WITE 2.0 OOB?

[Great_Ajax]

So I am building the WitE 2 OOB and it basically an expanded version of WitE with some nice and new features. Please keep in mind that these features are not complete and the design could still change in the future. But this is what I have built so far.

1. Historical units for Germans throughout BUT there is some flexibility not seen in previous versions as I have been receptive to some changes to spice things up. First of all, as per WITE, units are not disbanded on their historical dates unless the units were merged into new units. All theaters are represented separately by a theater box (Western Front, Italy, Balkans, North Africa, Norway, Finland-Murmansk, and the Axis Strategic Reserves (Germany). These boxes are all populated with Axis forces (air and ground) according to their historical dates. When using the theater boxes, players can move air and ground units around as needed but there will be consequences to stripping a theater of forces with events. These events haven't been reviewed or added yet. There are also units that were partially formed that never saw combat deployment because they ended up being renamed for destroyed units at Stalingrad and North Africa. These units are now available for the player to do with what he wishes and some examples include the West Schnelle Division and the 345th and 386th Motorized Divisions.

2. The rename function allows units to rename and change OBs many times throughout their life without requiring the unit to withdraw from the front and a fresh (and fully equipped) unit replacing it as a reinforcement. Now, we can properly simulate units being upgraded seamlessly. An example of this is the 373rd Wallonian Infantry Battalion that begins in the Western Theater Box. On Turn 104 (Summer 43), it upgrades to the 5th SS Walloonian Motorized Brigade and on Turn 174 (Fall 44), it upgrades to the 28th SS Wall. Grenadier Division.

3. "Free Production" or having units arrive fully kitted is now out. Now, units arrive without equipment when they were officially established and must rely on the production system to equip them. The 501st Heavy Panzer Company, for example, arrives in February 1942 without any tanks in the Axis Reserves box. The intent is to make the Axis and Soviet Strategic Reserves box a way to "store" units off the map to allow for priority refits. The production system has been re-calibrated to allow for historical production.

4. The Soviet system is going to be similar to what WitE did but they will have a historical OOB through 1941. Their new units will also arrive as shells without equipment. To give you a taste of what a true historical Soviet OOB would look like through 1941, I have added the following historical units to the Soviet Strategic Box in 1941 only that didn't exist in WITE:

a. 30 Engineer-Sapper Brigades (Construction)
b. 10 Separate Tank Regiments
c. 6 Motorcycle Regiments
d. Over 100 Anti-Tank Regiments
e. 80+ Artillery/Gun/Howitzer Regiments
f. 5 AA Regiments
g. Over 100 Separate Tank Battalions
h. Over 200 Engineer-Sapper Battalions (Construction)
i. 6 Heavy Mortar Battalions
j. 17 Guards Light Rocket Regiments
k. 11 Mortar Battalions
l. Over 100 AA Battalions

Trey

[Icier]

I don't know about anyone else, but you have completely wet my appetite....stopped my bitching...and
created a longing to see this game...so the big question is .....WHEN?

[Michael T]

Why can't we have an historical Soviet OOB post 1941?

I mean the historical shells arrive in the box you speak of and then they get filled out if production has the capacity?

So the historical OOB becomes the absolute limit. But you may not have enough men and equipment to flesh them out.

If you have excess then then perhaps an option exists to build additional units (available for both sides).

For example if the Soviet's had 31 Tank Corps that's all I really want to see. If some players want the ability to build more then make this an option. But again it should also be available to the Germans as well if you go down that path.

[Great_Ajax]

That's a design decision above my pay grade. Historical OOBs are possible of course.

There was discussion of putting caps on Soviet units based on the maximum number of those types of units that were historically created.

Trey

ORIGINAL: Michael T

Why can't we have an historical Soviet OOB post 1941?

I mean the historical shells arrive in the box you speak of and then they get filled out if production has the capacity?

So the historical OOB becomes the absolute limit. But you may not have enough men and equipment to flesh them out.

If you have excess then then perhaps an option exists to build additional units (available for both sides).

For example if the Soviet's had 31 Tank Corps that's all I really want to see. If some players want the ability to build more then make this an option. But again it should also be available to the Germans as well if you go down that path.

[Michael T]

There was discussion of putting caps on Soviet units based on the maximum number of those types of units that were historically created.

That would get my vote.

Thanks for the info BTW [:)]

[Farfarer61]

ORIGINAL: Michael T

There was discussion of putting caps on Soviet units based on the maximum number of those types of units that were historically created.

That would get my vote.

Thanks for the info BTW [:)]

This seems simple enough

[Flaviusx]

As a practical matter, how many players build 31 tank corps? Damn few I suspect. Ditto the 12 or so mech corps, the 40 odd artillery divisions, etc.

This is why I'd strongly prefer a historical OOB for the entire war. Most people will probably wind up getting a better army as a result, albeit a less optimized one.

The real constraint here should be replacements, not APs or whatever currency is used to buy or upgrade units.

[Peltonx]

ORIGINAL: Flaviusx

As a practical matter, how many players build 31 tank corps? Damn few I suspect. Ditto the 12 or so mech corps, the 40 odd artillery divisions, etc.

This is why I'd strongly prefer a historical OOB for the entire war. Most people will probably wind up getting a better army as a result, albeit a less optimized one.

The real constraint here should be replacements, not APs or whatever currency is used to buy or upgrade units.

Logistics is the key as we have exchanged in personal emails in the past.

I have them saved do you?

A massive / historical Red army

logistically was a ball and chain for Russia as Chaos has stated and he is right historically.

MT pushing for a historical Russian OOB is the right thing to do.

[morvael]

The problem with Soviet historical OOB is that it was very loss-driven and different formations may die/survive each time in the game, whereas German OOB is mostly static with very few units lost until 1945 when it no longer matters. So I would think custom/auto building but up to historical limits for given quarter of year would be the best compromise.

[swkuh]

Historical OOBs (both sides) would IMHO be best for the starts of all scenarios, any length. As the game proceeds there could be variances from history based on each sides performance. How these might be determined is problematic in the extreme, and maybe undeterminable. Who would you want running this war anyway? Adolph/Joe, Stavka/GHQ, Rommel/v. Manstein/Khruschev/Zhukov/??? And could the game code reflect this?

[Icier]

ORIGINAL: el hefe



3. "Free Production" or having units arrive fully kitted is now out. Now, units arrive without equipment when they were officially established and must rely on the production system to equip them. The 501st Heavy Panzer Company, for example, arrives in February 1942 without any tanks in the Axis Reserves box. The intent is to make the Axis and Soviet Strategic Reserves box a way to "store" units off the map to allow for priority refits. The production system has been re-calibrated to allow for historical production.

4. The Soviet system is going to be similar to what WitE did but they will have a historical OOB through 1941. Their new units will also arrive as shells without equipment. To give you a taste of what a true historical Soviet OOB would look like through 1941, I have added the following historical units to the Soviet Strategic Box in 1941 only that didn't exist in WITE:



Trey

I think going with Trey re-calibration along with Michael's request that they stick with the historical OOB would get us much closer to real thing.

[Flaviusx]

I don't save emails, unfortunately.

[HMSWarspite]

ORIGINAL: morvael

The problem with Soviet historical OOB is that it was very loss-driven and different formations may die/survive each time in the game, whereas German OOB is mostly static with very few units lost until 1945 when it no longer matters. So I would think custom/auto building but up to historical limits for given quarter of year would be the best compromise.

That would seem to be the best idea to me. I would also add a refinement for Germany too. Since OOB changes are generally to mitigate shortages or keep the unit count up when manpower declines, I would enforce the order and content of OOB changes but let the German player choose when to implement them. This would probably be streamed by unit type, so you cold select successive infantry ones but not do Panzer ones at all (as a hypothetical illustration). This allows correction for the actual state of the game rather than more enforcement of things out of player control. I am not sure this is necessary with Sov as so much of it is by unit type...

You would probably have to have a minimum interval between selecting OOB changes (say 6months).

[darbycmcd]

We focus a lot on historical vs non for soviet forces, but for me it would be a bigger improvement to allow more flexibility for the Axis. MT's point was that one side can optimize more than the other, which is a totally fair point. But doesn't it make sense to allow both to optimize? Really, the Axis most likely won't be able to build new armor divs, but if they play really well and have low losses, why not? At least be able to have flexibility over support units at least, the ability to raise a few more Tiger Bns if you are playing well would be helpful. It is also possible to react to a Sov player that is more focused than historical, ie if they go crazy with armor, you can raise more AT bns, but if they try to save trucks and so focus on inf, you can raise Art bns. MT is right that it is kind of weird to have very exacting historical accuracy for one side, but allow the other to react to the flow of the game.

[Michael T]

MT is right that it is kind of weird to have very exacting historical accuracy for one side, but allow the other to react to the flow of the game.

This aspect is being overlooked by some.

[MechFO]

ORIGINAL: el hefe
First of all, as per WITE, units are not disbanded on their historical dates unless the units were merged into new units.

In general, great stuff and another big step(s) forward.

I don't understand the above point though, since that was normally due combat losses or to reconstitute other units.

Both cases seem to be already handled by other mechanics.

[MechFO]

ORIGINAL: darbymcd

We focus a lot on historical vs non for soviet forces, but for me it would be a bigger improvement to allow more flexibility for the Axis. MT's point was that one side can optimize more than the other, which is a totally fair point. But doesn't it make sense to allow both to optimize? Really, the Axis most likely won't be able to build new armor divs, but if they play really well and have low losses, why not? At least be able to have flexibility over support units at least, the ability to raise a few more Tiger Bns if you are playing well would be helpful. It is also possible to react to a Sov player that is more focused than historical, ie if they go crazy with armor, you can raise more AT bns, but if they try to save trucks and so focus on inf, you can raise Art bns. MT is right that it is kind of weird to have very exacting historical accuracy for one side, but allow the other to react to the flow of the game.

Indeed, however one must also pay attention to not overloading the abstract production system. An extra tiger bn IMO wouldn't be a problem, because there is a finite number of tigers.

With artillery etc. the case is much less clear cut and this working would depend on the devs getting the Armament points just right, which is very difficult to do, since there are no easy controlling metrics.

[MechFO]

ORIGINAL: morvael

The problem with Soviet historical OOB is that it was very loss-driven and different formations may die/survive each time in the game, whereas German OOB is mostly static with very few units lost until 1945 when it no longer matters. So I would think custom/auto building but up to historical limits for given quarter of year would be the best compromise.

German historic OOB was very much loss/event driven as well. And the above is incorrect, many units were attrited to shells as early as 42/43 and then rebuilt with bn/regiments that were forming or stripped from other units.

This is why I have a problem with the focus on "historic" OOB in a game with such a wide scope, covering such a long period.

Historic OOB was driven by resource availability and events on the ground. Less losses or more resources or different priorities automatically would have led to different "historic" OOB's. Also both sides handled their units in a different manner, Germans at least tried to keep their shells to a certain % of strength, the Soviets only did this very selectively. How to account for both approaches? I think the shell system should help a lot, but it puts a big burden on the economic/production system.

IMO the actual root of the problem is that the production system needs a crutch (by virtue of incomplete and unresearchable information), and historic OOB's are as much a useful guideline as any other, but use it as a guideline, not as gospel.

[morvael]

The road from adjustable OOB leads to adjustable production leads to adjustable technology. I think this is more what Hearts of Iron series is about, but for this game the designers choose a different way. I do like building my own army, so I miss this part.

[RKhan]

ORIGINAL: morvael

The road from adjustable OOB leads to adjustable production leads to adjustable technology. I think this is more what Hearts of Iron series is about, but for this game the designers choose a different way. I do like building my own army, so I miss this part.

Not necessarily, and I am glad this is not Hearts of Iron.

I agree with those who say both sides ought to have more options to customise. But I think a free build OOB would be easy to implement as a set up option. Just remove the reinforcement schedule and give each side more AP to compensate. Production will still ultimately limit and constrain what can be built.

This would of course work better for the Soviets as they simply build more units.