Matrix Games Forums

To End All Wars Releasing on Steam! Slitherine is recruiting: Programmers requiredPandora: Eclipse of Nashira gets release dateCommunity impressions of To End All WarsAgeod's To End All Wars is now availableTo End All Wars is now available!Deal of the Week: Field of GloryTo End All Wars: Video, AAR and Interview!Ageod's To End All Wars: Video, AAR and Interview!To End All Wars: Artillery
Forums  Register  Login  Photo Gallery  Member List  Search  Calendars  FAQ 

My Profile  Inbox  Address Book  My Subscription  My Forums  Log Out

RE: Comprehensive Wishlist

 
View related threads: (in this forum | in all forums)

Logged in as: Guest
Users viewing this topic: none
  Printable Version
All Forums >> [Current Games From Matrix.] >> [World War II] >> Norm Koger's The Operational Art Of War III >> Scenario Design >> RE: Comprehensive Wishlist Page: <<   < prev  57 58 59 60 [61]
Login
Message << Older Topic   Newer Topic >>
RE: Comprehensive Wishlist - 7/19/2013 2:20:09 AM   
sPzAbt653


Posts: 2770
Joined: 5/3/2007
From: east coast, usa
Status: offline
I ran it thru as the Allies vs. the PO and got a significant victory. I didn't find it that easy, but I don't think I'm the best player either. I can send you the end file if you like to see those.

If you hadn't seen them, a couple sites that list a lot of the strongpoints are :

http://bunkersite.com/index.php
http://www.atlantikwall.org.uk/index.htm

The stuff isn't organized the way we'd like it to be, but I spent some time going thru them to find stuff I could add to my scenario. I also got a little booklet by Steven Zaloga called The Atlantic Wall, it was a decent way to cross reference those two sites.

On review, I might say that the Allied movement allowances are too high. I know the Americans could always find enough trucks to motorize an infantry division, but the thought of battalions loading into trucks and driving thru the bocage and marshes doesn't seem right. Similarly, the British never did anything bold. Even during Goodwood the 51st Div sat at the start line for 'protection' while the tanks struggled without infantry support.

Thanks for the nice scenario




Attachment (1)

(in reply to Brett Turner)
Post #: 1801
RE: Comprehensive Wishlist - 7/19/2013 3:14:21 AM   
Brett Turner

 

Posts: 19
Joined: 9/10/2008
Status: offline
Thank you for the good words. I'm glad you didn't find it terribly unbalanced. Version 3.0, played in TOAW 3.4, is pretty unbalanced toward the Allies when the PO plays itself; the Allies almost always win.

I'm testing Curtis Lemay's notion of droppoing British formation proficiencies to model British unwillingness to take casualties, and it is working pretty well, the British war machine has finally slowed down some. PO vs. PO is now about 50% draw, 50% Allied victory. I'm getting there.

It will be interesting to see some human testing, I have a sense that the PO attacks better than it defends, but I'm not 100% sure.

Thank you also for the sites, I will check them out.

--Brett

(in reply to sPzAbt653)
Post #: 1802
RE: Comprehensive Wishlist - 7/19/2013 8:36:45 AM   
Oberst_Klink

 

Posts: 1299
Joined: 2/10/2008
From: Germany
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Brett Turner

Thank you for the good words. I'm glad you didn't find it terribly unbalanced. Version 3.0, played in TOAW 3.4, is pretty unbalanced toward the Allies when the PO plays itself; the Allies almost always win.

I'm testing Curtis Lemay's notion of droppoing British formation proficiencies to model British unwillingness to take casualties, and it is working pretty well, the British war machine has finally slowed down some. PO vs. PO is now about 50% draw, 50% Allied victory. I'm getting there.

It will be interesting to see some human testing, I have a sense that the PO attacks better than it defends, but I'm not 100% sure.

Thank you also for the sites, I will check them out.

--Brett

Sign me up for the PBEM or Beta testing, aye?

Klink, Oberst
@Stalino, LwKdo Don

_____________________________

Ceterum censeo Carthaginem esse delendam
(Marcus Porcius Cato Censorius)

Visit the Gefechtsstand!

(in reply to Brett Turner)
Post #: 1803
RE: Comprehensive Wishlist - 7/19/2013 8:21:52 PM   
HPT KUNZ

 

Posts: 172
Joined: 7/4/2002
From: near Philadelphia
Status: offline
Brett, et al, may I suggest we move this to its own thread in SCENARIO DESIGN? Great scenario when it came out, and I am so glad to see Brett taking up the ball again. I started work on a .mod that has tried to tone done the Allies- decreased movement to 80%, decreased initial Allied landings to the forces that actually reached the beaches (especially tanks in the first wave), and decreased Allied reinforcement rates. Brett, I would be happen to send you a rough draft via PM...

signed
Kunz, HPTM

_____________________________

signed
Kunz, HPTM

"Dedicated to the Allied and German soldiers who fought, bled, froze and died for their countries." by Trevor N.DuPuy, in Hitler's Last Gamble.

(in reply to Oberst_Klink)
Post #: 1804
RE: Comprehensive Wishlist - 8/4/2013 1:01:28 AM   
Brett Turner

 

Posts: 19
Joined: 9/10/2008
Status: offline
Two Weeks In Normandy, version 4.00 Beta 1, is now available.

I have created a discussion thread in the Scenario Design forum.

Thank you all again for your interest and suggestions!


--Brett Turner

(in reply to HPT KUNZ)
Post #: 1805
RE: Comprehensive Wishlist - 8/10/2013 12:32:35 AM   
ColinWright

 

Posts: 2600
Joined: 10/13/2005
Status: offline
quote:

On review, I might say that the Allied movement allowances are too high. I know the Americans could always find enough trucks to motorize an infantry division, but the thought of battalions loading into trucks and driving thru the bocage and marshes doesn't seem right. Similarly, the British never did anything bold. Even during Goodwood the 51st Div sat at the start line for 'protection' while the tanks struggled without infantry support.


There's a big difference between troops that actually kept their vehicles in combat (panzergrenadiers, 'motor infantry' battalions, etc) and those that merely used trucks to get to the battlefield.

The latter would advance, fight, etc on foot, as a rule.

One thing you can do that I make use of in various scenarios is to regard truck movement of this kind as rail movement. I've actually edited the sound tile and altered the 'rail' tile to make it tidier in some scenarios -- but you wouldn't really need to do that.

Make Allied infantry units truckless. Then give them a hell of a rail movement allowance and a very quick rate of rail repair. Obviously, that would create some other problems -- but it might turn out to be a net plus.

For one, looking beyond just this scenario, one can limit just how many Allied divisions can go charging off across France. Historically, some were in fact stripped of their trucks in order to make a rapid advance possible.

More generally, though, we need dedicated truck units. Some way has to be found to simulate the real situation that existed outside the American Army. Almost all forces could move part of their infantry by truck -- and they could vary which part. However, they couldn't move all of it at once. The British army, for example, in at least the earlier part of the war, provided enough trucks to lift any one of the three brigades in a division at a time -- when Slim was advancing through Iraq, some of his troops rode, and the rest just stayed behind. German infantry units advancing through Russia in 1941-42 habitually formed a 'schnell abteilung' that would fully motorize an advance detachment whilst the rest of the division trailed along as best it could.

...I suppose that the most practical way of simulating both the value and the limitations of this would be to allow infantry to entruck or detruck -- so long as they weren't adjacent to an enemy unit.

...or some such programmable expedient. The point would be to confer (a) flexibility as to which units get a ride, whilst (b) preventing them from being panzergrenadiers. Perhaps 'entrucked' units would automatically detruck when they moved adjacent to an enemy unit -- and could only entruck at the start of their move. That should prove fairly easy to introduce -- and of course players can always stick with the current arrangement if it doesn't work for their purposes.

< Message edited by ColinWright -- 8/10/2013 12:42:41 AM >


_____________________________

"...this country belongs to us, to the white man."

-- Israeli Interior Minister Eli Yishai, interview published on 6/3/2012. Interesting world.

(in reply to sPzAbt653)
Post #: 1806
RE: Comprehensive Wishlist - 8/10/2013 1:16:27 AM   
Brett Turner

 

Posts: 19
Joined: 9/10/2008
Status: offline
Would be be sufficient simply to allow exchange of equipment between two units which start the turn in the same hex?

That plus a few dummy truck units (e.g., 1 jeep and 0/50 trucks) would allow shuttling of trucks between different divisions on different turns.

I haven't peered inside the combat resolution black box---does the mere presence of trucks (not halftracks or APCs) in the unit cause the infantry to fight as panzergrenadiers?

(in reply to ColinWright)
Post #: 1807
RE: Comprehensive Wishlist - 8/10/2013 1:43:47 AM   
Shazman

 

Posts: 118
Joined: 1/4/2009
Status: offline
Trucks in TOAW is an abstract term. Could be one, five or ten. Halftracks are also abstract when moving things like guns and troops. But when involved in combat one halftrack is one halftrack. Same with jeeps and other vehicles. So that one jeep might move an entire battalion. A halftrack is abstract there but not abstract there. It's a real mess. Been some discussion about the abstract truck thing before. Can't recall who or where.

(in reply to Brett Turner)
Post #: 1808
RE: Comprehensive Wishlist - 8/10/2013 2:33:12 AM   
Brett Turner

 

Posts: 19
Joined: 9/10/2008
Status: offline
If a halftrack is a halftrack in combat, then a truck is a truck; and since a truck is unarmed, trucks don't increase the combat effectiveness of anything else, e.g., infantry, in the same unit.

Correct? If so, all we really need to model a truck pool is to allow transfers of the same equipment (trucks) between units in the same square, perhaps plus a few dummy units to take the trucks from point A to point B without any real combat units have to go with them.

Equipment transfers aren't my #1 priority, but they would be nice to have.


(in reply to Shazman)
Post #: 1809
RE: Comprehensive Wishlist - 8/10/2013 11:35:50 AM   
sPzAbt653


Posts: 2770
Joined: 5/3/2007
From: east coast, usa
Status: offline
quote:

since a truck is unarmed, trucks don't increase the combat effectiveness of anything else


Check that, because Trucks (and any Transport Asset) add to the Defense Value of the unit that they are in >>




Attachment (1)

(in reply to Brett Turner)
Post #: 1810
RE: Comprehensive Wishlist - 8/10/2013 3:03:15 PM   
Brett Turner

 

Posts: 19
Joined: 9/10/2008
Status: offline
For a 1 defense strength, is the addition significant?

(in reply to sPzAbt653)
Post #: 1811
RE: Comprehensive Wishlist - 8/11/2013 1:00:22 AM   
sPzAbt653


Posts: 2770
Joined: 5/3/2007
From: east coast, usa
Status: offline
I have 'truck' units in one of my scenarios that contain 1,000 trucks and they have a defense strength of 27. Halftracks and carriers contribute more.

(in reply to Brett Turner)
Post #: 1812
RE: Comprehensive Wishlist - 11/13/2013 4:44:56 PM   
tcarusil

 

Posts: 80
Joined: 5/1/2011
Status: offline
This may have been mentioned before, or worse yet may already be a feature I have not discovered, but it would be nice if there was a screen, maybe the OOB, where one could tell which units had movement points left. I keep losing units in the stacks.

TomC

(in reply to sPzAbt653)
Post #: 1813
RE: Comprehensive Wishlist - 11/13/2013 11:16:59 PM   
Curtis Lemay


Posts: 6930
Joined: 9/17/2004
From: Houston, TX
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: tcarusil

This may have been mentioned before, or worse yet may already be a feature I have not discovered, but it would be nice if there was a screen, maybe the OOB, where one could tell which units had movement points left. I keep losing units in the stacks.


Each Formation Report shows its units' MPs remaining. But you can also set the Icon Display to Movement. Then the unit icons show MPs remaining.

(in reply to tcarusil)
Post #: 1814
RE: Comprehensive Wishlist - 11/14/2013 4:47:40 PM   
ogar

 

Posts: 221
Joined: 9/6/2009
Status: offline
quote:

This may have been mentioned before, or worse yet may already be a feature I have not discovered, but it would be nice if there was a screen, maybe the OOB, where one could tell which units had movement points left. I keep losing units in the stacks.

TomC


Beside the Form Report, I've gotten into the habit of using the hot-key, C, to view the group in the stack, and then running the cursor over one or more units for a more detailed selection - this shows up in usual spot, upper right corner of the screen.  Usually I do this in combat planning, but sometimes when trying to plan movement, and make sure those sluggards with only 5 MPs get the best use out of those MPs.

(in reply to Curtis Lemay)
Post #: 1815
RE: Comprehensive Wishlist - 11/14/2013 5:14:04 PM   
Lobster


Posts: 159
Joined: 8/8/2013
From: Third rock from the Sun.
Status: offline
Can we please have some toggles in the editor. Especially auto contour off/on. I am constantly having to change that one.

(in reply to Silvanski)
Post #: 1816
RE: Comprehensive Wishlist - 11/16/2013 3:08:34 PM   
tcarusil

 

Posts: 80
Joined: 5/1/2011
Status: offline
Curtis and Ogar: Both suggestions are good, but a column on the OOB would be even better. One stop viewing.

TomC

(in reply to ogar)
Post #: 1817
RE: Comprehensive Wishlist - 1/3/2014 10:40:57 PM   
Rom3l

 

Posts: 20
Joined: 1/20/2011
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: tcarusil

Curtis and Ogar: Both suggestions are good, but a column on the OOB would be even better. One stop viewing.

TomC


+1

(in reply to tcarusil)
Post #: 1818
RE: Comprehensive Wishlist - 2/20/2014 5:27:35 PM   
ColinWright

 

Posts: 2600
Joined: 10/13/2005
Status: offline
" US ranks low in LGBT military index

US placed 40 out of 103 armed forces based on inclusion of lesbian, gay, bisexual, transgender service members..."



Any chance of getting a 'force LGBT compliance rating' into the next update?

< Message edited by ColinWright -- 2/20/2014 6:36:06 PM >


_____________________________

"...this country belongs to us, to the white man."

-- Israeli Interior Minister Eli Yishai, interview published on 6/3/2012. Interesting world.

(in reply to Rom3l)
Post #: 1819
RE: Comprehensive Wishlist - 2/21/2014 9:16:54 PM   
shunwick


Posts: 1706
Joined: 10/15/2006
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: ColinWright
Any chance of getting a 'force LGBT compliance rating' into the next update?


Colin,

You just made my day.

Best wishes,
Steve

_____________________________

I love the smell of TOAW in the morning...

(in reply to ColinWright)
Post #: 1820
Page:   <<   < prev  57 58 59 60 [61]
All Forums >> [Current Games From Matrix.] >> [World War II] >> Norm Koger's The Operational Art Of War III >> Scenario Design >> RE: Comprehensive Wishlist Page: <<   < prev  57 58 59 60 [61]
Jump to:





New Messages No New Messages
Hot Topic w/ New Messages Hot Topic w/o New Messages
Locked w/ New Messages Locked w/o New Messages
 Post New Thread
 Reply to Message
 Post New Poll
 Submit Vote
 Delete My Own Post
 Delete My Own Thread
 Rate Posts


Forum Software © ASPPlayground.NET Advanced Edition 2.4.5 ANSI

0.127