Matrix Games Forums

Forums  Register  Login  Photo Gallery  Member List  Search  Calendars  FAQ 

My Profile  Inbox  Address Book  My Subscription  My Forums  Log Out

Changing AFV equipment

 
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 >> Changing AFV equipment Page: [1] 2   next >   >>
Login
Message << Older Topic   Newer Topic >>
Changing AFV equipment - 2/11/2011 4:54:39 PM   
Schmart

 

Posts: 662
Joined: 9/13/2010
From: Canada
Status: offline
Maybe I'm missing something, but I'm begining to scratch my head a bit at why we can change aircraft equipment in air units, but we can't change AFV equipment in ground units (like one could do in WIR). Perhaps there's a reasonable programming explanation for this, perhaps too complex to add it to the code or something, but if it can be done in WIR, surely it isn't that difficult? We can do so much else to ground units, like mess with TOE, supply, etc, but not AFV assignment. And with the new patch, aircraft equipment assignment has been expanded.

For me, one of the great things about WIR was exactly that, being able to change unit major equipment (AFV/aircraft model). A new tank comes online, and one could have some influence on where they start going. In WitE, it seems random, and if I am launching a new offensive in the north (as example) I would want some new tanks there, and not have the tanks start going to the south, or half of the new tanks end up in motorised divisions...
Post #: 1
RE: Changing AFV equipment - 2/11/2011 5:00:50 PM   
cookie monster


Posts: 1693
Joined: 5/22/2005
From: Birmingham,England
Status: offline
You can prioritise which units receive upgrades first by only having those units set to REFIT

(in reply to Schmart)
Post #: 2
RE: Changing AFV equipment - 2/11/2011 5:11:26 PM   
FredSanford3

 

Posts: 567
Joined: 6/23/2007
Status: offline
+1 on manual AFV upgrades.  Why not make it just like aircraft?

(in reply to cookie monster)
Post #: 3
RE: Changing AFV equipment - 2/15/2011 3:53:13 AM   
Schmart

 

Posts: 662
Joined: 9/13/2010
From: Canada
Status: offline
Bump.

Only two people feel this way!? Fair enough I guess, if there aren't many people who agree I don't want to make a big deal out of it, but I am curious as to why aircraft, but not AFV's?

(in reply to FredSanford3)
Post #: 4
RE: Changing AFV equipment - 2/15/2011 5:35:46 AM   
Senno

 

Posts: 489
Joined: 12/27/2010
Status: offline
I agree it's a good idea. Nice to have, but not urgent.

(in reply to Schmart)
Post #: 5
RE: Changing AFV equipment - 2/15/2011 8:24:09 AM   
jomni


Posts: 2827
Joined: 11/19/2007
Status: offline
I like the idea but here are the complicating factors (on a programming standpoint).

In the game, upgrade/assignment of AFV is similar to any equipment in the TOE.  So if you put in this feature, you should be able to do the same for guns, mortars, squads, etc.  It also involves the usage of captured equipment.  So results might be very gamey unless there are mechanisms to prevent it.

< Message edited by jomni -- 2/15/2011 8:25:40 AM >


_____________________________


(in reply to Senno)
Post #: 6
RE: Changing AFV equipment - 2/15/2011 10:28:46 AM   
alfonso

 

Posts: 470
Joined: 10/22/2001
From: Palma de Mallorca
Status: offline
I like the idea, but...

-can lead to very gamey decisions, for instance, in turn 1 as Soviets you send all your T-34s to the pool so then can fight the Moscow battles, and let your T-26 to be massacred at the frontiers. So you need more programming to avoid it or you need House rules

-you need some limits to the AFVs that can be exchanged. I gave up playing WIR 3.3 because it was possible to have PanzerDivisions equipped exclusively with Tiger tanks.

-Why aircraft yes and AFVs no? Well, we can assume that planes can be tele-transported, and AFVs cannot (we can assume they are now rail-transported by the AI during the logistic phase, hidden to the player). Including the AFVs exchange should include some rail payment to do that...more programming, more balancing....

Similarly (and somewhat off-topic here), I liked the idea of production management, but in WIR many Axis players abused the system by changing ALL their aircraft production in turn 1 to FW-190A....

< Message edited by alfonso -- 2/15/2011 10:29:41 AM >

(in reply to jomni)
Post #: 7
RE: Changing AFV equipment - 2/15/2011 10:38:46 AM   
karonagames


Posts: 4712
Joined: 7/10/2006
From: The Duchy of Cornwall, nr England
Status: offline
quote:

I like the idea, but...

-can lead to very gamey decisions, for instance, in turn 1 as Soviets you send all your T-34s to the pool so then can fight the Moscow battles, and let your T-26 to be massacred at the frontiers. So you need more programming to avoid it or you need House rules

-you need some limits to the AFVs that can be exchanged. I gave up playing WIR 3.3 because it was possible to have PanzerDivisions equipped exclusively with Tiger tanks.

-Why aircraft yes and AFVs no? Well, we can assume that planes can be tele-transported, and AFVs cannot (we can assume they are now rail-transported by the AI during the logistic phase, hidden to the player). Including the AFVs exchange should include some rail payment to do that...more programming, more balancing....

Similarly (and somewhat off-topic here), I liked the idea of production management, but in WIR many Axis players abused the system by changing ALL their aircraft production in turn 1 to FW-190A....


+1





_____________________________

It's only a Game


(in reply to alfonso)
Post #: 8
RE: Changing AFV equipment - 2/15/2011 1:28:06 PM   
sillyflower


Posts: 3509
Joined: 8/4/2010
From: Back in Blighty
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: BigAnorak

quote:

I like the idea, but...

-can lead to very gamey decisions, for instance, in turn 1 as Soviets you send all your T-34s to the pool so then can fight the Moscow battles, and let your T-26 to be massacred at the frontiers. So you need more programming to avoid it or you need House rules

-you need some limits to the AFVs that can be exchanged. I gave up playing WIR 3.3 because it was possible to have PanzerDivisions equipped exclusively with Tiger tanks.

-Why aircraft yes and AFVs no? Well, we can assume that planes can be tele-transported, and AFVs cannot (we can assume they are now rail-transported by the AI during the logistic phase, hidden to the player). Including the AFVs exchange should include some rail payment to do that...more programming, more balancing....

Similarly (and somewhat off-topic here), I liked the idea of production management, but in WIR many Axis players abused the system by changing ALL their aircraft production in turn 1 to FW-190A....


+1 more. I was in favour of production control as an option before game came out but have changed my mind. Developers' time better spent on other improvements and working on WiTW.

not much point in armour swap outs if can't control production and lose a turn and experience every time.







_____________________________

web exchange

Post: I am always fearful that when I put this game down on the table and people see the box-art they will think I am some kind of neo-Nazi

Reply: They already know you're a gamer. What other shame can possibly compare?

(in reply to karonagames)
Post #: 9
RE: Changing AFV equipment - 2/15/2011 3:17:43 PM   
janh

 

Posts: 1216
Joined: 6/12/2007
Status: offline
Very true, having both a lever to change AFV and TOE, as well as control over production would be awesome, but also should proceed within authentic "technical" possibilities. I like the complex WITP-AE model of production -- you can do a lot, it all costs various resources, and production changes reduce the output dramatically for a long time. Everything needs to be considered carefully, and not everything is sensible or possible.

I don't know about the development costs to implement that still in this game, but I surely hope to see both in "War in Europe".

quote:

ORIGINAL: alfonso
-can lead to very gamey decisions, for instance, in turn 1 as Soviets you send all your T-34s to the pool so then can fight the Moscow battles, and let your T-26 to be massacred at the frontiers. So you need more programming to avoid it or you need House rules


And TOE and AFV changes should require extra time (unready forces), cost experience (a tank/plane crew can't be trained for all vehicles equally well, though differences could be small if it is only minor model change), require supply and transport (rail & truck) expenditures consistent with the transport cost of such equipment, (and in some cases the old stuff back to pool).

quote:

ORIGINAL: alfonso
-you need some limits to the AFVs that can be exchanged. I gave up playing WIR 3.3 because it was possible to have PanzerDivisions equipped exclusively with Tiger tanks.


It was quite insensible to have one division entirely equipped with heavies and weaken the other ones, because the combined arms worked better with them spread out. Besides, their advantage wasn't to extremely huge as a spearhead, and the would be blunted soon. One could also consider that those heavy tanks commonly were less available ("downtimes, breakdowns, maintainance"), and also the supply/support needs of the division would need to go up. Ideally it should be within the freedom of a player to try equipping whole divs with Tigers, or Stalins for that matter, but it should come with authentic disadvantages such as low average readiness state of the whole unit, higher supply cost etc. That would probably soon render such an approach impracticable -- though technically it was of course well possible.

quote:

ORIGINAL: alfonso
-Why aircraft yes and AFVs no? Well, we can assume that planes can be tele-transported, and AFVs cannot (we can assume they are now rail-transported by the AI during the logistic phase, hidden to the player). Including the AFVs exchange should include some rail payment to do that...more programming, more balancing....


Disagree on your first argument. Pilots were not in excess, and replacement aircraft usually came forward by rail as well...

quote:

ORIGINAL: alfonso
Similarly (and somewhat off-topic here), I liked the idea of production management, but in WIR many Axis players abused the system by changing ALL their aircraft production in turn 1 to FW-190A....


See the WiTP-AE production and R&D model. It is quite powerful, but you can only make changes within reason or else you could screw up the whole war economy... I think going that way would give authentic freedom, but would also show the costs. (if you wanted the Panthers early and numerous, you have a little room for advancement, but pay the price for it by slowing everything else; on the opposite you could stick to the PzIV and PzIII and Jagdpanzer, saving lots of resources on the development and building of other plattforms, maybe later make the PzIVG-H impact by sheer numbers...)

I think there would be many ways to tackle gamey tactics, but give players sufficient freedom to play such a game out by going beyond the "Hitler mindstate". Yet the question is: how much development time would it cost, and would it be worth it for Matrix/2by3? I assume as a start they could adapt the routines from WiTP-AE, but still sounds like a lot of work...

(in reply to alfonso)
Post #: 10
RE: Changing AFV equipment - 2/15/2011 3:58:06 PM   
alfonso

 

Posts: 470
Joined: 10/22/2001
From: Palma de Mallorca
Status: offline
Janh,we agree that production/replacements would be a very interesting feature, but my point was that it was not very easy to implement it in a realistic, un-gamey fashion. That part of WIR had a special appeal to me (I played WIR until last December, against AI), and when I read that WITE was not going to have it, it was a disapointment. There were many threads a year ago with people demanding production, but the developers thought otherwise, so I do no think it is likely they are going to change their mind in order to include production in the near future. But, with my experience of WIR in mind, I hoped that it was a optional feature that could be deactivated for PBEM game. I never underestimate the ability of humans to find holes in any system.


And, just curious: I always had thought that one of the roles of women pilots (for instance, this WASP beauty) during WWII was to fly the planes from the factories to the front (or to the ports if they were going to be transported by ship). Never read about transporting them by train. As I don't know how the Russians and Germans handled this, would you be kind enough to indicate where can I read about planes being usually transported by train?






Attachment (1)

< Message edited by alfonso -- 2/15/2011 4:04:22 PM >

(in reply to janh)
Post #: 11
RE: Changing AFV equipment - 2/15/2011 4:34:22 PM   
janh

 

Posts: 1216
Joined: 6/12/2007
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: alfonso
And, just curious: I always had thought that one of the roles of women pilots (for instance, this WASP beauty) during WWII was to fly the planes from the factories to the front (or to the ports if they were going to be transported by ship). Never read about transporting them by train.


I might be wrong, but I remember reading about that. Yet I recall also that a lot of aircraft factories had adjacent airfields. I think a lot today still have, like Grumman or Boeing. Perhaps they were not just for test flights?

Anyway, yes, you are right. Having such system adds a lot of potential, but also a lot of potential loop holes. The future will show whether enough people actually want to be able to manipulate that. The catch for AE is also that it requires a lot of time and planning, which some players merely consider boring micromanagement. Probably a tough balance to make everyone happy, and the only way is probably as you suggest: by making it optional.

(in reply to alfonso)
Post #: 12
RE: Changing AFV equipment - 2/15/2011 6:45:07 PM   
Schmart

 

Posts: 662
Joined: 9/13/2010
From: Canada
Status: offline
Some of the discussion has turned to production, which is not what I had intented at all. That is a whole different ball of wax. I was only refering to changing AFV models in units, the same way as in air units.

Some of you bring up some good points, such as about gamey tactics, which I agree with. However, some of those can be easily fixed. Loading up a division with Tigers should be theoretically impossible, since there are different types of tanks (light, medium, heavy, CS) assigned to different equipment slots, each with their own limits. You couldn't/shouldn't be able to load up the (example) 6th Panzer Division with Tigers, since it dosen't have a heavy tank slot to assign the Tigers to. The only (German) units with Tiger slots would be later war SS and GD Pz Divs, and they would be limited to only one company (15-20) of Tigers.

Captured AFVs is maybe a more difficult thing to control...but surely in the scheme of the game the numbers/effect are so small?

Yes, some restrictions/penalties would have to be put on morale, experience, ready/unready vehicles when the switch occurs (real life logistics and training difficulties/confusion when changing to a new vehicle).

T-34s in Jun 41 should again (theoretically) be simple to fix, by not allowing any AFV changes for tank and mech divisions. Once these divisions are destroyed/disbanded, it becomes a non-issue as new tank brigades and tank/mech corps would have normal allowance for changing tank models, again within the restrictions placed upon type equipment slot (light, medium, heavy, CS).

I guess I'm just a bit frustrated watching many of my new Pz-IV's going into motorized divisions, when I still have some entire panzer divisions equiped with Pz38t's in early 1943...I just think that if there is already this exact system in place for aircraft, it couldn't be that hard to translate it for AFVs. But I'm not a computer programmer, so maybe I don't understand the real life difficulties of implementing this for AFVs.

< Message edited by Schmart -- 2/15/2011 6:54:13 PM >

(in reply to janh)
Post #: 13
RE: Changing AFV equipment - 2/15/2011 7:00:44 PM   
Skacee

 

Posts: 75
Joined: 11/25/2009
Status: offline
+1

(in reply to Schmart)
Post #: 14
RE: Changing AFV equipment - 2/15/2011 7:04:40 PM   
squatter

 

Posts: 1031
Joined: 6/24/2006
Status: offline
Totally agree with OP.

Presumably those making arguments against manual AFV replacement also wish that there was no aircraft manual replacement in the game too. Perhaps they should start a thread arguing that the developers should withdraw that function in the next patch.

There's no question this was one of the abiding pleasures in WiR.

(in reply to Skacee)
Post #: 15
RE: Changing AFV equipment - 2/15/2011 7:08:40 PM   
Schmart

 

Posts: 662
Joined: 9/13/2010
From: Canada
Status: offline
Upon further thought, a Russian player pooling all T-34's early in 1941 to save them for the winter, while gamey, the player gives up their ability to slow AGS as historically, so in the process making Rostov/Kharkov (even Kursk) much more solid objectives for a German player in 1941...with the political/production/resource implications involved, maybe the Russian player can't afford to pull the T-34's out. And what prevents a Russian player now, from withdrawing T-34 heavy divisions from the front, keeping them (and thus the T-34's in reserve) until the winter?

< Message edited by Schmart -- 2/15/2011 7:12:08 PM >

(in reply to Skacee)
Post #: 16
RE: Changing AFV equipment - 2/15/2011 7:52:27 PM   
alfonso

 

Posts: 470
Joined: 10/22/2001
From: Palma de Mallorca
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: squatter

Totally agree with OP.

Presumably those making arguments against manual AFV replacement also wish that there was no aircraft manual replacement in the game too. Perhaps they should start a thread arguing that the developers should withdraw that function in the next patch.

There's no question this was one of the abiding pleasures in WiR.


Once established that planes can be tele-transported, because they fly, and AFVs cannot, I think there is a big difference between replacing planes and replacing AFVs using the model alluded by the OP (WIR).

And yes, it was a pleasure in WiR. I liked the explicit Panzer Battalions, it is a pity that they are now pooled in the TOE, so 100 tank replacements could consume many railpoints. I would like see all that stuff in WITE, IF properly modelled (tank type, rail costs, exp, readiness, administrative points, with voluntary downgrade beeing a blow for morale, etc). I think the ground replacements are now abstracted via the REFIT function, which gives priority to those units: perhaps too abstracted (?)




< Message edited by alfonso -- 2/15/2011 8:31:46 PM >

(in reply to squatter)
Post #: 17
RE: Changing AFV equipment - 2/15/2011 8:10:54 PM   
alfonso

 

Posts: 470
Joined: 10/22/2001
From: Palma de Mallorca
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Schmart

Upon further thought, a Russian player pooling all T-34's early in 1941 to save them for the winter, while gamey, the player gives up their ability to slow AGS as historically, so in the process making Rostov/Kharkov (even Kursk) much more solid objectives for a German player in 1941...with the political/production/resource implications involved, maybe the Russian player can't afford to pull the T-34's out. And what prevents a Russian player now, from withdrawing T-34 heavy divisions from the front, keeping them (and thus the T-34's in reserve) until the winter?


Nothing, but at least the tanks are moving, not being tele-transported, as in WIR. And in the process you are withdrawing also artillery, squads, flak, etc...not just the elite tanks as in WIR. And I am a BIG BIG BIG fan of WIR (it is the only wargame I have played, besides WITE).

By the way, I'd rather defend Kharkov in September with my T-34s than Lvov in June.

(in reply to Schmart)
Post #: 18
RE: Changing AFV equipment - 2/15/2011 8:16:22 PM   
alfonso

 

Posts: 470
Joined: 10/22/2001
From: Palma de Mallorca
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: alfonso

I like the idea, but...

-can lead to very gamey decisions, for instance, in turn 1 as Soviets you send all your T-34s to the pool so then can fight the Moscow battles, and let your T-26 to be massacred at the frontiers. So you need more programming to avoid it or you need House rules

-you need some limits to the AFVs that can be exchanged. I gave up playing WIR 3.3 because it was possible to have PanzerDivisions equipped exclusively with Tiger tanks.

-Why aircraft yes and AFVs no? Well, we can assume that planes can be tele-transported, and AFVs cannot (we can assume they are now rail-transported by the AI during the logistic phase, hidden to the player). Including the AFVs exchange should include some rail payment to do that...more programming, more balancing....

Similarly (and somewhat off-topic here), I liked the idea of production management, but in WIR many Axis players abused the system by changing ALL their aircraft production in turn 1 to FW-190A....


I cite myself to make it clear that if the 3 BUTs are addressed....I like the idea!

1) morale, exp, readiness, AP costs
2) TOE limits by category
3) Rail costs


< Message edited by alfonso -- 2/15/2011 8:19:48 PM >

(in reply to alfonso)
Post #: 19
RE: Changing AFV equipment - 2/15/2011 9:43:31 PM   
squatter

 

Posts: 1031
Joined: 6/24/2006
Status: offline
Agree with those buts alfonso.

(in reply to alfonso)
Post #: 20
RE: Changing AFV equipment - 2/16/2011 12:32:52 AM   
jomni


Posts: 2827
Joined: 11/19/2007
Status: offline
For those comparing to WITP, you also cannot swap tanks in the game.

_____________________________


(in reply to squatter)
Post #: 21
RE: Changing AFV equipment - 2/16/2011 1:44:00 AM   
FredSanford3

 

Posts: 567
Joined: 6/23/2007
Status: offline
I agree with alfonso's 3 Buts. My suggestions are to make the process as analogous to the aircraft swap system, addressing the 3 Buts like so:
1. Morale and experience issues exist regardless of whether the player initiates the change or it happening automatically. There should be some 'familiarization' impacts, but not that bad. AP costs are comparable to what it costs to change a gruppe's planes- say each category of vehicle changed is 1 AP.
2. Definitely agree on TOE limitations. Lt tank for Lt tank, Medium for Medium, etc. No Tiger Divisions. No production changes, either. Somebody's going to use the Pz-35's and -38's.
3. When airgroups change aircraft, they lose their turn. How about the same thing? Like HQ Buildup's effect. It would make it most efficient to change all of a division's vehicles at once if the production pool permits.

(in reply to alfonso)
Post #: 22
RE: Changing AFV equipment - 2/16/2011 4:18:42 AM   
Mynok


Posts: 12108
Joined: 11/30/2002
Status: offline

quote:

2. Definitely agree on TOE limitations. Lt tank for Lt tank, Medium for Medium, etc. No Tiger Divisions. No production changes, either. Somebody's going to use the Pz-35's and -38's.


I'm no expert but this makes sense in light of what I've learned (mostly second hand here) about TOEs. Even though the Germans were immensely flexible in putting together Kampfgruppen that really didn't ascribe to any standard Wehrmacht TOE, they still had a mix of unit types because this simply worked the best. There are missions that need to be performed by any combat unit that require specific types of units. You don't send a Tiger rolling down the road scouting ahead of the main force. That's what ACs and light tanks were for.

There's no reason in my limited perspective to not have multiple TOE options for units. If I want to keep a corps or two with the 39 German infantry TOE, should I be forced to change? I'll have issues because the changes were driven by losses and the inability to replace (as I understand it), but if I'm doing better than historically, it seems reasonable to be able to keep some this way. I'm mostly seeing things from the German perspective as I understand their historical situation much better than the Soviets.

Just thinking out loud here.


_____________________________

"Measure civilization by the ability of citizens to mock government with impunity" -- Unknown

(in reply to FredSanford3)
Post #: 23
RE: Changing AFV equipment - 2/16/2011 4:35:27 AM   
Aurelian

 

Posts: 4333
Joined: 2/26/2007
Status: offline
The TOE didn't apply just to German units in Russia, but also to those in France, Italy, Yugoslavia, and so on. So yes, you should be forced to change. Just like the Russians are.

Doing "better" historiaclly should also have consequences. Units were transferred West because Hitler feared the West would invade to take pressure off Russia.

I'm just thinking myself.

(in reply to Mynok)
Post #: 24
RE: Changing AFV equipment - 2/16/2011 8:28:48 AM   
Skanvak

 

Posts: 577
Joined: 4/3/2005
Status: offline
There should be administration cost too. I prefer the solution to have alternative TOE than swapping of tanks (even if I woud be pleased scrapping the Tiger I). The production is relater to the TOE which in turn depend of theorical debate about weapon use and therefore unit training. It is gamey to think you can change everything, the general below and soldiers will simply reject it (hence we have to add a moral cost in some case).

But, the soviet in later time, did keep old TOE (at least old tanks) to have more divisions to field.

Side note : I hate the micromanagement of WitP, so unless the interface is greatly user friendly or that a true multiplayer for one side is implemented, I will be against in too much increased in mocromanagement.

Beside historical porduction is the best to put Hitler influence in the game as some ask.


_____________________________


Best regards

Skanvak

(in reply to Aurelian)
Post #: 25
RE: Changing AFV equipment - 2/16/2011 9:48:44 AM   
jomni


Posts: 2827
Joined: 11/19/2007
Status: offline
Advanced Tactics lets the player micromanage the TOE, replancement, and reinforcement.  It's a fun and novel concept but it's quite tedious.  Also not historical.

_____________________________


(in reply to Skanvak)
Post #: 26
RE: Changing AFV equipment - 2/16/2011 9:58:47 AM   
janh

 

Posts: 1216
Joined: 6/12/2007
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: jomni
For those comparing to WITP, you also cannot swap tanks in the game.


Right, but tanks weren't that important, imho, and the focus is on air and naval management. Though being able to manipulate AFVs would have been a nice addition, there wouldn't be much point for doing so in the Pacific theater.

There is lots of great idea and "thinking out loud" in this thread! Hopefully the devs are reading it and will consider it when going for the next titles.

The suggestion to keep tank slots /light/medium/heavy is a good one. These were decisions made for optimal force economy before the war, I believe, to organize the new tank formations, but they were also adapted continuously during the war (i.e. the heavy tanks didn't exist in Poland). I think it is detailed somewhere on wiki as well how the ToE were derived. Since divisions are the main counter in this game it makes sense to take these basic ToEs as organizational unit, but give it a little room for flexibility (would kind of mimic the more flexible Kampfgruppen a bit, if you like).

As such, it would be nice if the player would be forced to stick with the doctrinal considerations and exchange device against similar device. But in the long term, if Gary and Co do the whole war from 1939 to 45, one also would need the ability to change those slots to upgrade the ToE's. It would therefore also be nice to have the option to adjust these slots by cost of AP points or so. I like Skanvaks suggestion here. Given the disadvantages that "too heavy" or "too light" formations would have (above discussion; after all, if there were no disadvantages, I would bet that the war would have seen a completely "heavy" LAH or TK, so the game should aim to mimic these disadvantages, not to forbid it generally), a player could use his freedom to create them, but would need to weigh carefully against all the other (better?) things his AP could do.

Besides, for whoever would prefer to stick to historical ToE developments, and equipment, all this could be made optional. Same as this can be selected in WITP/AE for the production and R&D system, or the plane upgrades, but I don't think many players really stick to the historically fixed course since something more fun is available. I can't recall an AAR within this "historical" setting.


< Message edited by janh -- 2/16/2011 10:01:41 AM >

(in reply to jomni)
Post #: 27
RE: Changing AFV equipment - 2/16/2011 8:15:38 PM   
Schmart

 

Posts: 662
Joined: 9/13/2010
From: Canada
Status: offline
I also agree with alfonso's 3 rules.

The equipment upgrade shouldn't be hard-coded fully manual (ie: no upgrades unless the player actions it). It should be pretty much the way it is WIR: auto-computer controled, untill the player over-rides, or have it as an option check-box in the preferences screen (auto vs manual AFV upgrade), or even still, as it is for air units (toggle button in unit info screen). This way, a player can choose to play with auto upgrade if he chooses not to manage it, or have the option to manage it manually if he wishes. As the game is even now, there are plenty of micro-management options for players to use, but the game is still very playable if a player does not do any micro-managing. I think having option features like this gives the game a bit more 'chrome' than other games and adds to re-playability value, but doesn't force micro-management down the throats of players who don't want it.

(in reply to janh)
Post #: 28
RE: Changing AFV equipment - 2/16/2011 11:09:51 PM   
molchomor

 

Posts: 197
Joined: 12/28/2009
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: squatter

Totally agree with OP.

Presumably those making arguments against manual AFV replacement also wish that there was no aircraft manual replacement in the game too. Perhaps they should start a thread arguing that the developers should withdraw that function in the next patch.

There's no question this was one of the abiding pleasures in WiR.


+1

i was one of those ranting about this missing feature a year ago...hopefully they will have time to implement it...then this ranting will stop


< Message edited by molchomor -- 2/16/2011 11:10:20 PM >

(in reply to squatter)
Post #: 29
RE: Changing AFV equipment - 2/16/2011 11:11:04 PM   
molchomor

 

Posts: 197
Joined: 12/28/2009
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Schmart

I also agree with alfonso's 3 rules.

The equipment upgrade shouldn't be hard-coded fully manual (ie: no upgrades unless the player actions it). It should be pretty much the way it is WIR: auto-computer controled, untill the player over-rides, or have it as an option check-box in the preferences screen (auto vs manual AFV upgrade), or even still, as it is for air units (toggle button in unit info screen). This way, a player can choose to play with auto upgrade if he chooses not to manage it, or have the option to manage it manually if he wishes. As the game is even now, there are plenty of micro-management options for players to use, but the game is still very playable if a player does not do any micro-managing. I think having option features like this gives the game a bit more 'chrome' than other games and adds to re-playability value, but doesn't force micro-management down the throats of players who don't want it.


+1

(in reply to Schmart)
Post #: 30
Page:   [1] 2   next >   >>
All Forums >> [New Releases from Matrix Games] >> Gary Grigsby's War in the East Series >> Changing AFV equipment 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

0.500