RE: Extended Lvov

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: Extended Lvov

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 >> The War Room >> RE: Extended Lvov

Page: << < prev 1 2 3 4 [5]

Message

<< Older Topic Newer Topic >>

RE: Extended Lvov - 6/28/2012 9:48:13 PM

Aurelian

Posts: 3916
Joined: 2/26/2007
Status: offline

Now now, don't present facts to muddy the issue there

Musn't upset the head toddler-whiner ya know.

_____________________________

If the Earth was flat, cats would of knocked everything off of it long ago.

(in reply to Schmart)

Post #: 121

RE: Extended Lvov - 6/29/2012 11:39:31 PM

carlkay58

Posts: 8650
Joined: 7/25/2010
Status: offline

I did a comparison of the 42 scenario starting Soviet Army and the 43 scenario starting Soviet Army. I ignored all areas where there were fewer units in 43 than 42, added in all of the reinforcements from 42 to 43, and totaled the AP cost for the creation of the additional units. Note that I did not go through and make sure that there were already sufficient components existing to create all of the corps - I was just looking for a ball park figure. It comes out to 2,400 AP to create the additional units. 52 turns at 50 AP gives you 2600 AP, so you have 200 AP (roughly) to spend on things that ARE NOT unit or SU creation. Or about 4 AP per turn . . .

(in reply to Aurelian)

Post #: 122

RE: Extended Lvov - 6/30/2012 1:30:18 AM

Walloc

Posts: 3141
Joined: 10/30/2006
From: Denmark
Status: offline

For accuracy sake. In this case u get 60 points per turn and get 2 front HQs if IIRC so u do get 60*52+2*150 =3420. Which is some what more than 2600.

That said. i've done the same math and the 43-44 one too for that matter. There are things u presumably leave out, tho not of evil will. Since going gold there has been 2 significant changes that affects APs. Fort making and lowering of CP for russian army HQs with no "compensation".

Just taking the effect of the lowering of CP for army HQs works out in some thing like. 24-18 = 25% loss. This in effect means u need 25% more army HQs to support u units. There are 72-5 Tank army= 67 non air army HQ in the '43 oob. So not including buying the difference between 42 and 43 oob just to make up the CP loss u need 17 more army HQs at 25 APs a pop = 425 AP.

Then there is Tank armies(TA). With the new 15 CP limit the 5 historic TA can handle 3 corps a piece for 15 Tank/mech/cav corps with out getting CP penalties. Usually and historicly u would have many more tank/mech/cav corps, which means u will need significantly more TAies. Using history here isnt particular usefull as historicly the TA cycled in and out tank/mech corps constandly too refit used up ones and get new refitted ones in. At 13-15 AP per averaging out around 8-10ish with possible halfs its simply no way cost effecient to do it the historic way or the cost alone for that would be stagering. So in practic u easily can use 10 more TAs at 25 a pop for another 250 AP.

Presumably the 27 new armies doesnt come with perfect leaders. Replacing 2/3 of the leaders half would cost around 200ish AP

Adding 250+425+200 = 875 atop of Carlkay58s number of 2400(my number is slighly different)= 3275. 3420-3275 = 145 which is slightly worse than the 200.

So u have 145 AP in all for 52 turns to replacing historic losses/in game dead units, making command changes, replacing dead leaders, appointing promoted leaders, making Forts, changing aircrafts in units and so on.

Make u own conclusion about the whole "opitimized" russian army making/ is out of need or want and if there is an inherit advantage in the system for the russian side compared to a historic reinforcement schedule or whether whole thing is actual an liablity for the russian side as it is a system u in it self can target.

AP per turn should be altered to reflect the change in rules affecting AP usage in game, IMHO.

Kind regards,

Rasmus

< Message edited by Walloc -- 6/30/2012 2:11:36 AM >

(in reply to carlkay58)

Post #: 123