What's the Added Value of Having CPP in the Game?

Matrix Games Forums

Forums Register Login Photo Gallery Member List Search Calendars FAQ

My Profile Inbox Address Book My Subscription My Forums Log Out

What's the Added Value of Having CPP in the Game?

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 2 >> What's the Added Value of Having CPP in the Game?

Page: [1]

Message

<< Older Topic Newer Topic >>

What's the Added Value of Having CPP in the Game? - 5/14/2021 10:05:19 AM

Kriegsspieler

Posts: 205
Joined: 12/3/2006
Status: offline

By now, I have spent enough time with the game to appreciate how completely essential it is to properly manage CPP if you're going to get anywhere with the ground warfare part of things. So I'm not asking for advice about how to manage CPP.

Instead, I have a more basic question about what CPP are. What real-world feature of combat units are they meant to stand for? We already have represented in this game TOE%, morale, fatigue, experience, supply, ammo and fuel, for those units that need it. So what's missing from that list for which CPP are needed? The manual states (23.2) that CPP "reflect the advantage of allowing units to rest and plan before entering combat." To me that sounds like what is already captured in other concepts, like fatigue, supply and ammo.

One possible answer is that CPP reflect the value of staff work, briefings, placement of artillery and other support, and all the other stuff that are completely invisible in most war games. I would accept that, if that's what the thinking is that informs their use.

Alternatively, are CPP some kind of weighted average of the other factors that I listed above? Do you gain CPP at the same rate, even if your unit is in poor supply, short of ammo, your morale is crap, and it has big gaps in its TOE? The way you gain CPP -- sitting in place on hexes, preferably not next to enemy units -- suggests that CPP have their own secret sauce, but honestly I do not know.

Anyway, I'm not arguing with the design here, jut trying to gain some enlightenment.

Post #: 1

RE: What's the Added Value of Having CPP in the Game? - 5/14/2021 10:24:47 AM

mikael333

Posts: 66
Joined: 4/10/2021
Status: offline

Great question. I also struggle to understand the difference between CPP and fatigue and tend to think of them simply as opposites of each other. You also have combat prepration bonus in HOI but there it is linked to a particular offensive plan.

< Message edited by mikael333 -- 5/14/2021 10:25:20 AM >

(in reply to Kriegsspieler)

Post #: 2

RE: What's the Added Value of Having CPP in the Game? - 5/14/2021 10:51:17 AM

amatteucci

Posts: 389
Joined: 5/14/2000
From: ITALY
Status: offline

In my opinion the difference between CPP and fatigue is the same between resting and planning/preparing for something.

As the OP said, staff work, preparation, moving to assembly areas, issuing orders, fireplans, schedules, timetables, etc.

This is what CPP, IMHO, are intended to be, whether the current engine models them in the best way, that's another issue.

(in reply to mikael333)

Post #: 3

RE: What's the Added Value of Having CPP in the Game? - 5/14/2021 10:58:40 AM

amatteucci

Posts: 389
Joined: 5/14/2000
From: ITALY
Status: offline

[double post]

< Message edited by amatteucci -- 5/14/2021 7:23:27 PM >

(in reply to mikael333)

Post #: 4

RE: What's the Added Value of Having CPP in the Game? - 5/14/2021 11:17:31 AM

mikael333

Posts: 66
Joined: 4/10/2021
Status: offline

I get the difference between planning and resting. But the planning itself is in the head of the player. The game does not know where you want to attack. So the steps in game what you do to gain CPPs are basically the same as you would for resting (like e.g. march only through friendly territory). So for me as is the two concepts feel redundant.

< Message edited by mikael333 -- 5/14/2021 11:20:00 AM >

(in reply to amatteucci)

Post #: 5

RE: What's the Added Value of Having CPP in the Game? - 5/14/2021 11:29:07 AM

loki100

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

they have different adverse effects, high fatigue will cost you MP/CV and at the worst morale, lack of CPP merely means a lack of the advantages. On the other hand low fatigue brings no particular advantages while clearly high CPP is very important.

Its feasible to have low fatigue (good) and low CPP (less so) so they are not simple opposites in that regard. Its very unlikely you will have high CPP (good) and high fatigue (bad) at the same time as the tools for managing CPP retention/regain are essentially the same as you'd use to keep fatigue under control.

So being pragmatic, I rarely look at fatigue in isolation and more tend to focus on my CPP values.

_____________________________

(in reply to mikael333)

Post #: 6

RE: What's the Added Value of Having CPP in the Game? - 5/14/2021 11:45:32 AM

mikael333

Posts: 66
Joined: 4/10/2021
Status: offline

Thanks, loki. I feel like whether something is a penalty or a lack of an advantage is not very meaningful.
To say that some HQ is an assault army and spend valuable admin points on that (representing staff work) is representing planning. So in fact the mechanisms to lose fatigue and to gain CPP are slightly different, as they should to justify to have both concepts.

(in reply to loki100)

Post #: 7

RE: What's the Added Value of Having CPP in the Game? - 5/14/2021 12:27:17 PM

Kriegsspieler

Posts: 205
Joined: 12/3/2006
Status: offline

Well, I'm still not grasping the essentials here. Loki said that the management of fatigue -- i.e., reducing it -- is basically similar to managing CPP to increase it, which makes sense to me. But if that's the case, then why have CPP represented as a separate value at all? Why not just use fatigue as a negative modifier on CV?

Again, I'm not arguing whether CPP is a good design choice, I just want to know why someone in the development team thought that it was necessary.

And as for CPP as a stand-in for staff work and pre-battle planning and all that: I originally raised this because it was the way that I could best comprehend the concept underlying CPP. But if that's what it stands for, shouldn't a leader's admin value affect the rate of accumulation of CPP? Chapter 15.3.4 doesn't hint at any such effect.

< Message edited by Kriegsspieler -- 5/14/2021 12:28:12 PM >

(in reply to mikael333)

Post #: 8

RE: What's the Added Value of Having CPP in the Game? - 5/14/2021 2:10:43 PM

loki100

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

my view is primarily it reflects taking time to get things well organised. That is primarily a benefit to the side planning an offensive but also on the defence. A unit that has been static (or on the same sector) for a number of turns gains as well (remember there are a lot of defensive gains off CPP).

The original had the HQ build up concept which tried to reflect this and was rather bolted onto the game engine - and was thus endless exploited and rebalanced. CPP is pretty organic, it doesn't pop out of the ether, you have to earn by time, unit management etc

the oorrelation to fatigue makes sense in that the things that reduce unit fatigue tend to build CPP. Equally constantly attacking, moving, ending turns in semi-hostile terrain is tiring and slows CPP regain.

I started testing WiTE2 well over 5 years back and you could reasonably have described most of the design as 'WiTW goes East', looking back at my notes, CPP was one of the things that had already been changed when all we had to test was T1-18 (no winter rules). So its very embedded in the core of the game design and balance.

Could regain reflect admin soores, or morale scores or ... yes, but why complicate when the current rules are relatively simple and easy for a player to apply?

_____________________________

(in reply to Kriegsspieler)

Post #: 9

RE: What's the Added Value of Having CPP in the Game? - 5/14/2021 2:39:59 PM

Kriegsspieler

Posts: 205
Joined: 12/3/2006
Status: offline

Thanks, loki, the mists of incomprehension begin to lift a little! So this does actually resemble in intent the "planning bonus" that one gets in Hearts of Iron, although units on defense in HOI can't get that bonus. And here I agree with what this game does. Units on defense ought to build up CPP, as an obvious reflection of where they have chosen to place and harden their defensive strong points, even where they have rolled out the barbed wire! So all well and good.

So how specifically does this differ from what the original WitE used? I played that game for a good while, but it has been a several years at least since I've given it a look.

EDIT: Sorry, one more point. I don't think it would add to the complexity of the game at all to have CPP be modifiable by a leader's admin rating and one or two other factors. In fact, it would clarify the game, because it would make CPP more transparent as a concept. But it's probably not the most vital thing at present.

< Message edited by Kriegsspieler -- 5/14/2021 2:43:36 PM >

(in reply to loki100)

Post #: 10

RE: What's the Added Value of Having CPP in the Game? - 5/14/2021 3:39:31 PM

loki100

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

HQBU is a completely arbitrary concept, you select a HQ and ... voila ... extra supplies etc appear. It led to an endless cycle of abuse and patching. The great thing about CPP is it is organic to the game

so whether its well balanced is one question, but if it needs modifying it can be done in the natural context of a game, would be easy to tweak speed of gain/loss, some of the effects and so on

_____________________________

(in reply to Kriegsspieler)

Post #: 11

RE: What's the Added Value of Having CPP in the Game? - 5/14/2021 4:40:31 PM

GloriousRuse

Posts: 906
Joined: 10/26/2013
Status: offline

I think the answer you�re looking for lies with dead carl � it�s friction, and the nigh on herculean efforts it takes to combat it. CPP is in many ways the sum of friction and applied work to counter it. It�s not just planning and dissemination (and we do tend to lose sight of those facets with our nigh on godlike information, agility, staff support, and control of the battlefield that we take for granted as players) and, though obviously those have their part, it�s the endless series of events from the lowest squad rehearsal to a corps planner figuring out just who new guy over in division artillery is and how to work with him, finding out just where you ACTUALLY need the radios to be, to finally actually fixing that niggling battalion wide problem that you�ve been kluging over, and on and on and on. Your equipment and people can be very fresh, but your organization can be a pile of chaos objectified. And that chaos only grows as operations continue � no one in a division is on the same page by day three of an operation, let alone after sprinting across a hundred miles in an unexpected direction, a major attack, and then occupying a city � artillery batteries run into supply columns on a ne lane road because someone didn�t get the new movement schedule, a pile of ammunition sits in the wrong place for six hours because a general made a quick change at midnight and his staff only had he time to throw out a few basic orders before dawn, that flak battery that got repurposed to a different regiment because of the changing situation doesn�t have the right radio frequencies just yet so they�re working on runners�

All of these things can be solved with processes. Those processes take time to restore order. That�s CPP; if you�ve taken the time t set things straight, to beat down the vast and endless series of compounding problems that derail operations, you have CPP. If you haven�t, you don�t.

When you don�t have time to make it work, one of two things happen: you rely on leaders and staffs to get it done anyhow (the German answer in �41, with high admin, morale, and initiative ratings helping to compensate for a lot of the CPP issues), or things start to fall apart (soviet �41, where your �divisions� without time to plan and prepare are little more than masses of men you hopefully throw in the right directions and you don�t have the professionals to make things work on thefly).

(in reply to mikael333)

Post #: 12

RE: What's the Added Value of Having CPP in the Game? - 5/14/2021 4:58:15 PM

Bamilus

Posts: 973
Joined: 4/30/2010
From: The Old Northwest
Status: offline

I like the CPP addition. Adds a new wrinkle to counter-attacking and I think it really helps the Soviets in winter 41/42 because they can easily have many units with high CPP at that point. I think it's a much better concept than HQ buildup.

_____________________________

Paradox Interactive Forum Refugee

(in reply to GloriousRuse)

Post #: 13

RE: What's the Added Value of Having CPP in the Game? - 5/14/2021 5:13:59 PM

Kriegsspieler

Posts: 205
Joined: 12/3/2006
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Bamilus

I like the CPP addition. Adds a new wrinkle to counter-attacking and I think it really helps the Soviets in winter 41/42 because they can easily have many units with high CPP at that point. I think it's a much better concept than HQ buildup.

Right. That is clear from what loki said about the way HQ buildup could deliver extra supplies at the push of a button.

Thanks for this most interesting discussion!

So let me shift the terms a bit and ask about the comparative advantages of bringing CPP into this game. A few months back, before I knew very much about WitE2 -- except to know that yes, it really would appear before I leave this mortal plane! -- I dusted off TOAW and reinstalled it on my new laptop, specifically to play again the really nice Korean War scenario that the game offers. You may recall that TOAW splits unit characteristics into proficiency (i.e., experience), readiness (a function of both TOE% and fatigue), morale, and supplies. Now, at the time I became reengaged again with TOAW, I recall being impressed by how rich its assessment of a unit's status was, and how "realistic" it felt. So what does this game do better? I'll grant that the issue of not being in zones of control to build up CPP is a nice inspiration, and for the reasons described in the manual -- patrols, low-level wear and tear on men and equipment, etc. But what else can be said about it?

(in reply to Bamilus)

Post #: 14

RE: What's the Added Value of Having CPP in the Game? - 5/14/2021 5:28:56 PM

carlkay58

Posts: 8650
Joined: 7/25/2010
Status: offline

One of the results of CPP in the game is that you have pauses. There is a pause occasionally between offensives. So you have Operation Barbarossa go off in June 41. This tapers to a close in late July to early August in all three Army Groups for the Axis. There is a pause where the combat units are rested, refitted, and moved around and then a new set of operations (such as Operation Typhoon) are launched. One problem from the previous iterations of the system (such as WitE1, and WitW) is that you don't see those pauses occur. That leads to some swings in operations, casualties, and mobility that leads to some really bad non-historical results. This also reinforces the 'snowball' effect from the previous games. When the offensives have to pause occasionally, then the defense can do things such as counterattack or have time to recover their lines and such. This helps reduce the steamroller effects that both WitE1 and WitW could suffer from.

(in reply to Kriegsspieler)

Post #: 15

RE: What's the Added Value of Having CPP in the Game? - 5/14/2021 5:56:41 PM

Kriegsspieler

Posts: 205
Joined: 12/3/2006
Status: offline

Even with my limited experience so far -- I'm working through Road to Leningrad before taking on the whole thing -- I would agree that those pauses are quite prominent in the gameplay. The thing is, I'm not entirely sure how novel they are. In the original WitE. you had to pause when you outran your supply, to cite the most obvious instance, and I recall too that after a time you had to send your lead elements of any particular formation back for refits after they had accumulated too much fatigue and had chewed through too much equipment. But I do agree that this system feels more subtle in how you manage the pace of combat and intensity of the engagement.

< Message edited by Kriegsspieler -- 5/14/2021 5:58:08 PM >

(in reply to carlkay58)

Post #: 16

RE: What's the Added Value of Having CPP in the Game? - 5/15/2021 1:20:08 AM

Zemke

Posts: 642
Joined: 1/14/2003
From: Oklahoma
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: GloriousRuse

I think the answer you�re looking for lies with dead carl � it�s friction, and the nigh on herculean efforts it takes to combat it. CPP is in many ways the sum of friction and applied work to counter it. It�s not just planning and dissemination (and we do tend to lose sight of those facets with our nigh on godlike information, agility, staff support, and control of the battlefield that we take for granted as players) and, though obviously those have their part, it�s the endless series of events from the lowest squad rehearsal to a corps planner figuring out just who new guy over in division artillery is and how to work with him, finding out just where you ACTUALLY need the radios to be, to finally actually fixing that niggling battalion wide problem that you�ve been kluging over, and on and on and on. Your equipment and people can be very fresh, but your organization can be a pile of chaos objectified. And that chaos only grows as operations continue � no one in a division is on the same page by day three of an operation, let alone after sprinting across a hundred miles in an unexpected direction, a major attack, and then occupying a city � artillery batteries run into supply columns on a ne lane road because someone didn�t get the new movement schedule, a pile of ammunition sits in the wrong place for six hours because a general made a quick change at midnight and his staff only had he time to throw out a few basic orders before dawn, that flak battery that got repurposed to a different regiment because of the changing situation doesn�t have the right radio frequencies just yet so they�re working on runners�

All of these things can be solved with processes. Those processes take time to restore order. That�s CPP; if you�ve taken the time t set things straight, to beat down the vast and endless series of compounding problems that derail operations, you have CPP. If you haven�t, you don�t.

When you don�t have time to make it work, one of two things happen: you rely on leaders and staffs to get it done anyhow (the German answer in �41, with high admin, morale, and initiative ratings helping to compensate for a lot of the CPP issues), or things start to fall apart (soviet �41, where your �divisions� without time to plan and prepare are little more than masses of men you hopefully throw in the right directions and you don�t have the professionals to make things work on thefly).

GloriousRuse, your statement above is the most eloquent definition and description of friction in war I have ever read! Simply Beautiful!

_____________________________

"Actions Speak Louder than Words"

(in reply to GloriousRuse)

Post #: 17