Matrix Games Forums

Forums  Register  Login  Photo Gallery  Member List  Search  Calendars  FAQ 

My Profile  Inbox  Address Book  My Subscription  My Forums  Log Out

RE: Balance Thread

 
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 >> RE: Balance Thread Page: <<   < prev  1 [2] 3 4 5   next >   >>
Login
Message << Older Topic   Newer Topic >>
RE: Balance Thread - 12/25/2020 12:41:39 AM   
AlvaroSousa


Posts: 7472
Joined: 7/29/2013
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Flaviusx

Yes, armies can be split in two.

However, they cannot be built in smaller increments. Again, I miss this flexibility a lot with the Soviets, whereas with the other nations I often build divisions to be later merged into corps. The Soviets don't have this kind of production granularity. They have to buy in big chunks or not at all and this effectively means 1 rifle army per turn.

Sometimes I'd like to buy less than that and divert production to replacements. But I am forced by the lack of flexibility to almost always buy a rifle army. The Soviet is locked into a really inflexible production scheme compared to the other major powers.


The issue is Soviet divisions were too small to be effective like italians. Also realize 2 Small Armies still have ZoC while 3 divisions do not.

_____________________________

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 #: 31
RE: Balance Thread - 12/25/2020 12:44:08 AM   
AlvaroSousa


Posts: 7472
Joined: 7/29/2013
Status: offline
Could be armor is too strong.

_____________________________

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 malkarma)
Post #: 32
RE: Balance Thread - 12/25/2020 12:49:43 AM   
Flaviusx


Posts: 7591
Joined: 9/9/2009
From: Southern California
Status: offline
I'd cost the small armies at 120 base, reflecting their size and capabilities. (And not coincidentally, this is also the cost of rifle corps, which have similar capabilities.) Point is, they are the building blocks for the big armies just like divisions are for corps.



_____________________________

WitE Alpha Tester

(in reply to AlvaroSousa)
Post #: 33
RE: Balance Thread - 12/25/2020 5:22:39 AM   
Numdydar

 

Posts: 3058
Joined: 2/13/2004
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: AlvaroSousa


Devs won't say this, none I know of, but I will. There are some elements of games that players think they want but they don't really want. For example a Euro-sized Pacific map. I have been asked this a few times. But that map is simply too enormous to scale and makes the game unplayable or micromanaging convoys.




I totally disagree :)

As someone that has played a lot of War in the Pacific (45 miles/hex), WWII Europe (7.5 miles per hex) does not make the game unplayable. I would much rather have a bigger map than one too small. This is my biggest complaint with World at War. The map scale sucks. Especially after playing on the WiE map. So I would REALLY love a bigger map for Europe.

I am glad to see that you are pretty close to WitP AE map scale as I believe you are going for 50 miles/her in your pacific game. I still think a slightly bigger scale, like 40 miles/hex would be better, but we have had that discussion and since you are doing all the work, you win lol.

But if you are ever planning on doing a complete WWII game, you are going to have to split the world in half with two different map scales, one for Europe and one for the Pacific or have a unified map scale. Unfortunately to really showcase the ETO, you would have to have a scale of 10-15 miles/hex. Which would map the PTO HUGE lol.

Personally I would have no problem with that :). But players like me that REALLY would like that scale of a game, are likely not enough to make a game like that profitable. Even if we all bought 2 copies lol.

But I keep dreaming of a unified WWII map at 10 miles/hex to move my virtual units on :)

(in reply to AlvaroSousa)
Post #: 34
RE: Balance Thread - 12/25/2020 8:11:29 AM   
battlevonwar


Posts: 1001
Joined: 12/22/2011
Status: offline
People want what they think is good. Rather than that which balances the game out to make it a better game. I think what I am noticing is the pre-Barbarossa preparation is that the Axis can lawnmower the Weak/Low Experience/low effectiveness Russian Armies a little too much. The Russians are ready to defend too late as the game was designed around a Clear Weather turn for the invasion of the Soviet Union. Now you have about 3-7 game turns the Axis are getting and 6-7 Hexes deeper into the Soviet Territory that is giving off the impression of an imbalance. Now Axis can rebuild their effectiveness and the Soviets are really frail.

I am crazy about oil usage myself as Axis. I use every rail-line. I never attack unless I know I'm getting something for it and my navy pretty much is sitting in port 24-7. Oil by the time of December of '41 with a great Russian opponent should be around 30% at best. If the opponent pushes even harder that could could down into a deficit until the next year.

France is a little too easy now... I'm not sure why before it was harder and now it's easier it may be that people have gotten better at it over a year of playing the game. I know when I started the players were taking down 300-400 HP in land units and 100-150 in Air HP to take France and usually pushing into August/September. Without that issue the Axis really are a lot stronger going in early '41. I think this is giving off an impression of them being OP where previously they were taxed hard for that win.

Similar to '42 when The UK lands in with 5 Mechs, 3 Armor and 6-7 Air into Italy or North Africa without the US. Which can add and = number of units if they want by then. By '43 the two together can not be stopped...

I have practiced my Axis a lot. I think people need to learn the proper tactic for the Russians to survive and the proper balancing. Almeron once joked to me as he landed Armor off France that I couldn't do anything about it in 1941. It was true I could do nothing about it as it sat in Cherbourg and then Brest... especially when the weather changed the next turn. He knew it would tie up 3-4 Units.






quote:

ORIGINAL: AlvaroSousa

Could be armor is too strong.


(in reply to AlvaroSousa)
Post #: 35
RE: Balance Thread - 12/25/2020 9:19:55 AM   
OxfordGuy3


Posts: 986
Joined: 7/1/2012
From: Oxford, United Kingdom
Status: offline
Personally I would hate to have the Pacific War modelled at a similar scale to the European map, I think Alvaro has made the correct choice at splitting the map scales

(in reply to battlevonwar)
Post #: 36
RE: Balance Thread - 12/25/2020 9:55:16 AM   
malkarma

 

Posts: 309
Joined: 7/5/2020
Status: offline
Inmo the only situation i which the same scale in both theaters works is when you break the ocean in sea areas with search boxes like WiF does. In an oceanic hexes game (like this one) the ETO scale can be a real nightmare regarding the naval operations. Also there would be a lot of wasted space (let´s be honest here, no one care about Nepal and 3/4 of New Guinea and Australia would be empty wastelands).
So in this point, I agree with the developer. And since divisions doesn't exert a ZOC in the ETO they will work nicely in the PTO.

(in reply to OxfordGuy3)
Post #: 37
RE: Balance Thread - 12/25/2020 11:31:35 AM   
sillyflower


Posts: 3238
Joined: 8/4/2010
From: Back in Blighty
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: OxfordGuy3

Personally I would hate to have the Pacific War modelled at a similar scale to the European map, I think Alvaro has made the correct choice at splitting the map scales


+1

_____________________________

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 OxfordGuy3)
Post #: 38
RE: Balance Thread - 12/25/2020 3:04:42 PM   
kennonlightfoot

 

Posts: 1032
Joined: 8/15/2006
Status: offline
quote:

As someone that has played a lot of War in the Pacific (45 miles/hex),


How did you do this?
Grigsby's Pacific version has one day turns (sometimes you can speed up but you will get in trouble). That is 365 turns to get through one year. And, doing a turn in it is very complex. It's one of those "oh god it's beautiful" wonder if I can finish a game against the AI before I die of old age.

(in reply to Numdydar)
Post #: 39
RE: Balance Thread - 12/25/2020 4:21:31 PM   
Marco70

 

Posts: 13
Joined: 11/4/2019
From: Germany
Status: offline
It is not true that most of the USA resources went to the pacific. During the war, it was more like 25% and 75% for the war in europe, following the europe first strategy established at the arcadia conference in december 1941.
As late as december 1943, the proportions between the pacific and europe were very even, approx. 1.8 million soldiers each, 7,800 to 8,800 aircraft and 700 to 500 ships. At the end of the war, 47 divisions were in action in europe, while in the pacific, there were only 21 plus 6 marine divisions. It was certainly only in the naval sector that most capital ships were deployed in the pacific.

In general, the americans had undertaken an enormous buildup from the start of the war. They managed to reduce the construction time of an aircraft carrier from 42 months in 41 to 32 months in 44. this also shows that most carriers were laid down in 42 in order to be available in 44. I'm looking forward to seeing how this is implemented in warplan pacific.

To your previous question about an invasion of north africa. Such a large-scale invasion took a long time to plan. It took the allies a year for normandy. The americans simply had not yet produced enough landing ships, equipment, or soldiers. Most of the equipment was provided by the british. Therefore, they were not ready until november 42.

By the way, i think warplan is the best WW2 game of its scale so far. You are doing a great job and the discussion is just about nuances on a very good developed game.

(in reply to AlvaroSousa)
Post #: 40
RE: Balance Thread - 12/25/2020 4:40:24 PM   
michaelCLARADY

 

Posts: 108
Joined: 12/2/2019
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: battlevonwar

Lascar, trying to find balance though not really interested in history...Soviets didn't have a great command structure after the invasion of '41 until late '42...i.e. half sized divisons(they didn't have the leaders for such a large army)

We need to make the game we have easily and thoroughly even on both sides with skill levels even. We got to work with what we have as huge variation and desire of history is not going to make players able to fight more evenly on both sides.


Gotta ask- how many 'mirror' Games do you have where both yourself and the opponent had very disproportionate wins the same side- axis or allies doesn't matter.

(in reply to battlevonwar)
Post #: 41
RE: Balance Thread - 12/25/2020 5:08:37 PM   
AlvaroSousa


Posts: 7472
Joined: 7/29/2013
Status: offline
@Numdydar - I have to appeal to the most customers since making games is also for profit for me. There are some very hard core wargamers who would love nothing more than a full scale Europe at 10 miles per hex. But this is not the majority of players. It is also incredibly difficult to test as a game would take forever. WitP they had to come out with a 2nd version.

10m per hex is a massive undertaking also. I am surprised 2x3 Games hasn't done one. They have the data and the maps pretty much. It might not be cost effective for them or profitable.

So back to Russians. So the idea of converting the corps to armies is a good one. Makes the game simpler so you don't have to disband and rebuilt. I have to see how I can implement that.

Currently I made changes to the map as a fix. I remember early on there were too much defensive terrain and river lines and I had to remove some. But now that we got the play in hand and a feel for how the game runs I put some back to rebalance the Russian front. The largest issue with the Germans before was manpower running out in 1943. With some of the changes on manpower loss with air power this seems to have been resolved. I'll let you know at the end of my games.

So come Monday I will upload a new beta scenario set with the changes on the Russian front.

As for the Western Allies..... From my own games I hit them hard with subs and keep them busy. I don't do an all out 1941 Barb. Eventually yes they do land but I time it defensively pulling back giving ground trying to delay beyond historical time lines. Even as early as mid 1942 I go on the defensive vs the Western Allies. Like in the current game with Hadros it is October 1942 and I am pulling back from Africa and letting him slowly push forward saving my army. I am trying to gain as much VP as possible. The Allies have about 800 land strength in total. My largest problem in the game is the 1942 Barb which got stuffed and I went in with a large force too.

More balancing.



_____________________________

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 michaelCLARADY)
Post #: 42
RE: Balance Thread - 12/25/2020 5:21:23 PM   
AlvaroSousa


Posts: 7472
Joined: 7/29/2013
Status: offline
Map Changes based on terrain. I put extra river lines where some smaller ones met up.

Add some more terrain in spots making it slightly denser.






Attachment (1)

_____________________________

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 AlvaroSousa)
Post #: 43
RE: Balance Thread - 12/25/2020 5:31:18 PM   
Lascar


Posts: 428
Joined: 10/7/2000
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Marco70

It is not true that most of the USA resources went to the pacific. During the war, it was more like 25% and 75% for the war in europe, following the europe first strategy established at the arcadia conference in december 1941.
As late as december 1943, the proportions between the pacific and europe were very even, approx. 1.8 million soldiers each, 7,800 to 8,800 aircraft and 700 to 500 ships. At the end of the war, 47 divisions were in action in europe, while in the pacific, there were only 21 plus 6 marine divisions. It was certainly only in the naval sector that most capital ships were deployed in the pacific.

In general, the americans had undertaken an enormous buildup from the start of the war. They managed to reduce the construction time of an aircraft carrier from 42 months in 41 to 32 months in 44. this also shows that most carriers were laid down in 42 in order to be available in 44. I'm looking forward to seeing how this is implemented in warplan pacific.

To your previous question about an invasion of north africa. Such a large-scale invasion took a long time to plan. It took the allies a year for normandy. The americans simply had not yet produced enough landing ships, equipment, or soldiers. Most of the equipment was provided by the british. Therefore, they were not ready until november 42.

By the way, i think warplan is the best WW2 game of its scale so far. You are doing a great job and the discussion is just about nuances on a very good developed game.

In July of 1945 the US army had 62 divisions deployed in Europe out of the 90 divisions raised in total.

(in reply to Marco70)
Post #: 44
RE: Balance Thread - 12/25/2020 5:50:47 PM   
sillyflower


Posts: 3238
Joined: 8/4/2010
From: Back in Blighty
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Marco70


To your previous question about an invasion of north africa. Such a large-scale invasion took a long time to plan. It took the allies a year for normandy. The americans simply had not yet produced enough landing ships, equipment, or soldiers. Most of the equipment was provided by the british. Therefore, they were not ready until november 42.



The decision to go for landings in west and north Africa (GYMNAST/TORCH) was only made 10 weeks before it took place. See the timeline in my earlier post on page 1. I am not aware of any evidence that it could not have been undertaken earlier if it had been approved earlier.


_____________________________

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 Marco70)
Post #: 45
RE: Balance Thread - 12/25/2020 6:19:28 PM   
Flaviusx


Posts: 7591
Joined: 9/9/2009
From: Southern California
Status: offline
A much improved map. Not only does this help the Soviets early on, but also the Germans in the late war when falling back. It should slow things down a bit in the eastern front overall.

_____________________________

WitE Alpha Tester

(in reply to sillyflower)
Post #: 46
RE: Balance Thread - 12/25/2020 7:12:52 PM   
AlvaroSousa


Posts: 7472
Joined: 7/29/2013
Status: offline
This is what I mean by an organic solution. Flows with the game, adds to it, doesn't create new rules.

I am adding code to do an auto-convert Corps -> Armies which is an elegant add on for the Soviets.
Each turn after at war a corps will have a 33% chance to convert to an Army. Technically they only started doing this after the Winter offensive. But we can't have a whole army magically convert in 1 month.



< Message edited by AlvaroSousa -- 12/25/2020 7:21:08 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 Flaviusx)
Post #: 47
RE: Balance Thread - 12/25/2020 7:20:30 PM   
Flaviusx


Posts: 7591
Joined: 9/9/2009
From: Southern California
Status: offline
Small armies, I hope. Not the big ones.

_____________________________

WitE Alpha Tester

(in reply to AlvaroSousa)
Post #: 48
RE: Balance Thread - 12/25/2020 7:28:05 PM   
AlvaroSousa


Posts: 7472
Joined: 7/29/2013
Status: offline
What I will do is make any corps <= 18 strength a small army and more than 18 strength a large one

_____________________________

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 #: 49
RE: Balance Thread - 12/25/2020 7:33:50 PM   
Flaviusx


Posts: 7591
Joined: 9/9/2009
From: Southern California
Status: offline
But they are all 20 at full strength and by the time Barbarossa starts they will be at 20. I wonder if this is a little too good for the Soviets. You can literally build one such corps every turn for two years.

That's a lot of armies. You wouldn't even have to build more of them. Just set production to reinforcements.

I think it would be better if they converted to small armies regardless, and force the Soviet to merge them into full armies.



_____________________________

WitE Alpha Tester

(in reply to AlvaroSousa)
Post #: 50
RE: Balance Thread - 12/25/2020 7:39:46 PM   
AlvaroSousa


Posts: 7472
Joined: 7/29/2013
Status: offline
As for the 1942 Barbarossa I have put a lot of thought into this. I believe the solution is in the mech/armor operation points.

Historically they didn't form mechanized corps till late 1942. In the game they start improving in March 1942.

March 1942 -> October 1942 (7 opts)
September 1942 -> March 1943 (9 opts)

The largest issue with a 1942 Barbarossa is the Soviet armor blasting it's way through the Germans.

_____________________________

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 AlvaroSousa)
Post #: 51
RE: Balance Thread - 12/25/2020 9:04:38 PM   
sillyflower


Posts: 3238
Joined: 8/4/2010
From: Back in Blighty
Status: offline
I think it was 'new- model' tank corps (as opposed to the '41 tank/mech xxx with 3 divs) in the spring of '42 and mech xxx in the autumn. That said, there is no reason to think that the new formations would have been created in peacetime.

_____________________________

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 AlvaroSousa)
Post #: 52
RE: Balance Thread - 12/26/2020 3:43:06 PM   
MagicMissile


Posts: 1374
Joined: 10/11/2014
From: Stockholm, Sweden
Status: offline
Interesting changes. Will be a whole new game.
5 op mech the whole 42 will be tough but might be offset by the other changes.

/MM


(in reply to AlvaroSousa)
Post #: 53
RE: Balance Thread - 12/26/2020 4:06:05 PM   
Flaviusx


Posts: 7591
Joined: 9/9/2009
From: Southern California
Status: offline
Soviets began forming tank corps in spring of 42. Indeed, they began forming their first tank armies by mid year. It's true that mech corps came in the fall.

You could split the difference here and delay the mech corps mp increase, but imo tank corps should be coming online as they currently do. Tank corps are much more scarce in practice. So this will limit their mobile counterattacking ability in 42, without eliminating it entirely.

Imo, you are not going to get a good 42 Barbarossa regardless. The bottom line here is the Soviets get much more out of an extra year of peace than the Germans do, even with these tweaks. 1941 was the best year to strike and caught the Soviets very unprepared.

_____________________________

WitE Alpha Tester

(in reply to MagicMissile)
Post #: 54
RE: Balance Thread - 12/26/2020 4:06:51 PM   
sillyflower


Posts: 3238
Joined: 8/4/2010
From: Back in Blighty
Status: offline

'43 was also the year that German inf xx and xxx got smaller (and again in '44) but I suppose that's too much to hope for...............

_____________________________

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 MagicMissile)
Post #: 55
RE: Balance Thread - 12/26/2020 4:43:14 PM   
ncc1701e


Posts: 3665
Joined: 10/29/2013
From: Utopia Planitia Fleet Yards
Status: offline
Looking forward to play these changes. And nobody for Siberians coming with Winterized specialty to ease a local counter attack end of 1941? Now, it would be a little too much in favor of USSR.

Is it a new scenario only or is it coming in a new beta version?
--> Nevermind, this is a new beta version. Cool

< Message edited by ncc1701e -- 12/27/2020 10:23:47 AM >


_____________________________

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 sillyflower)
Post #: 56
RE: Balance Thread - 12/26/2020 4:50:37 PM   
ncc1701e


Posts: 3665
Joined: 10/29/2013
From: Utopia Planitia Fleet Yards
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Flaviusx

3. Reserve armies should enter the game at the current tech. A 39 assault army with 30% experience is really quite helpless in the open. The panzers just chew them up. I also wish they came in as AT rather than assault tech.



+1 the reserve armies should come at whatever tech level the USSR is.

_____________________________

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 #: 57
RE: Balance Thread - 12/26/2020 5:15:20 PM   
malkarma

 

Posts: 309
Joined: 7/5/2020
Status: offline
Agree with you. Soviets small corps should transform in small armies. I think that the 2 manpower loss in the process is a small price for the flexibility that will be obtained for the red army.

(in reply to Flaviusx)
Post #: 58
RE: Balance Thread - 12/26/2020 5:17:31 PM   
malkarma

 

Posts: 309
Joined: 7/5/2020
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: Marco70

It is not true that most of the USA resources went to the pacific.


What I wanted to say is that at the beginning of the war they have to invest a lot of resources in order to build the pacific fleet. I game terms, this means that if the USA have twice the production in Warplan global tha it have in vanilla Warplan (around 800 in 1942), one of every two turnn will be spent to build a carrier (960 PP with '41 tech)...and you will also need smaller ships, landing crafts, planes, expensive units (marines are 100 PP)... you know what I mean.


ps: edited to fix typos.

< Message edited by malkarma -- 12/27/2020 11:29:43 AM >

(in reply to Marco70)
Post #: 59
RE: Balance Thread - 12/27/2020 2:06:18 AM   
Harrybanana

 

Posts: 2372
Joined: 11/27/2004
From: Canada
Status: offline
With respect to everyone who has posted here, I personally think it is a bit early to make any changes until more games have been played with the latest version. From what little I have seen so far the game is either balanced or very close to it.

(in reply to malkarma)
Post #: 60
Page:   <<   < prev  1 [2] 3 4 5   next >   >>
All Forums >> [New Releases from Matrix Games] >> WarPlan >> RE: Balance Thread Page: <<   < prev  1 [2] 3 4 5   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

0.173