do a test using one of the longer 'road to' scenarios, I'd be delighted to go along and do some sort of AAR style report

_____________________________

(in reply to Walloc)

Post #: 32

RE: Realism discussion - 8/17/2013 1:53:50 PM

SigUp
Matrix Elite Guard

Posts: 1062
Joined: 11/29/2012
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: loki100

Within WiTE as it is, I'm intrigued at what would happen in PBEM if you set the logistics at say 80%. If anyone wants to do a test using one of the longer 'road to' scenarios, I'd be delighted to go along and do some sort of AAR style report

This is something I have been wondering. With the logistics being too generous, why don't people try playing with restricted logistics (and limited aerial resupply). Of course such a game would need a Soviet player who doesn't turn around and runs. I would be quite interested in the outcome. For my part, I only know what 60 logistics have for an effect against the AI (without bomber supply and other tools to bump logistics). The effect was basically what I described in a post above, severe lack of fuel for motorized units, forcing breaks after two turns or so.

(in reply to loki100)

Post #: 33

RE: Realism discussion - 8/17/2013 2:08:08 PM

swkuh
Matrix Elite Guard

Posts: 1034
Joined: 10/5/2009
Status: offline

Says Loki, "However, to be fair, I have no clue where competent gameplay crosses an imaginary line into exploitation."

Hurrah! So too me.

I hope for an enjoyable game versus AI (and get that now) and for H2H games that can be "balanced" through "house rules."

Remember that "historicity" in outcomes is not the same as "realism" in presentation. The former can be forced by hard coded ad hoc factors that change performance in an instant (whether documented or not.) Realism is perception of appearances and might always be improved. But every improvement in additional, more accurate detail could be a nightmare to reflect in historical performance though the code.

(in reply to Walloc)

Post #: 34

RE: Realism discussion - 8/17/2013 2:11:21 PM

tm1
Matrix Hero

Posts: 691
Joined: 5/15/2013
From: Central Coast NSW Australia
Status: offline

Hi guys
I don't want to start getting off the main topic of this thread but as a new player who plays the AI and has only played a handful of campaigns as the Axis.
Can someone clarify me on this Stalingrad divisions situation I have never captured the city yet.
Am I correct in reading that if the Axis player captures the city they automatically lose a certain number of divisions regardless if there is no disaster at Stalingrad.
what are talking about here the historical 22 divisions that were trapped there in 1942, its sounds kind of harsh if you win the city you lose troops, does not sound fair to me.
Is there any time limited say avoid capturing it in 42 but capture it in 41 or 43

Regards TM

(in reply to loki100)

Post #: 35

RE: Realism discussion - 8/17/2013 2:32:09 PM

SigUp
Matrix Elite Guard

Posts: 1062
Joined: 11/29/2012
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: tm1

Hi guys
I don't want to start getting off the main topic of this thread but as a new player who plays the AI and has only played a handful of campaigns as the Axis.
Can someone clarify me on this Stalingrad divisions situation I have never captured the city yet.
Am I correct in reading that if the Axis player captures the city they automatically lose a certain number of divisions regardless if there is no disaster at Stalingrad.
what are talking about here the historical 22 divisions that were trapped there in 1942, its sounds kind of harsh if you win the city you lose troops, does not sound fair to me.
Is there any time limited say avoid capturing it in 42 but capture it in 41 or 43

Regards TM

This is a misrepresentation. You don't lose any division because you reach Stalingrad. Some Stalingrad divisions are withdrawn, yes. But these are some of the reconstituted divisons after they were destroyed at Stalingrad, that were utilized elsewhere.

(in reply to tm1)

Post #: 36

RE: Realism discussion - 8/17/2013 2:35:52 PM

Gabriel B.
Matrix Hero

Posts: 501
Joined: 6/24/2013
Status: offline

Done just that , LW stays around 450,000; a bit more (470,000 ) if the 6 jager regiments are counted .
So the army with all the support units is around 2.5 milion out of 2.98 at the start of 1942
campaign.

(in reply to Walloc)

Post #: 37

RE: Realism discussion - 8/17/2013 3:30:36 PM

BleedingOrange
Matrix Recruit

Posts: 31
Joined: 6/28/2008
Status: offline

The problem with those reconstituted divisions being removed is they were new units because the old ones were destroyed. If you take the old unit and send it west, where does the newly created unit go? It doesn't go west because nothing changes in the west. So the German loses several divisions (either the original or the reconstituted ones) for no other reason then a loss that never occurs in your game. To add to this even though the original units were destroyed when they are withdrawn they are brought up to strength before being removed (unless my understanding of the withdrawal process is wrong, but seem to remember they did this to prevent people from suicide attacks with those units). In the game the German player can lose a million fewer men and no units, he still won't benefit from it. He won't get a single additional division, will be stuck with lowering morale and crappy TOE "upgrades".

_____________________________

Come back with your shield or on it.

(in reply to Gabriel B.)

Post #: 38

RE: Realism discussion - 8/17/2013 3:46:40 PM

SigUp
Matrix Elite Guard

Posts: 1062
Joined: 11/29/2012
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: BleedingOrange

The problem with those reconstituted divisions being removed is they were new units because the old ones were destroyed. If you take the old unit and send it west, where does the newly created unit go? It doesn't go west because nothing changes in the west. So the German loses several divisions (either the original or the reconstituted ones) for no other reason then a loss that never occurs in your game. To add to this even though the original units were destroyed when they are withdrawn they are brought up to strength before being removed (unless my understanding of the withdrawal process is wrong, but seem to remember they did this to prevent people from suicide attacks with those units). In the game the German player can lose a million fewer men and no units, he still won't benefit from it. He won't get a single additional division, will be stuck with lowering morale and crappy TOE "upgrades".

This view is short-sighted. The German side gets divisions the Germans historically probably wouldn't have sent East if some divisions didn't get destroyed. Who says that for example 304th, 306th, 333rd, 335th Infantry Divisions would have been transported East if the 6th Army doesn't get encircled at Stalingrad? You lose 8 Stalingrad divisions, stretched over 8 months. I am not convinced that this is a huge loss, considering you get dozens of new divisions in this span.

< Message edited by SigUp -- 8/17/2013 4:29:08 PM >

(in reply to BleedingOrange)

Post #: 39

RE: Realism discussion - 8/17/2013 4:07:02 PM

Aurelian
Matrix Legion of Merit

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

http://www.matrixgames.com/forums/tm.asp?m=3104200&mpage=1&key=stalingrad�

_____________________________

If the Earth was flat, cats would of knocked everything off of it long ago.

(in reply to SigUp)

Post #: 40

RE: Realism discussion - 8/17/2013 4:08:03 PM

BleedingOrange
Matrix Recruit

Posts: 31
Joined: 6/28/2008
Status: offline

To say that the Germans wouldn't have sent more units east if they had had the men and equipment to do so is what is shortsighted. Considering that most German players haven't lost anywhere near the men, equipment and units that were historically lost you can't say they wouldn't have gotten those divisions and more. Having an additional 8 experienced and usually high morale divisions would help most German players and I can't think of one that would say "no thanks". I find it funny that you have no problem punishing the German player for things that never happen in the game because of what happened historically.

_____________________________

Come back with your shield or on it.

(in reply to Aurelian)

Post #: 41

RE: Realism discussion - 8/17/2013 4:19:19 PM

loki100
Matrix Legion of Merit

Posts: 10920
Joined: 10/20/2012
From: Utlima Thule
Status: offline

but the point is the German player is not being punished. In effect those divisions were withdrawn from the Eastern Front, its just that withdrawal occured while they were being rebuilt post their destruction at Stalingrad.

there is a more significant issue and its around the build up of the Red Army in late 1941. The Soviets pulled far too many from agriculture and industry to reconstitute the losses of the summer. One particular worry was to ensure that sufficient loyal party members stayed in the factories as opposing to volunteering (by early 1942 something like 80% of the party membership was in the armed forces).

Now, if a Soviet player avoids the worst of the summer losses, there is no way would the GKO have authorised such a mass transfer to the armed forces. So in an ideal simulation, the Soviets should have a choice - take the historical reinforcements and replacements or gain extra industrial capacity.

So this runs across both sides (as Walloc rightly states) and you either have a game that isolates the Great Patriotic War or a Grand Europa/Hearts of Iron style simulation that tries to deal with the war in its absolute entirity. Even if War in the West is taken back to 1939 and WiTE 2 is to hand then the Allied side can grumble that events in the Pacific are forced on them.

_____________________________

(in reply to BleedingOrange)

Post #: 42

RE: Realism discussion - 8/17/2013 4:34:45 PM

SigUp
Matrix Elite Guard

Posts: 1062
Joined: 11/29/2012
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: BleedingOrange

To say that the Germans wouldn't have sent more units east if they had had the men and equipment to do so is what is shortsighted. Considering that most German players haven't lost anywhere near the men, equipment and units that were historically lost you can't say they wouldn't have gotten those divisions and more. Having an additional 8 experienced and usually high morale divisions would help most German players and I can't think of one that would say "no thanks". I find it funny that you have no problem punishing the German player for things that never happen in the game because of what happened historically.

The Wehrmacht severely lacked manpower and trained officers after their huge losses in 1941. They didn't have pools sitting around waiting to get pushed into divisions. Furthermore, if the Stalingrad divisions are not destroyed, then for example instead of the reformed 94th Infantry Division, the 304th Infantry Division gets sent to Italy or wherever the division ended up. If these divisions are not removed, and the arrivals still arrive like historical, then the Germans practically get an extra division. Now, I agree that this historical withdrawal thing is suboptimal, but as stated, WITW will come up with a better solution.

(in reply to BleedingOrange)

Post #: 43

RE: Realism discussion - 8/17/2013 5:21:22 PM

Gabriel B.
Matrix Hero

Posts: 501
Joined: 6/24/2013
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Walloc
Even in games and i participated in one where 55 axis div, around 40 of them german, was captured during the blizzard ans still the OOB numbers didnt reach near historicl levels. There historic one was 2.7-2.8m'ish.

You dont need to have 50 divisions captured to reach the historical numbers , steady grinding over 3 months would put you there .
and it is actually worse because you need to provide replacements for those 50 divisions also .by the start of the summer ofensive I had 2.9 milion of which 0.47 was the LW.

Now, at 3.5 milion, the infantry divisions would average around 11,500 men and actualy have
a CV between 4 and 7 depending on morale losses.

(in reply to Walloc)

Post #: 44

RE: Realism discussion - 8/17/2013 5:28:52 PM

BleedingOrange
Matrix Recruit

Posts: 31
Joined: 6/28/2008
Status: offline

Glad to hear that WITW has a better setup. I realize that the Wehrmacht didn't have the manpower or officer historically, but in the game the German player doesn't take anywhere near those casualties because the Soviet player tends to run. The problem is even with the massive casualties the Germans were able to reform those divisions, so if the Germans haven't had those casualties why don't they get them? The units that were at Stalingrad were not scheduled to be withdrawn they were destroyed, so if the Soviet player doesn't destroy them the German player should keep them. The new units that were formed and not historically sent elsewhere, should still go to the East. That would mean that the way the war in the game goes would determine how many divisions the German player has.

_____________________________

Come back with your shield or on it.

(in reply to SigUp)

Post #: 45

RE: Realism discussion - 8/17/2013 5:52:49 PM

Walloc
Matrix Legion of Merit

Posts: 3141
Joined: 10/30/2006
From: Denmark
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Gabriel B.

quote:

ORIGINAL: Walloc
Even in games and i participated in one where 55 axis div, around 40 of them german, was captured during the blizzard ans still the OOB numbers didnt reach near historicl levels. There historic one was 2.7-2.8m'ish.

You dont need to have 50 divisions captured to reach the historical numbers , steady grinding over 3 months would put you there .
and it is actually worse because you need to provide replacements for those 50 divisions also .by the start of the summer ofensive I had 2.9 milion of which 0.47 was the LW.

Now, at 3.5 milion, the infantry divisions would average around 11,500 men and actualy have
a CV between 4 and 7 depending on morale losses.

Sorry im not sure i understand u correctly so ill ask. What and when do u mean by a steady grinding over 3 months?
How does that have a bearing on the lost or not as the case might be 50 lost divisions?

Can point me to any AAR in the last year-year and a half where the german side come july 1942. Had a OOB number as they have in the 1942 scn of 2.97m or near it. The common number being between 3.3m and 3.7m. If u in a hundred or so recorded cases dont ever a have German OOB of 2.97m, no matter how the game has gone up until then. i think u can tell some thing with a fair amount of certainty. At leased it shows an overwhelming proberbility.
Am i to understand u have a game where it has happened to u?

Kind regards,

Rasmus

< Message edited by Walloc -- 8/17/2013 6:14:06 PM >

(in reply to Gabriel B.)

Post #: 46

RE: Realism discussion - 8/17/2013 6:22:07 PM

Schmart
Matrix Hero

Posts: 662
Joined: 9/13/2010
From: Canada
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: BleedingOrange

The units that were at Stalingrad were not scheduled to be withdrawn they were destroyed, so if the Soviet player doesn't destroy them the German player should keep them.

Please provide specific game details to back this up.

The German player DOES keep divisions that were destroyed but were not sent to other theaters. Aurelian posted the link to Trey's post that clearly lays it all out.

Of the 20 divisions destroyed at Stalingrad, 13 remain in game if the German player does not lose them (they are NOT withdrawn). That is a gain to the German player for a job well done. The remaining 7 divisions are withdrawn, because the German high command has decided to send them to other fronts, regardless if Stalingrad happens or not.

(in reply to BleedingOrange)

Post #: 47

RE: Realism discussion - 8/17/2013 8:01:27 PM

Gabriel B.
Matrix Hero

Posts: 501
Joined: 6/24/2013
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Walloc

Sorry im not sure i understand u correctly so ill ask. What and when do u mean by a steady grinding over 3 months?
How does that have a bearing on the lost or not as the case might be 50 lost divisions?

Can point me to any AAR in the last year-year and a half where the german side come july 1942. Had a OOB number as they have in the 1942 scn of 2.97m or near it. The common number being between 3.3m and 3.7m. If u in a hundred or so recorded cases dont ever a have German OOB of 2.97m, no matter how the game has gone up until then. i think u can tell some thing with a fair amount of certainty. At leased it shows an overwhelming proberbility.
Am i to understand u have a game where it has happened to u?

Kind regards,

Rasmus

The overall orbat number means surprisigly little , the HQ, airforce , support units, end up eating more than 1 million men if left at 100 % Toe.
If you start disbanding corps HQ , exces airbasses , you could easily get even the army in the 1942 scenario to 3.3 -3.4 milion .

I am not seing a direct comparison between losses and replaclacements .

and yes I did managed to get the german orbat down to 2.97 in my first try .

< Message edited by Gabriel B. -- 8/17/2013 8:02:12 PM >

(in reply to Walloc)

Post #: 48

RE: Realism discussion - 8/17/2013 9:47:26 PM

BleedingOrange
Matrix Recruit

Posts: 31
Joined: 6/28/2008
Status: offline

None of the units destroyed at Stalingrad were withdrawn or sent to the west they were destroyed. The 7 units sent to other fronts were basically new divisions using destroyed unit designations. So if those units weren't destroyed the new units that were historically created would still go to the other fronts leaving the originals in the east. If you want the "Stalingrad" units to be sent to other fronts because they weren't destroyed, then where do the divisions that were formed historically and actually sent there go?

_____________________________

Come back with your shield or on it.

(in reply to Gabriel B.)

Post #: 49

RE: Realism discussion - 8/17/2013 10:26:54 PM

Joel Billings
Moderator

Posts: 32265
Joined: 9/20/2000
From: Santa Rosa, CA
Status: offline

If the division is destroyed in the game as it was historically, then a shell is put on the map and is rebuilt using East Front manpower and armaments and then it will be withdrawn to the Western Front if on the withdrawal list. If the division is not destroyed, then it will simply be withdrawn, and the German player will have all the manpower and armaments available to go into their units in the East. So from a manpower/armaments point of view, there is no difference and it's best not to let your units get destroyed.

_____________________________

All understanding comes after the fact.
-- Soren Kierkegaard

(in reply to BleedingOrange)

Post #: 50

RE: Realism discussion - 8/17/2013 11:25:01 PM

Walloc
Matrix Legion of Merit

Posts: 3141
Joined: 10/30/2006
From: Denmark
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Gabriel B.

quote:

ORIGINAL: Walloc

Sorry im not sure i understand u correctly so ill ask. What and when do u mean by a steady grinding over 3 months?
How does that have a bearing on the lost or not as the case might be 50 lost divisions?

Can point me to any AAR in the last year-year and a half where the german side come july 1942. Had a OOB number as they have in the 1942 scn of 2.97m or near it. The common number being between 3.3m and 3.7m. If u in a hundred or so recorded cases dont ever a have German OOB of 2.97m, no matter how the game has gone up until then. i think u can tell some thing with a fair amount of certainty. At leased it shows an overwhelming proberbility.
Am i to understand u have a game where it has happened to u?

Kind regards,

Rasmus

The overall orbat number means surprisigly little , the HQ, airforce , support units, end up eating more than 1 million men if left at 100 % Toe.

But no one forces u to set the ToE at 100% for those nor set them at refit status. There are plenty a ways of going around this to even to the degree of disbanding units. Both sids have lots and the same choices to manipulate how and where the Manpower gets distribuated. Sure russian side has more units so they can easier pull out unit for refits but there is in the rules no difference between the options for the sides.

So saying that orbat numbers is meaningless IMO is not quite the full story. Even if we accept that u have 1m man in non combat units. The difference between having 3.7m or 2.9 is even bigger cuz that leaves 2.7m vs 1.9m a higher percentage ofd combat troops. Saying that orbat doesnt matter so getting 700k-1m man extra means supprising little is far from the whole story. All those extra man IF, and im saying it doesnt even have to be that way, wouldnt go to fill up non combat forces if they are alrdy filled so in essence u get those extra in ur combat forces. Just because ur strength raises 800k doesnt mean that the non combat strength have to raise nor would it if left alone less ppl go around losing airbases and the like on purpose.

quote:

If you start disbanding corps HQ , exces airbasses , you could easily get even the army in the 1942 scenario to 3.3 -3.4 milion

If u think that then u misunderstanding how the orbat works. If u disband a HQ or an airbase that manpower is then send back to the pools and the Orbat number drops with that number of ppl. The net gain or loss from disbanding airbases, HQ and so on is 0. Well u initally get less on map orbat strength but the manpower just gets moved to the pools. Then u can draw it back to units.

quote:

I am not seing a direct comparison between losses and replacements .

Eh, no. There is no link between losses and replacements so so u shouldnt see that. Replacement are "fixed" well it follow the loss of Manpower centers, but i assume u Arent losing any og them in 41 42 as german so that doesnt matter in thsi particular case. That said as u get 1% of disabled pool back every turn back as german and ½% as russian there is a link but its not a direct 1 to 1 link. Over time u slow get back the disabled taken into account the law of diminshing returns but as disabled are only part of the total casulties then that "link" is only partly there.

quote:

and yes I did managed to get the german orbat down to 2.97 in my first try .

In a PBEM game or vs the AI?

Kind regards,

Rasmus

< Message edited by Walloc -- 8/17/2013 11:34:44 PM >

(in reply to Gabriel B.)

Post #: 51

RE: Realism discussion - 8/18/2013 7:06:07 AM

Gabriel B.
Matrix Hero

Posts: 501
Joined: 6/24/2013
Status: offline

quote:

o saying that orbat numbers is meaningless IMO is not quite the full story. Even if we accept that u have 1m man in non combat units. The difference between having 3.7m or 2.9 is even bigger cuz that leaves 2.7m vs 1.9m a higher percentage ofd combat troops. Saying that orbat doesnt matter so getting 700k-1m man extra

Rasmus

The problems facing the axis player in 1942 is not whatever the orbat is 2.97 or less but understrenght combat units, so i spent 25 admin points , got it down to 2.83 to push manpower into infantry . You simply do not need 3 regional commands doing nothing or 40+ airbasses for 3000 airframmes.

Losses vs replacements , by june 42 german manpower centers had produced in my game 600,000 manpower , i assume these are the newly raised recruits. If a german player gets
orbats over the 3.3 milion figure he is either loosing less than historically or getting
more returning disabled.

vs the AI .

(in reply to Walloc)

Post #: 52

RE: Realism discussion - 8/18/2013 10:36:58 AM

Walloc
Matrix Legion of Merit

Posts: 3141
Joined: 10/30/2006
From: Denmark
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Gabriel B.

Rasmus

The problems facing the axis player in 1942 is not whatever the orbat is 2.97 or less but understrenght combat units,

Sorry, but u not getting it. If u have 2.97m man the chances are that ur units are understrength by X amount. If u have 3.7m then ur understength by 730k men less. As u have 730.000 more men they can then be distribuated into units making the that much less understrengthen. Also since u as a player can through manipulating the where the replacements go by mainipulating refits and ToE % of units. Then they dont need to go into airbases and HQs. U get to decide if u know the sytem where they go. So if the replacements end up in airbases and HQs its just u as a player made then not because they had too.

quote:

ORIGINAL: Gabriel B.
Losses vs replacements , by june 42 german manpower centers had produced in my game 600,000 manpower , i assume these are the newly raised recruits. If a german player gets
orbats over the 3.3 milion figure he is either loosing less than historically or getting
more returning disabled.

This is here ur wrong and dont understand the issue. If u take the orbat at turn 1 22 june 41 and again at end of june 42, where the 42 scn starts. U get a difference between the number. These 2 numbers based in what historically was there at the time, made to fit into how game system works. The historical difference between those 2 numbers are what they historically lost and what was withdrawn on the negative side. On the posetive side what gets added as in replacement and reinforcements. Since the historical losses are known. U can then calculated how much manpower that the german historically got infused in that periode, and what the games says the german get infused in manpower between june 22 1941 and end june 1942 by using the games own difference between the two dates/scenarios.

If u then in game between turn 1 and end of june 1942 does the same. Deduct withdrawls, add reinforcements, add replacements, add Hiwis, add what u get back from disablements and so on. The math is clear. U then in game gets infused around 980.000 more than the difference between the scn 41 and 42, when playing out the 1941 scn until july 1942. So by using the games own number u can show this. This is 980,000 atop of the historical replacement/infusement of manpower.

So this infact has next(disablements and hiwi creations differs but both are overall a very small proportion of the 980k and i purposly set those numbers consevativly) to nothing to do with whether or not the german infact do better or worse as the case might be. Using the games own numbers u can show that the reinforcement and replacement in the 1941 scn until july 42 is 980.000 man more than what the would have gotten in game by july 1942 when the 1942 scenario starts.

That said. If u look at the losses in game and compare them to the historic ones and i used current 10 15 AARs at the time i did the math. Naturally the numbers will differ depending on how the game goes. Still there was a clear trend in the numbers from the AARs. The losses was higher than the historic losses(this includes the blizzard driven losses) with usually around 300k ish. So u gets 980k more than u should have but also take 300k more. A net of around 680k. There are ofc outliers so it will vary a bit why in some AARs u only see 400k more in orbat numbers but in others closer to 800k 900k more in orbat numbers.

Futher logical profe. If replacement had been historical. One would expect if the if the german do worse and takes more losses in game and we have a number of games showing that in AARs that they would have orbat numbers less than the historic one. Again as we have 100ish expemples u have a fairly large statistical case. Non, never has these in a pbem game that is recorded in teh AAR section have been a cases where the orbat number reached the games own number come july 42. So if the number no matter how the game consitantly gives orbats that is higher no matter how good or how bad those games have go for the german side. The logical conclussion is then that the problem is systematic and not a question of how particular games go.

quote:

ORIGINAL: Gabriel B.
vs the AI .

When dicussion game balance its exclusively meant as in regards to PBEM games. How ever good and the AI is and in WiTE is better than most other AIs i have encountered. I have heard similar from others saying the same. An AI simply never is on a human level. Why its sugegsted when u play it u give it advantages. Because of that it doesnt give much meaning to use figurs from vs AI ganmes when u talk game balance. The game starts unbalanced as the human players starts at an advantage of having a reasoning brain. I will win any AI game i play and so it is for most part if not exclusively so for all ppl until the AI gets to cheat X amount. So all that can be deducected from AI games is that the advantages /disadvanatges in those are that the skill of a human player vs an AI is that the human player is so much better u cant really learn any thing about balance.

Again underlining i for game balance sake dont wana remove those 980.000 men. Im just pointing out u indeed gets lots more than u historicly should. That 2by2 games dont disadvantges the german side automaticly. When ppl bring up, tho wrongly, that the "lost" 7 divisions from the Stalingrad issue, it seems to matter much to them and is used as an example on how the german side gets disanfranchised. They infact gets 980k more Manpower or 60ish full strength inf divisions more in manpower in the first year of the game, than they by the games own admission should get. Doesnt that dwarf the potential of the "7 Stalingrad divisions" and i dont see any one also mentiong getting those unhistorical 60 more divs worth of manpower when they bring up the "7 divisions" issue.

Case in point being by OP.

Kind regards,

Rasmus

< Message edited by Walloc -- 8/18/2013 12:30:42 PM >

(in reply to Gabriel B.)

Post #: 53

RE: Realism discussion - 8/18/2013 2:32:14 PM

Gabriel B.
Matrix Hero

Posts: 501
Joined: 6/24/2013
Status: offline

Take for instance MT vs Kamil arr before the blizard

154,451 kia ( Axis not german )
3314 Mia
524,384 wia

The germans alone had by that date :

Wounded : 18,200 officers and 561,575 Nco + enlisted .
Killed : 6,827 officers and 155,972 Nco + enlisted .
Missing : 562 officers and 31,922 Nco + enlisted .

The last figures posted in the aar are for february (1. 38 million ) but they are not even reaching german losses, let allone axis and the worse is over .

So please provide a example for axis player taking higher losses than historicly and keep growing so we have a base for discution , otherwise we are speaking past each other.

(in reply to Walloc)

Post #: 54

RE: Realism discussion - 8/18/2013 3:33:23 PM

SigUp
Matrix Elite Guard

Posts: 1062
Joined: 11/29/2012
Status: offline

It's only against the AI, but as far as replacements it doesn't matter who your opponent is, losses including turn 24 (last pre blizzard turn):

Total (note, the game deducts the returning wounded, so the actual number is always higher): 803.120

Dead: 244.051

Missing: 4.775

OOB Size (German at start of turn 25): 3.284.458

Casualty numbers on the eve of the German summer offensive, turn 52:

Total: 1.479.750

Dead: 342.486

Missing: 10.039

OOB size: 3.723.830

(in reply to Gabriel B.)

Post #: 55

RE: Realism discussion - 8/18/2013 4:07:27 PM

Walloc
Matrix Legion of Merit

Posts: 3141
Joined: 10/30/2006
From: Denmark
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Gabriel B.

Take for instance MT vs Kamil arr before the blizard

One of the discusions over time on the forums have been is how the german losses are to low compared to historic pre Blizzard ones. In part cuz of runs in apart cuz when attacking u dont take many losses overall. A thing that also helps the russian steamroller come 43-45. Then the losses gets off set during blizzard going higher less u do a to Polen retreat avoid the blizzard effect losses. So there is nothing new or supprising in this. Just following the usual results for the recorded games.

quote:

ORIGINAL: Gabriel B.
So please provide a example for axis player taking higher losses than historicly and keep growing so we have a base for discution , otherwise we are speaking past each other.

So have a cherry picked AARs, no. I have just been into every AAR on the last 2 pages and these are the result for all of them where there are any results/recording of OOBs and losses near turn 54. A number doesnt make it so far and others dont give numbers. Not only that, if i can find the data on my old computer ill provide the data so u can pick them apart. Since i did the math a year ago or so ill hafta go see if i still have them as i gotten a new computer in the mean time. I havent exactly looked for them in teh mean time not do i know if i still even have them.

So we can agree on losses taken im providing a link to photocopies of the Heeresarzt 10 day casulty reports. Taken the number from 22-6-41 to 30-6.42, minus teh Lapland casulties as it isnt represnted in game.
KIA 277296-817= WIA 993551-27856 MIA 61630-1726 = 1.302.024

http://ww2stats.com/cas_ger_okh_dec42.html

HarryBanana vs Sapper
http://www.matrixgames.com/forums/fb.asp?m=3269893
Notice numbers are from turn 55 so the turn after turn 54 and that ofcs slighty diffent from teh math pertaining to turn 54.
German OOB 3.755.521
Losses 1.445.986.
These losses are indeed for all the axis so allowance has to be made so u can remove those losses. There in game is no way to tell teh difference so it has to be a guestimate. On the other had the 1.445.986 isnt the full losses taken. AS teh disabled pool is shriking every turn by 1% the overall losses isnt recorded as the returned from the disabled pool is each turn pulled out of those figurs.

U can back track with some certainty the disabled pool as if one have looked at a number of AAR and i did when i did the math can see a clear pattern in how the disabled pool develops. It isnt terribly high at start and grows fairly slowly until dec start where the blizzard effect kick in. In every case cheked was the number post blizzard at between 800.000 and 1.030.000 assuming ppl dont do a Polen retreat strategy. In that case then the disabled losses naturally dont go as high but its more than off setted by the lack of losses to the blizzard effect.

The diabled pool is at 888k at turn 55 and if u go back at look at right after the blizzard it was 830k at turn tunr 37. this suggest the pool has been fairly steady in the last 18 turns new adducties into the pool is off setted by the 1% leaving the pool every turn. So that 17* 8500= 144.500
At the start of the blizzard is was 449.760 at turn 26. The average tho it wont be 100% accurate of 830k and 450k is 690k . if it was liniar. Its not as the blizzard effects are the severist at the start and clings off in reallity the losses will be front loaded but im willing to for go that as it wont only make the figur higher. 11*6900 = 75.900.
The first 26 turn. Disabled pool will be heavily back loaded until then so lets use 100k as a mean, well below half of the 450k at 225k. 26*1000 = 26000.

So we need to add 26k+76k+144k to the 1.445.986= 1.691.000

From that we have to take the axis minors losses. This has to be a guestimate and im happy to hear differing opinion as to the number and why.

Clearly the majority of losses is german. They do most of the fighting and there simply are more of them so they take more attrition and blizzard effect losses. On the other side the moral is lower for teh axis miors generally by quite a bit making them take higher attrional losses % wise than german on teh otehr hand usually a high % of them is using in garrisoning cities avoiding the blizzard losses nor do they spend as much time overall in the frontlines by that in self they're taking much less attrition.
My best guess is soem where between 10-to 20% of the total losses. If we for argument sake says 15% then. IMO 15% is prolly to high but gota use some number.
1.691.000 -15% = 1.437.350 woudl be the german losses.
If number used is 10% the german losses are 1522k

So how does this all add up.

German OOB 3.755k vs the 2.971k or 784k more in the OOB/orbat.

Historic german losses 1.302k vs in game 1437k or 135k more casulties in game.

784k+135 = 919k+ 70k in Manpower pool -100k in the 1942scn MP pool 889k more german manpower than the 1942 numbers in game.

If the Axis minors losses accounts for 10% its 784k+220k+70k-100k= 974k more german Manpower than the 1942 scn.

Here are the 3 other AARs that has numbers. Feel free to do the math on those numbers. They are very similar so, so will the results be. Note one is a AI AAR which i dont think counts, but for fullness sake and get all AARs that has numbers on the last 2 pages its included but with that notation.
If u so wish or any one else u can go back before the 2 first pages and for the last year and a year and half of AARs the number will fall close, trust me as i have followed the AARs and seen the numbers over the last 2½ years.

http://www.matrixgames.com/forums/fb.asp?m=3249616

http://www.matrixgames.com/forums/fb.asp?m=3334483

http://www.matrixgames.com/forums/fb.asp?m=3260296

Kind regards,

Rasmus

< Message edited by Walloc -- 8/18/2013 4:37:14 PM >

(in reply to Gabriel B.)

Post #: 56

RE: Realism discussion - 8/18/2013 7:51:08 PM

Gabriel B.
Matrix Hero

Posts: 501
Joined: 6/24/2013
Status: offline

I presume the axis minors take a lot more losses than that .

take for instance Kamil vs Mike :

romanian orbat at the start 714,342
romanian orbat at 02.07.1942 (55 turn ) 598,287

reinforcements : 30,129 (3 sec divisions)
recruitment : 132,192 (2448 per turn )

714,342 +30,129+ 132,192= 876663
net loss : 278,376 .

that is 17 % of total axis casulties up to that point .

(in reply to Walloc)

Post #: 57

RE: Realism discussion - 8/18/2013 8:40:18 PM

Gabriel B.
Matrix Hero

Posts: 501
Joined: 6/24/2013
Status: offline

finland :
orbat at the start 358,553
orbat at 02.07.1942 (55 turn ) 279,946

reinforcements : 76,429
recruitment : 35,964 (666 per turn )
withdraw: 155,956

358,553+76,429+35,964-155,956= 314,990.

net loss: 35,044

2.19 % of axis casulties .

Might have missed several battalions but it does not change the overal figure by much .

< Message edited by Gabriel B. -- 8/18/2013 8:41:54 PM >

(in reply to Gabriel B.)

Post #: 58

RE: Realism discussion - 8/18/2013 10:35:09 PM

Walloc
Matrix Legion of Merit

Posts: 3141
Joined: 10/30/2006
From: Denmark
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Gabriel B.

I presume the axis minors take a lot more losses than that .

take for instance Kamil vs Mike :

romanian orbat at the start 714,342
romanian orbat at 02.07.1942 (55 turn ) 598,287

reinforcements : 30,129 (3 sec divisions)
recruitment : 132,192 (2448 per turn )

714,342 +30,129+ 132,192= 876663
net loss : 278,376 .

that is 17 % of total axis casulties up to that point .

A couple of things on that as i think some parts of ur presumtion is problematic, other things u forget or dont take into account.

First off. If u read this Sigup and u had an a game vs AI at turn 52 right?
If so, as we cant possibly see the pool from the minors, as they arent listed in the AARs so would u check urs and post them here please.

The main problem is that u dont take into account the what is in the minors manpower pool and assumes they are all empthy and that they have gone out to the units on map. Problem with that, is that manpower and its notoriosuly so for the axis minors, just ask Terje, that their manpower builds up in the minors pools and doesnt get into the unit. In part because many of their losses is taken during the blizzard and since re-replacement during that time is limited by the rules. They dont get back into the units particular fast. Nor during the muds last part of the time between blizzard end and turn 55. Ill bet u that if u look at the minor pools are full of manpower. Could u look in ur own game and tell us the pool level from the minors?

Then ur numbers for the rumeanins are slightly off. First off u forget 3 const btn for another added 3k men.
Then ur replacement numbers are slightly off. It isnt 131.192. U uses a multiplier of 54*9 but as the multipler is only 9 in 41 and 8 in 42
Correct numbers are. 27*9*274 in 41 = 66.582 and 27*8*274 = 59184 for a total of 125.766, not 132.192.

Then u presumably arent aware of the fact that the rumeanins OOB changes that changes their squad structure. This releass men from the on map units lowering the OOB figurs while putting the men in the pools. This in effect have an lowering effect on the rumeanin OOB numbers that isnt caused by losses.

Then u say net loss is 278,376 and that is 17%.
The losses at turn 55 is listed 1845072. 278376/1845072*100 = 15.01 % not 17 percent. Also u get to take into account that the 1845k isnt the real losses. As the disabled pool which in this case is also 50% larger then in the HarryBanna/Sapper game has been deducted of 1% each turn. So in fact the real number is significatly higher. The subtracted number in HB/sapper case was 246k. As the disabled pool is nearly 50% larger here then he figur in this case is to low. To be on the safe side we just add 40%. 246+40%=344k. So the real losses are 1845k+344k = 2189k.

Then u assume that other losses can come from some where else than rumeanians. In reality the number below will tell why its presumably wrong and there is a max that others can take and then my bet. Even if u calculate with the max u far from and add all that many more.

Start Finland OOB 358k
Reinforcements 80k
Withdrawls 129k
So it should be at 309k
At turn 55 its 280k difference at 29k plus what ever has been infused as replacements.
Replacement 41 74*9*27= 18k. 42 136 in all 34k
Theotical max is 63k but 30-40k is more likely.

Hungary. Start OOB 434k
Reinforcements 44k
Withdrawls 44k
At turn 55 450k add of 16k. Reason this is possble is that a divison comes at 1% ToE and can be build up.
Plus what has been infused as replacements not 13k of the replacemnt is counted into that unit that makes it posible to get to 447k
Replacement at 41 238*9*27= 57834. 42- 51408 = 109k of those 16k is counted. So 93k left.
Theoritical max 87k, my bet taken into account their manpower presumable in the pool around 40-45k.

Italians
Start: 228k
Reinforcements 5k
Withdrawls 4k
At turn 55 325k
As the italians has so few active units, before turn 53 and those units cant have reached teh front or taken losses yet so chance for taken losses and attriton is very low and as they at same OOB number they cant have taken any losses of any significance. 5k 10k at max.

Slovaks:
At start 81k
at turn 55 34k
Reinforcements 0k
Withdrawls 43k
81k-43k = 38k vs the on map 34k. 4k losses
Replacement in all 23k
Again tho they have some mobil units they are so few that they ahd had to die several times over to use 23k replacement not likely. My bet 10k losses max.

Rumenia:
At start 715k
At turn 55 598k
Reinforcements 33k u forgot 3 const btn's.
Withdrawls 0
Replacements u get are some what off. They arent 132192 but 125766
So theoritical max is slight off 715k+126+33k-598k= 276k not 278k, but that isnt the whole story.
As it doesnt take into account the manpower pool nor the OOB changed i bet u that the manpower pool is fairly large and 276k is far from the real losses. More likely they have 100k in the pool if not more. So by bet is around losses of 150-180k.

Adding it all up.

Theoritical max.
Finland 63k
Hungary 98k
italy 10k
Slovaks 27k
Rumeanians 276k

In all 472k out of 2189k or 472/2189*100 = 21,62%
But this is theoritical max assuming not single 1 man is left in any of the minor pools. That would be unseen and unlikely.

My bet

Finland 40k
Hungary 45k
italy 10k
Slovaks 10k
Rumeanians 170k

in all 275k. 275k/2189k*100 = 12.6%

Kind regards,

Rasmus

< Message edited by Walloc -- 8/18/2013 10:52:16 PM >

(in reply to Gabriel B.)

Post #: 59

RE: Realism discussion - 8/18/2013 10:57:18 PM

SigUp
Matrix Elite Guard

Posts: 1062
Joined: 11/29/2012
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Walloc

First off. If u read this Sigup and u had an a game vs AI at turn 52 right?
If so, as we cant possibly see the pool from the minors, as they arent listed in the AARs so would u check urs and post them here please.

Yes, I'm playing the AI, right now it's turn 53 and the German (my) summer offensive is under way. As for the manpower pools:

Germany: 264.329
Finland: 2.167
Italy: 36.820
Rumania: 8.993
Hungary: 83.594
Slovakia: 19.872

EDIT: The OOB numbers for the minors

Rumania: 670.622
Hungary: 450.927
Italy: 325.689
Finland: 247.725
Slovakia: 40.005

< Message edited by SigUp -- 8/18/2013 11:00:03 PM >

(in reply to Walloc)

Post #: 60