Matrix Games Forums

Forums  Register  Login  Photo Gallery  Member List  Search  Calendars  FAQ 

My Profile  Inbox  Address Book  My Subscription  My Forums  Log Out

RE: Hetzer

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

Logged in as: Guest
Users viewing this topic: none
  Printable Version
All Forums >> [New Releases from Matrix Games] >> Gary Grigsby's War in the East Series >> RE: Hetzer Page: <<   < prev  1 [2]
Login
Message << Older Topic   Newer Topic >>
RE: Hetzer - 1/2/2012 9:31:00 PM   
RCHarmon


Posts: 312
Joined: 1/19/2011
Status: offline
How can the game have the level of detail that it has and those numbers may or may not be arbitrary?  Do those numbers mean something or not?  

(in reply to Q-Ball)
Post #: 31
RE: Hetzer - 1/2/2012 9:38:31 PM   
alfonso

 

Posts: 470
Joined: 10/22/2001
From: Palma de Mallorca
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: RCH

How can the game have the level of detail that it has and those numbers may or may not be arbitrary?  Do those numbers mean something or not?  


The total numbers are not arbitrary. In this case historicity is controlled by total production and by OOB, not by monthly out-put.

(in reply to RCHarmon)
Post #: 32
RE: Hetzer - 1/2/2012 9:46:16 PM   
alfonso

 

Posts: 470
Joined: 10/22/2001
From: Palma de Mallorca
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Q-Ball

Back to the Hetzer: If someone can find a reliable source that the Hetzer was deployed to STUG units, or other units, besides the TOE in the game, then we should specify in this post, and I bet it will be researched and corrected in time.


I have found this
http://www.pegatiros.com/reportajes/vehiculos/hetzer/index.htm

Look at the bottom of the page.

Maybe this makes sense for TOE freak...errr, experts...(I can help with the Spanish...)

It seems as if the Hetzer was being delivered to PanzerJager units till the end of the war. I do not know if it is possible in the game to have mixed PanzerJager Battalions (Heavy/Light), with some companies being equipped with Hetzers

(in reply to Q-Ball)
Post #: 33
RE: Hetzer - 1/2/2012 10:28:29 PM   
heliodorus04


Posts: 1627
Joined: 11/1/2008
From: Denver Colorado
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: 2ndACR

Here you have the age old simulation versus history argument. This has been in every WW2 game I can think of.

Fixed withdrawls, fixed upgrade paths etc.

I would love to have the freedom to choose which of my div withdraw. The 10th Panzer may have withdrawn in real life for rebuild, but in my game it might be my strongest Div or the one holding a critical junction.



This is as poignantly noted in strategic terms as I could hope to tell it.
THIS is a key part of the many-faceted "Germany gets screwed because it's Germany" aspect that goes so oft-unnoticed or unremarked upon.

Flavius once noted somewhere to skip the 42a and 42b Rifle Corps (forgive me if it was 43, or mech or tank or cav or some such, but it was Flavius sharing efficiency pointers with a new Soviet player). The notion was that you're better off keeping your divisions as is until the 42c corps comes on line later in the year, because it's far more effective in the field.

Well, Germany doesn't get that benefit, because it's Germany, and it is sunk into the stovepipe TOE changes. Germany doesn't even have the OPTION to improve over history here.

To reiterate a point I want all German-playing players to understand, Germans pay at a rough minimum, 350% (three-hundred-fifty-percent) to 700% (seven-hundred percent) the AP cost (averaged) to move a division to a new HQ than does Soviet. The cost for moving a Soviet combat corps is 10-15 times as much as a Soviet division (converting to German perspective, corps cost about 75% to 150% more to re-assign as German divisions cost).

So where historically, the Soviets were fielding less effective corps because they hadn't realized it could be improved on yet (or they had no ability to improve on it). The real Soviet army was paying 3-5 times as much 'theoretical AP' (since there was no such currency in the real war) to move combat corps around (compared to the 3 component divisions/brigades). Soviet PLAYERS know to wait for the 42c Corps coming on line; this conversion will save them in combat effectiveness and a veritable fortune over what their historic predecessors would have paid in AP.

Here we have a simple TOE change mechanic that is, when viewed from German perspective, punishing you twice simply for being German. Soviets gain effectiveness by skipping bad TOEs, and the resultant cost savings benefits their army in AP accumulations as well.

Now, just the related note on withdrawing divisions: As 2nd ACR notes, maybe 10th Panzer is the unit in position to attack Moscow; maybe it's defied the odds and risen from 70 morale to 86, god forbid. If it's on the withdrawl schedule, there is no room to debate. Soviets, meanwhile, have the luxury of knowing how to qualify a unit for guard status, and can withdraw qualifying units from the line, pay the far cheaper cost to re-assign to a reserve area HQ (where they can go on refit and gain morale up to about 60, which I'm not going into here...) to wait until they convert to guard.

German players don't even have the OPTION of selecting a unit to withdraw themselves; even if the paremeters were restrictive (must be morale 80+, TOE 90+, etc.) it would be preferable to the current system.

Regardless of the problems with the current system favoring the attack, there are competitive imbalances in game mechanics that are only going to get worse once Soviet players know fully how to exploit them, because there are no counters to gameplay constraint.

This is well before we factor in the fact that the Soviets can create units and the German cannot.

< Message edited by heliodorus04 -- 1/2/2012 10:30:32 PM >


_____________________________

Spring 2018-Playing: Demyansk Shield: Frozen Fortress; Advanced Squad Leader,
Reading: Bonhoeffer
Rulebooks: ASL (always ASL), Holland'44, Demyansk Shield: Frozen Fortress

(in reply to 2ndACR)
Post #: 34
RE: Hetzer - 1/2/2012 11:29:28 PM   
2ndACR


Posts: 5659
Joined: 8/31/2003
From: Irving,Tx
Status: offline
Well said.

I do not want to create new units per se. I would just love to have options. Let me choose what div to withdraw, just tell me 2-3 turns in advance what needs to be withdrawn. IE Turn 22 you must withdraw 1 SS Motorized Div, 1 Infantry Div. But let me choose which ones that go bye bye. If the situation is critical, let me pay a 100 AP cost per turn to keep the said units. Of course this could easily snowball and force me to withdraw 4-5 units all at once because I sucked my AP pool dry.

Let me choose to upgrade/downgrade/manually select my armor upgrades......within reason stated above.

Don't punish me with historical TOE downgrades. I know someone was working on a TOE neutral mod after release. Which would be playable if you ask me. But I lost track of it and don't know if it ever got finished.

My biggest gripes are seeing a couple hundred tanks/stugs sitting in the pools and unable to use them. Just give us the PDU option and I could live with that. Next would be the TOE downgrades over time.

WITP had withdraw dates too, but you pay a steep price keeping said ships longer than you should.

The war gaming gods are tired of hearing me beg and I am running out of kids to sacrifice.

(in reply to heliodorus04)
Post #: 35
RE: Hetzer - 1/3/2012 12:48:19 AM   
vaned74

 

Posts: 387
Joined: 11/17/2008
Status: offline
In reply to the comments about production being more of an average over time (but totals to historical levels), ie the tanks are actually arriving earlier in quantity than in real life.

Agreed. This is true as best I can tell from looking at logged Hetzer deliveries someone posted earlier. However, two points need to be made:

1) in the case of the Hetzer, the TOEs of the JPz battalions all upgrading to Heavy TD only types is simply a mistake and historically inaccurate. Hetzers were clearly delivered in 44 to independent JPz battalions.

2) if we take production as an average, ie typically arriving earlier in the pool than units received vehicles(planes), then we have an unbalancing game mechanic in that the Soviet side can create new units to consume the early production and the Germans cannot react.

Simply said, allowing one to select TOE upgrades off/on via a flag (as can be done for aircraft models) would be the easiest fix.

(in reply to 2ndACR)
Post #: 36
RE: Hetzer - 1/3/2012 12:49:50 AM   
vaned74

 

Posts: 387
Joined: 11/17/2008
Status: offline
And I would say, if the German player reaches 45 in reasonable shape, why would he opt to upgrade to the historical upgrade of the Panzer division to 45 TOE? This was a wartime expedient brought on by shortages of all manner of mechanized equipment. If the German is not experiencing this, why should the Wermacht be neutered?

(in reply to vaned74)
Post #: 37
RE: Hetzer - 1/3/2012 2:45:06 AM   
Wild


Posts: 317
Joined: 12/10/2007
Status: offline
Wow!! I just read this thread and it deals with a lot of the issues that have stopped me from playing the game.

Vanned74,Helio,jzardos,2ndACR and others, you guys have it exactly right!! I strongly support your ideas. It seems such a shame that these issues have not even been addressed by the devs.

I have always supported 2by3 to the extreme but i am extremely disappointed that crucial and in my opinion game destroying factors have not been addressed in the rush to move on to WitW.

2by3,please at least attempt to fix these production issues. How can i go on to support the rest of your development line when issues such as these are not even responded to by the devs? Right now i have gone back to playing my favorite game War in Russia,I would like to move forward but it seems that concerns fundamental to me and others are not being taken seriously.

Please forgive the tone of my post but it reflects (maybe unfairly) my huge expectations that have not been lived up too. Please make the Germans fun to play like WiR.


< Message edited by Wild -- 1/3/2012 2:46:01 AM >

(in reply to Q-Ball)
Post #: 38
RE: Hetzer - 1/3/2012 12:21:13 PM   
Encircled


Posts: 1735
Joined: 12/30/2010
From: Northern England
Status: offline
They are fun to play



_____________________________


(in reply to Wild)
Post #: 39
RE: Hetzer - 1/3/2012 2:49:50 PM   
cavalry

 

Posts: 2367
Joined: 9/2/2003
From: Sampford Spiney Devon UK
Status: offline
Seems to me its like WITP / AE - what was learned in WITP made AE so good. So maybe WITW engine etc which will have to be pretty good will be retro fitted to this ( unlike AE - WITP).

I for one cannot get my head round no replay and I think that will be a breaker if you want the whole of Europe. No replay favours the attacker

Cav

(in reply to Encircled)
Post #: 40
RE: Hetzer - 1/3/2012 2:56:10 PM   
bdtj1815

 

Posts: 108
Joined: 1/25/2006
Status: offline
Another thing I am finding incredibly annoying in my present game is the way aircraft are sent to Axis Allies. Over 200 Ju.87D's have been sent to Rumania by turn 18 which with JU.87B production stopped means my tactical bomber units are just wasting away.

I can find no evidence that the Germans sent newer models to Allies before re-equipping their own units.

Cannot the player have control over this as well.

(in reply to Encircled)
Post #: 41
RE: Hetzer - 1/3/2012 5:41:27 PM   
Denniss

 

Posts: 6359
Joined: 1/10/2002
From: Germany, Hannover (region)
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: bdtj1815

Another thing I am finding incredibly annoying in my present game is the way aircraft are sent to Axis Allies. Over 200 Ju.87D's have been sent to Rumania by turn 18 which with JU.87B production stopped means my tactical bomber units are just wasting away.

I can find no evidence that the Germans sent newer models to Allies before re-equipping their own units.

Cannot the player have control over this as well.
A work-around is already in progress by delaying the availability date of the foreign version to one or two months behind the german version.

(in reply to bdtj1815)
Post #: 42
RE: Hetzer - 1/3/2012 7:17:23 PM   
heliodorus04


Posts: 1627
Joined: 11/1/2008
From: Denver Colorado
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Denniss


quote:

ORIGINAL: bdtj1815

Another thing I am finding incredibly annoying in my present game is the way aircraft are sent to Axis Allies. Over 200 Ju.87D's have been sent to Rumania by turn 18 which with JU.87B production stopped means my tactical bomber units are just wasting away.

I can find no evidence that the Germans sent newer models to Allies before re-equipping their own units.

Cannot the player have control over this as well.
A work-around is already in progress by delaying the availability date of the foreign version to one or two months behind the german version.



This will still be a non-impactful solution.
Elements that Germany NEEDS will still go to lesser powers, where they will be pooled and unused.

German export to minors needs to be disabled for the entire game. The Soviets can simply avoid making the less effective units and SUs to maximize efficiency of their army.
Germany needs to compete with that: shutting off foreign export will be a step in the right direction to bringing Germany's competitive balance up in the production game.

_____________________________

Spring 2018-Playing: Demyansk Shield: Frozen Fortress; Advanced Squad Leader,
Reading: Bonhoeffer
Rulebooks: ASL (always ASL), Holland'44, Demyansk Shield: Frozen Fortress

(in reply to Denniss)
Post #: 43
RE: Hetzer - 1/6/2012 1:51:06 AM   
Great_Ajax


Posts: 4084
Joined: 10/28/2002
Status: offline
Me and Jim are working on some OB solutions to the panzerjager supply issue. Some things we are discussing:

1. Changing the Hetzer and Jpz IV to assault guns types to allow them to be substituted into StuG Brigades and line units when there aren't enough StuGs.

2. Update the JagdPanther Battalion OB in late 44 so that the unit has 1 x Company of JagdPanther and 2 x Companies of Assault Guns (StuG, Hetzer, or Jpz IV)

3. Additional OB for a Marder Jpz Battalion that extends to July 44 and then transitions to Hetzers (there were 6 Hetzer Jpz Battalions historically).

4. Adding a handful of Jagd Abteilungs that were hastily created in 45 that were equipped with Hetzers.

Trey

_____________________________

"You want mercy!? I'm chaotic neutral!"

WiTE Scenario Designer
WitW Scenario/Data Team Lead
Sabre 21's perpetual arch-nemisis

(in reply to heliodorus04)
Post #: 44
RE: Hetzer - 1/6/2012 7:38:35 AM   
PKH

 

Posts: 242
Joined: 11/17/2011
Status: offline
It seems to me like you could use a more flexible system for picking of units, which would in this instance prioritize Hetzer in some slots if they're available. Misclassifying units really is a hack, and hacks have a tendency to come back to bite one in the ass eventually. IMO, the way to handle it is to make a system which imitates the real decision process that was used.

(in reply to Great_Ajax)
Post #: 45
RE: Hetzer - 1/6/2012 7:39:15 AM   
PKH

 

Posts: 242
Joined: 11/17/2011
Status: offline
*double post removed*

(in reply to Great_Ajax)
Post #: 46
RE: Hetzer - 1/6/2012 11:07:52 AM   
veji1

 

Posts: 1022
Joined: 7/9/2005
Status: offline
Just to chime in, I really think the best solution would be a form of PDU allowing the German player to tinker with his force composition based on the equipement at his disposal, the way the war is going, and his operationnal preferences. there would be no change at the divisionnal level and above in terms of overall numbers, but SUs could be built independently based on the equipment availability, and TOE adjusted.

Let the Axis player decide more, while staying overall in a realistic scale of OOB. And regarding dates of equipment availability compared to pool accumulation because of an averaged production system, just instate a start date before which, although the element is produced, it cannot be used.

Such modifications would not massively alter the balance of the game, just give the Germans a better ability to maximise the way the organise their forces. and in the end it will still be a lot more realistic than Japanese aircraft production capabilities in AE !

_____________________________

Adieu Ô Dieu odieux... signé Adam

(in reply to PKH)
Post #: 47
RE: Hetzer - 1/6/2012 9:42:35 PM   
Q-Ball


Posts: 6370
Joined: 6/25/2002
From: Chicago, Illinois
Status: online

quote:

ORIGINAL: el hefe

Me and Jim are working on some OB solutions to the panzerjager supply issue. Some things we are discussing:

1. Changing the Hetzer and Jpz IV to assault guns types to allow them to be substituted into StuG Brigades and line units when there aren't enough StuGs.

2. Update the JagdPanther Battalion OB in late 44 so that the unit has 1 x Company of JagdPanther and 2 x Companies of Assault Guns (StuG, Hetzer, or Jpz IV)

3. Additional OB for a Marder Jpz Battalion that extends to July 44 and then transitions to Hetzers (there were 6 Hetzer Jpz Battalions historically).

4. Adding a handful of Jagd Abteilungs that were hastily created in 45 that were equipped with Hetzers.

Trey


Seems like a good solution. Right on Wikipedia, there is a photograph of a Hetzer belonging to 8ss Cav; in the game, there is only STUGs in it's OOB. Maybe the photo is wrong, but I think Hetzers were used alot more than there is OOB space in the game.

_____________________________


(in reply to Great_Ajax)
Post #: 48
RE: Hetzer - 1/6/2012 10:12:05 PM   
Omat


Posts: 2145
Joined: 8/18/2004
Status: online

quote:

ORIGINAL: Q-Ball


Seems like a good solution. Right on Wikipedia, there is a photograph of a Hetzer belonging to 8ss Cav; in the game, there is only STUGs in it's OOB. Maybe the photo is wrong, but I think Hetzers were used alot more than there is OOB space in the game.



Hello

AUGUST 1944

8. SS-Kav.Div. 'Florian Geyer' = 14 Hetzer ab Heeres-Zeugamt. am 26. Aug. 1944 - 1. oder 2./SS-Pz.Jg.Abt. 8

source: (the last list (have to scroll down))

http://www.lexikon-der-wehrmacht.de/Waffen/pz38-R.htm

Hope it helps...

Omat


_____________________________

"The whole problem with the world is that fools and fanatics are always so certain of themselves, and wiser people so full of doubts."
Bertrand Russell

(in reply to Q-Ball)
Post #: 49
RE: Hetzer - 1/6/2012 11:30:12 PM   
Great_Ajax


Posts: 4084
Joined: 10/28/2002
Status: offline
Me and Jim aren't programmers. We just look for data fixes that can be applied to help in various ways.

Trey

quote:

ORIGINAL: PKH

It seems to me like you could use a more flexible system for picking of units, which would in this instance prioritize Hetzer in some slots if they're available. Misclassifying units really is a hack, and hacks have a tendency to come back to bite one in the ass eventually. IMO, the way to handle it is to make a system which imitates the real decision process that was used.



_____________________________

"You want mercy!? I'm chaotic neutral!"

WiTE Scenario Designer
WitW Scenario/Data Team Lead
Sabre 21's perpetual arch-nemisis

(in reply to PKH)
Post #: 50
RE: Hetzer - 1/21/2012 6:40:18 PM   
TAIL_GUNNER

 

Posts: 245
Joined: 6/14/2004
Status: offline
I see in KStN 1149 - Sturmgeschützabteilung (in Pz.Jg.Abt.) (10 od. 14 Geschütze) dated 2/1/1944

It specifically states the equipment used can be Sturmgeschütz III, Panzerjäger IV, or Panzerjäger 38.

Just thought I'd throw that out.

(in reply to Great_Ajax)
Post #: 51
RE: Hetzer - 1/21/2012 11:47:54 PM   
wulfgar

 

Posts: 61
Joined: 12/29/2011
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Omat


quote:

ORIGINAL: Q-Ball


Seems like a good solution. Right on Wikipedia, there is a photograph of a Hetzer belonging to 8ss Cav; in the game, there is only STUGs in it's OOB. Maybe the photo is wrong, but I think Hetzers were used alot more than there is OOB space in the game.



Hello

AUGUST 1944

8. SS-Kav.Div. 'Florian Geyer' = 14 Hetzer ab Heeres-Zeugamt. am 26. Aug. 1944 - 1. oder 2./SS-Pz.Jg.Abt. 8

source: (the last list (have to scroll down))

http://www.lexikon-der-wehrmacht.de/Waffen/pz38-R.htm

Hope it helps...

Omat



Google can translate this sort of stuff to english.

http://translate.google.com/translate?hl=en&sl=de&u=http://www.lexikon-der-wehrmacht.de/Waffen/Pz38.htm&ei=Z0kbT-vAE46ziQeoxNCXCw&sa=X&oi=translate&ct=result&resnum=4&ved=0CEAQ7gEwAw&prev=/search%3Fq%3DPanzer%2B35%28t%29%2Bund%2B38%28t%29%26hl%3Den%26prmd%3Dimvns

(in reply to Omat)
Post #: 52
RE: Hetzer - 1/23/2012 7:25:59 PM   
TAIL_GUNNER

 

Posts: 245
Joined: 6/14/2004
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: TAIL_GUNNER

I see in KStN 1149 - Sturmgeschützabteilung (in Pz.Jg.Abt.) (10 od. 14 Geschütze) dated 2/1/1944

It specifically states the equipment used can be Sturmgeschütz III, Panzerjäger IV, or Panzerjäger 38.

Just thought I'd throw that out.



Disregard the above...I just realized the Panzerjäger 38 is actually the Marder version...my mistake.

Hetzer is called Jagdpanzer 38.

(in reply to TAIL_GUNNER)
Post #: 53
Page:   <<   < prev  1 [2]
All Forums >> [New Releases from Matrix Games] >> Gary Grigsby's War in the East Series >> RE: Hetzer Page: <<   < prev  1 [2]
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

0.141