Matrix Games Forums

Forums  Register  Login  Photo Gallery  Member List  Search  Calendars  FAQ 

My Profile  Inbox  Address Book  My Subscription  My Forums  Log Out

Victory Point Conditions

 
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 >> The War Room >> Victory Point Conditions Page: [1]
Login
Message << Older Topic   Newer Topic >>
Victory Point Conditions - 10/5/2011 10:09:40 PM   
NotOneStepBack


Posts: 894
Joined: 6/17/2011
Status: offline
Let's all be honest here, (and before I am accused of being an Axis fanboy), that the Victory Point conditions have been created by the Kremlin. I think a proper re-valuation by the dev team on the victory conditions would go a long way towards keeping the game fresh and competitive throughout the entire campaign.

Here's a proposal, and I'm just throwing this out there to get some debate going, but I think that there needs to be some outright important cities that Axis has to take in order to secure victory. As is this stands now with the araments situation, Leningrad and Moscow are almost after-thoughts when it comes to over-all strategy, yet these are extremely high-profile targets politically. I highly doubt that OKH would not have these cities on the radar...at least in '41.

What do you guys think? What about some sudden death, decisive victory conditions, such as if Leningrad, Moscow, Kursk, Kharkov, etc are controlled by Axis in '41, it's game over. Such as:

'41: Leningrad, Moscow, Kursk, Kharkov, Stalino -- Decisive Victory

'42: Same as above, and Stalingrad

'43-'45 is up for debate, just throwing out some ideas.
Post #: 1
RE: Victory Point Conditions - 10/5/2011 10:30:44 PM   
Peltonx


Posts: 7250
Joined: 4/9/2006
Status: offline
Yes the VP system is just plain stupid and needs an over-all, but the devs have bigger fish to fry at this point. It is plain as day light that about no thought went into the current VP system.

I thk a system based off what they alrdy have set-up in smaller games would be nice.

If you hold city x you get y vp pts per turn ect ect.

Pelton

(in reply to NotOneStepBack)
Post #: 2
RE: Victory Point Conditions - 10/5/2011 10:47:23 PM   
Michael T


Posts: 4401
Joined: 10/22/2006
From: Queensland, Australia.
Status: offline
Sudden death conditions would be good. Even as an option. I think next game I will include sudden death conditions as a house rule. Not sure what yet though.

_____________________________


(in reply to Peltonx)
Post #: 3
RE: Victory Point Conditions - 10/5/2011 11:08:31 PM   
Q-Ball


Posts: 6880
Joined: 6/25/2002
From: Chicago, Illinois
Status: online
I would like a per-turn approach. As it is, a German victory is pretty much impossible.

Game is playable regardless.

Many of us played WITP-AE for years, and a Japanese auto-victory in that one is very rare. You have to basically take all of Australia, and sink the US Fleet. I took most of India once, and never came close.

_____________________________


(in reply to Michael T)
Post #: 4
RE: Victory Point Conditions - 10/6/2011 1:09:08 AM   
stone10


Posts: 238
Joined: 9/20/2008
Status: offline
under the current 1.05 patch, I think the 42 victory condition would be too easy for the Axis.

(in reply to Q-Ball)
Post #: 5
RE: Victory Point Conditions - 10/6/2011 6:06:51 AM   
Attack

 

Posts: 102
Joined: 10/4/2006
Status: offline
quote:

'41: Leningrad, Moscow, Kursk, Kharkov, Stalino -- Decisive Victory

'42: Same as above, and Stalingrad


I agree, but at the end of winter. This means that the Russians have lost the key cities AND the Red Army is too weak to recover them in a winter counteroffensive.

This will be much much better than historically the Germans did. To the soviets, it´s much easier to conquer Berlin before the end of 44 that to the Germans to reach these victory conditions.

< Message edited by Attack -- 10/6/2011 6:11:13 AM >

(in reply to stone10)
Post #: 6
RE: Victory Point Conditions - 10/6/2011 1:49:44 PM   
Balou


Posts: 813
Joined: 7/24/2009
Status: offline
Leningrad, Moscow, Kursk, Kharkov, Stalino decisive or sudden death in 41? This would somehow split the community. Majority - see polls - IIRC plays vs the AI and those objectives on normal/challenging are too easy within reach even befor mud.

(in reply to Attack)
Post #: 7
RE: Victory Point Conditions - 10/6/2011 5:17:18 PM   
Flaviusx


Posts: 7478
Joined: 9/9/2009
From: Southern California
Status: online
Those 41 sudden death conditions are quite possible to achieve even in PBEM. The only one of them which is seriously challenging is Moscow, and Moscow is by no means out of reach. The rest are taken quite regularly and easily in PBEM games. (Something needs to be done to make Leningrad a harder nut to crack, imo.)

I don't think those are very realistic conditions, either. The Soviets would certainly have fought on even losing all those.



_____________________________

WitE Alpha Tester

(in reply to Balou)
Post #: 8
RE: Victory Point Conditions - 10/6/2011 5:47:57 PM   
Attack

 

Posts: 102
Joined: 10/4/2006
Status: offline
quote:

I don't think those are very realistic conditions, either. The Soviets would certainly have fought on even losing all those.


May be. Barbarossa was a mistake, Germans have very little (or none) probabilities of a decisive victory (in real world).

But we´re talking about balance a game. IMHO, a game can be balanced in two ways:
-Changing the historical combat values (i.e., adding more tanks, doing the tanks faster or stronger...)
-Or adjusting the victory conditions. I prefer this one.

If the Germans never acheive in the game a total victory, and the Soviets do it, then is necesary to do some adjustements in total victory conditions.

But I agree with you, only to conquer these cities is too easy, a total victory should be more challenging. So that´s why I propose the second conditions: hold them at the end of winter. That means that was not soviet winter counteroffensive.

(in reply to Flaviusx)
Post #: 9
RE: Victory Point Conditions - 10/6/2011 8:49:31 PM   
Aurelian

 

Posts: 4055
Joined: 2/26/2007
Status: online

quote:

ORIGINAL: NotOneStepBack

Let's all be honest here, (and before I am accused of being an Axis fanboy), that the Victory Point conditions have been created by the Kremlin. I think a proper re-valuation by the dev team on the victory conditions would go a long way towards keeping the game fresh and competitive throughout the entire campaign.

Here's a proposal, and I'm just throwing this out there to get some debate going, but I think that there needs to be some outright important cities that Axis has to take in order to secure victory. As is this stands now with the araments situation, Leningrad and Moscow are almost after-thoughts when it comes to over-all strategy, yet these are extremely high-profile targets politically. I highly doubt that OKH would not have these cities on the radar...at least in '41.

What do you guys think? What about some sudden death, decisive victory conditions, such as if Leningrad, Moscow, Kursk, Kharkov, etc are controlled by Axis in '41, it's game over. Such as:

'41: Leningrad, Moscow, Kursk, Kharkov, Stalino -- Decisive Victory

'42: Same as above, and Stalingrad

'43-'45 is up for debate, just throwing out some ideas.


And if the above isn't met, the Axis lose.

(in reply to NotOneStepBack)
Post #: 10
RE: Victory Point Conditions - 10/6/2011 9:05:57 PM   
Balou


Posts: 813
Joined: 7/24/2009
Status: offline
Since Flaviusx mentioned that the aforementioned objectives are not unrealistic even in PBEM games, to me the question arises: is a decisive german victory in WitE in 1941 something that would be realistic in any eastern front simulation? Zillions of posts have argued with that and whith what ifs (eg earlier Typhoon etc). With the current settings, all these large cities don't have enough VPs, mainly because WitE doesn't take into account one factor: the psychological or political impact of territorial losses. This would require some sort of "morale" for the whole of a country and VP business could become a nightmare..

(in reply to Attack)
Post #: 11
RE: Victory Point Conditions - 10/6/2011 11:12:25 PM   
NotOneStepBack


Posts: 894
Joined: 6/17/2011
Status: offline
I think that is an excellent idea, and losing a major city should have a significant impact on national morale levels. It would give both sides a huge incentive to hold / keep cities. Losing 10 national morale or more for losing Moscow would cripple the Soviets with already low morale, nearly ensuring victory for Axis.

(in reply to Balou)
Post #: 12
RE: Victory Point Conditions - 10/6/2011 11:22:22 PM   
BletchleyGeek


Posts: 4587
Joined: 11/26/2009
From: Living in the fair city of Melbourne, Australia
Status: offline
Hi guys,

Pelton is certainly on the ball with respect this issue. Both about the solution (a VP system similar to that of scenarios) and about the devs having bigger fishes to fry.

I think this is a really important question - I really do, just do not take it too much to heart - so I've taken the data I've been collecting from my game with Q-Ball and composing a spreadsheet - how not - implementing a scoring function similar to that of scenarios. You should find it attached to this post.

I understand scenario VP system to be broken down into two different types: VPs awarded each turn by holding certain Victory Locations and VPs awarded because losses of men, artillery and afv's the opposing side incurs.

GC Max VP is 332, and the game only reports VP's for the Axis. So one can get the VP's awarded to victory locations just by subtracting from 332 whatever the Axis amount is. Those are the "current" VP's hoarded by the Evil Axis forces. By looking on the scenarios I see that a quite general rule
w.r.t. awarding VP's each turn is to get the # of VP's awarded at the end of the game, and divide them by ten. Each turn, this 10% is accumulated into the player's pot.

VP losses are conceptually more straightforward but require some manual work, by transcribing losses. VP's are awarded as follows:

1 VP for each 5,000 guys dead, pow or disabled
1 VP for each 500 artillery pieces counted as permanent loss
1 VP for each 50 AFV lost

If you take a look at the spreadsheet you'll see that this rough scoring function is describing eerily well how our game has been evolving.

Everything in the spreadsheet is configurable, including the VP loss and location multipliers.

Opinions are welcomed (and expected).

Attachment (1)

_____________________________

Wite2 - Lead Tester

(in reply to Balou)
Post #: 13
RE: Victory Point Conditions - 10/6/2011 11:53:57 PM   
BletchleyGeek


Posts: 4587
Joined: 11/26/2009
From: Living in the fair city of Melbourne, Australia
Status: offline
Whoops! Just found a bug there, check the revised version instead.

Attachment (1)

_____________________________

Wite2 - Lead Tester

(in reply to BletchleyGeek)
Post #: 14
RE: Victory Point Conditions - 10/7/2011 12:19:27 AM   
Peltonx


Posts: 7250
Joined: 4/9/2006
Status: offline
Nice job.

Someone like you be a person to put on a project like that for 2/3 for this game.

I agree with Flaviusx on the citys. Leningrad/Moscow/Tula/Stalino/Rostov is a little to easy. Only against the good russian players are they out of reach.

I like the VP per turn sytem, because once it is hammered out you basicly know by 43 if you have a snowballs chance in hell of winning or lossing.

At some point in the game you know you have reached XXXXXX VP and the other guy can't by the math get enough pts to win.

So in games you have the other person over matched you both know early on they cant win.

To much thinking for me to figure out a good sytem.

Pelton

(in reply to BletchleyGeek)
Post #: 15
Page:   [1]
All Forums >> [New Releases from Matrix Games] >> Gary Grigsby's War in the East Series >> The War Room >> Victory Point Conditions 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

0.141