TOE upgrade request

[IdahoNYer]

The TOE upgrades that occur during the course of the game are a great feature - I just wish they were optional - akin to the refit in WiTP. Why? Well, TOE upgrades were based on the historical timeline - some due to increased technological/equipment availability, some due to tactical awareness (reducing tank/infantry ratios), but many - especially later German - were due to manpower and equipment shortages as the war progressed.

But what happens when the war isn't going along the same track as historically? Perhaps the Germans are doing better? Two cases in point. Its late 44 going into 45 in my PBEM as the Germans. I have plenty of manpower and armaments in the pools - do I really want to convert to the 45 infantry division or the 45 panzer division which are weaker than the '44 counterparts? Not really.

Secondly, and this one kinda snuck up on me is the conversion of the security divisions to infantry divisions. This made perfect sense in the real campaign as the Germans were out of Soviet Russia by late 44 and didn't need the security divisions, so they became infantry divisions. But in my current game, all of the sudden (with no advanced warning) the security divisions garrisoning the cities behind my lines start converting to infantry units - losing the security garrison bonus as well! So now I've got to scramble and figure out how to re-garrison my rear areas - using 3 infantry units where one security unit could do the job! And face an increasing partisan threat.

While I'd prefer a menu to ask whether or not to upgrade, I realize that may be a stretch at this point.

At a minimum, I'd recommend WITHDRAWING the security divisions, and then having the replacing infantry divisions come in as reinforcements the same turn - that way, at least the German player would know they are losing the security divisions as they would be so indicated on the reinforcement screen as a withdrawal.

[Blubel]

+1

[dassie]

I want to able to change toe for soviet too the tank corp in 42 have awful toe because
Lack of tank in history , however most player will not loss as much tank in real history.
Plz allow us use ap to "buy" toe change , this should also make ap more useful in long run (like in 44.45 for sov)

[janh]

+2

[PKH]

This is a great idea. Being able to define custom TOE's for divisions and battalions from the start, and edit them during the game would be really cool.

[jaw]

ORIGINAL: IdahoNYer

The TOE upgrades that occur during the course of the game are a great feature - I just wish they were optional - akin to the refit in WiTP. Why? Well, TOE upgrades were based on the historical timeline - some due to increased technological/equipment availability, some due to tactical awareness (reducing tank/infantry ratios), but many - especially later German - were due to manpower and equipment shortages as the war progressed.

But what happens when the war isn't going along the same track as historically? Perhaps the Germans are doing better? Two cases in point. Its late 44 going into 45 in my PBEM as the Germans. I have plenty of manpower and armaments in the pools - do I really want to convert to the 45 infantry division or the 45 panzer division which are weaker than the '44 counterparts? Not really.

Secondly, and this one kinda snuck up on me is the conversion of the security divisions to infantry divisions. This made perfect sense in the real campaign as the Germans were out of Soviet Russia by late 44 and didn't need the security divisions, so they became infantry divisions. But in my current game, all of the sudden (with no advanced warning) the security divisions garrisoning the cities behind my lines start converting to infantry units - losing the security garrison bonus as well! So now I've got to scramble and figure out how to re-garrison my rear areas - using 3 infantry units where one security unit could do the job! And face an increasing partisan threat.

While I'd prefer a menu to ask whether or not to upgrade, I realize that may be a stretch at this point.

At a minimum, I'd recommend WITHDRAWING the security divisions, and then having the replacing infantry divisions come in as reinforcements the same turn - that way, at least the German player would know they are losing the security divisions as they would be so indicated on the reinforcement screen as a withdrawal.

I've heard this complaint before and my reaction is that if you actually don't need the late war upgrades then the game is over - you have won! I think players are so obsessed with acheiving victory conditions they ignore the reality of their battlefield situation. If the Axis player can survive until late 1944 without being in a hopeless strategic defensive situation then he has effectively won the game regardless of what the victory conditions say. It is time to quit and start a new game. Just because the program allows the game to run until the fall of 1945 doesn't mean it's supposed to last that long. Use some common sense and pull the plug when it is obvious the Soviets aren't going to be in Berlin by the Spring of 1945.

I know what I'm saying is heresy to some (including maybe the designers) but I see no point in playing WitE past the point the underlying logic of the design becomes invalid. When you outperform the historical Germans that means more resources are available not merely to preserve stronger TOEs but also to re-direct those resources to other fronts where German fortunes are on the decline. An extra panzer division or two makes almost no difference on the Eastern Front but it could have been decisive in the West. Do you really think Hitler would have allowed Ost battalions to be used in the West if he had thousands of German replacements available from a better than historical situation in the East? Would the "Atlantic Wall" been built around static divisions and obsolete captured equipment if ample replacements and brand new equipment were available? Obviously not so a better than historical situation in the East means a better than historical situation in the West and a completely unknown re-distribution of assets of both quantity and type. In short, none of the assumptions on which the late War game is based are valid and continued play is pointless.

If you really want to play an "historically based" fantasy game where the Germans fight the Red Army to a standstill while the Western Allies sweep across Germany, be my guest but don't expect me to change the TOE upgrades so you can indulge that fantasy; that's what you have an editor for.

[Aurelian]

Couldn't agree more jaw.

[pgg23]

+1

[veji1]

ORIGINAL: jaw

I've heard this complaint before and my reaction is that if you actually don't need the late war upgrades then the game is over - you have won! I think players are so obsessed with acheiving victory conditions they ignore the reality of their battlefield situation. If the Axis player can survive until late 1944 without being in a hopeless strategic defensive situation then he has effectively won the game regardless of what the victory conditions say. It is time to quit and start a new game. Just because the program allows the game to run until the fall of 1945 doesn't mean it's supposed to last that long. Use some common sense and pull the plug when it is obvious the Soviets aren't going to be in Berlin by the Spring of 1945.

I know what I'm saying is heresy to some (including maybe the designers) but I see no point in playing WitE past the point the underlying logic of the design becomes invalid. When you outperform the historical Germans that means more resources are available not merely to preserve stronger TOEs but also to re-direct those resources to other fronts where German fortunes are on the decline. An extra panzer division or two makes almost no difference on the Eastern Front but it could have been decisive in the West. Do you really think Hitler would have allowed Ost battalions to be used in the West if he had thousands of German replacements available from a better than historical situation in the East? Would the "Atlantic Wall" been built around static divisions and obsolete captured equipment if ample replacements and brand new equipment were available? Obviously not so a better than historical situation in the East means a better than historical situation in the West and a completely unknown re-distribution of assets of both quantity and type. In short, none of the assumptions on which the late War game is based are valid and continued play is pointless.

If you really want to play an "historically based" fantasy game where the Germans fight the Red Army to a standstill while the Western Allies sweep across Germany, be my guest but don't expect me to change the TOE upgrades so you can indulge that fantasy; that's what you have an editor for.

Come on !! What kind of answer is that ? If a player reaches this point in game in this situation than he should just stop the game and tell his PBEM opponent "Sorry pal but per Jaw I have whooped your derriere and this game should not be played anymore?!?!"

This is just ridiculous. Everytime there is a comment where someone thinks the game could be tinkered because it tends to be too deterministic and therefore skewed the more the actual match diverges from history, you just go there and say "you not happy? That's what the editor is for pal".

Again; another example of how the devs and community of WITP reacted positively to input and request and how in WITE's case a reasonnable query from a reasonnable playe gets a curt and condescending answer.

Not helpful really. Sorry to rant but that sort of reaction is really unhelpful.

[Schmart]

Meh. If you're doing significantly better (as the Axis) and your TOEs get downgraded, you're still going to have more men and equipment and your TOEs will be much closer to 100% than historical. The later-war German TOE, yes they were reduced, but the actual fighting unit strength was in reality much less than even the reduced TOE.

Personally, I don't want to see this game turn into a monster micromanagement clickfest, and I think the developers would be advised not to go down that route, as it would reduce their market even more. The market for wargames of this type is already pretty limited. Imagine how miniscule it'd be if this game turned into a monster micromanagement clickfest. Some people won't be happy until they can modify the work shifts of the factory workers producing kitchen utensils for export to Bulgaria. Sure, you might be able to squeeze out an extra 37mm AT Gun each month by optimizing the work shifts of the factory workers producing kitchen utensils for export to Bulgaria, but really!?

And yes, there is an editor. I'm frankly surprised how few community produced scenarios there are. The editor isn't as deep as TOAW, but there's decent room to wiggle.

[jaw]

ORIGINAL: veji1

Come on !! What kind of answer is that ? If a player reaches this point in game in this situation than he should just stop the game and tell his PBEM opponent "Sorry pal but per Jaw I have whooped your derriere and this game should not be played anymore?!?!"

This is just ridiculous. Everytime there is a comment where someone thinks the game could be tinkered because it tends to be too deterministic and therefore skewed the more the actual match diverges from history, you just go there and say "you not happy? That's what the editor is for pal".

Again; another example of how the devs and community of WITP reacted positively to input and request and how in WITE's case a reasonnable query from a reasonnable playe gets a curt and condescending answer.

Not helpful really. Sorry to rant but that sort of reaction is really unhelpful.

I apologize if I sounded condescending but players keep wanting to get around the design parameters built into the game and when someone points out why that isn't reasonable they cry foul. WitE is an OPERATIONAL game that will never be a strategic game (which WitP is) and no amount of tinkering with the TOEs is going to change that fact. If you want to keep playing the game past the point where the game and history significantly diverge then you got to accept the weirdnesses that result from that divergence including TOEs designed for an army that's loosing the War not winning it.

[IdahoNYer]

Jaw - I didn't take your comment as condescending, but I don't agree with your premise. The game as designed is a great operational game. However, the game goes to Sep 1945. Rules and concepts in the game should support that. I don't think it has been adequately playtested to the end. Having the security divisions turn to infantry is a MAJOR headache if you're still in the Soviet Union. As I said in the original post, change it to a withdrawal of the security divisions to give the player a warning they are going to lose thier ability to hold down the partisans. That would be an acceptable fix.

While I would like more control of TOE upgrades and tank upgrades (to prevent having that soon to withdraw panzer div get the newest tanks out of the factory), I can certainly live without it. But saying this is an operational game and using the editor doesn't cut it to change things you don't like. Once a PBEM game is started, using the editor is a big no-no in my book. Against the AI, sure. I find it amusing that you refer to WiTP as a strategic game - that allows players to set plane altitude, CAP levels, refits, etc etc - yet having the player in an operational game unable to change TOE upgrades is a problem. Doesn't make sense to me. I like and play both of these games. Neither is perfect. That's OK.

We've spent about a year of real time in a PBEM game where both players are still enjoying the fight, so saying quit early doesn't tread water either.

[Dili]

If there is excess weapons then it is realistic to cut the excess weapons by half. One half goes West the other half remains in East.

[Flaviusx]

ORIGINAL: IdahoNYer

However, the game goes to Sep 1945. Rules and concepts in the game should support that.

It shouldn't go that far, and the rules and concepts of the game don't support taking it out that far. They can't. The September stuff exists in flat contradiction to the rest of the ruleset. It needs to go away, because it is easier for it to go away than for the rest of the game to chage in order to be consistent with it.

[IdahoNYer]

I'd welcome a May 1945 ending.

[Farfarer61]

Getting back to incremental changes, can we please re-combine those platoon level German SU's like the 6 guys who have hauled their personal Nebelwerfer to Moscow and back?

[jaw]

ORIGINAL: IdahoNYer

I'd welcome a May 1945 ending.

Now that's an easy fix, just make a house rule at the beginning of your game that the War in Europe ends at the end of the second turn of May, 1945. Whatever the victory point position is at the end of that turn determines the winner and extent of victory.

[Great_Ajax]

An even easier solution would be to just go in the editor and reduce the number of turns to make a May 1945 ending and then you have a scenario that ends properly on that date.

Trey

ORIGINAL: jaw

ORIGINAL: IdahoNYer

I'd welcome a May 1945 ending.

Now that's an easy fix, just make a house rule at the beginning of your game that the War in Europe ends at the end of the second turn of May, 1945. Whatever the victory point position is at the end of that turn determines the winner and extent of victory.

[veji1]

an even simpler solution would be for the Devs to fix that in a patch, allowing the Players to play the game, rather than having to go in the editor to fix stuff...

[janh]

ORIGINAL: jaw
I've heard this complaint before and my reaction is that if you actually don't need the late war upgrades then the game is over - you have won! I think players are so obsessed with acheiving victory conditions they ignore the reality of their battlefield situation. If the Axis player can survive until late 1944 without being in a hopeless strategic defensive situation then he has effectively won the game regardless of what the victory conditions say. It is time to quit and start a new game. Just because the program allows the game to run until the fall of 1945 doesn't mean it's supposed to last that long. Use some common sense and pull the plug when it is obvious the Soviets aren't going to be in Berlin by the Spring of 1945.

I know what I'm saying is heresy to some (including maybe the designers) but I see no point in playing WitE past the point the underlying logic of the design becomes invalid. ...<important details>...

If you really want to play an "historically based" fantasy game where the Germans fight the Red Army to a standstill while the Western Allies sweep across Germany, be my guest but don't expect me to change the TOE upgrades so you can indulge that fantasy; that's what you have an editor for.

On the hand, this is simply strict logic, and cannot really be argued with. But on the other, it makes me wonder how much deviation from history is still reasonably possible while playing the game, taking into account the need to "stay within the underlying logic of the design"? It sounds very, say disillusioning. Sure, at some point every model, every game aiming to simulate or recreate something, reaches the limits of what it can describe. But IdahoNYer's situation does seem to unrealistic, or rare, but rather a reasonable aim of every Axis player -- especially against AI.

Taking jaw's argument, should one also call it quits if the Axis player takes Leningrad and Moscow in 1941 and trashes the Red Army? Because presumably this could have had consequences from upping the Lend-and-Lease help to detaching a handful of Panzer and Motorized Divisions or so to North Africa to clear the dangerous situation there, which both isn't covered by design and game either?

Hmmh, I would have hoped this game is designed to be more than a reenactment, and in a lot of areas I find it really is more: a detailed game and even a simulation with good approximations. But the flexibility of toying with force structures, is one area where it badly breaks down in that later part of the game. Adding rules for ToE changes really would made sense. Because some people want to play not just for winning, and ending games early, but for enjoying the ride. Even if the outcome seems in all probability decided.