stacking units: Ideally and realistically, how should it work in WITE? (Full Version)

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



Message

Mamluke -> stacking units: Ideally and realistically, how should it work in WITE? (5/30/2016 11:51:22 PM)

so, stacking units, in game its a simple 3 units per hex.

however, this creates some funny situations, like the Germans can at best stack like 30K to at max 40K men in a hex (3 Inf Divs at 12K men)

yet, thanks to the rifle core, the Soviets can, with SU, stack over 90K men! in a single hex

its makes me wonder, how should the stacking system work, in your opinion, to simulate reality in our game? this is more of a learning exercise then a game suggestion by the why.

also, how should stacking units work in WITE 2 for better game play and realism? (game play is still more important, I recognize that)




mrchuck -> RE: stacking units: Ideally and realistically, how should it work in WITE? (5/31/2016 12:03:52 AM)

Nothing new about this. Every east front game since S&T WITE in 1973-ish has worked much the same way.
And the CV of a german div will still be comparable to a soviet corps, give or take casualties, supply etc.

This seems to be a set of assumptions built in by generations of game designers. Perhaps someone needs to have a new look at it, based on actual operational densities both possible and achieved?



Michael T -> RE: stacking units: Ideally and realistically, how should it work in WITE? (5/31/2016 12:07:35 AM)

I beg to differ. Many games (board games at least) take stacking density in to account for East War 41-45. That is to differentiate between Corp and Division or between Army and Corp in the case of grand strategic type games.



mrchuck -> RE: stacking units: Ideally and realistically, how should it work in WITE? (5/31/2016 12:54:17 AM)

OK, I should have said 'most' not 'all'.

But I had a look at one extreme example of the alternative (DNO) once and in the board game era, it was basically unplayable.

One notion I've always had, which I've never seen put into effect, but would be quite feasible with computer games, is to have ZOC's dynamic. They should be computed by the strength and type of the units trying to exert them, and the units trying to get around them. So you wouldn't be able to hold up a full-strength 1941 panzer corps very much, for example, with an understrength infantry division lacking AT. The corps would simply brush past it with minimal or no movement cost.

This might lead to some very gamey defensive systems being a lot less viable, and improve the feel of the game.

The other notion I have seen, for example in Operation Crusader and the other games in the series, is different unit stances which affect movement and combat. There is a big difference between deployment for rapid movement and for all-out assault, and I feel that WITE is sufficiently small-scale (just) to make the distinction worth modelling, or at least investigating. The big advantage for mechanised forces, of course, being the flexibility to switch from one mode to the other very rapidly.



Michael T -> RE: stacking units: Ideally and realistically, how should it work in WITE? (5/31/2016 1:12:32 AM)

FYI the game you site (DNO) evolved in to FITE/SE. It has no stacking issues. The only Corp in the game are Soviet Arm/Mech units which for all practical purposes are the equivalent to divisions.

To be honest I can't think of any current board games on the subject that don't take different stacking in to account for Soviet INF Corp and German Divisions. But this is not the point. We are in agreement on the principle here. But it has all been raised before, everything you have cited. Nothing has been done.

I have no idea if things are going to be improved in WITE 2.0. But I doubt it.

FYI Tillers Strategic War based stacking on a points system per hex, worked great. Really nice system. But it never really took off and never made it to the east front. Sad as it had so much potential. If only they had started the series with a East Front game rather than France 1940.

It's a funny thing but as much as people like to claim PC games to be more advanced than board games, in fact most modern board games on similar subject matter and scale have much more sophisticated zoc and stacking rules than WITE or WITW.



javats -> RE: stacking units: Ideally and realistically, how should it work in WITE? (5/31/2016 2:19:43 AM)

For(DNO/FITE) it was my under standing that it was a simple way to represent the increasing capabilities of the soviet army as the war progress,but keep the unit vs unit German advantage.

Example: in 1941 German infantry div had a 10:1 advantage 6-8 plus game modifiers, But as soviet gained ability to form Corp. the German lost that advantage Div. vs soviet corp. (really a large Div, but it could stack 3.
Now if the German had "full" 3 Inf Div vs 3 Sov. inf corp 24 vs 12, but still had 6 vs 1 Div on Div.
It reflected nicely the massing the Sov. learned to do. (heaven help you, if you were one of the masses).

When playing as a Ger. and a newly formed Corp. appeared in the front line, always I cut it out and kill it.

I always liked idea of stacking of 3 units plus 1 non-division size. GG-WITE solution of attaching a sub-unit to a Division seemed to be a very nice solution.[8D]




Michael T -> RE: stacking units: Ideally and realistically, how should it work in WITE? (5/31/2016 3:03:38 AM)

I think you are missing a point here perhaps. Its not the Arm/Mech Corps that are the problem. It's the Soviet Infantry Corp that are the issue. They typically represent at least the equivalent of 2 full divisions each. So that's like having 6 ID in the hex.

A good solution might be only allowing 2 INF Corp per hex or 1 INF Corp and two other units.

But try finding a Soviet player who would support it. And you would need quite a few of them. Good luck.



EwaldvonKleist -> RE: stacking units: Ideally and realistically, how should it work in WITE? (5/31/2016 9:27:15 AM)

Stacking System is highly unrealistic in WITE. In reality, there is limit how many tanks/guns / man can effectively fight on a given area. So stacking limit is a question of the unit toe. So 3 full strength divs on a hex but 4 understrenghth. Big units like Korps give a Bonus cause better organisation.



MechFO -> RE: stacking units: Ideally and realistically, how should it work in WITE? (5/31/2016 3:21:01 PM)

Well the Soviets did do extremely dense concentrations on the offensive, and this was to simulate that. Of course it breaks down because those kind of concentrations would be very detrimental defensively and against arty/GS which the engine doesn't reflect.

TOAW got it right a long time ago with hex densities acting as multiplier for losses. It's a shame that system didn't get any further development, the framework for combat as well as the inclusion of the concept of synchronisation between combat-movement is still top notch.



Commanderski -> RE: stacking units: Ideally and realistically, how should it work in WITE? (5/31/2016 4:18:08 PM)

You also need to take into consideration that the turns are at one week intervals and any attacks are not at the same time. You can have that many men and tanks traverse an area of 10 kilometers (1 hex) over a period of one week. They are not always at the front of the hex standing on each others shoulders...[:)]



Joel Billings -> RE: stacking units: Ideally and realistically, how should it work in WITE? (5/31/2016 5:14:22 PM)

I could argue that all stacking and movement rules at the operational and strategic levels are full of abstractions, some more than others. The fundamental reality is that altering the interface to stack more units is very messy. It's doable, but time consuming and has issues that players might not enjoy (in boardgames, I hated games where I could stack large numbers of units/info counters in a hex, because my hands couldn't do it without knocking something over and you had to keep looking at the stacks to figure out what was there. Sure, more realistic, but at what cost? That said, I can't tell you for sure what will end up in WitE2, but I'll remind you that there are reserve and support rules that allow players the ability to bring in more units to a combat than just what's in the hex (although I realize with less control). Moving lots of units through an area can be difficult, because most units have to move on roads (certainly if they want to move quickly), and there are only so many roads. We continue to debate/struggle with how to handle admin movement. Bottom line, computer games are not as easy as boardgames to change fundamental rules, so there's a big cost associated with what can seem like the simplest of changes. I do appreciate the desire and justification for more "realistic" stacking rules, although keep in mind that doctrine and other factors can often trump hard facts like how many men/guns could you squeeze into a 10x10 mile area. Maybe it's just me, but the only place I see us having a big stacking problem (assuming we are dealing with other things correctly) is with certain ports and urban areas, where larger numbers of troops were massed.



MechFO -> RE: stacking units: Ideally and realistically, how should it work in WITE? (5/31/2016 9:06:27 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: Joel Billings
Maybe it's just me, but the only place I see us having a big stacking problem (assuming we are dealing with other things correctly) is with certain ports and urban areas, where larger numbers of troops were massed.


The Infantry Corps are a problem. Reserve activations do not enjoy the advantage of forts. The huge size of the corps allow defensive concentrations which are nearly impossible to attack.



Michael T -> RE: stacking units: Ideally and realistically, how should it work in WITE? (5/31/2016 10:18:29 PM)

Joel, I can think of no other game where a Soviet INF corp = a German Division for stacking purposes, and that is what WITE does. You can't sugar coat it or dance around it. It's just wrong. It should get fixed. It should be a priority to get fundamental things right. Variable zoc costs is another problem (or lack of I should say). How can no one in the engine room not see that a security regiment should not have the same amount of glue as a fully stacked hex of mobile units?

Idea: You say the Soviets need Corps to alleviate counter density. I agree. So make the playing field equal. Let the Germans create Corp units too. At least then a Kursk style attack is at least feasible and the unfairness of the stacking rules is fixed.



Cavalry Corp -> RE: stacking units: Ideally and realistically, how should it work in WITE? (6/1/2016 11:58:34 AM)

May I add as I am just getting into this game but have done a lot of gaming...

I am playing scenarios mainly as gaining experience for the big one.

I cannot understand why HQ count for stacking for both sides as they would always be in the back of the hex and the actual HQ staff are quite small the other stuff like trucks etc are not in any particular hex but kind of in a supply string heading toward the next HQ or rail.

I think that German Art Brigades are handicapped and should be SU style, having them count against stacking makes them pretty bad really ( OK they can be in reserve) but if they were a SU they would be really good - other units like Stug X and some X are SU??? Do not understand this logic of having these units on the map.

As regards German corps mentioned above I agree - for certain GD and HG ( which are designated as Corps are they not and in my Sleigh ride scn I am playing now) should allowed to combine to be a corps size unit and maybe other elite ones as well like 2SS Corps and others at Kursk. It is true that these units would be very powerful but it would be a very rare event when they could be deployed as such but it is a good and realistic idea.

Thanks






rmonical -> RE: stacking units: Ideally and realistically, how should it work in WITE? (6/1/2016 12:56:47 PM)

Allow the Germans to convert regiments to support units and attach them to a division. WITW has a vaguely similar mechanism. Then the Germans can get 6 divisions in a hex as well. This is not trivial to implement.



morvael -> RE: stacking units: Ideally and realistically, how should it work in WITE? (6/1/2016 12:58:23 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: rmonical

Allow the Germans to convert regiments to support units and attach them to a division. WITW has a vaguely similar mechanism. Then the Germans can get 6 divisions in a hex as well. This is not trivial to implement.


You could enable this for standalone regiments even today :)



Cavalry Corp -> RE: stacking units: Ideally and realistically, how should it work in WITE? (6/1/2016 1:03:50 PM)

Turn them into SU - how please ? What about the late war German Art Brigades!! :)



morvael -> RE: stacking units: Ideally and realistically, how should it work in WITE? (6/1/2016 1:07:29 PM)

See 1.08.05 new feature 29. To ensure that balance of existing scenarios is not altered by huge number of possible combat units (or stronger combat units) this feature is not active by default, so it will only work for games running custom generic data.



MechFO -> RE: stacking units: Ideally and realistically, how should it work in WITE? (6/1/2016 6:48:25 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: rmonical

Allow the Germans to convert regiments to support units and attach them to a division. WITW has a vaguely similar mechanism. Then the Germans can get 6 divisions in a hex as well. This is not trivial to implement.


It's physically impossible to have 6 divisions defending effectively in a 10x10 km box, even in flat terrain. If there are any kind of terrain features, forest, hills etc., usable space drops even more. Effective force x space ratio has a bell curve as well.

Allowing too high force densities per se is not a problem, the problem is there are no negative consequences.



rmonical -> RE: stacking units: Ideally and realistically, how should it work in WITE? (6/1/2016 6:56:14 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: MechFO


quote:

ORIGINAL: rmonical

Allow the Germans to convert regiments to support units and attach them to a division. WITW has a vaguely similar mechanism. Then the Germans can get 6 divisions in a hex as well. This is not trivial to implement.


It's physically impossible to have 6 divisions defending effectively in a 10x10 km box, even in flat terrain. If there are any kind of terrain features, forest, hills etc., usable space drops even more. Effective force x space ratio has a bell curve as well.

Allowing too high force densities per se is not a problem, the problem is there are no negative consequences.



Agree. This density is for the attack. There is probably a tweak on bombardment casualties - that is where density hurts.



Manstein63 -> RE: stacking units: Ideally and realistically, how should it work in WITE? (6/1/2016 11:46:12 PM)

I always liked the SPI game Kursk all the units had steps for example a rifle division would be 2 steps where as an elite German Panzer Division had 8 steps & each hex could hold only a maximum amount of unit steps (I forget how many exactly)
Manstein63



Michael T -> RE: stacking units: Ideally and realistically, how should it work in WITE? (6/2/2016 1:08:37 AM)

It's funny how some game developers have solved the stacking issue for almost decades and others are still in the stone age. For example Tiller has used quite a sophisticated stacking method since I can't remember. Akin to what you cite Manstein63. Yet GG can only manage 3 of anything, and can't seem to progress. Victor (DC3) uses a density penalty to punish over stacking. Ron Dockal (WWIIiE) at least can accommodate a finite number of air units & ground units per hex. Frank Hunter (Piecing Fortress Europa) uses stacking points. All these guys are pretty much one man bands. All have stacking systems light years of GG and his cohorts...



RoflCopter4 -> RE: stacking units: Ideally and realistically, how should it work in WITE? (6/2/2016 6:43:41 AM)

I don't know why nobody has mentioned it, but why can't something like the system used in Hearts of Iron 3 be implemented in some way? In that game you could stack as many things as you wanted in a single province but in combat every unit has a "frontage" requirement based on its size, and every battle has a finite available amount of frontage dependent on the variable size of the border the attack is coming from. This way only a vaguely realistic number of units can participate in a battle, although if they break and retreat the other units you have stacked there have a small chance (rarely better than 2% per hour) to take their place. However, in addition to this, stacking more than a certain number of men (not units) in a province also carries an exponential penalty to combat ability that can be as high as -99%, even if those units are not fighting. This allows you to cram lots of units into one place if you absolutely have to, but very strongly discourages it and nullifies its potential abuses. It would also be effectively impossible to supply a large number of units because the supply system actually moves supplies one province at a time from the capital to where they need to go, and only allows a certain amount of it to move through a province at a time (dependent on its infrastructure level) creating bottlenecks and shortages.

HOI3 is grossly unrealistic in most respects, but it has some interesting elements that really could be copied. HOI4 comes out next week too, who knows how that will be.



Michael T -> RE: stacking units: Ideally and realistically, how should it work in WITE? (6/2/2016 8:11:45 AM)

quote:

HOI3 is grossly unrealistic in most respects, but it has some interesting elements that really could be copied. HOI4 comes out next week too, who knows how that will be.


LOL probably no closer to WWII than Dark Souls III is, which I play for kicks [:D]



Denniss -> RE: stacking units: Ideally and realistically, how should it work in WITE? (6/2/2016 9:57:32 AM)

I've seen other games like Arsenal of democracy, a Hoi 2 follow-up, using penalties in battle if many units are involved. The larger the involved units (or the more of them) the harder it becomes to properly organize attack or defense operations.



Page: [1]

Valid CSS!




Forum Software © ASPPlayground.NET Advanced Edition 2.4.5 ANSI
0.6396484