Winter War consequences and exploiting the War Economy (Full Version)

All Forums >> [Current Games From Matrix.] >> [World War II] >> WW2: Time of Wrath



Message

carnifex -> Winter War consequences and exploiting the War Economy (11/6/2009 2:48:05 AM)

The Winter War event is set to fire randomly every week between Dec 1, 1939 and Feb 25, 1940. The chance for the event firing is 25%. Now you would think that it's almost certain that this event will fire eventually - it's hard not to roll under 25 twelve times in a row.

However, I've had two games as the Soviets where the event did not fire. The consequences were dire.

The following is a table which illustrates this: 
	NO WAR	 			 WAR	
DATE  Saved PP  WE		      Saved PP	WE
						
Dec 39	383	30			365	20
Jan 40	586	30			696	47
Feb 40	787	30			1032	54
Mar 40	990	30			1490	61
Apr 40	1190	30			1979	61
May 40	1393	30			2479	61
Jun 40	1604	30			2985	61
Jul 40	1754	30			3439	61
Aug 40	1987	30			3991	61
Sep 40	2223	30			4584	71
Oct 40	2512	50			5336	81
Nov 40	2952	50			6133	81
Dec 40	3374	50			6924	81
Jan 41	3832	50			7759	81
Feb 41	4302	50			8614	81


I ran two games. The first one I made the Winter War event not fire. The second one I made the event fire on December 1st. Both games had relatively the same progression - France fell at around the same time, the Axis Minors joined in a relatively same manner, etc. I spent no money at all except to beef up a couple of infantry units so they could fight Finland in good order.

Notice the amount of PPs I was able to save by Feb 41. In the game with the Winter War, I was able to save double the PPs, due to the War Economy rise during the Winter War. That translates into roughly 132 Level II infantry Corps. Realistically it's a lot less, because you have to spend PPs on research, strat points, and replacements for understrength units, but it's still a lot of scratch.

I suggest modifying the following line in territorial_demands_soviets_finland.xml:

Change

<rightOperand constValue="25"/>

to

<rightOperand constValue="75"/>

(or any other percentage you feel will almost guarantee a Winter War).

If this event doesn't fire then the Soviets are screwed. Big time.

As a corollary to the above, the Winter War event is subject to exploitation by the Soviet player. For example, I delayed my conquest of Finland by two months, just sitting outside their empty cities until I was ready to walk in. As a consequence, I entered the May turn with 2784 PPs and a WE of 75. If I wanted to stay at "war" with Finland for another six months, I bet I would have been able to squeeze another 2000-3000 PPs out of the system before the Germans made their move.

I would suggest for patch 1.7 that the pre-German invasion Soviet WE rise is capped (along with making the Winter War event more certain to fire).



carnifex -> RE: Winter War consequences (11/6/2009 6:40:08 PM)

Just wanted to add that the USSR can further game the WE status by declaring war on Persia on turn 1. Two months down the line the WE is 14% higher at absolutely no cost to the Soviets and it just keeps going. The USSR can stay at war with Persia forever - there's no need to invade them and if you send down a couple of divisions to watch the border the Persians will be rendered harmless.

The WE mechanic needs to be seriously re-examined, at the very least vis-a-vis the Soviets.




cpdeyoung -> RE: Winter War consequences (11/7/2009 2:08:51 PM)

These techniques have been explored and exploited for quite awhile. See my various RtV and ToW Soviet AARs, for example. Chocolino explored the Winter War ramifications quite awhile ago. The war economy going up when a nation is at war is the phenomenon being modeled, and this is not such a bad model.

The AI needs all the help it can get, so if it goes to war with Finland, let it wage the war, and get the increase. The AI will not declare war on Persia, or the Baltic States for that matter.

If you are playing the USSR and do not like the effect then don't wage the war. If you want to wage the war, but don't like the production points gained then use F11 and zap them.

If you are in a PBEM game then you could use a house rule, if all agree, which limits the bellicosity of the Soviets.

Or, if you are playing against Stalin and he is too active - slap him down, let the Soviet player know that attacking Estonia, or Persia is going to get a prompt declaration of war from the Axis. Stalin certainly could have historically been more agressive, but he was restraned by possible consequences. In the game you can provide the consequences. The player who tries a war with Persia probably will think twice if it means a prompt attack from Germany.

Given all that, perhaps it is time for the developers to reconsider that there are wars, and Wars, and that a war with Germany is not the same as a war with Persia. The Soviet people accepted great sacrifices to wage war on the Axis, but the would not accept the same to wage a war with Estonia.

By the way, in a recent PBEM whenI invaded Persia, the UK player promptly did also, and we ended up partitioning the country. The Soviets will not send a mere two divisions to the border if troops are pouring in from Kuwait.

The little wars give the Soviet player something to do while waiting for Armagedon, but the other powers should make sure that he has to think of consequences.

Chuck



Mike Parker -> RE: Winter War consequences (11/7/2009 3:49:41 PM)

There is only a 3.16% chance no winter war event will occur.  That to me is not unrealistic in the least.  Since this game tries to have a what-if feel to it, I suppose I am saying looking at 1 game in 33 where the USSR doesn't press for advantage against Finland is not a problem.

With that said I wholeheartedly agree with Chuck on the points he made.



Page: [1]

Valid CSS!




Forum Software © ASPPlayground.NET Advanced Edition 2.4.5 ANSI
0.75