RE: Admin pts. (Full Version)

All Forums >> [New Releases from Matrix Games] >> Gary Grigsby's War in the East Series



Message

Rhetor -> RE: Admin pts. (12/18/2009 8:55:45 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: PyleDriver
There are units that come from the eastern edge of the map also. The Soviets produce like rabbits in 41.


Now that's precisely what bothers me. If Soviet troops appear in scores at various remote points (Urals, Caucasus, in Astrakhan or elsewhere), the player would have to manually bring them up. Would it not be a waste of time? Would there be a decent reinforcment schedule/arrival screen?



PyleDriver -> RE: Admin pts. (12/18/2009 9:19:23 PM)

Once agian, most units form near population centers in the west. The Soviets have an huge rail ability, the balance act is how you delay them long enough to get your factories moved east...



PyleDriver -> RE: Admin pts. (12/18/2009 9:23:31 PM)

Oh, missed the last question. Yes theres a hot key that lets you know when and where reinforcments appear...



Endsieg -> RE: Admin pts. (12/19/2009 12:13:47 AM)

will the soviet AI  attempt to cut axis rail lines whenever/whereever  possible with isolated units in '41? i ask, because tedious discussons abt houserules regarding this issue always erupted in WIR pbems.



elmo3 -> RE: Admin pts. (12/19/2009 12:46:57 AM)

AI work is ongoing.  We'll all be working hard to make it as good as we can.



KarlXII -> RE: Admin pts. (12/23/2009 8:19:59 AM)

Will there be any summary screen of total casualties on detail level ?
Will there be any "history" log of achieved goals like which dates certain victory hexes was taken ?

Right now I am playing the predecessor to this incarnation, Western Front, and the only reason to replay the game is to compare your losses, dates for achieving victories etc. Now I have to write down every summary after every turn which is tedious. It would help to have this information summarised on a specific tab somewhere.



elmo3 -> RE: Admin pts. (12/23/2009 11:10:13 AM)

You can view casualties for the current turn and in total.  There is a victory screen that shows points for victory locations.  Don't think there is any history log as you describe and I don't know if something like that will be added or not.



KarlXII -> RE: Admin pts. (12/23/2009 11:44:44 AM)

Good, at least total losses is included. The rest can be done by hand.



bshirt7 -> RE: Admin pts. (12/27/2009 8:32:17 PM)

Wow....I just found this website today. 2nd Front....a blast from the past!

Gary Grigsby.......GREAT!

Forgive me my question. Is there no production options for the Germans all through the war?



Endsieg -> Nara (12/27/2009 11:52:44 PM)

In the zoomed-in screenshots of the Moscow area, I have not seen the Nara river...perhaps i am blind, is it there??
IIRC, in last half Nov '41, Kluge (4th army) was repeatedly urged/cajoled to attack across the Nara due east/northeast direction Moscow to bring pressure on the Russian center.....but waited too long in the opinion of his peers on the flanks. A town called Naro-Fominsk also springs to mind.

Is the Nara simply too minor a river to be included on the map? Is Naro-Fominsk on the map as a dot?



elmo3 -> RE: Nara (12/28/2009 12:00:35 AM)

I see the Nerl River that is northeast of Moscow.  Maybe that is what you are remembering?  There is also a small river with no name east of Moscow that might be it.  Not seeing a town called Naro-Fominsk but there are a lot of towns to check.



Endsieg -> RE: Nara (12/28/2009 12:16:58 AM)

Elmo:
Nara River (Russian: ¬¯¬Ñ¬â¬Ñ) is a river in the Moscow Oblast and Kaluga Oblast in Russia. It is a left tributary of the Oka River. The length of the river is 158 km. The area of its basin is 2030 km©÷. The Nara River freezes up in November-December and stays under the ice until April. The cities of Naro-Fominsk and Serpukhov are located on the Nara River.

It's west of and close to Moscow. It was a main defensive line of the Sovs throughout Nov 41. Perhaps Pavel can comment on this?




elmo3 -> RE: Nara (12/28/2009 1:07:50 AM)

OK I misunderstood your previous post that the river was east or northeast of Moscow.  Anyway I don't see it on the map either.  Maybe one of our map experts will be able to make the time to comment on it at some point.



ETF -> RE: War in the East Q&A (12/28/2009 1:50:45 AM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: jaw


quote:

ORIGINAL: Sentinel Six


Forgive me if these questions have already been asked elsewhere as I've only just discovered this thread.

1. Can a player control production, if so how long does it take to retool a factory?

2. Can a player bring forward the in service date of equipment by R&D?

3. When a unit's equipment is upgraded does it effect its experience or readiness. Can a unit train to work up its efficiency with the new weapon system.


Forget everything you knew about production from playing WAR IN RUSSIA, not only is the production system (actually I would describe it as a replacement system) completely computer controlled but there is no concept such as retooling a factory in the game. A factory can be producing one type of aircraft or AFV one month and switch to producing another type the next month with no impact on output by the switchover per se. Factories exist merely to regulate overall production.

Replacements in general, whether of new equipment or old, will impact experience.


Pity.... WIR production was a blast......



ETF -> RE: Admin pts. (12/28/2009 1:53:57 AM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: elmo3

AI work is ongoing.  We'll all be working hard to make it as good as we can.

Sorry if this has been asked.....as we all know AI's are weak no matter who makes the game.
What are the MP options? Can one do LAN games were both players work on their turns and then submit them for simultaneous computations? Can more than one player input orders? ie Army group North players South etc....
Are we just limited to the old PBEM only.



ETF -> RE: Admin pts. (12/28/2009 1:55:07 AM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: bshirt7

Wow....I just found this website today. 2nd Front....a blast from the past!

Gary Grigsby.......GREAT!

Forgive me my question. Is there no production options for the Germans all through the war?


Nope..... I think that was the best feature IMHO of 2nd Front and WIR.



PyleDriver -> RE: Admin pts. (12/28/2009 4:57:37 AM)

Lee thats one of those questions you let Pavel hit...



Joel Billings -> RE: Nara (12/28/2009 6:34:37 AM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: Endsieg

Elmo:
Nara River (Russian: ¬¯¬Ñ¬â¬Ñ) is a river in the Moscow Oblast and Kaluga Oblast in Russia. It is a left tributary of the Oka River. The length of the river is 158 km. The area of its basin is 2030 km©÷. The Nara River freezes up in November-December and stays under the ice until April. The cities of Naro-Fominsk and Serpukhov are located on the Nara River.

It's west of and close to Moscow. It was a main defensive line of the Sovs throughout Nov 41. Perhaps Pavel can comment on this?




The river is not on the map, but both those cities are on the map. I assume Pavel did not feel the river was large enough to include when he did his river review. There are so many rivers in Russia that I had instructed Pavel to try to be very selective so we didn't end up with too many rivers. As it is, we have many more rivers now than we started with before Pavel's map work.

[image]local://upfiles/1268/F5567CC72B4946D6A93E9C5B65527E7E.jpg[/image]



Joel Billings -> RE: Admin pts. (12/28/2009 6:43:59 AM)

We are only planning on a 2 player PBEM system. As an IGOUGO game, only one player moves at a time. Of course, there is nothing stopping a team from saving a turn in process and sending it between the players, although this could obviously slow the game down. They simply need to agree on the division of forces.



Helpless -> RE: Nara (12/28/2009 2:42:39 PM)

quote:

The river is not on the map, but both those cities are on the map. I assume Pavel did not feel the river was large enough to include when he did his river review. There are so many rivers in Russia that I had instructed Pavel to try to be very selective so we didn't end up with too many rivers. As it is, we have many more rivers now than we started with before Pavel's map work.


That's correct. Sometimes it is hard to decide which river should be on map and which should be out. Theoretically there might be a minor river almost in every single hex. [:)]

Appearance in operational report is not always a good indication. Usually commanders been referring to terrain difficulties in their reports once they met tough resistance.

In this case I'd say that some river is missing here. There is at least 3x Oka branches which go in parallel http://download.maps.vlasenko.net/smtm1000/n-37.jpg.

So probably ignoring them here is not the best solution. Let's see if it will be possible to add Nara [:)]



Endsieg -> RE: Nara (12/28/2009 2:44:37 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: Joel Billings


quote:

ORIGINAL: Endsieg

Elmo:
Nara River (Russian: ¬¯¬Ñ¬â¬Ñ) is a river in the Moscow Oblast and Kaluga Oblast in Russia. It is a left tributary of the Oka River. The length of the river is 158 km. The area of its basin is 2030 km©÷. The Nara River freezes up in November-December and stays under the ice until April. The cities of Naro-Fominsk and Serpukhov are located on the Nara River.

It's west of and close to Moscow. It was a main defensive line of the Sovs throughout Nov 41. Perhaps Pavel can comment on this?




The river is not on the map, but both those cities are on the map. I assume Pavel did not feel the river was large enough to include when he did his river review. There are so many rivers in Russia that I had instructed Pavel to try to be very selective so we didn't end up with too many rivers. As it is, we have many more rivers now than we started with before Pavel's map work.

[image]local://upfiles/1268/F5567CC72B4946D6A93E9C5B65527E7E.jpg[/image]

Thank you for the informative answer, Joel.
Drawing an imaginary line between the two cities you highlighted is precisely where i had been looking to find the Nara. An interesting defensive line, no? I think Zhukhov sort of relied on that river being there at the beginning of Nov41, frozen or not.
A year from now when we're all feverishly playing [;)], I can imagine situations where the Soviet PBEM player will really wish the river HAD been included; and likewise the Axis PBEM player will be really glad the river WASNT included[:D]



Joel Billings -> RE: Nara (12/28/2009 5:47:37 PM)

As soon as the ice level gets up high enough to freeze the river, it won't have an impact. Of course if the Germans get there early enough, it would have some impact.



Joel Billings -> RE: Nara (12/28/2009 5:50:52 PM)

Now you went and did it. You encouraged Pavel to add more rivers. Keep doing that and the map will turn blue. [:)]



Endsieg -> RE: Nara (12/28/2009 6:35:37 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: Joel Billings

Now you went and did it. You encouraged Pavel to add more rivers. Keep doing that and the map will turn blue. [:)]

Sorry, i didnt want to be an obstructionist and delay this game...i'd rather be playing it yesterday.[:)]
The map is beautiful, i luv all the named russian rivers all over the place.
It just startled me that a river which figures so repeatedly in all accounts of the (first) Battle of Moscow, Oct 15-Dec 5, 41 (heck, just Wiki it...)is not included on the game map. The Germans, in turn, used the Nara as a defensive line after their failed attack across it Dec 1,41., only was breached in late Dec, IIRC.
If Pavel adds just one river, the Nara, good for him! But the more the merrier, infantry and armour doesnt like waste deep water , even if it's only 20 meters across[;)]



molchomor -> RE: War in the East Q&A (12/28/2009 11:40:02 PM)

Hi and thanks for keeping strategy gaming alive.

I very fondly remember playing Second Front (WiR prequel) and to a lesser degree the sequel Western Front.

Q: Are you really saying that I would not be able to control axis production (at least for tanks and planes) ? For me this would be a major gamebreaker as this was one of the highlight in Second Front IMHO. An option for manual production setting would be great for those of us who can do with the micromanaging. This added very much to the depth of Second front, rounding up & assigning those precious first Tigers to your elite Pz-Divisions for the assault on Leningrad, while giving the older models to the Italians on the quiet part of the front...And the feeling when you first could produce ME-262 planes, switching almost all aircraft production to that to try the idea proposed by Galland and so on... This was a strategy game within the game - the balancing of older models/higher production vs. newer models/lower production.

Q: How will the west be represented, like in Second front where you had OKW and filled it with enough Divisions to "hold the line" ?

Q: Will the element of "training" your airsquads in the east against "easy" opposition before transfering them to the west to fight off B-17s be similar ?



jaw -> RE: War in the East Q&A (12/29/2009 2:36:17 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: molchomor

Hi and thanks for keeping strategy gaming alive.

I very fondly remember playing Second Front (WiR prequel) and to a lesser degree the sequel Western Front.

Q: Are you really saying that I would not be able to control axis production (at least for tanks and planes) ? For me this would be a major gamebreaker as this was one of the highlight in Second Front IMHO. An option for manual production setting would be great for those of us who can do with the micromanaging. This added very much to the depth of Second front, rounding up & assigning those precious first Tigers to your elite Pz-Divisions for the assault on Leningrad, while giving the older models to the Italians on the quiet part of the front...And the feeling when you first could produce ME-262 planes, switching almost all aircraft production to that to try the idea proposed by Galland and so on... This was a strategy game within the game - the balancing of older models/higher production vs. newer models/lower production.

Q: How will the west be represented, like in Second front where you had OKW and filled it with enough Divisions to "hold the line" ?

Q: Will the element of "training" your airsquads in the east against "easy" opposition before transfering them to the west to fight off B-17s be similar ?



You should not view WitE through the prism of SF/WIR or almost any other Gary Grigsby game. WitE is a division/corps (Soviets) level game with 10 mile hexes and week long turns. The game models combat down to the individual weapon level and every combat element (tank, plane, gun, squad etc.) is modeled in almost as much detail as a tactical game. The production of AFVs and aircraft is fixed to approximate historical production but all other production (various squad and weapon types) is "on demand" based on the difference between TOE strength and actual strength. The hundreds of TOEs provided in the game control the allocation of production so your Tiger tanks will go to the types of units which got them historically and not randomly distributed across the front.

The War off the Eastern Front is only indirectly represented in the game with the arrival or withdrawal of units to and from the Eastern Front. Everything which happened off the Eastern Front is assumed to happen by the historical time table and only influence the Eastern Front to the extent they did so historically. If the Axis player defeats the Soviet Union he wins the game even if he does so in May, 1945 with the Allies on the Elbe. Although that may sound weird the chance of it happening are almost zero. Unless the Axis player has inflicted mortal damage on the Russian player by the end of 1942, the Soviet Union will at worse fight Germany to a standstill; more likely the Russians will begin pushing the Germans back by 1943. It is hard to predict more than that because so much depends on the playing style of the players. Conservative players will make for a dull game; aggressive players will have more fun and probably a more "historical" game.



thackaray -> RE: War in the East Q&A (12/29/2009 6:16:37 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: jaw
Conservative players will make for a dull game; aggressive players will have more fun and probably a more "historical" game.


Woah! Woah! Woah! Woooooaaaaahhhh there!

So to be historical you have to be aggressive regardless of which side you play?

This doesn't seem right. I would have thought an aggressive player would have an ahistorical game, i.e. do better than actual history.

So how does the AI play - conservative/aggressive? And the other question is how badly does the AI cheat to make itself an effective opponent against a human?




Endsieg -> RE: War in the East Q&A (12/29/2009 6:58:27 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: thackaray


quote:

ORIGINAL: jaw
Conservative players will make for a dull game; aggressive players will have more fun and probably a more "historical" game.


Woah! Woah! Woah! Woooooaaaaahhhh there!

So to be historical you have to be aggressive regardless of which side you play?

This doesn't seem right. I would have thought an aggressive player would have an ahistorical game, i.e. do better than actual history.

So how does the AI play - conservative/aggressive? And the other question is how badly does the AI cheat to make itself an effective opponent against a human?

i think Jaw mis-typed...am guessing he meant aggressive players "might" have an ahistorical game...?



elmo3 -> RE: War in the East Q&A (12/29/2009 7:17:52 PM)

Early in the campaign the Germans must be aggressive.  Their best chance, as was the case historically, is to score an early victory.  The longer the Soviets stay in the game the more likely it is they will recover and eventually go over on the offensive.  At that point the Soviets need aggressive play to prevent the Germans from setting up a stalemate situation.



thackaray -> RE: War in the East Q&A (12/29/2009 7:48:12 PM)

I know WitE isn't WIR but in PBEM when German players can't take Leningrad before Winter '41, most of them give up and ruin a good game for a Soviet player who has taken time and effort to organise a good defence.

The Russians won historically in the main by grinding the German forces down and pushing back a dogged German defence. This was conservative by my definition. Granted, Soviet Generals competed against each other nearer the end of the war.

My definition of aggressive attack is breaking through the enemy lines and pushing deep a 3-4 hexes behind to cut off enemy units and keeping this style of play up all along the front. This means risking lack of supply and air cover.

Conservate game play for the Russian attacker is attacking all along the front all the time, advancing 1-2 hexes within supply/rail conversion limits. This is what happened in real life.



Page: <<   < prev  11 12 [13] 14 15   next >   >>

Valid CSS!




Forum Software © ASPPlayground.NET Advanced Edition 2.4.5 ANSI
1.535156