U-Boat war/Railways

Advanced Tactics is a versatile turn-based strategy system that gives gamers the chance to wage almost any battle in any time period. The initial release focuses on World War II and includes a number of historical scenarios as well as a full editor! This forum supports both the original Advanced Tactics and the new and improved Advanced Tactics: Gold Edition.

Moderator: Vic

Post Reply
Mehring
Posts: 2437
Joined: Thu Jan 25, 2007 8:30 am

U-Boat war/Railways

Post by Mehring »

Can anyone tell me how submarines can best be employed to interdict enemy shipping, say, accross the atlantic?

f.e. if you have a chain of sub units strung out, can cargo ships get through gaps or will subs attack adjacent hexes as the ships pass through?

Also, as others have mentioned it would be a really good thing to get railways seperated from roads. This would necessitiate the introduction of rail repair and guage conversion. As an old War in Europe player, I'm imbued with the idea that probably the greatest strategic brake on Barbarossa, given the lack of a West European road network, was the need to convert Russian rail guage, a slow process. Supplies just couldn't keep up. This is entirely absent in the game and if true, gives the Germans an un-historical advantage.
“Old age is the most unexpected of all things that can happen to a man.”
-Leon Trotsky
seille
Posts: 2048
Joined: Tue Jun 19, 2007 8:25 am
Location: Germany

RE: U-Boat war/Railways

Post by seille »

Submarines don´t automatic attack neighbour hexes.
Either direct attacks or you use them to cause AS losses.
They do not slow ships in neighbour hexes or something like this (would be nice to have...)
 
This can be done with placing them on supply lines and with more effect close to target
or sending port. Very effective (but also risky) is to block the ports completely.
 
For your rail network.
It is simply not possible in most smaller scenarios cause as far as i know the game allows only ONE road
type per hex. And a road you can destroy would screw the game completely. Be happy you can destroy the bridges
or block the roads by paratroopers.
You think Germany has a advantage in russia 1941 ? With more time i would like to show you this is not true.....
 
Overall it´s pretty easy. You can not model ALL little details of a war into such a game without making it too complex.
Vic had to set priorities and to decide what he can implement and what not.
 
And i must say i like the result.
Mehring
Posts: 2437
Joined: Thu Jan 25, 2007 8:30 am

RE: U-Boat war/Railways

Post by Mehring »

...you use them to cause AS losses

like this?

This can be done with placing them on supply lines and with more effect close to target
or sending port.


Sorry, I'm not clear on what you're saying here.

You can not model ALL little details of a war into such a game without making it too complex

My point is, that if War in Europe modelled it more or less right (and everything I've read about the Eastern Front confirms it) we're not talking about a little detail but one of the most decisive strategic influences of Barbarossa and therefore the entire war. There was no road network in most of Russia comparable to that of Western Europe and the Germans were not prepared for this. It took them a long while to improvise around the problem, and they never were able to organise supply as in the West. They were, then, heavily dependent upon the rail network for logistics, particularly in the crucial battles of 1941 but this was of a different gauge from Western Europe, and without rolling stock, was useless until converted to West European gauge.

AT is logistics heavy, a strong point in my view, so to leave out this crucial issue detracts from the accuracy of the game. If the above is correct, historical accuracy is important and the game can be fixed, it should be fixed.


“Old age is the most unexpected of all things that can happen to a man.”
-Leon Trotsky
seille
Posts: 2048
Joined: Tue Jun 19, 2007 8:25 am
Location: Germany

RE: U-Boat war/Railways

Post by seille »

Fixed ? Lol, bugs can be fixed.
But what you posted are no bugs that are just things you don´t like.
 
I don´t like the procedure with disbanding. First disbanding all subunits before i can disband the unit.
Everybody will find things like this.
 
And some wishes are simply impossible like having roads and railroads seperated.
You can´t have them in the same hex, so how you want to implement this ??
It is impossible due to the game design. And i´m sure Vic won´t change this.
Way too late.
 
Anti supply works perfect as it is yet. No reason to change anything.
 
When i have some time we can play a game of russia 1941 and you show me the advantage of Germany
using the perfect russian roads. There is no advantage.....
Making the advance harder for Germany it would be IMPOSSIBLE to win with them even they german
player makes no mistakes. It´s pretty easy.
I played russia 1941 often enough, i know what i´m talking about [;)]
Mehring
Posts: 2437
Joined: Thu Jan 25, 2007 8:30 am

RE: U-Boat war/Railways

Post by Mehring »

I don´t like the procedure with disbanding. First disbanding all subunits before i can disband the unit.
Everybody will find things like this.

What anyone likes or dislikes is their business. I've suggested an historical rationale for changing the game but you have not given any for keeping it the same. I rest my case.
“Old age is the most unexpected of all things that can happen to a man.”
-Leon Trotsky
GrumpyMel
Posts: 864
Joined: Fri Dec 28, 2007 8:37 pm

RE: U-Boat war/Railways

Post by GrumpyMel »

It's fine to suggest a historical rationale for something, it's another thing to actualy figure out how to build it.... or whether it really fits the style of game.
 
I can think of plenty of things that were important in WWII that AT doesn't model. For instance, code breaking.... and strategic intelligence played a rather important part in WWII (at least for some battles)... not sure how you would model it though. Another one is attitude toward particular nationalties (i.e. German forces on the East Front would be far more likely to battle to the death against Soviet troops to avoid capture.... whereas those same troops on the West Front... by the end of the war anyway... would surrender en masse to a single U.S. infantryman.)..... again not sure how the engine would model that...or whether it should even try.
 
Bottom line is that AT is not a WWII simulator, it's generic, somewhat Beer and Pretzels WWII STYLE war engine. It has a surprising level of depth and is remarkably flexible in what it can model (as evidenced by the scenerio bank)..... but that doesn't mean that it can or frankly even should try to model every single aspect of WWII.
 
I'm with Sielle on this one. Plus try out some of the existing East Front scenerio's. I think you'll find the Germans DO have to pay attention to supply line issues in many of them.

 
Mehring
Posts: 2437
Joined: Thu Jan 25, 2007 8:30 am

RE: U-Boat war/Railways

Post by Mehring »

Firstly, although I know nothing about coding computer programs, if you can have roads, plains, swamps, 2 sorts of forest, hills and mountains etc etc, I can't see why on earth you can't have railways and associated rules, so maybe it's a question of will rather than possibility. That goes to whether or not the designer considers it to be within "the style of the game."
 
I can't see how seperate railways and roads is so stylistically different from AT as it is. As is obvious, it's a logistics heavy game, so separating road from rail networks would, in my view, only enhance the existing system.
 
Because one important aspect of WW II is not modelled, does that mean that another should not be? Strange logic there ;) . I believe in any case, one example you cite, code breaking, has been modeled and it effects the detection of U-Boats.  As for Germans being more likely to surrender in the West, and fight to the death against the Russians, it's worth noting that most of the Wehrmacht surrendered in the East, to the Russians- Stalingrad and Bagration being but two of innumerable examples. Nevertheless, if a designer thought there was historical rationale for making their surrender there less likely, how about boosting German or perhaps just SS morale (if that reduces the chance of surrender) when fighting Russians? Or perhaps another way, like capping the loss % when not facing Russians. I don't know. Perhaps, again, where there's a will, there's a way. The more possibilities the engine offers, the more mod designers can interpret history as they understand it.
 
I've never encountered an historical war game that, whether it succeeds or not, doesn't try to abstract the history it deals with. Sure, there's always a balance to be struck between complexity and playability, but game engines, like all things, tend to develop in complexity and new dimensions, as they evolve. That's a good thing in my view.
 
I've had a glance at the 1941 Barbarossa scenario, and I take your point at their lack of detail. With Romanian formations cutting through Russian lines as easily as German, for example, it doesn't appear to have been designed to simulate, as you say, the campaign in any but the most general way. That doesn't mean it's not fun to play, but personally, I value historical detail.
 
But I have to ask, whether you would value introducing railways or not, what do you have to lose by it?
“Old age is the most unexpected of all things that can happen to a man.”
-Leon Trotsky
Ande
Posts: 197
Joined: Thu Jul 05, 2007 12:12 pm
Location: Göteborg/Sweden

RE: U-Boat war/Railways

Post by Ande »

I think the problem is that there is only one roadtype avaiable per hex and only one buildable by engineers. This functionality is buried deep DEEP into the code, so deep that it would be easier creating a new game than fixing it
tweber
Posts: 1411
Joined: Wed Jun 27, 2007 1:32 pm

RE: U-Boat war/Railways

Post by tweber »

There are ways to do more sophisticated modeling of logistics by creating different land types even if you are limited to 1 road type.  Think of the road type as the really good road/ highway / rail line and make different plains or other types for lessor transportation infrastructure.  You can also make different Axis and Soviet units so they handle the terrain differently.  I kept it pretty simple in the Russia scenario.  But, I would encourage someone to take another crack at it.  I would be happy to provide pointers if interested.
Mehring
Posts: 2437
Joined: Thu Jan 25, 2007 8:30 am

RE: U-Boat war/Railways

Post by Mehring »

I'm still finding my feet with this game and I haven't tried modding yet, Tweber, but I might just take you up on that offer of pointers in, hopefully, the near future.
“Old age is the most unexpected of all things that can happen to a man.”
-Leon Trotsky
BoredStiff
Posts: 237
Joined: Sun Jun 17, 2007 11:24 pm

RE: U-Boat war/Railways

Post by BoredStiff »

ORIGINAL: Mehring

I can't see how seperate railways and roads is so stylistically different from AT as it is. As is obvious, it's a logistics heavy game, so separating road from rail networks would, in my view, only enhance the existing system.

Although I have this game, I haven't played it, so keeping this in mind, why can't the road network simply be treated as rail?
Except for shorter, tactical adjustments, the strategic transfer of units was almost always done by rail anyway, so why even simulate a road network in a large WW2 scenario such as the Russo-German war?
BoredStiff

Mehring
Posts: 2437
Joined: Thu Jan 25, 2007 8:30 am

RE: U-Boat war/Railways

Post by Mehring »

Hey! Try reading the thread ;)
“Old age is the most unexpected of all things that can happen to a man.”
-Leon Trotsky
BoredStiff
Posts: 237
Joined: Sun Jun 17, 2007 11:24 pm

RE: U-Boat war/Railways

Post by BoredStiff »

I did.
I suppose what I really ought to do before even asking a simple question, is to actually play the game.
So, sorry I asked.
BoredStiff

rickier65
Posts: 14241
Joined: Thu Apr 20, 2000 8:00 am

RE: U-Boat war/Railways

Post by rickier65 »

ORIGINAL: BoredStiff

I did.
I suppose what I really ought to do before even asking a simple question, is to actually play the game.
So, sorry I asked.


Hey Bored,

AT actually has quite a range of scales from broad strategy operational. You could in fact assume the "road" network is actually a rail network. At the broad strategy level it certainly seem reasonable. Some of the searnarios actually explicitly model rail transport.

Rick
BoredStiff
Posts: 237
Joined: Sun Jun 17, 2007 11:24 pm

RE: U-Boat war/Railways

Post by BoredStiff »

ORIGINAL: Rick

You could in fact assume the "road" network is actually a rail network. At the broad strategy level it certainly seem reasonable.

Rick
That's what I was wondering about.
Bottom line is, I need to get into this game, as I like construction set-types like this. I used to make scenarios for the old game, Empire II, The Art of War.

Anyway, not to hijack Mehring's topic.
BoredStiff

Post Reply

Return to “Advanced Tactics Series”