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  4 5 [6] 7 8   next >   >>
Login
Message << Older Topic   Newer Topic >>
RE: Strat movement & game balance - 1/22/2011 5:54:20 PM   
alfonso

 

Posts: 470
Joined: 10/22/2001
From: Palma de Mallorca
Status: offline 		Do the Soviets have 60 full blown 100% TOE Rifle Divs after the frontier battles? And, really no one has any data on how many Divisions the Soviets were able to transfer in one week? What was their record? 10? 20? 40?

(in reply to cookie monster)
Post #: 151
RE: Strat movement & game balance - 1/22/2011 6:00:42 PM   
Flaviusx


Posts: 7750
Joined: 9/9/2009
From: Southern California
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: alfonso

Do the Soviets have 60 full blown 100% TOE Rifle Divs after the frontier battles? And, really no one has any data on how many Divisions the Soviets were able to transfer in one week? What was their record? 10? 20? 40?


They do, if you count the various frozen units scattered around the map. But you don't actually get access to all of this immediately. (Or even very soon, for places like the Transcaucus.)



_____________________________

WitE Alpha Tester

(in reply to alfonso)
Post #: 152
RE: Strat movement & game balance - 1/22/2011 6:32:17 PM   
Reconvet

 

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

ORIGINAL: Flaviusx

Once again: nobody is moving 60 full strength divisions a turn by rail. That's a fantasy. They aren't moving even half that.

Reduce the rail cap in half, give the Soviets the German cap and you'll get the same exact results by and large. However, this would make factory evacuations more difficult.



Effective German cap for quickly rail moving reserves near the front in '41 is exactly: Zero.
Effective Soviet cap for quickly rail moving reserves near the front in '41 is around 60 combat ready Divisions. Can this be used to significantly stiffen Soviet defenses in '41, yes or no?


Edit: Not "... near the rail front ..." but "... near the front ...".

< Message edited by Reconvet -- 1/22/2011 9:38:10 PM >

_____________________________

The biggest threat for mankind is ignorance.


(in reply to Flaviusx)
Post #: 153
RE: Strat movement & game balance - 1/22/2011 6:35:32 PM   
Flaviusx


Posts: 7750
Joined: 9/9/2009
From: Southern California
Status: offline 		In practical terms, no.

There aren't 60 available full strength rifle divisions in reserve that you can just magically rail somewhere. The capacity to do this exists purely at the theoretical level.

If the forces did exist, then yeah, your case would be stronger. But they don't, this simply isn't the way the game is being played on the Soviet side.

You won't have that kind of reserve until much later on. (At which point you actually can leverage your very high rail cap in creative ways. This is especially true in the 43 scenario.)



_____________________________

WitE Alpha Tester

(in reply to Reconvet)
Post #: 154
RE: Strat movement & game balance - 1/22/2011 6:48:28 PM   
Reconvet

 

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

ORIGINAL: pompack

Flav: I am slightly concerned about this as well, although mostly from the standpoint of the underrated cost of multiple turn factory movement. Please don't let the adversarial tone of some of the posters affect your normal objectivity.



"Adversarial" was probably me. Sorry if my patience suffered.

I just felt that my arguments are being shoved aside by Soviet players who defend a pet instrument which makes their pbem-life too easy in pre-Blizzard '41, and to make it worse: by Soviet players who could hold their own easily without Wunderwaffen-logistics in '41.



_____________________________

The biggest threat for mankind is ignorance.


(in reply to pompack)
Post #: 155
RE: Strat movement & game balance - 1/22/2011 6:56:52 PM   
karonagames


Posts: 4712
Joined: 7/10/2006
From: The Duchy of Cornwall, nr England
Status: offline
quote:

You won't have that kind of reserve until much later on. (At which point you actually can leverage your very high rail cap in creative ways. This is especially true in the 43 scenario.)


I definitely don't want Axis rail capacity reduced in 1943. You have to be able to strategically redeploy 4-6 motorised divisions as fire-brigades.

_____________________________

It's only a Game


(in reply to Reconvet)
Post #: 156
RE: Strat movement & game balance - 1/22/2011 7:51:53 PM   
Aurelian

 

Posts: 3916
Joined: 2/26/2007
Status: offline 		Between getting factories out of harms way, along with routed units, and moving all those shell units foreward, I don't see it in 1941.



< Message edited by Aurelian -- 1/22/2011 10:20:39 PM >

(in reply to karonagames)
Post #: 157
RE: Strat movement & game balance - 1/22/2011 9:35:52 PM   
Reconvet

 

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

ORIGINAL: cookie monster

I say let the man with the beef load up as the Soviets and try and move 60 full blown divisions around.

If he has the patience


Yep, I'm here, I'd be happy to find an Axis player who knows how to put pressure on a Soviet player in pre-Blizzard '41, I am not an expert Soviet player so under pressure I'll probably have to lean more heavily on the rail pool than proven good ones like Flaviusx claim to do, and I'm more than willing to document Soviet rail movements to hit home my point. The game wouldn't have to be continued after first Blizzard starts or ends, therefore I'd release the Axis player if he doesn't want to continue (my splint in the eye is Soviet strategic movement in '41, come '42 both sides fight with the same tools).

I'm all game. Pity that people defending Soviet rail capacities are not, because they'd be top for exploiting Soviet weaknesses.



_____________________________

The biggest threat for mankind is ignorance.


(in reply to cookie monster)
Post #: 158
RE: Strat movement & game balance - 1/22/2011 9:41:27 PM   
Reconvet

 

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

ORIGINAL: BigAnorak

quote:

You won't have that kind of reserve until much later on. (At which point you actually can leverage your very high rail cap in creative ways. This is especially true in the 43 scenario.)


I definitely don't want Axis rail capacity reduced in 1943. You have to be able to strategically redeploy 4-6 motorised divisions as fire-brigades.


This thread was opened to deal with the strat movement situation in '41. Please refrain here from discussing later situations when both sides fight with the same tools. '41 is when only one side has overblown strat movement capabilities.



_____________________________

The biggest threat for mankind is ignorance.


(in reply to karonagames)
Post #: 159
RE: Strat movement & game balance - 1/22/2011 9:45:25 PM   
Zovs


Posts: 6668
Joined: 2/23/2009
From: United States
Status: offline 		Technically in this game both sides never have the same tools, one has to use the Germans one way and the Soviets another way, each sides 'tools' must be used differently and I think this game portrays those differences quite well.

_____________________________


Beta Tester for:
Flashpoint Campaigns: Sudden Storm
War in the East 1 & 2
WarPlan & WarPlan Pacific
Valor & Victory
DG CWIE 2
SPWW2 & SPMBT scenario creator

(in reply to Reconvet)
Post #: 160
RE: Strat movement & game balance - 1/22/2011 9:55:59 PM   
alfonso

 

Posts: 470
Joined: 10/22/2001
From: Palma de Mallorca
Status: offline 		Yours seems to be a very poorly designed experiment, because if you happen to stall the Germans, there are so many variables that there is no guarantee that your success is due only to rail pool issues. Perhaps you are the most talented player. Your victory would not add a microgram of evidence to your point.

What you have to do is to play two (ideally a higher number, to get statistical significance) games against a Soviet player, and show that you can beat him only if he reduces his railpool (perhaps using the editor, perhaps through a gentlemen pact), at a level that suits you, everything else being equal.

And then, you still have to prove that the railpool that creates the conditions for Axis successes has any relationship to reality.

And then you will have hit home your point.


< Message edited by alfonso -- 1/22/2011 9:59:37 PM >

(in reply to Reconvet)
Post #: 161
RE: Strat movement & game balance - 1/22/2011 9:58:23 PM   
karonagames


Posts: 4712
Joined: 7/10/2006
From: The Duchy of Cornwall, nr England
Status: offline
quote:

This thread was opened to deal with the strat movement situation in '41. Please refrain here from discussing later situations when both sides fight with the same tools. '41 is when only one side has overblown strat movement capabilities.


Ummmm... 1941 is not mentioned in the initial post. The campaign game lasts 4 years, and for the SU to win they need to capture Berlin, and they will need all the rail capacity they can lay their hands on to achieve that.

The WITE "engine" has to attempt to recreate 4 years of warfare between 2 armies that evolve in two completely different directions, and it has to deal with some "Spikes" that happen over very short periods out of the full 200+ turns. 12 Turns of Blizzard in 1941/42 is one spike, and industry relocation is another that occurs over the first 15-20 turns. It is important that changes in the rules to deal with these spikes does not unbalance the remaining turns.

IMHO.

_____________________________

It's only a Game


(in reply to Zovs)
Post #: 162
RE: Strat movement & game balance - 1/22/2011 10:00:36 PM   
Reconvet

 

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

ORIGINAL: dlazov66

Technically in this game both sides never have the same tools, one has to use the Germans one way and the Soviets another way, each sides 'tools' must be used differently and I think this game portrays those differences quite well.


I love this game, really, developers and testers and AI designers have done an outstanding job. My problem is that I don't see any AAR in which Axis could develop working tactics against a capable Soviet player's fast pace of shifting around significant reserves to hotspots in '41. This is what this discussion is all about: Soviet strategic mobility in '41 pbem, when Axis have zero railing capabilities within useful distance of front regions.



_____________________________

The biggest threat for mankind is ignorance.


(in reply to Zovs)
Post #: 163
RE: Strat movement & game balance - 1/22/2011 10:04:57 PM   
Reconvet

 

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

ORIGINAL: alfonso

Yours seems to be a very poorly designed experiment, because if you happen to stall the Germans, there are so many variables that there is no guarantee that your success is due only to rail pool issues. Perhaps you are the most talented player. Your victory would not add a microgram of evidence to your point.

What you have to do is to play two (ideally a higher number, to get statistical significance) games against a Soviet player, and show that you can beat him only if he reduces his railpool (perhaps using the editor, perhaps through a gentlemen pact), at a level that suits you, everything else being equal.

And then, you still have to prove that the railpool that creates the conditions for Axis successes has any relationship to reality.

And then you will have hit home your point.



If I document each turn with which pool size what kind of units (shell, unready, ready) or factories I moved to which regions with what reason with what success, then we'd have a more solid base for discussing Soviet rail movement capabilities. I can't get solid data on Soviet rail movements when I play Axis...





_____________________________

The biggest threat for mankind is ignorance.


(in reply to alfonso)
Post #: 164
RE: Strat movement & game balance - 1/22/2011 10:08:29 PM   
alfonso

 

Posts: 470
Joined: 10/22/2001
From: Palma de Mallorca
Status: offline 		You can try playing both sides. Play yourself the Russians with 75% 50%, 25% or 5% of the railpool, or whatever. Then try to smash them (you) with Axis.

(in reply to Reconvet)
Post #: 165
RE: Strat movement & game balance - 1/22/2011 10:19:23 PM   
Reconvet

 

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

ORIGINAL: BigAnorak

quote:

This thread was opened to deal with the strat movement situation in '41. Please refrain here from discussing later situations when both sides fight with the same tools. '41 is when only one side has overblown strat movement capabilities.


Ummmm... 1941 is not mentioned in the initial post. The campaign game lasts 4 years, and for the SU to win they need to capture Berlin, and they will need all the rail capacity they can lay their hands on to achieve that.

The WITE "engine" has to attempt to recreate 4 years of warfare between 2 armies that evolve in two completely different directions, and it has to deal with some "Spikes" that happen over very short periods out of the full 200+ turns. 12 Turns of Blizzard in 1941/42 is one spike, and industry relocation is another that occurs over the first 15-20 turns. It is important that changes in the rules to deal with these spikes does not unbalance the remaining turns.

IMHO.


Okay, my bad. I tried to focus discussion to '41, when only Soviets can raildrop lots of troops near hotspot front regions until late in the year. I think that the ability to shift tons of reserves (up to 60 combat ready Divisions) up to 55 hexes per week blocking Axis offensives is mainly responsible for all these AAR-pbem in which Axis get stalled before achieving major goals.





_____________________________

The biggest threat for mankind is ignorance.


(in reply to karonagames)
Post #: 166
RE: Strat movement & game balance - 1/22/2011 10:24:30 PM   
Reconvet

 

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

ORIGINAL: alfonso

You can try playing both sides. Play yourself the Russians with 75% 50%, 25% or 5% of the railpool, or whatever. Then try to smash them (you) with Axis.



I'd be utterly surprised if I could achieve operational surprise against myself... No solution, sorry.



_____________________________

The biggest threat for mankind is ignorance.


(in reply to alfonso)
Post #: 167
RE: Strat movement & game balance - 1/22/2011 10:29:55 PM   
alfonso

 

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

ORIGINAL: Reconvet

... is mainly responsible for all these AAR-pbem in which Axis get stalled before achieving major goals.



as happened historically.

(in reply to Reconvet)
Post #: 168
RE: Strat movement & game balance - 1/22/2011 10:39:50 PM   
FredSanford3

 

Posts: 567
Joined: 6/23/2007
Status: offline 		My suggestion to the devs that would help prevent ahistorical excessive retreating by BOTH sides:  Raise the probability of leader execution substantially whenever an HQ unit moves east (Soviet) or west (German).  Have a little 'cushion' so that minor moves don't trigger this, but if "heads roll", people will tend to stand and fight more.  I think this has the benefit of (a) simplicity, and (b) historical accuracy.  That will make the rail capacity question moot.

edit: combine this with a national morale penalty hit for abandoning population centers for added punch, but that might be more complicated to implement.

< Message edited by Franklin Nimitz -- 1/22/2011 10:40:53 PM >

(in reply to alfonso)
Post #: 169
RE: Strat movement & game balance - 1/22/2011 10:40:54 PM   
Reconvet

 

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

ORIGINAL: alfonso


quote:

ORIGINAL: Reconvet

... is mainly responsible for all these AAR-pbem in which Axis get stalled before achieving major goals.



as happened historically.


You aren't a lawyer by chance?

I could have written: ... before being able to significally weaken Red Army pre-Blizzard. But let's not discuss "significally" please, there won't be two people here who'd agree how much Red Army /Soviet industrial capacities could/should be hurt in '41. Do that somewhere else and let's focus here on Soviet strat movement capacities in '41, ok?





_____________________________

The biggest threat for mankind is ignorance.


(in reply to alfonso)
Post #: 170
RE: Strat movement & game balance - 1/22/2011 10:44:17 PM   
Reconvet

 

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

ORIGINAL: Franklin Nimitz

My suggestion to the devs that would help prevent ahistorical excessive retreating by BOTH sides:  Raise the probability of leader execution substantially whenever an HQ unit moves east (Soviet) or west (German).  Have a little 'cushion' so that minor moves don't trigger this, but if "heads roll", people will tend to stand and fight more.  I think this has the benefit of (a) simplicity, and (b) historical accuracy.  That will make the rail capacity question moot.


Could be exploited by assigning the poorest leaders to Sov armies and fronts before you execute withdrawals. There are a bunch of guys among your generals you'd be happy to get rid of.





_____________________________

The biggest threat for mankind is ignorance.


(in reply to FredSanford3)
Post #: 171
RE: Strat movement & game balance - 1/22/2011 10:47:08 PM   
alfonso

 

Posts: 470
Joined: 10/22/2001
From: Palma de Mallorca
Status: offline 		You think that the capacity to move 60 Rifle Divs at full range in one week is "overblown".
How many RifleDiv you would consider OK to move in one week at full range? 40? 20? 10?

(in reply to Reconvet)
Post #: 172
RE: Strat movement & game balance - 1/22/2011 10:55:41 PM   
FredSanford3

 

Posts: 567
Joined: 6/23/2007
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: Reconvet


quote:

ORIGINAL: Franklin Nimitz

My suggestion to the devs that would help prevent ahistorical excessive retreating by BOTH sides:  Raise the probability of leader execution substantially whenever an HQ unit moves east (Soviet) or west (German).  Have a little 'cushion' so that minor moves don't trigger this, but if "heads roll", people will tend to stand and fight more.  I think this has the benefit of (a) simplicity, and (b) historical accuracy.  That will make the rail capacity question moot.


Could be exploited by assigning the poorest leaders to Sov armies and fronts before you execute withdrawals. There are a bunch of guys among your generals you'd be happy to get rid of.


And you'd waste APs doing so. Also bear in mind that the wholesale retreats this is meant to minimize are multi-turn events, you are looking at lots of dead leaders even if you try to set up the suckers.

OR, what if, say a retreat is 'big enough', what if it raised the possibility of Stalin/Hitler conducting a major "purge", and all leaders, even unassigned, were at some risk?

edit: and FWIW, what you suggest isn't necessarily unheard of. It wouldn't be the first time in history patsies were "promoted" to positions destined to fail.

< Message edited by Franklin Nimitz -- 1/22/2011 10:57:16 PM >

(in reply to Reconvet)
Post #: 173
RE: Strat movement & game balance - 1/22/2011 10:58:36 PM   
Reconvet

 

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

ORIGINAL: alfonso

You think that the capacity to move 60 Rifle Divs at full range in one week is "overblown".
How many RifleDiv you would consider OK to move in one week at full range? 40? 20? 10?


What would a lawyers answer be? Maybe: What would be your suggestion?

I'd love it if somebody from the developing team came along, giving reasons why rail pool numbers are where they are at the moment. Because it felt playable for soviet rail mobility plus factory evacs? Or did they base it on logistical data available from WWII?





_____________________________

The biggest threat for mankind is ignorance.


(in reply to alfonso)
Post #: 174
RE: Strat movement & game balance - 1/22/2011 11:01:48 PM   
Reconvet

 

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

ORIGINAL: Franklin Nimitz

what you suggest isn't necessarily unheard of. It wouldn't be the first time in history patsies were "promoted" to positions destined to fail.



Agreed.

But let's get back to Soviet rail movement capacities in '41.



_____________________________

The biggest threat for mankind is ignorance.


(in reply to FredSanford3)
Post #: 175
RE: Strat movement & game balance - 1/22/2011 11:03:07 PM   
Aurelian

 

Posts: 3916
Joined: 2/26/2007
Status: offline 		As previously stated, it's playable and easily understood. If I want to worry about timetables, which trains go where, how far they move, single vs double track, well, I have all three Railroad Tycoons and Rails across America.

I just want to tell my Minister of Transport "Move the 5th Guards Tank Army to here." And all I want from him is to click his heels and say "Yes Comrade." Or the 2nd Panzer Army as it were.

And the system allows that.

In all the Russian Front games I've played, the Russians do have a far greater ability to move units by rail. And until now, that was never a problem.

(in reply to alfonso)
Post #: 176
RE: Strat movement & game balance - 1/22/2011 11:07:15 PM   
FredSanford3

 

Posts: 567
Joined: 6/23/2007
Status: offline 		Fair enough, I'll post the suggestion in a separate thread. I just don't see the Devs doing a major revamp of the rail movement system, especially since there seems to be a lack of hard data, but lots of opinionated conjecture about what "seems" right.

(in reply to Reconvet)
Post #: 177
RE: Strat movement & game balance - 1/22/2011 11:13:36 PM   
alfonso

 

Posts: 470
Joined: 10/22/2001
From: Palma de Mallorca
Status: offline 		My suggestion: 60, because having no idea myself I would tend to trust the developers.

I was pretty sure that I was not going to get an answer from you.

Anyhow, I have found this, for those interested.

"Railroads made the evacuation possible. As the railroads moved 2.5 million men to the front in June, July, and August, they moved industrial machinery on their return journeys. For example, on August 7, 1941, 3,000 rail cars per day evacuated iron and steel manufacturing equipment from the Dnieper area--1,000 cars per day for the electrical industry, 400 cars per day for the chemical industry, and others. From August 8 to August 15, 1941, 26,000 rail cars evacuated industries in the Ukraine. In Moscow, 80,000 cars transported 498 factories, including 75,000 lathes, leaving only 21,000. Production by many factories resumed by December."

Anyone knows how many railcars are needed to move a Division?

(in reply to Reconvet)
Post #: 178
RE: Strat movement & game balance - 1/22/2011 11:17:10 PM   
Reconvet

 

Posts: 355
Joined: 1/17/2011
Status: offline 		I'm trying to get a good Axis player, to get some data. No Soviet fanboy is going to do that. I'll stick to my theory that strat rail movement is a holy cow for Soviet players right now. I like a good steak any time.



_____________________________

The biggest threat for mankind is ignorance.


(in reply to FredSanford3)
Post #: 179
RE: Strat movement & game balance - 1/22/2011 11:18:44 PM   
Mynok


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

ORIGINAL: Aurelian

As previously stated, it's playable and easily understood. If I want to worry about timetables, which trains go where, how far they move, single vs double track, well, I have all three Railroad Tycoons and Rails across America.

I just want to tell my Minister of Transport "Move the 5th Guards Tank Army to here." And all I want from him is to click his heels and say "Yes Comrade." Or the 2nd Panzer Army as it were.

And the system allows that.

In all the Russian Front games I've played, the Russians do have a far greater ability to move units by rail. And until now, that was never a problem.



It's only a problem in one person's head.

_____________________________

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

(in reply to Aurelian)
Post #: 180
Page:   <<   < prev  4 5 [6] 7 8   next >   >>
All Forums >> [New Releases from Matrix Games] >> Gary Grigsby's War in the East Series >> RE: Strat movement & game balance Page: <<   < prev  4 5 [6] 7 8   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

1.125