How to calibrate the counter values correctly

[chuckfourth]

Getting the first turn surprise rule right allows you to calibrate all the counter values because in their correct configuration they can be tested against the German historical first week performance.

There is no difference between the German capabilities on week one and week two. The only difference was with the Russians apparently had about one third of their troops in barracks on day one. So the first turn surprise rule should just be that the RUSSIAN attack/defend values should be about one third less on day one. "Surprise" isn't a real thing the Russians were well aware of the German buildup.
If this change is made and the Germans cant reach or overreach their historical penetrations that then shows you that the counter values are WRONG.
When comparing German and Russian units on a equipment basis, the Russians look much better than they actually were, the game rightly takes poor leadership into account, but the Germans had a sophisticated radio network that made ALL their forces completely integrated, The Russians were still waving flags out of hatches, and jumping on horses. This is why the Germans cut the Russian forces to pieces in 41. The radio net acts as a massive force multiplier because all the components talk to each other and act as an integrated whole. The Russians still had a piecemeal WW1 army.

Look I really like this game and I want WITE #2 to succeed where #1 didn't but it does seem prone to "overthink" the problem putting high level overreaching unnecessary "rules" into place to address issues that can be solved by looking more closely at the fundamentals. The game tends towards becoming if anything, too complex.

[jacktimes2]

One thing I have to disagree with is the notion that reducing troop levels by 33% linearly reduces a unit’s combat effectiveness by the same 33%.

[chuckfourth]

Thank you for your reply jack
Sure you are right this may well be the case, The important point is that on day one the Russians need to be diminished and the Germans remain the same as week 2.

[Farfarer61]

With at least two weeks supply of Privitin this seems historical.

[chuckfourth]

Im sorry Fararer I dont understand your comment.

[Hanny]

ORIGINAL: chuckfourth

Im sorry Fararer I dont understand your comment.

Of course you don’t. Because your uniformed as to how the German Army operated in wartime.

[bwheatley]

ORIGINAL: chuckfourth

Getting the first turn surprise rule right allows you to calibrate all the counter values because in their correct configuration they can be tested against the German historical first week performance.

There is no difference between the German capabilities on week one and week two. The only difference was with the Russians apparently had about one third of their troops in barracks on day one. So the first turn surprise rule should just be that the RUSSIAN attack/defend values should be about one third less on day one. "Surprise" isn't a real thing the Russians were well aware of the German buildup.
If this change is made and the Germans cant reach or overreach their historical penetrations that then shows you that the counter values are WRONG.
When comparing German and Russian units on a equipment basis, the Russians look much better than they actually were, the game rightly takes poor leadership into account, but the Germans had a sophisticated radio network that made ALL their forces completely integrated, The Russians were still waving flags out of hatches, and jumping on horses. This is why the Germans cut the Russian forces to pieces in 41. The radio net acts as a massive force multiplier because all the components talk to each other and act as an integrated whole. The Russians still had a piecemeal WW1 army.

Look I really like this game and I want WITE #2 to succeed where #1 didn't but it does seem prone to "overthink" the problem putting high level overreaching unnecessary "rules" into place to address issues that can be solved by looking more closely at the fundamentals. The game tends towards becoming if anything, too complex.

Could you elaborate a bit on what you're asserting? What goals did you set for your T1 advance? What did you actually get?

I am having trouble determining if you're talking about the CV that you're seeing on your units or the opponents units? Are you playing with FOW?
FOW has been made foggier then it was back in WITE1 as well.


I've found WITE2 that the Germans tend to do better than they did in WITE1 on T1. But one big change is that the attacker loses combat effectiveness after multiple attacks in a single turn.
That's a big change from WITE1 and something that personally took me awhile to get used to with WITE2.


Thanks for taking the time to post. <3

[Nix77]

I've found WITE2 that the Germans tend to do better than they did in WITE1 on T1.

Wite2 T1 is longer than in Wite1, it's a full week now. I think the German advance is calibrated to reflect that.

[chuckfourth]

Hello bwheatley

The point I am making is that the fact that you need the special first turn rule PROVES that the counter values are wrong because if they were right you would not need the special first turn rule.
or
The first turn surprise rule is necessary because without it the Germans cannot reach the historically achieved penetrations, It follows then that they cannot reach those objectives because the German and Russian counter values MUST be wrong.

Now the first turn surprise rule is unrealistic. Zones of control, German movement abilities, Soviet Morale and Damage were the same on week one as on week two.

The first turn should be played as it happened historically, ie without the Surprise rule and with the Russians attack and defence values about 1/3 less than they are at full strength. (apparently about a third of them got caught in their barracks). No other changes.

If the first turn Surprise rule is dropped you would very likely find that now the Germans cannot reach their historical penetrations. And that would be because compared to the Russians the German counter values are too weak.

There is a obviously a very large amount of guesswork is giving the German and Russian counters their attack, defence and movement values.

The well documented opening week of Barbarossa is ideal scenario to correctly test what values the German and Russian counters should actually have. This is because when they are set right the Germans will achieve what they achieved historically in the game WITHOUT needing the surprise first turn rule. So whatever values of the Russian and German counters let the Germans achieve their historical penetrations must be the CORRECT counter values because the first turn surprise rule is a convenient fiction. So you can use the first turn to get the correct counter values, ie you can use the first turn to calibrate the counter values because the first week is so well documented.

Every assault has an element of surprise not just the first attack of the operation. The first turn rule is necessary to cover up the incorrect values of the counters. Other east front games do not have such a rule.

In the games defence random morale and experience goes some way to reflect those Soviet forces caught in the barracks. But it is simpler to just break the Russian front line divisions into 3 regiments and then remove one regiment per division before the game starts to represent those caught in their Barracks. This would also give something similar to the zone of control aspect of surprise rule that needs to be removed.

To answer your questions I get about the historical results playing WITE 1. I am not complaining that I cant get where I need to go. I am saying that the first turn rule is hiding incorrect counter baseline values.

Im talking about the relative difference between the German and Russian counters. So to compensate for removing the first turn surprise rule you could either increase the values of the German counters, decrease the values of the Russian counters, though removing a regiment from each division might be enough. Or change the values of both countries counters

The first turn rule should be removed altogether and the counter values adjusted to compensate or it needs to stay in place for EVERY turn. This is because there was no difference in German capabilities between week 1 and week 2. First turn rule is a game artifact unsupported historically.

I don't USE FOG as I am learning the game.

So I'm not so interested in how well the Germans do in turn 1 other than that they should be able to do what was achieved historically WITHOUT the Surprise rule. This is important because if the Germans were that good on turn 1 they should be that good on turn 2. Because of the first turn surprise rule they perform historically on turn one but then are majorly devalued for ALL the subsequent turns.

Is that any clearer?

[Simulacra53]

ORIGINAL: chuckfourth

Im sorry Fararer I dont understand your comment.

Pervitin is a type of Methamphetamine.
https://thesecuritydistillery.org/all-a ... in-1939-45

...of course the use of speed-like substances in warfare isn’t exactly limited to Germany and WW2, now is it.
Also the usage in the Wehrmacht is somewhat overstated, but it is cool to pretend that the Nazis were constantly high on speed.

[chuckfourth]

Thank you Simulcra53
The point I would make is that Pervertine is not restricted to week one during operation Barbarossa, if it was then that would be reason for the extra speed the Germans have on turn 1 compared to turn 2

[SigUp]

ORIGINAL: chuckfourth

Is that any clearer?

All I'm seeing is somebody who (not only here but also elsewhere) just runs into minutiae that are sometimes not even accurate that he complete misses the bigger picture. You assume because there is a need to first turn surprise rule that this means the base system of the game is completely wrong. Did you maybe consider that there is also the possibility that the system works for the rest of the game aside from the first turn and that by "fixing" the first turn according to your wishes you would break the game for the rest of the war unless you introduce multitudes of special rules here and there?

This game has been through years of testing. So in my humble opinion you are acting quite haughty by claiming based on a few hours of game play at best that the system is wrong and you not only know it better but also know how to fix it without breaking anything else.

[Searry]

I don't get it. I've read through the posts several times and all I see is the "historical" argument which never works for video games.

[chuckfourth]

Hi SigUp and Searry
This is not based on a few hours of game play. It is a "Logical" argument. Let me rephrase it this way SigUp

If you remove the first turn rule then the Germans will not be able to reach there historical objectives, correct? yes.
So
because the first turn rule is a fiction then the counter values MUST be out of whack. The German forces should be able to duplicate their historical performance without it.

That they have to rely on the first turn rule for the game to work tells you the counters have the wrong values. It is not possible for the first turn rule to exist and the counter values to be correct at the same time.

Searry the game has to rely on a historical argument. Who would play it if the Germans consistently achieved half or twice there there first turn penetrations? no one.

Because they cant get the counter values right is why they had to make up the first turn rule. Its a "cover up" to adjust for wrong counter values.

The first turn rule is a quick fix to do exactly that, give a historical result its a quick fix because it isn't based on anything real. If they remove it and then adjust the counter values accordingly then with the fundamental counter values right then that will inform the game about how the other various overarching rules need to be adjusted. It is a much better approach to design the ruleset upwards from the correct baseline counter values than to have the wrong counter values which is what we have now, and having to adjust all sorts of aspects of the game to get the right gameplay outcomes.

And if you play the first turn without the first turn rule that can be used to tell you correctly what the counter values should be, you can use the first turn to calibrate the counters.

I read the forums they are adjusting the game to get historical type outcomes doing this with the wrong basic counter values is chasing your tail. For example with the right counter values German supply nerfing might not be such a big issue.

[Joel Billings]

I don't really understand. The first turn rules have to do with movement costs, not combat. The Germans can easily win the battles they need to on turn 1. However, the speed of movement and the inability of the Soviets to react quickly enough can be said to be unique to the opening of a war where one side is not used to fighting and not really prepared, and the other side has been able to study and plan for the opening moves for months without any change or interruption. Without the first turn rules the Germans would not be able to cover the ground that they did historically as the system assumes a certain amount of friction when moving into enemy areas that doesn't really apply in the first few days where the defense is surprised/confused/unprepared.

[carlkay58]

I have always considered that the Turn 1 Rules were there to represent the Soviets being caught flat-footed by the attack and the quick movement the German spearheads achieved rather than anything on the German side.

[HMSWarspite]

So the game is flawed unless the combat effects can automatically take account of an army that was under orders to not provoke Hitler by doing anything to prepare? When else in the war were so many planes caught on the ground and so many troops not deployed when an offensive prepared in peacetime conditions kicked off? Sure, this is the ultimate in unpreparedness but is so far outside the rest of the war that you want the system to cope without aid? If I was designing say weather for a game where the history was affected by a once in 100 years level typhoon (say) would I design the weather system to have a chance of generating one randomly and the rules be able to cope automatically or would you special rule it? Because designing a system to cope out to a 1:100 year event means you have an awful lot of 1:50 or 1:10 year event effects you will likely never use! Wasted effort.

[Hanny]

ORIGINAL: chuckfourth

Hi SigUp and Searry
This is not based on a few hours of game play. It is a "Logical" argument. Let me rephrase it this way SigUp

If you remove the first turn rule then the Germans will not be able to reach there historical objectives, correct? yes.
So
because the first turn rule is a fiction then the counter values MUST be out of whack. The German forces should be able to duplicate their historical performance without it.

That they have to rely on the first turn rule for the game to work tells you the counters have the wrong values. It is not possible for the first turn rule to exist and the counter values to be correct at the same time.

Searry the game has to rely on a historical argument. Who would play it if the Germans consistently achieved half or twice there there first turn penetrations? no one.

Because they cant get the counter values right is why they had to make up the first turn rule. Its a "cover up" to adjust for wrong counter values.

The first turn rule is a quick fix to do exactly that, give a historical result its a quick fix because it isn't based on anything real. If they remove it and then adjust the counter values accordingly then with the fundamental counter values right then that will inform the game about how the other various overarching rules need to be adjusted. It is a much better approach to design the ruleset upwards from the correct baseline counter values than to have the wrong counter values which is what we have now, and having to adjust all sorts of aspects of the game to get the right gameplay outcomes.

And if you play the first turn without the first turn rule that can be used to tell you correctly what the counter values should be, you can use the first turn to calibrate the counters.

I read the forums they are adjusting the game to get historical type outcomes doing this with the wrong basic counter values is chasing your tail. For example with the right counter values German supply nerfing might not be such a big issue.

Units have mp allocation for t1, you can reach week one objectives with them, and without first turn rule in effect, so no it’s not a logical argument.

[Joel Billings]

While you might reach some of the turn 1 hitorical gains without the turn 1 special rules, you'd be bery hard pressed to do it everywhere. Not having to pay zoc to zoc costs, nor some costs of moving through enemy territory, while not having some lower combat delays would make things much harder.

[SigUp]

ORIGINAL: chuckfourth

Hi SigUp and Searry
This is not based on a few hours of game play. It is a "Logical" argument. Let me rephrase it this way SigUp

Your argument is only logical in the sense that you are committing logical fallacy. It's quite a stretch to say that designing a rule set to fit the week of 22nd June means you have automatically fixed the rule set for over 200 weeks.

And what German supply nerfing are you talking about? Surely not your random claim with the city supply for which you have provided exactly 0 sources to back it up. If anything, German supply in 1941 might still be above what they were able to deliver to the front.

Again, all I'm seeing here is somebody who is way over his head while not truly understanding either history or the game system itself (saying that the first turn ZOC rule is unrealistic and not based on history alone shows that you haven't really grasped what this is really attempting to simulate).