Eastern Front 1941-1945 V8.1 for TOAWIV 12/2023

[governato]

done

[governato]

After getting a lot of useful feedback from the forum here is the newest release (attached at the end of the post), version 8.1 12/12/2023. It's a relatively minor upgrade, but it will improve your game experience in a few ways

Peipus.png (2.97 MiB) Viewed 751 times

- Small changes to the map in the Leningrad sector, Lake Peipus (38,15) is bigger and defending that area is now more realistic.
- Tallinn (8,30 Baltic states) will become a supply source for the Axis when conquered. Its supply rate will grow in 1942.
- Small changes to the rail network in the Prypet marshes
- Novorossyisk (42,60) is a Red Army minor supply source (it was/is a major harbour, if captured by the Axis then the Red Army supply to Sevastopol is cut)).

The top two map changes should not affect balance but will give the players some historical options: the Red Army can anchor its defensive line at Pskov, the Axis can draw supply from Tallinn, especially if the railroad from it is repaired and then push East towards Leningrad along the coast

- Some alternative graphics (place them in the Graphic Override folder) to make the railroads network more visible are included, (courtesy of user ncc1701e).
- updated some PO tracks.
- Front/Theater HQs have the right amount of XXXXXs on their counter
- Fixed a few few typos

Broken railway lines are easier to see when zoomed out (from an older v8 game)

brokenrail.png (895.48 KiB) Viewed 751 times

[FellingerXZ]

Why does the map end at the cities of Stalingrand, Gorky and Saratov? even if those would be lost the ussr wouldnt be knocked out. I feel like it would be better if you included all of European USSR

[governato]

Why does the map end at the cities of Stalingrand, Gorky and Saratov? even if those would be lost the ussr wouldnt be knocked out. I feel like it would be better if you included all of European USSR

The quick answer is: for an efficient use of designer time/resources+scenario historical focus.

The scenario map has a depth of 100-200 miles beyond what was historically achieved by the Axis at any point along the front line. There is enough space to cover for example, the planned envelopment of Moscow and Leningrad and a push towards Baku...
On a game perspective I have not found a Human vs Human AAR of any East Front game (TOAW, GWITE, DC Barbarossa) that went past the Stalingrad/Gorky/Murmansk line.

Surely a' what if' scenario that covers say a 1942 campaign to the Urals (as in 'The Man in the High Castle" novel) would be fun...there is a boardgame by a great designer (Ty Bomba) that covers that timeline Beyond the Urals Campaign 1942

I am considering (but noy any time soon as I have other projects in mind ) an hypothetical start where the Red Army deployment follows the original 1940 plan by generals Pavlov and Timoshenko, that is with most Red Army forces close to the SW border rather than deployed in depth..which was what the Axis was hoping for.

[cathar1244]

Fabio, hear you about designer time available. The modifiable elements in a TOAW scenario can rarely be altered without triggering a huge follow-on of other scenario changes that have to be made to keep everything in good order. I've rarely found changes that could be made in a few minutes that didn't have implications for other aspects of the scenario's design.

Cheers

[alomoes]

Tried PO vs PO, and Germans are winning handedly in 1944. About to recapture Leningrad (captured both it and stalingrad in 1941 and 1942). I assume PO is either a work in progress for the Soviets, or I got really lucky, or there's some kind of issue with the scenario. If it is unfixable, then sure, but Soviets got wrecked. So did the Germans, but it shouldn't be this close in my opinion. Case in point of there being a problem, 1 German unit took Stalingrad without meeting any resistance because they simply bypassed the main front. Kind of whack. I wish I took a picture, that was weird.

Update: while I was typing this, they took Leningrad again.

Pretty much:
Stuff keeps changing hands and both sides are out of supply.

[rhinobones]

Tried PO vs PO . . . I assume PO is either a work in progress for the Soviets, or I got really lucky, or there's some kind of issue with the scenario. If it is unfixable, then sure, but Soviets got wrecked.

The PO is normally designed (or should I say intended) to offer the player a competitive opponent. It defends critical objectives and assaults as ordered. The more advanced scenarios tend to use events to switch between multiple objective tracks giving the PO a bit more unpredictability and a more enjoyable game.

By expecting a PO vs PO game to simulate historical results you may be asking something that the designer did not intend. So long as the PO plays well against the human opponent, I don’t see that there is anything to fix. Also note that in a long scenario, such as EF 1941-45, it is just about impossible to program all of the events encountered during years of warfare and finish with a historical result. I find it amazing that the authors have done as well as they have. Kudos to them all.

For myself, I use PO vs PO mainly to get a sense of how the opening turns evolve into the battle I’m attempting to create. Other uses would be to verify timed events are triggered or that random features are in fact randomly selected. Many uses for PO vs PO play, just not in the manner you are describing.

Regards, RhinoBones

[governato]

A quick note on the PO opponent.

Over the 8+ versions and a lot of fine tuning of the scenario the PO has been programmed to be a fun opponent..for a while at least!

PO Axis vs Human (probably the most challenging, there is an ongoing AAR HERE

Human vs PO Red Army. (A good player should win in early 1942 or even earlier).


From the manual: 6.The Programmed Opponent (PO): Elmer, the game PO puts up a decent fight particularly through Spring 1942. If playing against the PO, human players are
strongly advised to help Elmer every few turns to reorganize armies, defend major cities and move air units closer to the front. The player could modify PO objectives
as the game progresses. These actions will greatly help the PO to provide an interesting challenge. The PO uses multiple tracks for both sides.



If you made it this far...and as mentioned out earlier (Thanks RB!), given the scripted nature and well known limitations of the TOAW "AI" there is no point for PO vs PO specific scripts. One has to keep in mind that the PO is not truly 'reactive'. The complex back and forth of the East Front after say, early 1942 can only be modeled in a very crude way through changing tracks and objectives (which this scenario does, see above). One can surely watch the the game PO vs PO, but as pointed out, mostly to check that events and other things work properly. (see image where the Red Army PO "won" vs the Axis PO in Feb 1945...). However the POs will not play in a realistic way suitable for such a long scenario and will tend to wear itself down too fast.


If one is interested in watching the computer play itself on the East Front I recommend Decisive Campaigns and GWITE2, they have 'clever' AIs that are capable of a) keeping a continous front and to b) even plan simple encirclements.

POvsPO.T190.2-5-45.png (4.38 MiB) Viewed 518 times

[FellingerXZ]

Why does the map end at the cities of Stalingrand, Gorky and Saratov? even if those would be lost the ussr wouldnt be knocked out. I feel like it would be better if you included all of European USSR

The quick answer is: for an efficient use of designer time/resources+scenario historical focus.

The scenario map has a depth of 100-200 miles beyond what was historically achieved by the Axis at any point along the front line. There is enough space to cover for example, the planned envelopment of Moscow and Leningrad and a push towards Baku...
On a game perspective I have not found a Human vs Human AAR of any East Front game (TOAW, GWITE, DC Barbarossa) that went past the Stalingrad/Gorky/Murmansk line.

Surely a' what if' scenario that covers say a 1942 campaign to the Urals (as in 'The Man in the High Castle" novel) would be fun...there is a boardgame by a great designer (Ty Bomba) that covers that timeline Beyond the Urals Campaign 1942

I am considering (but noy any time soon as I have other projects in mind ) an hypothetical start where the Red Army deployment follows the original 1940 plan by generals Pavlov and Timoshenko, that is with most Red Army forces close to the SW border rather than deployed in depth..which was what the Axis was hoping for.

Will check the wargame you listed. Also i asked because i remember playing Lemay's USSR 1941 scenario as germany and in it i had literally reached as far as Gorky,Stalingrand,Samara and Archangalesk and i was disapointed that the game did not continue after Op.Barbarossa

[ncc1701e]

Don't know if a revamp of the AI is in the pipe in a new TOAW update but it would be useful. The problem is that it would certainly break all scenario compatibility...

[alomoes]

Tried PO vs PO . . . I assume PO is either a work in progress for the Soviets, or I got really lucky, or there's some kind of issue with the scenario. If it is unfixable, then sure, but Soviets got wrecked.

The PO is normally designed (or should I say intended) to offer the player a competitive opponent. It defends critical objectives and assaults as ordered. The more advanced scenarios tend to use events to switch between multiple objective tracks giving the PO a bit more unpredictability and a more enjoyable game.

By expecting a PO vs PO game to simulate historical results you may be asking something that the designer did not intend. So long as the PO plays well against the human opponent, I don’t see that there is anything to fix. Also note that in a long scenario, such as EF 1941-45, it is just about impossible to program all of the events encountered during years of warfare and finish with a historical result. I find it amazing that the authors have done as well as they have. Kudos to them all.

For myself, I use PO vs PO mainly to get a sense of how the opening turns evolve into the battle I’m attempting to create. Other uses would be to verify timed events are triggered or that random features are in fact randomly selected. Many uses for PO vs PO play, just not in the manner you are describing.

Regards, RhinoBones

No problem, I just assumed that the human player would be able to exploit whatever caused the USSR to allow Germany to do what it did. If it's good from a human perspective, then great.

[Lascar]

I was wondering why Barbarossa starts with the Soviets possessing Petsamo. Was it for game balance concerns or something else?

[governato]

I was wondering why Barbarossa starts with the Soviets possessing Petsamo. Was it for game balance concerns or something else?

My mistake. Petsamo should be Axis controlled at start. Tx for catching it. Will fix it in the next version.