RE: Game Suggestions: (Full Version)

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



Message

76mm -> RE: Game Suggestions: (4/25/2011 5:08:00 AM)

Another idea: "semi-random" or "random-lite" weather, which only moves the mud/blizzard forward or backward a turn or two, and does not permit mud during the summer.

I am currently playing a PBEM GC where my German opponent has had TWO mud turns by Turn 7. I mean, come on...



Sabre21 -> RE: Game Suggestions: (4/25/2011 6:43:16 AM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: 76mm

Just remembered something I've wanted for a long time: can there be some on-map indication to show when a factory hex has been fully-evacced? Especially if you have several games going, it can be difficult to remember where you left off, and very tedious to go clicking from one factory hex to another.

I was thinking that when you select the show factory toggle, factory hexes which have been evacced would be a slightly different color, or show some symbol, etc.


The red highlight does go away if the on-map factory function is selected and all factories have been relocated. The downside is resources and ports trigger this highlight. That is on the suggestion list to try and get changed. That way when all factories are moved, then the highlight is gone.



Tarhunnas -> RE: Game Suggestions: (4/25/2011 6:44:58 AM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: 76mm

Another idea: "semi-random" or "random-lite" weather, which only moves the mud/blizzard forward or backward a turn or two, and does not permit mud during the summer.

I am currently playing a PBEM GC where my German opponent has had TWO mud turns by Turn 7. I mean, come on...


+1! I feel random weather is way too random at present.



Sabre21 -> RE: Game Suggestions: (4/25/2011 6:45:21 AM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: Shupov

Which unit is stronger? In mud turns since v1.04.10 it's not obvious. One can go through calculations based on the defensive strength but there is no easy way to tell the difference. This makes it unnecessarily difficult to position forces properly for the 1942 summer campaign for both the Axis and Soviets.

I suggest a third toggle on the 'z' hotkey that shows the unmodified CV. It could display as X+Y where X is the unmodified CV and Y is the movement points remaining. In the example shown the Panzer division might show as 15+23 and the Hungarian calvary as 2+7.

Another possibility is to show the unmodified CV in the Commanders Report.

[image]local://upfiles/10847/45135DB3ABB0487788D5D19CDA842D1E.jpg[/image]


Seems like these things are always getting tweaked one way or another. Hopefully something can get figured out on this that works under the various weather conditions.



Sabre21 -> RE: Game Suggestions: (4/25/2011 6:47:53 AM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: Wild

I would definitely like to see the air war improved . I mean they already had a great system with Bombing the reich or Witp. I just can't see why the decision was taken to take such a big step backwards in this area.
I'm hoping when we are all said and done to have the greatest Eastern front game ever. It deserves a first class air system. Heck i would even take War in Russia's air system over this one, as i recall i had a blast with the airwar in that game.

My only other gripe is cosmetic. Please give me the ability to change the pink color of 4th Panzer to perhaps the Red of the RHQ or something. I cannot stand having a pink panzer army. The lime green one could go too. (Sorry Esther)

Other than these few complaints i think an excellent job is being done by everyone involved in this project.

P.S. i would also agree to tone down amphibious assaults somewhat.



The air war is being improved upon.

You do know that pink was the official panzer color. I'm surprised folks don't like pink panthers...lol. Jon (the first WitE tester) hates pink too. I think Ester put it in there just for him.



Sabre21 -> RE: Game Suggestions: (4/25/2011 6:49:40 AM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: 76mm

Another idea: "semi-random" or "random-lite" weather, which only moves the mud/blizzard forward or backward a turn or two, and does not permit mud during the summer.

I am currently playing a PBEM GC where my German opponent has had TWO mud turns by Turn 7. I mean, come on...


Off weather can only occur 1 time per zone per season. So if you get mud in only one zone during the summer, the other zones can still get it.



randallw -> RE: Game Suggestions: (4/25/2011 7:08:46 AM)

Players who don't like their panzer divisions in pink can simply allow the Soviet player to destroy them.  Problem solved. [:D]



76mm -> RE: Game Suggestions: (4/25/2011 8:03:26 AM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: Sabre21

The downside is resources and ports trigger this highlight. That is on the suggestion list to try and get changed. That way when all factories are moved, then the highlight is gone.


Yeah, that's what I meant...if you can't move them, I don't care to see a highlight. I can figure out that the cities have a population and maybe some resources and railyards, and really those things don't matter that much in determining gameplay.



gingerbread -> RE: Game Suggestions: (4/25/2011 12:22:42 PM)

1) Re-evaluate the NKVD Border Regiments. They should never get any replacements (to make them shatter eventually if attacked) and should have a disband date like the Tank XX's. They are a-historically useful now.

2) Add some DL to entrained units to represent aerial recon of main feeder lines (i.e. the rails on the map). This should get interdiction up. (Please also "tell" the AI about this.)

3) The Rudel discussion made me remember some details about which rail lines the Soviets re-gauged in the Baltic States and eastern Poland. This is from memory as I do not have the FitE rules;
a) the Riga-Pskov was broad gauge
b) not all lines south of the Pripet marshes were made broad gauge
Incorporating this could slow down the drive to Leningrad while also increasing the pace in the south, at least west of the Dnepr.



Tarhunnas -> RE: Game Suggestions: (4/25/2011 8:56:51 PM)

This is from the thread: http://www.matrixgames.com/forums/tm.asp?m=2792280&mpage=1� where you can read the full discussion. This is my suggestion:

I think HQ buildup is too cheap for the Germans. I usually have the trucks to spare, and the AP cost is not very high. In my experience, it is somewhat overused. I would suggest that the AP price be raised by 50% or so.

Compare this to motorizing an infantry division. It costs about twice as many APs, and is of much more limited effectiveness. I never motorize any inf divs. The price of that should be like 1/4 of its present AP cost if players should be expected to use it.




Helpless -> RE: Game Suggestions: (4/25/2011 10:54:05 PM)

quote:

1) Re-evaluate the NKVD Border Regiments. They should never get any replacements (to make them shatter eventually if attacked) and should have a disband date like the Tank XX's. They are a-historically useful now.


They are disbanding automatically already. Probability is 20%.



DTurtle -> RE: Game Suggestions: (4/25/2011 11:55:14 PM)

The losses breakdown in the logistics screen doesn't seem to properly distinguish between combat, attrition, and surrender. It treats surrenders because of combat (eliminating isolated units) as combat losses. The only way to get surrenders in that screen seems to be automatic surrenders.



Shupov -> RE: Game Suggestions: (4/26/2011 2:01:17 AM)

quote:

quote:

ORIGINAL: Shupov


I suggest a third toggle on the 'z' hotkey that shows the unmodified CV. It could display as X+Y where X is the unmodified CV and Y is the movement points remaining. In the example shown the Panzer division might show as 15+23 and the Hungarian calvary as 2+7.


Good point, but I would suggest showing the un-modded CVs in the right panel.


That would work for me just as well.



Shupov -> RE: Game Suggestions: (4/26/2011 4:54:30 PM)

** Deleted **



carnifex -> RE: Game Suggestions: (4/26/2011 5:17:38 PM)

1) I'd like to be able to sort the ASSIGN PLANES window. The current interface is cumbersome. I have to click plane type for the detailed selection window to come up and it's pre-checked for all. Now I have to click deselect all then click the type of plane I want then another mouseclick to get the main list to display. I just want to sort the main list by plane type, then click to add from there. Super easy.

2) Another vote to get rid of the super-annoying "select all units" functionality. I move my FBD 1 hex, repair line. Click on other unit in hex. Click on other unit in hex. Move FBD 1 hex, click to repair. Click on other unit in hex. Click on other unit in hex. Etc. I don't know how else people play this game, but I NEVER EVER move whole stacks or even groups of units. One at a time, always. So much extra clicking.

3) I'd like to be able to load up an AI game and switch sides.

4) When the system asks you for a choice and you don't make one, it shouldn't make it for you. Example: I have 44 Corps, all at various Support Level settings. I click the SUPPORT LEVEL link, a window opens up, I change my mind and click X, oh noes all my Corps Support Levels are now zero. Same for AC CHANGE MODE, which defaults to AUTO. Click the link, click X, now they're all on MANUAL. Clicking X means NO CHANGE please.




Q-Ball -> RE: Game Suggestions: (4/26/2011 8:04:08 PM)

1. Greater ability for high-morale isolated units to hold-out, particularly ones that receive air supply.

2. Turn-Based VPs in the GC scenario, which would reward taking/holding territory more

3. Greater color difference between 3rd and 4th Romanian Armies (difficult to tell sometimes!. I realize colors are short, but a little green shading should do the trick

4. Rationalized Amphib landing rules. Soviets have too much ability to land troops over long distances in Black Sea. Several divisions landed over a few hexes is OK, but all the way in Romania....no. Plus, getting guys ashore is one thing, supplying them is another.

You also shouldn't be able to do any amphib landings in areas you don't have air superiority. Amphib vessels make easy targets.




morvael -> RE: Game Suggestions: (4/26/2011 10:13:08 PM)

Option to turn off all AI cheats that it currently enjoys, especially the major ones (unlimited rail capacity, no AP limit). The manual says some of these depend on difficulty settings but not all. I hate to see when I have closed the pocket minus one hex in zoc, but still 80% of units vanish from it next turn.



Tarhunnas -> RE: Game Suggestions: (4/26/2011 11:13:09 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: Q-Ball

1. Greater ability for high-morale isolated units to hold-out, particularly ones that receive air supply.

2. Turn-Based VPs in the GC scenario, which would reward taking/holding territory more

3. Greater color difference between 3rd and 4th Romanian Armies (difficult to tell sometimes!. I realize colors are short, but a little green shading should do the trick

4. Rationalized Amphib landing rules. Soviets have too much ability to land troops over long distances in Black Sea. Several divisions landed over a few hexes is OK, but all the way in Romania....no. Plus, getting guys ashore is one thing, supplying them is another.

You also shouldn't be able to do any amphib landings in areas you don't have air superiority. Amphib vessels make easy targets.



I second all of those, they are good suggestions and would improve the game a lot IMHO. (except maybe the color thing, I don't have any problem with the colors as they are)



Wild -> RE: Game Suggestions: (4/27/2011 5:06:54 AM)

Just to restate, i would very much like the ability to change the colors of Armys. Maybe not add new ones, but change the ones we have now around. Mind you, i realize there are more important matters to work on, but if there is time it would be appreciated.



Aurelian -> RE: Game Suggestions: (4/27/2011 9:05:44 AM)

The ability to set airbases to "no fly".

Hard to build a force of IL-4s to bomb Ploesti if they keep flying and get shot up.



56ajax -> RE: Game Suggestions: (4/27/2011 10:08:49 AM)

From the Production screen, when you click on an aircraft to see the factories etc could it also display the type eg fighter bomber of the aircraft; most are self evident but nice to have...

and i have already ementioned but in the Logistics report, for isolated units can it please display the map refs as a mimimum, link would be nice but perhaps over kill...

(and build a utility that penalises a user 40 admin points every time they spell morale as moral)



alaric318 -> RE: assign from parent High Hq to Lower Hq request (4/27/2011 12:06:13 PM)

best greetings, i apologize if this have been said before, but a feature i will really like is to allow the assign/form on parent headquarters, in example, sending support units from an Army HQ or Panzer Armee HQ to a subordinate Hq, and then, to the front line unit, i dont know the extra work needed to do that and if some bug may arise from my request, but it can really save time and help to control the support units that come as reinforcements, (aside the lock Hq feature that works well for that matter, if you use it, that is)

best regards and have good gaming all,

Alarick.



Manstein63 -> RE: Game Suggestions: (4/27/2011 2:22:58 PM)

Would it be possible for the Barbarossa scenario to be extended through to April 1942 .With automatic victory for the Germans if they hold all citys from Lenningrad  to Moscow and Rostov as well as Sevastopol  but also have weekly victory points awarded to the Soviet Player for holding onto Minsk Kiev Dneperpetrovosk & other major cities. It would alow newer players the chance to experience all weather conditions as well as attack & defense & would give the more experienced players a chance to play quicker game & to test how new upgrages are working without having to commit to a full GC.
Manstein63



JAMiAM -> RE: Game Suggestions: (4/27/2011 7:04:19 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: Aurelian

The ability to set airbases to "no fly".

Hard to build a force of IL-4s to bomb Ploesti if they keep flying and get shot up.

Agreed, and I've lost count of how many times I've bitched about this. The two workarounds that I've come up with for this are:

1. Send all the heavy bombers you can to the National Reserve, and move your empty airbases and their HQs to the Crimea. Then, on a single turn select all the fresh air groups you can to load up those air bases. Next turn, hit Ploesti/Bucharest.

2. Instead, set the bombers to fly night missions. Then they should not get shot to pieces so much and instead be around to dedicate to some refinery runs. Just remember to turn them all off from night missions before you fly the strike.

Of course, this tedious micromanagement would be avoided if the air bases and/or air groups could just be assigned a mission type of "rest" so that they do not fly at all, except for interceptions against air base strikes on their own base.



Q-Ball -> RE: Game Suggestions: (4/28/2011 3:15:53 PM)

Right now, it is too easy to game the combat results in a PBEM, simply by closing out. You can run a combat over and over and over until you get a result that you want. While I don't think an opponent has done this to me in a PBEM (I trust mine), I can see the potential for abuse. The result is that you can do combats over and over, roll "all 6s", and there is nothing your opponent can do about that.

To counter that, I propose one of the following changes:

1. Inability to take back moves in a PBEM. The excellent Battlefield series had this ability; once you moved something, you were stuck. Occasionally you made a legit mistake and kind of screwed yourself, but otherwise it worked well.

This probably would be a major coding change, so understand if that's not possible.

OR

2. Some sort of indication on how lady luck has gone in combats; a "die-roll" history. A few turns it should get to a large enough sample size that almost all games will be in the 45%-55% range. If I was playing a game in turn 18, and my opponent was having 75% luck on die rolls, I would be very suspicious. The game would probably end at that point. Anyone abusing this will stop if they know they are being watched.

#2 would go a long way to keeping a lid on outsized combat results



76mm -> RE: Game Suggestions: (4/28/2011 3:41:39 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: Q-Ball
2. Some sort of indication on how lady luck has gone in combats; a "die-roll" history. A few turns it should get to a large enough sample size that almost all games will be in the 45%-55% range. If I was playing a game in turn 18, and my opponent was having 75% luck on die rolls, I would be very suspicious. The game would probably end at that point. Anyone abusing this will stop if they know they are being watched.


I don't see how this would work given how complicated the combat model is. Moreover, no one seems to understand how the combat model works.



pompack -> RE: Game Suggestions: (4/28/2011 3:46:20 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: Q-Ball

2. Some sort of indication on how lady luck has gone in combats; a "die-roll" history. A few turns it should get to a large enough sample size that almost all games will be in the 45%-55% range. If I was playing a game in turn 18, and my opponent was having 75% luck on die rolls, I would be very suspicious. The game would probably end at that point. Anyone abusing this will stop if they know they are being watched.



Q-Ball:
Love the idea. Just a one liner in the status report with cum distribution index and last turn distribution index would do it.

OTOH, the thought of testing the change that makes me shudder. Find every RV call, add a percentage calc, a game cum calc and a turn cum calc. Now test it to verify that you have found every one of the calls and that the three calcs are correct. Ouch[X(] And buried bugs here could ruin many a promising PBEM relationship.

However couldn't you get much the same result with a count of restarts between end-turn processing (implimentation: attach the running count to the save game just loaded)?




Manstein63 -> RE: Game Suggestions: (4/28/2011 7:30:13 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: Q-Ball

changes:

1. Inability to take back moves in a PBEM. The excellent Battlefield series had this ability; once you moved something, you were stuck. Occasionally you made a legit mistake and kind of screwed yourself, but otherwise it worked well.

Why not play with the auto save function on. that would limit the scope for unfair play or maybe have Auto save locked into PBEM as a default setting
Manstein63



pompack -> RE: Game Suggestions: (4/28/2011 8:19:55 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: Manstein63

Why not play with the auto save function on. that would limit the scope for unfair play or maybe have Auto save locked into PBEM as a default setting
Manstein63


Well, the trouble with that is I would much prefer to trust my opponent in order to retain the ability to do intermediate saves as insurance against a power failure (or Bill Gates seizing my computer and killing the game in order to update a Windows function I don't use)



Manstein63 -> RE: Game Suggestions: (4/28/2011 9:13:03 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: pompack
Well, the trouble with that is I would much prefer to trust my opponent in order to retain the ability to do intermediate saves as insurance against a power failure (or Bill Gates seizing my computer and killing the game in order to update a Windows function I don't use)


I agree (apart from the Bill Gates Thing) you should always assume your opponent is honest. It was mearly a suggestion for the more cynical among us.
Manstein63



Page: <<   < prev  2 3 [4] 5 6   next >   >>

Valid CSS!




Forum Software © ASPPlayground.NET Advanced Edition 2.4.5 ANSI
1.71875