RE: Please Sir, send the 105mm AA guns to the front!

RE: Please Sir, send the 105mm AA guns to the front! (Full Version)

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

Message

pad152 -> RE: Please Sir, send the 105mm AA guns to the front! (3/31/2011 4:23:54 AM)
The Editor Manual claims that production is on-demand and adjusts, is that true?

larryfulkerson -> RE: Please Sir, send the 105mm AA guns to the front! (3/31/2011 5:59:37 AM)
Oh.....I hope so. Everytime a TOE changes to a different weapon device there's a need to adjust something in production. Etc.

BleedingOrange -> RE: Please Sir, send the 105mm AA guns to the front! (3/31/2011 6:25:27 AM)
The problem with the Tanks that don't exist theory is that if his units had taken more hvy tank losses those units that "don't exist" would be used. The send your units into combat more so you can have higher tank losses just to be able to access those tanks makes no sense.

76mm -> RE: Please Sir, send the 105mm AA guns to the front! (3/31/2011 7:47:23 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: BleedingOrange The send your units into combat more so you can have higher tank losses just to be able to access those tanks makes no sense. Actually I think it makes perfect sense as long as the devs have decided not to allow the Germans to create new units, as they have. Let's face it, the Germans were pretty thin on resources, and if the Tiger battalions on the Eastern Front were at 100% TOE, the Tigers would have been sent elsewhere, it is not as if the Germans were not in desperate need of panzers everywhere. If, on the other hand, the Tiger battalions saw continuous heavy action and contantly needed replacements, the tanks would be sent to them. You can argue about whether the devs should allow the Germans to create new units, but given their decision this mechanism is perfectly logical.

wosung -> RE: Please Sir, send the 105mm AA guns to the front! (3/31/2011 8:17:49 AM)
ORIGINAL: kirkgregerson quote: You'll never convince me that it's not dumb as heck for any game to allow for 200 tanks of any type to sit in a 'pool'. It just never would have EVER happened, so why would the game allow for it? That's what is disturbing to me. "Never EVER." Nothing less boastful would fit, wouldn't it? You base your argument on how clever games should behave?! Historically such a big tank pooling just happened right in 1941. Based on Order No. 32. tank reinforcement for the Ostfront was handled very restrictive in 1941: The production was to be used rather for creating new Panzer divisions (for attacking the Middle East), than to resupply those fighting at the Ostfront. Sources: Bernhard R. Kroener, Die personellen Ressourcen des Dritten Reiches im Spannungsfeld zwischen Wehrmacht, Bürokratie und Kriegswirtschaft 1939-42 [Third Reich’s personnel ressources between Wehrmacht, bureaucracy and war economy], in: Deutschland und der Zweite Weltkrieg, vol. 5.1, pp. 693-1001, esp. p. 867. , p. 868. Rolf-Dieter Müller, Das Scheitern der wirtschaftlichen "Blitzkriegstrategie" [The failed economic Blitzkrieg strategy], in: Das Deutsche Reich und der Zweite Weltkrieg, Vol. 4, Der Angriff auf die Sowjetunion, pp. 936-1078, see pp. 974-975. http://www.matrixgames.com/forums/tm.asp?m=2684171&mpage=1&key=�

BleedingOrange -> RE: Please Sir, send the 105mm AA guns to the front! (3/31/2011 9:03:40 AM)
Since the game doesn't cover any other fronts and it's been stated that these tanks are for the East it still makes no sense that they would sit in a pool and not be used. If the game provided for overages to be "used" on other fronts to improve the Axis situation I wouldn't mind it, but the game doesn't. If the Germans would have had that many noncommitted Tigers I don't think there is any doubt they would have formed additional units and that the majority would have been sent East. The problem is that the German player is not rewarded for conserving his forces because he will not get any more units and his TO&E will be "upgraded" to a less combat effective unit regardless of how many Rifle squads, tanks, etc he has. This to me is a serious flaw because the Soviets on the other hand can create additional units so they have the use of additional forces they historically didn't have. They should either give the Germans the same ability or remove it from the Soviets. I hope they will fix this soon. This should be in reply to 76MM

stevie -> RE: Please Sir, send the 105mm AA guns to the front! (3/31/2011 10:04:11 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: kirkgregerson I'm not sure why some people can't understand the solution is simple. Just allow for either side some control over creating units (div/rgt/bat) with surplus units (production) at cost of APs. Good luck trying to argue it will cause any imbalance. If you have the equipment/manpower then you should be able to use it. You'll never convince me that it's not dumb as heck for any game to allow for 200 tanks of any type to sit in a 'pool'. It just never would have EVER happened, so why would the game allow for it? That's what is disturbing to me. I know at some point the developers will allow for this feature to be in the game. It won't happen any time soon as there's bigger fish to fry <cough air campaign>, but it will happen. So I'm not sweating it. Please don't make a fool out of yourself and say that hundreds of valuable tanks would have been sitting around waiting for units to lose tanks in order for them to ever be sent to the front .. for either side in this campaign. In fact the Germans were in many cases sending tanks to the front well before they were even properly put through their trial runs. Just look at the early panther models. Absolutely right. With so many efforts made to be historically accurate (fortunately), just to stick to fixed TOE's is counterproductive. Germany made any effort on all fronts to improve their fighting power (e.g. the landsers replacing their "Karabiner" with the russian SMG's) The use of captured equipment was often inevitable. I admit that it will be very difficult to reproduce this. The fixed arrival dates of most units in WITE is a good feature, but in reality they were simply dependend on and a result of the availability of the equipement. Don't get me wrong, I love the arrival schedule in general, but it could be improved. Why not simply add some flexibility in the system? The greater the pool, the greater the possibility of the automatic creation of, for excample, the "schwere Panzerabteilung 515"? You could see it as a kind of reward for the careful player, very motivating for him, if it happens. Or simply let the player decide if he wants to create a new additional unit and spent the required APs. Add some weeks or month of delay and the players will be careful to use the option. It is, by the way, something the russian player is allowed to do and leads to ahistorical scenarios anyway.

karonagames -> RE: Please Sir, send the 105mm AA guns to the front! (3/31/2011 10:18:02 AM)
quote: The Editor Manual claims that production is on-demand and adjusts, is that true? Can everyone please re-read Trey(El Hefe)'s post, and understand that ALL production of aircraft and AFVs are averaged out. We have already had a thread about FW190A appearing in the pool before they are used by arriving reinforcements. Pretty soon we will have people complaining that their 1943 Panzer divisions will be short of Panthers, because the averaged out production does not match what was sent to units historically. By using an averaged system there are bound to be anaomalies when there are peaks and troughs of demand out side of the average. I cannot see the system changing, as it can be proven that the current system does produce the correct totals for production. As part of testing I monitored Tiger Production up to the end of 1943, and the game's production system produced 1 less than was produced historically. The "pool" is simply the mechanic that is used to hold the variances from the average consumptions off the map and out of the game. Should players use these numbers to plan their whole game strategy around? I think not. They are simply numbers that are not intended to bear any resemblance to "reality", except when you get to the end of the game and can compare total production to the numbers in the charts posted earlier. Only then can you say that the current system doesn't do the job it was intended to do.

76mm -> RE: Please Sir, send the 105mm AA guns to the front! (3/31/2011 10:19:18 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: BleedingOrange Since the game doesn't cover any other fronts and it's been stated that these tanks are for the East it still makes no sense that they would sit in a pool and not be used. If the game provided for overages to be "used" on other fronts to improve the Axis situation I wouldn't mind it, but the game doesn't. Then, as many others have suggested, the solution is simple--you simply lose any Tigers if your TOE is at 100%, to represent them being sent to other fronts--is that better? At least this way you can build up a reserve of Tigers and use the heck out of them during the war. As stated over and over and over again in this thread, the buildup in the pool is a function of a rather simple production function. Why are some of you so fixated on this issue? quote: ORIGINAL: BleedingOrange If the Germans would have had that many noncommitted Tigers I don't think there is any doubt they would have formed additional units and that the majority would have been sent East...The problem is that the German player is not rewarded for conserving his forces..." Really? I don't know how you could know such a thing. Moreover, in many large organizations, including militaries, there is a principle known as "use it or lose it"--in this instance, they gave you 100 Tigers, you didn't lose any, so apparently you are not using them as you should and don't need anymore. Instead, the Tigers should be given to someone who fights with them, not keeps them in the motorpool all the time, as you apparently do. Like it or not, there is a certain logic to this argument. quote: ORIGINAL: BleedingOrange ...the Soviets on the other hand can create additional units so they have the use of additional forces they historically didn't have. They should either give the Germans the same ability or remove it from the Soviets. I hope they will fix this soon. I seriously doubt they will "fix" this because I am not sure that it is such a big issue; at least there are not that many people complaining about it, at least until the "200 Resting Tigers" appeared...

BleedingOrange -> RE: Please Sir, send the 105mm AA guns to the front! (3/31/2011 12:01:23 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: 76mm Then, as many others have suggested, the solution is simple--you simply lose any Tigers if your TOE is at 100%, to represent them being sent to other fronts--is that better? At least this way you can build up a reserve of Tigers and use the heck out of them during the war. As stated over and over and over again in this thread, the buildup in the pool is a function of a rather simple production function. Why are some of you so fixated on this issue? Sending the tanks to another front is not better because as has been stated this equipment is for the East Front. Yes it is a simple production function, but it is also one that as others have stated has a known ebb and flow and the designers are okay with an excess at times and a shortage at others so the end numbers come out right. If the units are there, there is no reason they shouldn't be used. The Soviet side has the ability to take advantage of these types of situations so why shouldn't the Germans? Nobody is fixated on this issue just expressing our opinions on it. quote: ORIGINAL: 76mm Really? I don't know how you could know such a thing. Moreover, in many large organizations, including militaries, there is a principle known as "use it or lose it"--in this instance, they gave you 100 Tigers, you didn't lose any, so apparently you are not using them as you should and don't need anymore. Instead, the Tigers should be given to someone who fights with them, not keeps them in the motorpool all the time, as you apparently do. Like it or not, there is a certain logic to this argument. No country is going to punish a general for trying to minimize casualties and equipment losses by withholding advanced weapon systems from a front as dire as the East was. As far as the original poster not using his units, I don't know what he did with them. You refer to someone else fighting them, but as has been pointed out it's only the East front so there is no logic to keeping it from the player however he choses to use his units. quote: ORIGINAL: 76mm I seriously doubt they will "fix" this because I am not sure that it is such a big issue; at least there are not that many people complaining about it, at least until the "200 Resting Tigers" appeared... The issue isn't just the 200 resting tigers. There have been several posts asking about the ability to create units on the German side to reward a player for playing well and having significantly less than historical losses.

76mm -> RE: Please Sir, send the 105mm AA guns to the front! (3/31/2011 12:28:54 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: BleedingOrange You refer to someone else fighting them, but as has been pointed out it's only the East front so there is no logic to keeping it from the player however he choses to use his units. I really don't understand why the German players are so worked up about this tiny issue in a huge game. If the Tiger batt TOE is at 10% and there are still 200 Tigers in the pool, OK, fair enough to complain. Othewise, while you're complaining about not getting 200 Tigers as soon as they arive in the pool, may I complain about the 1.1 MILLION men, and 150+ tanks in my pool at the beginning of 1942? I would certainly trade your problem for mine.

Berkut -> RE: Please Sir, send the 105mm AA guns to the front! (3/31/2011 1:22:31 PM)
This is really rather funny. No matter how many times it is pointed out that the "problem" such as it is is that there are TOO MANY Tigers at some particular point, the fanbois still INSIST that the only possible solution is to get those Tigers to the front. MOAR TIGGERS PLZ!!!! The solution to that problem is to create a more fine grained production model that has production varied by month, so that production matches historical use. Sorry - but there is not "realistic WW2 eastern front" solution that will involve giving you guys more Tigers to play with - if that is what you need, simply create a new scenario where you have however many Tigers and the units to use them that you need to be satisfied. You will be happy, and the rest of us will be happy. Everyone is happy!

karonagames -> RE: Please Sir, send the 105mm AA guns to the front! (3/31/2011 1:29:40 PM)
Tiger fetish is a curable condition - therapy and counseling classes will commence shortly.

Berkut -> RE: Please Sir, send the 105mm AA guns to the front! (3/31/2011 1:33:42 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: stevie Or simply let the player decide if he wants to create a new additional unit and spent the required APs. Add some weeks or month of delay and the players will be careful to use the option. It is, by the way, something the russian player is allowed to do and leads to ahistorical scenarios anyway. This is not a bad suggestion - and on the face of it makes some sense. Why not let the German player create new support units in the fashion the Soviet player does? However, I would argue against it - although I will also admit straight up that my argument is very subjective. But here it is... One thing I really like about WitE is that opening up the game as the German player is vastly different than opening it up as the Soviet player. The two sides are ridiculously asymetrical - almost to the extent that you are playing two different games. Playing the Germans, you are handed this incredibly well designed, capable, and powerful tool, and then expected to achieve some pretty amazing results with that tool. The tool (the Wehrmacht) is very powerful, but also very precise. You do not have much flexibility in how it is organized, or how it is designed. The challenge is to make it work the best way possible, but within the rather severe limits that the tool is designed around. And there is kind of a problem - the tool is really freaking awesome, but it isn't quite the right tool for the job. Seems the guys who made the tool didn't exactly understand the task that it was designed to solve. So while the tool is powerful, resilient, and well organized, it doesn't quite fit the task at hand. Your challenge is making it work anyway. The Soviets are totally different. Here your tool is a piece of ****. It doesn't work at all! It is unwieldy, has all the moving parts in the wrong place, most of the moving parts don't even move, and it breaks every-time you try to do something with it. But...you have a huge workshop at your disposal. You have lots and lots and lots of war material, and while the tool you have is almost certainly going to be destroyed, you get to try to organize, design, and deploy a new tool, one better suited to the task at hand. THAT is the challenge of playing the Soviets - how do you make the Red Army actually work? So that is why I don't want to see the German player be allowed to create new units in the manner the Soviet player can - it would take away what I personally see as the unique challenge of each side. The Germans already have an incredibly potent war machine - letting the player tweak and over-optimize it is just going to make them that much more powerful, and in a fashion that fundamentally changes what makes the German job so hard, despite their incredible army. The Soviets get that capability, but then, they are starting with utter crap. Turning their crap army into something that actually works is the entire fun of playing the Soviets - why play them if the Germans get a better army, AND can turn around and fix its flaws as well?

Great_Ajax -> RE: Please Sir, send the 105mm AA guns to the front! (3/31/2011 2:04:26 PM)
Weapon systems that use armament points are on-demand such as mortars, anti-tank guns, howitzers, etc. Vehicles have their own factories which continue to churn out x units each turn. Trey quote: ORIGINAL: pad152 The Editor Manual claims that production is on-demand and adjusts, is that true?

Berkut -> RE: Please Sir, send the 105mm AA guns to the front! (3/31/2011 2:16:15 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: BigAnorak Tiger envy is a curable condition - therapy and counseling classes will commence shortly. If the designers of this game cared about the players, they would combine both of these problems into one, and get a truly awesome fix: Fantasy units that can use those Tigers...but modified with the 10.5cm guns that are extra! Of course, there are 400 extra guns, and only 200 extra Tigers. So they would need to either make another 200 extra Tigers, or maybe just put two guns on each Tiger.

Oleg Mastruko -> RE: Please Sir, send the 105mm AA guns to the front! (3/31/2011 2:47:14 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Berkut Fantasy units that can use those Tigers...but modified with the 10.5cm guns that are extra! Of course, there are 400 extra guns, and only 200 extra Tigers. So they would need to either make another 200 extra Tigers, or maybe just put two guns on each Tiger. I nominate this for Post of the Week [&o] [:D] Of course don't forget surplus 81mm mortars that would be mounted in quad-tube mounts on top of these vehicles. The resulting vehicle would be employed as mothership to launch obsolete mini-tanks like Pz IIs or Czech P38s, which would be towed to the deployment area behind the mothership Tiger. Hitler the proto-megalomaniac would love these ideas!

JAMiAM -> RE: Please Sir, send the 105mm AA guns to the front! (3/31/2011 4:41:14 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Oleg Mastruko quote: ORIGINAL: Berkut Fantasy units that can use those Tigers...but modified with the 10.5cm guns that are extra! Of course, there are 400 extra guns, and only 200 extra Tigers. So they would need to either make another 200 extra Tigers, or maybe just put two guns on each Tiger. I nominate this for Post of the Week [&o] [:D] Actually, I think that the following post by Berkut is better. So, I will nominate it for Post of the Month! quote: ORIGINAL: Berkut quote: ORIGINAL: stevie Or simply let the player decide if he wants to create a new additional unit and spent the required APs. Add some weeks or month of delay and the players will be careful to use the option. It is, by the way, something the russian player is allowed to do and leads to ahistorical scenarios anyway. This is not a bad suggestion - and on the face of it makes some sense. Why not let the German player create new support units in the fashion the Soviet player does? However, I would argue against it - although I will also admit straight up that my argument is very subjective. But here it is... One thing I really like about WitE is that opening up the game as the German player is vastly different than opening it up as the Soviet player. The two sides are ridiculously asymetrical - almost to the extent that you are playing two different games. Playing the Germans, you are handed this incredibly well designed, capable, and powerful tool, and then expected to achieve some pretty amazing results with that tool. The tool (the Wehrmacht) is very powerful, but also very precise. You do not have much flexibility in how it is organized, or how it is designed. The challenge is to make it work the best way possible, but within the rather severe limits that the tool is designed around. And there is kind of a problem - the tool is really freaking awesome, but it isn't quite the right tool for the job. Seems the guys who made the tool didn't exactly understand the task that it was designed to solve. So while the tool is powerful, resilient, and well organized, it doesn't quite fit the task at hand. Your challenge is making it work anyway. The Soviets are totally different. Here your tool is a piece of ****. It doesn't work at all! It is unwieldy, has all the moving parts in the wrong place, most of the moving parts don't even move, and it breaks every-time you try to do something with it. But...you have a huge workshop at your disposal. You have lots and lots and lots of war material, and while the tool you have is almost certainly going to be destroyed, you get to try to organize, design, and deploy a new tool, one better suited to the task at hand. THAT is the challenge of playing the Soviets - how do you make the Red Army actually work? So that is why I don't want to see the German player be allowed to create new units in the manner the Soviet player can - it would take away what I personally see as the unique challenge of each side. The Germans already have an incredibly potent war machine - letting the player tweak and over-optimize it is just going to make them that much more powerful, and in a fashion that fundamentally changes what makes the German job so hard, despite their incredible army. The Soviets get that capability, but then, they are starting with utter crap. Turning their crap army into something that actually works is the entire fun of playing the Soviets - why play them if the Germans get a better army, AND can turn around and fix its flaws as well? Well said, indeed!

marty_01 -> RE: Please Sir, send the 105mm AA guns to the front! (3/31/2011 4:51:27 PM)
Not to belabor this any more than it already has been, but I still have a question about production averaging – even after reading back through El Hefe’s posts. I agree, everyone posting to this thread should re-read his posts on Page-1 of the thread to be in tune with the averaging aspect of equipment production and what the equipment pool numbers thingy represents in-game vs. what we – or at least I -- was intuitively thinking the pool numbers represent. Moreover, like various things in this game, what we see being represented is sometimes counter-intuitive to our own particular thought processes (ala some of the Air Doctrine settings took awhile for me to get used to). But once I see the design intent or designers notes or an in-depth (hopefully rational and friendly) forum discussion it becomes a bit more clear what to do and how to do it in-game. This is from the Game Manual on page 249 – which also sort of says the same thing: quote: However, simply having the ground element equipment and manpower available doesn’t mean they will get to the unit that requires replacements. The unit must pass several checks to see that they actually get replacements, and how many they get. As a special case, it will generally be harder for Axis units to receive replacements during the first winter (22.3). This results in ground element equipment and manpower remaining in the pool even though there are units that need them as replacements. In addition, while some ground element equipment requiring armament points are built and sent out during the replacement segment based on unit demand, other equipment is automatically built during the production phase that is not immediately used and eventually may end up being scrapped if the ground element becomes obsolete and too much equipment stacks up in the pool relative to the number of units still using that type of ground element equipment. This system allows for the realistic production of armaments ahead of time, that often end up never being used, instead of having a perfect just in time production system. Unfortunately I’d be willing to bet that this same question is going to be asked again -- and maybe again and again -- on this forum as a result of new players buying the game and subsequently getting into the nutz and boltz of the game. Be that as it may… But like I say, I still have a question regarding the production averaging thingy described on page-1 of this thread as well as what is sort of stated (see above) in the game manual on page-249. If our virtual Albert Speer produces the same numbers of Tiger tanks per week with the number some sort of average of total historical production (if you don’t wanna talk Tigers than insert whatever piece of equipment you like into the blank), what is the point of the German armament points and such? The manual indicates the following on Page- 246 quote: The production system builds the individual AFV, combat vehicle or devices from armament point production and places them in the pools, which is what is reflected on the production screen. & Page-249 quote: In order for units to receive replacement ground elements, there must be either in the pool, or alternatively for ground elements built from armaments points, there must be sufficient armament points in the pool to build the devices associated with that type of ground element. My question is: If the Germans don’t produce as many armament points as whatever average was used to develop the “baseline” or “pseudo-Historical” German production rates for all the various forms of equipment their units are being provided with, how does the in-game production model go about compensating and rebalancing equipment and supply production when in-game armament point production drops below the “pseudo-Historical" baseline figure? In other words, if the Soviets start capturing German industry in 1943 or whatever, does virtual Albert Speer still get to produce 9-tiger tanks per week (or whatever the Tiger Tank production figure is)? I assume this could happen given the right in-game circumstances and two players that still want to press on to the bitter end inspite of the Russians being in Germany in 1943.

karonagames -> RE: Please Sir, send the 105mm AA guns to the front! (3/31/2011 5:09:10 PM)
quote: does virtual Albert Speer still get to produce 9-tiger tanks per week (or whatever the Tiger Tank production figure is)? If there is a shortage of fuel and/or resources when the production cycle starts, then factories' scheduled production will not happen - on a random basis, so yes, the total production will be reduced as a result, and I am pretty certain Pavel will have linked total production to an assumed amount of resource contribution from captured locations - hence the implied need to follow the historical strategy of going for the Oil in the south.

marty_01 -> RE: Please Sir, send the 105mm AA guns to the front! (3/31/2011 5:25:24 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: BigAnorak quote: does virtual Albert Speer still get to produce 9-tiger tanks per week (or whatever the Tiger Tank production figure is)? If there is a shortage of fuel and/or resources when the production cycle starts, then factories' scheduled production will not happen - on a random basis, so yes, the total production will be reduced as a result, and I am pretty certain Pavel will have linked total production to an assumed amount of resource contribution from captured locations - hence the implied need to follow the historical strategy of going for the Oil in the south. Thanks BigAnorak. I don't know enough about what the game is doing for production -- i.e. the balancing act between Armament points -- fuel -- raw materials(?) etc. From your answer it seems conceivable that the Germans could be placed in a situation where they are producing fewer Armament Points than what the Designers have set as the "pseudo-historical" armaments production figure -- the baseline figure that would presumably result in a completely historic set of reinforcements and replacements being pooped out by our virtual Albert Speer. I have a follow-up question: Is it possible within the current game model for the Germans to produce more armament points than the "pseudo-historical" baseline figure for arms points production? Like as you suggest the Axis capture Baku (or whatever)?

Lrfss -> RE: Please Sir, send the 105mm AA guns to the front! (3/31/2011 5:28:52 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Berkut quote: ORIGINAL: stevie Or simply let the player decide if he wants to create a new additional unit and spent the required APs. Add some weeks or month of delay and the players will be careful to use the option. It is, by the way, something the russian player is allowed to do and leads to ahistorical scenarios anyway. This is not a bad suggestion - and on the face of it makes some sense. Why not let the German player create new support units in the fashion the Soviet player does? However, I would argue against it - although I will also admit straight up that my argument is very subjective. But here it is... One thing I really like about WitE is that opening up the game as the German player is vastly different than opening it up as the Soviet player. The two sides are ridiculously asymetrical - almost to the extent that you are playing two different games. Playing the Germans, you are handed this incredibly well designed, capable, and powerful tool, and then expected to achieve some pretty amazing results with that tool. The tool (the Wehrmacht) is very powerful, but also very precise. You do not have much flexibility in how it is organized, or how it is designed. The challenge is to make it work the best way possible, but within the rather severe limits that the tool is designed around. And there is kind of a problem - the tool is really freaking awesome, but it isn't quite the right tool for the job. Seems the guys who made the tool didn't exactly understand the task that it was designed to solve. So while the tool is powerful, resilient, and well organized, it doesn't quite fit the task at hand. Your challenge is making it work anyway. The Soviets are totally different. Here your tool is a piece of **. It doesn't work at all! It is unwieldy, has all the moving parts in the wrong place, most of the moving parts don't even move, and it breaks every-time you try to do something with it. But...you have a huge workshop at your disposal. You have lots and lots and lots of war material, and while the tool you have is almost certainly going to be destroyed, you get to try to organize, design, and deploy a new tool, one better suited to the task at hand. THAT is the challenge of playing the Soviets - how do you make the Red Army actually work? So that is why I don't want to see the German player be allowed to create new units in the manner the Soviet player can - it would take away what I personally see as the unique challenge of each side. The Germans already have an incredibly potent war machine - letting the player tweak and over-optimize it is just going to make them that much more powerful, and in a fashion that fundamentally changes what makes the German job so hard, despite their incredible army. The Soviets get that capability, but then, they are starting with utter crap. Turning their crap army into something that actually works is the entire fun of playing the Soviets - why play them if the Germans get a better army, AND can turn around and fix its flaws as well? I see your point, however why not allow for the game to expand it's horizons for at least Support Unit creation for the Germans. If polled by far I suggest most would vote, yes on this subject matter? After all if it's an option you can choose to have it or not and I'm sure there will be plenty of people happly playing with the option on or off...simple as heck I would think, no? If it were me, I would have the "option" that either side could do equal in so far as production tweaks and unit creation period. Bottom line is allow the "Player's/Buyer's" of this product the choice to choose! Most people like having choices in life/games (LOL) and not be forced down one path in particular when they know that path will lead to one outcome which will likely be worse than possible otherwise... I VOTE TO GIVE >POWER TO THE PEOPLE**< [:D] Now is all we need is for some intelligent bored to death person to make a poll so we can vote and start a GG Revolt if necessary...[8\|]

Emx77 -> RE: Please Sir, send the 105mm AA guns to the front! (3/31/2011 8:28:55 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Oleg Mastruko quote: ORIGINAL: Berkut Fantasy units that can use those Tigers...but modified with the 10.5cm guns that are extra! Of course, there are 400 extra guns, and only 200 extra Tigers. So they would need to either make another 200 extra Tigers, or maybe just put two guns on each Tiger. I nominate this for Post of the Week [&o] [:D] Of course don't forget surplus 81mm mortars that would be mounted in quad-tube mounts on top of these vehicles. The resulting vehicle would be employed as mothership to launch obsolete mini-tanks like Pz IIs or Czech P38s, which would be towed to the deployment area behind the mothership Tiger. Hitler the proto-megalomaniac would love these ideas! [sm=00000280.gif][sm=00000280.gif][sm=00000280.gif]

Baron von Beer -> RE: Please Sir, send the 105mm AA guns to the front! (4/1/2011 8:43:33 PM)
Ok, why beat around the bush. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Landkreuzer_P._1500_Monster MELT the 200 tigers and make 7 of these babies. No quad mortars on the roof, this will have quad TIGERS mounted on top.

Berkut -> RE: Please Sir, send the 105mm AA guns to the front! (4/1/2011 9:39:23 PM)
LOL. quote: On 23 June 1942 the German Ministry of Armaments proposed a 1,000 tonne tank – the Landkreuzer P. 1000 Ratte. Adolf Hitler himself expressed interest in the project and go-ahead was granted. In December the same year, Krupp designed an even larger 1,500 tonne tank – the P 1500 Monster. In 1943, Albert Speer, the Minister for Armaments, cancelled both projects. That Speer guy was such a wet blanket. Sometimes I am just kind of stunned the Nazis ever got as far as they did. What a bunch of fruitloops.

Lrfss -> RE: Please Sir, send the 105mm AA guns to the front! (4/1/2011 10:13:40 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Baron von Beer Ok, why beat around the bush. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Landkreuzer_P._1500_Monster MELT the 200 tigers and make 7 of these babies. No quad mortars on the roof, this will have quad TIGERS mounted on top. Would be fun to make those seven or so and see what they could do in a "Last Stand In Berlin" scenerio...lol!

Lrfss -> RE: Please Sir, send the 105mm AA guns to the front! (4/1/2011 10:16:57 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Berkut LOL. quote: On 23 June 1942 the German Ministry of Armaments proposed a 1,000 tonne tank – the Landkreuzer P. 1000 Ratte. Adolf Hitler himself expressed interest in the project and go-ahead was granted. In December the same year, Krupp designed an even larger 1,500 tonne tank – the P 1500 Monster. In 1943, Albert Speer, the Minister for Armaments, cancelled both projects. That Speer guy was such a wet blanket. Sometimes I am just kind of stunned the Nazis ever got as far as they did. What a bunch of fruitloops. Actually, he no doubt did many great things for the Third Reich, all those awesome buildings, amazing deco and gathering the labor forces together to make all this cool stuff[X(]

sillyflower -> RE: Please Sir, send the 105mm AA guns to the front! (4/1/2011 10:23:03 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Berkut One thing I really like about WitE is that opening up the game as the German player is vastly different than opening it up as the Soviet player. The two sides are ridiculously asymetrical - almost to the extent that you are playing two different games. Playing the Germans, you are handed this incredibly well designed, capable, and powerful tool, and then expected to achieve some pretty amazing results with that tool. The tool (the Wehrmacht) is very powerful, but also very precise. You do not have much flexibility in how it is organized, or how it is designed. The challenge is to make it work the best way possible, but within the rather severe limits that the tool is designed around. And there is kind of a problem - the tool is really freaking awesome, but it isn't quite the right tool for the job. Seems the guys who made the tool didn't exactly understand the task that it was designed to solve. So while the tool is powerful, resilient, and well organized, it doesn't quite fit the task at hand. Your challenge is making it work anyway. The Soviets are totally different. Here your tool is a piece of ****. It doesn't work at all! It is unwieldy, has all the moving parts in the wrong place, most of the moving parts don't even move, and it breaks every-time you try to do something with it. But...you have a huge workshop at your disposal. You have lots and lots and lots of war material, and while the tool you have is almost certainly going to be destroyed, you get to try to organize, design, and deploy a new tool, one better suited to the task at hand. THAT is the challenge of playing the Soviets - how do you make the Red Army actually work? So that is why I don't want to see the German player be allowed to create new units in the manner the Soviet player can - it would take away what I personally see as the unique challenge of each side. The Germans already have an incredibly potent war machine - letting the player tweak and over-optimize it is just going to make them that much more powerful, and in a fashion that fundamentally changes what makes the German job so hard, despite their incredible army. The Soviets get that capability, but then, they are starting with utter crap. Turning their crap army into something that actually works is the entire fun of playing the Soviets - why play them if the Germans get a better army, AND can turn around and fix its flaws as well? I agree. If I'm doing well enough to have these stocks, I shall just be grateful as I know I will need them later. If I don't end up needing them, it will be because I won.

Zort -> RE: Please Sir, send the 105mm AA guns to the front! (4/1/2011 10:41:56 PM)
I'm bored so I thought I would chime in on this. Didn't Hitler refuse giving Guedarian 400 engines for his tanks or something like that? So if the germans are doing better then why would Hitler give away tanks when he would use them somewhere else? Ok I know we all want to be able to play with the production. Play Bombing the Reich (or the new one) and micro manage a/c engines. I hope the grand campaign game will allow us to change factory production (not build anything before it was available), ie, stop building panzer 2's and also have the option to not change the TOE when it comes available. At some time the germans will have to change TOE's just because they don't have enough manpower.

marty_01 -> RE: Please Sir, send the 105mm AA guns to the front! (4/2/2011 2:45:40 PM)
Bump I have a follow-up question to BigANorak's Reply (see above): Is it possible within the current game model for the Germans to produce more armament points than the "pseudo-historical" baseline figure for arms points production? Like as you suggest the Axis capture Baku (or whatever)?

Page: << < prev 1 2 3 [4] 5 next > >>

Forum Software © ASPPlayground.NET Advanced Edition 2.4.5 ANSI

6.046875