Matrix Games Forums

 Forums  Register  Login  Photo Gallery  Member List  Search  Calendars  FAQ 

My Profile  Inbox  Address Book  My Subscription  My Forums  Log Out

RE: Strat movement & game balance

 
View related threads: (in this forum | in all forums)

Logged in as: Guest
Users viewing this topic: none
  Printable Version
All Forums >> [New Releases from Matrix Games] >> Gary Grigsby's War in the East Series >> RE: Strat movement & game balance Page: <<   < prev  1 [2] 3 4 5   next >   >>
Login
Message << Older Topic   Newer Topic >>
RE: Strat movement & game balance - 1/20/2011 5:42:45 PM   
Reconvet

 

Posts: 355
Joined: 1/17/2011
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: gradenko_2000

I don't see where you're all coming from that the Soviets have no limitations on rail movement: Strategic movement points is the cap.

After all, the limit on how far a unit can travel in a week by train should be expressed as something WITHIN the unit, shouldn't it?



As long as units have no train engines and wagons in their OOB and don't build their own tracks for the move, it's obviously a calculation of OUTSIDE factors.

Regarding rail movement cap: I'm not the only one who considers Strat movement pool points as too high at the moment. In every AAR I read so far the Soviet player was able to shift tons of reserve troops easily in every relevant sector (AGN + AGC), without being confronted with hard choices. Timely factory evacuations are no problem whatsoever if remaining pool points at the end of the turn are used for that and no excessive shortrange railhopping for combat units is practised.





_____________________________

The biggest threat for mankind is ignorance.


(in reply to gradenko2k)
Post #: 31
RE: Strat movement & game balance - 1/20/2011 6:25:46 PM   
JAMiAM

 

Posts: 6165
Joined: 2/8/2004
Status: offline 		I tend to favor reconvet's point of view here, as it is something that bothers me, as well. Whether I'm playing the Axis, or the Soviets, I find the current method where you use the same amount of rail cap for a 20 mile ride as you do for a 1000 mile ride...lacking.

I feel that there is a very easy (to code) solution available. Since all Strat movement is based on a 100 MP maximum usage per unit, just multiply by the proportion of MPs expended by the unit in strat mode - to include loading, movement, and unloading - and use that adjusted total for the actual reduction to the rail cap. If necessary for game balancing, then adjust total cap accordingly.

Since a significant portion of the Strat MPs are expended in loading and unloading, this will still favor long hauls for the most efficient use of rail cap. However, it still allows the players to move larger bunches of units over short hauls to save wear and tear on the truck-based supply assets.

Then, of course, we need to get interdiction fixed so that units moving by Strat movement are actually attacked, instead of getting a free ride. This is one of my pet peeves about the game.

(in reply to Reconvet)
Post #: 32
RE: Strat movement & game balance - 1/20/2011 6:48:50 PM   
LiquidSky


Posts: 2811
Joined: 6/24/2008
Status: offline

The Rail Cap is physical space. That physical space wont change just because a unit travels less distance. Time is measured in movement points. So after a short hop by train, the unit can move on its merry way if it has time (movement points) left. That physical space (the cap) representing the train that carried the unit is not available to move anything else this turn, because there is no guarentee that it can get to another unit in time to move it.

What you get, instead is an average. In points. Some of the points can be used twice for shorter hops by just increaing the size of the pool. If you say 25% of the trips are short, then add 25% to the points. If the trips take longer then a week (the unit is stil entrained), then deduct those points from the pool.

I have yet to play a Russian front game that didnt allow mass train transport of the Russian army.

(in reply to JAMiAM)
Post #: 33
RE: Strat movement & game balance - 1/20/2011 6:53:42 PM   
JAMiAM

 

Posts: 6165
Joined: 2/8/2004
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: LiquidSky



The Rail Cap is physical space. That physical space wont change just because a unit travels less distance. Time is measured in movement points.


I think that what reconvet, and I, are arguing for is that the Rail Cap should be factor of Space-Time, and not simply Space.

(in reply to LiquidSky)
Post #: 34
RE: Strat movement & game balance - 1/20/2011 7:06:20 PM   
alfonso

 

Posts: 470
Joined: 10/22/2001
From: Palma de Mallorca
Status: offline 		As I said, I think there is some degree of averaging and abstracting in the train system. You (Reconvet) are proposing a more concrete system, because you feel that would be a better representation of the reality. But in this case you fail to consider which is the true impact of implementing your system. The distance by rail from Moscow to Leningrad is 40 hexes, and to Orel is 21 hexes. Are you proposing that to rail transfer from Moscow to Orel should cost aprox 50% of the rail transfer to Leningrad? This would be if the limiting factor is only the distance, but I doubt it seriously. Some time has to be expended loading the trains, I would think, and the workhours (which are also abstracted inside railpoints) of the crane operators are the same irrespective of the destination, as is the paperwork of the Transportation Bureau. If to transfer a Division from Moscow to Leningrad costs 1000 rail points, how many do you consider fair for a transfer to Orel? 525 (1000*21/40)? 700? 900? Why? Now, it is also 1000. Ok, it is a simplification, but, my subjective feeling is that anything above 800 makes it unnecessary the coding effort. For shorter distances, there is already the penalization for loading and unloading, so it is very doubtful that someone uses rail transfer for distances much shorter than 20 hexes (although if you make them very cheap it could be taken into consideration!). And the maximum of rail transfer of an active division is 55 (because 45 are only for load/unload) hexes, so for normal ranges (25-55 hexes) I doubt there should be significant differences in terms of game balance.

Besides, as it the system is implemented now, distance is not completely irrelevant, because after a short trip there are movement points remaining, to simulate than in that week other things could be done. And the maximum for a unit already trained is 100 hexes (1000 miles), normally is only used by Division that in reality can be considered to come from “….very very very far away….”

My impression is that what you really want is less railpoints for the Soviets, but that is a different matter

(in reply to Reconvet)
Post #: 35
RE: Strat movement & game balance - 1/20/2011 9:03:00 PM   
Muzrub


Posts: 1780
Joined: 2/23/2001
From: Australia, Queensland, Gold coast
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: TulliusDetritus

quote:

I must admit it is getting boring.


LOL! Well, how many Soviet divisions do you want to swallow? 10, 20, 80? The whole Red Army except some lousy reserves in Moscow and Leningrad to make a last, decisive stand...?



Yawn- are you serious?

Surely you've played the game and dealt with the frustration of magically moving Soviet lines?

I would play as the Soviets- but with the benefits you seem to get it would seem like a cheat!


< Message edited by Muzrub -- 1/20/2011 9:10:54 PM >

_____________________________

Harmlessly passing your time in the grassland away;
Only dimly aware of a certain unease in the air.
You better watch out,
There may be dogs about
I've looked over Iraq, and i have seen
Things are not what they seem.


Matrix Axis of Evil

(in reply to TulliusDetritus)
Post #: 36
RE: Strat movement & game balance - 1/20/2011 9:13:22 PM   
TulliusDetritus


Posts: 5521
Joined: 4/1/2004
From: The Zone™
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: Muzrub

Surely you've played the game and dealt with the frustration of magically moving Soviet lines?


"an entire front runs away for miles", "then retreats for miles", that's what you said. On my book that means you aren't swallowing a lot of Soviet units. And you are apparently unhappy because of that. Hey, NOT my fault

NO, I haven't played this game at ALL. You're 100% correct

_____________________________

a nu cheeki breeki iv damke

(in reply to Muzrub)
Post #: 37
RE: Strat movement & game balance - 1/20/2011 9:14:53 PM   
Zort

 

Posts: 684
Joined: 7/19/2004
From: Colorado Springs, CO
Status: offline 		If I remember from my reading is that most german inf divisions marched to the front. I think the Spanish Blue div took over a month to get to Leningrad. So if we want to do it right then there should be little german troop movement by rail the first year east of the polish border. (now this comment will start another burst of responses ).

As has been stated in several other places, the soviet factories can move much further then any other unit in the game. So it has been suggested that factory movement be limited to the same restrictions as any other unit. Otherwise the rail movement abstraction is just fine. Anymore detail will me we will have to manage each train.

A question on how the rails were managed, since most lines were single tracked, how did they get multiple trains to one place and turn them around and not run into incoming trains?


(in reply to Muzrub)
Post #: 38
RE: Strat movement & game balance - 1/20/2011 9:27:19 PM   
Reconvet

 

Posts: 355
Joined: 1/17/2011
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: alfonso

For shorter distances, there is already the penalization for loading and unloading,
....

Besides, as it the system is implemented now, distance is not completely irrelevant, because after a short trip there are movement points remaining, ....



"Penalization" for the UNIT (MP's remaining), sure, but no bonus or malus for the strat movement point POOL. The full rolling stock price is paid and deducted from the pool (the loading cost as it appears in the unit detail screen), whether transport is for minimum or maximum range. It makes no difference to the pool deduction if you move a unit 6 hexes or 50 hexes.

Imagine a train transporting cargo 50 miles or 500 miles. Don't you think this train could and would be used for transporting more cargo on several more trips if time allows it because of a lower distance on one run? It really doesn't feel right as it's programmed at the moment. How you use your limited strat transport pool points should be linked to how far you move single units and factories. Travel distance should have an impact on the strat point pool. I don't think humanity had beaming tech in WWII...


quote:

ORIGINAL: alfonso

My impression is that what you really want is less railpoints for the Soviets, but that is a different matter




I consider tweaking of the transport pool a necessity for pbem balancing, yep, but linking transport distance with strat point pool calculation goes beyond that. Strat transport pool points should not only be an abstraction of CARGO SPACE and loading/unloading management, but should also consider transport DISTANCE which means transport TIME.

Right now only one bottleneck of every logistical system is implemented: Cargo space. Distance/asset use time is not factored in at the moment. I'd like to be able to use the same train more than once if I only use it for a fraction of the week. Laziness is neither tolerated in the worker's paradise nor in Führer's obedient workforce...




_____________________________

The biggest threat for mankind is ignorance.


(in reply to alfonso)
Post #: 39
RE: Strat movement & game balance - 1/20/2011 9:34:12 PM   
Reconvet

 

Posts: 355
Joined: 1/17/2011
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: Zort


A question on how the rails were managed, since most lines were single tracked, how did they get multiple trains to one place and turn them around and not run into incoming trains?




Build a good trainlength of double tracks once in a while, so one train can wait there on the sidetrack and let another train coming his way pass, and then gets going againg after the object on collision course has passed. As simple as that.



_____________________________

The biggest threat for mankind is ignorance.


(in reply to Zort)
Post #: 40
RE: Strat movement & game balance - 1/20/2011 9:39:00 PM   
Zort

 

Posts: 684
Joined: 7/19/2004
From: Colorado Springs, CO
Status: offline 		Yea, siding length dictates the length of the trains. I understand that. So I guess at 'railhead', multiple sidings were placed so several trains could unload. And I guess the trains that were heading back to germany were backing since there probably wasn't a roundabout to turn the engines around. Managing a rail system is fairly complex even now with all the radios/gps. So just wondered how they managed it back then.

(in reply to Reconvet)
Post #: 41
RE: Strat movement & game balance - 1/20/2011 9:43:02 PM   
TulliusDetritus


Posts: 5521
Joined: 4/1/2004
From: The Zone™
Status: offline 		Muzrub, this balance thing is a sort of déjà-vu... In the War in the Pacific forum this issue "balance vs REALISM" appeared too... Thanks god those who wanted balance were defeated. UTTERLY defeated Most of the community agreed: WitP is too serious (because it delivers an amazing simulation of that conflict aka no Japanese invasion of Panama, West Coast, etc.). Don't mess with it.

In fact the Admiral's Edition was another nail in the coffin of "balance". More realism instead... Ah, the paradise...

You are obviously allowed to want a balanced (we could call that game War in The Twilight Zone) as opposed to a realistic game. I hope you will be utterly defeated though. Literally



_____________________________

a nu cheeki breeki iv damke

(in reply to Reconvet)
Post #: 42
RE: Strat movement & game balance - 1/20/2011 10:03:26 PM   
Reconvet

 

Posts: 355
Joined: 1/17/2011
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: Zort

Yea, siding length dictates the length of the trains. I understand that. So I guess at 'railhead', multiple sidings were placed so several trains could unload. And I guess the trains that were heading back to germany were backing since there probably wasn't a roundabout to turn the engines around. Managing a rail system is fairly complex even now with all the radios/gps. So just wondered how they managed it back then.



No idea how they proceeded back then. One possible solution:




Somehow I didn't manage to embed the picture in this post. Click to upload is clear, I also see the "image"-button on the message editor, but couldn't make it work. Can anybody give a tip what I'm doing wrong?


Edit: Thanks to TulliusDetritus I managed to embed my fist pic here.

Attachment (1)

< Message edited by Reconvet -- 1/20/2011 10:55:26 PM >

_____________________________

The biggest threat for mankind is ignorance.


(in reply to Zort)
Post #: 43
RE: Strat movement & game balance - 1/20/2011 10:09:05 PM   
TulliusDetritus


Posts: 5521
Joined: 4/1/2004
From: The Zone™
Status: offline 		Sure, Reconvert.

Make sure the file isn't enormous (BMP files are).




Attachment (1)

_____________________________

a nu cheeki breeki iv damke

(in reply to Reconvet)
Post #: 44
RE: Strat movement & game balance - 1/20/2011 10:20:59 PM   
alfonso

 

Posts: 470
Joined: 10/22/2001
From: Palma de Mallorca
Status: offline 		Reconvet

You have not answered my question:

If transporting a Division from Moscow to Leningrad has a cost of 1000, what should be the cost to transport it to Orel?

Your question: yes, the train going 50 miles away could make more than one trip. I doubt it should be allowed to make 10 times the number of trips of the other train. I doubt even more that a 50 mile example has anything to do with STRATEGIC movements. A more valid example would be 500 vs 800 miles. You seem to think that the 500 mile trip should allow to transport 60% more stuff or consume 37.5% less strategic points than the other trains, but again, you forget that railpoints are an abstraction for a lot of things, and many of those things are the same for a 500 mile trip than for a 800 mile trip

Another example: the "complexity" (looking timetables, booking online, facturation, printing board passes, going to the airport with time enough, passing security controls, boarding...) of flying from Mallorca to Madrid is not only half (or 36%) of the complexity of flying from Mallorca to London.... Yes, it is more "complicated" to go from here to Sidney than to Ibiza, but for "normal" ranges, "complexity" is only marginally affected by distance. This is how I envisage rail points, as an abstract measure of "complexity", including more or less everything..

(in reply to Reconvet)
Post #: 45
RE: Strat movement & game balance - 1/20/2011 10:22:35 PM   
Reconvet

 

Posts: 355
Joined: 1/17/2011
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: TulliusDetritus

Muzrub, this balance thing is a sort of déjà-vu... In the War in the Pacific forum this issue "balance vs REALISM" appeared too... Thanks god those who wanted balance were defeated. UTTERLY defeated



If I may drop my 5 cents: Realism for strat transport in WitE is impossible (lack of data) and nobody sane would ask the programmers for a simulation of every single train engine and wagon). But an approach to let it feel a bit more real instead of the current artificially abstracted numbers for pool and pool usage would be more than welcome.





_____________________________

The biggest threat for mankind is ignorance.


(in reply to TulliusDetritus)
Post #: 46
RE: Strat movement & game balance - 1/20/2011 10:29:38 PM   
Reconvet

 

Posts: 355
Joined: 1/17/2011
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: TulliusDetritus

Sure, Reconvert.

Make sure the file isn't enormous (BMP files are).






Aaaaaaaaaah, I didn't know I had to include "local://upfiles/...", thanks.

Didn't get any hint of the path after the upload, filesize 4k is well below the limit. I'll try again.






_____________________________

The biggest threat for mankind is ignorance.


(in reply to TulliusDetritus)
Post #: 47
RE: Strat movement & game balance - 1/20/2011 10:37:56 PM   
TulliusDetritus


Posts: 5521
Joined: 4/1/2004
From: The Zone™
Status: offline 		Reconvert, As I have said I don't know how many Soviet divisions could be transported during the war, especially on the first 6 months of the war. I know that historically the Soviets sent (STAVKA reserves) 150 divisions and 44 brigades to the front from 22 june to 1 december. I guess by train...

But as far as I know NO one -on this thread- could say "hey, I've got the answer, I know they could only tranport x divisions per week. FACT!".

So, given that NO one gave us that answer, we have what we have on the game. And as I said, I DO trust the game developers. No one is perfect and they could have it wrong, true. But until someone proves them wrong, I trust them

< Message edited by TulliusDetritus -- 1/20/2011 10:39:12 PM >

_____________________________

a nu cheeki breeki iv damke

(in reply to Reconvet)
Post #: 48
RE: Strat movement & game balance - 1/20/2011 10:38:44 PM   
Reconvet

 

Posts: 355
Joined: 1/17/2011
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: alfonso

Reconvet

You have not answered my question:

If transporting a Division from Moscow to Leningrad has a cost of 1000, what should be the cost to transport it to Orel?

Your question: yes, the train going 50 miles away could make more than one trip. I doubt it should be allowed to make 10 times the number of trips of the other train. I doubt even more that a 50 mile example has anything to do with STRATEGIC movements. A more valid example would be 500 vs 800 miles. You seem to think that the 500 mile trip should allow to transport 60% more stuff or consume 37.5% less strategic points than the other trains, but again, you forget that railpoints are an abstraction for a lot of things, and many of those things are the same for a 500 mile trip than for a 800 mile trip

Another example: the "complexity" (looking timetables, booking online, facturation, printing board passes, going to the airport with time enough, passing security controls, boarding...) of flying from Mallorca to Madrid is not only half (or 36%) of the complexity of flying from Mallorca to London.... Yes, it is more "complicated" to go from here to Sidney than to Ibiza, but for "normal" ranges, "complexity" is only marginally affected by distance. This is how I envisage rail points, as an abstract measure of "complexity", including more or less everything..


I know some degree of abstraction is unavoidable. One 500 mile trip can't be equalled with ten 50 mile trips, we surely agree there. Put a malus on shorter transports, a certain percentage on loading cost, decreasing with longer trips? I don't quite see the usefulness of discussing concrete numbers at this point. But some degree of relevance of transport distance on pool usage could and should be implemented.




_____________________________

The biggest threat for mankind is ignorance.


(in reply to alfonso)
Post #: 49
RE: Strat movement & game balance - 1/20/2011 10:48:46 PM   
Reconvet

 

Posts: 355
Joined: 1/17/2011
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: TulliusDetritus

Reconvert, As I have said I don't know how many Soviet divisions could be transported during the war, especially on the first 6 months of the war. I know that historically the Soviets sent (STAVKA reserves) 150 divisions and 44 brigades to the front from 22 june to 1 december. I guess by train...

But as far as I know NO one -on this thread- could say "hey, I've got the answer, I know they could only tranport x divisions per week. FACT!".

So, given that NO one gave us that answer, we have what we have on the game. And as I said, I DO trust the game developers. No one is perfect and they could have it wrong, true. But until someone proves them wrong, I trust them



Let's say that's 200 large units in half a year, that would be an average of less than 10 per week? How many big units can you move right now in a week?

I do trust the developers too, I absolutely have full faith in their longtime dedication with this still young game. But they did take a shortcut when programming strat movement, and I sure hope they'll eventually make this aspect feel a tad mor realistic. I'm definitly NOT asking for a historically accurate solution here, just to make life not overly easy for Soviet pbem players in the first year.



_____________________________

The biggest threat for mankind is ignorance.


(in reply to TulliusDetritus)
Post #: 50
RE: Strat movement & game balance - 1/20/2011 10:55:11 PM   
TulliusDetritus


Posts: 5521
Joined: 4/1/2004
From: The Zone™
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: Reconvet

Let's say that's 200 large units in half a year, that would be an average of less than 10 per week? How many big units can you move right now in a week?


Nope That number is simply the number of divisions and brigades sent to the front. We still don't know the Soviet capacity, sorry. So that would be a minimum if you want.

< Message edited by TulliusDetritus -- 1/20/2011 10:56:29 PM >

_____________________________

a nu cheeki breeki iv damke

(in reply to Reconvet)
Post #: 51
RE: Strat movement & game balance - 1/20/2011 11:07:29 PM   
Muzrub


Posts: 1780
Joined: 2/23/2001
From: Australia, Queensland, Gold coast
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: TulliusDetritus


quote:

ORIGINAL: Muzrub

Surely you've played the game and dealt with the frustration of magically moving Soviet lines?


"an entire front runs away for miles", "then retreats for miles", that's what you said. On my book that means you aren't swallowing a lot of Soviet units. And you are apparently unhappy because of that. Hey, NOT my fault

NO, I haven't played this game at ALL. You're 100% correct


Indeed that is what I said- thanks for pointing that out.

The problem I have with a line that constantly retreats (with apparently no penalty) is that for the most I feel the game is like a Sunday drive in the country- Yes indeed, a nice little Sunday drive with no red lights, stop signs and your very own police motorcade.
The game has two defences 7-8 hex deep lines or running 7-8 hexes.

But I figure your a man who likes rose coloured glasses- enjoy


< Message edited by Muzrub -- 1/20/2011 11:18:13 PM >

_____________________________

Harmlessly passing your time in the grassland away;
Only dimly aware of a certain unease in the air.
You better watch out,
There may be dogs about
I've looked over Iraq, and i have seen
Things are not what they seem.


Matrix Axis of Evil

(in reply to TulliusDetritus)
Post #: 52
RE: Strat movement & game balance - 1/20/2011 11:17:02 PM   
Muzrub


Posts: 1780
Joined: 2/23/2001
From: Australia, Queensland, Gold coast
Status: offline 		Hmmm TulliusDetritus,

Realism hey, I don't see the realism in this game at all.
And there is certainly no balance- which is not what I am calling for thank you.

Your concerned about realism, well geewiz! So am I- now all we have to do is look forward to a game that provides some and not fanboy it up so nothing improves.

If your blind to the issues here- please don't bother replying back- your wasting my time and yours TulliusDetritus.


_____________________________

Harmlessly passing your time in the grassland away;
Only dimly aware of a certain unease in the air.
You better watch out,
There may be dogs about
I've looked over Iraq, and i have seen
Things are not what they seem.


Matrix Axis of Evil

(in reply to TulliusDetritus)
Post #: 53
RE: Strat movement & game balance - 1/20/2011 11:23:38 PM   
Mynok


Posts: 12108
Joined: 11/30/2002
Status: offline
quote:

I know some degree of abstraction is unavoidable. One 500 mile trip can't be equalled with ten 50 mile trips, we surely agree there. Put a malus on shorter transports, a certain percentage on loading cost, decreasing with longer trips? I don't quite see the usefulness of discussing concrete numbers at this point. But some degree of relevance of transport distance on pool usage could and should be implemented.


All you are basically saying is you want a reduction in the Soviets strat move pool and you propose a complicated means of doing that. There's little point in that.

The basic premise of the game is that MP = Time. This works just as well for the strat move side of things as it does for the land move side of things, and indeed it ought to work the same. It already pro-rates the speed of trains vs land.

Argue for a reduced strat move pool if you want. You may have a point there. But don't muck up a very playable and elegant way of representating capacity.

< Message edited by Mynok -- 1/20/2011 11:25:43 PM >

_____________________________

"Measure civilization by the ability of citizens to mock government with impunity" -- Unknown

(in reply to Reconvet)
Post #: 54
RE: Strat movement & game balance - 1/20/2011 11:23:40 PM   
TulliusDetritus


Posts: 5521
Joined: 4/1/2004
From: The Zone™
Status: offline
quote:

for the most I feel the game is like a Sunday drive in the country- Yes indeed, a nice little Sunday drive with no red lights, stop signs and your very own police motorcade


I very much doubt it's a "Sunday drive in the country" for my German PBEM opponent...

Cheers

_____________________________

a nu cheeki breeki iv damke

(in reply to Muzrub)
Post #: 55
RE: Strat movement & game balance - 1/20/2011 11:26:34 PM   
Muzrub


Posts: 1780
Joined: 2/23/2001
From: Australia, Queensland, Gold coast
Status: offline 		I don't doubt PBEM games different- I will be trying that out with some friends when I get the chance.

My issue is with the AI, and how the AI deals with situations.

cheers

This is a lot nicer.

_____________________________

Harmlessly passing your time in the grassland away;
Only dimly aware of a certain unease in the air.
You better watch out,
There may be dogs about
I've looked over Iraq, and i have seen
Things are not what they seem.


Matrix Axis of Evil

(in reply to TulliusDetritus)
Post #: 56
RE: Strat movement & game balance - 1/21/2011 7:04:14 AM   
Reconvet

 

Posts: 355
Joined: 1/17/2011
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: Mynok

All you are basically saying is you want a reduction in the Soviets strat move pool and you propose a complicated means of doing that. There's little point in that.

The basic premise of the game is that MP = Time. This works just as well for the strat move side of things as it does for the land move side of things, and indeed it ought to work the same. It already pro-rates the speed of trains vs land.

Argue for a reduced strat move pool if you want. You may have a point there. But don't muck up a very playable and elegant way of representating capacity.


Another shot from the hip, and a wide miss. Nope, I'm asking for more than a pool reduction.

Once more: If a train transports something for a fraction of the max range, then this train should be available for more trips in the same week. What's complicated about that? Paying the same price (transport cost as in the unit detail screen) for a 5 hex transport and for a 50 hex transport makes no sense whatsoever.

MP only deals with the time of the transported unit, not with the time of trains and ships. If the unit has some time for action left after transport, then trains should have some time left too, which should be mirrored in a reduced transport cost (speak: pool deduction reduction) for short transport distances. These are absolutely two different aspects, and throwing both in the same pot neglects the very basics of logistical realities.

Tweaking the early Soviet early rail capacity is an easy feasible short term measure. Adapting the basic strat pool concept goes beyond that, will take a programming and renewed balancing effort, but it would correct an ugly design oversight (train time IS a basic element for logistics).


Edit: Typo

< Message edited by Reconvet -- 1/21/2011 7:06:49 AM >

_____________________________

The biggest threat for mankind is ignorance.


(in reply to Mynok)
Post #: 57
RE: Strat movement & game balance - 1/21/2011 7:14:20 AM   
jomni


Posts: 2827
Joined: 11/19/2007
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: TulliusDetritus
It's epic. I can't see the epic thing on the Axis side


I can see the EPIC FAILURE! Lol!

BTW, I guess you just have to fight the game system for now. Make sure you cut those rail lines so that the Soviet's can't use them retreat.
I believe the massive MP allocation of your Panzers can pull this off. Just have to plan on where they go.

This will foil any withdrawal plans of the Russians as I experienced in my current campaing (I'm playing Russians).

< Message edited by jomni -- 1/21/2011 7:15:53 AM >

(in reply to TulliusDetritus)
Post #: 58
RE: Strat movement & game balance - 1/21/2011 8:07:02 AM   
alfonso

 

Posts: 470
Joined: 10/22/2001
From: Palma de Mallorca
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: Reconvet



I don't quite see the usefulness of discussing concrete numbers at this point.



Probably because they might show that your idea will have a negligible effect in terms of game balance. In the meantime you can cheaply complain about "design oversights" without having to provide a real alternative, besides repeating the irrelevant example of the 5 and 50 hexes to make grandiloquent points ("makes no sense whatsoever"), which at least are a lack of respect to the designers, and in the process ignoring all other considerations.

If a trip from Moscow costs 1100 to Leningrad and 900 to Orel, do you think it is critical that the game assigns 1000 for both? And if the costs are 1050 and 950? What are the differences that bother you so much, forgetting that there should be some degree of reasonable simplification? You will have to show more to convince me, but based in hard facts, please.

(in reply to Reconvet)
Post #: 59
RE: Strat movement & game balance - 1/21/2011 9:12:24 AM   
Reconvet

 

Posts: 355
Joined: 1/17/2011
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: alfonso


quote:

ORIGINAL: Reconvet



I don't quite see the usefulness of discussing concrete numbers at this point.



Probably because they might show that your idea will have a negligible effect in terms of game balance. In the meantime you can cheaply complain about "design oversights" without having to provide a real alternative, besides repeating the irrelevant example of the 5 and 50 hexes to make grandiloquent points ("makes no sense whatsoever"), which at least are a lack of respect to the designers, and in the process ignoring all other considerations.

If a trip from Moscow costs 1100 to Leningrad and 900 to Orel, do you think it is critical that the game assigns 1000 for both? And if the costs are 1050 and 950? What are the differences that bother you so much, forgetting that there should be some degree of reasonable simplification? You will have to show more to convince me, but based in hard facts, please.



Seems like you took "makes no sense whatsoever" personal, sorry for that, was not intentional. I meant it in a sense that there had to be a consensus first to build in train time, before discussing concrete numbers. And once more: I have utmost respect of the tremendous job developers and testers have done, but they did oversimplify strategic movement.

You want a concrete example, ok. I’m dead tired right now, so I hope I get the numbers right:

In one Soviet game versus AI I have a tank div in hex 109,45, just east of Moscow. Transport cost as in the unit detail screen is 2379. Max transport range (with loading, without disembarking at trip end) is what I’d take as 100% for transport cost (pool point cost, this train is used to his max capacity). A 40 hex trip to just south of Leningrad (hex 82,19) leaves 30 strat move points (SMP), minus disembarking cost of 15 leaves 15 of 100 SMP. So let’s calculate with 15% train capacity left after this transport (we could reduce this further because of additional coordination efforts for using leftover capacity or whatsoever, but let’s keep things simple right now). 15% reduction of transport cost: 2379*.85 results in a pool point reduction (transport price) of 2022 (rounded down) for this transport.

Example same unit to Orel hex: 47 SMP left after transport, minus 15 disembarking cost leaves 32 SMP left, 23 hexes travelled. This train has a leftover capacity of 32% for the rest of the week. 32% reduction of transport cost: 2379*.68 results in a pool point reduction (transport price) of 1617 (rounded down) for this transport.

So a transport distance of 23 hexes versus a transport distance of 40 hexes makes a difference of (2022-1617=) 405 transport cost points. Compare the fix cost of 2379 as it is right now for any distance with above examples (40 hex travel 2022, 23 hex travel 1671). That’s a difference that could and should matter in my book, not negligible at all… Facts concrete and hard enough?



_____________________________

The biggest threat for mankind is ignorance.


(in reply to alfonso)
Post #: 60
Page:   <<   < prev  1 [2] 3 4 5   next >   >>
All Forums >> [New Releases from Matrix Games] >> Gary Grigsby's War in the East Series >> RE: Strat movement & game balance Page: <<   < prev  1 [2] 3 4 5   next >   >>
Jump to:





New Messages No New Messages
Hot Topic w/ New Messages Hot Topic w/o New Messages
Locked w/ New Messages Locked w/o New Messages
 Post New Thread
 Reply to Message
 Post New Poll
 Submit Vote
 Delete My Own Post
 Delete My Own Thread
 Rate Posts


Forum Software © ASPPlayground.NET Advanced Edition 2.4.5 ANSI

1.625