RE: Fix the TB replacement system!

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: Fix the TB replacement system!

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 >> RE: Fix the TB replacement system!

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

Message

<< Older Topic Newer Topic >>

RE: Fix the TB replacement system! - 1/22/2022 2:49:54 PM

malyhin1517

Posts: 1426
Joined: 9/20/2015
From: Ukraine Dnepropetrovsk
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: ShaggyHiK
As a Soviet player, I don't want to lose cannons in divisions early on. According to this, divisions consisting to a greater extent of infantry are more economically advantageous for me than divisions with a large number of guns.

I am not saying that it will be beneficial not to have guns in the army, but only that if there is a choice to lose a division of 10k people and 50 guns, it is more profitable than a division of 14k people and 180 guns.

My game already has a front line and almost no environments. But I have to send troops for guns to the reserve. In addition, a number of new units (militia divisions, naval rifle brigades, some tank divisions) arrive on the map without guns and tanks, and I also have to send them to the reserve! During the war, often new divisions were sent to the front without guns, but they received weapons after arriving at the front after being unloaded from the trains. Now this is not happening.

_____________________________

Sorry, i use an online translator :(

(in reply to ShaggyHiK)

Post #: 31

RE: Fix the TB replacement system! - 1/22/2022 8:14:18 PM

xhoel

Posts: 3219
Joined: 6/24/2017
From: Germany
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: ShaggyHiK

But I am also forced to say that with an increase in replenishments on the Eastern Front, the question will inevitably arise that the Soviet army cannot inflict losses on the German army similar to historical losses.

But that is not true though. Combat and losses in the Axis TBs are minimal in the span of 1941-late 1943, so this will not affect the size of the troops in the east. It will have an impact by late 1944 and 1945 after the Allies have landed in France but I dont see an issue with that.

The Soviets are doing fine with the losses they inflict as far as I have seen, what data are you using that shows otherwise?

@maly: I think that may have more to do with what equipment you have available. In the early war the Soviets have a severe lack of guns so that may be causing problems. Plus the bug that caused shell units to fill up automatically has been fixed, so the Soviets should have a lot more manpower and equipment to use for their field armies now.

@Stamb: I dont think I have ever seen a unit go to exactly 100% TOE even after being on refit. A unit that has more than 90% of its TOE is considered full strength in my eyes.

_____________________________

AAR WITW: Gotterdammerung 43-45
http://www.matrixgames.com/forums/tm.asp?m=4490035
AAR WITE: A Clash of Titans 41-45
http://www.matrixgames.com/forums/tm.asp?m=4488465
WitE 2 Tester and Test Coordinator

(in reply to ShaggyHiK)

Post #: 32

RE: Fix the TB replacement system! - 1/22/2022 9:22:16 PM

ShaggyHiK

Posts: 166
Joined: 10/10/2021
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: xhoel
But that is not true though. Combat and losses in the Axis TBs are minimal in the span of 1941-late 1943, so this will not affect the size of the troops in the east. It will have an impact by late 1944 and 1945 after the Allies have landed in France but I dont see an issue with that.

I said that the Soviet army is not able to inflict losses on the German army.
From the beginning of the game, starting already from the first move, with such a change, the German army on MAP(East) will tend to increase its numbers, which historically has not happened. Simply because the German army bears 80-90% of its losses in the phase of logistical losses.
That is, a drawdown in the size of the German army on MAP will not follow, which will become a serious strengthening of the German army in the winter of 41-42, especially in 42-43, when the Soviet player is trying with all his might to turn the tide of the company.

That is, again, if this change happens without any changes to the combat system, we will get the most passive Soviet game until 43. Not trying to hold on to industry, city, or victory points. The Soviet player will only carry out attacks in those cases in which he has a high chance of winning.
It will be absolutely not interesting for the Soviet player, for the observers AAR of the game.

< Message edited by ShaggyHiK -- 1/22/2022 9:32:34 PM >

(in reply to xhoel)

Post #: 33

RE: Fix the TB replacement system! - 1/22/2022 9:35:52 PM

Jango32

Posts: 307
Joined: 3/15/2021
Status: offline

Until 1943 there are only three Axis TBs where combat can occur: Finland, North Africa and the garrison. The one in Finland will have low intensity from November/December 1941 onward, whereas with the other two it's more dynamic, but mostly with relatively extended periods of lulls in the combat.

In all of these TBs the majority of forces are Axis allies, with very few German units. So I am unsure what impact xhoel's suggestions would have for on-map replacements until late 1942/1943, when Africa will heat up and fall along with most of the Italian forces, leading to invasions of Italy. It's only from then on that German units will become more common (and eventually the majority) in combat TBs.

(in reply to ShaggyHiK)

Post #: 34

RE: Fix the TB replacement system! - 1/22/2022 9:46:09 PM

ShaggyHiK

Posts: 166
Joined: 10/10/2021
Status: offline

In general, I question the possibility of the Soviet player to really win under the rules of VP. The speed of the return of vast territories in 43-44 years, with the inability to encircle the German army, is doubtful in my opinion. Especially if the front line turned out to be even further east relative to the historical one in 41-42.
Of course, I am not an active player in 43-44 years, I started the scenarios for review, but did not play them properly. According to my subjective assessments, if you start in the winter of 42-43 from Stalingrad, provided that the German player has been playing from the age of 41 without a scenario and does not get surrounded, getting to Berlin by May 45 is not a realistic idea.

(in reply to Jango32)

Post #: 35

RE: Fix the TB replacement system! - 1/22/2022 10:27:00 PM

Beethoven1

Posts: 754
Joined: 3/25/2021
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: ShaggyHiK

That is, a drawdown in the size of the German army on MAP will not follow, which will become a serious strengthening of the German army in the winter of 41-42

This is incorrect. German reinforcements are limited by freight, not by manpower until the freight penalty gets lifted in early 1942. Just look at the graph of manpower pool in any game and you will see Germany has plenty of manpower, it just doesn't go into units due to lack of freight. So changing how the theater boxes work would not affect the strength of on-map German units until the freight penalty is lifted, unless it also would somehow magically give the Axis extra free freight.

(in reply to ShaggyHiK)

Post #: 36

RE: Fix the TB replacement system! - 1/23/2022 3:42:30 PM

malyhin1517

Posts: 1426
Joined: 9/20/2015
From: Ukraine Dnepropetrovsk
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: xhoel
@maly: I think that may have more to do with what equipment you have available. In the early war the Soviets have a severe lack of guns so that may be causing problems. Plus the bug that caused shell units to fill up automatically has been fixed, so the Soviets should have a lot more manpower and equipment to use for their field armies now.

A small part of the soldiers gets on the map, but the guns and tanks completely go to the reserve and theaters. There are a lot of weak units and they completely take away their military equipment and most of the soldiers. I don't understand why, in this case, new units without guns and tanks, such as militia divisions and naval rifle brigades, arrive on the map. I'm just wasting my time and I have to send them back to the reserve.

_____________________________

Sorry, i use an online translator :(

(in reply to xhoel)

Post #: 37

RE: Fix the TB replacement system! - 1/23/2022 4:21:54 PM

xhoel

Posts: 3219
Joined: 6/24/2017
From: Germany
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: ShaggyHiK

I said that the Soviet army is not able to inflict losses on the German army.

Wrong.

quote:

ORIGINAL: ShaggyHiK
From the beginning of the game, starting already from the first move, with such a change, the German army on MAP(East) will tend to increase its numbers, which historically has not happened. Simply because the German army bears 80-90% of its losses in the phase of logistical losses.

That is, a drawdown in the size of the German army on MAP will not follow, which will become a serious strengthening of the German army in the winter of 41-42, especially in 42-43, when the Soviet player is trying with all his might to turn the tide of the company.

Not true as I already explained to you. In the span of 1941-1943 the change to the replacement system will not affect the size of the German Army in the East as the replacements are already going to the Ostfront. Your presumptions are just wrong and unfounded on anything.

Please stop with your extremely biased takes and actually engage the arguments that are being presented. In every single thread you complain about how bad the Soviets have it and present arguments that are completely subjective and that barely have anything to do with reality. Its just so tiring.

_____________________________

(in reply to ShaggyHiK)

Post #: 38

RE: Fix the TB replacement system! - 1/23/2022 5:14:30 PM

malyhin1517

Posts: 1426
Joined: 9/20/2015
From: Ukraine Dnepropetrovsk
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: xhoel
In the span of 1941-1943 the change to the replacement system will not affect the size of the German Army in the East as the replacements are already going to the Ostfront.

Indeed, Germany at the beginning of the war does not receive many new units and enough reinforcements come to the map if there is a good supply. Germany will have a problem when they end up in the same situation at the end of the war as the Russians are at the beginning of the war! When a dozen new units enter the reserve each turn, they may not have enough production of military equipment for the troops on the map and they will be left without reinforcements. Russians find themselves in this situation at the beginning of the war. The problem is that the troops in the refit on the map receive reinforcements after the troops in the reserve and in other theaters. This is profoundly wrong!

< Message edited by malyhin1517 -- 1/23/2022 5:15:13 PM >

_____________________________

Sorry, i use an online translator :(

(in reply to xhoel)

Post #: 39

RE: Fix the TB replacement system! - 1/23/2022 6:02:57 PM

xhoel

Posts: 3219
Joined: 6/24/2017
From: Germany
Status: offline

@maly: This has been changed and now rebuild units arriving in the reserve arrive at TOE set to 0. So you can change it when you like, but it allows the Soviets to use their manpower and equipment for the field army.

The other issue that you mentioned is the same one that I have. That TBs and Reserve are prioritized. That is what we are trying to change.

_____________________________

(in reply to malyhin1517)

Post #: 40

RE: Fix the TB replacement system! - 1/23/2022 6:04:44 PM

malyhin1517

Posts: 1426
Joined: 9/20/2015
From: Ukraine Dnepropetrovsk
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: xhoel
@maly: This has been changed and now rebuild units arriving in the reserve arrive at TOE set to 0. So you can change it when you like, but it allows the Soviets to use their manpower and equipment for the field army.

Wrong! This only applies to restored units. There are a lot more new units and they will still take most of the replenishment.

< Message edited by malyhin1517 -- 1/23/2022 6:06:49 PM >

_____________________________

Sorry, i use an online translator :(

(in reply to xhoel)

Post #: 41

RE: Fix the TB replacement system! - 1/23/2022 6:23:37 PM

AlbertN

Posts: 3693
Joined: 10/5/2010
From: Italy
Status: offline

Various good solution have been already proposed. A percentage slider can do. Easy to add as special condition that a TB having less than 90% of their needed stuff overrides the player determine % of max replacements. Ie. Disaster happens and suddenly West TB is at 50%. That TB will suck practically all replacements til it is at 90% again. {plate too can transfer units to help}.

(in reply to malyhin1517)

Post #: 42

RE: Fix the TB replacement system! - 1/23/2022 6:26:48 PM

FriedrichII

Posts: 90
Joined: 3/16/2021
From: Germany
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Joel Billings

... If this were War in Europe, you could decide where the men went to, but it's not, ...

Is there any chance War in Europe is going to happen, or DLCs for WitE2 which unlocks theaters boxes to be able to play them on map? For example a Finnland or North Africa DLC?
Thanks in advance! I hope you can give us a hint about that.

(in reply to Joel Billings)

Post #: 43

RE: Fix the TB replacement system! - 1/23/2022 7:06:01 PM

xhoel

Posts: 3219
Joined: 6/24/2017
From: Germany
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: malyhin1517

Wrong! This only applies to restored units. There are a lot more new units and they will still take most of the replenishment.

That is what we are trying to change.

_____________________________

(in reply to malyhin1517)

Post #: 44

RE: Fix the TB replacement system! - 1/23/2022 9:17:47 PM

ShaggyHiK

Posts: 166
Joined: 10/10/2021
Status: offline

Let's understand the essence of the process. Let's say the German player has 100k recruits per turn. For the sake of simplicity, let's not get distracted by the armaments industry, delivery issues through and to warehouses and to troops, checks on commanders and other variables.
So there is 100k per turn.
By priority, now up to 80% of replenishments come to the reserve and other TB.
Because of this, the German losses rushing on the map somewhere in the 15-20k man per turn are significant.
That is, if the German player's logistics system is disgusting and the loss rate for some reason increases, the troops on the map will begin to lose their ToE, because the loss rate is higher than the replenishment rate. If 80% of the 100k starts to arrive on the map, then the Soviet army, even potentially carrying out serious attacks and inflicting high losses during the game from the very beginning, will not be able to overcome the level of replenishment of the German troops. Even jumps in losses of the German army from 20-30k to 50-60k will not affect the number of troops on the map.

But in order for the German player to bear such losses, the Soviet player must inflict a huge number of blows along the entire front line. And bear the corresponding losses.

What I want to draw attention to.

Now there is some balance of the game, I don't want to say that it is perfect or that it is disgusting, but with the vision of such a player-adjusted system, we will inevitably swing the scales of the balance to the side and I doubt that it will be successful if the change is not thought out in depth.

Just like Malykhin says, there is a problem that new parts devour the replenishment pool thoroughly, but this is a different look at the mechanics.

I think that such a priority really looks strange, while in the East the fate of the war in 41-42-43 is being decided, the huge number of replenishments during this period for the western front on the French coast seems stupid.

(in reply to xhoel)

Post #: 45

RE: Fix the TB replacement system! - 1/26/2022 10:43:07 AM

xhoel

Posts: 3219
Joined: 6/24/2017
From: Germany
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: ShaggyHiK

I think that such a priority really looks strange, while in the East the fate of the war in 41-42-43 is being decided, the huge number of replenishments during this period for the western front on the French coast seems stupid.

Yes it does. That is the point of the discussion.

The example you used above is however incorrect but I�m not bothered to go into it again since I already explained to you how the system works.

_____________________________

(in reply to ShaggyHiK)

Post #: 46

RE: Fix the TB replacement system! - 2/1/2022 7:01:56 PM

xhoel

Posts: 3219
Joined: 6/24/2017
From: Germany
Status: offline

Bump.

_____________________________

(in reply to xhoel)

Post #: 47

RE: Fix the TB replacement system! - 2/8/2022 9:44:46 AM

xhoel

Posts: 3219
Joined: 6/24/2017
From: Germany
Status: offline

So my game has now reached mid April 1945 and with the Soviets at the gates of Berlin everything is being thrown East to stop or at least stall the Soviet advance.

No, just kidding, all ground forces in the East only received 4.6k men last turn. To contrast that, 2 Flak Regiments in the West got around 7k men and multiple other units in the WE got plenty of replacements. This is just absurd. How can 2 regiments in the West get assigned more manpower than the entire Eastern Front combined???

This system has so many issues so let me break them down one by one:

-Because of the priority system, the only way to refit units is to either send them to an NSS or to the Axis reserve. Nothing else will work, even if you put them in a depot full of freight and stacked with a HQ. This basically nullifies the whole supply system when it comes to replacements. It literally hinders another feature of the game from working and makes refitting units and absolute chore.

So now you are probably thinking: Whats the issue with refitting on an NSS?

-You are limited by the game to how many units you send to and stack on a NSS. There is a City Fort in both Berlin and Prague and both cities need forces to defend them in case the Soviets breakthrough. So at most I can refit 4 divisions by using the NSS. Every other unit on the map has to starve for manpower because they are not getting anything.

So if NSS is not the solution why not the Reserve? I dont like that the game forces the player to send forces to the reserve. I do not like sending units to the reserve. I want to refit them on map and then get them to the front. Why am I not a fan of the Reserve?

1) The process takes too long. Here is a usual rundown example:

T10: Send to reserve.
T11: Unit arrives, is set to refit, cant be moved.
T12: Unit is filled up, ordered to move to map.
T13: Unit arrives on map, to the rear, will need to be moved forward.

2) The units that arrive from the reserve usually come with very few trucks and with low supplies. This means they will need to both be supplied by air drops and also have to sit on an NSS to get trucks. Sitting them on a normal depot usually doesnt work. Since the NSS option is out of the question, the player is again forced to commit them to combat the way they are.

The lack of trucks also means they have low MPs on arrival and if they are attacked, they lose a lot of equipment. Because they arent sitting on a depot that lack of trucks will continue to follow them around the whole time, causing the same low MPs and other issues.

-It completely breaks realism and immersion to see units in the West at 80-100% TOE and constantly getting replacements when the Eastern Front is starved at unbelievable levels. Almost all of my HQs East are at 65% TOE. In the West they are at 80-100%. So while I am missing a bunch of rolls due to a lack of support squads, the Western HQs are sitting at such high levels and they dont even need them, because there are no rolls for TBs.

Here is another interesting piece of information to see how great the divide is:

-There are 862 units in the East (excluding Air Bases). Of those 343 have a TOE of 0-55%. That is 40% of all units.
If we exclude SUs, there are 313 units and of those, 142 have a TOE of 0-55%. That is 45%.

-There are 301 units in the West (excluding Air Bases). Of those only 6 have a TOE of 0-55%. That is just 2% of all units.

So we are in a situation where basically half of the Eastern Front has a TOE of 55% at best, while in the West, only 2% of the forces have such low TOEs. This is so off the mark that I am honestly just stunned that is being treated as WAD.

WE Front Armored, Infantry and Mechanized forces TOE:

Same units in the East:

And all of these issues could be avoided if you make a simple tweak:

Reserve a portion of the manpower and equipment for the Eastern Front. Then the TBs can get what they need.

Devs, please, please take a look at this. This isnt just me seeing this as an issue. Multiple posters in this thread have also stated the same. I can guarantee you that as more games move into the later war this issue will be raised again. Lets fix/change this now before more games are affected by it.

Thank you!

< Message edited by xhoel -- 2/8/2022 9:47:22 AM >

_____________________________

(in reply to xhoel)

Post #: 48

RE: Fix the TB replacement system! - 2/8/2022 10:20:06 AM

Stamb

Posts: 1030
Joined: 10/26/2021
Status: offline

If we look at the title of the game - it says Gary Grigsby's War in the East 2. Not Europe, not West, nor Africa, nor any other TBs.

You did a great job of showing current replacement system flaws.

I would also like to see no Reserve TB
https://www.matrixgames.com/forums/tm.asp?m=5140797

Moreover units on a map must be priority №1 for replacements, as they are doing something useful (otherwise - why they are on a map?). If player is setting unit to a refit - it means that he really needs this unit to be refitted. And if there is enough manpower/other equipment and freight in a depot, not only NSS, unit must get those replacements.
It means that part of a replacements should be reserved not to the eastern front itself, but to a other TBs, so they can refit units too, as eastern front is the main battlefield. It must get most replacements and not to be the last in the list.

I would propose to have on map units as the highest priority for replacements, if Reserve TB is not removed then it should be 2nd in the list, then TBs.

(in reply to xhoel)

Post #: 49

RE: Fix the TB replacement system! - 2/8/2022 2:11:59 PM

EwaldvonKleist

Posts: 2038
Joined: 4/14/2016
From: Berlin, Germany
Status: offline

Imo there should be an interface where ypu can precisely define the replacement distribution in % between on-map, theatre boxes and national reserve.

If players can get an advantage by starving other theatre boxes, then there is a problem in the theatre boxes model that should be fixed there, not via a crude replacement distribution workaround.

Example: If players starve the West of replacements, then the West should collapse so quickly that this strategy is punished ingame. But starving the West should be possible if you can live with the consequences.

< Message edited by EwaldvonKleist -- 2/8/2022 2:16:06 PM >

_____________________________

The Library of Gary Grigsby's War in the East resources.
Do you want total war? Guide for WitE players

(in reply to Stamb)

Post #: 50

RE: Fix the TB replacement system! - 2/8/2022 2:23:38 PM

Stamb

Posts: 1030
Joined: 10/26/2021
Status: offline

I also wonder about this line from patch v01.02.14 � 10th January 2022:
*Theater boxes (including the reserve) are now limited during the logistics phase in that they will never use more than 2/3 of the trained pilots that begin the replacement phase in the pool. 1/3 of the trained pilots are reserved for air units on the map, which receive their replacements after the theater boxes.

If I have all air groups in TBs on normal and only on map units have TPI, then this 2/3 of the trained pilots are sitting in the pool, or they still can be used in an on map formations?

< Message edited by Stamb -- 2/8/2022 2:26:10 PM >

(in reply to EwaldvonKleist)

Post #: 51

RE: Fix the TB replacement system! - 2/8/2022 2:33:10 PM

Teo41_ITA

Posts: 151
Joined: 9/2/2021
Status: offline

I don't recall the manual, but is it possible to adjust the TOE of units in other TBs?

(in reply to Stamb)

Post #: 52

RE: Fix the TB replacement system! - 2/8/2022 2:36:09 PM

Stamb

Posts: 1030
Joined: 10/26/2021
Status: offline

No, which is a problem. If you forgot to change unit's TOE before sending it to TBs then you are stuck with that value until you move it again to a map/reserve, which takes multiple turns to do.

And if somebody plays with locked TBs... Poor neighbors :D

< Message edited by Stamb -- 2/8/2022 2:37:29 PM >

(in reply to Teo41_ITA)

Post #: 53

RE: Fix the TB replacement system! - 2/8/2022 2:43:58 PM

xhoel

Posts: 3219
Joined: 6/24/2017
From: Germany
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Stamb

If I have all air groups in TBs on normal and only on map units have TPI, then this 2/3 of the trained pilots are sitting in the pool, or they still can be used in an on map formations?

AFAIK, TBs get priority in receiving Trained Pilots. Its why the change was added. So no, TBs will get that 2/3 unless they have all the pilots they need. You only get 1/3.

quote:

ORIGINAL: Teo41_ITA

I don't recall the manual, but is it possible to adjust the TOE of units in other TBs?

Its not.

@EvK: I would be fine with a simpler solution honestly. The simpler the change, the faster it will be available and will probably bring less bugs/issues with it. I dont think the devs would be open to the adjustment proposal as it may lead to gamey moves.

_____________________________

(in reply to Stamb)

Post #: 54

RE: Fix the TB replacement system! - 2/8/2022 3:23:57 PM

Teo41_ITA

Posts: 151
Joined: 9/2/2021
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: xhoel

Its not.

@EvK: I would be fine with a simpler solution honestly. The simpler the change, the faster it will be available and will probably bring less bugs/issues with it. I dont think the devs would be open to the adjustment proposal as it may lead to gamey moves.

I get your point. The Axis player may just set everything to 50%, in order to have all the divisions in the East at full strenght.

Then I fully support the option to set a % of supplies and reinforcements to both the map and the TBs, with a minimum treshold below which the player cannot go.

(in reply to xhoel)

Post #: 55

RE: Fix the TB replacement system! - 2/8/2022 9:35:04 PM

mikael333

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

quote:

ORIGINAL: Joel Billings

This is WAD. The system may be crude, but we've done things for a reason to prevent players from exploiting the TBs. You are at the point where Germany is beginning to be overrun in the west, so it's reasonable for there to be a large commitment of forces there. Adding more controls on the TBs will likely end up with adverse consequences. If this were War in Europe, you could decide where the men went to, but it's not, and this scenario is set up so as to not allow the WE to take Berlin before the end of the scenario. Given that, any additional controls would lead the player to rob from the west even more than they already can.

I completely get your point. But why did you then include the theatre box control in the first place (except the reserve theatre box which I like and use a lot)? I play with enhanced TB control off, because I want to deal with whatever the overall German high command gives me for the Eastern front. Still the system gives me plus or minus 1 VP (mostly minus) in many turns. I simply feel that the AI is not doing its job then because I never interact with with the TBs. Should I pull more forces to the Eastern front? Or restrict myself with less? Either way feels gamey, because I do not control the other fronts and the only difference is in victory points deducted or added. Since this is so abstract, it does not feel, I am earning these VPs in the same way, as when I conquer a city. For example it could be a fun thing to bring Rommel to the Eastern front. But how much VPs would that cost? I could just try it but if the answer is, very little, I feel like gaming the system. If the answer is a lot, it would be stupid to do it. My guess is that War in Europe is in the making, and you wanted to give us a little appetizer here. But I can see no benefit in moving forces from and to theatres, I have not the slightest control over.

(in reply to Joel Billings)

Post #: 56

RE: Fix the TB replacement system! - 2/9/2022 7:38:37 AM

loki100

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

quote:

ORIGINAL: Teo41_ITA

...
I get your point. The Axis player may just set everything to 50%, in order to have all the divisions in the East at full strenght.

Then I fully support the option to set a % of supplies and reinforcements to both the map and the TBs, with a minimum treshold below which the player cannot go.

not sure why, can only speak from my personal experience but I've not had an issue with refits in the TB pulling assets from the map and I have an Axis vs AI game that ended in Jan 45 and a HtH into Oct 43.

quote:

ORIGINAL: mikael333

...Still the system gives me plus or minus 1 VP (mostly minus) in many turns. ....

or this, I always play with TB control off and tend to pick up a slow stream of positive VP and the occasional 'delay'

In reality in the campaign your performance in the TB mirrors on map. Simple eg, the post-Stalingrad transfers to France were in reality the shell of the divisions that surrendered and started to refit from low TOE mostly using men who were in hospital etc when Stalingrad was cut off. So if you get to send them at a decent TOE you get 3 advantages

- higher % in the TB = VP
- less resources going to the TB = more on map (esp important as you also get the manpower bonus to fit them out)
- which in combination gives you a few more VP (say the time bonus for a city) and a stronger on map presence

Xhoel is making a lot out of his experience with VtB, I'd suggest that even with locked control the system in the campaign is neat, easy to manage and broadly rewards how you manage the on map dynamics.

I do tend to send a few bits to the theatres to help out, esp Italy, even if I can't pull them back later.

_____________________________

(in reply to Teo41_ITA)

Post #: 57

RE: Fix the TB replacement system! - 2/9/2022 8:52:46 AM

xhoel

Posts: 3219
Joined: 6/24/2017
From: Germany
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: loki100

Xhoel is making a lot out of his experience with VtB

I dont understand why these comments are needed. I have presented evidence and arguments that support my case that the current system is not only extremely flawed but also unrealistic and affects game balance and immersion. The talk is and has been about the effects in the late game.

VtB is one of the three main campaigns of the game. As a player I expect it to have a system of replacements that works and is not completely out of touch with historical evidence and plain common sense and one that doesnt mess up the supply system that is in place.

And this isnt just me seeing these issues. You are a Beta tester and have access to the dev forums. Look at the StB campaign that Chris and Randy played from 1942 to May 1945. Randy (Axis Player) which is probably the most experienced Axis player for the late war game says the same thing that I said about the TBs: That the priority system in its current form is wrong and that too much is going west. So this isnt just an issue with VtB, its an issue with the late war game.

I look forward to seeing your game and other HvH games go into the late war. My VtB campaign will be done in a few turns and all in all its a campaign that only goes for 20 turns so I am posting here with the hope that this gets fixed for other games as its too late for my game.

Its better to get a fix for this soon and see the StB and CG 41 games have a smooth late war game than to wait months until these games reach that point and the same complaints are raised again. Cant imagine being an Axis player that has put in 180 turns and who is screwed in the end because of a flawed system.

< Message edited by xhoel -- 2/9/2022 8:53:51 AM >

_____________________________

(in reply to loki100)

Post #: 58

RE: Fix the TB replacement system! - 2/9/2022 1:16:20 PM

Searry

Posts: 848
Joined: 1/24/2014
Status: offline

It's absolutely true that this system needs to be changed. Prioritising the TBs just means you need to start doing stupid shuffling of units so you get fresh troops into the front line but it just takes more turns than a saner system would. The current system doesn't solve any exploits since when you realize the system prioritises TBs, you just shuffle the units in a certain manner so you have fresh troops for the east.

< Message edited by Searry -- 2/9/2022 1:20:49 PM >

_____________________________

WITE2 Beta Tester
Axis Bias mod Fanboy
https://www.matrixgames.com/forums/tm.asp?m=5144537

(in reply to ShaggyHiK)

Post #: 59

RE: Fix the TB replacement system! - 2/10/2022 1:09:06 PM

Jeff_Ahl

Posts: 160
Joined: 10/10/2018
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: xhoel

And all of these issues could be avoided if you make a simple tweak:

Reserve a portion of the manpower and equipment for the Eastern Front. Then the TBs can get what they need.

Devs, please, please take a look at this. This isnt just me seeing this as an issue. Multiple posters in this thread have also stated the same. I can guarantee you that as more games move into the later war this issue will be raised again. Lets fix/change this now before more games are affected by it.

Thank you!