RE: Changes in the next public beta now in test (Full Version)

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



Message

morvael -> RE: Changes in the next public beta now in test (10/1/2013 3:45:00 PM)

Yes, but how much weaker they would be with every lost combat removing additional 1 point?



Gabriel B. -> RE: Changes in the next public beta now in test (10/1/2013 3:52:12 PM)


quote:

Also, more morale will be preserved for the summer, because the automated loss of 1 point in lost combat is disabled.


This was very frustrating indeed.



Flaviusx -> RE: Changes in the next public beta now in test (10/1/2013 4:24:36 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: terje439

The thing is as I see it, the game is being redesigned to match the super turns, not the non-elite openings and moves, and that does not fit my game style, and sorry to say, each patch drives me further and further away. Others might not agree, but for me the game as of now is simply no fun, and this patch to me looks to be sending it further down the wrong (for me atleast) path.

Terje


Terje, this blizzard fix isn't aimed at the 1%. It's for the 99% of people who aren't using fuel exploits to crush the Soviets in 1941 and must therefore deal with the blizzard for real.

This most certainly includes you.

Not seeing how you could possibly object to this, it's dealing with a very longstanding problem in the game. I don't know if it will work, but it can hardly be worse than the vanilla blizzard which has been utterly broken more or less from the getgo.



rmonical -> RE: Changes in the next public beta now in test (10/1/2013 4:28:35 PM)

[&o]
I finished a blizzard as Soviets a few weeks ago and as German last week. Neither was fun.



SigUp -> RE: Changes in the next public beta now in test (10/1/2013 4:39:31 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: morvael

Yes, but how much weaker they would be with every lost combat removing additional 1 point?

I don't doubt that. My point is, that they are perhaps still too weak in terms of morale. But this will clear up once human vs. human tests come in.



Joel Billings -> RE: Changes in the next public beta now in test (10/1/2013 5:05:05 PM)

Something I don't think is being considered are all of the changes that came in 1.07.10 (the current public beta) that made some major changes in the way morale rules work. They will put the Soviets in a worse situation in 1942 (lower morale units and harder to get the morale up) while the Germans will have opportunities for their units that are below NM to regain to NM faster. If anything, the potential is for quite a scary time for the Soviets in 1942. We won't really know for sure until players get that far using the new rules, but I would expect 1942 to have a much different feeling.

As for the airbases and refueling, in WitW we have fixed airbases on the map, but in WitE we don't have that. Yes, clearly you will have to take some airbase units with your Panzers if you want to maximize your air transport capabilities. The AI will never do this and will suffer for it. A human player can and should, but it will cause a little more difficulty as you might find yourself having to protect an airbase. The big change is not being able to bring fuel in the heavy bombers, so there's only so much the transports can do.



SigUp -> RE: Changes in the next public beta now in test (10/1/2013 5:15:14 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: Flaviusx


quote:

ORIGINAL: terje439

The thing is as I see it, the game is being redesigned to match the super turns, not the non-elite openings and moves, and that does not fit my game style, and sorry to say, each patch drives me further and further away. Others might not agree, but for me the game as of now is simply no fun, and this patch to me looks to be sending it further down the wrong (for me atleast) path.

Terje


Terje, this blizzard fix isn't aimed at the 1%. It's for the 99% of people who aren't using fuel exploits to crush the Soviets in 1941 and must therefore deal with the blizzard for real.

This most certainly includes you.

Not seeing how you could possibly object to this, it's dealing with a very longstanding problem in the game. I don't know if it will work, but it can hardly be worse than the vanilla blizzard which has been utterly broken more or less from the getgo.

I think he is not objecting to this, but rather to the restrictions on aerial resupply.



janh -> RE: Changes in the next public beta now in test (10/1/2013 5:16:19 PM)

+1

About the best news lately! The dev support remains superior as always. Thanks also to Morvael for this much needed rule alternative. I almost envy you guys for being allowed to look into and modify the source of this gem. I am very curious how the new blizzard will feel like. Sounds like with this the realism of the game just made a gigantic jump forward.



Gabriel B. -> RE: Changes in the next public beta now in test (10/1/2013 5:17:45 PM)

It is like moravel said : 2-3 cv for infantry and 4-6 cv for panzers but :

Had to give up two hexes per turn in december (AI only scored 2-4 atacks per turn that month)
Panzers were kept in the citys in the rear where i planed to make a stand in february :

Ivanovo-Vladimir-Ryazan-Lipesk-Voronej-Vorosilovgrad

Got out of Tambov,Murom,Bogusar in the last moment , againt a humman oponent at least 6 divisions would be toast.
Had trown 12 infantry divisions to the slaughter, to slow the soviets down in january , now ( turn 50) they sit in army groups reserve because their morale is below 67.









Flaviusx -> RE: Changes in the next public beta now in test (10/1/2013 5:20:50 PM)

But the air supply stuff is hardly going to affect him. He never min maxed air supply in the first place or has ever been in a position to truly abuse fuel exploits. The only people affected by this are the MTs and Peltons and Mktours of the world who were bypassing the entire logistical system.




SigUp -> RE: Changes in the next public beta now in test (10/1/2013 5:26:33 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: Flaviusx

But the air supply stuff is hardly going to affect him. He never min maxed air supply in the first place or has ever been in a position to truly abuse fuel exploits. The only people affected by this are the MTs and Peltons and Mktours of the world who were bypassing the entire logistical system.



Well yeah, but terje doesn't seem to think so. His frustration also stems from the opinion that without a perfect turn 1 thorugh 5 the German side will lose, whatever losing means.



Flaviusx -> RE: Changes in the next public beta now in test (10/1/2013 5:32:50 PM)

What a perfect Axis turn 1-5 does is allow you to land a knockout blow in 1941. It seems to me that the entire emphasis of this patch is to try to get away from 1941 knockout blows, period, be they either Axis or Soviet. So to that extent I can only applaud the changes. The game really shouldn't be decided in the first year.




SigUp -> RE: Changes in the next public beta now in test (10/1/2013 5:35:02 PM)

I agree with that and I hope it can achieve this. That's why I told terje that he is throwing in the towel too early. But his frustration seems to have boiled over.



terje439 -> RE: Changes in the next public beta now in test (10/1/2013 6:06:28 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: SigUp

I agree with that and I hope it can achieve this. That's why I told terje that he is throwing in the towel too early. But his frustration seems to have boiled over.


Not frustration, just telling what I see. As I said, all we can do is agree to disagree. I will not get you guys to see my PoW, nor will you get me to agree with your PoW [;)]

I will however give a [&o] for continuous patching of the game.

Terje



Peltonx -> RE: Changes in the next public beta now in test (10/1/2013 6:20:55 PM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: morvael

I beg to differ. I hope you'll see it for yourself, I'm not a powergamer myself, so I would not be happy coding things helping powergamers more than regular players. Remember that due to airbase fix you will deliver 100% fuel from transports to panzers in or next to airbase's hex.

Fixing rolls for support units means (due to better leaders and early extreme quality superiority) that Germans will have easier time fighting the Soviets in '41, one beta report shows that blasting through Leningrad's defenses with a stack full of attached pioneers is now much easier. Buildups will also no longer damage Axis units because they won't be treated as OOS anymore.

What I would like to see in the game, is the Axis to retain some Case Blue capability for '42, as my own PBEM games has shows that it's too easy to have a stalemate through the year. Mild blizzard will see that the Axis will stay closer to their highwatermark line than before and that their morale will be a bit better; thus they will be in better position for attack. Working support units will also make them stronger. I don't want to see encirclements the size of France happen in '42 and '43 though. Stronger in combat - yes, faster in penetration - no.



The problem with 1942 for 95% of GHC players is they sucked at 1941 and the Middle Earth Blizzard effects.

I played a round of games (6) before my last round and I only used transports for fuel drops and chaining HQBU's and did not lose a game.

As we know Morale is [sm=happy0029.gif] of The Battle Field so for me and my Morale play style a Draw is a given now. Yes 22 is huge with my no Corps defense come mid 43.

I believe now even vs the better SHC players I can win out in 42 using SD game.

1. Smoke Leningrad 1941
2. The standard southern smoke show is still very easy using only chain HQBU's and transports as I am doing it and have done it without bombers as fuel tanks.
3. conserve morale during blizzard. Again I will for sure with draw 9-12 infantry divisions and 9 panzer, because holding the lines will be easyer then ever.
A. Oka north hold the lines
B; Oka south with draw during December to a fort line in January.
4. Move Model and the 9 90+ morale infantry units to smoke Moscow in 1942, done it more then once in 42 after only KIA 2.75 to 3.25 million SHC troops in 1941.
5. Capture whatever else is needed in south for game set match. Fuel is never an issue in 1942 because SHC can't run.

If you can't get a draw as GHC now you simply do not know what your doing.





Peltonx -> RE: Changes in the next public beta now in test (10/1/2013 6:27:42 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: SigUp

@morvael: Then that gives hope. Because my defensive strategy in that Moscow scenario is unfeasible for campaign games. In December and early January I used my Panzer units to plug dangerous holes and afterwards kept them there to hold dangerous spots. Obviously with a possible summer offensive in mind such a tactic would be suicide due to the morale damage.

@terje: Why rolling your eyes? If the blizzard is mitigated so that the Germans won't have to run 2 hexes per turn west, but can actually hold that is a good trade off.

EDIT: BB = byebye perhaps? [&:]


Holding in front of Moscow before the change was doable as Katza southern tactic, both me and MT used to hold ground in front of Moscow.

If you can't hold the ground in front of Moscow now, just play SHC heheh J.K

You will still have to give ground south of Oka, not as much for as long.

Also don't forget the bug that was fixed which counter 1 win as 2 for SHC units getting to guard statis. Massive bug fix that will now have a huge 42 effect,



Peltonx -> RE: Changes in the next public beta now in test (10/1/2013 6:31:51 PM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: Flaviusx


quote:

ORIGINAL: terje439

The thing is as I see it, the game is being redesigned to match the super turns, not the non-elite openings and moves, and that does not fit my game style, and sorry to say, each patch drives me further and further away. Others might not agree, but for me the game as of now is simply no fun, and this patch to me looks to be sending it further down the wrong (for me atleast) path.

Terje


Terje, this blizzard fix isn't aimed at the 1%. It's for the 99% of people who aren't using fuel exploits to crush the Soviets in 1941 and must therefore deal with the blizzard for real.

This most certainly includes you.

Not seeing how you could possibly object to this, it's dealing with a very longstanding problem in the game. I don't know if it will work, but it can hardly be worse than the vanilla blizzard which has been utterly broken more or less from the getgo.


Flaviusx is right the changes will make the game now playable for the 98% that simply got destroyed playing GHC.

The 2% now as GHC will never lose, a draw for them is a given. Plus vs 90% of the SHC an out right 42 SD win is a given.

Chaining and transport drops is all that's needed.




821Bobo -> RE: Changes in the next public beta now in test (10/1/2013 6:33:05 PM)

What means ground in front of Moscow? I pushed you back to the Smolensk. [:D]



821Bobo -> RE: Changes in the next public beta now in test (10/1/2013 6:34:27 PM)

Any estimated date when the beta will be available? As there is no option to apply the new Blizzard rules for ongoing games, my opponent and I decided for restart with the new rules.



Peltonx -> RE: Changes in the next public beta now in test (10/1/2013 6:39:06 PM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: Flaviusx

But the air supply stuff is hardly going to affect him. He never min maxed air supply in the first place or has ever been in a position to truly abuse fuel exploits. The only people affected by this are the MTs and Peltons and Mktours of the world who were bypassing the entire logistical system.




Flaviusx the only round of game I used bombers a fuel cans was the last 6, as I clearly stated and supported by my round before that I only used chaining and transports ( Pelton vs M60 ect)

The new rules will have no effect on my Morale strategy, chaining tactic or transports or 90% of MT's game play.

Leningrad will simply now fall even faster, Moscow will hold in 1941 as it should and the south will crumble as it always has simply using chaining and transports.

GHC morale for me at least will be insanely high and grinding Moscow into the ground in 42 will be easyer then ever.

I 100% agree something needed to be done to make the game playable for 98% of the peeps that have tried playing GHC, but for some (2%) these changes are simply giving us the game in 42 instead of 41.

Morale is The King of The Battle Field.



Peltonx -> RE: Changes in the next public beta now in test (10/1/2013 6:42:33 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: 821Bobo

What means ground in front of Moscow? I pushed you back to the Smolensk. [:D]


That was before Katza figured out a new blizzard tactic



Peltonx -> RE: Changes in the next public beta now in test (10/1/2013 6:49:48 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: Flaviusx

What a perfect Axis turn 1-5 does is allow you to land a knockout blow in 1941. It seems to me that the entire emphasis of this patch is to try to get away from 1941 knockout blows, period, be they either Axis or Soviet. So to that extent I can only applaud the changes. The game really shouldn't be decided in the first year.




I agree games will at least get into 1942 and probably 75% will know get close to 45.

The key is morale as always.



Flaviusx -> RE: Changes in the next public beta now in test (10/1/2013 6:50:42 PM)

Pelton, one step at a time. If it turns out that 42 isn't tuned right, then we can address that down the line.

Right now the main thing is getting games out of this 1941 ghetto.

I think you are far too fixated on morale, btw. Why on earth should you continue to withdraw units as you have in the past? Knowing as I do that you will go all out for Moscow in 1942, I would simply go all out during the blizzard in front of Moscow and push you as far west there as possible since you won't make any determined attempt to hold a line even with these changes.

If the Soviet manages to push you back to or near Smolensk you're going to have a difficult time getting to Moscow in 1942 before the clock runs out and Red Army 2.0 kicks in for real.



morvael -> RE: Changes in the next public beta now in test (10/1/2013 7:05:18 PM)

Yeah, I was always afraid what the changes will allow powergamers to do. It's hard to restrict them without breaking the game for the ordinary people. All in all, it may bring back the 290 VP scenario into popularity, not 260 and certainly not SD. What I would love to do is to have a campaign scenario with standard scenario-like earning of VP. I hate games ending prematurely. All this time investment lost...



morvael -> RE: Changes in the next public beta now in test (10/1/2013 7:17:09 PM)

Pelton, your no Corps defense will no longer work as good as it did. The penalty for attaching units to too high command level was unblocked. This was done to prevent having great rolls all across the board for units attached to STAVKA (for example) where there is no range penalty to the direct HQ (so Zhukov could do his magic all across the board). The penalty is now there, maybe not fatal, but certainly significant.



hfarrish -> RE: Changes in the next public beta now in test (10/1/2013 7:20:52 PM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: morvael

Yeah, I was always afraid what the changes will allow powergamers to do. It's hard to restrict them without breaking the game for the ordinary people. All in all, it may bring back the 290 VP scenario into popularity, not 260 and certainly not SD. What I would love to do is to have a campaign scenario with standard scenario-like earning of VP. I hate games ending prematurely. All this time investment lost...


Get rid of HQBU. Seriously, there is no need for it now. Combine that with the changes at hand and you should get a very intense '41 as the Reds will really need to actually put the brakes on the German offensive, since there is no free multi-hundred mile pushback come winter.



Flaviusx -> RE: Changes in the next public beta now in test (10/1/2013 7:24:30 PM)

We are condemned to live with the HQBU, alas, since the game lacks any other means of prioritizing supply. If you were to remove it -- and I think it should be in the long run -- you'd have to replace it with some kind of mechanism for supply prioritization (one that has restrictions and real opportunity costs.) I fully agree that the existing one is a mess but it's the only game in town.

Dominick here has done some real magic things with the code, but this sort of thing is almost certainly going to have to wait for 2.0.



hfarrish -> RE: Changes in the next public beta now in test (10/1/2013 7:30:04 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: Flaviusx

We are condemned to live with the HQBU, alas, since the game lacks any other means of prioritizing supply. If you were to remove it -- and I think it should be in the long run -- you'd have to replace it with some kind of mechanism for supply prioritization (one that has restrictions and real opportunity costs.) I fully agree that the existing one is a mess but it's the only game in town.

Dominick here has done some real magic things with the code, but this sort of thing is almost certainly going to have to wait for 2.0.


I just think if the Soviets truly have to fight hard forward, there is far less need for it since German infantry will actually play a larger role in actual fighting (and rail lines will be much closer to the front), and the giant 50MP sweeps are what break fighting forward in many games completely....and as you say it doesn't really have real restrictions/costs in any case, so why even use it at all?



morvael -> RE: Changes in the next public beta now in test (10/1/2013 7:54:33 PM)

I think HQBU could be harnessed to work as a supply prioritization tool, but still being not overpowered. The same could apply to air drops. If someone could confirm to me if chaining is what I think it is, it could be easily prevented. I can then think of some ideas on how to implement that in .12. As I said I'm opposed to 300-mile raids into enemy territory at full speed resulting in great encirclements made in one turn. They are possible only because of week-long turns, shorter turns would not made them possible. If fixing that means making supply of panzers with expended MP in freshly conquered territory harder, then I would be happy to make them.



STEF78 -> RE: Changes in the next public beta now in test (10/1/2013 8:23:06 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: rmonical

[&o]
I finished a blizzard as Soviets a few weeks ago and as German last week. Neither was fun.

+1

and thanks to 2by3 (and dominik) for maintaining the game



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

Valid CSS!




Forum Software © ASPPlayground.NET Advanced Edition 2.4.5 ANSI
0.9375