A funny thing happened to SP (Full Version)

All Forums >> [Current Games From Matrix.] >> [World War II] >> Steel Panthers World At War & Mega Campaigns



Message


Galka -> A funny thing happened to SP (7/31/2002 5:59:37 AM)

Like many of you I've played through the various game titles and versions which have resulted in SPWAW V7.1

I may be jumping to conclusions, but it seems like many folks think that 7.1 is not the best version of this game.


I got into a discussion with another veteran player, which resulted in my latest opinion of the game:

>Y'now if they made artillery less plentiful , but more effective.
>i.e. nothing greater than a mortar for the scale of battle we are >currently fighting. (3 cys, 1 squad of tanks, etc)
>Made infantry a dime a dozen, but ineffective on tanks as in MBT >Less heroic, like a very old version of spww2 when the squad >went south after taking 50% per cent casualties
>Kept tanks very expensive, but mass killers HE and MG, same >with field artillery



When I think about the revisions and OOBs that have come and gone, well I'd like to take stock of some of the positve changes that evolved over the years, especially the ones that have been put aside a some point to follow another course.

One mentioned above was that of less heroic infantry.
A long ago versin of SPWW2 or SPWAW had infantry squads dissolving, pinning themselves for the balance of the game or retreating or in full rout with little chance of bringing them back to the front lines.

At one point Paul V made a poignant comment about how real combat being boring to the point that it wouldn't make for good gameplaying. So in the extreme example we have tank crews that have been shot out of their tanks running amok on the battlefield with a either a death wish or a good chance at killing another tank.

Artillery:

Gamers like the notion that companies have a regiment of artillery assigned to them for the duration of a battle. A typical German (32nd) infantry division had 30 companies in three infantry regiments supported by 12 batteries of 4 guns (32 105mm, 12 150mm) Some times these batteries had to reinforce the Pak, Recon or Pioneer Battalions too, at least another 10 cys. That is less than one howitzer for every company. Infantry support weapons such as the 150mm sIG and 75mm leIG and 50mm and 80mm mortars rounded out and probably accounted for more kills than divisional howitzers.

It should be clear in this example that the weapons doing the job in WW2 are not the ones we use while playing our game. Why because there are ineffective in comparison. Further, of these weapons only the mortars in our game can fire indirectly. Who uses an 88 flak to repel troops? Only a dead man (despite the fact it was one of the most effective weapons of WW2).

Summary

Footsoldiers could cost much less, be less effective, and rout before they are down to 25% of their original strength. Crews once shot out of their vehicles could be pinned in retreat or rout, and only fire defensively.

Artillery could be far more effective, and a great deal more expensive, or troops could be far less expensive. HE in direct fire mode could too be most effective against troops. During half the war the German 74/24 was the largest common gun. The Sherman short 75mm and the russian 76mm were the most common allied guns for all of the war.

Does anyone know statistically how many rounds of 75mm , in direct fire mode a squad can take before it routs?




G_X -> (7/31/2002 8:42:39 AM)

Several, I've seen an SS squad take 7, over two turns, this does include rallying however, but still, 7 before it was routed, and about 3 casualties.




john g -> Re: A funny thing happened to SP (7/31/2002 9:31:37 AM)

[QUOTE]Originally posted by Galka
[B]. Who uses an 88 flak to repel troops? Only a dead man (despite the fact it was one of the most effective weapons of WW2).



Footsoldiers could cost much less, be less effective, and rout before they are down to 25% of their original strength. Crews once shot out of their vehicles could be pinned in retreat or rout, and only fire defensively.

Artillery could be far more effective, and a great deal more expensive, or troops could be far less expensive. HE in direct fire mode could too be most effective against troops. During half the war the German 74/24 was the largest common gun. The Sherman short 75mm and the russian 76mm were the most common allied guns for all of the war.

Does anyone know statistically how many rounds of 75mm , in direct fire mode a squad can take before it routs? [/B][/QUOTE]

I guess you have never fended off an infantry heavy assault with 88's, I have. I refer to them as 88mm sniper rifles, I love shooting them with he at advancing infantry. I even would buy the 88flak versions instead of the AT version so that I got more he shells, I rarely ran out of AP rounds but almost always ran out of he.

If infantry seems too godlike to you, you can always adjust the toughness percentage down to 60-70, then they will be cannon fodder just like in SP2.

A suggestion to model WWI was to up the arty to 250 and infantry down to 50. Arty then rules the field but then no one moves since if they are seen they are dead.

The point costs are a balance, each unit has an advantage/disadvantage to others in the game and no one point value is true in all cases. But in the event that a player takes a normal combined arms force, it gives a compromise score.

Just as in the discussion as to how many bombs a unit could survive in an Italian hill town spread over 24 hours vs how many they could survive when all bombers are concentrated in one turn of bombing, just how much fire a unit can survive depends on its circumstances. What terrain is the unit in? Is it moving? Are the rounds coming in 1-2 per turn or 30-40 at once?

From what I have read of WWII, the arty casualties that are best documented are shellings of rear areas, not of front line units during action. It seems that more troops were killed or wounded by lucky hits on the buildings they were sleeping in due to harrassment fire, then by fire while in close contact with the enemy. That is what most of the divisional asset arty used in the game would really be doing. Exceptions are out there, like the ranger company that held a hill against a regimental assault with the support of most of the arty of the nearest corps. It just doesn't make much of a game when you blind shell a town in the dark.
thanks, John.




Galka -> Re: Re: A funny thing happened to SP (7/31/2002 2:26:36 PM)

[QUOTE]Originally posted by john g
[B]


If infantry seems too godlike to you, you can always adjust the toughness percentage down to 60-70, then they will be cannon fodder just like in SP2.

A suggestion to model WWI was to up the arty to 250 and infantry down to 50. Arty then rules the field but then no one moves since if they are seen they are dead.

The point costs are a balance, each unit has an advantage/disadvantage to others in the game and no one point value is true in all cases. But in the event that a player takes a normal combined arms force, it gives a compromise score.

[/B][/QUOTE]

Thanks for responding John. I understand that I can modify ratings to ensure that HE is more effective, or that troops will rout easier, etc. The problem is Artillery is too darn cheap. I've had a frustrated opponent shell my positions with a 5.5 inch howitzer battery for nearly a dozen turns, inflicting very light casualties. His 25lber battery has done even less. 3in mortars are fireworks, etc.

I wouldn't feel so bad if the barrage at least routed my troops, but every turn they are able to raise thier courage and advance into this apparently lethal rain.

If a 5.5 inch battery costs twice as much and inflicted twice as much damage, then a 3" mortar or a 75 leIG, or a 150 sIG might be worth purchacing.

If an infantry troop cost 50% less and routed twice as fast they would make the tank/artillery/troop ratio look even more WW2like.




Les_the_Sarge_9_1 -> (7/31/2002 9:09:07 PM)

Steel Panthers suffers from the same effect that Advanced Squad Leader suffers from when using ASLs DYO Design Your Own chapter.

I would imagine the same problem exists in any game where the player is offered a menu of items forces or options to choose from.

I once played a friend that had picked a rather tidy well thought out SS formation. Mixed force very credible looking.
I picked a massive force with my points of pure rubbish conscript garbage Russians.

The problem was, 26 squads of yahooos shooting the hell out of the neighbourghood will kill just about anything. I had such idiotic numbers against his well planned out but numerically small numbered force.
He died under a hail of bullets from trash troops.

I played a game against a buddy hotseat Steel Panthers game. We set up with the other busy watching tv. Played the game sitting at computer though.
But I knew my German playing buddy was going to purchase a typical German force ie you can bet there would be 88s back there. He had a mix of atypical Panzer III units (I forced him to suffer a game in 1940 France.
My side had nothing much but a basic infantry unit and a swarm of Matilda IIs and backed up by 8 inch artillery.
He had neglected to get artillery himself.

The game was predictable. I dropped a wall of smoke in front of his positions (he grabbed the center board Objective hexes first turn). He foolishly moved his Panzers to close to my Matildas (it was slaughter) and I just dumped 8 inch hell on the Objective hexes till his men were trashed.

The best way to play balanced Steel Panthers is in my opinion with a well designed scenario (note I said well designed, just cause its available doesn't mean you will like it).

The Battle generator is fun, but you have a better chance of a lop sided mess than a good game. 5 turns into the game it is usually easy to see who has won the game.




Bing -> (7/31/2002 9:27:45 PM)

I agree with Les the Sarge. We've tried many different combinations with PBEM generated battles, they all come out being ridiculous. If you can find a well designed scenario, use that for PBEM play - the trick is exactly as Les says, finding that scenario.

Bing




Jack -> (8/1/2002 7:19:01 AM)

In my opinion if play balance is that important agree to play a mirrored game. Highest score wins. Problem solved. You can't playtest a SPWAW scenario as easily as an ASL scenario. I just got done playing the huge Stalingrad map(M4 Jess made it). I nick named one of my opponents Steamroller. Why because that is how he played it as the Soviet. We had a real hoot. Just getting into melee in the factories was worth it.
I guess it depends on why you play SPWAW and how serious you are in doing well. Of course we all want to win but the bottom line is none of us would even be on this forum if we did not play the game. I only play H2H btw and I am happy with it. Galka have you tried it?




Galka -> (8/1/2002 7:43:45 AM)

[QUOTE]Originally posted by Jack
[B]. I only play H2H btw and I am happy with it. Galka have you tried it? [/B][/QUOTE]

Tried It? I thought I told you about it :)

Where do you find opponents for H2H Jack?




Les_the_Sarge_9_1 -> (8/1/2002 8:07:05 AM)

Jack you sound like a top drawer opponent then.

I will always remember ASL for it's ability to be fun regardless of who was winning.

That is why I have no posts to my credit complaining about statistical accuracy anywhere on the forum.

I will NOT be found sifting through the OOBs looking for confusing anomolies. Nor will I be seen running wierd tests to see if a certain weapon's performance makes correct sense.

My hats are off to the oddballs that get off on that stuff, the game I suppose benefits from their efforts.

But I would rather concentrate on playing the game.

Let someone else tend to the minutae:)




Alby -> (8/1/2002 8:12:23 AM)

[QUOTE]Originally posted by Galka
[B]

Tried It? I thought I told you about it :)

Where do you find opponents for H2H Jack? [/B][/QUOTE]

MaNY of us over at the Blitz ladder now play H2H exclusively, In fact, it is one of the games listed in the SP series.
If your unhappy with SPWAW 7.1 I suggest H2H
ask anyone who has played it, and a new update should be out soon.




Jack -> (8/1/2002 8:49:13 AM)

Galka
I got my opponents on the other forum strictly for opponents. I usually have three games on the go. Always with the same guys. We all only play H2H. The attitude that prevails is let's just play. You know how serious or how bad someone wants to play if the negotiations last longer than the game. I avoid people like that. I lost my last two games but who cares. Did I learn from them? yes
Will I make the same mistakes again down the road? Hope not but I might. That's why I like the big battles and make the big maps. Whole rifle coys get wiped out but I had a hoot. You want to play H2H go to the other forum and you will play, you just have to ask.




Colonel von Blitz -> A funny thing happenend to SP (8/1/2002 12:09:12 PM)

[QUOTE]Originally posted by Les the Sarge 9-1
[B]5 turns into the game it is usually easy to see who has won the game. [/B][/QUOTE]

Sarge, this depends SOOOO much on opponents.

For me it takes app. 5 turns to see who will win, if I play against opponent with lower experience. But against opponent who has app. the same skill level as I have, then determining the winner before last turn has been played, is VERY difficult.

Actually, Sarge, you sound like pro to me. The main point why I replied is that I'd like to challenge you for a battle in SPWAW :cool:

If interested, e-mail me: [email]jarno.harma@lut.fi[/email] and we'll agree on rules and preferences.

Colonel




G_X -> (8/2/2002 9:55:04 AM)

Just my meek and humble two cents...I've had games against the AI where I didn't think I was gonna win till the last three rounds or so. I've read DAR's where five rounds into it, one side is winning outright and the other is in a rout, then I come back and only a few turns later, the one that was routed is back and is now winning, only to have the tables turned again, and again, and again.




Colonel von Blitz -> (8/2/2002 11:36:08 AM)

[QUOTE]Originally posted by G_X
[B]I've read DAR's where five rounds into it, one side is winning outright and the other is in a rout, then I come back and only a few turns later[/B][/QUOTE]

It's not unusual to see tables turned suddenly.

Sometimes it can be tactics: make your enemy think he/she is winning and with a couple of nice maneuvers one can suddenly change the name of the game. Sometimes it's just pure luck...like it was in the following example:

In one of my sweetest PBEM victories, I was barely able to repel my opponents vigorous attack with all he got: my SS squads were almost demolished, couple Tigers immobilized or knocked out, and lines of communication severed. My rear objective flags were under enemy control, except one flag...he took it, I took it back in the following turn (if I hadn't been able to recapture it, the game would have been over).

By sheer luck I was able to contact one of my Artillery battery in this time when I needed it the most: a barrage into my rear victory hexes and the remnants of my troops assaulted! In the same time, 3 SpecOps infiltrated into my opponents rear. I was able to capture both my and his rear victory hexes. Only a handful of SS men drove several Soviet Guard squads out of the small forest and killed couple of T-34 tanks.

It took me a couple of turns to regroup my troops. I didn't want to get my remnants killed and I had to think about my choices. I took a moment of pause: suddenly I realized that my opponent had gambled with all he got and that he didn't have numerical superiority anymore. Actually, his losses were already greater than mine. The rest of the game was only sweeping the three middle victory hex bundles and the victory was mine.

All of you can probably imagine why this kind of victory tastes so sweet :)

Colonel von Blitz




Irinami -> (11/13/2002 11:04:29 PM)

[QUOTE]Originally posted by Les the Sarge 9-1
[B]
The problem was, 26 squads of yahooos shooting the hell out of the neighbourghood will kill just about anything. I had such idiotic numbers against his well planned out but numerically small numbered force.
He died under a hail of bullets from trash troops.
[/B][/QUOTE]

Welcome to the age of the gun, [B]Les[/B]. If LOS could be blocked by lack of communication (EG, the enemy unit has been spotted by one of your units, but since the other of your units is out of contact, they can't fire at this unit because they couldn't have been contacted with regards to them), the game would better represent things. If stealth (esp. with SpecOps squads) were modelled better, it may be a bit different. But, in a sit-down fight, he who puts out the most bullets tends to win the engagement. (Note I didn't say battle. There are strategic elements to that.) That's why Volksgrenadiers were organized. That's why the Marines kept putting more and more automatic weapons into the hands of Platoon commanders. That's why the StG-44/MP44 was produced, and why the Soviet Union chose a terribly inaccurate weapon with amazing reliability and simplicity enough that any conscript from anywhere in the world could be taught it's use. That's my observation of history. In a firefight, he who puts out the most bullets wins that firefight. They may lose the next one, or be annihilated by a flanking maneuver, or their supplies interdicted and the soldiers forced to disband... but that firefight they will win 9 times out of 10. In My (not so) Humble Opinion/Observations, Your Mileage May Vary.




troopie -> (11/18/2002 7:41:37 AM)

Imagine if the game REALLY simulated the actual flow of combat. Your company is on the defensive, hastily dug in along a river line. Several rifle sections are hitting patrol in each platoon area, seeing nothing. Suddenly one hears what he thinks is a clank and sees movement in the bush on the other side of the river. He fires, the rest of the section fires and soon most of the platoon is shooting up the greenery. Then they stop. The patrol goes forward, finds some rabbit crap and a lot of shot up plants.

Someone in No. 2 platoon sees movement in the cleared area in front of a machine gun about five hundred metres away. The MG shoots off a quarter of a belt before it is determined that the sighting WAS of an enemy scout who buggered off as soon as the shooting started.

You've been in position for more than two hours. You, as company commander are tired, but every time you lay your head down, something happens.

It is now past 01h00. You finally fall asleep when a mortar bomb lands among No 1 platoon. Lights and flashes are seen from across the river. Your men are shooting at the flashes, and the company mortar section is firing a mission called by the CO of No. 1 Platoon. You call for fire support from Battalion, but it is unavailable. They don't tell you why. The firing dies down in No.1 platoon's area. A sniper fires at No. 3 platoon. The platoon fires back and the sniper shuts down.

At 04h15 you receive word to pull back several miles. You curse Battalion and pull back, knowing you will not get a chance to sleep for hours. Your XO is swearing that he was on duty all night and didn't get a chance to have a smoke. You offer him one, but discover you're out as well.

Does anyone REALLY want to play a scenario like that?

troopie




Les_the_Sarge_9_1 -> (11/18/2002 8:33:43 AM)

Pity is though, that is the only way that they will ever get to simulate real combat.

It sure isn't being smulated with all that "real" time garbage that they try to tell us actually simulates "real" combat.

From all I have been told, combat patrols are 15 seconds of mad shooting, one side is dead the other wins.




troopie -> (11/18/2002 11:28:59 AM)

[QUOTE]Originally posted by Les the Sarge 9-1
[B]Pity is though, that is the only way that they will ever get to simulate real combat.



From all I have been told, combat patrols are 15 seconds of mad shooting, one side is dead the other wins. [/B][/QUOTE]

Correct, Les.

On a rifle section level, one side sees the other or suspects the presence (more often) of the other and opens up. Other side either runs away, or returns fire. Whoever can set up the heaviest firescreen wins. Usually everything is over in under a minute.

On a larger level the battle [so called] can last all day but individual firefights are very short.

About two minutes (it seemed an eternity) was the longest action that I was ever in.

troopie




Les_the_Sarge_9_1 -> (11/18/2002 9:24:40 PM)

Actually now that I think of it, I heard a few remarks on how some spots of Band of Brothers was a bit dull in spots. But then fortunately ( I am sure they so it that way too), the guys were not constantly fighting for their lives.

I also recall a comment that an online multi user wargame had been noticed to be a bit dull in some aspects. Yep there won't be a major batle going on everywhere all the time (regardless of what level of command).

It is only in artificially controlled circumstances (wargames) where something is happening with everything all the time.

Games are supposed to be fun, even if reality is often dull.




Page: [1]

Valid CSS!




Forum Software © ASPPlayground.NET Advanced Edition 2.4.5 ANSI
1.578125