Matrix Games Forums

Happy Easter!Battle Academy is now available on SteamPlayers compare Ageods Civil War to Civil War IIDeal of the week - An updated War in the East goes half Price!Sign up for the Qvadriga beta for iPad and Android!Come and say hi at Pax and SaluteLegends of War goes on sale!Piercing Fortress Europa Gets UpdatedBattle Academy Mega Pack is now availableClose Combat: Gateway to Caen Teaser Trailer
Forums  Register  Login  Photo Gallery  Member List  Search  Calendars  FAQ 

My Profile  Inbox  Address Book  My Subscription  My Forums  Log Out

RE: New morale rule has screwed 41.

 
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: New morale rule has screwed 41. Page: <<   < prev  1 [2] 3 4   next >   >>
Login
Message << Older Topic   Newer Topic >>
RE: New morale rule has screwed 41. - 5/1/2013 2:03:23 PM   
morvael


Posts: 2982
Joined: 9/8/2006
From: Poland
Status: offline
50 is 56% better than 40 (0.25 over 0.16 - including experience equal to morale), also we don't know when and how are the numbers rounded so it may be even more (or less).

(in reply to Flaviusx)
Post #: 31
RE: New morale rule has screwed 41. - 5/1/2013 2:06:17 PM   
morvael


Posts: 2982
Joined: 9/8/2006
From: Poland
Status: offline
Since morale was not working it would be good to return to morale rules from version 1.0 and start from there, as all later changes were not what they seemed to be, because of the bug. In 41, 45 NM would be ok for me.

(in reply to morvael)
Post #: 32
RE: New morale rule has screwed 41. - 5/1/2013 4:10:44 PM   
rmonical

 

Posts: 1386
Joined: 4/1/2011
Status: offline
quote:

The test I ran on 1942 Germans showed that about 15% of the German units below NM were getting a bump


My post blizzard German results are similar. Will try to quantify over the weekend. Time consuming because I want to look at units off the line even though units on the line get an occasional bump.


< Message edited by rmonical -- 5/1/2013 4:30:07 PM >

(in reply to Joel Billings)
Post #: 33
RE: New morale rule has screwed 41. - 5/1/2013 4:51:05 PM   
Joel Billings


Posts: 20488
Joined: 9/20/2000
From: Santa Rosa, CA
Status: offline
Thanks for the test results. For some reason the Soviet morale increase due to the change happens much more often than it does for the Germans. Sounds like we have to find out what that is and either dial it back or reduce Soviet 41 NM as suggested. We'll look into it. Pavel is out of town this week so I don't think any changes will be possible until next week.

_____________________________

All understanding comes after the fact.
-- Soren Kierkegaard

(in reply to rmonical)
Post #: 34
RE: New morale rule has screwed 41. - 5/1/2013 9:14:19 PM   
Hetulik

 

Posts: 44
Joined: 8/3/2009
Status: offline
Question: I am in the middle of doing turn 1 in a game I started as the axis against the soviet AI. Should I revert back to version 1.07.04 before ending turn?

And if so can I just apply the 04 installer over my 06 installation?
Thanks!

< Message edited by Hetulik -- 5/1/2013 10:07:07 PM >

(in reply to Joel Billings)
Post #: 35
RE: New morale rule has screwed 41. - 5/1/2013 10:21:33 PM   
Michael T


Posts: 2190
Joined: 10/22/2006
From: Queensland, Australia.
Status: offline
FWIW I think a Soviet NM brought back closer to the 43-45 range in 41 is needed here. AND a slowing down of the rate that topping out is acheived through the *new* morale rule. Topping out in 2 weeks from a low of 30 something is still too fast. The Soviet player should face the decision of whether to place low morale units in the front or not. If the rate of morale increase remains the same you will still see morale 35 units on T1 be at 45 by T3. Which doesn't sit quite right with me. Anyway I trust 2by3 will come up with an answer. I am thankful that it is going to get fixed

_____________________________

'Deus le Volt!'
------------------

(in reply to Hetulik)
Post #: 36
RE: New morale rule has screwed 41. - 5/1/2013 10:25:44 PM   
Michael T


Posts: 2190
Joined: 10/22/2006
From: Queensland, Australia.
Status: offline
As an another option, it seems to me 41 was pretty close to balanced without this *new* rule and it is not going to help the Axis that much in 41 so why not simply leave it out in 41 altogether. Bring it on line in 1942. Thats when both sides really need it.

So don't mess with 41, it wasn't broken.

_____________________________

'Deus le Volt!'
------------------

(in reply to Michael T)
Post #: 37
RE: New morale rule has screwed 41. - 5/2/2013 8:40:24 AM   
Mehring

 

Posts: 1539
Joined: 1/25/2007
Status: offline
Playing Russian in spring 42 and cycling low morale units from front to rest. Over ten hexes from enemy they rise 3 or 4 morale per turn (typically 47 to 50 in a turn), even when still entrained. Some rest and refit. How about stopping morale rises and refits for entrained units?

_____________________________

“The end of democracy and the defeat of the American Revolution will occur when government falls into the hands of lending institutions and moneyed incorporations.”
¯ Thomas Jefferson

(in reply to Flaviusx)
Post #: 38
RE: New morale rule has screwed 41. - 5/2/2013 10:25:05 AM   
Flaviusx


Posts: 6239
Joined: 9/9/2009
From: Southern California
Status: offline
Mehring, presumably they stuff those rail cars with drill sergeants.

I kid, I kid.

_____________________________

WitE Alpha Tester

(in reply to Mehring)
Post #: 39
RE: New morale rule has screwed 41. - 5/2/2013 10:35:01 AM   
Mehring

 

Posts: 1539
Joined: 1/25/2007
Status: offline
Flavius, what an aweful thought.

I really hope the morale in WitE2 will in part be determined by events. This Russians railing north business is a great game tactic but please let's have logistics, game objective and morale incentives to make historical choices at least worthy of consideration for both sides.

_____________________________

“The end of democracy and the defeat of the American Revolution will occur when government falls into the hands of lending institutions and moneyed incorporations.”
¯ Thomas Jefferson

(in reply to Flaviusx)
Post #: 40
RE: New morale rule has screwed 41. - 5/2/2013 11:29:51 AM   
gingerbread


Posts: 1617
Joined: 1/4/2007
From: Sweden
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Mehring

I really hope the morale in WitE2 will in part be determined by events.


So the troops participating in the 1st blizzard offensive should be suffering from defeatism due to that a large part of their motherland is occupied?

Some parameters are and should be beyond the players control and influence. The one (mis-)labelled 'Morale' is definitely one of them.


As to the new morale rule, just how many Soviet RD with morale in the low 30s are affected?

Starting morale is 30 + Rnd(24) (= mean of 42 and even distribution) with a bonus for those in SW & Moscow set up areas. Leaving aside those in the border regions (it might be that players will have to modify their opening turn to care about not routing these) I'd say at most 20 RD (again, with morale in the low 30s) and for this, the NM should be lowered to 45 from the start??? I think not; it would be overcompensating. There is still the issue of having men to fill these units with, and that has not changed.

(in reply to Mehring)
Post #: 41
RE: New morale rule has screwed 41. - 5/2/2013 12:20:11 PM   
Flaviusx


Posts: 6239
Joined: 9/9/2009
From: Southern California
Status: offline
A fair number of the shells arriving at the map edge from late summer on start with bad morale, actually. Very irritating.

I think the problem here is with this rapid increase in morale gains virtually all divisions in the Red Army are going to hit upper 40s by August. So it's not just about a few bad apples that survive the 1st turn.

Prior to the recent morale change, getting to or anywhere near 50 morale with the entire army was in practical terms not possible. You needed time to get there, and by the time you could get there, NM caps had already gone down. So as a result this latest bug fix does indeed raise the performance of the 1941 Red Army as compared to before.

Now, you could argue that's okay and will give the Red Army the ability to fight a forward defense that has sadly been lacking. But the truth is people are going to run early on just because of the ridiculous opening turn which makes it impossible to defend forward early on. Even with better morale. Not enough counters on the board, period.

Changing the NM cap to 45 in practical terms leaves things as they were before more or less. A good player like MT here shouldn't be too scared of 45 morale rifle divisions.

_____________________________

WitE Alpha Tester

(in reply to gingerbread)
Post #: 42
RE: New morale rule has screwed 41. - 5/2/2013 1:14:59 PM   
gingerbread


Posts: 1617
Joined: 1/4/2007
From: Sweden
Status: offline
Ah yes, the free rebuilds. They begin with morale 32-50, set in refit mode with TOE% 100 so they soak up men that would be much more useful in the better units. This mechanism is just another incentive to run since loosing units will just add to the downward spiral.

I actually had a fight with the devs about the Refit/100% setting, but it has to be that way for the German rebuilds. They in turn actually got a boost (*) that perhaps should be rescinded with the new/working morals gain rule in place.




* V1.05.59 – January 31, 2012
Destroyed German units that return to play are given a
morale equal to 30+(NM/4)+random (NM/4). The formula used to be 20+… There is no
change in the formula that sets their initial experience.

(in reply to Flaviusx)
Post #: 43
RE: New morale rule has screwed 41. - 5/2/2013 10:31:22 PM   
carlkay58

 

Posts: 1778
Joined: 7/25/2010
Status: offline
gingerbread - it is strange to think that the bug was probably responsible for having to increase the German base morale for the reconstituted units.

(in reply to gingerbread)
Post #: 44
RE: New morale rule has screwed 41. - 5/4/2013 12:24:52 AM   
Joel Billings


Posts: 20488
Joined: 9/20/2000
From: Santa Rosa, CA
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Michael T

Ok tested 10 ID. All in refit more than 10 hexes from the front with 1.07.03

Unit - Start morale T1/ T3 morale

178 - 32/37
18 - 37/42
144 - 40/44
166 - 37/41
187 - 33/37
229 - 39/44
160 - 37/41
170 - 33/37
186 - 32/36
98 - 35/39

So mostly they went up by 4 points. Avg 2 per turn.

Now same units at T1 with same morale but patched up to 1.07.06 (new morale rule)

178 - 32/41
18 - 37/51
144 - 40/49
166 - 37/50
187 - 33/41
229 - 39/47
160 - 37/45
170 - 33/43
186 - 32/43
98 - 35/47

That's about another 3.3 pts per turn on top of the 2 pts per turn. So ~5.3 pts per turn in total.

It's just too much Joel.

I have the save files if you want them.



Were these units attached directly to Stavka? Gary and I went through the code today and found that units attached to Stavka and OKH were given a second chance to meet the conditions to get the Die(NM/10) roll if they failed on the first chance. This code was written years ago and will for sure be removed. Also, it does appear that the lower your morale, the greater the chance that the conditions are met, which explains why German units with 60 morale were getting it less often than Soviet units with a low morale. I should have checked this before going ahead with the change. If those units in your test were attached to Stavka I can see why most of the units were getting the bonus increase in morale each turn. If they weren't attached to Stavka, then it's harder to see why the Soviets went up on average 2.95 more points per turn in your test. It would help to know if the units were attached to Stavka in this test. In any case we'll be making a change to make sure this is not having the big impact it seems to be having. Thanks.

BTW, in reviewing the morale gain rules, there seem to be several things that were news to me that are worth reporting:

We didn't see the check listed in the manual that says if Die(75) is greater than you NM you have a chance for a morale gain. There is a case where if you're morale is less than 50 then you have a chance it will gain a point. It's possible this Die(75) check is somewhere else in the code, but it's also possible it was taken out in one of the patches.



_____________________________

All understanding comes after the fact.
-- Soren Kierkegaard

(in reply to Michael T)
Post #: 45
RE: New morale rule has screwed 41. - 5/4/2013 12:54:43 AM   
Michael T


Posts: 2190
Joined: 10/22/2006
From: Queensland, Australia.
Status: offline
These units were all in Armies that reported to Stavka. Eg 24th, 22nd, 20th, 19th etc.

Whatever you do, please don't do something that pushes Soviet morale up too fast in 1941. IMO the 41 summer slightly favours the Soviets already. Any thing that makes the Soviet Army stronger in 1941 will only push the balance further to the Reds in 41. I see no problem at all in an accelerated morale boost for both sides from 42 on.



_____________________________

'Deus le Volt!'
------------------

(in reply to Joel Billings)
Post #: 46
RE: New morale rule has screwed 41. - 5/4/2013 10:55:30 AM   
Mehring

 

Posts: 1539
Joined: 1/25/2007
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: gingerbread


quote:

ORIGINAL: Mehring

I really hope the morale in WitE2 will in part be determined by events.


So the troops participating in the 1st blizzard offensive should be suffering from defeatism due to that a large part of their motherland is occupied?



"I really hope the morale in WitE2 will in part be determined by events.

So, territorial loss should be one of a number of factors affecting morale. Holding certain objectives by the end of the German campaign season might increase morale for a while. No player has absolute control over how much territory and cities they hold or lose.

If morale is nothing but training and doctrine, it is indeed a misnomer, but where, then, is morale represented in game? Do isolated units suddenly lose doctrine and training? Do units with insufficient supplies lose their drill instructors and also, then, morale? Do Finnish drill instructors go on strike when asked to work south of the 'no attack line"? Do defeated or routed units lose doctine and training? No, all these instances clearly show that WitE morale is not just doctrine and training, it is (also) morale in the commonly understood sense of the word.

< Message edited by Mehring -- 5/4/2013 12:28:28 PM >


_____________________________

“The end of democracy and the defeat of the American Revolution will occur when government falls into the hands of lending institutions and moneyed incorporations.”
¯ Thomas Jefferson

(in reply to gingerbread)
Post #: 47
RE: New morale rule has screwed 41. - 5/4/2013 2:19:17 PM   
gingerbread


Posts: 1617
Joined: 1/4/2007
From: Sweden
Status: offline
IMO, that aspect is covered by the declining NM during '41 and I also think it should be beyond players power to influence.


(in reply to Mehring)
Post #: 48
RE: New morale rule has screwed 41. - 5/4/2013 3:00:17 PM   
Mehring

 

Posts: 1539
Joined: 1/25/2007
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: gingerbread

IMO, that aspect is covered by the declining NM during '41 and I also think it should be beyond players power to influence.



It's another example of game mechanism purporting to represent historical events meeting a fluid game situation which will vary from those events. The result is very ugly, IMO. Why would NM decline if Russia is doing well and holding its major political, economic and population centres? These mechanisms are the fountain of all ahistorical strategies, not least the great Russian summer '41 runaway.

Morale is a difficult thing to represent in game, granted, but avoiding the problem will not create a solution. Reverses can boost determination as well as sap the will to fight, depending on other factors. Look how Churchill made Dunkirk look, to some extent, like a victory.

The effect of an event must be variable and then there's the question of the duration of that effect. Should the loss of, say, Kiev, lose the Russians 1 NM and its recapture gain 1NM? I would argue that any city NM loss/gain should be variable and temporary. People and populations take morale hits and boosts but tend to then settle back to an underlying level, adjusting to the new situation.

Complex interactions like manpower loss, terrain loss, war weariness etc are not so much beyond 2 by 3 as what they do. They just haven't extended what they do to the issue of morale yet, and I hope they remedy that.

_____________________________

“The end of democracy and the defeat of the American Revolution will occur when government falls into the hands of lending institutions and moneyed incorporations.”
¯ Thomas Jefferson

(in reply to gingerbread)
Post #: 49
RE: New morale rule has screwed 41. - 5/4/2013 4:47:56 PM   
Flaviusx


Posts: 6239
Joined: 9/9/2009
From: Southern California
Status: offline
The game morale mechanic is inherently unstable as is without tying it in to territory. And minor variations to it can have disproportionate effects when it shifts past certain thresholds. The biggest ones being 40, 50 and the points at which movement costs go down. It has a bad tendency of creating feedback loops. Failure breeds failure and success breeds success in a mechanical fashion that lends itself to abuse of game mechanics and has little to do with real life. It used to be a lot looser than it is now, btw. The tendency over time has been to try to lock down NM norms rather than making them less restrictive.

In the first two years of the war in particular there's just not much room for changing things up here on the Soviet side. If you tie NM to territory or events and it drops below 40, it's going to be incredibly hard to recover from that. Likewise, a too early shift upwards to 50 or more or more is going to shut the Axis down.

The way to deal with runaway strategies is via victory points, not NM.



< Message edited by Flaviusx -- 5/4/2013 4:49:22 PM >


_____________________________

WitE Alpha Tester

(in reply to Mehring)
Post #: 50
RE: New morale rule has screwed 41. - 5/4/2013 5:56:07 PM   
Mehring

 

Posts: 1539
Joined: 1/25/2007
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: Flaviusx
If you tie NM to territory or events and it drops below 40, it's going to be incredibly hard to recover from that. Likewise, a too early shift upwards to 50 or more or more is going to shut the Axis down.

The way to deal with runaway strategies is via victory points, not NM.



quote:

The effect of an event must be variable and then there's the question of the duration of that effect. Should the loss of, say, Kiev, lose the Russians 1 NM and its recapture gain 1NM? I would argue that any city NM loss/gain should be variable and temporary. People and populations take morale hits and boosts but tend to then settle back to an underlying level, adjusting to the new situation.



In conjunction with a realistic logistics system, German expansion eastwards is going to have limits in 1941. I can't envisage Russian NM getting to 50 in 41 unless the Germans really deserve to lose.

< Message edited by Mehring -- 5/4/2013 6:10:19 PM >


_____________________________

“The end of democracy and the defeat of the American Revolution will occur when government falls into the hands of lending institutions and moneyed incorporations.”
¯ Thomas Jefferson

(in reply to Flaviusx)
Post #: 51
RE: New morale rule has screwed 41. - 5/5/2013 1:29:45 AM   
Manstein63


Posts: 396
Joined: 6/30/2010
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Flaviusx


The way to deal with runaway strategies is via victory points, not NM.




I agree.
A lot of people are hung up on the 'Lvov Gambit' that most German Players use on T 1 & how it distorts the game forcing the Russian player to head for the hinterlands like the Scythians against Darius. However if the German opening turn is toned down most Russian players will say thank you very much & will have railed out most of Southwestern Front by the end of their turn. Giving punitive victory points to the Axis player would force the Russian player to make a game of it earlier on.
Manstein63

(in reply to Flaviusx)
Post #: 52
RE: New morale rule has screwed 41. - 5/5/2013 2:13:51 AM   
Michael T


Posts: 2190
Joined: 10/22/2006
From: Queensland, Australia.
Status: offline
Yes, I think a SD check around August that would force less of a runaway would be a good thing. Same for Axis around Feb 42. Too much running in the game. It needs to be hauled in. I already have some HR for this but I need to expand it to slow up Soviet running in summer 41. Other than that a HR that prevents evacuating any Industry from say Kharkov, Stalino and Tula before a certain date. That way if you run you suffer a big penalty rather than a SD loss.

_____________________________

'Deus le Volt!'
------------------

(in reply to Manstein63)
Post #: 53
RE: New morale rule has screwed 41. - 5/5/2013 8:14:29 AM   
SigUp

 

Posts: 671
Joined: 11/29/2012
Status: offline
Well, I right now experience how hard fighting a 50+ morale Red Army can be. For this game I have set Soviet morale at 119 (and German logistics at 60). It is turn 7 and I am only at Vitebsk and barely over the Dnepr in the centre. I lose tanks at a record rate for a game against the AI, my total AFV stock is at about 2600 and dropping fast, I already lost 1000 tanks. One advantage exists, however, units won't rout out of pockets.

(in reply to Michael T)
Post #: 54
RE: New morale rule has screwed 41. - 5/5/2013 10:52:25 AM   
Pelton

 

Posts: 5720
Joined: 4/9/2006
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Flaviusx

The game morale mechanic is inherently unstable as is without tying it in to territory. And minor variations to it can have disproportionate effects when it shifts past certain thresholds. The biggest ones being 40, 50 and the points at which movement costs go down. It has a bad tendency of creating feedback loops. Failure breeds failure and success breeds success in a mechanical fashion that lends itself to abuse of game mechanics and has little to do with real life. It used to be a lot looser than it is now, btw. The tendency over time has been to try to lock down NM norms rather than making them less restrictive.

In the first two years of the war in particular there's just not much room for changing things up here on the Soviet side. If you tie NM to territory or events and it drops below 40, it's going to be incredibly hard to recover from that. Likewise, a too early shift upwards to 50 or more or more is going to shut the Axis down.

The way to deal with runaway strategies is via victory points, not NM.




This has been talked about more then once and were told its not possible.


_____________________________

GHC
22 - 4 - 8

15 games ended in 41 (15-0-0)
7 games ended in 42 (5-0-2)
8 games ended in 43 (2-3-3)
4 games ended in 44 (0-1-3)


General Cheesefinder of WitW

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=afmyypGyfng&list=PLrY4H4gWWBircAjo

(in reply to Flaviusx)
Post #: 55
RE: New morale rule has screwed 41. - 5/5/2013 1:36:02 PM   
Marquo


Posts: 1271
Joined: 9/26/2000
Status: offline
Until this is fixed I think the Axis player should set morale at 105 - 110%.

(in reply to Pelton)
Post #: 56
RE: New morale rule has screwed 41. - 5/6/2013 9:11:58 PM   
Joel Billings


Posts: 20488
Joined: 9/20/2000
From: Santa Rosa, CA
Status: offline
A new public beta should be out by tomorrow that will drastically reduce the chance of a unit getting the Die(NM/10) boost in NM. It doesn't remove it, but it makes it a very low chance, so it should not have a major impact on the game. We looked at other alternatives, but thought this was the best way to go. If we cut Soviet NM to 45 in 41, Soviet units could still race up to the 45 using the old boost and then be sent to the rear to refit to get to 50. With the new change, the Soviet morale will be a little higher in 1941, but the Germans will get a boost in the rest of the game as they'll now be able to recover to a NM higher than 50, something that wasn't really possible in the past.

_____________________________

All understanding comes after the fact.
-- Soren Kierkegaard

(in reply to Marquo)
Post #: 57
RE: New morale rule has screwed 41. - 5/6/2013 10:10:54 PM   
Michael T


Posts: 2190
Joined: 10/22/2006
From: Queensland, Australia.
Status: offline
Thanks Joel

_____________________________

'Deus le Volt!'
------------------

(in reply to Joel Billings)
Post #: 58
RE: New morale rule has screwed 41. - 5/6/2013 10:36:23 PM   
morvael


Posts: 2982
Joined: 9/8/2006
From: Poland
Status: offline
Wonder how it will work in the end. Under previous rules some units for 2 years on refit could not get from high 30s to low 40s, with NM approaching 50. If the NM/10 thing will be low chance it may be the same problem again. The chance should be higher for units having morale a lot under NM.

(in reply to Michael T)
Post #: 59
RE: New morale rule has screwed 41. - 5/7/2013 12:41:28 AM   
Shupov


Posts: 216
Joined: 2/7/2004
Status: offline
Thanks for the very quick assessment and response. I don't wan't my Russians to have an unfair advantage!

_____________________________

Two broken Tigers on fire in the night,
Flicker their souls to the wind...

Al Stewart, "Roads to Moscow"

(in reply to morvael)
Post #: 60
Page:   <<   < prev  1 [2] 3 4   next >   >>
All Forums >> [New Releases from Matrix Games] >> Gary Grigsby's War in the East Series >> RE: New morale rule has screwed 41. Page: <<   < prev  1 [2] 3 4   next >   >>
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

0.107