Matrix Games Forums

Forums  Register  Login  Photo Gallery  Member List  Search  Calendars  FAQ 

My Profile  Inbox  Address Book  My Subscription  My Forums  Log Out

HQ Buildup under 1.08

 
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 >> HQ Buildup under 1.08 Page: [1]
Login
Message << Older Topic   Newer Topic >>
HQ Buildup under 1.08 - 11/13/2014 12:46:08 PM   
wac29

 

Posts: 215
Joined: 1/13/2011
Status: offline
It seems to me the HQ buildup rules under 1.08 will result in much stronger german 41 offensives because:

The 25 hex rule vs. 20MP. This is especially significant in the center for turns 3-6 because of all the rivers and in the north for turns 6-12 because of the forests. This will result in buildups much further, hex-wise, from the railheads than before.

Being able to move the HQ on the turn of buildup. This eliminates the elaborate positioning of HQ's the turn before the buildup and of calculating the 20MP range. It will also enable buildups turn after turn vs. before was every other turn with the same HQ. The small penalty of getting slightly less supply because of using up a percentage of your movement points is overwhelmed, to me, by the flexibility of being able to move it at all on the buildup turn.

Re-assigning units to different HQs to save AP still works. For example, 2 corps of 3 mobile units each. Reassign the three units in the second corps to the first. Do the buildup with all six assigned to the first corps. AP cost is about 32 vs. 2 buildups of about 25 each =50. Because of the lower AP reassignment cost it will cost 6-12 AP to reassign roundtrip, resulting in a savings of 8-12 AP net.


I think you will see German players doing buildups multiple turns in a row on the same units and this will be quite difficult for the Red Army in 1941 to stop. Plus, with the lower AP reassignment costs for units and leaders there should be more AP available for buildups.

< Message edited by wac29 -- 11/13/2014 2:21:34 PM >
Post #: 1
RE: HQ Buildup under 1.08 - 11/13/2014 12:56:17 PM   
morvael


Posts: 10968
Joined: 9/8/2006
From: Poland
Status: offline
When the change was made for the first time during internal beta, the protection to MP reduction from failed leader admin/initiative rolls was also based on the buildup percentage (so at 50% you only got 50% of the 0.8*MP reduction) and the supply bonus was the only source of extra supply (there was no constant part) and the AP cost was higher. But it turned out that HQBU in this form was completely useless. I'm not a HQBU expert so I trusted what the other said. Gradually the limits on HQBU were retracted and this is what we have now. Please discuss this with one of the more HQBU-knowledgeable testers.

edit: I would be happy to block reassignment of units that did a HQBU (on the turn they did it and on the next). Would that be enough?

< Message edited by morvael -- 11/13/2014 2:01:55 PM >

(in reply to wac29)
Post #: 2
RE: HQ Buildup under 1.08 - 11/13/2014 1:17:01 PM   
wac29

 

Posts: 215
Joined: 1/13/2011
Status: offline
I am not being critical of the changes you made, just trying to envision from experience how players will use the new rules. We will see how the games play out in the forums but I know getting ~50MP two or three turns in a row for the same units in the summer of 1941 can be devastating. We may see more blowout 1941 German wins.

In my testing with the overloaded corps of six units, so 12CP, all six units were about 48-49MP the turn after the buildup (passed the leader checks), every time I tested it (3 times) I don't recall the leader but it was AGC.

I think not allowing buildups for HQ's that have had perhaps more than one unit assigned to it that turn would eliminate the reassigning AP trick. Units are reassigned every turn here and there for different reasons so it would be good to have the ability to assign one unit and still buildup. Not sure how you would program that...

The simplest way might be overload HQ's cannot do buildups since that is what you do with the AP trick in essence. In this case what if you do the buildup and then attempt to assign additional units? I have not tested that....

< Message edited by wac29 -- 11/13/2014 2:44:01 PM >

(in reply to wac29)
Post #: 3
RE: HQ Buildup under 1.08 - 11/13/2014 1:29:53 PM   
wac29

 

Posts: 215
Joined: 1/13/2011
Status: offline
What do other people think about the 25 hex and moving HQ rules?

< Message edited by wac29 -- 11/13/2014 2:46:20 PM >

(in reply to wac29)
Post #: 4
RE: HQ Buildup under 1.08 - 11/13/2014 1:35:55 PM   
morvael


Posts: 10968
Joined: 9/8/2006
From: Poland
Status: offline
Currently in HQBU leader tests are automatically passed, as in 1.07.

I agree overload should stop buildup as well. But the restriction to reassign will also be important, because it will impact strength in combat a lot if you fight under overloaded corps.

(in reply to wac29)
Post #: 5
RE: HQ Buildup under 1.08 - 11/13/2014 1:44:39 PM   
morvael


Posts: 10968
Joined: 9/8/2006
From: Poland
Status: offline
Units assigned after buildup is done are not doing a buildup themselves for free, so it's safe.

edit: in any case I would only block changing the assignment of combat units that did a HQBU to another HQ, not by blocking assignment of more units to a HQ that did a HQBU.

< Message edited by morvael -- 11/13/2014 2:46:08 PM >

(in reply to morvael)
Post #: 6
RE: HQ Buildup under 1.08 - 11/13/2014 2:06:49 PM   
mktours

 

Posts: 712
Joined: 5/25/2013
Status: offline
I tend to agree with wac29.
I don't understand why 1.08 make so much changes, most of which have never been required by players in the forum, so why bother to change them? I feel overwhelmed by the change log and didn't read a single line of the PDF, nor play a single minute of 1.08..

(in reply to wac29)
Post #: 7
RE: HQ Buildup under 1.08 - 11/13/2014 2:08:24 PM   
timmyab

 

Posts: 1903
Joined: 12/14/2010
From: Bristol, UK
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: wac29

What do other people think about the 25 hex and moving HQ rules?

Well I suspect it's going to be too strong.
We'll see once Pelton posts the results from his 1.08 games. I should think he's having a field day with 1.08.
I'd like to scrap HQ buildup completely. I'd prefer something like a 'priority' button on HQs which would allow for extra supplies in incremental steps, say 10% per click at a cost in APs with a maximum percentage allowed per turn related to distance from rail head.

(in reply to wac29)
Post #: 8
RE: HQ Buildup under 1.08 - 11/13/2014 2:24:51 PM   
wac29

 

Posts: 215
Joined: 1/13/2011
Status: offline
I am glad to know the rule about leaders automatically passing the test after buildup.

It is good units can't be attached after the buildup and get it for free.

It will be interesting seeing how the attachment restriction gets worked out. I vote for no buildups for overloaded HQ's. It seems to be the simplest way. If people are operating their mobile HQs overloaded, which they wouldn't if they did the math on how bad it is to their leader rolls, they need to change the way they play or not get buildups for those HQs.

I do think the other two things in my original post are more significant to game balance though.

< Message edited by wac29 -- 11/13/2014 3:27:46 PM >

(in reply to morvael)
Post #: 9
RE: HQ Buildup under 1.08 - 11/13/2014 2:46:02 PM   
mktours

 

Posts: 712
Joined: 5/25/2013
Status: offline
HQ build up is already too powerful in the old version, in my game with Saper222, he did many HQ build up, and much to my surprise, he seemed didn't have vehicle shortage.
Before I played with him, I didn't realize that GHC didn't have Vehicle shortage no matter how many HQ build up it made. I only made 3-4 HQ build up in my GHC games (though none of my GHC games past T15).

(in reply to wac29)
Post #: 10
RE: HQ Buildup under 1.08 - 11/13/2014 2:52:07 PM   
Denniss

 

Posts: 6120
Joined: 1/10/2002
From: Germany, Hannover (region)
Status: offline
HQ buildup was perverted/misused by some players + the additional supplies/fuel were created out of thin air or taken from locations all over the map.
This rework should prevent misuse + player should see increased vehicle usage for buildup.
As with many other changes in 1.08 this needs a wider audience for testing and finetuning.

(in reply to mktours)
Post #: 11
RE: HQ Buildup under 1.08 - 11/13/2014 3:16:00 PM   
wac29

 

Posts: 215
Joined: 1/13/2011
Status: offline
Denniss,

I agree that it needs a wider audience and testing but disagree about this rework preventing misuse. How do you see it preventing misuse?
What I am suggesting is it will likely encourage more buildups because the conditions to do them are less restrictive than 1.07.

< Message edited by wac29 -- 11/13/2014 4:22:21 PM >

(in reply to Denniss)
Post #: 12
RE: HQ Buildup under 1.08 - 11/13/2014 3:22:08 PM   
heliodorus04


Posts: 1627
Joined: 11/1/2008
From: Denver Colorado
Status: offline
Remember that the tradeoff for moving any HQ/unit that will later build up in the turn is that the amount of re-supply you take is inversely related to how much you move. The more you move (on the turn you build up) the less payoff you get for buildup. Thus, you're better off doing what you did before: don't move on the turn you use buildup.

I agree it's powerful, but it was before too. There remain several critical things Soviet players must do:
1) Defend cities that have resources. Don't lose the factories in Kharkov, Stalino, Tula, Dnepopetrovsk etc. because you did not garrison them well enough.

2) Know your rail supply routes, especially in the area east of the Pripyets to Kursk. You can get a whole lot of units cut off if you find yourself using the Kursk western rail line as your only source of supply.

3) Know how ZOC impacts movement.

4) Never ever let the German cut off Leningrad the easy way (isolating all 3 ports across Lake Ladoga). It takes very few troops to ensure HQBU cannot accomplish this.

_____________________________

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 #: 13
RE: HQ Buildup under 1.08 - 11/13/2014 3:25:23 PM   
Northern Star


Posts: 1881
Joined: 2/17/2008
Status: offline
I suggest you to wait a bit before making other changes... the HQBU costs so many APs that it will be impossible in my opinion to make so many HQBU in few turns.
In my last Road to Moscow pbem I didn't manage to do a single HQBU in 9 turns. Now we'll see... I doubt it will work against heavily reinforced lines. Remember it only gives you more MP and not more strength.

_____________________________

War in the East alpha tester

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xPV9JWWtOQ0

(in reply to wac29)
Post #: 14
RE: HQ Buildup under 1.08 - 11/13/2014 8:05:11 PM   
Pelton


Posts: 9572
Joined: 4/9/2006
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: wac29

It seems to me the HQ buildup rules under 1.08 will result in much stronger german 41 offensives because:

The 25 hex rule vs. 20MP. This is especially significant in the center for turns 3-6 because of all the rivers and in the north for turns 6-12 because of the forests. This will result in buildups much further, hex-wise, from the railheads than before.

Being able to move the HQ on the turn of buildup. This eliminates the elaborate positioning of HQ's the turn before the buildup and of calculating the 20MP range. It will also enable buildups turn after turn vs. before was every other turn with the same HQ. The small penalty of getting slightly less supply because of using up a percentage of your movement points is overwhelmed, to me, by the flexibility of being able to move it at all on the buildup turn.

Re-assigning units to different HQs to save AP still works. For example, 2 corps of 3 mobile units each. Reassign the three units in the second corps to the first. Do the buildup with all six assigned to the first corps. AP cost is about 32 vs. 2 buildups of about 25 each =50. Because of the lower AP reassignment cost it will cost 6-12 AP to reassign roundtrip, resulting in a savings of 8-12 AP net.


I think you will see German players doing buildups multiple turns in a row on the same units and this will be quite difficult for the Red Army in 1941 to stop. Plus, with the lower AP reassignment costs for units and leaders there should be more AP available for buildups.


Not sure WTH you are but your full of you know what.

Data is what counts not some one I have never seen do sht on the field of play.

I am playing what I consider the best SHC player still playing, a very good SHC player and one I consider ok to good.

The results so far are what I kinda thought going in Saper has a WOS built on turn 5 50+ stacks at landbridge and 20-30 south of Leningrad and south his standard blob of counter attacking.

So far going by my game vs Saper SHC is still WAY WAY over powered
vs one of the others I think I will win or draw
and the 3rd draw or lose.

Play the game vs people(known on forums) that have some skills then post the DATA.

Just throwing sht against the wall is just that.

Post results.

Thanks for posting bro, but play then bitch.

I have a long long history of both.




_____________________________

Beta Tester WitW & WitE

(in reply to wac29)
Post #: 15
RE: HQ Buildup under 1.08 - 11/13/2014 8:15:52 PM   
Pelton


Posts: 9572
Joined: 4/9/2006
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: timmyab


quote:

ORIGINAL: wac29

What do other people think about the 25 hex and moving HQ rules?

Well I suspect it's going to be too strong.
We'll see once Pelton posts the results from his 1.08 games. I should think he's having a field day with 1.08.
I'd like to scrap HQ buildup completely. I'd prefer something like a 'priority' button on HQs which would allow for extra supplies in incremental steps, say 10% per click at a cost in APs with a maximum percentage allowed per turn related to distance from rail head.


20 hex limit would be fine with me.

Dude we had way way better HQBU back in the day and it was completely usless vs Bomazz, Flav, MT, Saper, Katza, TDV, Hoooper
none of these Players ever lost a single game as SHC and Most never lost Leningrad.

The problem is we have allot of very unskilled SHC players.

HQBU vs highly skilled SHC is completely usless after turn 4, but without it not a single highly skill GHC player vs a highly skill SHC would ever get across the rivers and would lose the game by early 44.

The current ruleset so heavly favors SHC its not funny.

Sure vs average to poor SHC I can smoke MP and vs the Good one get a draw.

vs the best SHC players its not even fun to play.

Play GHC vs Saper then post the data.

1.08 helps GHC for sure, but still falls short I believe, but I will not know until the games play out.

I will be posting the AAR;s from all 3 as soon as we get past turn 8.

Data data data is what matters - good data. Don't be a newbie whining.

I picked 3 skilled players at all 3 skill levels Great/ good and average.

Why waste my time playing poor players? OK Ok it is fun as hell, but not going to help balance game




< Message edited by Pelton -- 11/13/2014 9:18:06 PM >


_____________________________

Beta Tester WitW & WitE

(in reply to timmyab)
Post #: 16
RE: HQ Buildup under 1.08 - 11/13/2014 8:20:22 PM   
Pelton


Posts: 9572
Joined: 4/9/2006
Status: offline
wac29

When you can have 50 CV stacks by turn 5 talk to me. level 2 fort in lt woods.





< Message edited by Pelton -- 11/13/2014 9:21:08 PM >


_____________________________

Beta Tester WitW & WitE

(in reply to wac29)
Post #: 17
RE: HQ Buildup under 1.08 - 11/13/2014 8:36:34 PM   
Pelton


Posts: 9572
Joined: 4/9/2006
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Northern Star

I suggest you to wait a bit before making other changes... the HQBU costs so many APs that it will be impossible in my opinion to make so many HQBU in few turns.
In my last Road to Moscow pbem I didn't manage to do a single HQBU in 9 turns. Now we'll see... I doubt it will work against heavily reinforced lines. Remember it only gives you more MP and not more strength.


You can do about 2 per turn.

The logistics model is allot different people.

Play the game.


_____________________________

Beta Tester WitW & WitE

(in reply to Northern Star)
Post #: 18
RE: HQ Buildup under 1.08 - 11/13/2014 8:40:48 PM   
Pelton


Posts: 9572
Joined: 4/9/2006
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: mktours

HQ build up is already too powerful in the old version, in my game with Saper222, he did many HQ build up, and much to my surprise, he seemed didn't have vehicle shortage.
Before I played with him, I didn't realize that GHC didn't have Vehicle shortage no matter how many HQ build up it made. I only made 3-4 HQ build up in my GHC games (though none of my GHC games past T15).


Saper was using the port HQBU exploit and a few others.

He was doing them 30 hexes past Rail heads, Saper is king of fuel exploits for sure.

I think we have with MT's help nerfed all of them

If saper does the HQBU's like he use to he be down on trucks before winter and he would get as real ass kicking during the 41/42 winter.

Saper is a good SHC player, but as GHC I think all his toys have been taken away


_____________________________

Beta Tester WitW & WitE

(in reply to mktours)
Post #: 19
RE: HQ Buildup under 1.08 - 11/13/2014 9:27:32 PM   
timmyab

 

Posts: 1903
Joined: 12/14/2010
From: Bristol, UK
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Pelton
Don't be a newbie whining.

Lol, I'm not whining, I prefer to play the Axis side anyway. I have a suspicion that the Axis side will be too strong in 41 and 42, that's all. Only time will tell if I'm right or not.


(in reply to Pelton)
Post #: 20
RE: HQ Buildup under 1.08 - 11/13/2014 10:30:58 PM   
Pelton


Posts: 9572
Joined: 4/9/2006
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: timmyab


quote:

ORIGINAL: Pelton
Don't be a newbie whining.

Lol, I'm not whining, I prefer to play the Axis side anyway. I have a suspicion that the Axis side will be too strong in 41 and 42, that's all. Only time will tell if I'm right or not.




No man not you, lol

Sorry was being a little to general my bad.

I know you your good+

The dude or chick that started thread.


< Message edited by Pelton -- 11/13/2014 11:32:52 PM >


_____________________________

Beta Tester WitW & WitE

(in reply to timmyab)
Post #: 21
RE: HQ Buildup under 1.08 - 11/16/2014 12:11:56 PM   
mktours

 

Posts: 712
Joined: 5/25/2013
Status: offline
Denniss,
Thanks for the reply.
I didn't think Saper misused HQ build up in the game between him and me.I think that is the reward for he having more knowledge and experience of the game.
The increase of Vehicle usage is a very good improvement, but I think Wac29 has a good argument about the new HQ build up rules. According to his argument, the new rule will make HQ build up more powerful than before, I tend to agree.
Thanks for your works for improving the game, I personally don't like to study new rules (as I don't have much free time), but that is a personal issue, perhaps I shouldn't mention it in my comments above, I apologize for doing so.

quote:

ORIGINAL: Denniss

HQ buildup was perverted/misused by some players + the additional supplies/fuel were created out of thin air or taken from locations all over the map.
This rework should prevent misuse + player should see increased vehicle usage for buildup.
As with many other changes in 1.08 this needs a wider audience for testing and finetuning.


(in reply to Denniss)
Post #: 22
RE: HQ Buildup under 1.08 - 11/16/2014 12:25:33 PM   
mktours

 

Posts: 712
Joined: 5/25/2013
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: Pelton


quote:

ORIGINAL: mktours

HQ build up is already too powerful in the old version, in my game with Saper222, he did many HQ build up, and much to my surprise, he seemed didn't have vehicle shortage.
Before I played with him, I didn't realize that GHC didn't have Vehicle shortage no matter how many HQ build up it made. I only made 3-4 HQ build up in my GHC games (though none of my GHC games past T15).


Saper was using the port HQBU exploit and a few others.

He was doing them 30 hexes past Rail heads, Saper is king of fuel exploits for sure.

I think we have with MT's help nerfed all of them

If saper does the HQBU's like he use to he be down on trucks before winter and he would get as real ass kicking during the 41/42 winter.

Saper is a good SHC player, but as GHC I think all his toys have been taken away


I didn't see Saper doing anything wrong regarding HQ build up in the game between him and me, it is the number of HQ build ups that surprised me.
I think what Wac29 and others are talking is that the new HQ build up is more powerful than before, and he made a very good argument, it is nothing about trying to take some advantage from GHC or try to make the game more in favor of SHC.
The HQ build up is a small issue in this huge game. In my game with Saper, Saper's GHC is deeply hopeless from 1943 spring on, so you see I am not complaining about the HQ build ups he made. People are discussing technical issues here, not game balance.


< Message edited by mktours -- 11/16/2014 1:27:12 PM >

(in reply to Pelton)
Post #: 23
RE: HQ Buildup under 1.08 - 11/16/2014 12:58:50 PM   
Pelton


Posts: 9572
Joined: 4/9/2006
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: mktours

quote:

ORIGINAL: Pelton


quote:

ORIGINAL: mktours

HQ build up is already too powerful in the old version, in my game with Saper222, he did many HQ build up, and much to my surprise, he seemed didn't have vehicle shortage.
Before I played with him, I didn't realize that GHC didn't have Vehicle shortage no matter how many HQ build up it made. I only made 3-4 HQ build up in my GHC games (though none of my GHC games past T15).


Saper was using the port HQBU exploit and a few others.

He was doing them 30 hexes past Rail heads, Saper is king of fuel exploits for sure.

I think we have with MT's help nerfed all of them

If saper does the HQBU's like he use to he be down on trucks before winter and he would get as real ass kicking during the 41/42 winter.

Saper is a good SHC player, but as GHC I think all his toys have been taken away


I didn't see Saper doing anything wrong regarding HQ build up in the game between him and me, it is the number of HQ build ups that surprised me.
I think what Wac29 and others are talking is that the new HQ build up is more powerful than before, and he made a very good argument, it is nothing about trying to take some advantage from GHC or try to make the game more in favor of SHC.
The HQ build up is a small issue in this huge game. In my game with Saper, Saper's GHC is deeply hopeless from 1943 spring on, so you see I am not complaining about the HQ build ups he made. People are discussing technical issues here, not game balance.



Under 1.08 it is hard to do more then 2 per turn when your 15+ hexes from a RH, old rules you could easly do 3 or 4 per turn. Because of some of the changes its more important to get leadership changes done and SU's in units then HQBU's after turn 3 or 4.

Under 1.07 you could do 2 or 3 in south and 1 or 2 in north.

I am not using HQBU's much at all in my 3 games so far.


_____________________________

Beta Tester WitW & WitE

(in reply to mktours)
Post #: 24
Page:   [1]
All Forums >> [New Releases from Matrix Games] >> Gary Grigsby's War in the East Series >> HQ Buildup under 1.08 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

0.133