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: list/menu of captured/destroyed factories

 
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: list/menu of captured/destroyed factories Page: <<   < prev  24 25 [26] 27 28   next >   >>
Login
Message << Older Topic   Newer Topic >>
RE: list/menu of captured/destroyed factories - 11/16/2017 1:55:00 PM   
morvael


Posts: 11762
Joined: 9/8/2006
From: Poland
Status: offline 		Good idea.

(in reply to Stelteck)
Post #: 751
RE: Soviet air force - 11/16/2017 11:48:40 PM   
thedoctorking


Posts: 2297
Joined: 4/29/2017
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: tyronec

The point I was making was specifically about growth of experience relative to losses. As I understand it Soviet air units can get increased experience even if they are taking such losses that you might expect them to be losing experience. I don't think the same is going to apply to ground forces as losses are at nothing like the same level. However have not done an analysis of this and don't know exactly how the game works it.
This was not a criticism of your taking advantage of it - I trust we are both working the engine to the best of our ability.


I have been following this discussion and I would like to offer some thoughts regarding the increase of experience for air units. Remember, loss of an aircraft in combat does not necessarily imply the loss of the pilot. Soviet planes, especially the very commonly used American lend-lease P-39's and P-40's, had armored cockpits and self-sealing gas tanks, meaning that pilots were more likely than not to survive the loss of their aircraft. Also, the Soviets were fighting in their own national air space. Even if a pilot bailed out over territory nominally controlled by the Axis, he was likely to find friendly civilians and even members of the Red Army on the ground to welcome him. So a pilot could certainly gain useful experience (at least about what not to do) from a mission in which his aircraft is lost. Also, as long as an air unit retains a cadre of its experienced pilots, the inexperienced newcomers will learn from their more experienced comrades.

And, especially with the contribution of the Americans, the USSR had no shortage of aircraft. So they could tolerate more losses than the Germans in the interests of gaining experience.

Therefore, I think the current system rewards a very proper and historical aggressiveness by the Soviet air force in the early part of the war. What I think of as an "exploit" is the habit that some Soviet players have of moving units wholesale into the National Reserve and keeping them there for many months. National Reserve is fine for a couple of weeks for retraining and perhaps reequipping with modern aircraft, but I can't imagine Stalin sitting still for his air force commanders basing the entire inventory in Chelyabinsk while the Luftwaffe bombs the Red Army at will.

< Message edited by thedoctorking -- 11/17/2017 12:04:19 AM >

(in reply to tyronec)
Post #: 752
RE: Soviet air force - 11/17/2017 1:42:22 PM   
Aufklaerungs

 

Posts: 243
Joined: 6/4/2009
From: Chicago
Status: offline 		Thanks, guys. Good thread. Let's be careful about drawing definitive conclusions from speculation and fragmentary data.

< Message edited by SPNILHOB -- 11/17/2017 1:46:09 PM >

(in reply to thedoctorking)
Post #: 753
RE: Soviet air force - 11/17/2017 11:13:49 PM   
thedoctorking


Posts: 2297
Joined: 4/29/2017
Status: offline 		And loss of an aircraft on the ground will almost never mean loss of the pilot. And at least in the games I've played (through early 1942 only, though), the vast majority of USSR aircraft losses come on the ground. That should cause minimal to no experience loss.

(in reply to Aufklaerungs)
Post #: 754
RE: Soviet air force - 12/11/2017 12:38:30 AM   
thedoctorking


Posts: 2297
Joined: 4/29/2017
Status: offline 		How about a random leader stats option? Maybe when combined with a system so that you don't know or can't know exactly what a leader's true abilities are until you have used him in combat.

This would be especially appropriate for the Russians since it had been quite some time since the Civil War and few senior Red Army officers had survived the period of purges from that earlier conflict. And even fewer of them had held high command before.

(in reply to thedoctorking)
Post #: 755
RE: Soviet air force - 12/11/2017 1:21:51 PM   
Telemecus


Posts: 4689
Joined: 3/20/2016
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: thedoctorking
How about a random leader stats option? Maybe when combined with a system so that you don't know or can't know exactly what a leader's true abilities are until you have used him in combat.


I really like this idea. A new interesting part of the game would be finding out which one of your leaders is actually very good. Which is pretty historical. I wonder also would there be a Peter's principle involved? Could good corps commanders turn out to be not very good army commanders, so more randomness at promotions.

I suppose you could have some historical well knowns fixed like Zhukov - there would be too many complaints if Zhukov got a bad rating. But some randomness among all the generals who died early historically but could survive and become military geniuses in your game?

(in reply to thedoctorking)
Post #: 756
RE: Soviet air force - 12/11/2017 2:29:34 PM   
thedoctorking


Posts: 2297
Joined: 4/29/2017
Status: offline 		And maybe those guys the NKVD shot on turn 3 historically actually were just unlucky and would have been good had they survived? After all, trusting some Chekist to be able to tell if a general is qualified or not is a little random.

Maybe what you could say is that leaders who have commanded large forces in combat before have fixed and known stats - so Zhukov, for example, was a proven quantity after the Khalkhin Gol campaign, and Timoshenko and Budenny had shown their skills, such as they were, in the Civil War. Most of the Germans would be known by this standard. But most Soviet leaders would be unknown at start. You would have a "det level" on each leader based on how many battles they had been in that would give you a closer and closer approximation of that leader's actual stats.

(in reply to Telemecus)
Post #: 757
RE: Soviet air force - 12/11/2017 3:22:52 PM   
Crackaces


Posts: 3858
Joined: 7/9/2011
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: thedoctorking

How about a random leader stats option? Maybe when combined with a system so that you don't know or can't know exactly what a leader's true abilities are until you have used him in combat.

This would be especially appropriate for the Russians since it had been quite some time since the Civil War and few senior Red Army officers had survived the period of purges from that earlier conflict. And even fewer of them had held high command before.


This option makes War Between the States interesting .. in the American Civil war the problem was finding the better leaders ...
Not totally random . I think there are constraints ..

_____________________________

"What gets us into trouble is not what we don't know. It's what we know for sure that just ain't so"

(in reply to thedoctorking)
Post #: 758
RE: Soviet air force - 12/11/2017 4:07:58 PM   
thedoctorking


Posts: 2297
Joined: 4/29/2017
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: Crackaces


quote:

ORIGINAL: thedoctorking

How about a random leader stats option? Maybe when combined with a system so that you don't know or can't know exactly what a leader's true abilities are until you have used him in combat.

This would be especially appropriate for the Russians since it had been quite some time since the Civil War and few senior Red Army officers had survived the period of purges from that earlier conflict. And even fewer of them had held high command before.


This option makes War Between the States interesting .. in the American Civil war the problem was finding the better leaders ...
Not totally random . I think there are constraints ..

In the American Civil War, none of the leaders had ever commanded more than a few companies in battle. Some of the most highly respected leaders - Bragg, Halleck, McClellan - turned out to be useless, while Grant and Sherman had both left the army before the war as not too highly respected junior officers.

There's a board game I played, I think it was Victory Games' Civil War, where all your generals are hidden at start. That is, you draw 3-star general ??? and you assign him to command an army, only finding out later whether you got Lee or Van Dorn.

That game also has a promotion system where some generals get better as their experience and rank increases and others get worse. I notice that there's a little of that in War in the East, but there could be more.

< Message edited by thedoctorking -- 12/11/2017 4:09:21 PM >

(in reply to Crackaces)
Post #: 759
RE: Soviet air force - 12/13/2017 9:33:10 PM   
thedoctorking


Posts: 2297
Joined: 4/29/2017
Status: offline 		How about semi-free deployment? Say 50% of Soviet units must be within 5 hexes of the border and another 25% within 15 hexes. Air bases could be fixed or required to be in specific regions or some such.

There's a kind of a seam in the Russian deployment in the south that permits a near-automatic isolation of a huge bunch of Soviet units around Lvov right off the bat. At a minimum it would be good to shuffle some units around to make this move less straightforward for the Germans on turn 1.

(in reply to thedoctorking)
Post #: 760
RE: Soviet air force - 12/13/2017 10:06:41 PM   
Dreamslayer

 

Posts: 452
Joined: 10/31/2015
From: St.Petersburg
Status: offline 		Impact of the trucks shortage on the MP for motorized units.
e.g. Motorized unit that have 50% trucks – 25 or 50% MP reduction.

(in reply to thedoctorking)
Post #: 761
RE: Soviet air force - 2/7/2018 7:17:45 AM   
postfux

 

Posts: 175
Joined: 8/18/2015
Status: offline 		I have all my HQs except the highest on support level 0 to save CPs. This results in a need for micromanagement each turn to equip each corps HQ with the right SUs.

If the CP cost for manually transfering a SU one HQ level up is reduced to 0 I could lock all these corps HQs and move SUs only when needed. The outcome is the same only with much less effort.

An indicator in the attack icon warning that no SUs will be provided (HQ out of range or hasty attack and HQ moved) would reduce my anger level about myself when watching a battle unfold a lot.

(in reply to Dreamslayer)
Post #: 762
RE: Soviet air force - 2/7/2018 8:29:03 AM   
Denniss

 

Posts: 7902
Joined: 1/10/2002
From: Germany, Hannover (region)
Status: offline 		Doesn't look like you are saving CPs with this strategy. If you work this way you should equip a front HQ with your desired mix of SUs and then lock HQ support level so they won't be sent away.

(in reply to postfux)
Post #: 763
RE: Soviet air force - 2/7/2018 10:19:46 AM   
postfux

 

Posts: 175
Joined: 8/18/2015
Status: offline 		Automove (upstream) is free and asigning using the HQ interface (downstream) is free.

Having SUs at the highest HQ brings flexibility so automove is great.

Downside is all SUs move upstream every turn, also away from corps HQs where they are needed.

When I lock corps HQ the only way to move a SU to another HQ is manually asigning it by using the SU interface. This costs 1 CP even when moving only one level up, which would be free using automove.

When I dont lock the corp HQs I have to asign the SUs every turn which is annoying.

I see no reason for getting punished doing something manual the game would do automatic.

(in reply to Denniss)
Post #: 764
RE: Soviet air force - 2/7/2018 1:17:58 PM   
Telemecus


Posts: 4689
Joined: 3/20/2016
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: Denniss

Doesn't look like you are saving CPs with this strategy. If you work this way you should equip a front HQ with your desired mix of SUs and then lock HQ support level so they won't be sent away.


They only get sent away in logistics after your opponents phase - and you have your own phase to manually assign them down again for free. So you can get exactly the same result using this strategy as you can by locking the HQ. The only difference is you have to do some more clicks. So the only job of the HQ lock is as a labour saver. It may even be it saves on logistics cost if supply is done after SUs move?

On the other hand if you do this you do have the flexibility to change your SU distribution to something else in your own action phase. If you leave the HQ locked your options are reduced.

(in reply to Denniss)
Post #: 765
RE: Soviet air force - 2/7/2018 2:57:36 PM   
postfux

 

Posts: 175
Joined: 8/18/2015
Status: offline 		Telemecus, that was exactly my understanding.

So I have my corp HQ with all the SUs I want it to have plus one siege mortar.

To get the siege mortar up I have to unlock the HQ and then later reasign the needed stuff down some of which will come from high level HQs and then lock the HQ again.

It would be a much more easy and intuitive to just asign the not needed stuff up one level and does save a lot of clicks each turn.

It is not a very big issue but I guess it is not too difficult to implement either. CU asignement works exactly this way.

Also a change would be perfectly in line with the game mechanics of auto transfer.

The CP cost for asigning downstream from the SU Interface is also not consistent with the free asignment using the HQ Interface.

(in reply to Telemecus)
Post #: 766
RE: Soviet air force - 2/7/2018 3:04:21 PM   
Telemecus


Posts: 4689
Joined: 3/20/2016
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: postfux
The CP cost for asigning downstream from the SU Interface is also not consistent with the free asignment using the HQ Interface.


I take it that is the same as what is sometimes refered to as pulling down SUs as opposed to pushing down SUs? If so I seem to be able to get free assignment both ways?

The real issue of the difference is one relies on choosing one from that class of ToEs whereas the other relies on choosing the individual SU. Choose an SU that assigns down the command line and it should still be for zero cost? Also by pulling down the SUs in higher commands are prioritised first (e.g. in OKH) whereas for supply purposes you probably want to prioritise the ones lower down first (or ones withdrawing soon etc).

(in reply to postfux)
Post #: 767
RE: Soviet air force - 2/7/2018 6:51:02 PM   
uw06670


Posts: 221
Joined: 3/12/2015
Status: offline 		Not sure where exactly to place this, but on the idea that sending SU up the command chain should be free, +1 from me as I'm doing German turn 1 currently...

_____________________________

- Mark

(in reply to Telemecus)
Post #: 768
RE: Soviet air force - 2/7/2018 8:48:09 PM   
postfux

 

Posts: 175
Joined: 8/18/2015
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: Telemecus

I take it that is the same as what is sometimes refered to as pulling down SUs as opposed to pushing down SUs? If so I seem to be able to get free assignment both ways?



My fault. Pushing down is free as well. On the other hand it cant be complicated to make pushing up one level free as well.

It would not change gameplay since the same effect is achieved by using auto but it would make things easier a lot, especially for the german player in the first few turns.

(in reply to Telemecus)
Post #: 769
RE: Soviet air force - 2/9/2018 9:50:30 AM   
morvael


Posts: 11762
Joined: 9/8/2006
From: Poland
Status: offline 		Pushing down is free, pushing up or sideways is not.

(in reply to postfux)
Post #: 770
RE: Soviet air force - 3/28/2018 8:20:29 PM   
Djouk

 

Posts: 42
Joined: 7/25/2009
Status: offline 		Sorry but i resume in this answer all i had to say now about this game that has become unplayable except against IA.

I had some bad feelings on latest patchs since months and i recognized it became very hard, nearly impossible to play soviets in 41-end 42 against some players where my army had became ridiculous compared axis on historical
perspectives.
Playing soviets, i was victim of super panzers making incredible breakthroughs fighting with no fatigue and impossible logistic... But unable to do that by my own playing axis. Ok i assumed i was simply bad, but septic.
It's great to make new patchs changing SDKFZ254 by the real historical SDKFZ254g, and discussing combat rules... but this become useless when you know this buildup method :

With first aid of a member of this forum i tested this method which works :

1. Move a unit from a HQ you want to buildup, i recommend only 1 hex of the unit most in the rear to avoid interdiction which unable undo move.
2. Go BuildUp the HQ.
3. Undo last move.
4. Until now all is normal because admin points go back.
5. But at the start of next turn your HQ has buildup for free !
6. You can do that as many time you want in a turn. This affects your motor pool but give you super powers...
7. No doubt that with all more prisoners and vehicules you can take your motor pool isn't so much affected

An other exploit i found is to edit an original scenario/campaign, then "exploiting" parameters and saving it and to propose it as the original on game server for the hosting player.
For exotics original scenarios just edit for example Campaign 41/45 then modify it save it and propose it on server. You can rename but to lure just use the same name than the orignal. Restriction is that other players must have
your extensions.

An other "funnies" :
I was rather well holding in pripet marsches. Then without axis breakthrough or any intrusion of enemy units in my rears and a good supply rail line all my units in marsches where surrounded by enemies ZOC and rails lines destroyed ... and so loosing marsches next turn...
May this be result of using HQ build every where on axis front at the same time !?!

For example I suspect an opponent to have increased growth of its forces, so at the end of 1942 he had more than 4 000 000 german soldiers even loosing nearly 2 000 000. Sorry but all become possible after that.
Moreover how to explain that in this same 41/45 bitter end campaign i had not a single SU-2 dive bomber and i have these in the new one ?!

Even not being a tester, i also remember i could air drop tigers in the past, no more possible now but i can still air drop normal infanterie in my own lines...

For the next patch it would be greater to allow multiple selections of support units for faster transfers to other hq : a huge gain in time for players.

Until all this not corrected it's useless playing multiplayer except to have fun to meet a cheater who believes you don't know what he's doing.

< Message edited by Djouk -- 5/15/2018 10:13:12 AM >

(in reply to morvael)
Post #: 771
RE: Soviet air force - 3/29/2018 1:35:09 PM   
Aufklaerungs

 

Posts: 243
Joined: 6/4/2009
From: Chicago
Status: offline 		An edited scenario will not run in multiplayer unless both players are using identical DAT files. If one player makes changes, the other player must import the changed files for the game to continue. If one player changes game options after starting a game, the opponent must make the same changes for game to continue.

_____________________________

Aufklärungs

(in reply to Djouk)
Post #: 772
RE: Soviet air force - 5/12/2018 11:22:43 AM   
Djouk

 

Posts: 42
Joined: 7/25/2009
Status: offline 		Sorry but i resume in this answer all i had to say now about this game that has become unplayable except against IA.

I had some bad feelings on latest patchs since months and i recognized it became very hard, nearly impossible to play soviets in 41-end 42 against some players where my army had became ridiculous compared axis on historical
perspectives.
Playing soviets, i was victim of super panzers making incredible breakthroughs fighting with no fatigue and impossible logistic... But unable to do that by my own playing axis. Ok i assumed i was simply bad, but septic.
It's great to make new patchs changing SDKFZ254 by the real historical SDKFZ254g, and discussing combat rules... but this become useless when you know this buildup method :

With first aid of a member of this forum i tested this method which works :

1. Move a unit from a HQ you want to buildup, i recommend only 1 hex of the unit most in the rear to avoid interdiction which unable undo move.
2. Go BuildUp the HQ.
3. Undo last move.
4. Until now all is normal because admin points go back.
5. But at the start of next turn your HQ has buildup for free !
6. You can do that as many time you want in a turn. This affects your motor pool but give you super powers...
7. No doubt that with all more prisoners and vehicules you can take your motor pool isn't so much affected

An other exploit i found is to edit an original scenario/campaign, then "exploiting" parameters and saving it and to propose it as the original on game server for the hosting player.
For exotics original scenarios just edit for example Campaign 41/45 then modify it save it and propose it on server. You can rename but to lure just use the same name than the orignal. Restriction is that other players must have
your extensions.

An other "funnies" :
I was rather well holding in pripet marsches. Then without axis breakthrough or any intrusion of enemy units in my rears and a good supply rail line all my units in marsches where surrounded by enemies ZOC and rails lines destroyed ... and so loosing marsches next turn...
May this be result of using HQ build every where on axis front at the same time !?!

For example I suspect an opponent to have increased growth of its forces, so at the end of 1942 he had more than 4 000 000 german soldiers even loosing nearly 2 000 000. Sorry but all become possible after that.
Moreover how to explain that in this same 41/45 bitter end campaign i had not a single SU-2 dive bomber and i have these in the new one ?!

Even not being a tester, i also remember i could air drop tigers in the past, no more possible now but i can still air drop normal infanterie in my own lines...

For the next patch it would be greater to allow multiple selections of support units for faster transfers to other hq : a huge gain in time for players.

Until all this not corrected it's useless playing multiplayer except to have fun to meet a cheater who believes you don't know what he's doing.

< Message edited by Djouk -- 5/15/2018 10:13:22 AM >

(in reply to Aufklaerungs)
Post #: 773
RE: Soviet air force - 5/18/2018 11:36:39 AM   
EwaldvonKleist


Posts: 2038
Joined: 4/14/2016
From: Berlin, Germany
Status: offline 		Please abolish the automatism that tries to attach 3 construction units/pioneers automatically per turn. I hate it so much. They always end up in some useless HQs. Why can't they use the normal support setting to or get an own "construction unit support level" setting?

Sorry for the rant, but that always upsets me both as Soviets and Axis.


_____________________________

The Library of Gary Grigsby's War in the East resources.
Do you want total war? Guide for WitE players

(in reply to Djouk)
Post #: 774
RE: Game Suggestions: - 5/22/2018 1:25:10 AM   
thedoctorking


Posts: 2297
Joined: 4/29/2017
Status: offline 		It would be nice if you could have the German HQ's in normal numerals instead of Roman numerals. It is such a pain to assign your unit to the 'XXVIII' corps by mistake when you wanted the 'XXXVIII'.

(in reply to Sabre21)
Post #: 775
RE: Game Suggestions: - 5/22/2018 5:56:52 AM   
Denniss

 

Posts: 7902
Joined: 1/10/2002
From: Germany, Hannover (region)
Status: offline 		Wehrmach had an affection to roman numerals, this is historic and will not change.

(in reply to thedoctorking)
Post #: 776
RE: Game Suggestions: - 5/22/2018 12:47:31 PM   
Telemecus


Posts: 4689
Joined: 3/20/2016
Status: offline 		BTW it was originally adopted, in many countries, to avoid confusing corps with Arabic numbered armies or divisions

(in reply to Denniss)
Post #: 777
RE: Game Suggestions: - 5/22/2018 5:12:50 PM   
thedoctorking


Posts: 2297
Joined: 4/29/2017
Status: offline 		Another reason to prefer the Commies to the fascists...

(in reply to Telemecus)
Post #: 778
RE: Game Suggestions: - 5/27/2018 7:57:57 AM   
Simon Edmonds

 

Posts: 132
Joined: 5/10/2018
Status: offline 		Hello. I am fairly new to WitE and I am heading towards the end of 1943 playing the Germans on normal difficulty. There was no “disaster at Moscow” or “Stalingrad”. This leaves the Axis with around 4.4 million troops on the ground and the Soviets with about 9.2 million. Most infantry units are sitting above 90% TOE and the Axis VP score is 255. Now I find that my infantry divisions are being “upgraded” from 9 battalions to 6 to become the new 1944 infantry division. Historically this re-organisation was done as a result of military disasters leaving the army 1.5 million troops in the red.
I would like to see a screen which progressively gives the player more ahistorical decisions in the game, as each game unfolds in an ahistorical way. It might be a tick box; “reorganise from 9 battalion to six to free manpower”. When you tick the box the reorganisation begins. Looking at it historically it’s a miracle the Germans weren’t routed at Moscow. If they had then the High Command (you) would have been looking for extra manpower as early as 1942.
There are numerous decisions such as this that could be offered. The Luftwaffe ground troops are another example. In the game they turn up historically in response to a military disaster that in game terms hasn’t happened. Another decision; “request emergency Luftwaffe manpower”
Does anyone out there have any similar ideas?

(in reply to Sabre21)
Post #: 779
RE: Game Suggestions: - 5/27/2018 9:48:23 AM   
Denniss

 

Posts: 7902
Joined: 1/10/2002
From: Germany, Hannover (region)
Status: offline 		Newer game versions already have a function to keep infantry divs at 9bn if you have sufficient manpower in the pool, otherwise they are downgraded to 6bn. This only works if the game was started under 1.08.05 and newer
quote:

77. Certain mid­to­late war German divisions may upgrade to bigger or smaller TOE variant. If, at the
moment of upgrade, German manpower pool (including transfer pool) is below 100k or German armaments pool is below 50k, smaller variant will be chosen automatically. If manpower pool is above 200k and armaments pool is above 100k, bigger variant will be chosen automatically.
Between those values the variant will be determined randomly, with probability increasing together
with the size of the pools. There are two variants of 44 Infantry Division, 45 Infantry Division, 44
Jager Division, 45 Jager Division, and 44 Mountain Division TOEs.

(in reply to Simon Edmonds)
Post #: 780
Page:   <<   < prev  24 25 [26] 27 28   next >   >>
All Forums >> [New Releases from Matrix Games] >> Gary Grigsby's War in the East Series >> RE: list/menu of captured/destroyed factories Page: <<   < prev  24 25 [26] 27 28   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

1.000