Stepping away...

A complete overhaul and re-development of Gary Grigsby's War in the East, with a focus on improvements to historical accuracy, realism, user interface and AI.

Moderators: Joel Billings, RedLancer

HardLuckYetAgain
Posts: 7060
Joined: Fri Feb 05, 2016 12:26 am

RE: Stepping away...

Post by HardLuckYetAgain »

ORIGINAL: GibsonPete

If you rely on AI assist to handle the LW during your campaign expect to lose most of your airframes. If you handle the LW with care it will be make a lot of virtual widows and scrap metal of the VVS. Many players are ending turn one now with over 4000 kills for less than a 100 airframes. The OPS losses are still high but not what they were. If you do not over extend the OPS drop significantly. The flak losses are an issue but reality dictates if I fly 100 planes over a hex with 3-5 AA battalions I deserve what happens. The changes made by the DEV team are making a difference but we need to adapt. We are smarter than the AI.

Using the Air AI will 100% bleed the Germans Dry in the air. I am sure there are others that are good at it but I will rely on my own limited skills to create my own damage to my German Air force. But this is how I feel when I use the German AIR AI.

Image
Attachments
willy1.jpg
willy1.jpg (55.33 KiB) Viewed 7 times
Dreamslayer
Posts: 453
Joined: Sat Oct 31, 2015 1:37 pm
Location: St.Petersburg

RE: Stepping away...

Post by Dreamslayer »

"Just when I thought I was out, they pulled me back in."
HardLuckYetAgain
Posts: 7060
Joined: Fri Feb 05, 2016 12:26 am

RE: Stepping away...

Post by HardLuckYetAgain »

ORIGINAL: Dreamslayer

"Just when I thought I was out, they pulled me back in."

Hahahahahaha
HardLuckYetAgain
Posts: 7060
Joined: Fri Feb 05, 2016 12:26 am

RE: Stepping away...

Post by HardLuckYetAgain »

Sean Bean to the rescue!

Image
Attachments
gitgood1.jpg
gitgood1.jpg (44.99 KiB) Viewed 7 times
metaphore
Posts: 238
Joined: Sat Sep 04, 2021 3:34 am

RE: Stepping away...

Post by metaphore »

ORIGINAL: Joch1955

well before making assumptions that the game is "broken" (tm), we have to get the facts. F4 production did officially start in may 41, but they only trickled into the theater. F2 production officially continued until august 41 and they were the most numerous type of F models until dec. 41. At the end of sept. 41, 75%+ of F models were F2 and it was still over 50% at the end of december.

On the ground, having a F2 rather than a F4 should not make any differences. Yes, the F4 was better performing on paper, but the VVS in 41 was mostly flying obsolete ACs, like the I-16 which were no match for the F2.

If there actually is an issue which can be documented, I'm sure the Devs will get around to fixing it. However,to me this is a very minor issue which has no impact on the game
We have to get the facts straight, yes. Then you also need to read again what it was all about concerning F2-F4 production and not to divert Sauron's point which wasn't complaining about having an inferior fighter model.

His point was all about game mechanics and sloppy coding, not fighter quality, and his frustration came from another dodgy answer used to divert the blame into supposed game balance effect: "we won't fix it because it would give an advantage to this side blah blah blah" or, in this case, "the rules are the same for both players so it's not broken"... which is a moot excuse when consequences for each side are not the same.
Nix77
Posts: 565
Joined: Sun Oct 02, 2016 6:19 am
Location: Finland

RE: Stepping away...

Post by Nix77 »

I have enjoyed the fruits of Gary's "sloppy coding" for almost 30 years now :P
User avatar
Thogode
Posts: 9
Joined: Mon Aug 08, 2011 2:19 pm
Location: North Germany

RE: Stepping away...

Post by Thogode »

Same with me.

The core of this discussion is: Is this a game or a historical simulation?
MarkShot
Posts: 6811
Joined: Sat Mar 29, 2003 6:04 am

RE: Stepping away...

Post by MarkShot »

I have played a lot of tactical stuff: CMx1, CMx2, TCM/SOW and some larger operational stuff: AJE (Roman), AGEOD ACW 1&2, all PG's WWII ops. I must say the GG games are very ambitious and comprehensive (WITW/WITE2). The manuals say they are sandbox games, but I consider them to be constrained explorations. In the sense that so much is immutable, but yet their is enough variability to make them both educational and say "what if".

At the beginning of the year, I was experimenting with HOI4, but it was a comic strip ... using only the language and imagery of the period, but the music was perhaps best attempt to capture the period.

These games are well done, and the only series which rivals it greatly is Panther Games which is real time, delays, and intelligent agents of military command ... but it cannot handle this scope.

They strike a good balance between interactive appreciation/education and simply books/courses. I bought WITE2 (then WITW) initially just on the basis of the manual. I didn't think I would like turns, but I found out the game was a very clever hybrid that hides what is distasteful about chess: many things occur out of step and create a pseudo simultaneous experience.

After playing WITE2 for a while and coming here, it was clear that the game is in need of some balancing. But from what I can see reading the WITW and WITE2 docs; it is getting done. I think it is fine to say I will be back later when they are done. I also think it is fine to be part of the process that helps them find the right balance.

It is possible to say: I bought it and I want it PERFECT NOW. But given complexity of the product and way beta programs actually work. That is not totally reasonable. If you feel passionately, then stick around and post so that they can tune. If you don't want to touch something yet 100% complete ... don't stress; come back when it is done.

There is no need to get emotional. I see no other way than releasing it to passionate players to go from solid foundation to a cathedral. Myself, I am playing WITW and waiting, but happy others are helping to make this a great game.

So. Thank you to those who stay and post; and, of course, the developers/betas.
(於 11/13/21 台北,台灣,中國退休)
Joch1955
Posts: 32
Joined: Sat Sep 05, 2020 10:25 am

RE: Stepping away...

Post by Joch1955 »

ORIGINAL: metaphore
His point was all about game mechanics and sloppy coding, not fighter quality, and his frustration came from another dodgy answer used to divert the blame into supposed game balance effect: "we won't fix it because it would give an advantage to this side blah blah blah" or, in this case, "the rules are the same for both players so it's not broken"... which is a moot excuse when consequences for each side are not the same.

Well I don’t see that at all, “sloppy coding” is a bit harsh. As Denniss pointed out, F4 production in July was just starting up. The F2 was still the main production model and around 250 were produced after Barbarossa began. All we are talking about is including F4s in some units in June and maybe tweaking the reinforcement schedule.

The WitX series are very complex and track every AC, AFV, Artillery piece, etc. in the theater. There are bound to be errors/guesstimates in the OOB. WW2 was a very well documented war, but often when you try to track down details, you find the info is not there. IMHO however, the Devs are committed to this series and will eventually fix any errors pointed out to them.

As I said, this is a tempest in a tea cup and nothing to get worked up about. As it is, the F2 wipes the floor with the VVS. I have been checking the Air Combat results for June-July and whenever VVS fighters run into 109s, even the E model, they suffer massive losses. This is even the case with the MIG-3 which was arguably the best Russian fighter in 41 and on paper roughly equal to the 109. This is because the LW skill level is much higher than the VVS one. Having more F4s would not change the results.
User avatar
GibsonPete
Posts: 312
Joined: Wed Nov 05, 2014 10:53 am

RE: Stepping away...

Post by GibsonPete »

Joch1955 I agree 100%.
“Reader, suppose you were an idiot. And suppose you were a member of Congress. But I repeat myself.”
User avatar
821Bobo
Posts: 2290
Joined: Tue Feb 08, 2011 2:20 pm
Location: Slovakia

RE: Stepping away...

Post by 821Bobo »

It really doesn't matter if LW is flying F-2 or F-4, they will maul VVS badly anyway. If not, you are doing something wrong.
metaphore
Posts: 238
Joined: Sat Sep 04, 2021 3:34 am

RE: Stepping away...

Post by metaphore »

...
metaphore
Posts: 238
Joined: Sat Sep 04, 2021 3:34 am

RE: Stepping away...

Post by metaphore »

ORIGINAL: Joch1955
ORIGINAL: metaphore
His point was all about game mechanics and sloppy coding, not fighter quality, and his frustration came from another dodgy answer used to divert the blame into supposed game balance effect: "we won't fix it because it would give an advantage to this side blah blah blah" or, in this case, "the rules are the same for both players so it's not broken"... which is a moot excuse when consequences for each side are not the same.

Well I don’t see that at all, “sloppy coding” is a bit harsh. As Denniss pointed out, F4 production in July was just starting up. The F2 was still the main production model and around 250 were produced after Barbarossa began. All we are talking about is including F4s in some units in June and maybe tweaking the reinforcement schedule.

The WitX series are very complex and track every AC, AFV, Artillery piece, etc. in the theater. There are bound to be errors/guesstimates in the OOB. WW2 was a very well documented war, but often when you try to track down details, you find the info is not there. IMHO however, the Devs are committed to this series and will eventually fix any errors pointed out to them.

As I said, this is a tempest in a tea cup and nothing to get worked up about. As it is, the F2 wipes the floor with the VVS. I have been checking the Air Combat results for June-July and whenever VVS fighters run into 109s, even the E model, they suffer massive losses. This is even the case with the MIG-3 which was arguably the best Russian fighter in 41 and on paper roughly equal to the 109. This is because the LW skill level is much higher than the VVS one. Having more F4s would not change the results.
Again, I do think that you are still missing the point about what is not correct with the production system as it was implemented.

One should ask himself, before coding, if all possible cases were actually covered by studies. This is supposed to be a simulation of something existing. So, how were organized the production lines? Did we have one single line per factory or multiple ones? Did we have only one model in production or multiple models of the same aircraft/tank/equipment running at the same time? Was overlapping in production a possibility or not?

Consequently, if the answer given to such an issue when it's happening in game is "sorry guys but we didn't cover such case in our code but, as it's the same issue for both players, you'll have to be happy with it". can't be taken for a serious answer.

This F2/F4 issue was simply an example of something that will impact one side more than the other, because this side was producing a lot less of each stuff, but with multiple models at different places or production lines.

Then, when something was upgraded, the whole production would not be halted (Bf 109 in August in our example), because, in reality, any previous model (F2 in our example) was still in production at Factory "x" line #a alongside the change in new model (F4) at Factory "y" line #b which could have been stopped the time necessary for retooling.

Sauron example given being:
- F4 production started in May
- F2 production was stopped in July

But, in our actual game with the current system: 0 Bf 109 are delivered in August (F2 or F4)

While, of course in reality, both F2 and F4 models were delivered in June, July, August, etc.


The point was that, as this game is a so-called simulation, it should at least try to simulate it because there is an impact to be felt with many other pieces of equipment during the campaign.
User avatar
erikbengtsson
Posts: 126
Joined: Sun Mar 29, 2020 11:50 am

RE: Stepping away...

Post by erikbengtsson »

ORIGINAL: Nix77

ORIGINAL: erikbengtsson

The Luftwaffe being "bled white" of 109's in late summer, early fall of 1941? How on earth can that possibly happen?

The air war is still being looked into, and if you mean bleeding dry the Luftwaffe in human control, that's absolutely possible, depending on how you use them. With AI control, first turn losses are 500ish German aircraft iirc, and that's still a sustainable number. With some tweaking and human intervention, the losses can fall well below 100. Do that tweaking every turn and you won't be "bleeding white".
My post was a reaction to one of the original poster's claims that I thought was a bit over the top. ;)
metaphore
Posts: 238
Joined: Sat Sep 04, 2021 3:34 am

RE: Stepping away...

Post by metaphore »

ORIGINAL: erikbengtsson

My post was a reaction to one of the original poster's claims that I thought was a bit over the top. ;)

Yeah, it was over the top, and probably out of frustration :)
Nix77
Posts: 565
Joined: Sun Oct 02, 2016 6:19 am
Location: Finland

RE: Stepping away...

Post by Nix77 »

ORIGINAL: metaphore

But, in our actual game with the current system: 0 Bf 109 are delivered in August (F2 or F4)

Actually F2 will be delivered to units in August unless you've managed to wreck all of them from the pool. F4 will be produced in August, but will only be delivered to units in late August, once there's enough in the pool. T10 seems to be the first turn when AI starts upgrading them automatically to the units, while in September (T12) you can do this manually.

And by the way, I tested what happens if I change first production month as June for the F4. Both F2 and F4 WILL be produced in June, and in my test game JG received F4 upgrade in July already.

Since only the chassis production is factory-based, you can have concurrent production of different models of same chassis, but the chassis pool will be the limiting factor.

So actually there's no problem at all with Bf-109 production. If you feel the F4 should be present in start of Barbarossa, just change the start month, or add some to the pool. Not a big deal.

I noticed however there's a slight hiccup in the Bf-109 production: on turn 3 for some reason always only 25 Bf-109F-2 are produced instead of the full capacity of 42 pcs, even though there are chassis available in the pool. And also if I set the F4 production to earlier month, neither of the Bf-109 models get produced AT ALL on turn 3. Turn 4, production resumes normally.

EDIT: I think I got it, the game doesn't want to empty the Bf-109 chassis pool completely, so on T3 it leaves a buffer in the pool (25 pcs), and only part of the aircrafts are produced. If I added the F4 production to the equation, the chassis pool got sucked dry completely on T2, so on T3 nothing gets produced. Keep this in mind if you're fiddling with production rates & dates :)
Joch1955
Posts: 32
Joined: Sat Sep 05, 2020 10:25 am

RE: Stepping away...

Post by Joch1955 »

ORIGINAL: metaphore

But, in our actual game with the current system: 0 Bf 109 are delivered in August (F2 or F4)


As Nix77 pointed out, that is wrong, F2s will continue to be produced in August and until F4s are produced and the production model is flexible enough to produce both F2s AND F4s at the same time. I suspected as much since, as I recall, it was not an issue with Wite1.

So there is nothing wrong with the production model in the simulation as designed.
User avatar
Zemke
Posts: 647
Joined: Tue Jan 14, 2003 12:45 am
Location: Oklahoma

RE: Stepping away...

Post by Zemke »

I am certainly not an Air expert in this game, just the opposite. Until recently, I was only using AI-controlled air, but to play PvP, I switched to manual control.

Frankly, the whole Air Model seems too complicated, not very intuitive, and a lot of clicks to get something close to what you want, and even then, you don't know if the computer is going to do what you tell or not, or it seems that way.

I routinely put fighters on Air Superiority, yet it seems not much happens, or the results seem rather bland. I can see bombing results, I got that, I can see Naval Interdiction results, I get that.

I would almost prefer an old SPI NATO game box system where each player puts his Air blindly against the other player and you see what level of Air Superiority is gained or is it contested, and that affects everything else.

What I would also like is I want my CAS Air units to support certain attacks above all else, priority. For example to make a breakthrough attack on the ground you need to clear out 3 hexes across ideally. To do that you need to push those first-line units out of the way, and usually, this will require some CAS Air support, but I don't want to use up all my Air Support on those "battlefield setting the conditions" attacks, I would prefer to be able to use the air for the critical must-win attacks. I don't think the game does that very well, it just flies all the CAS that can fly each battle till there is no longer any CAS to fly.

Like I said above, I am no expert at Air, this is an Operational level ground combat game, and the air model is of secondary importance in the big picture, but the air should be easier to use or understand. But I may be missing something completely, Air in this game is not very intuitive.

"Actions Speak Louder than Words"
User avatar
Zemke
Posts: 647
Joined: Tue Jan 14, 2003 12:45 am
Location: Oklahoma

RE: Stepping away...

Post by Zemke »

One more post on WitE2 in general:

Many people have brought up good ideas and concerns about how certain things are modeled in the game or executed in the game. I feel like this game has too much focus on minutia detail and data. As the Commander of the entire Eastern front, I don't care about all that detail unless it affects operations, unless there is something that can be done within the appropriate Command level, Theater COmmander. The East Front Commander is NOT going to be able to change production, nor should he be in the business of deciding bomb load-outs; that is just insane to me, but whatever floats your boat.

If I were in charge of the game, I would change a lot of things about the game, but I am not. And that brings me to my main point, the guys working on this game are working their asses off with minimal resources in people, so ALL changes take time to program and test and tweak. Don't forget each change will upset someone, the Soviet Fan Boys, the German Fan Boys, the Data Tweakers, the control freaks, the game system manipulators, amateur east front historians, the military purest, etc. (I fall into the last two categories.)
"Actions Speak Louder than Words"
AlbertN
Posts: 3828
Joined: Tue Oct 05, 2010 3:44 pm
Location: Italy

RE: Stepping away...

Post by AlbertN »

While not on the topic at hand I quite agree with Zemke that right now the air model seems a lot of noise, really a lot of it, for relatively little.
On the other hand it may well add to the micromanagement to have it more precise and detailed (such as to determine what units are to fly as CAS specifically for each battle).
Post Reply

Return to “Gary Grigsby's War in the East 2”