RE: The core problem with WitE+

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: The core problem with WitE+

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: The core problem with WitE+

Page: << < prev 2 3 [4] 5 6 next > >>

Message

<< Older Topic Newer Topic >>

RE: The core problem with WitE+ - 1/7/2014 5:21:21 AM

Flaviusx

Posts: 7750
Joined: 9/9/2009
From: Southern California
Status: offline

RAGE AGAINST THE DYING OF THE LIGHT

_____________________________

WitE Alpha Tester

(in reply to chuckfourth)

Post #: 91

RE: The core problem with WitE+ - 1/7/2014 5:49:12 AM

SigUp

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

Pelton, for the 1000th time, I'm not denying that the combat system has its deficiencies and is badly in need for a fix in WITW / WITE2 (which I'm confident it will get). I have mentioned this numerous times on the forums how broken the combat system is, how especially by 1943 the Soviet losses are ridiculously low as compared to the German ones, how on the other hand in 1941 the German losses are too low. It is not me who is sticking his head into the ground, it is you by continously ignoring what I've been saying. The only reason I've translated this lengthy stuff about logistics is because chuckles initially asked me about sources for Fall Blau's logistical troubles. Once again you are thinking you're arguing against the world, while in fact you are arguing against an imaginary opponent who is not there.

EDIT: chuckles, nobody, I repeat nobody, is defending the combat system as it is. Everybody here recognizes the need for a severe revamp for WITW / WITE2. It is Pelton who continues to ignore this and thinks everybody wants to fix logistics only that has this "discussion" going on. What I've been saying is merely that aside from the combat system the logistics also need a fix. Pelton apparently thinks that logistics are good as they are right now and fixing the combat system will complete the game which is untrue. Fix the combat model, give the Soviets and Germans their historical replacements and the game is still broken, perhaps even more so than before without an adequate logistics model.

< Message edited by SigUp -- 1/7/2014 6:58:30 AM >

(in reply to Flaviusx)

Post #: 92

RE: The core problem with WitE+ - 1/7/2014 8:01:39 AM

Michael T

Posts: 4443
Joined: 10/22/2006
From: Queensland, Australia.
Status: offline

I think the simple point Pelton is trying to make is that the combat system is so far out of whack that it really pales the problems with logistics.

It is also true that we have seen numerous and significant logistics fixes that wind back the Axis in 1941. Yet, we have seen nothing to enhance the real combat advantages that the Germans had in 41/42/43. They just don't exist in this game.

If these are his points I entirely agree with him.

_____________________________

(in reply to SigUp)

Post #: 93

RE: The core problem with WitE+ - 1/7/2014 8:48:37 AM

SigUp

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

The fixes on the logistics didn't really touch the true problem of it. They only removed the most ridiculous parts like the flying fuel cans. In WITE the logistics aren't taking capacity into account at all. Theoretically you can supply the entire Wehrmacht using a single rail line, as long as the units are within acceptable range. However, even after their rails caught up the Germans still faced problems stemming from the fact that often they couldn't max out the capacity or the capacity of the rail line itself was insufficient. In WITE neither the Germans nor the Soviets will face the dilemma of making the choice which offensive prong should be favoured if both are within acceptable range of the rail line. You can simply pursue both (or even more) at the same time, provided you have the forces to do it.

Last but not least I contest Pelton's assertion that logistics had no influence in the casualty ratio. They did. Can you imagine how much more damage the Germans could have done without logistical problems (full mobility, no lack of artillery ammo, no lack of spare parts etc.)?

(in reply to Michael T)

Post #: 94

RE: The core problem with WitE+ - 1/7/2014 8:52:51 AM

Michael T

Posts: 4443
Joined: 10/22/2006
From: Queensland, Australia.
Status: offline

quote:

Now granted, some of those games were with 105/95 settings so they are not necessarily representative. Nevertheless, 8 of these 9 games ended with a complete and utter destruction of your opponents. Sometimes with encirclement of Moscow on T14 which is an absurdity in itself and just shows that the logistic system is still too much in favor of the Axis in 41.

Bozo you seem incapable of accepting that an elite player can cut a newbie to pieces. I am curious what you would think the limit of the Axis advance would be if no Soviet Army existed at all? Which in the hands of a totally incompetent player is not far from the real situation. Nothing at all can be determined from Peltons victories over some newbies, apart from the point that he is very good and they very bad.

Do you want an idiot proof version of WITE? A game where no matter how bad a player is and no matter how good the opposition a quick and decisive victory is not possible. That the rates of advance are the same no matter the level of ineptness of the Soviet player?

Surely you don't expect close to historical rates of advance no matter who plays who?

The thing I find amusing is that when the levels of skill are reversed it's quite all right with some that Germany gets no where and are totally trashed in 1941.

One thing I like about WITE is that good players whip bad players.

_____________________________

(in reply to Michael T)

Post #: 95

RE: The core problem with WitE+ - 1/7/2014 10:32:12 AM

Aurelian

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

quote:

ORIGINAL: Bozo_the_Clown

quote:

Having read Paul Carells "Hitler's war on Russia" It is interesting to note that it contains no references to supply problems.

Isn't Paul Carell a pseudonym for Paul Carl Schmidt who was a high ranking Nazi? I haven't read his book but because an author doesn't mention supply problems on the eastern front doesn't necessarily mean that they didn't existed.

Lt Colonel in the SS.

_____________________________

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

(in reply to Bozo_the_Clown)

Post #: 96

RE: The core problem with WitE+ - 1/7/2014 10:33:05 AM

Walloc

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

quote:

ORIGINAL: chuckles

Having read Paul Carells "Hitler's war on Russia" It is interesting to note that it contains no references to supply problems.

Best Regards Chuck.

Smile, well i was spot on 3 4 months ago then, wasnt i. As I said then ill say it again. I strongly suggest u read some books that isnt based on die hard nazi with an agenda based on 1970s history view of eastern front. Alot has happend and been researched and written since.
Yes, i also have read the book. One should get as broad a perspective as possible. The more varied u read the more one can put the extrems in each end into perspective. This is a book from one end of the extrems.

Kind regards,

Rasmus

< Message edited by Walloc -- 1/7/2014 3:08:52 PM >

(in reply to chuckfourth)

Post #: 97

RE: The core problem with WitE+ - 1/7/2014 11:24:22 AM

Peltonx

Posts: 7250
Joined: 4/9/2006
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Walloc

quote:

ORIGINAL: chuckles

Having read Paul Carells "Hitler's war on Russia" It is interesting to note that it contains no references to supply problems.

Best Regards Chuck.

Smile, well i was spot on 3 4 months ago then, wasnt it. As I said then ill say it again. I strongly suggest u read some books that isnt based on die hard nazi with an agenda based on 1970s history view of eastern front. Alot has happend and been researched and written since.
Yes, i also have read the book. One should get as broad a perspective as possible. The more varied u read the more one can put the extrems in each end into perspective. This is a book from one end of the extrems.

Kind regards,

Rasmus

I agree Walloc. Hitler vs Stalin is a good one based on allot of data that it new. aka after the wall came down.

I think one of the old school ideals is that if you simply tell the tale based on historical data from "both sides" and not just one your labeled a Nazis freak.

This is part of our politics now which has infected every part of our lifes.

What ever you do ignore the message and kill the messanger.

People simply do not want to hear or read about the combat ratio's as they do not fit the political message we have been feed for 50yrs.
The people that were personally effected by the conflict are passing on and now this generation can take a more objective look at the past events.
If you read history this is what almost always happens. The victor's write their version of history shortly after the conflict,
but then historians years latter write what historically happen. Which in many cases is light yrs from what the victor wanted people to believe.

Germans did more with less, German equipment was not as good the allies in most cases,
they had logistics problems ect ect. Yet they were able to do what they did on the ground and in the air being heavly outnumbered in all areas including logistics.
In the air they were out numbered 5 to 1 and still were able to inflict hvy loses on all fronts until the last quarter of 1943. They simply ran out the high % of quality trained troops and veterns and had to rush men to the front instead of properly train them all.

People want to hear the Germans were stupid, had no freedom on the battle field ect ect and
all the allies armys were as good man for man as a German,
which is simply not true as the data clearly shows no matter which set we want to look at.

The Allies did not win because of logistics, better troops, better equipment or better tactics which is clear.
They won because they heavly out numbered the Axis and could produce far more.

Industrial output won the conflict. Germany produced over 100% more equipment in 44 then it did in 42, but it did not matter as America could easly out produce Germany on its own.

We won by attrition, industrial attrition.

When Germany won on the battlefield, it was because it had far better C&C, trained army/airforse and modern tactics.

_____________________________

Beta Tester WitW & WitE

(in reply to Walloc)

Post #: 98

RE: The core problem with WitE+ - 1/7/2014 11:32:56 AM

Flaviusx

Posts: 7750
Joined: 9/9/2009
From: Southern California
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Michael T

I think the simple point Pelton is trying to make is that the combat system is so far out of whack that it really pales the problems with logistics.

It is also true that we have seen numerous and significant logistics fixes that wind back the Axis in 1941. Yet, we have seen nothing to enhance the real combat advantages that the Germans had in 41/42/43. They just don't exist in this game.

If these are his points I entirely agree with him.

And yet the logistics are still borked.

I really don't see how anybody can choose here between the combat model and the arcade supply system. Really, they both suck. Trying to determine which sucks worse is pointless.

Operational tempo in this game is grossly accelerated despite a bazillion fixes. It is, remains, and always has been much much much too fast. The two feed off each other here.

And I'm morally certain that the problems Pelton has with the combat system are in fact not at all the same ones I have. He would absolutely hate my ideal combat system because his pet Nazis would enter winter 1941 hurting quite badly. That is to say, attacking would actually start hurting the attacker. Bad. Cumulative attrition would add up.

No, what he wants is MOAR NAZIS.

The game is systematically biased in favor of the offense. I accept this as being true of both the Germans and the Soviets. I'm pretty sure that Pelton does not accept this, nor you in fact. You indeed want Axis offensive capabilities to increase at no cost. You'll happily pocket any penalties on the Sovs, though.

That's a mug's game.

< Message edited by Flaviusx -- 1/7/2014 1:05:42 PM >

_____________________________

WitE Alpha Tester

(in reply to Michael T)

Post #: 99

RE: The core problem with WitE+ - 1/7/2014 11:48:28 AM

Walloc

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

quote:

ORIGINAL: Txema

quote:

ORIGINAL: Pelton

The combat engine simply does not reflex the historical non-surrender combat ratio's at all.

1941 6 to 1
1942 5 to 1
1943 4 to 1
1944-45 3 to 1

The in game ratios are 1.5 to 1 starting in September 1942 which is simply way way off historical.

Hi Pelton,

Could you please tell us the in game ratios for each year? Do you think that the in game ratios are accurate for 1941?

How do you calculate them?

Thank you very much for all your testing work to improve WitE !!

Txema

He doesnt calculate them. He has a percieved notion on how it should be, which happens to be far far from history.
Ok lets use the sources that Pelton has used a few times trying to make an arguement.

For russian side casulties.
Soviet Casulties and combat loses in the Twintieth Century by G.F. Krivosheev.
Total losses for all causes expect prisnors as Pelton writes non surrender casulties, including navy losses.
Table 67, page 94. Plus text on page 93.

2.138.320 during 1941.

Note that this includes sick, forstbites and every thing else. the most common number use when talking / ppl reference to german losses is that they look at what is called "Bl�tige Verluste"
This only included combat losses. It doesnt include discharged, sick, frostbites, non combat casulties, psy cases and so on. Not only that. If a soldier that is wounded make it back to a field aid station / hospital that is further back than the unit own. The casulty isnt counted in the unit tally but in a seperate tally again not included in bl�tige verluste. Even if he dies later on. As per Zetterlings statical analytic work on Kursk.

This mean u cant compare "bl�tige verluste" with G.F. Krivosheev as this lncludes every thing. Using "bl�tige verluste" is when i read the most common numbers used when stating german losses. U tend to be an underrepresentation of losses as said higher up a number of categories of losses isnt included. Even Zetterling falls in his own trap from time to time.

On German side using "Das Deutsche Reich und der Zweite Weltkrieg". From the bunderswehr history department. Total losses in 1941 1.061.000. For sake of fairness excluding prisnors/missing as a number tho not all of the missing would have been prisnors at 44k leaving a total of 1.017.000.

Then we get to a problem. The russian numbers are including losses taken fighting the axis minor. That would either have to be removed from the russian total or the axis minor casulties added. As pelton specificly say german vs russian the thing to do is try and deduct casulties casued by axi minor. Unfortunatly its prolly all but impossible to know get figurs on how many of the russian casulties was caused by axis minors. Obviously its not a teh majority but looking at losses at the Oddessa campaign alone there is clearly some thign to deduct. 200k is prolly onthe low side a but gota use some number. If any one got better numbers please share.

Then u have 2.138.320-200.000/1017000= 1.9 to 1.

So if 6-1 is the correct non surrender combat ratio per Pelton numbers, which would limit the german combat casulties too just over 300k. Some what below the "blutige verluste" numbers by a factor of around 2.5.
Then apparently teh german suffered a tons of losses not related to combat. If u look at attrition in game its around twice as high for russian side too. So apparently the game need to introduce some sorta mechanism that gives outside of combat gives a hell of alot of casulties to teh german. Or Peltron assumpion of 6-1 combat casulties is off by around 300%.

No, i dont even wana bother doing the 42 and later number.

Kind regards,

Rasmus

< Message edited by Walloc -- 1/7/2014 1:26:53 PM >

(in reply to Txema)

Post #: 100

RE: The core problem with WitE+ - 1/7/2014 12:13:52 PM

loki100

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

quote:

ORIGINAL: Pelton

quote:

ORIGINAL: Walloc

quote:

ORIGINAL: chuckles

Having read Paul Carells "Hitler's war on Russia" It is interesting to note that it contains no references to supply problems.

Best Regards Chuck.

Smile, well i was spot on 3 4 months ago then, wasnt it. As I said then ill say it again. I strongly suggest u read some books that isnt based on die hard nazi with an agenda based on 1970s history view of eastern front. Alot has happend and been researched and written since.
Yes, i also have read the book. One should get as broad a perspective as possible. The more varied u read the more one can put the extrems in each end into perspective. This is a book from one end of the extrems.

Kind regards,

Rasmus

I agree Walloc. Hitler vs Stalin is a good one based on allot of data that it new. aka after the wall came down.

I think one of the old school ideals is that if you simply tell the tale based on historical data from "both sides" and not just one your labeled a Nazis freak.

This is part of our politics now which has infected every part of our lifes.

What ever you do ignore the message and kill the messanger.

Pelton

Walloc's point is that there is a lot of material that is *ahem* biased. The German generals were busily (a) blaming someone else why burnishing their own reputations, (b) trying to avoid the hangman's noose at Nuermberg. So the first wave of German works tend to blame Hitler as he helped with both goals. Then came a wave of stuff from outright Nazis like your mate Carrell. By the 60s they weren't going to get hung no more, so we get Hitler/Nazis were geniuses let down by effete generals.

On the Soviet side, the key driver was the various shifts between Stalin, Kruschev, Brezhnev. In first phase (say 45-55), it was all great Stalin and some commanders like Koniev got it in the neck - particularly over the disaster on the Reserve Front at the start of October 1941. The Kruschev era saw a well calibrated poke at the Stalin version and people like Zhukov got it for being too pro-Stalin. Koniev, who hated Zhukov had great fun with this theme. With the fall of Kruschev, say post-65, then his mistakes came up for criticism [1]. Across all this, poor Kirponos was always held to blame for the Kiev disaster.

Across this were the twists of post war Soviet military strategy where each was justified by pulling instances out of the Great Patriotic War. So both Kruschev's assumption that any war would be thermonuclear and the post-65 variant of assuming a conventional phase saw a lot of rewriting history.

So read any Soviet material in the period 45-75 in those lights.

But both German and Soviet historians produced work of merit across this period (I'd say initially more the Germans). By the late 70s Soviet histories of the GPW are actually pretty good and by the 80s they were opening their archives. Some Western historians such as Erickson actually had access to the Stavka day diaries as well as the Front reports in the late 70s - which is why his conclusions still hold up. There has obviously been a lot of work since on the archives but in many ways the state of historical research in Russia seems to be in reverse as Putin is not exactly into being open.

[1] - if you want chapter and verse I can take you through the controversy that exists over who had planned the Stalingrad counteroffensive.

< Message edited by loki100 -- 1/7/2014 1:16:03 PM >

_____________________________

(in reply to Peltonx)

Post #: 101

RE: The core problem with WitE+ - 1/7/2014 12:15:04 PM

pzgndr

Posts: 3170
Joined: 3/18/2004
From: Maryland
Status: offline

FWIW, I've always questioned how well a tactical level combat model tracking individual squads/tanks/guns can be extrapolated to large scale operational level campaigns spanning years. In theory it should work. But realistically it can never be perfect and every small imperfection snowballs over time until you get to a point where the results are skewed. Unless you create special rules/exceptions to deal with some issues, but ultimately those create new issues later on that inevitably lead to unrealistic and ahistorical results.

Back in the day, the old AH boardgames like The Russian Campaign and Russian Front were much more abstract but still fundamentally pretty good games. And with sudden death victory conditions, they were interesting and challenging to play as both sides throughout the entire conflict 1941-1945. While we all daydreamed about a game someday like WITE for more detail and such, I continue to question how well this really works in practice. I think these operational level games are good for limited operational level scenarios, but multi-year full-front campaigns bordering on the strategic level (without any strategic gameplay elements such as diplomacy, research, production, etc.) always seems to be a bridge too far. Be careful for what you wish for?

(in reply to Walloc)

Post #: 102

RE: The core problem with WitE+ - 1/7/2014 12:32:40 PM

Zovs

Posts: 6668
Joined: 2/23/2009
From: United States
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Bozo_the_Clown

quote:

Having read Paul Carells "Hitler's war on Russia" It is interesting to note that it contains no references to supply problems.

Isn't Paul Carell a pseudonym for Paul Carl Schmidt who was a high ranking Nazi? I haven't read his book but because an author doesn't mention supply problems on the eastern front doesn't necessarily mean that they didn't existed.

He was born: Paul Karl Schmidt and he was an Lieutenant Colonel in the civilian Allgemeine SS. He also worked as the chief press spokesman for Nazi Germany Foreign Minister Joachim von Ribbentrop.

I would not trust any of his writings, he glorified the Nazi's (not surprisingly).

_____________________________

Beta Tester for:
Flashpoint Campaigns: Sudden Storm
War in the East 1 & 2
WarPlan & WarPlan Pacific
Valor & Victory
DG CWIE 2
SPWW2 & SPMBT scenario creator

(in reply to Bozo_the_Clown)

Post #: 103

RE: The core problem with WitE+ - 1/7/2014 12:57:30 PM

SigUp

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

quote:

ORIGINAL: Walloc

On German side using "Das Deutsche Reich und der Zweite Weltkrieg". From the bunderswehr history department. Total losses in 1941 1.061.000. For sake of fairness excluding prisnors/missing as a number tho not all of the missing would have been prisnors at 44k leaving a total of 1.017.000.

A little correction Rasmus, the correct number of wounded and killed in action for the East Front in 1941 would be 767.938 men. Now I also don't know what share of Soviet soldiers were killed / wounded by the Axis minors, but for the sake of it let us assume 15%. Then it would leave the share of the Germans at 1.817.572 for a casualty ratio of 2.37 to 1.

As for Flav's point, absolutely agree with the attacking losses. Just consider: In December 1941 the total number for killed / wounded Germans was 72.499. That was the lowest month in 1941 (excluding June). The numbers from January to March 1942 unfortunately do not differentiate between killed / wounded / missing. If we utilize the average share of missing soldiers between June and December 1941 we arrive at 4.3%. After deducting this guesstimate from the casualty number we would get 268.147 killed and wounded between January and March 1942. Adding the December number on top of it and you have around 340.646 killed and wounded for the blizzard period for a monthly average of 85.162.

The same number for the period between June and November would be 695.439 for a monthly average of 131.215 men, which is 54% higher. In fact between June and September 1941 the Germans lost 504.178 killed and wounded (monthly average of 152.781) topping out in August 1941 at 182.141 killed and wounded. That shows, attacking really extracted a toll out of the German forces. Between June and September they lost the equivalent of 10 divisions per month!

< Message edited by SigUp -- 1/7/2014 2:03:18 PM >

(in reply to Walloc)

Post #: 104

RE: The core problem with WitE+ - 1/7/2014 1:18:46 PM

Peltonx

Posts: 7250
Joined: 4/9/2006
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Flaviusx

quote:

ORIGINAL: Michael T

I think the simple point Pelton is trying to make is that the combat system is so far out of whack that it really pales the problems with logistics.

It is also true that we have seen numerous and significant logistics fixes that wind back the Axis in 1941. Yet, we have seen nothing to enhance the real combat advantages that the Germans had in 41/42/43. They just don't exist in this game.

If these are his points I entirely agree with him.

And yet the logistics are still borked.

I really don't see how anybody can choose here between the combat model and the arcade supply system. Really, they both suck. Trying to determine which sucks worse is pointless.

Operational tempo in this game is grossly accelerated despite a bazillion fixes. It is, remains, and always has been much much much too fast. The two feed off each other here.

And I'm morally certain that the problems Pelton has with the combat system are in fact not at all the same ones I have. He would absolutely hate my ideal combat system because his pet Nazis would enter winter 1941 hurting quite badly. That is to say, attacking would actually start hurting the attacker. Bad. Cumulative attrition would add up.

No, what he wants is MOAR NAZIS.

The game is systematically biased in favor of the offense. I accept this as being true of both the Germans and the Soviets. I'm pretty sure that Pelton does not accept this, nor you in fact. You indeed want Axis offensive capabilities to increase at no cost. You'll happily pocket any penalties on the Sovs, though.

That's a mug's game.

A few ideas for fixes would be

1. Morale should not be the end all to be all, training and C&C should be. Poland had great morale vs Germany, but did little as tactics/C&C/training won the day.
2. Retreats should be allot easyer to come by, but at a much higher cost to poorly trained troops.
This is what Stalin was all about, blood for land at any cost.
3. The replacement system is wrong/off. Germany and WA's had to pull units from the front to refit units,
Russia tended to simply throw together new very poorly trained units and send them to the front.

I know I do not have all the answers or someone might have better.
Tweaking of the logistics system has helped, but it encourages turtling/running and really makes it peoples only option.

The current system is based more on pockets to get historical ratio's.

If the defending side simply avoids them,which is becoming easyer and easyer with each tweak to logistics then you end up with trench warfare.

Just some ideas I figured I would throw out there.

If they are any good they can stand up to being picked apart.

I want this thing to work and be historical and have it feel like a struggle.

I also believe VP conditions are very important as it would incourage attacking ect.

Russia had 12 million KIA and Germany 3.25 which is low so lets say 4 million with 3 million on Eastern Front.

That is 4 to 1, which if you average my yrs out 41-44 is about 4 to 1.

< Message edited by Pelton -- 1/7/2014 2:23:21 PM >

_____________________________

Beta Tester WitW & WitE

(in reply to Flaviusx)

Post #: 105

RE: The core problem with WitE+ - 1/7/2014 1:39:02 PM

Walloc

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

quote:

ORIGINAL: SigUp

quote:

ORIGINAL: Walloc

On German side using "Das Deutsche Reich und der Zweite Weltkrieg". From the bunderswehr history department. Total losses in 1941 1.061.000. For sake of fairness excluding prisnors/missing as a number tho not all of the missing would have been prisnors at 44k leaving a total of 1.017.000.

A little correction Rasmus, the correct number of for the East Front in 1941 would be 767.938 men. Now I also don't know what share of Soviet soldiers were killed / wounded by the Axis minors, but for the sake of it let us assume 15%. Then it would leave the share of the Germans at 1.817.572 for a casualty ratio of 2.37 to 1.

As for Flav's point, absolutely agree with the attacking losses. Just consider: In December 1941 the total number for killed / wounded Germans was 72.499. That was the lowest month in 1941 (excluding June). The numbers from January to March 1942 unfortunately do not differentiate between killed / wounded / missing. If we utilize the average share of missing soldiers between June and December 1941 we arrive at 4.3%. After deducting this guesstimate from the casualty number we would get 268.147 killed and wounded between January and March 1942. Adding the December number on top of it and you have around 340.646 killed and wounded for the blizzard period for a monthly average of 85.162.

The same number for the period between June and November would be 695.439 for a monthly average of 131.215 men, which is 54% higher. In fact between June and September 1941 the Germans lost 504.178 killed and wounded (monthly average of 152.781) topping out in August 1941 at 182.141 killed and wounded. That shows, attacking really extracted a toll out of the German forces. Between June and September they lost the equivalent of 10 divisions per month!

Thx for the correction sigup, but ur number doesnt include sick, discharged and so on, but only wounded and dead, right?

The 767k is the bl�tige verluste as it basicly the same as OKWs numbers, which defernatly is bl�tige verluste.
Heeresartzt figurs are by from 22 6 1941- 31 12 1941 for the East front 172.722 KIA, 621.308 WIA 35.873 MIA -30k ish from outside of the map. = 800k. Those numbers are for sure only bl�tige verluste as it says so in the german source.

My whole point is u need to compare comparible numbers why i used total losses. If we compare with "blutige verluste" numbers u'll need to remove the non combat casulties and so on the russian side too, to have comparible figurs.

If we only look at dead and wounded hafta u remove all those non combat casulties from the russian figurs. It amounts to 1.336.147 u will need to take from the russian figurs if u only look at wounded and killed. Then we at

2180k-1336k-15%(ur assumption mine, was closer to 10%)/767k or at ratio 0.94 to 1.

Kind regards,

Rasmus

< Message edited by Walloc -- 1/7/2014 2:52:54 PM >

(in reply to SigUp)

Post #: 106

RE: The core problem with WitE+ - 1/7/2014 1:45:54 PM

Walloc

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

quote:

ORIGINAL: Pelton

Russia had 12 million KIA and Germany 3.25 which is low so lets say 4 million with 3 million on Eastern Front.

That is 4 to 1, which if you average my yrs out 41-44 is about 4 to 1.

And yet again u can change the figurs but it doesnt make them correct. Again from the book u used as ur reference many times page 92 table 65.
Killed in action, died of wounds, disease, as a result of accidents etc: 6.885.100 total in the rusian army and navy.

The 12 mio presuambly includes civlians.

Kind regards,

Rasmus

< Message edited by Walloc -- 1/7/2014 2:50:50 PM >

(in reply to Peltonx)

Post #: 107

RE: The core problem with WitE+ - 1/7/2014 2:24:55 PM

Bozo_the_Clown

Posts: 890
Joined: 6/25/2013
From: Bozotown
Status: offline

quote:

Bozo you seem incapable of accepting that an elite player can cut a newbie to pieces. I am curious what you would think the limit of the Axis advance would be if no Soviet Army existed at all? Which in the hands of a totally incompetent player is not far from the real situation. Nothing at all can be determined from Peltons victories over some newbies, apart from the point that he is very good and they very bad.

MichaelT, how would you feel if someone would publicly call you "totally incompetent" and equate your performance in a game as not even being there. There are all kinds of players in this forum and they all need to be treated with respect.

quote:

Do you want an idiot proof version of WITE?

No, do you?

quote:

The thing I find amusing is that when the levels of skill are reversed it's quite all right with some that Germany gets no where and are totally trashed in 1941.

Who are you referring to? Not me I hope.

(in reply to Michael T)

Post #: 108

RE: The core problem with WitE+ - 1/7/2014 2:35:08 PM

Walloc

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

quote:

ORIGINAL: SigUp

As for Flav's point, absolutely agree with the attacking losses. Just consider: In December 1941 the total number for killed / wounded Germans was 72.499. That was the lowest month in 1941 (excluding June). The numbers from January to March 1942 unfortunately do not differentiate between killed / wounded / missing. If we utilize the average share of missing soldiers between June and December 1941 we arrive at 4.3%. After deducting this guesstimate from the casualty number we would get 268.147 killed and wounded between January and March 1942. Adding the December number on top of it and you have around 340.646 killed and wounded for the blizzard period for a monthly average of 85.162.

The same number for the period between June and November would be 695.439 for a monthly average of 131.215 men, which is 54% higher. In fact between June and September 1941 the Germans lost 504.178 killed and wounded (monthly average of 152.781) topping out in August 1941 at 182.141 killed and wounded. That shows, attacking really extracted a toll out of the German forces. Between June and September they lost the equivalent of 10 divisions per month!

About the december number. It per say isnt incorrect but again its the number of blutige verluste u cite there. That doesnt for example include frostbites. So while its technicly correct to say their "combat losses" was at the lowest in dec. It isnt the truth about lost german manpower. AS there tend to be alot more of frostbits, trenchfoot and so on in december than in july. So if u look at what the german army actually lost in manpower not only the "blutige verlust" which his directly related to only combat related causes. The numbers isnt right. So I would hafta say thats an big asterisk on the number, whether u lost by a bullit wound or by a case of frostbite doesnt really matter in terms of availble manpower left. So yes one can look at ur numbers and say, btw Zetterling makes same "mistake", and technicly say that during Winter the combat losses was less than during the fall/summer and that is correct but if u look at actual drain of Manpower. Be that combat plus non combat causes including sick, frostbites and so on, its not correct. The devil is in the detail here.

Kind regards,

Rasmus

< Message edited by Walloc -- 1/7/2014 3:40:39 PM >

(in reply to SigUp)

Post #: 109

RE: The core problem with WitE+ - 1/7/2014 3:53:16 PM

SigUp

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

Rasmus, I was specifically referring to the combat losses. As you see, I picked up on Flav's assessment of attacking losses being too low, which is correct. In the current WITE engine the Germans suffer the highest combat losses during the Soviet counterattack due to the engine's reliance on retreat losses. The frostbites etc. are actually taken care of in the game with the extra disruptions of the first winter. To bring it to a point, combat losses during the offensive period in WITE is too low, while combat losses during the blizzard is too high.

As for Soviet casualty numbers, the total population loss is generally given at 26.6 million (this number is utilized by the Russian government). Other works cite a number between 21.8 and 46 million with most hovering around 27-28. In regards to Krivosheev's number, they have to be viewed carefully as the numbers for 1941-42 were partly estimates due to missing documentation. In addition some scholars dispute Krivosheev's number for POW deaths. Mikhalev for example argues that the figures of Krivosheev can't be reconciled with the total men drafted and he has calculated a number of over 10 million. Yet other researches have claimed that the field reports, upon which Krivosheev's numbers are based didn't consider soldiers who died in rear area hospitals. These people used the Russian Military Archives' card files to assist in determining the number and arrived at 13-14 million. Some Russian researchers even go up to numbers in excess of 16 million.

(in reply to Walloc)

Post #: 110

RE: The core problem with WitE+ - 1/7/2014 4:17:57 PM

Oberst_Klink

Posts: 4778
Joined: 2/10/2008
From: Germany
Status: offline

CQ

Shan't we not focus on constructive feedback for Joel, Gary and the others rather than fighting it out in a thread? Seems like there's much CV and logistics being wasted to post insults and " I am the one who's RIGHT! " stuff...

I invite some of you to spend a few days up in the mountains of WVa. that would cool ya's down... wind-chill factor -5F...

Klink, Oberst

_____________________________

My Blog & on Twitter.
Visit CS Legion on Twitter & Facebook for updates.

(in reply to SigUp)

Post #: 111

RE: The core problem with WitE+ - 1/7/2014 4:34:52 PM

Bozo_the_Clown

Posts: 890
Joined: 6/25/2013
From: Bozotown
Status: offline

quote:

Shan't we not focus on constructive feedback for Joel, Gary and the others rather than fighting it out in a thread? Seems like there's much CV and logistics being wasted to post insults and " I am the one who's RIGHT! " stuff...

I wholeheartedly agree with this statement.

However, I do appreciate the discussion regarding the numbers because it's kind of important to base requests for design changes on the right set of numbers. You can't just make stuff up.

quote:

I invite some of you to spend a few days up in the mountains of WVa. that would cool ya's down... wind-chill factor -5F...

-40F were I live. Brrr

(in reply to Oberst_Klink)

Post #: 112

RE: The core problem with WitE+ - 1/7/2014 4:35:29 PM

Flaviusx

Posts: 7750
Joined: 9/9/2009
From: Southern California
Status: offline

Oberst, if you're looking for constructive advice, here is mine: get into the WITW beta and start testing. That's where the real action is. Pelton is in that Beta. The combat model in that beta is the only one that matters, really, going into the future.

This topic isn't about feedback but about grandstanding, and very poorly reasoned grandstanding at that. I'm just blowing raspberries, myself, not trying to win hearts and minds.

_____________________________

WitE Alpha Tester

(in reply to Oberst_Klink)

Post #: 113

RE: The core problem with WitE+ - 1/7/2014 4:52:53 PM

Wheat

Posts: 154
Joined: 6/17/2011
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Michael T

I think the simple point Pelton is trying to make is that the combat system is so far out of whack that it really pales the problems with logistics.

It is also true that we have seen numerous and significant logistics fixes that wind back the Axis in 1941. Yet, we have seen nothing to enhance the real combat advantages that the Germans had in 41/42/43. They just don't exist in this game.

If these are his points I entirely agree with him.

Yeah, as Flaviusx has said in so many words, Pelton is sometimes his own worst enemy. I agree 100% with this post.

(in reply to Michael T)

Post #: 114

RE: The core problem with WitE+ - 1/7/2014 4:59:26 PM

Wheat

Posts: 154
Joined: 6/17/2011
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Flaviusx

quote:

ORIGINAL: Michael T

I think the simple point Pelton is trying to make is that the combat system is so far out of whack that it really pales the problems with logistics.

It is also true that we have seen numerous and significant logistics fixes that wind back the Axis in 1941. Yet, we have seen nothing to enhance the real combat advantages that the Germans had in 41/42/43. They just don't exist in this game.

If these are his points I entirely agree with him.

And yet the logistics are still borked.

I really don't see how anybody can choose here between the combat model and the arcade supply system. Really, they both suck. Trying to determine which sucks worse is pointless.

Operational tempo in this game is grossly accelerated despite a bazillion fixes. It is, remains, and always has been much much much too fast. The two feed off each other here.

And I'm morally certain that the problems Pelton has with the combat system are in fact not at all the same ones I have. He would absolutely hate my ideal combat system because his pet Nazis would enter winter 1941 hurting quite badly. That is to say, attacking would actually start hurting the attacker. Bad. Cumulative attrition would add up.

No, what he wants is MOAR NAZIS.

The game is systematically biased in favor of the offense. I accept this as being true of both the Germans and the Soviets. I'm pretty sure that Pelton does not accept this, nor you in fact. You indeed want Axis offensive capabilities to increase at no cost. You'll happily pocket any penalties on the Sovs, though.

That's a mug's game.

And I agree with some of this. But I don't think Michael T or Pelton want an I win button for the Krauts.

(in reply to Flaviusx)

Post #: 115

RE: The core problem with WitE+ - 1/7/2014 5:32:16 PM

gingerbread

Posts: 2994
Joined: 1/4/2007
From: Sweden
Status: offline

There is an aspect that has not been covered as I see it, and that is the 2by3 design decision to not have historical shackles or mandatory actions imposed on the players.

With that is mind and accepted as an axiom for this simulation, it is obvious that the Soviet casualties are not going to be historical during '41, since no player would make repeated unsupported human wave attacks that was made in reality. This is already reflected in the lower replacement rates. A lot of men never enter the rolls.

As to the design decision itself, I would assume that it is at least partially made on commercial reasons. Who would want to play the Soviets if you have to make mandatory but pointless attacks. Can you imagine the flak in the forum that such a rule would generate? The exploit & patch to nerf exploit would go on forever.

The benchmark that is still somewhat useful is the size of the OOB and here the early years numbers are a bit high, on both sides. The GHC does not want to suffer historical losses attacking so they try to pocket. This requires fuel and guess where the exploit & patch effort have been highest?

There is already a logistic break on the Soviets in the vehicle pool number. I'll admit that it is not as tuned as I would like it, but there has not been that many posts about it. I guess that players make do with what they have.

TL;DR Soviet casualties reflected in lower than historical replacements. Axis does not want to loose troops.

(in reply to Wheat)

Post #: 116

RE: The core problem with WitE+ - 1/7/2014 5:50:05 PM

Peltonx

Posts: 7250
Joined: 4/9/2006
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Walloc

quote:

ORIGINAL: Pelton

Russia had 12 million KIA and Germany 3.25 which is low so lets say 4 million with 3 million on Eastern Front.

That is 4 to 1, which if you average my yrs out 41-44 is about 4 to 1.

And yet again u can change the figurs but it doesnt make them correct. Again from the book u used as ur reference many times page 92 table 65.
Killed in action, died of wounds, disease, as a result of accidents etc: 6.885.100 total in the rusian army and navy.

The 12 mio presuambly includes civlians.

Kind regards,

Rasmus

No,

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/World_War_II_casualties

20 million is the general total for both,

Military run from 8 to 14 million and some more.

Most agree that 12 million military is the best guess with another 8 - 17 million non military.

I can copy and past more sites, but this one gives the general numbers

Some say 12 million and another 17 non military.

WWII Death Count Per Country:

Country/Military/Civilian/Total

USSR 12 million 17 million 29 million
Poland 597,000 5.86 million 6.27 million
Germany 3.25 million 2.44 million 5.69 million
Yugoslavia 305,000 1.35 million 1.66 million
Romania 450,000 465,000 915,000
Hungary 200,000 600,000 800,000
France 245,000 350,000 595,000
Italy 380,000 153,000 533,000
Great Britain 403,000 92,700 495,000
United States 407,000 6,000 413,000
Czechoslovakia 7,000 315,000 322,000
Holland 13,700 236,000 249,000
Greece 19,000 140,000 159,000
Belgium 76,000 23,000 99,000

< Message edited by Pelton -- 1/7/2014 6:50:47 PM >

_____________________________

Beta Tester WitW & WitE

(in reply to Walloc)

Post #: 117

RE: The core problem with WitE+ - 1/7/2014 5:55:27 PM

Peltonx

Posts: 7250
Joined: 4/9/2006
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: gingerbread

There is an aspect that has not been covered as I see it, and that is the 2by3 design decision to not have historical shackles or mandatory actions imposed on the players.

With that is mind and accepted as an axiom for this simulation, it is obvious that the Soviet casualties are not going to be historical during '41, since no player would make repeated unsupported human wave attacks that was made in reality. This is already reflected in the lower replacement rates. A lot of men never enter the rolls.

As to the design decision itself, I would assume that it is at least partially made on commercial reasons. Who would want to play the Soviets if you have to make mandatory but pointless attacks. Can you imagine the flak in the forum that such a rule would generate? The exploit & patch to nerf exploit would go on forever.

The benchmark that is still somewhat useful is the size of the OOB and here the early years numbers are a bit high, on both sides. The GHC does not want to suffer historical losses attacking so they try to pocket. This requires fuel and guess where the exploit & patch effort have been highest?

There is already a logistic break on the Soviets in the vehicle pool number. I'll admit that it is not as tuned as I would like it, but there has not been that many posts about it. I guess that players make do with what they have.

TL;DR Soviet casualties reflected in lower than historical replacements. Axis does not want to loose troops.

I agree, but the issue is not 1941, but 42-45.

If your simply going to run and then know that you will not suffer historical losses aka 1.5 to 1 and not 4 to 1 on average then why not run?

The issue has zero to do with players fighting forward or running.

42-45 there were few pockets made so the base ratio's at a mini should be 3 to 1.

We are not talking about player moves but the simple fact of basic combat results per battle on average over a yr.

< Message edited by Pelton -- 1/7/2014 6:56:21 PM >

_____________________________

Beta Tester WitW & WitE

(in reply to gingerbread)

Post #: 118

RE: The core problem with WitE+ - 1/7/2014 6:02:31 PM

Peltonx

Posts: 7250
Joined: 4/9/2006
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Oberst_Klink

CQ

Shan't we not focus on constructive feedback for Joel, Gary and the others rather than fighting it out in a thread? Seems like there's much CV and logistics being wasted to post insults and " I am the one who's RIGHT! " stuff...

I invite some of you to spend a few days up in the mountains of WVa. that would cool ya's down... wind-chill factor -5F...

Klink, Oberst

Not sure why anyone would be up-set?

This is simple basic math, based on the game results vs historical results.

I have played more then enough to know the game results from September 42 to Jan 45. I have posted them in many threads so we have data +++

We know the historical results.

Not sure why anyone would be up-set at simply looking at the numbers and
wanting to get the game to more closely reflect them?

I have made positive suggestions and am looking for input to them ( good and bad), I simply do not see how that would upset people?

_____________________________

Beta Tester WitW & WitE

(in reply to Oberst_Klink)

Post #: 119

RE: The core problem with WitE+ - 1/7/2014 6:13:43 PM

Rasputitsa

Posts: 2903
Joined: 6/30/2001
From: Bedfordshire UK
Status: offline

Just coming to the end of 'Demolishing the Myth - The Tank Battle at Prokhorovka, Kursk, July 1943' - Valeriy Zamulin and it joins some of the small number of books that have genuinely changed history for me. 'The Bloody Triangle' - Victor J. Kamenir graphically described the state of Soviet forces in 1941, explaining the initial rapid successes for the Axis during Barbarossa. 'Demolishing the Myth' shows that in 1943 the same Soviet command and control problems were still there, lack of co-ordination with other ground and air units, lack of reconnaissance, units knowing little about enemy, or even friendly dispositions, higher HQ setting unrealistic tasks, all of which results in tragically high casualty rates.

The main theme is that the biggest tank battle in history, never happened, at least not in the way it has been described up to now. It wasn't a chaotic encounter battle with a surprised enemy, the II SS PzK knew the Soviet tank attack was coming on the 12th July and where it would take place, going over to the defensive on that part of the front, to inflict maximum casualties on the attacking Soviet tank corps of the 5th Guards Tank Army, whilst continuing to advance on the flanks of the expected attack. It didn't involve 1500 tanks and there was no great melee of AFVs, most of the damage was done by anti-tank guns and tanks firing from ambush positions on expected lines of advance. Tanks and guns did become intermingled, but not on the scale that has been previously presented.

Quote : The brigade has been fighting under conditions of complete ignorance of the enemy's strength that has been concentrated on this sector; without sufficient attack preparation: and on an unsuitable tactical line, which has restricted the maneuver of tanks and infantry - all of this has contributed to heavy casualties in the brigade.

The command staff is poorly directing the fighting. It does not always skilfully assess the situation and make decisions. - Col. Drozdov, 11th Guards Mechanised Brigade

This is echoed in the reports of many other tank units, thrown hurriedly into the attack, expecting to expand and exploit an existing breakthrough, but finding themselves blundering into a prepared and unbroken enemy.

The Germans seemed so well prepared on the sector of the Soviet attack, that one Soviet commander commented that it looked as though the Germans had been in their positions for a month, rather than having just occupied them the day before. There is a stark contrast in command and control abilities even at this late stage in 1943.

None of this changes the eventual result of the 1943 summer campaign, but it didn't happen the way it has been portrayed.

The point is, that in attempting to set an historical framework for the game, the problem is what is that historical framework to be. It is clear that much of the original story is from the memoirs and reports of Gen. Rostmistrov - 5th Guards Tank Army and Col. Gen. Vatutin - Voronezh Front who, having thrown the strategic reserve into the battle with little preparation, needed another narrative to explain the huge losses.

The German command and control advantage was hugely significant at the tactical combat level, where the game system is working, even if it was sometimes pitiful at the operational and strategic level, but then the player fills that slot.

This is not looking for a 'Germans win button', but a more realistic balance of the capabilities of the two sides, as well as just adjusting logistics and OOBs. Even 'War in Russia' from the 1980's had a feature that some plotted movement for Soviet forces, in the initial turns of the campaign game, would randomly fail to be enacted, to reflect the command and control problems experienced by the Soviet side.

WiTE gives the Soviet side command and control abilities that historically did not exist, requiring the game to be re-balance by changing other features, which then do not match historical levels.

< Message edited by Rasputitsa -- 1/7/2014 7:31:13 PM >

_____________________________

"In politics stupidity is not a handicap" - Napoleon

�A people which is able to say everything becomes able to do everything� - Napoleon

�Among those who dislike oppression are many who like to oppress" - Napoleon

(in reply to Peltonx)

Post #: 120