1945 TOE "upgrades" from nowhere are soo annoying !

1945 TOE "upgrades" from nowhere are soo annoying ! (Full Version)

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

Message

molchomor -> 1945 TOE "upgrades" from nowhere are soo annoying ! (7/11/2011 8:39:55 PM)
Allied planes don't fly nor do they ever get replacements (exports) so airgroups stay at 0 planes, Soviet AI has no problem warping endless units or with conducting offensives in blizzard 50+ mp from railheads maintaining strong CVs, most of the produced tigers etc. just sitting idle in the pool. And as that was not enough, now in january '45, WHAM partisan activity exploded suddenly. Why ? Well all of a sudden 12 of my Sec regiments decided to reform into regular army regiments. WITHOUT WARNING. 10 cities are now suddenly not garrisoned properly (at ~45%), and nothing I can do about that in one round is there (except replaying, as usual when the game pulls such tricks on you. I guess this reforming will continue the next rounds, causing replay replay replay... Well, end of rant ! Well not quite. Root cause here is that for some unknown reason and wisdom the decision was to follow history,. but only for the axis side. So, as there was no need in the historical war to have Axis Sec units in '45 garrisoning Soviet towns (they were all lost), i get this shoved down my throat even if I hold leningrad, Moscow, and Stalingrad in my game. Why are the Soviets allowed to bend history at will (creating the type of units that is most needed atm, etc.) but the axis side is chained to the historical events ? That is just so unfair.

mmarquo -> RE: Another issue that just makes you regret you bougth this (7/12/2011 1:13:49 AM)
Was there any warning in the upcoming events log ?

76mm -> RE: Another issue that just makes you regret you bougth this (7/12/2011 6:13:15 AM)
If you're holding Leningrad and Moscow in 1945 why are you worried about increased partisan activity?

molchomor -> RE: Another issue that just makes you regret you bougth this (7/12/2011 10:35:26 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: 76mm If you're holding Leningrad and Moscow in 1945 why are you worried about increased partisan activity? Why do you think ? The AI is still a formidable enemy even with key production centers lost, much due to unlimited APs, unit warping, and huge stores of materials. It still has more oil and tanks and men and guard corps of death than it needs to hold the front.

Tarhunnas -> RE: Another issue that just makes you regret you bougth this (7/12/2011 11:38:10 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: molchomor quote: ORIGINAL: 76mm If you're holding Leningrad and Moscow in 1945 why are you worried about increased partisan activity? Why do you think ? The AI is still a formidable enemy even with key production centers lost, much due to unlimited APs, unit warping, and huge stores of materials. It still has more oil and tanks and men and guard corps of death than it needs to hold the front. Of course he wants to have the place quiet and pacified and ready for the german settlers [;)] Seriusly, I think you are ranting somewhat, but I agree that German reinforcements might reflect the fortunes of war. If the Germans are still occupying a substantial number of Soviet cities, the SEC units would in all likelihood not have been converted to infantry. OTOH, it would be a little too much to expect the designers to tailor the reinforcement scedule to every eventuality. Perhaps it could have been left to the player, to disband them and have the trops join the replacement pool whenever the player feels they are no longer useful?

morvael -> RE: Another issue that just makes you regret you bougth this (7/12/2011 12:16:55 PM)
This is the area where this operational game touches strategical level and it's not good in that realm. Rigged reinforcements/withdrawals/TOE changes/production would work well in a shorter time-frame game, having only battle scenarios (Barbarossa, Typhoon, Case Blue) on limited part of the front and/or over short time periods. The 1945 TOE "upgrades" are really a game killer, when you reach them while not being in historical situation of being clubbed to death on Berlin's doors.

molchomor -> RE: Another issue that just makes you regret you bougth this (7/12/2011 12:36:44 PM)
Yes a rant it is but I think that reflects well on your typical reaction to such game ehrm features when they pop up after you already put days/weeks into the game. Look, we are not a few weeks after release anymore and alot of annoying gameplay issues are still there and I'm sure I'm not the only one getting annoyed at times. Anyway I changed the title to something less confrontational, but I have to say I still largely agree with myself after re-reading the first post.

mmarquo -> RE: Another issue that just makes you regret you bougth this (7/12/2011 12:53:55 PM)
"Perhaps it could have been left to the player, to disband them and have the trops join the replacement pool whenever the player feels they are no longer useful? " Was it not flagged to happen in the reinforcement/withdrawal schedule? Marquo

jaw -> RE: Another issue that just makes you regret you bougth this (7/12/2011 1:22:52 PM)
Oh come on guys! This is a ridiculous complaint. If as the Axis you are holding Leningrad in 1945 why are you still playing the game? You have obviously won regardless of what the VP total may be. The game is designed to provide an historical simulation at various periods of the War, not accomodate serious deviations from history. Once a serious deviation from history occurs it is time to stop and say "okay, I've beaten the enemy or okay, the enemy's beaten me" and start over with a more challenging play balance setting or a new scenario. I don't see the point in playing the game into 1945 with a situation widely at variance from history. WitE was not designed to be a strategic level game where the Axis player had complete control of his military forces and war economy. It was designed to simulate one front of a multi-front war where you the player are in the same predicament as the historical Eastern front commanders trying to cope with a difficult situation with limited resources. The partisan "explosion" is a one-time mishap resulting from being unaware of the security division to regular division conversion in 1945. It was not a case of the Soviet player having greater strategic flexibility than the Axis player. Had the Axis player taken the time to consider what the real world ramifications would have been for German military success on the Eastern Front after the fall of 1942, he would have realized that the game could no longer provide a valid simulation of the consequence of such success and ended the game there. If you ignore the historical deviation and continue on playing you are playing for the mere fun of it and shouldn't be concerned that occasional weird stuff will happen. You've already gone through the rabbit hole.

mmarquo -> RE: Another issue that just makes you regret you bougth this (7/12/2011 1:28:47 PM)
Why is Molchomor still playing the game? I suppose because it is his personal choice, he is having fun, and getting his money's worth. [:)] Marquo

jaw -> RE: Another issue that just makes you regret you bougth this (7/12/2011 3:01:07 PM)
If you're having fun, why rant? It didn't sound like he was having much fun to me.

carnifex -> RE: Another issue that just makes you regret you bougth this (7/12/2011 4:02:02 PM)
This is the same issue I encountered in SSG's otherwise excellent Russia. By 1944-45 the German units were just shells of their former selves, and it led to frustrating situations where I would be one city away from victory but there was no way I would be able to take it even though I had it surrounded and pounded on it for turns and turns.

Baelfiin -> RE: Another issue that just makes you regret you bougth this (7/12/2011 9:56:12 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: jaw Oh come on guys! This is a ridiculous complaint. If as the Axis you are holding Leningrad in 1945 why are you still playing the game? You have obviously won regardless of what the VP total may be. The game is designed to provide an historical simulation at various periods of the War, not accomodate serious deviations from history. Once a serious deviation from history occurs it is time to stop and say "okay, I've beaten the enemy or okay, the enemy's beaten me" and start over with a more challenging play balance setting or a new scenario. I think this is why issues are continuing to crop up. Situations that most likely never occurred in the testing phase are occurring as more players are playing games into the late war period. A historical timeline is all well and good, but if you want to refight the digital war and are in an ahistorical position versus history, you as the player should have some options or controls to help manage the situation.

mmarquo -> RE: Another issue that just makes you regret you bougth this (7/12/2011 10:38:58 PM)
For some, ranting is pure joy [:)]

neuromancer -> RE: Another issue that just makes you regret you bougth this (7/12/2011 10:57:56 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Tarhunnas Seriusly, I think you are ranting somewhat, but I agree that German reinforcements might reflect the fortunes of war. If the Germans are still occupying a substantial number of Soviet cities, the SEC units would in all likelihood not have been converted to infantry. OTOH, it would be a little too much to expect the designers to tailor the reinforcement scedule to every eventuality. Perhaps it could have been left to the player, to disband them and have the trops join the replacement pool whenever the player feels they are no longer useful? I would suggest a simple switch like on the aircraft upgrades. Auto upgrade or manual upgrade. When in manual form an upgrade option can be listed for manual upgrade and if the player wants to, he can activate it. If not, he ignores it. Probably leave it on auto until early 43 and then switch to manual for everything - unless your fortunes are more akin to historical, whereupon you may as well let it do its own thing. The Germans had to start reorganizing their units to reflect the circumstances. They were running low on manpower, didn't have enough tanks, nor enough fuel for them, didn't have enough field units to hold the line against the Allies and Soviets on two fronts (1943) and three fronts (1944 and 45) and so on. But if they hadn't taken such a severe beating in the East they wouldn't have had to change the organization when they did. In other words, if they had the resources to support the older TOE units, they would have. By simply allowing the player to choose when to upgrade to the next TOE, they could alleviate much of the problem for a player doing well. It would still be no where near as flexible as the Soviets, but it would help (the Axis has the idiocy of Hitler and the Nazi bureaucracy, but the Soviets don't have to suffer the idiocy of Stalin and the Communist bureaucracy). Oh, and no, there is no warning that a unit is going to switch TOE. You simply get notified one turn that Unit X has changed to 194X TOE. You get a few turns warning that a ground unit is going to leave, but no warnings that a unit is changing TOE. Similarly, air units don't actually declare when they have left - or are going to - so you have to keep checking the withdrawal/ reinforcement schedule to try to keep tabs on it all. In my first few games I was sitting there wondering where a bunch of fighter and bomber groups went. It was only later that I found the schedule and started checking what would happen next so at least it wasn't a complete surprise, although I still forget to reorganize the air groups to deal with the seemingly random withdrawal schedule.

randallw -> RE: Another issue that just makes you regret you bougth this (7/13/2011 12:27:34 AM)
The Soviet player doesn't get absolute 100% flexibility on choices; the tank divisions are dropped to brigades for months in 1941-1942, and mech/motor divisions are unavailable for longer.

mmarquo -> RE: Another issue that just makes you regret you bougth this (7/13/2011 2:02:29 AM)
"In other words, if they had the resources to support the older TOE units, they would have." So, no R&D, no technologcal advances; they would have fought the entire war with an endless supply of MK 2s and MG 34s? Marquo [:)]

Lieste -> RE: Another issue that just makes you regret you bougth this (7/13/2011 2:29:12 AM)
They would have probably preferred MG34 to MG08 and MG08/15 or MG15... Some of the "upgrades" are just scraping the very bottom of the barrel... and doing it with far smaller numbers than they'd like. I think the suggestion was that a 110 tank PzD would only be "upgraded" to 50 tanks if that was already an 'optimistic' reflection of combat strengths. If there were sufficient PzIV/PzV available then the 'improvement' isn't required. Equally renaming a Sec Rgt as an Inf Division isn't something you would do if you 1) still need rear area security, and 2) can still field 'enough' normal divisions.

Wild -> RE: Another issue that just makes you regret you bougth this (7/13/2011 4:13:48 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: neuromancer quote: ORIGINAL: Tarhunnas Seriusly, I think you are ranting somewhat, but I agree that German reinforcements might reflect the fortunes of war. If the Germans are still occupying a substantial number of Soviet cities, the SEC units would in all likelihood not have been converted to infantry. OTOH, it would be a little too much to expect the designers to tailor the reinforcement scedule to every eventuality. Perhaps it could have been left to the player, to disband them and have the trops join the replacement pool whenever the player feels they are no longer useful? I would suggest a simple switch like on the aircraft upgrades. Auto upgrade or manual upgrade. When in manual form an upgrade option can be listed for manual upgrade and if the player wants to, he can activate it. If not, he ignores it. Probably leave it on auto until early 43 and then switch to manual for everything - unless your fortunes are more akin to historical, whereupon you may as well let it do its own thing. The Germans had to start reorganizing their units to reflect the circumstances. They were running low on manpower, didn't have enough tanks, nor enough fuel for them, didn't have enough field units to hold the line against the Allies and Soviets on two fronts (1943) and three fronts (1944 and 45) and so on. But if they hadn't taken such a severe beating in the East they wouldn't have had to change the organization when they did. In other words, if they had the resources to support the older TOE units, they would have. By simply allowing the player to choose when to upgrade to the next TOE, they could alleviate much of the problem for a player doing well. It would still be no where near as flexible as the Soviets, but it would help (the Axis has the idiocy of Hitler and the Nazi bureaucracy, but the Soviets don't have to suffer the idiocy of Stalin and the Communist bureaucracy). Oh, and no, there is no warning that a unit is going to switch TOE. You simply get notified one turn that Unit X has changed to 194X TOE. You get a few turns warning that a ground unit is going to leave, but no warnings that a unit is changing TOE. Similarly, air units don't actually declare when they have left - or are going to - so you have to keep checking the withdrawal/ reinforcement schedule to try to keep tabs on it all. In my first few games I was sitting there wondering where a bunch of fighter and bomber groups went. It was only later that I found the schedule and started checking what would happen next so at least it wasn't a complete surprise, although I still forget to reorganize the air groups to deal with the seemingly random withdrawal schedule. +1 I must say this is a great idea! I would LOVE an option to switch things from auto to manual, or to prevent a TOE change from happening. Not sure how hard it would be to code though, or if it fits within the design philosophy of the game. But it sure would make things a lot more fun.

Page: [1]

Forum Software © ASPPlayground.NET Advanced Edition 2.4.5 ANSI

1.125