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  2 3 4 5 [6]
Login
Message << Older Topic   Newer Topic >>
RE: Balance Thread - 1/8/2021 6:15:36 PM   
squatter

 

Posts: 585
Joined: 6/24/2006
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: ncc1701e

Yes thanks, but I need to sacrifice a mech if I want an air unit. Arghh.

And, sorry, you said you will not touch France. But, having to switch units from the Maginot line to have units at 50% in Belgium. Why not put them directly in Belgium?
This is a boring process to do each game imo.


+1

(in reply to ncc1701e)
Post #: 151
RE: Balance Thread - 1/8/2021 6:17:12 PM   
squatter

 

Posts: 585
Joined: 6/24/2006
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Flaviusx

Manpower is indeed the real constraining factor for the Germans down the line and why later in the war they end up subsidizing the Axis minors and Italy as a matter of efficiency.

Alvaro mentioned something upthread about infantry not scaling well. I think he is on to something here. And German infantry has a massive 20% experience bonus over everyone else, but even with that infantry just doesn't keep up well with mech in the later years.

This is exactly the opposite of real life, where armor started off strong but struggled later on as infantry AT weapons and such reversed the balance of arms more in favor of the poor bloody infantry as time went on. Combined arms become more rather than less important in time.


Agreed. Plus if anything inf divisions on either side tended to feature more tank destroyer/SP gun attachments as time went on

(in reply to Flaviusx)
Post #: 152
RE: Balance Thread - 1/8/2021 6:54:53 PM   
MagicMissile


Posts: 1374
Joined: 10/11/2014
From: Stockholm, Sweden
Status: offline
In my games few have reached 1944 but for the games I have I would say number of mech units as follow.

Now with UK economy more stretched by subs maybe western allies will lose 2 mech or so at least in 43.


Soviet 43 13-17 44 20-25
Allied 43 10-12 44 15-17

/MM

< Message edited by MagicMissile -- 1/8/2021 7:03:54 PM >

(in reply to AlvaroSousa)
Post #: 153
RE: Balance Thread - 1/8/2021 8:21:20 PM   
MagicMissile


Posts: 1374
Joined: 10/11/2014
From: Stockholm, Sweden
Status: offline
I think this thread is very interesting I have not contributed as much as I wanted as I have some things going on in real life for the moment

Here are some points.

1) I think I agree with Harrybanana that balance is not so far off and we havent really seen any games finished with the latest patch so I think changes should not be too big.

2) I think France campaign is ok and the Germans can afford a fair amount of losses and still launch a strong attack in the east. I just try to take one hexrow per turn in France and keep retreat paths open. Yes 1 corps might be lost but one should not have to lose more. Of course if one push too hard then it can get worse. I aim to take Paris last turn of July or first of August. Any faster maybe can be done but would increase risk of losing units. Yes sometimes I feel allied airforce is a bit too strong maybe there something could be done but I am not sure if it is needed.

3) I do agree that the Germans seems to fold a bit easy in 43 but I am also scared of giving them too much more as I have yet to see in recent patches the allies being able to land properly in Italy and knock out Italy in 1943 for example. Yes maybe that means too much Germans in Italy and therefore makes them too weak in the East. This is of course extremely hard to know as balance is a fickle thing and depends on so many factors.

4) I like the corps to army change but I would be careful with too many new rivers.

5) One thing I have been thinking of is possibly mech units too powerful. What about the idea of lowering OP by 1? But maybe that would be a too big change.

/MM




(in reply to MagicMissile)
Post #: 154
RE: Balance Thread - 1/8/2021 8:56:10 PM   
AlvaroSousa


Posts: 7472
Joined: 7/29/2013
Status: offline
In the latest beta the Axis get production boosts ~18% over 15 months starting in 1942 reflecting armaments increase. They won't have an impact on a 1942 campaign in terms of balance
I also doubled the Waffen SS recruits in the scripts which should see the Germans having some historical manpower problems in 1943 but not crippling.
The rivers help both sides BTW.

What I am seeing in some of the PBEM games sent to me is that the Axis do not put enough uboat pressure on the Allies. I put a lot of pressure on the Allies. So there is a balance between which the beta patch addresses.

_____________________________

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 #: 155
RE: Balance Thread - 1/8/2021 9:00:18 PM   
ncc1701e


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

ORIGINAL: MagicMissile

1) I think I agree with Harrybanana that balance is not so far off and we havent really seen any games finished with the latest patch so I think changes should not be too big.


+1000 - let's wait a little the testing of the corps to army migration.

quote:

ORIGINAL: MagicMissile

2) I think France campaign is ok and the Germans can afford a fair amount of losses and still launch a strong attack in the east. I just try to take one hexrow per turn in France and keep retreat paths open. Yes 1 corps might be lost but one should not have to lose more. Of course if one push too hard then it can get worse. I aim to take Paris last turn of July or first of August. Any faster maybe can be done but would increase risk of losing units. Yes sometimes I feel allied airforce is a bit too strong maybe there something could be done but I am not sure if it is needed.


Epilogue, July 5th, 1940, Paris is taken. My opponent is very good, far better than me. I was very focused to avoid losing units by deadly counter attacks. I still think the French airforce is too good. 40% experience would be my dream.




Attachment (1)

< Message edited by ncc1701e -- 1/8/2021 9:01:50 PM >


_____________________________

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 #: 156
RE: Balance Thread - 1/8/2021 9:02:55 PM   
ncc1701e


Posts: 3665
Joined: 10/29/2013
From: Utopia Planitia Fleet Yards
Status: offline
My losses so far. You are right Alvaro, historically the Germans have taken air losses during the Battle of France. This is just that carefully moving each of my air units between full support or mission only, I was not expecting losing so much.




Attachment (1)

< Message edited by ncc1701e -- 1/8/2021 9:03:59 PM >


_____________________________

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 ncc1701e)
Post #: 157
RE: Balance Thread - 1/8/2021 10:03:13 PM   
Flaviusx


Posts: 7591
Joined: 9/9/2009
From: Southern California
Status: offline
Your losses are trivial and you even are a bit ahead of schedule here with a mid July surrender. I figured it would take you a turn longer.

Honestly do not understand your complaints here. This is an excellent position for the Germans. What are you expecting here?

_____________________________

WitE Alpha Tester

(in reply to ncc1701e)
Post #: 158
RE: Balance Thread - 1/9/2021 8:33:09 AM   
ncc1701e


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

ORIGINAL: Flaviusx

Your losses are trivial and you even are a bit ahead of schedule here with a mid July surrender. I figured it would take you a turn longer.

Honestly do not understand your complaints here. This is an excellent position for the Germans. What are you expecting here?


Nothing, you have already answered to me.
quote:

You are not going to get a late June surrender on France against any kind of competent allied player. So forget that. Human allied players aren't going to be as stupid as the historical ones.


You see against AI, I can destroy Netherlands, Belgium, Luxembourg and France in three turns and be on track compared to the historical pace. And, I don't have to care too much about losing any kind of units. The French AI is unable to perform any counter attack contrary to a competent allied player as you said.

But, I have forgotten that May 24th, 1940 was an heavy rain turn in this game. So, yes Germans are not too bad here and, for the first time, I did not lose a mech in these operations.

My main concern is that, me as French, I can inflict many losses to German player during the Battle of France. Historically, French did not. That's all. That's why I was willing to reduce the experience of the French to prevent me to do that. After sustaining such losses, I think this is nearly game over for my German PBEM opponent. It happen to me many times to fail in France as Germans.

See here:
http://www.matrixgames.com/forums/fb.asp?m=4937739
German losses - Land: 382 - Air: 175

Edit: I guess I am getting better. The game must not be changed. The player needs to learn how to master it. But, this can be brutal for some PBEM opponent to lose in France whereas historically it was a big French defeat.

< Message edited by ncc1701e -- 1/9/2021 8:36:31 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 Flaviusx)
Post #: 159
RE: Balance Thread - 1/9/2021 3:20:39 PM   
ncc1701e


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

ORIGINAL: ncc1701e

See here:
http://www.matrixgames.com/forums/fb.asp?m=4937739
German losses - Land: 382 - Air: 175


You see in this game the tanks literally crashed into the French defenses losing their efficiency turn after turn. My feeling was more WW1 than WW2. The combined arm of tank + plane was not working.

Thus, my feeling that the French were too strong. But, this is perhaps my opponent that was not trained enough to the game.

< Message edited by ncc1701e -- 1/9/2021 3:21:17 PM >


_____________________________

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 ncc1701e)
Post #: 160
RE: Balance Thread - 1/10/2021 6:51:56 PM   
Harrybanana

 

Posts: 2372
Joined: 11/27/2004
From: Canada
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: Flaviusx

Manpower is indeed the real constraining factor for the Germans down the line and why later in the war they end up subsidizing the Axis minors and Italy as a matter of efficiency.

Alvaro mentioned something upthread about infantry not scaling well. I think he is on to something here. And German infantry has a massive 20% experience bonus over everyone else, but even with that infantry just doesn't keep up well with mech in the later years.

This is exactly the opposite of real life, where armor started off strong but struggled later on as infantry AT weapons and such reversed the balance of arms more in favor of the poor bloody infantry as time went on. Combined arms become more rather than less important in time.


+1 I was going to post the same thing. The other difference between early war and late war was psychological. The Shock and Awe effect of tanks early in the War was much greater than it was by the end of the War.

< Message edited by Harrybanana -- 1/10/2021 6:52:52 PM >

(in reply to Flaviusx)
Post #: 161
RE: Balance Thread - 1/10/2021 9:10:00 PM   
battlevonwar


Posts: 1001
Joined: 12/22/2011
Status: offline
Defang armor becareful, as air has been defanged you will never get strong points or breakthroughs ... An Infantry AT Corp at 23 Strength sitting on an objective fully supplied will take a lifetime to destroy ...

(in reply to Harrybanana)
Post #: 162
RE: Balance Thread - 1/10/2021 9:16:09 PM   
Flaviusx


Posts: 7591
Joined: 9/9/2009
From: Southern California
Status: offline
The tweak Alvaro applied to heavy armor tech seems like a nice modest adjustment, nothing too crazy. I'm happy to see how that plays out.

_____________________________

WitE Alpha Tester

(in reply to battlevonwar)
Post #: 163
RE: Balance Thread - 1/11/2021 8:29:58 AM   
Jeff_Ahl

 

Posts: 95
Joined: 10/10/2018
Status: online

quote:

ORIGINAL: Flaviusx

The tweak Alvaro applied to heavy armor tech seems like a nice modest adjustment, nothing too crazy. I'm happy to see how that plays out.


I am to busy at the moment to looking up that tweak and have missed what was changed. Please deveolope, I know there was alot of discussion around Heavy Armor vs Breakthrough but never heard what was done about it.

(in reply to Flaviusx)
Post #: 164
RE: Balance Thread - 1/11/2021 2:59:16 PM   
AlvaroSousa


Posts: 7472
Joined: 7/29/2013
Status: offline
Heavy armor defense and tanks have been reduced by one by 1945.

Their progression was slowed for the other years.

_____________________________

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 Jeff_Ahl)
Post #: 165
RE: Balance Thread - 1/11/2021 4:45:12 PM   
Jeff_Ahl

 

Posts: 95
Joined: 10/10/2018
Status: online

quote:

ORIGINAL: AlvaroSousa

Heavy armor defense and tanks have been reduced by one by 1945.

Their progression was slowed for the other years.


T(h)anks.

(in reply to AlvaroSousa)
Post #: 166
RE: Balance Thread - 1/11/2021 5:49:13 PM   
battlevonwar


Posts: 1001
Joined: 12/22/2011
Status: offline
Alvaro, in my last two games vs Allied Opponents of equal or greater skill. I find that the Axis can survive well into '42, do some damage but there it ends. The situation is about this, the Allies know they can give land and have time and the Allies can land anywhere they want with an army they can afford to lose and rebuild within a short period of time. So no matter what the Allies will always win when the opponents are of = skill by '43... Unless the Axis player makes zero errors, then I think the possibility of survival in '44 is doable.

No strategy or tactic I can see on 1.9 would change this the Axis are short about 10 or 15 Corps to defend against the Allies in the West and are hard pressed in late '42 and early '43 to hold. Not to mention Italy is just a royal pain and most Axis have to garrison here with all her finest units and with all those ports you do it at your peril. The only way the Axis win this game as it was is utterly wiping out say the Soviets in '41... Total Destruction ...

Of course is a VP Win still possible I saw one in AAR, so if the Axis play for time I don't know that possibility is there depending on the skill level?


(in reply to AlvaroSousa)
Post #: 167
RE: Balance Thread - 1/11/2021 6:26:27 PM   
squatter

 

Posts: 585
Joined: 6/24/2006
Status: offline
In the PBEMs I have played, what has jumped out in particular is the size that the UK/Commonwealth war machine can grow to in a very short space of time.

The UK can survive battle of France with few losses, and basically match anything the Axis can throw at them in N Africa and Middle East in 40/41 (especially with the help of the disproportionate amount of bad weather in these zones that thwart offensive action). By the summer 41 the UK can easily field 5 mech/armour corps and many more inf corps. Did UK have 5 mech/armour corps even by 1945 irl?

And then the Canadians in the same time frame can field easily 3/4 inf corps - a bigger army than either Romania or Hungary at their point of entry to the war.

I also feel the ease of invasions is too high, its possible to put ashore as many corps in the game in 42 as were put ashore at D-day in 1944.

Possible tweaks (not suggesting all of them at once):

Reduce UK/Canada production

Further increase landing ship cost and/or landing ship build time

Don't allow UK to turn off repairs/upgrade to naval units (simulate necessity/desire to keep the empire connected/protected)

Decrease UK manpower

Decrease UK starting experience for ground units

Increase manpower/production Germany gains from conquering certain countries (representing huge amounts of willing conscripts/press-gang conscripts/slave-labour/captured equipment etc)





(in reply to battlevonwar)
Post #: 168
RE: Balance Thread - 1/11/2021 6:54:02 PM   
AlvaroSousa


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

quote:

ORIGINAL: squatter

In the PBEMs I have played, what has jumped out in particular is the size that the UK/Commonwealth war machine can grow to in a very short space of time.

The UK can survive battle of France with few losses, and basically match anything the Axis can throw at them in N Africa and Middle East in 40/41 (especially with the help of the disproportionate amount of bad weather in these zones that thwart offensive action). By the summer 41 the UK can easily field 5 mech/armour corps and many more inf corps. Did UK have 5 mech/armour corps even by 1945 irl?

And then the Canadians in the same time frame can field easily 3/4 inf corps - a bigger army than either Romania or Hungary at their point of entry to the war.

I also feel the ease of invasions is too high, its possible to put ashore as many corps in the game in 42 as were put ashore at D-day in 1944.

Possible tweaks (not suggesting all of them at once):

Reduce UK/Canada production

Further increase landing ship cost and/or landing ship build time

Don't allow UK to turn off repairs/upgrade to naval units (simulate necessity/desire to keep the empire connected/protected)

Decrease UK manpower

Decrease UK starting experience for ground units

Increase manpower/production Germany gains from conquering certain countries (representing huge amounts of willing conscripts/press-gang conscripts/slave-labour/captured equipment etc)



Thanks for suggestions some of these have been already adjusted in the game.
How many games have you played so far vs human opponents? It takes a lot to get a good feel for the game trying various strategies. As many as I have played even I haven't explored all the possibilities.


_____________________________

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 squatter)
Post #: 169
RE: Balance Thread - 1/11/2021 6:54:21 PM   
AlvaroSousa


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

quote:

ORIGINAL: battlevonwar

Alvaro, in my last two games vs Allied Opponents of equal or greater skill. I find that the Axis can survive well into '42, do some damage but there it ends. The situation is about this, the Allies know they can give land and have time and the Allies can land anywhere they want with an army they can afford to lose and rebuild within a short period of time. So no matter what the Allies will always win when the opponents are of = skill by '43... Unless the Axis player makes zero errors, then I think the possibility of survival in '44 is doable.

No strategy or tactic I can see on 1.9 would change this the Axis are short about 10 or 15 Corps to defend against the Allies in the West and are hard pressed in late '42 and early '43 to hold. Not to mention Italy is just a royal pain and most Axis have to garrison here with all her finest units and with all those ports you do it at your peril. The only way the Axis win this game as it was is utterly wiping out say the Soviets in '41... Total Destruction ...

Of course is a VP Win still possible I saw one in AAR, so if the Axis play for time I don't know that possibility is there depending on the skill level?




I tend to agree here. In my matches with Hadros the games went to the last turn when I was the Allies. But I think he is a better player and he really ravaged the Russians in one game.

When I am the Axis I am crushed by 1944.
In my current game I took Gibraltar via Spain, took Norway, had 10 subs out in the Atlantic by 1941. I have drastically slowed the Western Allies. It's coming up on Summer of 1943 and they still can't invade Italy although they just took Algiers and are approaching Tripoli.

I did do a calculation on the sub run up from my games because I go heavy subs. Hadros is a little light or historical. He also does a 1941 Barbarossa

But over the many games we played he and I both noticed Germany ran out of manpower by 1943. They lacked a in production and manpower.

I still have really yet to try a straight 1941 Barbarossa with historical subs myself but I faced a few.

In the last Beta Germany did get a boost to production starting in 1942 that won't really affect the 1942 offensive. I also doubled the Waffen SS recruit events which by my calculations should keep their manpower up ok till later in the war. But little steps for balance. Russia did get a slowdown in status from 1941 to 1942 which impacts their production.

Sadly I can't play WarPlan all day as I have other things to do.

As for victory.... the VP system is the way to win.

If you match up 2 excellent World in Flames players it will come down to 1945 and victory objectives. Neither will blow out the other. So yes Germany should plan to play the game for VPs always.

The best game for both players is the nail biting one that goes to the last turn, and last objective. Thus why as the Axis you need to plan operationally and strategically.

But a 1942 option should be available for the Germans as a strategy. The Russian production is historical till 1941.

I am hoping my changes will allow a 1942 strategy for the Axis as an equal option to the 1941 option.

_____________________________

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 #: 170
RE: Balance Thread - 1/12/2021 10:05:09 AM   
sillyflower


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

quote:

ORIGINAL: AlvaroSousa


The best game for both players is the nail biting one that goes to the last turn, and last objective.


Hmmmmm

This is what happened in my first game vs sveint. I think that the stress took 5 years off my life, and I don't have many of them to spare these days.

_____________________________

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 #: 171
RE: Balance Thread - 1/12/2021 3:03:01 PM   
AlvaroSousa


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

ORIGINAL: sillyflower


quote:

ORIGINAL: AlvaroSousa


The best game for both players is the nail biting one that goes to the last turn, and last objective.


Hmmmmm

This is what happened in my first game vs sveint. I think that the stress took 5 years off my life, and I don't have many of them to spare these days.



LOL... see healthy dose of anxiety is good for a game.

_____________________________

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 sillyflower)
Post #: 172
RE: Balance Thread - 1/12/2021 5:46:39 PM   
squatter

 

Posts: 585
Joined: 6/24/2006
Status: offline
I'm wondering whether there ought to be a similar capacity for air and armoured production as there are shipyards.

Ie depending on the country, they can only have x amount of armour units in production at any point in time. Call it vehicle plant capacity. This would be a) historical, b) set at levels to prevent players building nothing but armour

(in reply to AlvaroSousa)
Post #: 173
RE: Balance Thread - 1/12/2021 8:38:11 PM   
battlevonwar


Posts: 1001
Joined: 12/22/2011
Status: offline
Another point here is the Germans don't have the men to fight a good and long war I have found. Not if there is a lot of fighting . . . I don't know where the Soviets are at but I will get you the figure for this game if you desire? Or USA/UK...




Attachment (1)

(in reply to AlvaroSousa)
Post #: 174
RE: Balance Thread - 1/13/2021 12:41:21 AM   
Harrybanana

 

Posts: 2372
Joined: 11/27/2004
From: Canada
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: squatter

In the PBEMs I have played, what has jumped out in particular is the size that the UK/Commonwealth war machine can grow to in a very short space of time.

The UK can survive battle of France with few losses, and basically match anything the Axis can throw at them in N Africa and Middle East in 40/41 (especially with the help of the disproportionate amount of bad weather in these zones that thwart offensive action). By the summer 41 the UK can easily field 5 mech/armour corps and many more inf corps. Did UK have 5 mech/armour corps even by 1945 irl?

And then the Canadians in the same time frame can field easily 3/4 inf corps - a bigger army than either Romania or Hungary at their point of entry to the war.

I also feel the ease of invasions is too high, its possible to put ashore as many corps in the game in 42 as were put ashore at D-day in 1944.

Possible tweaks (not suggesting all of them at once):

Reduce UK/Canada production

Further increase landing ship cost and/or landing ship build time

Don't allow UK to turn off repairs/upgrade to naval units (simulate necessity/desire to keep the empire connected/protected)

Decrease UK manpower

Decrease UK starting experience for ground units

Increase manpower/production Germany gains from conquering certain countries (representing huge amounts of willing conscripts/press-gang conscripts/slave-labour/captured equipment etc)




Have the Axis players in your game built large numbers of U-Boats? If you build an historical level of U-Boats (say 6 to go with the 3 the Germans start with) then I think you will find that the Brits and Canadian are too busy in 1940 and 1941 building MS and escorts to build large armies and LSs. You can keep them even more on the ropes if you send in the German surface fleet to raid the convoys (though you risk losing ships doing so).

Have your Axis players attacked the British hard in Egypt? Historically the Brits were forced to use a lot of production here replacing losses and using supply trucks.

If you don't build U-Boats and press the Brits in North Africa then I don't think you have any right to complain that the UK is too strong in 1941 or 1942. Historically if the Axis didn't do these things than the UK would have been a lot stronger in 41 and 42. If you want to go All-In on Russia that is fine, I do the same thing, but then you can't complain about British invasions all over the place.

As for the Canadians (of which I am one) you are correct that in the game the Canadians can build a much larger army than they did historically. But that is because historically Canada spent a high percentage of it's production on ships (by Wars end we had the 3rd largest navy in the World) and air units (I read somewhere that about 25% of Bomber Command were Canadian). Had Canada concentrated on building army divisions rather than naval and air units we could have had a much larger army. I think Australia (with about 80% of Canada's population and far less production capacity) built 15 divisions during the War.



(in reply to squatter)
Post #: 175
RE: Balance Thread - 1/13/2021 12:44:58 AM   
Harrybanana

 

Posts: 2372
Joined: 11/27/2004
From: Canada
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: squatter

I'm wondering whether there ought to be a similar capacity for air and armoured production as there are shipyards.

Ie depending on the country, they can only have x amount of armour units in production at any point in time. Call it vehicle plant capacity. This would be a) historical, b) set at levels to prevent players building nothing but armour


I agree with you on this point and in fact posted something similar myself. It will probably have to wait for Warplan 2 though.

(in reply to squatter)
Post #: 176
RE: Balance Thread - 1/13/2021 6:59:00 PM   
squatter

 

Posts: 585
Joined: 6/24/2006
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Harrybanana


quote:

ORIGINAL: squatter

In the PBEMs I have played, what has jumped out in particular is the size that the UK/Commonwealth war machine can grow to in a very short space of time.

The UK can survive battle of France with few losses, and basically match anything the Axis can throw at them in N Africa and Middle East in 40/41 (especially with the help of the disproportionate amount of bad weather in these zones that thwart offensive action). By the summer 41 the UK can easily field 5 mech/armour corps and many more inf corps. Did UK have 5 mech/armour corps even by 1945 irl?

And then the Canadians in the same time frame can field easily 3/4 inf corps - a bigger army than either Romania or Hungary at their point of entry to the war.

I also feel the ease of invasions is too high, its possible to put ashore as many corps in the game in 42 as were put ashore at D-day in 1944.

Possible tweaks (not suggesting all of them at once):

Reduce UK/Canada production

Further increase landing ship cost and/or landing ship build time

Don't allow UK to turn off repairs/upgrade to naval units (simulate necessity/desire to keep the empire connected/protected)

Decrease UK manpower

Decrease UK starting experience for ground units

Increase manpower/production Germany gains from conquering certain countries (representing huge amounts of willing conscripts/press-gang conscripts/slave-labour/captured equipment etc)




Have the Axis players in your game built large numbers of U-Boats? If you build an historical level of U-Boats (say 6 to go with the 3 the Germans start with) then I think you will find that the Brits and Canadian are too busy in 1940 and 1941 building MS and escorts to build large armies and LSs. You can keep them even more on the ropes if you send in the German surface fleet to raid the convoys (though you risk losing ships doing so).

Have your Axis players attacked the British hard in Egypt? Historically the Brits were forced to use a lot of production here replacing losses and using supply trucks.

If you don't build U-Boats and press the Brits in North Africa then I don't think you have any right to complain that the UK is too strong in 1941 or 1942. Historically if the Axis didn't do these things than the UK would have been a lot stronger in 41 and 42. If you want to go All-In on Russia that is fine, I do the same thing, but then you can't complain about British invasions all over the place.

As for the Canadians (of which I am one) you are correct that in the game the Canadians can build a much larger army than they did historically. But that is because historically Canada spent a high percentage of it's production on ships (by Wars end we had the 3rd largest navy in the World) and air units (I read somewhere that about 25% of Bomber Command were Canadian). Had Canada concentrated on building army divisions rather than naval and air units we could have had a much larger army. I think Australia (with about 80% of Canada's population and far less production capacity) built 15 divisions during the War.





I have to admit I haven't faced a strong uboat strategy as the Allies yet.

So is it the case that the only way to avoid an early avalanche of UK/Canada ground units you absolutely must go for the 9 uboat strategy?


(in reply to Harrybanana)
Post #: 177
RE: Balance Thread - 1/14/2021 12:25:59 AM   
Harrybanana

 

Posts: 2372
Joined: 11/27/2004
From: Canada
Status: offline
Another option I used (see my AAR) was to only build 3 U-Boats for a total of 6. But then I didn't invade either Norway or the Netherlands. Between them these 2 countries give the UK 78 MS. It would take 3 U-Boats well over a year to sink this many MS and, of course, they would be taking damage that needs to be repaired. But, of course, there is a potential down side to this strategy as well. I believe some players even build 9+ U-Boats (for a total of 12+) over the course of the 1st 2 years of the War. You just have to choose your poison.

< Message edited by Harrybanana -- 1/14/2021 12:26:24 AM >

(in reply to squatter)
Post #: 178
RE: Balance Thread - 1/20/2021 3:43:25 PM   
ncc1701e


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

quote:

ORIGINAL: AlvaroSousa

Heavy armor defense and tanks have been reduced by one by 1945.

Their progression was slowed for the other years.


Well a first surprise, I fail to take Belgium in one turn with this change. Netherlands and Luxembourg invasion were fine. I need to review my tactics...

_____________________________

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 #: 179
RE: Balance Thread - 1/20/2021 4:41:38 PM   
AlvaroSousa


Posts: 7472
Joined: 7/29/2013
Status: offline
The changes should not affect the early war years.

_____________________________

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 #: 180
Page:   <<   < prev  2 3 4 5 [6]
All Forums >> [New Releases from Matrix Games] >> WarPlan >> RE: Balance Thread Page: <<   < prev  2 3 4 5 [6]
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

0.174