Over rated Russian rail system.

Gary Grigsby’s War in the East: The German-Soviet War 1941-1945 is a turn-based World War II strategy game stretching across the entire Eastern Front. Gamers can engage in an epic campaign, including division-sized battles with realistic and historical terrain, weather, orders of battle, logistics and combat results.

The critically and fan-acclaimed Eastern Front mega-game Gary Grigsby’s War in the East just got bigger and better with Gary Grigsby’s War in the East: Don to the Danube! This expansion to the award-winning War in the East comes with a wide array of later war scenarios ranging from short but intense 6 turn bouts like the Battle for Kharkov (1942) to immense 37-turn engagements taking place across multiple nations like Drama on the Danube (Summer 1944 – Spring 1945).

Moderators: Joel Billings, elmo3, Sabre21

Aurelian
Posts: 4031
Joined: Mon Feb 26, 2007 2:08 pm

RE: Over rated Russian rail system.

Post by Aurelian »

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Eastern_Fr ... ial_output

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Soviet_arm ... rld_War_II

http://www.sturmvogel.orbat.com/sovprod.html

Suppossedly 50% of the war industry lost, (though I haven't seen any evidence of it.), and they *still* did all that.

Like Flav said. "If you really want to hurt the Soviets, forget the factories. Look at, oh, I dunno, the freaking Red Army."

Watched a documentary on beavers. Best dam documentary I've ever seen.
User avatar
PeeDeeAitch
Posts: 1276
Joined: Mon Jan 01, 2007 4:31 am
Location: Laramie, Wyoming

RE: Over rated Russian rail system.

Post by PeeDeeAitch »

60% of all facts are made up, 72% of the people know that.
"The torment of precautions often exceeds the dangers to be avoided. It is sometimes better to abandon one's self to destiny."

- Call me PDH

- WitE noob tester
User avatar
LiquidSky
Posts: 2811
Joined: Tue Jun 24, 2008 4:28 am

RE: Over rated Russian rail system.

Post by LiquidSky »



Perhaps it would appease everyone if:

1) Industry is evacced automatically by the computer whenever a city has an axis unit adjacent to it, (or is within some arbitrary range) or if the city is isolated, similar to the way manpower is evac'd.

2) On such an evacuation, rail cap for the Russians is lowered by some amount for the next few turns (up to 4).

3) A percentage of said industry is elimanted in said move...maybe based on date. (100% destruction turn 1 to 0-25% mud turn)

4) Said industry shows up in cities on the other side of the Volga in the same number of turns as 2)


“My logisticians are a humorless lot … they know if my campaign fails, they are the first ones I will slay.” – Alexander the Great
Aurelian
Posts: 4031
Joined: Mon Feb 26, 2007 2:08 pm

RE: Over rated Russian rail system.

Post by Aurelian »

ORIGINAL: PeeDeeAitch

60% of all facts are made up, 72% of the people know that.

Survey says!!!!
Watched a documentary on beavers. Best dam documentary I've ever seen.
Aurelian
Posts: 4031
Joined: Mon Feb 26, 2007 2:08 pm

RE: Over rated Russian rail system.

Post by Aurelian »

ORIGINAL: LiquidSky



Perhaps it would appease everyone if:

1) Industry is evacced automatically by the computer whenever a city has an axis unit adjacent to it, (or is within some arbitrary range) or if the city is isolated, similar to the way manpower is evac'd.

2) On such an evacuation, rail cap for the Russians is lowered by some amount for the next few turns (up to 4).

3) A percentage of said industry is elimanted in said move...maybe based on date. (100% destruction turn 1 to 0-25% mud turn)

4) Said industry shows up in cities on the other side of the Volga in the same number of turns as 2)



It won't please anyone. The Axis won't get to do their factory raiding. The Reds won't get to decide when it's time to move them. Or worry about waiting too long.
Watched a documentary on beavers. Best dam documentary I've ever seen.
JAMiAM
Posts: 6127
Joined: Sun Feb 08, 2004 6:35 am

RE: Over rated Russian rail system.

Post by JAMiAM »

ORIGINAL: Aurelian

ORIGINAL: LiquidSky



Perhaps it would appease everyone if:

1) Industry is evacced automatically by the computer whenever a city has an axis unit adjacent to it, (or is within some arbitrary range) or if the city is isolated, similar to the way manpower is evac'd.

2) On such an evacuation, rail cap for the Russians is lowered by some amount for the next few turns (up to 4).

3) A percentage of said industry is elimanted in said move...maybe based on date. (100% destruction turn 1 to 0-25% mud turn)

4) Said industry shows up in cities on the other side of the Volga in the same number of turns as 2)



It won't please anyone. The Axis won't get to do their factory raiding. The Reds won't get to decide when it's time to move them. Or worry about waiting too long.
Ahhh...compromise. The delicate art of displeasing the most people, the least...[:D]
User avatar
76mm
Posts: 4765
Joined: Sun May 02, 2004 4:26 am
Location: Washington, DC

RE: Over rated Russian rail system.

Post by 76mm »

It would be interesting if players could set some kind of slider allocating rail capacity to factory evac vs troop movement, with the factory evacs then happening automatically.

In fact given the planning involved in moving the factories I wonder if the military had any direct say in which factories moved when, more likely the military to some extent had to react to planned factory moves, so there could be a basis for removing this kind of decision from player control. Moreover, the Sovs would certainly have screwed things up sometimes (how did the Germans cut that rail line?!) so random losses of factories would also be expected.

Another thing I would like to point out about this topic is that the whole industrial model is rather arbitrary: We've seen that the devs just cut the arm multiplier from 200 to 130, a drop of 35%. So now the Sovs evac more arm factories but the amount of arm points that they receive doesn't necessarily increase at all. But of course some Germans think they should be able to prevent the Sovs from building any weapons...

Would people be happier if the devs changed things to allow the Germans to capture more arm, but increased the multiplier? The whole discussion is rather pointless and I don't see why industry evac should be used to balance the game, the only people this rewards are the panzer-raiders.

I actually did some research on this topic on Russian-language websites, but didn't really find anything interesting other than the fact that much of the military-related production was devoted to producing ammunition, which fits with the role of hvy industry in the game and which could mean big problems for Sov players later in the war if they ignored hvy industry (and of course if the devs' assumptions re hvy industry and ammo production, distribution, and expenditure are anywhere close to correct).
User avatar
76mm
Posts: 4765
Joined: Sun May 02, 2004 4:26 am
Location: Washington, DC

RE: Over rated Russian rail system.

Post by 76mm »

ORIGINAL: Pelton
2. I had seen the number of 40% of Russian production was destroyed or captured by the Germans. This article from the BBC claims that 66% was destoryed. http://www.bbc.co.uk/history/worldwars/ ... n_01.shtml
or if you really want some fun numbers buy and read this bad boy. http://www.jstor.org/pss/151494

Ok we look at both numbers I only look at the arm production in the areas of German advances and we will call it 50% captured.

Ok, I've finally found the time to read both of these articles and can't say that I was surprised to find that neither of them support the numbers you claim.

The BBC article does not seem to include any percentage figure at all, and the Soviet Studies article states (see footnote 8) that "From June 1941 to January 1943 more than 1,500 large industrial enterprises were evacuated to the rear. Among the objects evacuated were '..the equipment of almost all defence plants..." [emphasis added].

As an aside, the article also states that 25 million civilians were also evaced, including 17 million from June-December 1941.

Are we finished now?

Oskkar
Posts: 23
Joined: Tue Oct 18, 2011 8:24 am

RE: Over rated Russian rail system.

Post by Oskkar »

ORIGINAL: Pelton

2. I had seen the number of 40% of Russian production was destroyed or captured by the Germans. This article from the BBC claims that 66% was destoryed. http://www.bbc.co.uk/history/worldwars/ ... n_01.shtml

The BBC article says that two thirds of the heavy industry were captured.
You say that the article says that two thirds of the production were destroyed.

See the difference?

User avatar
BletchleyGeek
Posts: 4458
Joined: Thu Nov 26, 2009 3:01 pm
Location: Living in the fair city of Melbourne, Australia

RE: Over rated Russian rail system.

Post by BletchleyGeek »

I happen to be able to access the full text of the JSTOR article Pelton refers to. Some selected quotations follow (and emphasis is mine):
Accordingly, a massive evacuation-relocation effort was undertaken in the summer and autumn of 1941. In general, the evacuation schedule for specific economic regions was tied to changes in the location and condition of the military front.4 More specifically, 109 enterprises were evacuated from Belorussia between June and August, 283 major industrial enterprises from the Ukraine between July and October,5 92 large-scale enterprises from Leningrad between July and September,6 and 498 all-union and union-republic-level enterprises from the Moscow region between July and November. All in all, between July and November 1941, 1523 industrial enterprises, including more than 1,360 large plants, were evacuated to the rear-226 to the Volga region, 667 to the Urals, 244 to western Siberia, 78 to eastern Siberia, and 308 to Kazakhstan and Central Asia. The temporary loss of their productive capacity stretched the already strained Soviet war effort even further. By mid-1942, however, more than 1,200 of these evacuated enterprises had been restored to production. The struggle for survival, at least on the industrial front, had been won.

Initially, however, the evacuation project was marked by chaos, particularly in the western border regions that lay in the immediate path of the rapidly advancing enemy forces. Party and governmental organs in these areas had to deal with the problems of evacuation themselves because the regimes's evacuation machinery was not yet functioning. Indeed, at the start of hostilities, contingency plans for the evacuation of industry did not even exist. The absence of such plans, the speed of the enemy advance, the immensity of the task at hand, and the lack of power and competence on the part of the local officials in border areas to cope with the larger issues and problems of evacuation combined in most instances to doom the efforts of the local organs to failure.

And in the conclusions, the key to understand why something which seems far-fetched by Western standards, was within reach of the Soviet Union under Stalin:
Yet, at the same time, all too often it is overlooked that the Soviet regime, despite the precarious position in which it found itself during this period, still possessed sufficient strength, and sufficient resources-physical, moral, and administrative-to make the evacuation of industry the great success it was. The Stalinist system, even at the height of the crisis of war, still appears to have been viable. Indeed, while readily recognizing all of the negative aspects of Stalinism, including its basic responsibility for the country's lack of preparation for war in June 1941, it can be argued that, given the Soviet Union's overall position at the start of the war, it is doubtful whether the country would have been able to survive had a different system been in effect. In a way, the Stalinist system - a garrison state making considerable use of extraordinary forms of administration and control even in the pre-war period - was itself a vital factor in the Soviet Union's ability to survive in time of all-out war.

This article is from 1983, though, that's 28 years ago. It has only 14 citations - which is not bad for Military History. Following them, I came across this work:

Resource mobilization for World War II: the U.S.A., U.K., U.S.S.R., and Germany, 1938-1945
M. Harrison
The Economic History Review, vol 41, number 2, pages 171-192, 1988

which can be downloaded here. After a cursory reading, I find this quote particularly interesting:
Why did Hitler fail? Circumstantial factors played a certain part, of course. Among the underlying reasons for German failure in 1941-2, however, are included the counter-actions and initiatives of the Soviet government and people. German military success in 1941-2 depended on stunning and paralyzing the Soviet military economic machine with a colossal blow. Soviet resilience stemmed partly from the reactions and initiatives of Soviet leaders from above, partly from those of Soviet people at a lower, less discernible level. At the highest level the Soviet military economicmachine was only partially and momentarily stunned. The Kremlin’s first clearsighted responses to the economic emergency can be found in the campaign for industrial evacuation. It was this programme which saved Soviet specialized defence plant and provided the essential context for the economy-wide mobilization of war production.

Such early high-level initiatives to grapple seriously with the threatened economic catastrophe depended heavily on the qualities of leading individuals. The individualization of authority and responsibility, reinforced by dictatorial powers, rapidly became a leading principle of wartime administration in the first eighteen months. It was reflected in the division of labour within Stalin’s war cabinet where, for example, Beriya was responsible for armament and ammunition procurement, Malenkov for the aircraft industry, Molotov for tank building, Kaganovich for railway transport. This adaptation of the Soviet political system to new tasks had peacetime precedents in previous emergencies of confrontation with the peasantry and food shortage, of international tension, and of industrial and defence mobilization.

Compare this with the organization of the Third Reich military and economic decision making. I couldn't help chuckling [:D]. The Nazi officers - a bunch of amateurs mostly - were out of their league by far, when compared to some of the guys that steered the Soviet system clear out of the Civil War and were resourceful and clever enough to take over the Revolution and displace or eliminate their political adversaries.
wosung
Posts: 610
Joined: Mon Jul 18, 2005 8:31 am

RE: Over rated Russian rail system.

Post by wosung »

Just one example from the rail discussion for Pelton's "citation techniques":

http://www.feldgrau.com/dreichsbahn.html:
"German military railroad planners made one critical error in their Barbarossa calculations - they did not take the primitiveness of the Soviet interior into account when planning for their attack. This would cost the Germans dearly later."

Pelton:
"What it does say about the Soviet rail network:
1) the primitiveness of the Soviet interior [...]
I have to say, after reading this article, I'm starting to wonder whether the in-game Soviet rail cap shouldn't be about 1/5th the united Axis rail cap rather than about 5x as it is!"

Draw your own conclusions.

Regards
wosung
marty_01
Posts: 288
Joined: Thu Feb 10, 2011 2:16 pm

RE: Over rated Russian rail system.

Post by marty_01 »

It would be interesting to see a numeric comparison of the amount of rolling stock, locomotives and etc. between the Soviet Union and th Axis between say 1940 and 1945. I haven't the foggiest idea how the historical figures might shake out or what designer assumptions were entailed in determining in-game rail capactities. Was Soviet rail capacity really four or five times great than Germany's + Rumania + Hungry (and I suppose Czech, Austrian, Polish and etc.)? -- (or whatever the actual in-game rail capacity ratio is between Axis & Soviet)
Aurelian
Posts: 4031
Joined: Mon Feb 26, 2007 2:08 pm

RE: Over rated Russian rail system.

Post by Aurelian »

ORIGINAL: 76mm
ORIGINAL: Pelton
2. I had seen the number of 40% of Russian production was destroyed or captured by the Germans. This article from the BBC claims that 66% was destoryed. http://www.bbc.co.uk/history/worldwars/ ... n_01.shtml
or if you really want some fun numbers buy and read this bad boy. http://www.jstor.org/pss/151494

Ok we look at both numbers I only look at the arm production in the areas of German advances and we will call it 50% captured.

Ok, I've finally found the time to read both of these articles and can't say that I was surprised to find that neither of them support the numbers you claim.

The BBC article does not seem to include any percentage figure at all, and the Soviet Studies article states (see footnote 8) that "From June 1941 to January 1943 more than 1,500 large industrial enterprises were evacuated to the rear. Among the objects evacuated were '..the equipment of almost all defence plants..." [emphasis added].

As an aside, the article also states that 25 million civilians were also evaced, including 17 million from June-December 1941.

Are we finished now?


I doubt it.

The Sovs evacuated their industries.

They conscripted 29,574,900 men in addition to the 4,826,907 in service at the beginning of the war.(Wonder how they got to the front :))
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Red_Army#T ... riotic_War

They outproduced the Germans even though the Germans had more resources. (something to be said for the simple, robust T-34 series compared to a Panther.)

I'm with you. It should be over. IMHO, this claim about over rated rail is a non issue. HI should mean more, but even if Pelton's figures are true, the real Soviets didn't get his memo.
Watched a documentary on beavers. Best dam documentary I've ever seen.
Aurelian
Posts: 4031
Joined: Mon Feb 26, 2007 2:08 pm

RE: Over rated Russian rail system.

Post by Aurelian »

ORIGINAL: marty_01

It would be interesting to see a numeric comparison of the amount of rolling stock, locomotives and etc. between the Soviet Union and th Axis between say 1940 and 1945. I haven't the foggiest idea how the historical figures might shake out or what designer assumptions were entailed in determining in-game rail capactities. Was Soviet rail capacity really four or five times great than Germany's + Rumania + Hungry (and I suppose Czech, Austrian, Polish and etc.)? -- (or whatever the actual in-game rail capacity ratio is between Axis & Soviet)

Well, the Reich's rail net, as pointed out above, was kind of low on the priority list.

Troops were given orders to capture Russin engines, rolling stock. But they loved to shoot them up.

One also has to remember that The Axis were engaged on multiple fronts. (They had 34 divisions in the Balkans for example. Didn't stop Tito et al though.)

And the Soviets just had one front.
Watched a documentary on beavers. Best dam documentary I've ever seen.
wosung
Posts: 610
Joined: Mon Jul 18, 2005 8:31 am

RE: Over rated Russian rail system.

Post by wosung »

ORIGINAL: marty_01

It would be interesting to see a numeric comparison of the amount of rolling stock, locomotives and etc. between the Soviet Union and th Axis between say 1940 and 1945. I haven't the foggiest idea how the historical figures might shake out or what designer assumptions were entailed in determining in-game rail capactities. Was Soviet rail capacity really four or five times great than Germany's + Rumania + Hungry (and I suppose Czech, Austrian, Polish and etc.)? -- (or whatever the actual in-game rail capacity ratio is between Axis & Soviet)

Some data:
Reichsbahn freight in tons:
1939: 46,14 Mio. tons (between 3,1 and 4,4 Mio tons per month)
1940: 46, 91 Mio. tons (between 2,9 and 4,6 Mio tons per month)
1941: 45,95 Mio. tons (between 3,4 and 4,2 Mio tons per month)
War time reeorg of Reichsbahn was controlled by Wehrmacht. Despite all efforts the performance of the Reichsbahn did not match neither the growing needs of transport outside the Reich nor the wartime economy. “Even if the Reichsbahn performance collaps which happened during the first war-winter wasn’t repeated, in the second half of 1941 a steady drop of performance took place because of the War in the East.”
Das Deutsche Reich und der 2. Weltkrieg, Vol. 5.1 p. 651-653.

The transportation situation of the Reichsbahn in the winter 1939/40 became very bad, it even directly influenced the war conduct. Because of the overstraining for years locomitives, freightcars and railroads were in bad shape. Those pre-war deficits became worse in the winter 1939/40. Thus the lacking coal supply for the armament industry led to production delays. In January 1940 the Reichsbahn reported to the Army’s transportation leader that it couldn’t support a major offensive. On Hitler’s order the most urgent deficies were corrected before the offensive in the West 1940. But all in all in nearly all sectors the situation was unsatisfying and led to lots of temporary substitutes strainig the menpool and organization”
Burkhart Mueller-Hillebrand, Das Heer, Vol.2, p.42.


Paul Kennedy, The rise and fall of the great powers, p. 466
„[In WW2 in the German-occupied parts of European Russia, the Ukraine, and Belorussia] transportation was hit by the destruction of 65.000 km of railway track, loss of or damage to 15.800 locomotives, 428.000 good wagons [...] and half of all the railway bridges in the occupied territory [...].
wosung
marty_01
Posts: 288
Joined: Thu Feb 10, 2011 2:16 pm

RE: Over rated Russian rail system.

Post by marty_01 »

ORIGINAL: wosung

ORIGINAL: marty_01

It would be interesting to see a numeric comparison of the amount of rolling stock, locomotives and etc. between the Soviet Union and th Axis between say 1940 and 1945. I haven't the foggiest idea how the historical figures might shake out or what designer assumptions were entailed in determining in-game rail capactities. Was Soviet rail capacity really four or five times great than Germany's + Rumania + Hungry (and I suppose Czech, Austrian, Polish and etc.)? -- (or whatever the actual in-game rail capacity ratio is between Axis & Soviet)

Some data:
Reichsbahn freight in tons:
1939: 46,14 Mio. tons (between 3,1 and 4,4 Mio tons per month)
1940: 46, 91 Mio. tons (between 2,9 and 4,6 Mio tons per month)
1941: 45,95 Mio. tons (between 3,4 and 4,2 Mio tons per month)
War time reeorg of Reichsbahn was controlled by Wehrmacht. Despite all efforts the performance of the Reichsbahn did not match neither the growing needs of transport outside the Reich nor the wartime economy. “Even if the Reichsbahn performance collaps which happened during the first war-winter wasn’t repeated, in the second half of 1941 a steady drop of performance took place because of the War in the East.”
Das Deutsche Reich und der 2. Weltkrieg, Vol. 5.1 p. 651-653.

The transportation situation of the Reichsbahn in the winter 1939/40 became very bad, it even directly influenced the war conduct. Because of the overstraining for years locomitives, freightcars and railroads were in bad shape. Those pre-war deficits became worse in the winter 1939/40. Thus the lacking coal supply for the armament industry led to production delays. In January 1940 the Reichsbahn reported to the Army’s transportation leader that it couldn’t support a major offensive. On Hitler’s order the most urgent deficies were corrected before the offensive in the West 1940. But all in all in nearly all sectors the situation was unsatisfying and led to lots of temporary substitutes strainig the menpool and organization”
Burkhart Mueller-Hillebrand, Das Heer, Vol.2, p.42.


Paul Kennedy, The rise and fall of the great powers, p. 466
„[In WW2 in the German-occupied parts of European Russia, the Ukraine, and Belorussia] transportation was hit by the destruction of 65.000 km of railway track, loss of or damage to 15.800 locomotives, 428.000 good wagons [...] and half of all the railway bridges in the occupied territory [...].

That's good. It looks like statistics on freight tonnage that's being moved about Germany (and perhaps western Europe). Track bedding and sleepers typically employed during this period in Western Europe was in-general far more robust than the same utilized by the Soviet union. Moreover, the German's subgrade and bedding were better prepared than Soviet tracks. Part of what the Germans were doing in Russia with all those FBD construction units was not only gauge conversion, but they were often improving bedding to increase the ability of tracks to carry larger tonnages -- as well as to prolong life of track beds against repetitive loading\failure.

What about Rolling stock and engines from occupied countries (or freight tonnages) -- Czech, Poland, France -- And Rolling Stock and engines (or tonnages) from Allies (Romania, Hungry, Italy). What about captured rolling stock and locomotives that are utilized by the Germans and their allies on the Eastern Front. Do the actual numbers show this to be significant or insignificant -- I mean significant\insignificant aside from each engine and each wagon that ends up in Axis hands is one less engine or wagon that the Soviets get to utilize for moving troops and industry about.

And the numbers for the Reds? -- even tonnages would be something to go off? Although if we compare shipping tonnages there's the whole track capacity thingy to consider when normalizing apples & oranges to something like apples & apples.
wosung
Posts: 610
Joined: Mon Jul 18, 2005 8:31 am

RE: Over rated Russian rail system.

Post by wosung »

I know that the data above is only one small part of the puzzle. It seems that it's not so easy to get complete railway data, that is comparable:

- SU railroad data in Stalin era seems to have been state secret. Some data can be found online. Speaking Russian might help. Surely Pavel provided good data for WitE.

- Finding data about East-middle European countries won't be easy.

- Next Problem: Distribution of IRL rail capacity between war-production, civilian needs, war transportation & evacuation?

-One last thought: Shouldn't the German RR capacity in WitE be cut down in spring 1944, when Wallies started to execute their transportation air bombing plan to prepare second front, and thus decimated roling stock in the Fortress Europa? Is this build in WitE?

Regards
wosung
User avatar
Stoat
Posts: 37
Joined: Mon Sep 19, 2011 9:16 pm
Location: Toronto, Canada

RE: Over rated Russian rail system.

Post by Stoat »

ORIGINAL: ComradeP

The game is quite different from before going from 1941 to 1942 now, as the Germans get Hiwi's, Soviet national morale is reduced and forts are less impressive, and it will be a while before the long term effects of recent changes are felt.

To say, like Pelton and now Stoat too, that the developers essentially only care about the Soviet side, is complete rubbish. To say that Pelton and Stoat represent most of the community is also false.

After the recent changes, there are more minor and major issues with the system than there are minor and major issues with a certain side, which was the case before, so in my opinion we're on the right track at least in that regard. Could that have been achieved earlier? Maybe, but we probably would've broken more things than were broken now with changes being applied more gradually.

Also, Stoat: We jump on Pelton because he rants and doesn't really provide evidence supporting his cause. What he says wouldn't be the problem if it would not be a rant (coming from a not so very articulated person) and if it would be based on the average situation and not what he views as a problem at the time. For obvious reasons, the game is more likely to be adjusted if something goes wrong on average than if something goes wrong in one single game, as long as it doesn't concern a bug, but an outcome.

Hiya all, quickly stickin' me hed up outta me hole. I think FlaviusX, like a stalwart Russian sailor who is defending the City of Lenin to the death & has no time for counterrevolutionary nonsense, has given me the ole' "Nye khodi za mnoi, burzhui, ya vsya Krasnaya!" ("Do not follow me, bourgeois, I am with the Reds!"):

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JsBC-I6wocw (The dance itself. Is it just me, or does the sailor himself bear a striking resemblence to "Flavvy's Avvy", that is, FlaviusX's avatar? To me, I see the man himself dancing proudly & showing his considerable élan).

http://www.barynya.com/sailors.stm (interesting Revolution-era lyrics to the tune for those who are into that sort of thing)

Thought he might respond to my thoughts, but having offered only his tenderest expressions of man-love, I must accept these in the spirit with which they were no doubt given, satisfy myself that this represents either tacit agreement or that he doesn't follow me, and gingerly tiptoe away, lest I am accused of wreaking irreparable harm upon the soul of an artist.

And so I turn my gaze to ComradeP, with a "Dank u wel" for his acknowledgement of my comments, although I am forced to regard him, as a marginally more balanced version of FlaviusX, with squinty Stoat eyes and a furrowed Stoaty brow. Really, there doesn't seem to be much daylight between you guys as concerns game balance - is there secretly some NKVD guy with a Maxim gun enforcing discipline in your rear? ;)

Towarischtsch P:

I accuse the devs of nothing other than having created a wonderful and beautiful thing. Mais je t'accuse, monsieur, of being a part of the obstacle to finding a game balance pleasing to users. Following this harsh accusation let me admit in fairness that I agree with you that this is moving in the right direction with almost every patch. But I still fear we will not get to a good play balance.

Yes, yes, our Pelton. Btw is this a contraction of the French "peloton" for "platoon", by any chance? As in the drill command, "Pel'ton, tournez ààà... gauche!" (At any rate, you lot can only wish that Pelton would tourne à gauche). [:'(]

Regarding the lad's tone, I'm not saying for a moment he oughtn't be sent to Mrs. Grinch's Finishing School for Wayward Girls, where his etiquette circuitry will be upgraded, and where he'll be threatened with a strict diet of cold porridge & mustard should he fall out of line. But his tone doesn't concern me much when I see him persistently trying to do good things against all odds, weathering so many blows like water off a duck's back, unconcerned by so many noxious raindrops, protected by his Regenschirm der Rechtschaffenheit. If he speaks roughly, it is because his chin is made of Kruppstahl, and he must need it to carry on speaking truth to power here.

And as you say, he is often taken down on the grounds of having a historical bias. This doesn't concern me as much as game balance. For one thing, I feel the game is in very, very good hands as concerns historicity. I do not believe it is perfect, but the game as it stands is already a tremendous distillation of historical research and analysis. Fantastic work. And I believe everyone only wants it to be better in this regard. So I really have no concerns there. Everything's going in the right direction.

I've previously expressed my notion of historical accuracy & game balance, defined in unambiguous, mathematical terms. For any aspect of the game being measured, deviation from historicity is the size of the mean observed error. Game balance is whether the observed distribution of outcomes is a pleasing one. They are two entirely different things. Historical accuracy and play balance are confused by many here and they should not be. Since the product is made to please the broad user base, not the much narrower predilections of the test team, in some fashion an effort should be made to work to achieve a game balance that will please the former, not the latter, when these interests are not the same. The Thick Brown Line, that staunch Cabal of Orthodoxy, has many outstanding attributes. Immense powers and talents, with unshakeable morale, it always advances, never retreats. But if it cannot listen..., well, this is a consequential flaw.

To put this another way, trying to use the vernacular of your chosen tribe: Pyotr Pietrowitsch, in the Soyuz Nerushimi, when an Apparatchik spends too much time in his Dacha, toasting his comrades with Stopki Vodki s Molokom, and enjoying the sound of his own voice, he saps, rather than buttresses, the Sila Narodnaya & has, in fact, become a Vrag Proletariata. He should be denounced as such so that the voices of the Rabotniki can once again be heard & respected. Is this not your way?
GGWitE = GröKAZ ("Greatest Wargame of All Time") - thx to GG, Company & Community for continuing to make it even better!
User avatar
Stoat
Posts: 37
Joined: Mon Sep 19, 2011 9:16 pm
Location: Toronto, Canada

RE: Over rated Russian rail system.

Post by Stoat »

ORIGINAL: JAMiAM

ORIGINAL: Stoat
So the way I see it, reduced down to the crux of it, Pelton is the greatest champion of making the game better, and FlaviusX is the greatest proponent of destroying the game. I think they're both smart and I like them both. But this is why I stand with Pelton & why I stand against FlaviusX.
Untrue and unfair.

Though it was pretty clear to me that it (along with much of your overly long and rambling post) was intended as a bit of humorous hyperbole, it makes it rather difficult to pay any credence to some of the more important issues that you do allude to in the rest of the post. Namely, what range of outcomes should we take to be reasonable, and historically plausible?
y long and rambling post) was intended as a bit of humorous hyperbole, it makes it rather difficult to pay any credence to some of the more important issues that you do allude to in the rest of the post

JAMiAM, mein sehr geehrter Herr, in truth I cannot disagree with anything you've said. In my defense, as a way of not going after Flavvy in too mean-spirited & harsh a way, I did try to go right over the top & go after the majority of active posters in this universe, not to exclude your bad self. [;)] Although I did speak against the person of our fellow, I tried to go to pains to explain on what basis I did so (my perception of his ideas for affecting game balance), and that it was by no means on the basis of any lack of love or respect for him personally or his noteworthy positive contributions. As a rhetorical technique, I feel that personification, or imbuing persons or things with ideas or other qualities, is useful and can help an audience focus where discussing the dry ideas themselves without use of metaphor may fail to excite or get through.

Briefly, regarding what range of outcomes do I propose, you have asked a central question and have put me on the spot. Thank you for this! Of course it is easier to criticise what is than to propose a good solution for what should be. Let me think on this, would you, & rather than give you a very bad answer today, let me try to give a slightly-less bad answer in a wee bit.
GGWitE = GröKAZ ("Greatest Wargame of All Time") - thx to GG, Company & Community for continuing to make it even better!
gradenko2k
Posts: 930
Joined: Mon Dec 27, 2010 6:08 am

RE: Over rated Russian rail system.

Post by gradenko2k »

ORIGINAL: 76mm
In fact given the planning involved in moving the factories I wonder if the military had any direct say in which factories moved when, more likely the military to some extent had to react to planned factory moves, so there could be a basis for removing this kind of decision from player control. Moreover, the Sovs would certainly have screwed things up sometimes (how did the Germans cut that rail line?!) so random losses of factories would also be expected.
That would just muddy the scope of the player's reach even more. We're supposedly the part of some very high command that can ignore political objectives at will, but we're subject to having our commanders randomly reassigned and dismissed ostensibly by Hitler/Stalin?

The Soviet player has much more complete control over the formation/construction/composition of his Army, but the German player has no say in this, up to and including withdrawals of formations that were only due to East Front events that may not have happened in the alternate timeline he's already playing!
Post Reply

Return to “Gary Grigsby's War in the East Series”