Matrix Games Forums

Forums  Register  Login  Photo Gallery  Member List  Search  Calendars  FAQ 

My Profile  Inbox  Address Book  My Subscription  My Forums  Log Out

Fixing GD 1938

 
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] >> Advanced Tactics Series >> Mods and Scenarios >> Fixing GD 1938 Page: [1] 2   next >   >>
Login
Message << Older Topic   Newer Topic >>
Fixing GD 1938 - 4/12/2016 10:31:50 PM   
ernieschwitz

 

Posts: 2296
Joined: 9/15/2009
From: Denmark
Status: offline
Hi Guys (and Gals if there are any)...

I was hoping that you could use this thread to come up with what you think is wrong with GD 1938, and what you think could be done to fix it. Now remember some things may simply be impossible to implement (real time diplomacy and combat for instance), so within the framework of the ATG engine, is the way solutions should be presented.

I know this is kind of asking for it, opening up and asking for critique, but some things I am sure need fixing, or tweaking, and I'd like for this thread to be a list of this.

I would like to ask you to be gentle, in the way you word things, since both Bombur and I hold this creation very dearly. So If you could keep it respectful, we would love that.

Yours
Ernieschwitz
Post #: 1
RE: Fixing GD 1938 - 4/12/2016 11:26:34 PM   
baloo7777


Posts: 708
Joined: 5/18/2009
From: eastern CT
Status: offline
I wouldn't mind if the Heavy Tank, in all its types, were a bit less the all powerful force it is at present. And would like to see infantry have a bit more "inherent" ability to fight with armor in general.

_____________________________

JRR

(in reply to ernieschwitz)
Post #: 2
RE: Fixing GD 1938 - 4/12/2016 11:35:36 PM   
Twotribes


Posts: 5492
Joined: 2/15/2002
From: Jacksonville NC
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: baloo7777

I wouldn't mind if the Heavy Tank, in all its types, were a bit less the all powerful force it is at present. And would like to see infantry have a bit more "inherent" ability to fight with armor in general.

You mean make them ahistorical and fantasy?

(in reply to baloo7777)
Post #: 3
RE: Fixing GD 1938 - 4/12/2016 11:37:22 PM   
Twotribes


Posts: 5492
Joined: 2/15/2002
From: Jacksonville NC
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: baloo7777

I wouldn't mind if the Heavy Tank, in all its types, were a bit less the all powerful force it is at present. And would like to see infantry have a bit more "inherent" ability to fight with armor in general.

You are aware that GD1938 has AT guns, ATR's, Bazookas and such rather then embedding them in rifle units?

(in reply to baloo7777)
Post #: 4
RE: Fixing GD 1938 - 4/13/2016 12:14:40 AM   
LJBurstyn

 

Posts: 217
Joined: 4/19/2011
Status: offline
The best thing in my opinion would be to tweak the victory choices and circumstances. And to allow the choice to happen at a later turn.

(in reply to Twotribes)
Post #: 5
RE: Fixing GD 1938 - 4/13/2016 12:26:36 AM   
rhinobones

 

Posts: 705
Joined: 2/17/2002
Status: offline
Would like to see an optional game selection that allows AI opponents to randomly join into alliances. If some do form an alliance, they would all move during a single turn.

Regards, RhinoBones


_____________________________

Colin Wright:
Comprehensive Wishlist Forum #467 . . . The Norm (blessed be His name, genuflect three times and accept all values in the program as revealed truth)

Pre Combat Air Strikes # 64 . . . I need have no concern about keeping it civil

(in reply to ernieschwitz)
Post #: 6
RE: Fixing GD 1938 - 4/13/2016 12:29:00 AM   
Bombur

 

Posts: 2988
Joined: 7/2/2004
Status: offline
The excessive power of tanks vis a vis infantry is a matter of concern to us. In the last official version (221v) we decreased armour HP by 20%.

(in reply to rhinobones)
Post #: 7
RE: Fixing GD 1938 - 4/13/2016 12:34:43 AM   
ernieschwitz

 

Posts: 2296
Joined: 9/15/2009
From: Denmark
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: rhinobones

Would like to see an optional game selection that allows AI opponents to randomly join into alliances. If some do form an alliance, they would all move during a single turn.

Regards, RhinoBones


Sorry RhinoBones, that is outside of my ability. The game is not designed for AI opponents, first of all, and doing so was something that even Vic told me would be near impossible to do.

(in reply to rhinobones)
Post #: 8
RE: Fixing GD 1938 - 4/15/2016 1:27:51 AM   
Bombur

 

Posts: 2988
Joined: 7/2/2004
Status: offline
I have a question to you, would you like to have a more open world GD1938, or an approximate simulation of WW2 with minimal room for variation?

(in reply to ernieschwitz)
Post #: 9
RE: Fixing GD 1938 - 4/15/2016 2:27:10 AM   
Webizen


Posts: 1953
Joined: 4/12/2005
From: WV USA
Status: offline
I vote more open world. I'd rather make history than replay it.

quote:

ORIGINAL: Bombur

I have a question to you, would you like to have a more open world GD1938, or an approximate simulation of WW2 with minimal room for variation?



< Message edited by Webizen -- 4/18/2016 6:29:48 PM >


_____________________________

Tac2i

(in reply to Bombur)
Post #: 10
RE: Fixing GD 1938 - 4/15/2016 2:39:27 AM   
Twotribes


Posts: 5492
Joined: 2/15/2002
From: Jacksonville NC
Status: offline
I want the ability to change what happened with good play but prefer it resemble history.

(in reply to Webizen)
Post #: 11
RE: Fixing GD 1938 - 4/15/2016 4:03:14 PM   
cpdeyoung


Posts: 4011
Joined: 7/17/2007
From: South Carolina, USA
Status: offline
This can be handled with options, or house rules.

Open world victory conditions are tough.

Chuck

(in reply to Twotribes)
Post #: 12
RE: Fixing GD 1938 - 4/15/2016 5:27:34 PM   
gwgardner

 

Posts: 4057
Joined: 4/7/2006
Status: offline
Taking over minor countries diplomatically should be much more difficult, especially if the desire is to make the game historical. Is it possible to have an option, allowing the current diplomatic system for achieving an ahistorical type of play, and another diplo system for historical?

Notwithstanding my failure to ever end isolationism in the one game I entered as the USA, I was however gradually accumulating all of South and Central America with very little opposition and had more than 50 cities if I recall correctly, only a little less than Germany.

I noted that very quickly the USSR took over Turkey, France took over Spain, etc.

(in reply to ernieschwitz)
Post #: 13
RE: Fixing GD 1938 - 4/16/2016 3:27:29 PM   
cpdeyoung


Posts: 4011
Joined: 7/17/2007
From: South Carolina, USA
Status: offline
Remember that there is a way (discord) to make a nations relations go backwards.

Diplomacy is not passive in GD1938. Tightly fought diplomatic battles are possible. France does not get Spain all that often. We have seen Axis Turkey too.

GD1938 has a system where the "Axis minors" can arrive as they did historically, although it is shifted about one or two years earlier.

That being said there are some issues that could be altered.

1. The Americans in Scandinavia are a backdoor to war that the isolationist people would never have allowed. America can be active in the north and can gain Denmark, Norway, Sweden and Finland potentially. Their start points and growth rates there are probably too high.

2. The penalty for America influencing in the Western Hemisphere is too harsh, and leads to problems with new players who do not understand the path out of isolationism.

3. Please display the results of diplomacy on the notification, so you do not have to click through another blue card cycle to see them. If this is doable it would be nice.

4 Perhaps some dynamic movement in diplomatic status as the fortunes of war shift. Germany had much success in her recruitment of allies after her early success. On the other hand there is no way Spain was ever going to join a losing cause.

5. If we are going to continue with a 1938 start I think we need to slow everything down, perhaps a lot. This involves production, research, and diplomacy.

I just throw these out as thinking points.

Chuck

(in reply to gwgardner)
Post #: 14
RE: Fixing GD 1938 - 4/16/2016 3:38:17 PM   
cpdeyoung


Posts: 4011
Joined: 7/17/2007
From: South Carolina, USA
Status: offline
On Production :

I think we might move to monthly research availability. This would allow for something like an investable tech tree. The variability would be small, perhaps a month or two earlier, or later than historical.

Many leaders on the political side took an active role in bringing new tech forward. Hitler, for example, killed projects he did not like and favored those that demonstrated well.

Chuck

(in reply to cpdeyoung)
Post #: 15
RE: Fixing GD 1938 - 4/16/2016 4:57:05 PM   
cpdeyoung


Posts: 4011
Joined: 7/17/2007
From: South Carolina, USA
Status: offline
On Experience :

This is the issue I think most important.

There is too wide a range of experience, and morale. At the division level there are always new men. This is because all armed conflict involves losses on both sides. This may not be true of elite squads against raw, barely trained squads, but at divisional levels bullets fly both ways. In ATG it is possible to have elite divisions that take no battle losses, and with each success this result becomes more likely. This makes counter-attacking counter-productive (I could not resist the phrase). Those who only play the attacking powers might not realize how tough this is on the Soviet player, for example.

Since this is an ATG issue I think we need something like "superior doctrines" to address the width of the experience-morale-losses gap. I think 2-1, 3-1 should be the widest it gets. Now it is more like 5-1, even 10-1. In real life defenders tend to learn more from defeats than the attackers learn from victories, but that is not currently reflected in the simulation. If we had a mechanism to address this issue it would help I think. Perhaps another "superior training" dose, one that came with combat rather than being bought. Men exiting basic training in 1942 had learned new techniques than those of 1938. I have no problem with the Germans having an edge on the Soviets, but not such a large edge. The wear and tear of attacking just is lost in this model.

Do not make the mistake of thinking it is a German-Soviet problem. Once any nation starts on the downhill slope the 10-1, 20-1 range makes the slope too steep. It can be hard to realize the problem unless you are on the wrong side of it.

Chuck

(in reply to cpdeyoung)
Post #: 16
RE: Fixing GD 1938 - 4/16/2016 6:18:19 PM   
ernieschwitz

 

Posts: 2296
Joined: 9/15/2009
From: Denmark
Status: offline
On experience:

There are basically four things that can be adjusted regarding experience.

1). the autogain function: It can be capped at a max pr. round.
2). the augogain function: can be changed... (not an easy function to change to something reasonable)
3). the max exp. levels of troops can be changed.
4). the max exp free autogain can be capped earlier, or later.

Unsure if any of these would help any at all.

(in reply to cpdeyoung)
Post #: 17
RE: Fixing GD 1938 - 4/16/2016 6:19:28 PM   
ernieschwitz

 

Posts: 2296
Joined: 9/15/2009
From: Denmark
Status: offline
On research:

I'd like to know a bit more on the details of this before commenting. What exactly do you mean by monthly research...

(in reply to ernieschwitz)
Post #: 18
RE: Fixing GD 1938 - 4/16/2016 6:22:28 PM   
ernieschwitz

 

Posts: 2296
Joined: 9/15/2009
From: Denmark
Status: offline
On diplomacy:

Diplomacy is unlikely to change much. Mostly because I like that there is an alternative to combat to make smart moves. Taking over a country and making it closer to happening, gives a player something to think about. Coups and discord are possible to prevent take-overs by other countries... and I think that the right dynamic has been reached to create something worth investing in rather than waging war for all the PPs available.

(in reply to ernieschwitz)
Post #: 19
RE: Fixing GD 1938 - 4/16/2016 10:59:54 PM   
Bombur

 

Posts: 2988
Joined: 7/2/2004
Status: offline
Could some of you take notes of the number of VP controlled by each player in some games? Send me the game number, the year and months and number of VP owned by each country please? I´m working with ernie in a possible new (and simpler) system of victory that will reward both countries and coalitions.

(in reply to ernieschwitz)
Post #: 20
RE: Fixing GD 1938 - 4/18/2016 2:24:09 AM   
cpdeyoung


Posts: 4011
Joined: 7/17/2007
From: South Carolina, USA
Status: offline
What I mean by monthly research is that the units do not become available to research all at once in January.

If the PzIVG showed up in March 1942 in real life then this would be the date in the game that research is possible. Optional the player may spend PP to advance this a bit, one or two months maximum I think is realistic. If this is too difficult this can be waived.

This would not change the game a lot, but would be a bit more realistic, and would spread PP spending out.

Chuck

(in reply to Bombur)
Post #: 21
RE: Fixing GD 1938 - 4/18/2016 7:12:32 PM   
ernieschwitz

 

Posts: 2296
Joined: 9/15/2009
From: Denmark
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: cpdeyoung

What I mean by monthly research is that the units do not become available to research all at once in January.

If the PzIVG showed up in March 1942 in real life then this would be the date in the game that research is possible. Optional the player may spend PP to advance this a bit, one or two months maximum I think is realistic. If this is too difficult this can be waived.

This would not change the game a lot, but would be a bit more realistic, and would spread PP spending out.

Chuck


Yeah I see what you mean. At the moment it is programmed so that it has one event pr. batch of techs released. Making 12 times the number of events that is already in that part of the code seems impractical. However maybe a smarter way of coding it could be introduced. I´ll look into it. But it is not high on the list.

Yours
Claus / Ernieschwitz

(in reply to cpdeyoung)
Post #: 22
RE: Fixing GD 1938 - 4/21/2016 2:40:06 AM   
Bombur

 

Posts: 2988
Joined: 7/2/2004
Status: offline
Going to historical research is somewhat complex. I´m doing it in Bombur mod, but I went to auto research, you get the historical units in the historical time. If you want all the units to appear in the year/Month they were ready IRL it´s possible, but it´s also unrealistic since the ability to research depends on the amount of resources you have. If Germany kept its empire intact until 1945, they would have been able to produce lots of advanced units. If the USSR remained neutral in WW2, it was possible that Stalin would have implemented its ambitious naval expansion plans, including 60.000 ton battlehips. We decided to allow some flexibility to players, units can appear 1-2 years before the time they appeared in history. I don´t think the game would improve with a more rigid approach.

(in reply to ernieschwitz)
Post #: 23
RE: Fixing GD 1938 - 4/21/2016 6:53:00 AM   
ironduke1955


Posts: 1584
Joined: 5/17/2006
From: UK
Status: offline
quote:

On Experience : This is the issue I think most important. There is too wide a range of experience, and morale. At the division level there are always new men. This is because all armed conflict involves losses on both sides. This may not be true of elite squads against raw, barely trained squads, but at divisional levels bullets fly both ways. In ATG it is possible to have elite divisions that take no battle losses, and with each success this result becomes more likely. This makes counter-attacking counter-productive (I could not resist the phrase). Those who only play the attacking powers might not realize how tough this is on the Soviet player, for example. Since this is an ATG issue I think we need something like "superior doctrines" to address the width of the experience-morale-losses gap. I think 2-1, 3-1 should be the widest it gets. Now it is more like 5-1, even 10-1. In real life defenders tend to learn more from defeats than the attackers learn from victories, but that is not currently reflected in the simulation. If we had a mechanism to address this issue it would help I think. Perhaps another "superior training" dose, one that came with combat rather than being bought. Men exiting basic training in 1942 had learned new techniques than those of 1938. I have no problem with the Germans having an edge on the Soviets, but not such a large edge. The wear and tear of attacking just is lost in this model. Do not make the mistake of thinking it is a German-Soviet problem. Once any nation starts on the downhill slope the 10-1, 20-1 range makes the slope too steep. It can be hard to realize the problem unless you are on the wrong side of it. Chuck


I find the Soviets currently overpowered if you look at the quantities of losses the Soviets are able to sustain KV1 heavy tanks 200+ getting near 4 times the German losses,
if well used the Germans can do well on the Russian front, if they are not they will be crushed with ease, if every time the Germans Soviets or any other power do not perform as well a player believes they should,
we make alterations to make them more powerful, then we will be creating a imbalance in the game, the MOD designers can only aim for a realistic representation of German and Soviets forces and leave it to the players to fight it out.

I have played the Soviets several times and never found the Axis forces to be to powerful.

The main element to German failure was the winter it was the levelling of the playing field,
a loss of mobility and unpreparedness for winter warfare effected Germans forces and caused catastrophic losses to the Germans losses they never really recovered from,
that and bad decisions led to their defeat. As we don't have weather particularly Mud and Snow,
were the German advantages could be suspended, lets face it these advantages amount to only a 15% modification in combats, is it possible to alter this German modification for winter months.

And I might add that the effects of the winter and autumn could have been mitigated by the Germans, to inflict the same casualties on the Germans is to presume that the player would reach the same level of professional incompetence as the Germans historical Leader.

< Message edited by ironduke1955 -- 4/21/2016 7:21:35 AM >

(in reply to cpdeyoung)
Post #: 24
RE: Fixing GD 1938 - 4/24/2016 6:52:21 PM   
ironduke1955


Posts: 1584
Joined: 5/17/2006
From: UK
Status: offline
GD1938 221V-2

Just reading the preamble in the game Brief and General

"I'll begin about fighter interception, chances are generally low"

Can you just confirm the interception rates for the new build 221V-2 please

Just a minor bug

The FW190-f is shown on the production list for the Germans when you try and build the FW190-f you get the generic Fighter Bomber II

(in reply to ironduke1955)
Post #: 25
RE: Fixing GD 1938 - 4/24/2016 9:13:38 PM   
ernieschwitz

 

Posts: 2296
Joined: 9/15/2009
From: Denmark
Status: offline
Its the briefing that is wrong. It wasn't changed by bombur, and I changed it for v 221x.

(in reply to ironduke1955)
Post #: 26
RE: Fixing GD 1938 - 4/25/2016 7:29:51 PM   
Bombur

 

Posts: 2988
Joined: 7/2/2004
Status: offline
I can fix the Fw-190F for 2.21x....

(in reply to ernieschwitz)
Post #: 27
RE: Fixing GD 1938 - 4/26/2016 1:48:23 AM   
Bombur

 

Posts: 2988
Joined: 7/2/2004
Status: offline
Fw-190F bug fixed. Sent my file to our game 23 folder and also a copy to Claus in our joint folder.

(in reply to Bombur)
Post #: 28
RE: Fixing GD 1938 - 4/30/2016 1:13:29 AM   
Twotribes


Posts: 5492
Joined: 2/15/2002
From: Jacksonville NC
Status: offline
RPG-1 does not appear on list of sfts that can be assigned to TOE units.

(in reply to ernieschwitz)
Post #: 29
RE: Fixing GD 1938 - 4/30/2016 8:04:50 AM   
Twotribes


Posts: 5492
Joined: 2/15/2002
From: Jacksonville NC
Status: offline
Ok figured it out they upgrade from AT rifles.

(in reply to Twotribes)
Post #: 30
Page:   [1] 2   next >   >>
All Forums >> [New Releases from Matrix Games] >> Advanced Tactics Series >> Mods and Scenarios >> Fixing GD 1938 Page: [1] 2   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

0.125