Questions for Jason

[Deputy]

I am gonna try and not make this controversial. [:)]

I have some observations about the patches that came after 1.02B....

Something that occured to me when comparing version 1.02B with 1.04. It looks to me like patches after 1.02 were designed to REDUCE the fighting ability of the Germans. In 1.02B the German Army didn't have a lot of problems defeating the Soviets or the Western allies. Especially later in the war when Panther and Tiger tanks appeared. The changes that were made in 1.03 and 1.04 both seemed to be a subtle effort to "balance" the game and make the allies more competitive against the Germans. I was playing 1.04 last night, and to my amazement, Russian TANKS were using hidden fire while in open terrain and remaining unspotted. Now MAYBE I can believe a small, hand-carried anti-tank gun staying hidden pretty well, even a larger 50MM anti-tank gun might stay hiddden for one or two turns, but THREE STACKED platoons of T34/85 tanks in open terrain remaining hidden WHILE FIRING....no way. The Soviets would have to be usng the "Philadelphia Experiement" of making them invisible to achieve an effect like that. This is just another reason why I prefer 1.02B. It is closer to real world experience and not some kind of artificial "play balance" engineered by those who want to see more Allied victories or more "fair" gameplay.

It is also quite obvious that the German OOB has been altered from what it was in the Talonsoft and early Matrix versions of the game. I am regularly seeing a company of tanks, either Tiger or Panther, and 1 of the 4 platoons is always understrength. So you have three platoons at a strength of 4 and one at a strength of 2. Is this some kind of artificial attempt to "balance gameplay", or did someone at Matrix suddenly discover documentation that the German Army always had one platoon understrength?

And of course, we have the notorious anti-tank mortars and artillery. This also looks like another attempt to "balance gameplay" by giving the allies a long range anti-tank weapon in the form of mortars and artillery. The standard answer that everyone posts is to spread out your armor and not stack them in one hex. I tried that. Major catastrophe. It just meant that allied artillery had more targets to hit, not that it was more difficult to hit them. The only real compensation for the current anti-armor artillery is that the German Panther and Tiger tanks can move one hex after firing twice to make sure you disrupt any spotters.


So is Matrix tweaking gameplay to make things "more balanced". Did users complain that they couldn't defeat the German units so things were "adjusted" to help them out? Was this a request by PBEM folks? And why weren't the German units given hidden units and killer mortars and artillery? [&:]

Enquiring minds want to know [:)]

[MrRoadrunner]

ORIGINAL: Deputy
Something that occured to me when comparing version 1.02B with 1.04. It looks to me like patches after 1.02 were designed to REDUCE the fighting ability of the Germans. In 1.02B the German Army didn't have a lot of problems defeating the Soviets or the Western allies. Especially later in the war when Panther and Tiger tanks appeared. The changes that were made in 1.03 and 1.04 both seemed to be a subtle effort to "balance" the game and make the allies more competitive against the Germans. I was playing 1.04 last night, and to my amazement, Russian TANKS were using hidden fire while in open terrain and remaining unspotted. Now MAYBE I can believe a small, hand-carried anti-tank gun staying hidden pretty well, even a larger 50MM anti-tank gun might stay hiddden for one or two turns, but THREE STACKED platoons of T34/85 tanks in open terrain remaining hidden WHILE FIRING....no way. The Soviets would have to be usng the "Philadelphia Experiement" of making them invisible to achieve an effect like that. This is just another reaasin why I prefer 1.02B. It is closer to real world experience and not some kind of artificial "play balance" engineered by those who want to see more Allied victories or more "fair" gameplay.

I've never had tanks firing in the open that remain hidden, that would be interesting to see. And, the 50mm German AT gun does stay hidden. Even after firing.
I have not seen invisible destroyers so I do not understand about the "Philadelphia Experiment" reference.

ORIGINAL: Deputy It is also quite obvious that the German OOB has been altered from what it was in the Talonsoft and early Matrix versions of the game. I am regularly seeing a company of tanks, either Tiger or Panther, and 1 of the 4 platoons is always understrength. So you have three platoons at a strength of 4 and one at a strength of 2. Is this some kind of artificial attempt to "balance gameplay", or did someone at Matrix suddenly discover documentation that the German Army always had one platoon understrength?

I thought the changes were already announced, in every update. You can research it. The 2 strength platoon was the HQ platoon, IIRC. Nothing was done to any of the OOB's to make balance. Everything still fires according to the original fire tables except for artillery which went from a 3% chance to a 5% chance of damaging armor. The version 1.05 patch will fix the smaller caliber mortars from doing damage to armor. BTW, all armor is effected by the tables and not just the German armor.

ORIGINAL: Deputy And of course, we have the notorious anti-tank mortars and artillery. This also looks like another attempt to "balance gameplay" by giving the allies a long range anti-tank weapon in the form of mortars and artillery. The standard answer that everyone posts is to spreaad out your armor and not stack them in one hex. I tried that. Major catastrophe. It just meant that allied artillery had more targets to hit, not that it was more difficult to hit them. The only real compensation for the current anti-armor artillery is that the German Panther and Tiger tanks can move one hex after firing twice to make sure you disrupt any spotters.

See that above comment regarding the mortars. Also remember that ambush shots are more effective, by the established tables? It makes the mortars and hidden AT guns more effective when they first fire.
I also have/had a problem with the artillery fire. But, as stated version 1.05 or reverting to 1.02 will fix that?
Messing with the fire tables could effect game play but not balance. Unless they make Panthers and Tigers fire like PzKwII's?

ORIGINAL: Deputy So is Matrix tweaking gameplay to make things "more balanced". Did users complain that they couldn't defeat the German units so things were "adjusted" to help them out? Was this a request by PBEM folks? And why weren't the German units given hidden units and killer mortars and artillery? [&:]

All I have seen from the changes to the OOB's were to make them more historically accurate. Changes to the OOB's do nothing toward "balance". Balance of play is in the hands of the scenario designer. You can add or subtract strength points to units as well as replacing units within the OOB to other units, ie trade out soft trucks for half tracks.
PBEM folks mostly wanted more and varied units that actually were used in combat. Some wanted the navy stuff and others wanted the airfields and mobile supply bases.
Personally I do not like the naval units, airfields (on map), and mobile supply units. Nor, do I like the engineers that can build bridges and create minefields in six minutes (but that is a different argument altogether).

The only changes to earlier versions, that I know of, were done to add historical units.

RR

[OttoVonBlotto]

ORIGINAL: Deputy

to my amazement, Russian TANKS were using hidden fire while in open terrain and remaining unspotted. Now MAYBE I can believe a small, hand-carried anti-tank gun staying hidden pretty well, even a larger 50MM anti-tank gun might stay hiddden for one or two turns, but THREE STACKED platoons of T34/85 tanks in open terrain remaining hidden WHILE FIRING....no way. The Soviets would have to be usng the "Philadelphia Experiement" of making them invisible to achieve an effect like that.

Were you playing with variable visibility on ? That may explain this you can take it off in the optional rules (I would advise not having it on if you want a fair game) it should be off by default.

[Warhorse]

That arty is vicious across the board, the German arty sometimes even takes out K'talan MBT's!!!! These are the equivalent of modern T-90 tanks. The result is "Disabled" meaning tracks knocked off, crew stunned beyond capability of a viable combat-ready unit, and other such results. I learn to not leave ANY unit in one hex for very long, LOL!![:D] Kinda sucks some times, but there you have it!!

Mike

[Jason Petho]

ORIGINAL: Deputy


Something that occured to me when comparing version 1.02B with 1.04. It looks to me like patches after 1.02 were designed to REDUCE the fighting ability of the Germans. In 1.02B the German Army didn't have a lot of problems defeating the Soviets or the Western allies. Especially later in the war when Panther and Tiger tanks appeared. The changes that were made in 1.03 and 1.04 both seemed to be a subtle effort to "balance" the game and make the allies more competitive against the Germans. I was playing 1.04 last night, and to my amazement, Russian TANKS were using hidden fire while in open terrain and remaining unspotted. Now MAYBE I can believe a small, hand-carried anti-tank gun staying hidden pretty well, even a larger 50MM anti-tank gun might stay hiddden for one or two turns, but THREE STACKED platoons of T34/85 tanks in open terrain remaining hidden WHILE FIRING....no way.

The Soviets would have to be usng the "Philadelphia Experiement" of making them invisible to achieve an effect like that. This is just another reason why I prefer 1.02B. It is closer to real world experience and not some kind of artificial "play balance" engineered by those who want to see more Allied victories or more "fair" gameplay.

The general hidden when attack rule changed with West Front, the original one, from Talonsoft and was included with East Front II and the follow on packages as part of the game.

While a rarity that you are describing, it is actually part of the game.

ORIGINAL: Deputy


It is also quite obvious that the German OOB has been altered from what it was in the Talonsoft and early Matrix versions of the game. I am regularly seeing a company of tanks, either Tiger or Panther, and 1 of the 4 platoons is always understrength. So you have three platoons at a strength of 4 and one at a strength of 2. Is this some kind of artificial attempt to "balance gameplay", or did someone at Matrix suddenly discover documentation that the German Army always had one platoon understrength?

Read Mr RR's response, as it is correct.

ORIGINAL: Deputy
So is Matrix tweaking gameplay to make things "more balanced". Did users complain that they couldn't defeat the German units so things were "adjusted" to help them out? Was this a request by PBEM folks?

The Germans are actually really easy to beat, especially later in the war. They have been since the original version of East Front, in my experiences anyway.

ORIGINAL: Deputy
And why weren't the German units given hidden units and killer mortars and artillery? [&:]

Try playing as the Russians, you'll see the same things happening. The rules are the same for all the countries.

Jason Petho

[Deputy]

ORIGINAL: Otto von Blotto

ORIGINAL: Deputy

to my amazement, Russian TANKS were using hidden fire while in open terrain and remaining unspotted. Now MAYBE I can believe a small, hand-carried anti-tank gun staying hidden pretty well, even a larger 50MM anti-tank gun might stay hiddden for one or two turns, but THREE STACKED platoons of T34/85 tanks in open terrain remaining hidden WHILE FIRING....no way. The Soviets would have to be usng the "Philadelphia Experiement" of making them invisible to achieve an effect like that.

Were you playing with variable visibility on ? That may explain this you can take it off in the optional rules (I would advise not having it on if you want a fair game) it should be off by default.

I don't think so. Is that one of the check boxes at the very begining of a scenario? I'll look and see, but I don't have any of the boxes checked right now.

[Deputy]

ORIGINAL: Warhorse

That arty is vicious across the board, the German arty sometimes even takes out K'talan MBT's!!!! These are the equivalent of modern T-90 tanks. The result is "Disabled" meaning tracks knocked off, crew stunned beyond capability of a viable combat-ready unit, and other such results. I learn to not leave ANY unit in one hex for very long, LOL!![:D] Kinda sucks some times, but there you have it!!

Mike

I wish I could get the German arty to do that!!!! Even with direct fire, 105s and 150s just seem to make noise and nothing else. They work against infantry and trucks and headquaters, but not against tank armor (in my experience). I move my tanks on every turn now. Even just moving them 1 hex helps.

[Deputy]

ORIGINAL: Jason Petho

ORIGINAL: Deputy


Something that occured to me when comparing version 1.02B with 1.04. It looks to me like patches after 1.02 were designed to REDUCE the fighting ability of the Germans. In 1.02B the German Army didn't have a lot of problems defeating the Soviets or the Western allies. Especially later in the war when Panther and Tiger tanks appeared. The changes that were made in 1.03 and 1.04 both seemed to be a subtle effort to "balance" the game and make the allies more competitive against the Germans. I was playing 1.04 last night, and to my amazement, Russian TANKS were using hidden fire while in open terrain and remaining unspotted. Now MAYBE I can believe a small, hand-carried anti-tank gun staying hidden pretty well, even a larger 50MM anti-tank gun might stay hiddden for one or two turns, but THREE STACKED platoons of T34/85 tanks in open terrain remaining hidden WHILE FIRING....no way.

The Soviets would have to be usng the "Philadelphia Experiement" of making them invisible to achieve an effect like that. This is just another reason why I prefer 1.02B. It is closer to real world experience and not some kind of artificial "play balance" engineered by those who want to see more Allied victories or more "fair" gameplay.

The general hidden when attack rule changed with West Front, the original one, from Talonsoft and was included with East Front II and the follow on packages as part of the game.

While a rarity that you are describing, it is actually part of the game.

ORIGINAL: Deputy


It is also quite obvious that the German OOB has been altered from what it was in the Talonsoft and early Matrix versions of the game. I am regularly seeing a company of tanks, either Tiger or Panther, and 1 of the 4 platoons is always understrength. So you have three platoons at a strength of 4 and one at a strength of 2. Is this some kind of artificial attempt to "balance gameplay", or did someone at Matrix suddenly discover documentation that the German Army always had one platoon understrength?

Read Mr RR's response, as it is correct.

ORIGINAL: Deputy
So is Matrix tweaking gameplay to make things "more balanced". Did users complain that they couldn't defeat the German units so things were "adjusted" to help them out? Was this a request by PBEM folks?

The Germans are actually really easy to beat, especially later in the war. They have been since the original version of East Front, in my experiences anyway.

ORIGINAL: Deputy
And why weren't the German units given hidden units and killer mortars and artillery? [&:]

Try playing as the Russians, you'll see the same things happening. The rules are the same for all the countries.

Jason Petho

Thanks Jason. That clears up a lot.
I mainly play as the Germans and am quite good with them. Not bragging, just saying [;)]

[Deputy]

Almost forgot...I do see where the 4th tank platoon in 1.02B is also a strength of 2. So I guess it was implemented pretty early. My apologies on that complaint [:)]

[marcbarker]

Give me my 2nd Armored with what I sent you and I would give you a run for your dineros' amigo de apollo

[Deputy]

ORIGINAL: barker

Give me my 2nd Armored with what I sent you and I would give you a run for your dineros' amigo de apollo

No thanks. You are too good at those OOBs. [;)]

[marcbarker]

nah just an oob that is from stanton's us army handbook...i was building german oob's from nafzigers trinity but lost the books from a tragedy

[marcbarker]

built US V corps with rotating troops...elements of the 2d French Armored, Rotating British Troops, Battalions getting Detached when you least can afford them in a clutch DCG

[MrRoadrunner]

ORIGINAL: Deputy
I wish I could get the German arty to do that!!!! Even with direct fire, 105s and 150s just seem to make noise and nothing else. They work against infantry and trucks and headquaters, but not against tank armor (in my experience). I move my tanks on every turn now. Even just moving them 1 hex helps.

I've been on the receiving end of German artillery. Indirect is the same all around.
The Direct Fire tables for artillery need tweaking. Artillery is much less effective firing direct at armor as they probably should be. Though, if you play in the desert and get close to 25 pdrs you'll wish you did not get that close. [;)]
Firing direct against soft targets artillery is devastating. Look at the fire tables and see how hard they hit even at range.

Firing from ambush, directly, makes them even more effective.



RR

[OttoVonBlotto]

ORIGINAL: Deputy

ORIGINAL: Otto von Blotto

Were you playing with variable visibility on ? That may explain this you can take it off in the optional rules (I would advise not having it on if you want a fair game) it should be off by default.

I don't think so. Is that one of the check boxes at the very begining of a scenario? I'll look and see, but I don't have any of the boxes checked right now.

Then it must be the fire and hidden rule Jason mentioned that came in with West Front, odd as I can't say I've noticed it in any game I've played.

As you normally play against the AI and are good at playing the Axis why not try as the Allies or think about using some of the optional rules, especially the Extreme Assault one to make it more challenging, the EA rule is great to make play against the AI more interesting and could have been made with players like you in mind. You could also set the slider to help out the allies if your finding it too easy.

If you have indirect fire by map off you shouldn't be getting caught by artillery and mortar blind fire as the AI shouldn't be able to target hexes it can't see.

[scottintacoma]

I knocked out 3 T34's between yesterday and today.

The main way to keep tanks from being knocked out by artillery, including mortars is to not stack more the 12 points in a hex.

Scott in tAcoma

[marcbarker]

makes sense more units in a 250 meter hex has a higher probability of being hit thereby causing secondary damage due to proximity of other units in the same area

[MrRoadrunner]

ORIGINAL: scottgibson

I knocked out 3 T34's between yesterday and today.

The main way to keep tanks from being knocked out by artillery, including mortars is to not stack more the 12 points in a hex.

Hex density is important. I overlooked that.
Couple density with ambush and it's even more deadly.

When you play versus the AI it always seems that the units tend to collect in certain places. Well stacked, fully packed, fire at will!

Nice call Scott.



RR

[Deputy]

ORIGINAL: scottgibson

I knocked out 3 T34's between yesterday and today.

The main way to keep tanks from being knocked out by artillery, including mortars is to not stack more the 12 points in a hex.

Scott in tAcoma

This has not been my experience at all. I tried using single units in a hex and the artillery that missed the primary target took out the scattered units quite easily. I'm back to stacking them and moving them one square every turn.

[marcbarker]

I sacrified a few halftracks to draw out an ambush then move infantry to suppress the move armor to over take. But I have encountered heavy losses due to the arty and hidden armor. So you adapt and overcome so goes the dogs of war