Matrix Games Forums

Forums  Register  Login  Photo Gallery  Member List  Search  Calendars  FAQ 

My Profile  Inbox  Address Book  My Subscription  My Forums  Log Out

Changes in the next public beta now in test

 
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 >> Changes in the next public beta now in test Page: [1] 2 3 4   next >   >>
Login
Message << Older Topic   Newer Topic >>
Changes in the next public beta now in test - 10/1/2013 6:00:57 AM   
Joel Billings


Posts: 31739
Joined: 9/20/2000
From: Santa Rosa, CA
Status: offline
We have a version of WitE now in test that adds a new Reduced Blizzard Effect game option, makes some changes in the air transport rules, and fixes a slew of bugs. Most of these changes have been in test for almost a week now. We're hoping this will be available as a public beta within a week or so. When it does become available, please realize we have limited internal testing capabilities now so when it becomes available it needs to be considered a beta with all the pros and cons that come with that.

That said, we want to thank Dominik (morvael), whose efforts have made it possible to provide this new game option (and the bug fixes). Dominik threw himself into the code and showed a real talent for understanding what was going on and how to work with it. We've always wanted to provide a game option but never had the time or resources to make it happen. We don't claim that the new game option creates a more balanced game. It is something for players to try out and decide for themselves. It will probably make for a more interesting first winter, but we cannot claim to know exactly how it will impact play or game balance. The air transport changes are changes we think make sense and should tone down the worst of the abuse, as we agree it was too easy to airdrop large quantities of fuel. Here's the complete list of changes coming in the next public beta:


V1.07.11– September 30, 2013

• New Features and Rule Changes

1. New Game Option - Added "reduced blizzard effect" option. It can be enabled in Game Options for a new game. When using this option some of the First Winter rules are altered. Simply put Combat Value Modifications are no longer random, in worst case they should be equivalent to the old rules’ best case or slightly better, and the player can mitigate those effects to a certain degree by using forts and cities of all sizes.

The detailed rules are as follows:
- The automatic loss of 1 morale for non-Finnish Axis units whenever they are attacked and the final end of combat odds are greater than 1:2 mentioned in patch notes “v1.04.10 - April 18, 2011” is disabled.
- Combat Value of non-Finnish, non-mountain and non-ski Axis units during Blizzard or Snow weather between December 1941 and April 1942 in the First Winter Zone is reduced to 36% plus 4% for each point scored when checking the following conditions (to a maximum of 100% - 16 points):
Month is:
- January, February, March, April +4
Weather Zone of the battle hex is:
- Europe +3
- Southern Soviet +2
- Central Soviet +1
When the unit is in or next to the battle’s hex and the unit’s hex contains:
- Terrain:
1. Heavy Urban +5
2. Light Urban +4
3. City +3
4. Any terrain with a Town +1
- Fort +1 (for each level)
When the unit defends in the battle hex (is not a reserve unit):
- Always +4
- Month is February +4
- Month is March, April +8
- Weather is Snow +6
- Terrain:
1. Heavy Urban +5
2. Light Urban +4
3. City +3
4. Any terrain with a Town +1
5. Light Woods, Heavy Woods, Rough, Mountain terrain without a town +1

- The displayed CV values for Finns, Soviets, and Axis mountain and ski units are no longer doubled during first winter blizzard turns.

Example: A German division in January ‘42 (+4) located in Central Soviet Weather Zone (+1) in a town in clear terrain (+1) with a level 2 fort (+2) is defending (+4, +1 from town again). The score is 13, so the CV will be reduced to 36+13*4=88% of the original CV value. The same division would attack a neighboring hex with 68% of the original CV value.

Note: The player has to remember that CV is also reduced by damage to ground elements when taking part in combat (rule 22.3.2), so the units are weaker than they seem from the values on counters. However, preparing a proper defensive line based on cities, forts and reserves (perhaps at a cost of reduced gains in November ‘41), should allow for holding it successfully in most parts of the front, and the units should be in much better shape for a summer offensive.


2. Rule Change – Air transport of fuel and supplies is changed as follows: 1) Level bombers may not transport fuel. 2) Only 25-75% of supplies are dropped successfully, while only 16-50% of fuel is dropped successfully (was 33-100% for both). 3) Hexes that contain or are adjacent to a friendly air base unit will receive all of the supplies and fuel that are dropped (no drop attrition as stated in item 2 occurs).
3. Interface Change - Added the ability to sort units properly according to their Arabic and/or Roman numerals, including subunit designations before “/” sign.
4. New Interface - Added detailed CV attack and defend values under the counter in the unit detail window.
5. Editor - Added the ability to specify individual division numbers and their guard status for Soviet Cavalry and Mountain Corps in the Scenario Editor.
6. Improved AI - Added missing "march madness" rule to AI evaluation functions. Fixed minor mismatch in an AI evaluation function concerning value of ground elements in support units attached to combat units as opposed to ground elements in their parent units.


• Bug Fixes

1. Added proper handling of Soviet mountain corps units. Its subunits (mountain divisions) retain their number, guard status and victory/defeat counters, and the corps can now build up again after breaking down.
2. Fixed the detection of a nearby (in or next to target hex) airbase on air supply drop, that was meant to prevent cargo reduction (waste) but was never working.
3. Fixed the way vehicles, vehicle need, ammo, ammo need, supply, supply need, fuel, fuel need, support, support need and air supply tons are divided between subunits when breaking down a Division or a Corps, so that no items are lost (in case the original number did not divide by 3 without remainder) and support is displayed properly.
4. Fixed the way support, support need and air supply tons are pooled from subunits when building up a Division or a Corps, so that support is displayed properly.
5. Fixed experience loss when building up an existing Soviet Corps from subunits containing ground elements not present in Corps TOE, for example newer or alternate equipment.
6. Fixed evaluation of artillery ground elements in units having less than 75% of required ammo, whose value was doubled rather than halved.
7. Added missing fatigue calculations when merging or building up units.
8. Improved several functions to work correctly for support units by properly detecting their location.
9. Fixed problems with Soviet air army renames not working, when a similarly named air army was present (for example 16th Air Army blocks rename to 6th Air Army).
10. Fixed problems with Soviet front renames affecting other units, when a similarly named air army was present (for example Southern Ural M.D. was renamed together with Southern Front).
11. Fixed bug in morale formula when merging units, where one unit was weighted as if having 100% TOE instead of actual number.
12. Improved movement formula when merging units.
13. Fixed a bug where subunits of two different Soviet corps with the same number and of the same type (but with different Guards status) could be used for building up, clearing corps allegiance from remaining subunits.
14. Fixed a bug that would clear corps allegiance from subunits of a Soviet Corps when corps merge failed.
15. Fixed a bug when recombining a non-Guards Soviet Corps eligible for Guards status (due to majority of its subunits achieving Guards status when operating alone), would clear corps allegiance from subunits of a Guards Soviet Corps with the same number and type.
16. Fixed a bug when recombining a non-Guards Soviet Corps eligible for Guards status (due to majority of its subunits achieving Guards status when operating alone), would not trigger an immediate rename, resulting in duplicate corps names.
17. Fixed a bug when a message about not enough AP was shown when building up an existing Soviet Cavalry Corps if there was less than 5 AP available.
18. Fixed a bug with modified combat value being 100 times higher than it should (invisible to the user).
19. Fixed a crash bug in Debug mode (and possible memory corruption) when opening unit detail window for a Soviet Cavalry Corps.
20. Fixed a crash bug in Debug mode (and possible memory corruption) when displaying attached support unit that has moved in unit detail window.
21. Fixed a crash bug when AI tried to pull back its units.
22. Fixed many bugs causing leader rolls to fail for support units.
23. Allowed airhead supply to reach HQs and airbases.
24. Fixed command point bonus for O.K.H. to be unlimited (instead of 900).
25. Fixed bug causing Soviet motorized units not to have +10 bonus to NM as documented in the manual/patch notes.
26. Fixed picking new HQ to work correctly for units in airhead supply (in a limited way as for isolated units, instead as for fully supplied).
27. Fixed automated support unit detach (using [X] button) to work in the same way as picking new HQ manually (will work for isolated and airhead supply units if a path can be traced between them; the support unit will be properly blocked from being reassigned again this turn).
28. Fixed x,y unit detection to work for cities, and support units attached to combat units or cities.
29. Fixed bug in path tracing between units not working for off-map units and units in the same hex.
30. Enabled display of support unit supply status (only airhead supply tonnage was displayed previously).
31. Updated CV for ground element types: Special Forces, Marine Commando, Airborne Engineer, Air Landing Section and Light Armored Car from 0 to 3; CS Cavalry Tank and CS Infantry Tank from 0 to 9.
32. Defined motorized unit for combat CV and Admin roll rules as being non-HQ, permanently motorized and/or having an Armor, Mechanized, Motorized or SP GUN TOE type.
33. Fixed a bug with units on buildup being treated as isolated during next friendly logistics phase (and for the remainder of the turn in case of support units). Made sure that support unit's supply situation will update in sync with parent's supply situation.
34. Fixed memory leak in air code, preventing the game from running long AI vs AI games.


• Data and Scenario Changes

Scenario Updates
1. Fixed. 1941 campaigns, Operation Barbarossa, Road to Kiev, Road to Leningrad
Finnish units 1st/2nd Command Bn with Italian support squads
Romanian High command with Hungarian support squads
VI Rum. Corps with German support squads
2. Fixed. 654th Heavy Panzerjager Bn (1376) uses wrong OB and equipment, should be OB 280 with Elefant, not 281 with Nashorn in TOE and equipped with future Jagdpanther
3. Various data fixes


Data Changes
1. 88mm Field Gun (0071) – Increased Fuel Use from 6 to 22; to be consistent all guns size 2 and larger now require a prime mover (except rail only guns whose fuel use is 0).
2. 75mm Anti-aircraft Gun (0162) – Increased Load Cost from 16 to 22; Increased Fuel Use from 6 to 22.
3. 76mm Field Gun (0169) – Changed Device from ZiS-3 gun to more probable F-22 gun.
4. 75mm Anti-aircraft Gun (0213) – Increased Fuel Use from 6 to 22.
5. 75mm Anti-aircraft Gun (0273) – Increased Size to 2; increased Fuel Use from 6 to 22.
6. 80mm Anti-aircraft Gun (0308) – Increased Size to 2; increased Fuel Use from 6 to 22.
7. 122mm Field Gun (0370) – Increased Size to 2; increased Fuel Use from 6 to 22.
8. 3.7in Anti-aircraft Gun (2068) – Decrease Fuel Use to 18 (for WitW assumes use of American halftrack as towing vehicle).
9. 4.5in Field Gun (2098) – Decrease Fuel Use to 18 (for WitW assumes use of American halftrack as towing vehicle).
10. 5.5in Field Gun (2100) – Decrease Fuel Use to 18 (for WitW assumes use of American halftrack as towing vehicle).
11. 7.2in Howitzer (2101) – Decrease Fuel Use to 18 (for WitW assumes use of American halftrack as towing vehicle).
12. 8in Howitzer (2102) – Decrease Fuel Use to 18 (for WitW assumes use of American halftrack as towing vehicle).
13. 240mm Howitzer (2116) – Decrease Fuel Use to 18 (for WitW assumes use of American halftrack as towing vehicle).
14. 155mm Field Gun (2120) – Decrease Fuel Use to 18 (for WitW assumes use of American halftrack as towing vehicle).
15. 155mm Howitzer (2587) – Increase Fuel Use to 18.
16. 4.5in Field Gun (2588) – Decrease Fuel Use to 18.
17. 149mm Howitzer (2639) – Decrease Fuel Use to 18 (for WitW assumes use of American halftrack as towing vehicle).
18. Some minor corrections to fuel use by ground elements to further consistency of treatment.
19. Renamed the Hetzer to the Jagdpanzer 38(t) Hetzer.
20. 0003 Ar 234B - remove rear cannon armament as this was never used in production aircraft, re-calculate ammo cost
21. 0177 Do 17M(R) - remove empty equipment slot
22. 0307 R-5 - upgrade to 0326 U-2 (recon)
23. 0308 R-Z - upgrade to 0317 Il-2
24. 0307 R-10 - upgrade to 0326 U-2 (recon)
25. 0314 SB-2(recon) - upgrade to 0331 Pe-2R
26. 0342 TB-3G-2 - upgrade to 0347 Li-2



_____________________________

All understanding comes after the fact.
-- Soren Kierkegaard
Post #: 1
RE: Changes in the next public beta now in test - 10/1/2013 7:40:26 AM   
821Bobo


Posts: 2271
Joined: 2/8/2011
From: Slovakia
Status: offline
Probably no chance to apply reduced blizzard effect on ongoing games, right?

Anyway it looks to be great feature. Thanks

(in reply to Joel Billings)
Post #: 2
RE: Changes in the next public beta now in test - 10/1/2013 8:47:14 AM   
SigUp

 

Posts: 1062
Joined: 11/29/2012
Status: offline
These are great news. The changes to the blizzard sound very good. So in the worst case of a German unit defending in a North Soviet Zone hex during December 1941 it still retains 52% of its CV. That's great, seems like the days of getting frustrated because even three Panzer Divisions with a total of 250 stacked in a clear hex getting pushed away like ragdolls are at an end. Coupled with the restrictions on aeriel supply I hope that 1941 will produce better results. Less running and more dynamic battles. Thanks for listening to the community. And also a great thanks to morvael.

(in reply to 821Bobo)
Post #: 3
RE: Changes in the next public beta now in test - 10/1/2013 8:57:59 AM   
mmarquo


Posts: 1376
Joined: 9/26/2000
Status: offline
"Rule Change – Air transport of fuel and supplies is changed as follows: 1) Level bombers may not transport fuel. 2) Only 25-75% of supplies are dropped successfully, while only 16-50% of fuel is dropped successfully (was 33-100% for both). 3) Hexes that contain or are adjacent to a friendly air base unit will receive all of the supplies and fuel that are dropped (no drop attrition as stated in item 2 occurs). "

Thanks for this. Question: what if the airbase is stacked with a panzer HQ or divisions far forward 200 kms behind enemy lines? Are we going to witness mulling fuel thanks to blitzing airbases? I know it is a design nightmare, but still...

Thanks again.

(in reply to Joel Billings)
Post #: 4
RE: Changes in the next public beta now in test - 10/1/2013 10:19:19 AM   
morvael


Posts: 11762
Joined: 9/8/2006
From: Poland
Status: offline
SigUp: remember that you get 52% but the CV is diminished because of element damage and additional fatigue, so it's more like 25% in the end (3-5CV for a panzer division). It's still better than the original situation (where most units ended with CV of 1), and can be mitigated by constructing a defensive line based on cities and forts. Also, more morale will be preserved for the summer, because the automated loss of 1 point in lost combat is disabled. I hope this is enough to make the Germans think about standing fast instead of running west as worthwile option, though it was extensively tested only in AI vs AI games (and the AI is not good at preparing this defensive line), so players may find ways to abuse it, so perhaps some factors will have to be revised (a point or two down) in the next patch.

Marquo: I proposed some rules like not including moved airbases or airbases in freshly taken territory (dark gray) to help alleviate this problem, but ultimately they were not accepted and implemented. I hope that with only transport aircraft carrying fuel it will be still enough to prevent front-wide deep-ranging panzers. This could be added (I'm speaking only on my part), if these new rules provide too good (drops were nerfed, but previously airbases didn't help in reducing drop loss because of the bug).

821Bobo: unfortunately that is so.

< Message edited by morvael -- 10/1/2013 10:20:34 AM >

(in reply to mmarquo)
Post #: 5
RE: Changes in the next public beta now in test - 10/1/2013 11:10:47 AM   
SigUp

 

Posts: 1062
Joined: 11/29/2012
Status: offline
Yes, I did realize that. You mean the 3-5 CV for a Panzer Division is the reduction or the final CV? I hope and believe these changes will make it somewhat easier to hold in the open terrain in the centre and south (Central and Southern Soviet Weather Zone). Because right now the Germans can slow down and hold in the favourable terrain in front of Moscow come January, but it is of no use if you are getting trashed in the South forcing the withdrawal from there. Just as an example, currently I'm playing the Moscow 41-42 scenario against loki. Since January hit (we are now in February) the lines from 30 miles east of Rzhev to 40 miles south of Kaluga have practically not changed, due to favourable terrain and level 1 to 2 forts. But if I hadn't pushed my units up to Ryazan and Voronezh in November I would have been forced to abandon these lines as it is just not possible to slow down the Red Army with 1 CV ants who have a tough time holding against hasty attacks by Cavalry Corps. And even Panzer Divisions are getting trashed like nothing, leading to me driving around with a couple of divisions possessing only like 2 tanks. To be mentioned is also that we play with reduced logistics, which according to loki makes it harder for him to sustain attacks, as his units lose CV relatively fast if he pushes them to the front lines in the areas in which I have thoroughly destroyed the rail system.

(in reply to morvael)
Post #: 6
RE: Changes in the next public beta now in test - 10/1/2013 11:31:24 AM   
morvael


Posts: 11762
Joined: 9/8/2006
From: Poland
Status: offline
Infantry mostly ended up in the 2=3 range (unless they were fresh reinforcements coming later, in January or February or a very high morale ID), panzers something like 4=6 (if kept safe in cities), though some badly handled were also 2=3s. Remember you won't see huge Soviet (and Finn and Mountain) CVs on map anymore, because their CV is no longer virtually doubled. So it's hordes of 1=1s (Guards and Cav corps change that situation, though) vs 2=3 Germans. And I'm pretty sure with proper defensive lines the Germans will hold much better than in AIvsAI games. Holding in the south should also be possible, because there are a lot of towns to bump the CV and then there is the weather zone modifier.

If the Soviets are able to concentrate their best troops (Gds, Cavalry) in one area, then they are guaranteed to make a dent in German lines with deliberate attacks. That was actually my goal. However, this will be limited to just part of the front as the strong units cannot be everywhere. They still retain their 1:1->2:1 bonus till February and have lower movement costs. However, good lines will not have to fear stacks, or even single units, of 1=1 ants. It will be good to plan the defensive lines with mobile units in close reserve - note that you have a chance to bump up attack CV as well, if the battle happens next to the sheltered unit. Some counterattacks may be possible to, from the strongpoints, though remember that before every attack your units take additional fatigue/disruption hit and their CV falls some 20% because of that, before the real battle starts.

(in reply to SigUp)
Post #: 7
RE: Changes in the next public beta now in test - 10/1/2013 11:42:46 AM   
terje439


Posts: 6918
Joined: 3/28/2004
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Joel Billings

2. Rule Change – Air transport of fuel and supplies is changed as follows: 1) Level bombers may not transport fuel. 2) Only 25-75% of supplies are dropped successfully, while only 16-50% of fuel is dropped successfully (was 33-100% for both).



BB

Terje

_____________________________

"Hun skal torpederes!" - Birger Eriksen

("She is to be torpedoed!")

(in reply to Joel Billings)
Post #: 8
RE: Changes in the next public beta now in test - 10/1/2013 11:50:53 AM   
morvael


Posts: 11762
Joined: 9/8/2006
From: Poland
Status: offline
And BB means what?

(in reply to terje439)
Post #: 9
RE: Changes in the next public beta now in test - 10/1/2013 11:51:24 AM   
SigUp

 

Posts: 1062
Joined: 11/29/2012
Status: offline
@morvael: Then that gives hope. Because my defensive strategy in that Moscow scenario is unfeasible for campaign games. In December and early January I used my Panzer units to plug dangerous holes and afterwards kept them there to hold dangerous spots. Obviously with a possible summer offensive in mind such a tactic would be suicide due to the morale damage.

@terje: Why rolling your eyes? If the blizzard is mitigated so that the Germans won't have to run 2 hexes per turn west, but can actually hold that is a good trade off.

EDIT: BB = byebye perhaps?

(in reply to terje439)
Post #: 10
RE: Changes in the next public beta now in test - 10/1/2013 11:53:55 AM   
morvael


Posts: 11762
Joined: 9/8/2006
From: Poland
Status: offline
You guys focus too much on change number 1) and 2). Actually for me 22) is the biggest improvement since 1.0 :)
24) and 33) are also great for Axis player.

(in reply to SigUp)
Post #: 11
RE: Changes in the next public beta now in test - 10/1/2013 12:00:33 PM   
terje439


Posts: 6918
Joined: 3/28/2004
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: SigUp

@terje: Why rolling your eyes? If the blizzard is mitigated so that the Germans won't have to run 2 hexes per turn west, but can actually hold that is a good trade off.



Because as the Axis you now need to have a perfect T1-5, and as one of those that never has that, the further reduction in Pz movement means there is no chance at all for me to have an enjoyable game.
Imo the game was far better 5 patches (or so) ago than it is atm...

*edit* yup ByeBye.

Terje

< Message edited by terje439 -- 10/1/2013 12:01:09 PM >


_____________________________

"Hun skal torpederes!" - Birger Eriksen

("She is to be torpedoed!")

(in reply to SigUp)
Post #: 12
RE: Changes in the next public beta now in test - 10/1/2013 12:12:17 PM   
SigUp

 

Posts: 1062
Joined: 11/29/2012
Status: offline
Well, depending on how the blizzard turns out you might not need a perfect turn 1-5.

(in reply to terje439)
Post #: 13
RE: Changes in the next public beta now in test - 10/1/2013 12:13:08 PM   
Bozo_the_Clown


Posts: 890
Joined: 6/25/2013
From: Bozotown
Status: offline
I think it's fantastic that the game is till being fine-tuned after all these years. This should make the game more interesting.

And yes, T1 becomes even more important but at least you won't have the silly situation of the Germans running all the way back to Kiev during blizzard.

I will definitely play an Axis game as soon as the new patch becomes available.

Thanks for the ongoing support!

(in reply to terje439)
Post #: 14
RE: Changes in the next public beta now in test - 10/1/2013 12:16:53 PM   
SigUp

 

Posts: 1062
Joined: 11/29/2012
Status: offline
And I do think it is a bit foolish to give up on the game yet. If Soviet resistance in the summer becomes too big an issue, who is to say that the developers won't make adjustments like the ones with the blizzard and aerial refuel right now? And Terje, your last two opponents are quite skilled as far as I can see. So who is to say that you can't get an enjoyable game against a less skilled Soviet player?

< Message edited by SigUp -- 10/1/2013 12:18:30 PM >

(in reply to Bozo_the_Clown)
Post #: 15
RE: Changes in the next public beta now in test - 10/1/2013 12:21:10 PM   
Oberst_Klink

 

Posts: 4662
Joined: 2/10/2008
From: Germany
Status: offline
Great news! Especially the flying air-tankers are now reduced... Any date about finding the new beta at the members area to d/l?

Klink, Oberst

_____________________________

My Blog & on Twitter.
Visit CS Legion on Twitter & Facebook for updates.

(in reply to SigUp)
Post #: 16
RE: Changes in the next public beta now in test - 10/1/2013 12:22:48 PM   
terje439


Posts: 6918
Joined: 3/28/2004
Status: offline
The thing is as I see it, the game is being redesigned to match the super turns, not the non-elite openings and moves, and that does not fit my game style, and sorry to say, each patch drives me further and further away. Others might not agree, but for me the game as of now is simply no fun, and this patch to me looks to be sending it further down the wrong (for me atleast) path.

Terje

_____________________________

"Hun skal torpederes!" - Birger Eriksen

("She is to be torpedoed!")

(in reply to SigUp)
Post #: 17
RE: Changes in the next public beta now in test - 10/1/2013 12:38:19 PM   
morvael


Posts: 11762
Joined: 9/8/2006
From: Poland
Status: offline
I beg to differ. I hope you'll see it for yourself, I'm not a powergamer myself, so I would not be happy coding things helping powergamers more than regular players. Remember that due to airbase fix you will deliver 100% fuel from transports to panzers in or next to airbase's hex.

Fixing rolls for support units means (due to better leaders and early extreme quality superiority) that Germans will have easier time fighting the Soviets in '41, one beta report shows that blasting through Leningrad's defenses with a stack full of attached pioneers is now much easier. Buildups will also no longer damage Axis units because they won't be treated as OOS anymore.

What I would like to see in the game, is the Axis to retain some Case Blue capability for '42, as my own PBEM games has shows that it's too easy to have a stalemate through the year. Mild blizzard will see that the Axis will stay closer to their highwatermark line than before and that their morale will be a bit better; thus they will be in better position for attack. Working support units will also make them stronger. I don't want to see encirclements the size of France happen in '42 and '43 though. Stronger in combat - yes, faster in penetration - no.

(in reply to terje439)
Post #: 18
RE: Changes in the next public beta now in test - 10/1/2013 12:41:19 PM   
Commanderski


Posts: 926
Joined: 12/12/2010
From: New Hampshire
Status: offline
Thank you for the continued support!

(in reply to terje439)
Post #: 19
RE: Changes in the next public beta now in test - 10/1/2013 12:43:22 PM   
Manstein63


Posts: 688
Joined: 6/30/2010
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: terje439

The thing is as I see it, the game is being redesigned to match the super turns, not the non-elite openings and moves, and that does not fit my game style, and sorry to say, each patch drives me further and further away. Others might not agree, but for me the game as of now is simply no fun, and this patch to me looks to be sending it further down the wrong (for me atleast) path.

Terje


Play as the Soviets I am willing to play you using this beta (when available) & after we have finished our current game. I have only played the Germans against the AI & scenarios & I have never liked the Bomber as fuel carriers rule anyway.
Manstein63

(in reply to terje439)
Post #: 20
RE: Changes in the next public beta now in test - 10/1/2013 12:43:39 PM   
821Bobo


Posts: 2271
Joined: 2/8/2011
From: Slovakia
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: terje439

The thing is as I see it, the game is being redesigned to match the super turns, not the non-elite openings and moves, and that does not fit my game style, and sorry to say, each patch drives me further and further away. Others might not agree, but for me the game as of now is simply no fun, and this patch to me looks to be sending it further down the wrong (for me atleast) path.

Terje


I can not agree. It is quite opposite. It will have impact on games with the "super" openings when Panzers are hanging on turn 5 around Vyazma, Kharkov etc w/o fuel. If you fail to advance you are close to railheads and there is no reason for fuel airdrop.

(in reply to terje439)
Post #: 21
RE: Changes in the next public beta now in test - 10/1/2013 12:50:43 PM   
morvael


Posts: 11762
Joined: 9/8/2006
From: Poland
Status: offline
Also, bug fix 31) means that 260 light armored cars the Germans have on 22 June give them some bonus 5.5CV in total :)

Current balance may be really shaken up by the fixes. I count 461 875 men, 10 877 guns and 727 AFVs in Axis support units (minus construction units), that can be now used to their fullest potential in the first period of war, while their counterparts on the other side are still weak and not so numerous (309 915/5 904/79).

(in reply to 821Bobo)
Post #: 22
RE: Changes in the next public beta now in test - 10/1/2013 12:53:18 PM   
terje439


Posts: 6918
Joined: 3/28/2004
Status: offline
Well, guess I see things different from the rest, which ofc is great for the producers and the others, but for me this game is going the wrong way.

But as I see it, with a less than perfect T1-5, you will encounter a severe USSR wall at the rivers, placed properly you will have severe issues penetrating it more than 2 hexes wide. Add that a single panzer division will be forced to retreat due to the way combat is resolved (numbers seems far too important early on to me), and you need to stack your panzers. That means fewer surrounded USSR units, which means fewer USSR surrenders, which means a higher USSR OOB. That again gives you further issues down the line at the next river.

So, let us all just agree to disagree

@Sean, sorry, but the game vs BigBaba is my last. I have no fun with this game anymore tbh.


Terje


_____________________________

"Hun skal torpederes!" - Birger Eriksen

("She is to be torpedoed!")

(in reply to 821Bobo)
Post #: 23
RE: Changes in the next public beta now in test - 10/1/2013 1:55:28 PM   
Lobster


Posts: 4981
Joined: 8/8/2013
From: Third rock from the Sun.
Status: offline
How about a phased movement option like was done by John Tiller Games for the Panzer Campaign series to make the game more realistic?

(in reply to Joel Billings)
Post #: 24
RE: Changes in the next public beta now in test - 10/1/2013 2:06:55 PM   
loki100


Posts: 10382
Joined: 10/20/2012
From: Utlima Thule
Status: online
quote:

ORIGINAL: terje439

The thing is as I see it, the game is being redesigned to match the super turns, not the non-elite openings and moves, and that does not fit my game style, and sorry to say, each patch drives me further and further away. Others might not agree, but for me the game as of now is simply no fun, and this patch to me looks to be sending it further down the wrong (for me atleast) path.

Terje


I think you have a valid point. If we look at the current batch of AARs, there are a couple of quite implausible axis gains, but in others, it seems if you let the Soviets off the hook, then they can create very solid fronts quite early.

Clearly in here is a mix of skill and attitude. I play for enjoyment and if top class play means fussing over every little detail I am not interested. However, I prefer PBEM as you gain the enjoyment of interaction and the horrible feeling your opponent is up to something nasty.

I'm glad to see this will end/reduce some of the worst abuses of the game engine and a more limited blizzard would be a welcome balance point.

As part of the earlier discussion about reducing supply as a balance, I'm playing a 2nd scenario (the Moscow one that came with Lost Battles) with SigUp as the Soviets. Now that is unrealistic (in that its implausible to see a 1-1 odds on that front in a campaign), but at 75% logistics, its developing rather interestingly. The Axis front in the immediate Moscow sector is holding quite well, but the flanks are breaking up - no idea where its going to end (I've just done my turn 19), but odds on it could leave a powerful axis force not far from Moscow - potentially a nice set up for 1942.

Reason I'm saying this is (a) I really like your AARs; and (b) I think its a case of feeling our way to balances for a given game. I'd be happy to play the Soviets with 95% morale, as if you play the AI and use 85-90% you just don't see the sort of high CV walls that a few AARs have generated. The quid pro quo may be lower supply for both sides to dampen mobility - or not.

and as an edit - should have said, thanks to all for putting this patch together, most appreciated

< Message edited by loki100 -- 10/1/2013 2:11:37 PM >


_____________________________


(in reply to terje439)
Post #: 25
RE: Changes in the next public beta now in test - 10/1/2013 3:03:49 PM   
Toidi

 

Posts: 200
Joined: 8/31/2011
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: morvael

So it's hordes of 1=1s (Guards and Cav corps change that situation, though) vs 2=3 Germans.


Morvael, well done for all the coding. Congratulations on the changes! For me, the best thing is that one can counterattack - now attacks with 100,000 troops in December and even January may fail to dislodge a single infantry division.

To me, they look good, but there is still the automatic morale decrease for each unit (1 point per turn), which gives significant incentive to send troops back to Germany and fall back as fast as possible (as it also creates strain on Soviet trucks and via reducing supply, reduces mobility of Soviet units). Also, 1=1 is in AI game. I have not played Soviets for a while, but I always had at least 60% units with cv between 2 & 3 (and some elite with displayed cv of 8, so 4 real cv).

Anyway, the changes seem to be in the right direction - kind of getting rid of bomber fuel supply vs somewhat easier blizzard (hard to say how much easier - it may be easier in December, but is it easier in February?) and fixes with HQ buildup, calculation of CV (100 times too high cv, that seems like a serious bug) and better support unit commitment.

Of course, now everyone will bomb half the front to have easier attacks, so the bombers will get some use (before the patch generally the better use of bombers was to supply fuel). And again the army airfields with reckon planes will follow closely all the tanks so the drops will be more efficient...

Once again, splendid job Morvael.

(in reply to morvael)
Post #: 26
RE: Changes in the next public beta now in test - 10/1/2013 3:10:54 PM   
morvael


Posts: 11762
Joined: 9/8/2006
From: Poland
Status: offline
Yes, morale drops 1 per turn, but this is to reduce morale to June '41 levels, because it will be pumped up sky high by summer/autumn victories. Since there is no automatic drop of 1 additional point in lost combat, overall morale must still end up better in the end than before. Taking both away seemed like too big advantage, and the combat one had to be taken off to decrease the incentives to run away.

Don't worry about the CVx100 bug, it was just something that was broken in one place but compensated in the other so actually this fix changes nothing to the end user, except engine being cleaner (2 out of 3 places didn't multiply CV by 100).

The bug was not about support units commitment. It was about support units (and German army airbases) failing all, some or more often than they should their leader rolls.

We'll see how the PBEMs will go with the patch, then you will decide whether to thank me or curse me :)

(in reply to Toidi)
Post #: 27
RE: Changes in the next public beta now in test - 10/1/2013 3:16:51 PM   
SigUp

 

Posts: 1062
Joined: 11/29/2012
Status: offline
I'm not too sure about that automatic morale loss. I think it is perhaps 4 turns too many.

(in reply to morvael)
Post #: 28
RE: Changes in the next public beta now in test - 10/1/2013 3:30:47 PM   
Bozo_the_Clown


Posts: 890
Joined: 6/25/2013
From: Bozotown
Status: offline
quote:

I'm not too sure about that automatic morale loss. I think it is perhaps 4 turns too many.


Could we maybe play the new patch first before we start demanding more changes?

(in reply to SigUp)
Post #: 29
RE: Changes in the next public beta now in test - 10/1/2013 3:43:05 PM   
SigUp

 

Posts: 1062
Joined: 11/29/2012
Status: offline
Perhaps I misunderstood the manual, but with the blizzard effects running through March 42 it would equate to a 16 point morale loss. For an average 75 morale infantry division, I doubt it will go higher than 85. Meaning a 16 point drop-off would lead to weaker units, even before factoring in combat morale losses. But well, let's see about it first.

(in reply to Bozo_the_Clown)
Post #: 30
Page:   [1] 2 3 4   next >   >>
All Forums >> [New Releases from Matrix Games] >> Gary Grigsby's War in the East Series >> Changes in the next public beta now in test Page: [1] 2 3 4   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

0.477