Future fixes

Matrix Games Forums

Forums Register Login Photo Gallery Member List Search Calendars FAQ

My Profile Inbox Address Book My Subscription My Forums Log Out

Future fixes

View related threads: (in this forum | in all forums)

Logged in as: Guest

Users viewing this topic: none

Printable Version

All Forums >> [Current Games From Matrix.] >> [World War II] >> Germany at War: Barbarossa 1941 >> Mods and Scenarios >> Future fixes

Page: [1]

Message

<< Older Topic Newer Topic >>

Future fixes - 9/19/2018 10:26:17 PM

AceDuceTrey

Posts: 100
Joined: 8/14/2011
Status: offline

Divisions are "out of proportions"/TOO WEAK strength wise when compared to Brigades (X3/2), Regiments (X2), and
Battalions (X3}. This can realistically be fixed by simply allowing Divisions to use BOTH their action points to
ATTACK. This would give them a cumulative attack strength of 30.

Also, in order to demonstrate the concept of INITIATIVE, anytime the "phasing side" performs a (successful) attack
against the enemy, the enemy must forfeit an action point in its next phasing turn IF it defends itself or retreats. The non-phasing units would only forfeit both their action points if taking two actions; and only be able to retreat after using both action points. This way ALL units on both sides may only expend two action points per turn (not
counting forced multiple retreats).

Post #: 1

RE: Future fixes - 9/20/2018 5:05:46 AM

Ronald Wendt

Posts: 1880
Joined: 6/8/2009
Status: offline

Hi AceDuceTrey,

it would be interesting to know if many other players feel that divisions are too weak. Thats not easy to judge as they can have so many variations with the different types of equipment, the support units and the experience.

While its true that they might seem a bit weak in some compositions during an single engagement, they ususally prevail in the long run due to their advantages.

Basically i would not mess around with that concept as it is a fundamental one, unless a great number of players agreed this is a major problem.

Regards,

_____________________________

Ronald Wendt
Phobetor website
Phobetor on Facebook

(in reply to AceDuceTrey)

Post #: 2

RE: Future fixes - 9/20/2018 2:22:18 PM

AceDuceTrey

Posts: 100
Joined: 8/14/2011
Status: offline

Good Point! Ronald
The strength attack "scale" of 15:10:7:5 may be preferable to the 30 for divisions; particularly since you would need to double
the cost. For me, I can adjust my thinking of Divs as Bdes, Bdes as Regs, and Regs as reinforced Bns.
However, my second comment on gaining and maintaining the INITIATIVE is an essential "Principle of War" and is one of the major faults with IGOUGO war games. Think of it this way: the phasing unit spends the entire day engaging a defender; then that defender spends the entire SAME day engaging a different unit.

(in reply to Ronald Wendt)

Post #: 3

RE: Future fixes - 9/23/2018 11:33:15 AM

AngrySwan

Posts: 435
Joined: 10/3/2013
Status: offline

Hi AceDuceTrey,

Depends on how badly the division has suffered. In the latest Lwow scenario test the 257th infantry division ran into a sudden counterattack of 3-4 units, was nearly destroyed, had to be pulled out next turn and spent another turn getting replacements. And they were lucky they could retreat, it could have been worse.

I guess every type of game has its pros and cons. Real time in my opinion is perfect for multiplayer with each player controlling one man and not so good for grand strategies (after all, the real timeline of Op Barbarossa is 2-4 months in the most optimistic scenario and 6 months assuming that the war ends in 1941 after the fall of Moscow). IGOUGO and WEGO have the benefit that you can control a large number of units but loss of detail of individual battles is the price (in real time it is the other way, you can have super detailed situation in one sector but that sector is all you get.) Of course there are ways to improve.

There could be combined attacks if possible in this game, like several divisions attack one (as you can do in Decisive Campaigns or Wasteland Interactive games) but then you also need a second echelon of attackers to destroy the retreating enemy. An enemy who has retreated will return and fight again. And sometimes the scenario ends after you destroy so many points, so I do not want to see the enemy running, I want him destroyed.

Not sure about the division size. In 1941 many Soviet divisions are understrength and maybe they seem weaker because of that? By the end of the year some of them
get really tough, especially the defenders of Moscow.

(in reply to AceDuceTrey)

Post #: 4

RE: Future fixes - 9/24/2018 7:36:11 PM

AngrySwan

Posts: 435
Joined: 10/3/2013
Status: offline

By the way, if you ever feel like making a smaller scale mod that would be interesting to see and play. Some games gave different scales depending on the mod, like Strategic Command II can be either a global conflict or one campaign or one operation.

(in reply to AngrySwan)

Post #: 5