Matrix Games Forums

Space Program Manager gets mini-site and Twitch SessionBuzz Aldrin: Ask Me Anything (AMA) on redditDeal of the week Fantasy Kommander: Eukarion WarsSpace Program Manager Launch Contest Announced!Battle Academy 2 is out now on iPad!A closer look at rockets in Space Program ManagerDeal of the Week - Pride of NationsA new update for Piercing Fortress EuropaNew screenshots for War in the West!Pike & Shot is now available!
Forums  Register  Login  Photo Gallery  Member List  Search  Calendars  FAQ 

My Profile  Inbox  Address Book  My Subscription  My Forums  Log Out

Suggestion on withdrawls

 
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 >> Suggestion on withdrawls Page: [1]
Login
Message << Older Topic   Newer Topic >>
Suggestion on withdrawls - 2/22/2012 3:16:38 PM   
cavalry

 

Posts: 1877
Joined: 9/2/2003
From: Blackboys East Sussex UK
Status: online
I had an idea after seeing my lines open up with units vanishing from the front at a CRITICAL moment.

A suggestion would be units in contact with the enemy in either turn do not withdraw but you loose some VP instead??? Soonest you can you let them go - units could be highlighted in some colour warning you?

cav
Post #: 1
RE: Suggestion on withdrawls - 2/22/2012 3:36:31 PM   
Von Hindenburg

 

Posts: 118
Joined: 11/15/2006
Status: offline
Or instead of losing VP, how about an increasing amount of APs?

(in reply to cavalry)
Post #: 2
RE: Suggestion on withdrawls - 2/22/2012 5:02:56 PM   
JAMiAM

 

Posts: 6149
Joined: 2/8/2004
Status: offline
Or, you could, once per turn, take advantage of one of the game's features to check your lines for units that are imminently getting ready to withdraw. Those red boxes stand out pretty well, and a quick 10 second scan of your front lines once per turn will avoid having gaps suddenly open up.

Free recon for you, Brad...




Attachment (1)

(in reply to Von Hindenburg)
Post #: 3
RE: Suggestion on withdrawls - 2/22/2012 5:12:22 PM   
Dark_Star


Posts: 49
Joined: 1/21/2012
From: Flatland
Status: offline
This brings up an interesting point, withdraws and new arrives were based on historical events which are not necessarily happening in any one WITE game. It seems most withdraws were based events outside a WITE game. The game has a good method for warning and noting which unit is to be withdrawn. but this problem should be solved as more of War in Europe is added (I hoped added). Also to gain control over withdraws might mean lost of new arrivals which were base WITE events that do not happen in any one game.

(in reply to Von Hindenburg)
Post #: 4
RE: Suggestion on withdrawls - 2/23/2012 9:40:35 AM   
cavalry

 

Posts: 1877
Joined: 9/2/2003
From: Blackboys East Sussex UK
Status: online
My point was units could be kept on for a few more turns - at a price.

Remember the Russian are also aware of fixed date withdrawls and they can time things around that.

Cav

(in reply to Dark_Star)
Post #: 5
RE: Suggestion on withdrawls - 2/23/2012 9:57:44 AM   
Blubel

 

Posts: 268
Joined: 6/22/2011
Status: offline
I would like to see a randomizing option for withdrawls/reinforcements like in WitP-AE. Then the unit would withdraw, but not always at the same time.

(in reply to cavalry)
Post #: 6
RE: Suggestion on withdrawls - 2/23/2012 11:21:09 AM   
cavalry

 

Posts: 1877
Joined: 9/2/2003
From: Blackboys East Sussex UK
Status: online
Or say a unit withdrawn earlier and gain some VP even?

(in reply to Blubel)
Post #: 7
RE: Suggestion on withdrawls - 2/23/2012 5:42:22 PM   
Baron von Beer

 

Posts: 232
Joined: 9/18/2003
Status: offline
Why it wasn't capability based, leaving it to the player to select the units to fill the requirement, is beyond me. "We need X Panzer divisions to send to Normandy" rather than we need these specific 3, never mind that they are currently holding critical sections of the front while 3 others are refitting in quiet sectors and would be much more suitable to send."

Yes, we have the dates in advance. So, we have to plan operations based on historical foresight that didn't exist, so that the "Right" divisions, according to history, are pulled out.

If it were based on nationality, there would still be no original WIR sending the Romanians to defend Normandy, and using the current rule of having them refill to required TO&E % before leaving, leaves nothing to exploit, while having a much more logical implementation.

< Message edited by Baron von Beer -- 2/23/2012 6:22:34 PM >

(in reply to cavalry)
Post #: 8
RE: Suggestion on withdrawls - 2/23/2012 6:28:10 PM   
LiquidSky


Posts: 878
Joined: 6/24/2008
Status: offline

Because the people in control dont ask nicely if they could please borrow a couple panzer divisions, anything will do. They say..OMG they invaded Italy! Send the XXth and YYth SS panzers NOW!

In reality, sometimes you wont get any warning at all. And I am quite sure the people in commanding in Russia were as upset as you would be for losing the units.

What the game should do is randomly take away divisions and return them after random periods of time. What is silly about the whole withdrawl dynamic is that you know before you even invade Russia when your divisions are withdrawn. Maybe give a one turn warning.

< Message edited by LiquidSky -- 2/23/2012 6:37:27 PM >


_____________________________

What's the sense of sending $2 million missiles to hit a $10 tent that's empty?

— President George W. Bush, Oval Office meeting, 13 September 2001.

(in reply to Baron von Beer)
Post #: 9
RE: Suggestion on withdrawls - 2/23/2012 11:40:19 PM   
Baron von Beer

 

Posts: 232
Joined: 9/18/2003
Status: offline
And how do you suppose they arrive at the decision to send XXth and YYth SS panzers? They just happened to be the first two they could think of? Filled one of those big wire rotating raffle drums with every armored division in service and drew two, or looked at the situation on the front and found the most suitable when considering how quickly it could arrive where it was needed, if it was currently engaged how quickly it could disengage, how its withdrawal would effect the front it was leaving, what it's current strength was, etc. You know, the very things that HQ staffs exist for.

< Message edited by Baron von Beer -- 2/23/2012 11:42:23 PM >

(in reply to LiquidSky)
Post #: 10
RE: Suggestion on withdrawls - 2/24/2012 1:52:22 AM   
LiquidSky


Posts: 878
Joined: 6/24/2008
Status: offline


Doesnt matter how they came up with it....the fact is, and I am glad you agree...they came up with it. Not the commanders in the field.

_____________________________

What's the sense of sending $2 million missiles to hit a $10 tent that's empty?

— President George W. Bush, Oval Office meeting, 13 September 2001.

(in reply to Baron von Beer)
Post #: 11
RE: Suggestion on withdrawls - 2/24/2012 2:30:47 AM   
Baron von Beer

 

Posts: 232
Joined: 9/18/2003
Status: offline
No, not the commander in the field, the general staff. Ostensibly who we as the player represent in the game. How they come up with it does matter, they didn't just do it willy nilly, ala the rafle. As implemented in the game, this is precisely the end result. The withdrawals hold an inflexibly rigid tie to history, with no link to the reality within a given instance of the game.



< Message edited by Baron von Beer -- 2/24/2012 2:53:54 AM >

(in reply to LiquidSky)
Post #: 12
RE: Suggestion on withdrawls - 2/24/2012 4:32:38 AM   
Aurelian

 

Posts: 2257
Joined: 2/26/2007
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: Baron von Beer

No, not the commander in the field, the general staff. Ostensibly who we as the player represent in the game. How they come up with it does matter, they didn't just do it willy nilly, ala the rafle. As implemented in the game, this is precisely the end result. The withdrawals hold an inflexibly rigid tie to history, with no link to the reality within a given instance of the game.



Actually, as the Axis player, you not the head honcho/s. OKW isn't in the game. *They*, either on their own hook, or on Hitler's orders, decided who got picked. It wasn't OKH that pulled those SS Panzers out after Kursk and sent them west. It was Hitler. Anymore than it was OKH who sent the 6th Panzer Army from the west to Hungary.

Of course the withdrawls are tied to history. What happens on the other fronts is the not the purview of OKH. The arrivals are tied to it as well. And for the Soviets as well.

< Message edited by Aurelian -- 2/24/2012 4:39:12 AM >

(in reply to Baron von Beer)
Post #: 13
RE: Suggestion on withdrawls - 2/24/2012 4:41:07 AM   
2ndACR


Posts: 5653
Joined: 8/31/2003
From: Irving,Tx
Status: offline
And here we have the same crap. The Russians are not tied to anything. Want a few infantry corps, just build them. Want some more sappers, tank regiments, artillery, divisions, brigades......just build them.

The German player is tied to history, the Russians get fantasy world.


(in reply to Aurelian)
Post #: 14
RE: Suggestion on withdrawls - 2/24/2012 5:03:38 AM   
Baron von Beer

 

Posts: 232
Joined: 9/18/2003
Status: offline
I admit, there is a decided lack of consistency (The Soviet player most definitely isn't playing the "Theater commander", but I'm able to accept that. This one though, just wasn't done in a very plausible manner.

And Aurelian, I don't take issue with forces being withdrawn, only the manner in which it is handled.

< Message edited by Baron von Beer -- 2/24/2012 5:11:34 AM >

(in reply to 2ndACR)
Post #: 15
RE: Suggestion on withdrawls - 2/24/2012 8:14:37 AM   
Aurelian

 

Posts: 2257
Joined: 2/26/2007
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: 2ndACR

And here we have the same crap. The Russians are not tied to anything. Want a few infantry corps, just build them. Want some more sappers, tank regiments, artillery, divisions, brigades......just build them.

The German player is tied to history, the Russians get fantasy world.




Then provide a list of units that OKH built. And the sources. Or are you saying that 2by3 just pulled everything out of their gludius maximus.

Yeah, the same crap. "I can't build what I want even though this was known before the game came out."

Give it a rest if you please. It isn't going to change in WiTE. Maybe if the whole War in Europe becomes a reality.



< Message edited by Aurelian -- 2/24/2012 8:37:05 AM >

(in reply to 2ndACR)
Post #: 16
RE: Suggestion on withdrawls - 2/24/2012 11:41:40 AM   
gradenko_2000

 

Posts: 834
Joined: 12/27/2010
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: LiquidSky
Because the people in control dont ask nicely if they could please borrow a couple panzer divisions, anything will do. They say..OMG they invaded Italy! Send the XXth and YYth SS panzers NOW!

In reality, sometimes you wont get any warning at all. And I am quite sure the people in commanding in Russia were as upset as you would be for losing the units.

What the game should do is randomly take away divisions and return them after random periods of time. What is silly about the whole withdrawl dynamic is that you know before you even invade Russia when your divisions are withdrawn. Maybe give a one turn warning.

They might not ask nicely, but they would certainly ask intelligently.

Withdrawing the same units at the same given time regardless of the overall strategic situation doesn't make much sense, because those folks back at OKH probably wouldn't pull out a division if they knew that it was holding an essential portion of the line, but that's the current model of the game.

You're then telling us that it wouldn't make much sense either for OKH to put forward a formal request for a division that the player just has to fill, because OKH would instead **demand** that certain divisions be handed over to them ... but the end result would be the same! If I was asked to give up a division, any division, then obviously I'd give the one I could spare the most. I would think that OKH would arrive at the same conclusion, again because they wouldn't want to pull out the guys who are holding key points of the line.

(in reply to LiquidSky)
Post #: 17
RE: Suggestion on withdrawls - 2/24/2012 7:28:15 PM   
LiquidSky


Posts: 878
Joined: 6/24/2008
Status: offline


It seems to me after doing some random reading on the different units that were withdrawn, that the actual units were in reserve before being sent west. A couple cases where the unit was destroyed and was being rebuilt in Germany, but then used in the west instead as well. I even read a case where Manstein asked for the 9th and 10th SS panzer div's to be sent east so he could use them in a counterattack. After they were 'used' up and were resting, they were sent to Normandy on June 12th.

It also seems that they tend to leave their heavy equipment behind to act as replacements, while they pick up new equipment in the destination.

_____________________________

What's the sense of sending $2 million missiles to hit a $10 tent that's empty?

— President George W. Bush, Oval Office meeting, 13 September 2001.

(in reply to gradenko_2000)
Post #: 18
RE: Suggestion on withdrawls - 2/24/2012 8:16:35 PM   
Schmart

 

Posts: 657
Joined: 9/13/2010
From: Canada
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: LiquidSky
It also seems that they tend to leave their heavy equipment behind to act as replacements, while they pick up new equipment in the destination.


Yes, this was typical, because hauling all the heavy equipment across the continent takes up a lot of rail capacity.

Also typical, was that withdrawn divisions were usually burnt out, hence the reason for the withdrawl to the west. They didn't sit in the east, get re-built, then go west. Again, that would have been a waste of rolling stock.

(in reply to LiquidSky)
Post #: 19
RE: Suggestion on withdrawls - 2/24/2012 9:00:27 PM   
janh

 

Posts: 1226
Joined: 6/12/2007
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: Schmart
Also typical, was that withdrawn divisions were usually burnt out, hence the reason for the withdrawl to the west.


Let's pick out the early SS Division since those seem to go through the largest transformation in the war. After hard struggle of the SS leadership against the will of OKW and OKH, they were allowed to expand into division sized elements, motorized. They were not allowed to use the ranks of the regular army, though, and had to use their own since the Wehrmacht wasn't willing to be put on par with "not-Wehrmacht trained", non-military personel and "officers", but they underwent major transformations at quite short intervals.

Of these, LAH, GD, Wiking, and Totenkopf, each one goes through different pathways during their evolution, in history and in this game. While Wiking never leaves and still goes through all of the ToE changes, DR and LAH leave after changing to a 42-Mot.Inf. (that is in effect already a Panzergrenadier Div. composition) by late June and late July, respectively, the TK remains even until late October before withdrawing for the restructuring to a Panzergrenadier Division.

So perhaps if Wiking was restructured in the East, the others probably could have been too -- if they were not badly diminished? The need to rebuild or refit them seems like a major factor in the decision to withdraw them at all, and for the exact timing and sequence. Certainly also material availability influenced the schedule. So there are reasons for the historical course, which led to the moves as these did. However, the game will play out differently, and the reasoning for rebuilding, withdrawals or ToE changes may change -- just like the reasoning for the Soviets changes depending on the game play.

Similarly, as #pointed out by gradenko_2000 or Liquidsky, there were surely some reasons why specific other divisions (for which rebuilding was a lesser factor) were chosen to withdraw to other fronts.

There seems to be plenty of causality that changes in each game and would be a good argument to also add some flexibility to rules for the future titles. For example, one could have made a rule that those divisions to ought to pull out of line for the ToE change to occur and/or ultimately withdraw if going below a certain strength level, which would also imply a certain wiggle room to take the units out of the frontline: for e.g. one per month between late June and late October, or if it stays, suffer some railroad capacity cuts for the additional equipement hauling. Maybe eveb an option to keep them longer for some AP costs? Similarly, for those withdrawing to reinforce other fronts, there should be an option to pick either the most suitable, available ones (fulfilling certain minimum strength criteria), or at least allow to exchange the requested units against player selected ones again at an AP cost.

< Message edited by janh -- 2/24/2012 9:15:21 PM >

(in reply to Schmart)
Post #: 20
RE: Suggestion on withdrawls - 2/24/2012 9:38:45 PM   
Schmart

 

Posts: 657
Joined: 9/13/2010
From: Canada
Status: offline
Sorry, I forgot to mention (and this just recently occured to me) that part of my point is in relation to the refit to 100% phase that a withdrawing unit is required to go through in game. Since production in WitE only represents that which was sent to the Russian front (roughly 80% of German total production), then why is a withdrawing unit refitted using Russian Front equipment? Historically, it was refit using the remaining 20% of the German production that is not seen in the game. This is the reason we only see 80% of German production, because the rest was used for other fronts and refitting burnt-out units pulled off the Russian Front. But the game uses Russian Front production to refit units in the west?

(in reply to janh)
Post #: 21
RE: Suggestion on withdrawls - 2/25/2012 6:19:40 AM   
cpt flam


Posts: 1167
Joined: 1/16/2011
From: caen - France
Status: offline
sorry to remember you that:
4 turns before withdrawal you are inform
during this time you have possibility to reach 76 per cent TOE
and in this case unit will leave without problem
i see that as a system to prevent abuse (1 div must be shipped away , take this 30 per cent all is fine)

(in reply to Schmart)
Post #: 22
RE: Suggestion on withdrawls - 2/25/2012 7:01:11 AM   
Aurelian

 

Posts: 2257
Joined: 2/26/2007
Status: offline
Awww, never mind :)

< Message edited by Aurelian -- 2/25/2012 7:07:14 AM >

(in reply to gradenko_2000)
Post #: 23
Page:   [1]
All Forums >> [New Releases from Matrix Games] >> Gary Grigsby's War in the East Series >> Suggestion on withdrawls Page: [1]
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

0.109