Matrix Games Forums

Forums  Register  Login  Photo Gallery  Member List  Search  Calendars  FAQ 

My Profile  Inbox  Address Book  My Subscription  My Forums  Log Out

Winter weather

 
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] >> WarPlan >> Winter weather Page: [1]
Login
Message << Older Topic   Newer Topic >>
Winter weather - 10/13/2020 8:06:51 PM   
MagicMissile


Posts: 1001
Joined: 10/11/2014
From: Stockholm, Sweden
Status: offline
This idea goes a bit with the Siberians and winter weather thread.

I always felt that winter combat is too harshly penalized. I dont know the number of games where I tried to do some kind of winter offensive, it is really hard next to impossible. So basically in rain, heavy rain, snow and blizzard nothing really happens. So the game is active in the period May-September 5 months of 12 the rest of the year not that much happens except maybe in Africa. We all know that a fair amount of things happened in the winter months especially in the east.

So my idea for WP 2 is that the combat penalty in snow and blizzard be toned quite a bit. To stop the Germans from conquering Belgium and France in snow weather I think a change in the weather table to more rain/heavy rain in the temparate zone should be enough. To stop the Axis to continue to attack in 41 and possibly 42 in the east is to give the axis a one time big reduction of effectiveness on the first snow/blizard turn in 41 and a smaller penalty in 42 and a lower recovery rate.

This would change balance quite a lot if the game have bloodier winters so changes to manpower and the like would be necessary but maybe it would make the game a bit more interesting during the winter which now mostly feels like a waiting time for the spring/summer.

Good or bad idea?

/MM
Post #: 1
RE: Winter weather - 10/13/2020 9:06:38 PM   
ncc1701e


Posts: 3300
Joined: 10/29/2013
From: Utopia Planitia Fleet Yards
Status: offline
Agree, winter offensive are hard even for the Soviets. The right balance is not easy to find.
I think adding Siberians with winterized specialization may worse a try.

This way it will save command points for this critical year.

_____________________________

Chancellor Gorkon to Captain James T. Kirk:
You don't trust me, do you? I don't blame you. If there is to be a brave new world, our generation is going to have the hardest time living in it.

(in reply to MagicMissile)
Post #: 2
RE: Winter weather - 10/14/2020 12:01:00 AM   
AlvaroSousa


Posts: 6943
Joined: 7/29/2013
Status: offline
Remember your German player is playing with Hindsight. He would have to foolishly push and exhaust himself to allow an overwhelming counter attack.



_____________________________

Games worked on

Designer of the Strategic Command 2 products
- Brute Force (mod)
- Assault on Communism
- Assault on Democracy

Designer of the Strategic Command 3 products
- Map Image Importer

(in reply to ncc1701e)
Post #: 3
RE: Winter weather - 10/14/2020 12:11:12 AM   
Flaviusx


Posts: 7503
Joined: 9/9/2009
From: Southern California
Status: offline
Alternately, all Siberian reinforcements should arrive with the winterization attachment.

Soviets get very few attachments going into the first winter and nobody saves them up for this event. Typically the 3-4 they get by this point are all used as elite for their armor.

If they got a bonus 4 winter attachments on top of this they might be able to do something in the winter. It might even be worth saving them up for the winter to add to other units in order to get a critical mass of such men on the front line 7-8 winterized units is enough to maybe get something going. As things stand, it just doesn't really work.

_____________________________

WitE Alpha Tester

(in reply to AlvaroSousa)
Post #: 4
RE: Winter weather - 10/14/2020 3:18:14 AM   
AlvaroSousa


Posts: 6943
Joined: 7/29/2013
Status: offline
I make it work.

You can't recreate history because hindsight.

Already the Germans suffer effectiveness losses.

_____________________________

Games worked on

Designer of the Strategic Command 2 products
- Brute Force (mod)
- Assault on Communism
- Assault on Democracy

Designer of the Strategic Command 3 products
- Map Image Importer

(in reply to Flaviusx)
Post #: 5
RE: Winter weather - 10/14/2020 6:34:03 PM   
ncc1701e


Posts: 3300
Joined: 10/29/2013
From: Utopia Planitia Fleet Yards
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: Flaviusx

Alternately, all Siberian reinforcements should arrive with the winterization attachment.

Soviets get very few attachments going into the first winter and nobody saves them up for this event. Typically the 3-4 they get by this point are all used as elite for their armor.

If they got a bonus 4 winter attachments on top of this they might be able to do something in the winter. It might even be worth saving them up for the winter to add to other units in order to get a critical mass of such men on the front line 7-8 winterized units is enough to maybe get something going. As things stand, it just doesn't really work.


Yes, in my game, I have just enough command points for 4 specializations. I think we are sharing the same view.

Call me a Russian fanboy (I think I am) but I would like to counter attack a little more during the first winter with adequate winterized units i.e. the Siberians.

_____________________________

Chancellor Gorkon to Captain James T. Kirk:
You don't trust me, do you? I don't blame you. If there is to be a brave new world, our generation is going to have the hardest time living in it.

(in reply to Flaviusx)
Post #: 6
RE: Winter weather - 10/14/2020 6:59:02 PM   
battlevonwar


Posts: 948
Joined: 12/22/2011
Status: offline
The Extreme Winter was hell on the Germans and the Soviets of course were better prepared for it. Ironically the Russians burned themselves out during the '41-'42 offensive to the point that lead to the German Summer Offensive the next year.

The Germans were insane scrambling for Typhoon. They burned themselves out severely. Their trucks were all wore out. Their Spare Parts were not there. They transferred so many divisions between Army Groups they lost tons of Trucks, tons of Tanks. Basically they were like a car that drives up and down a roadblock 500 times trying to find a way in and when they arrived in Army group Center they were dead. (plus the reality is the Russians really had wore out the Germans totally in 1941 pre Typhoon, not the Siberians came to save the day contrary to popular belief, read Kiev 1941)

Germans learned from Winter Weather so the subsequent Winters should be less harsh on them. We have hindsight as mentioned so we are going to dig in find shelter, and prepare for what is coming... That is the option to you.

IMHO: The Eastern Front in game is perfectly balanced and pretty historical for the scale. The Western Front is a little OP for the Allies come into 1942 like they would have in 1944. As recent games show that I have had both Sveint and MM(didn't bother with air just built Stalin Tanks en masse) both eradicated my Axis without much effort or sweat(they had more Armor than the Axis in early 1942 on both fronts and more air)... The Russians can counterattack if they want in 1941-42 Winter but they get losses just like they did historically. If you want an elite group of Siberians, no stress but I would like to see the Western Allies pushed off the Production to build 15 Armor by Summer of '42.

A lot of people people think the Germans were so outproduced in Tanks, sure they were but more so in the long haul and I do believe there was parity between the Russians and Germans in AFVs in total. Nearly 100k each by wars end. Lots of cheap Stugs were produced to deal with Mass Russian Armor.(not a bad unit for the Axis in Game cheaper and primarily for ATG roles for late game?)

< Message edited by battlevonwar -- 10/14/2020 7:02:36 PM >

(in reply to ncc1701e)
Post #: 7
RE: Winter weather - 10/14/2020 10:29:21 PM   
MagicMissile


Posts: 1001
Joined: 10/11/2014
From: Stockholm, Sweden
Status: offline
Regarding the winter of 41. I agree it shouldnt be all that great. In history the offensive didint capture all that many hexes and didnt inflict that much casualties. And as someone said most German forces wont be so tired as they were in history probably. I think if the Siberians arrived with winterization it would be a nice touch. Even then I think you will struggle to find a 2-1 odds and most certainly most attacks would be 1-1 and that is probably not a very good trade off for the Soviets so better to hold off.

My idea was mostly to try to make the game a bit more active during the winter turns. We know a lot happened during those periods but in the game it is just a time to hunker down and rebuild for the summer as the very big penalties for combat in the winter makes attacking very difficult to do.

edit. Another idea hit me. Maybe keep the combatpenalty if that feels important but remove movement penalty so you at least can get units to the front and attack as normal.

/MM

< Message edited by MagicMissile -- 10/14/2020 10:41:46 PM >

(in reply to battlevonwar)
Post #: 8
RE: Winter weather - 10/14/2020 11:19:27 PM   
battlevonwar


Posts: 948
Joined: 12/22/2011
Status: offline
MagicMissile,

I agree the Winter Turns in PBEM are rather dull. The game was designed around them is the issue. i.e. France doesn't fall too early, USSR doesn't fall in '41 and it gives all sides time to re-up manpower/oil.(really the Axis for oil and manpower mostly) As the war years progressed I think almost all sides become Winterized automatically. It would be a fun time for the Russians to be able to fight the Germans without German Airpower and a fun time for the Axis(since they were probably more use to Winter from their experience in the East) to fight the Western Allies on the borders of France. I think for 30-40 Winter you would be stuck.

Issue is you would have to give the Germans probably some more manpower/oil/less of a penalty and more of a risk/reward for the Russians to do it. I think I remember in previous patches that it was a great time to grind out some XP for those terrible Russian Units but why would the Germans allow it now? I generally rest the hell out of my Germans and Truck Supply them in places to hold on through Blizzards/max entrenchment/rough terrain/Rivers.

Something to break up the monotony would be nice... And since North Africa really isn't of much value fighting over unless you like you did vs me take Syria... There is nothing to do but build and wait. You could almost skip 6-8 turns altogether! That or make the battle of the Atlantic more immersive but assume a lot of this will end up in Warplan 2?

(in reply to MagicMissile)
Post #: 9
RE: Winter weather - 10/15/2020 11:13:27 AM   
Flaviusx


Posts: 7503
Joined: 9/9/2009
From: Southern California
Status: offline
The problem with the Western Allies is the sub war doesn't really slow them down very much. So when the Germans turn east the WA can quickly start launching invasions elsewhere.

It's just too easy for the British to build a lot of amphibious capacity early on while they hunker down in the UK and Egypt. And they do their landings with armor. Magic Missile doesn't ever bother building any infantry past 1940 for the UK and none at all with the US. He just spams armor corps and lands with them. The recent nerf to their operational points in a landing isn't quite enough. Doubling the amphib landing cost isn't either.

The Western Allies shouldn't be launching invasion with whole armored corps before 1943 at the very earliest. Or maybe even 1944. Right now there is no reason at all to build anything other than mech and spam the necessary amphibious points to do the landings.

Put a leash on the armored landings and make subs more formidable and the Western Allies will not be able to rush things. This is definitely the weak spot in the game right now. I don't think mucking around with production will solve the issue.

_____________________________

WitE Alpha Tester

(in reply to battlevonwar)
Post #: 10
RE: Winter weather - 10/15/2020 11:58:43 AM   
76mm


Posts: 4302
Joined: 5/2/2004
From: Washington, DC
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: battlevonwar
A lot of people people think the Germans were so outproduced in Tanks, sure they were but more so in the long haul and I do believe there was parity between the Russians and Germans in AFVs in total. Nearly 100k each by wars end. Lots of cheap Stugs were produced to deal with Mass Russian Armor.

Actually the Germans were outproduced in tanks. By a lot.

Germans produced about 50k tanks/AFV, Soviets alone produced about 119k. Here is a link comparing Wikipedia data:
https://www.mathscinotes.com/2017/09/ww2-tank-production-comparison-between-combatants/

Another source (Companion to the Red Army by Zaloga and Ness) shows Soviet tank production of 72k vs 24k for the Germans (presumably they are including fewer types of armored vehicles).

(in reply to battlevonwar)
Post #: 11
RE: Winter weather - 10/15/2020 12:05:14 PM   
MagicMissile


Posts: 1001
Joined: 10/11/2014
From: Stockholm, Sweden
Status: offline
Yes all my ideas are more for WP2 in general. I really like this game and I think it is really good and a second version of it with all we have learned could be amazing. And I absolutely hope for a WW2 both Europe and the Pacific combined game one day. No pressure Alvaro! .

/MM

(in reply to battlevonwar)
Post #: 12
RE: Winter weather - 10/15/2020 1:34:04 PM   
MagicMissile


Posts: 1001
Joined: 10/11/2014
From: Stockholm, Sweden
Status: offline
I build like 5 inf corps with the British 39/40 then they recieve is it like 4 for free. The free french and 3 corps in africa/iraq so they end up with a fair amount of infantry. And with oil no constraint for the allies I see no reason to build any with the US just mech and arm.

Landing with arm units is of course because they have a better combat strength than infantry. With that said I think with the 2 op rule and difficulty with intelligence with basically no clue what you invade into and difficulty to get air superiority invading is getting very difficult. In my game vs Battlevonwar I felt Italy impossible to invade and see how fairly easy my invasion of France was beaten back. And losing arm corps hurt a lot of course not so much the production points but the time it takes to replace.

I felt very pressured in the Atlantic in my game with Battlevonwar. He got off with a good start and sunk a lot of escorts so it snowballed a bit and he didnt even build a lot of extra subs I dont think he ever had more than 4 or maybe 5.

On the other hand I am now playing a game where for the first time I decided not to go all in in the east. I decided to not build any landing ships and as soon as there was a possibility I would buy a sub and repair them when they got damaged and all out tech research. The result so far is disappointing to say the least.

I have taken 45 sub losses for 66 merchants and 5 escorts. My army in sep 40 is not over 1000 and airforce 50% shot down so invasion of Sovietunion will be very weak. It is not over yet though I got 6 subs and he only have 20 escorts as of right now so things might get alot better we will see.

His carriers have hit me 6 or 7 times with something like 15-20 sub losses including one 4 point hit which sunk the unit. I have had several 2 sub convoy attacks once vs 0 escorts on the African line and they didnt sink a single merchant. And here is my problem it all seems a bit too random. I have seen outcomes from 0 merchants sunk and subs take damage to 7 merchants and 1 escort sunk for no sub losses. The range of outcome seeems very big and no idea what to expect. Which makes puting resources into subs such a gamble compared to just buy armour and air to use in the east.

In our other game as the allies I have built so many escorts got 32 I think as of sep 40 I lost 31 merchants and 1 escort for 21 Subs and the battle of the Atlantic is I think already over.

A good thing here might be shedding some light how subs works. I kind of like the fog of war not really knowing what to expect but here I feel maybe some kind of table with approximate outcomes might benefit us all.

Lots of rambling time to stop .

/MM




Attachment (1)

(in reply to Flaviusx)
Post #: 13
RE: Winter weather - 10/15/2020 2:12:12 PM   
AlvaroSousa


Posts: 6943
Joined: 7/29/2013
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Flaviusx
The problem with the Western Allies is the sub war doesn't really slow them down very much. So when the Germans turn east the WA can quickly start launching invasions elsewhere.

It's just too easy for the British to build a lot of amphibious capacity early on while they hunker down in the UK and Egypt. And they do their landings with armor. Magic Missile doesn't ever bother building any infantry past 1940 for the UK and none at all with the US. He just spams armor corps and lands with them. The recent nerf to their operational points in a landing isn't quite enough. Doubling the amphib landing cost isn't either.


Hadros did this to me also. I think the possible solution is supply to oil.
Increase the oil use of armor and mech for the Allies. Consider they have to ship all their oil overseas. They have more physical units per corps. I believe about double the number of armor. There was also a logistical limitation on why the US only fielded 89 divisions when they could have had 200.

By doubling oil armor/mech costs for the Allies this is what happens....

As an example. If you fly an air unit twice it costs 4-6 oil.
If you move and attack an armor 3x in a turn move-attack 3x it costs ~12.
If this oil is double for the Allies it would very likely solve the issue as it creates an oil problem for them when armor is now 24 oil to use their full operation points and attack vs an infantry unit of 1 oil.

Another option is simply to reduce their oil supply. But I think the former is better as it applies a direct correlation of overseas supply to use.

I'd need to see a game in 1944-1945 where this armor strategy was done so I can properly balance the oil costs.

Or if anyone who has done this strategy can chime in on their Allied oil situation in 1944/1945


_____________________________

Games worked on

Designer of the Strategic Command 2 products
- Brute Force (mod)
- Assault on Communism
- Assault on Democracy

Designer of the Strategic Command 3 products
- Map Image Importer

(in reply to Flaviusx)
Post #: 14
RE: Winter weather - 10/15/2020 2:24:28 PM   
AlvaroSousa


Posts: 6943
Joined: 7/29/2013
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: MagicMissile

I build like 5 inf corps with the British 39/40 then they recieve is it like 4 for free. The free french and 3 corps in africa/iraq so they end up with a fair amount of infantry. And with oil no constraint for the allies I see no reason to build any with the US just mech and arm.

Landing with arm units is of course because they have a better combat strength than infantry. With that said I think with the 2 op rule and difficulty with intelligence with basically no clue what you invade into and difficulty to get air superiority invading is getting very difficult. In my game vs Battlevonwar I felt Italy impossible to invade and see how fairly easy my invasion of France was beaten back. And losing arm corps hurt a lot of course not so much the production points but the time it takes to replace.

I felt very pressured in the Atlantic in my game with Battlevonwar. He got off with a good start and sunk a lot of escorts so it snowballed a bit and he didnt even build a lot of extra subs I dont think he ever had more than 4 or maybe 5.

On the other hand I am now playing a game where for the first time I decided not to go all in in the east. I decided to not build any landing ships and as soon as there was a possibility I would buy a sub and repair them when they got damaged and all out tech research. The result so far is disappointing to say the least.

I have taken 45 sub losses for 66 merchants and 5 escorts. My army in sep 40 is not over 1000 and airforce 50% shot down so invasion of Sovietunion will be very weak. It is not over yet though I got 6 subs and he only have 20 escorts as of right now so things might get alot better we will see.

His carriers have hit me 6 or 7 times with something like 15-20 sub losses including one 4 point hit which sunk the unit. I have had several 2 sub convoy attacks once vs 0 escorts on the African line and they didnt sink a single merchant. And here is my problem it all seems a bit too random. I have seen outcomes from 0 merchants sunk and subs take damage to 7 merchants and 1 escort sunk for no sub losses. The range of outcome seeems very big and no idea what to expect. Which makes puting resources into subs such a gamble compared to just buy armour and air to use in the east.

In our other game as the allies I have built so many escorts got 32 I think as of sep 40 I lost 31 merchants and 1 escort for 21 Subs and the battle of the Atlantic is I think already over.

A good thing here might be shedding some light how subs works. I kind of like the fog of war not really knowing what to expect but here I feel maybe some kind of table with approximate outcomes might benefit us all.

Lots of rambling time to stop .

/MM


Well what are you doing with the subs? How are you placing them?

My sub warfare always accomplishes what I need it to do. Really hurt the Allies. In my last game with Hadros the UK was out of oil I sank so much stuff. The USA had to ship them oil with their MMs.

My strategy is this. I build 10-12 subs.

Every time I spread them out in groups of threes swapping convoy lanes. Sometimes I will take a 1 group and put it in a convoy lane I know my opponent isn't protecting due to my last turn placement like South Africa.

So each turn I will have a split of 3-4 sub fleets in various zones with 1-2 zones concentrated with 3 groups. I keep rotating them and always keep them at least 10 hexes from any potential Allied fleet and 10 hexes from Iceland.

If a sub group gets low like 2-3 strength I return it to base for repair. At base I put 6 AA.

The game is also about math. If the Allies expend an enormous effort bombing my subs in port vs 6 AA the loss they take in air strength could surpass the losses at sea in MMs even though my subs get damaged. Now with the reduced naval repair cost it is a balance the Allies need to figure out if it is worth it.

Don't ask me for the exact numbers because their aren't any. There are too many variables to calculate.

But as something simply you can say 1 tactical group strength point in 1942 costs 10 production. 1 sub strength to repair costs ~8 PPs. An investment of 6 AA vs 1 tactical group should kill 30 air PPs vs the potential of hitting a sub for 8. This is just a rough estimate.

I even build some tankers for the subs to keep them at sea.

If the CVs are that large of an issue I can reduce the ASW for them and increase it on the tech chart. But personally I don't feel they are from my games where Hadros chased me down.


< Message edited by AlvaroSousa -- 10/15/2020 2:25:01 PM >


_____________________________

Games worked on

Designer of the Strategic Command 2 products
- Brute Force (mod)
- Assault on Communism
- Assault on Democracy

Designer of the Strategic Command 3 products
- Map Image Importer

(in reply to MagicMissile)
Post #: 15
RE: Winter weather - 10/15/2020 5:14:31 PM   
Flaviusx


Posts: 7503
Joined: 9/9/2009
From: Southern California
Status: offline
Increasing oil costs is an interesting solution, and this also indirectly makes subs more useful for the Axis as it will put more stress on the allied merchant marine.

CVs are a little too good at sub hunting once you figure out how to use them. Wouldn't mind seeing a slight nerf here. This might even force the allies to actually buy expensive ASW long range bombers, something they can take a pass on right now. Escorts and CVs can more than handle subs as things presently stand.


_____________________________

WitE Alpha Tester

(in reply to AlvaroSousa)
Post #: 16
RE: Winter weather - 10/15/2020 6:14:19 PM   
AlvaroSousa


Posts: 6943
Joined: 7/29/2013
Status: offline
Please explain how the CV fleets are killing you?

I just play keep away allowing them only 1 attack.

I have been thinking about the submarine hunting game with the CVs. I don't like it. Battle of the Atlantic is supposed to be very low key. I didn't think players would be spamming CVs to hunt subs. I've been trying to think of a more elegant solution to it.

Something like...
No naval groups can attack subs directly except on a coast.
But naval groups can sit in a convoy land and add their ASW value to convoy protection up to the escort limit.

It is a very ineffective way of doing it but it takes the micromanagement out of the hands of players. I have to see if I can code it in with the existing structure.

_____________________________

Games worked on

Designer of the Strategic Command 2 products
- Brute Force (mod)
- Assault on Communism
- Assault on Democracy

Designer of the Strategic Command 3 products
- Map Image Importer

(in reply to Flaviusx)
Post #: 17
RE: Winter weather - 10/15/2020 6:32:36 PM   
MorningDew

 

Posts: 1000
Joined: 9/20/2006
From: Greenville, SC
Status: offline
I like it - sub hunts feels like whack-a-mole, and eventually, ends. Requiring the commitment of the resources without the tactical chasing around would be a win IMHO.

I know this is a Warplan 2 type of idea, but I like the idea of committing resources to the merchant war - such as having a box per convoy route and each player commits resources by placing the units in the box. That way they are off map and committed to the merchant war but it is abstract enough to eliminate micromanagement.

Just for the record, it sounds to me like you are zeroing on some really good improvements to the gameplay, both here and as a result of the naval war aspects of Pacific. Thank you for all the effort!

< Message edited by MorningDew -- 10/15/2020 6:47:40 PM >


_____________________________

(formerly user AndrewKurtz)

(in reply to AlvaroSousa)
Post #: 18
RE: Winter weather - 10/15/2020 8:06:24 PM   
MagicMissile


Posts: 1001
Joined: 10/11/2014
From: Stockholm, Sweden
Status: offline
Of course I move them so the CVs only get one strike and I try to use stack of 2-3 I move them around and sometimes I try to move far out so you can threaten South Atlantic/Africa or North Atlantic/America route.

Concerning the CVs is again what seems a very wide range of outcomes. I dont think I have ever seen so many hits from CVs as I have seen in this game but on the other hand I have also seen games where there been 0 hits the whole first year of the war from CVs.

This is sep 40 dont think you can have 10-12 subs that early but I do concede that the outcome might still be good later in 41 onwards. We will see. But the math works the other way too every sub built will make the Soviets take smaller losses and make them stronger earlier.

And I think this is the curse of all WW2 strategy games. The players knows that the war is won and lost mostly in the east and if you can send in a stronger army than historical and if you can inflict critical damage on the Soviets you might win the game whereas the submarine war generally dont lead to a win. Therefore it makes sense to put all your resources into the army and let the submarines starve. This will lead to a faster western allied buildup but you will have a window to try and crush the Soviets and then move back your army to the west and if you are successful you will probably win the game.

/MM

/MM


(in reply to AlvaroSousa)
Post #: 19
RE: Winter weather - 10/15/2020 8:40:39 PM   
AlvaroSousa


Posts: 6943
Joined: 7/29/2013
Status: offline
I have been working on the above items talked about today all day today.

I did a little research on Uboat kills by CV and was surprised to find only 53 uboats were sunk by CVEs out of 785 in the North Atlantic. I thought this would be higher. That's only 7% of the total.

Carriers use their naval air factors to attack subs. They are now reduced 75% when attacking a sub.

The change I spoke of above requires some special coding and it takes how it works now too far out of what is expected. It also isn't ironed out and I could come up with quite a few exploits.



< Message edited by AlvaroSousa -- 10/15/2020 8:41:25 PM >


_____________________________

Games worked on

Designer of the Strategic Command 2 products
- Brute Force (mod)
- Assault on Communism
- Assault on Democracy

Designer of the Strategic Command 3 products
- Map Image Importer

(in reply to MagicMissile)
Post #: 20
RE: Winter weather - 10/16/2020 8:25:38 PM   
kennonlightfoot

 

Posts: 960
Joined: 8/15/2006
Status: offline
I would be curious to know what the actual odds are of a CV get a hit result on subs (and for that matter Surface Raiders). Based on my results it seems like it is about 1% but I can't tell if that is my bad luck or just me giving up after a hundred tries.

Also, does it improve as Carrier Operations level up?
This has two sides since it is a relative calculation. Does Carrier Operation advancement more than what the sub advancement does?

Right now I mainly use the CV's to force the subs and surface raiders to move each turn. They do get one attack but it so rarely hits I don't consider it part of any plan to counter subs. Escorts are far more effective against subs.

Almost all my kills of both surface raiders and subs has been due to opponent mistakes. Things like they went to a port that I could strike with air and ships that wasn't well defended or forgot to move their units.

(in reply to AlvaroSousa)
Post #: 21
RE: Winter weather - 10/17/2020 5:29:33 PM   
AlvaroSousa


Posts: 6943
Joined: 7/29/2013
Status: offline
The spotting and combat calculations are very detailed under the hood that I can't give you an exact answer without exactly know which units are in combat and all their stats. And then there is chance.

This is done this way to reduce min-maxxing or what I call sequential strategy. What you simply find the most mathematically efficient way to do something.

I try to make as much as possible in WarPlan feel like real decisions points based on abstract analysis of the situation.

_____________________________

Games worked on

Designer of the Strategic Command 2 products
- Brute Force (mod)
- Assault on Communism
- Assault on Democracy

Designer of the Strategic Command 3 products
- Map Image Importer

(in reply to kennonlightfoot)
Post #: 22
RE: Winter weather - 10/17/2020 9:16:34 PM   
battlevonwar


Posts: 948
Joined: 12/22/2011
Status: offline
I think killing subs was a hugely combined effort(early in the war a UK CV was sunk at the start of the war by a U-boat)

Intel, ASW Techniques, numbers of escorts, Land Based Sea Coverage(CV based planes were not the best ASW ships)

regardless the Battle of the Atlantic should be fun...and challenging, it gives something to do for both sides at sea!

(in reply to AlvaroSousa)
Post #: 23
RE: Winter weather - 10/17/2020 9:55:33 PM   
ncc1701e


Posts: 3300
Joined: 10/29/2013
From: Utopia Planitia Fleet Yards
Status: offline
Sorry but back to the original topic: winter weather.

My own PBEM experience is that people stop any kind of offensive during snow or blizzard turns. But reading my history, Russian has always attacked during each winter of WW2.

Winter 1941-1942: Battle for Moscow, Demiansk, Kholm
Winter 1942-1943: Operation Uranus (November 1942), Operation Saturn (December 1942 - February 1943), Operation Iskra (January 1943)
Winter 1943-1944: Kiev (November 1943), Korsun (January 1944)
Winter 1944-1945: Poland (January 1945)

The game should be a little more active during winter.

_____________________________

Chancellor Gorkon to Captain James T. Kirk:
You don't trust me, do you? I don't blame you. If there is to be a brave new world, our generation is going to have the hardest time living in it.

(in reply to battlevonwar)
Post #: 24
RE: Winter weather - 10/17/2020 10:29:20 PM   
MagicMissile


Posts: 1001
Joined: 10/11/2014
From: Stockholm, Sweden
Status: offline
I agree but I think it will have to be for WP2 as it would involve changing so much. I think the game would benefit from a little more activity in the winter.

/MM

(in reply to ncc1701e)
Post #: 25
RE: Winter weather - 10/18/2020 8:21:58 AM   
ncc1701e


Posts: 3300
Joined: 10/29/2013
From: Utopia Planitia Fleet Yards
Status: offline
I wonder if it would involve a big change. I propose small changes like what was done before. The rifle corps suggestion from Flaviusx was one of this small change that has helped to balance the game a lot.
The 1942 summer campaign of Germany in the game is very powerful. Germans are not losing any forces during first winter of 1941 since the odds are not good for the Russians to attack.

Alvaro is solving something in the display here for winter combat ratio:
http://www.matrixgames.com/forums/fb.asp?m=4899547

Let's add winterized specialization to the four Siberians armies and see how it goes in the next beta.





_____________________________

Chancellor Gorkon to Captain James T. Kirk:
You don't trust me, do you? I don't blame you. If there is to be a brave new world, our generation is going to have the hardest time living in it.

(in reply to MagicMissile)
Post #: 26
RE: Winter weather - 10/18/2020 2:30:46 PM   
AlvaroSousa


Posts: 6943
Joined: 7/29/2013
Status: offline
Remember all of you have hindsight and won't make the same stupidities the Germans or Soviets did. That changes the game.

I guarantee if you replaced Stalin with a very good wargamer in April 1941 the Germans would have lost in 1942.

_____________________________

Games worked on

Designer of the Strategic Command 2 products
- Brute Force (mod)
- Assault on Communism
- Assault on Democracy

Designer of the Strategic Command 3 products
- Map Image Importer

(in reply to ncc1701e)
Post #: 27
RE: Winter weather - 10/18/2020 2:34:00 PM   
AlvaroSousa


Posts: 6943
Joined: 7/29/2013
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: battlevonwar

I think killing subs was a hugely combined effort(early in the war a UK CV was sunk at the start of the war by a U-boat)

Intel, ASW Techniques, numbers of escorts, Land Based Sea Coverage(CV based planes were not the best ASW ships)

regardless the Battle of the Atlantic should be fun...and challenging, it gives something to do for both sides at sea!


UK already won the battle of the Atlantic by 1942 hands down. The tech war kept swinging back and forth. What really made the largest difference was the formation of convoys. The UK discovered they could group a large number of ships and support them with just 8 DEs. This was the optimal formation for uboat defense. The size of the group had very little impact on the spotting of it. It was way better than sending out a bunch of smaller groups of transports.

When the USA came in the UK offered to help and the USA said we don't need your help. Thus 2nd happy time. Then the USA listened.

The most interesting read on the Battle of the Atlantic was Black May by Gannon. I learned so much from that book.

I actually had the Battle of the Atlantic set historically late beta if I remember. But players complained their wasn't enough action so I had to make it a bit more exciting by stretching out the math.

_____________________________

Games worked on

Designer of the Strategic Command 2 products
- Brute Force (mod)
- Assault on Communism
- Assault on Democracy

Designer of the Strategic Command 3 products
- Map Image Importer

(in reply to battlevonwar)
Post #: 28
RE: Winter weather - 10/18/2020 3:32:11 PM   
ncc1701e


Posts: 3300
Joined: 10/29/2013
From: Utopia Planitia Fleet Yards
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: AlvaroSousa

Remember all of you have hindsight and won't make the same stupidities the Germans or Soviets did. That changes the game.

I guarantee if you replaced Stalin with a very good wargamer in April 1941 the Germans would have lost in 1942.


Thus, I am bad compared to Stalin.

I agree with you that we have hindsight. I just find that the Russians (or any winterized countries) are not really helped in winter (snow / blizzard turns) to perform any kind of local counter offensive. The odds are just too bad.

Perhaps this is just me. I am doing a better 1941 now. But, summer 1942 is always a disaster.

_____________________________

Chancellor Gorkon to Captain James T. Kirk:
You don't trust me, do you? I don't blame you. If there is to be a brave new world, our generation is going to have the hardest time living in it.

(in reply to AlvaroSousa)
Post #: 29
RE: Winter weather - 10/18/2020 7:02:14 PM   
MagicMissile


Posts: 1001
Joined: 10/11/2014
From: Stockholm, Sweden
Status: offline
But to compensate for the hindsight and the Soviets "play" better in the game than in real life is at least partially off set by the fact that the Germans tend to invade with a larger army than in history as well as possibly add more Italians and finally invading earlier. I still feel the Soviets struggle a bit in the game but it is a very close call so I dont think any large changes needed.

From my nickname I think people understand I play a bit of RPGs and I do . So I tend to like a bit of extra chrome/rpg aspects in games so for that reason I think it would be fun if the Siberians arrived with the winter speciality.

/MM


(in reply to AlvaroSousa)
Post #: 30
Page:   [1]
All Forums >> [New Releases from Matrix Games] >> WarPlan >> Winter weather 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

0.188