Matrix Games Forums

WarPlan system has an oil and manpower system. It is difficult to balance since running out can be really crippling in the middle of a game. It is also very difficult to balance correctly as the results are pretty absolute. Either you have it or you don't. With manpower there is a degradation of experience but once you hit zero you are done.

So I was considering making a change from a static situation for both to a variable one.

Static is the current system. You run out of manpower or oil you are screwed. You can't build units, you can't move air, navy, and armor.

Variable means once you hit certain points you perform worse but can never be depleted.

With the current system you go 100% until you run out.
With a variable system your units perform differently with oil.
75-100% reserve capacity (RC) = 100% functionality
50-75% RC = 80% functionality
25-50% RC = 60% functionality
0-25% RC = 30% functionality

For manpower it would be something like.
95-100% manpower capacity (MC) = 110% of default experience (DE)
40-95% MC = 100% DE
20-39% MC = 80% DE
0-20% MC = 60% DE

Variable system sounds great!

Thinking about possible drawbacks... it could be harder to learn for new people not familiarized with the game, maybe it could add complexity to play.

It simplifies it.

A new player suddenly running out of oil pisses them off. It breaks their game right there as usually when Germany does run out say in 1942 they are in real trouble.

The variable system gives them slow warnings of what is happening so they can adjust before it cripples them.

Perhaps you should fix the existing problems with the game before you introduce a major change in the rules. I have followed the game for three years now and it is still not ready for prime time. I would like to play a finished version before I die of old age.

Sieben wrote: ↑Wed Mar 22, 2023 8:33 pm Perhaps you should fix the existing problems with the game before you introduce a major change in the rules. I have followed the game for three years now and it is still not ready for prime time. I would like to play a finished version before I die of old age.

Perhaps you should list the existing problems with the game that needs to be fixed according to you.

Sieben wrote: ↑Wed Mar 22, 2023 8:33 pm Perhaps you should fix the existing problems with the game before you introduce a major change in the rules. I have followed the game for three years now and it is still not ready for prime time. I would like to play a finished version before I die of old age.

Are you in the correct forum?
Game has been highly playable for 2 years with "minor" issues in my eyes.

So yes...what issues do you have?

Maybe you have not played based on your post stating you have "followed" the game...not "played".

The changes for for WP II NOT WP I.


That would be like telling a car dealer to fix all the issues with the car before they make a new model next year.

How would, say, 80% functionality when you were low on fuel work?

80% movement?

I love this idea, and to me it seem more realistic, and i would agree it would tend to be less jarring for new players.

I'm going to skip replying to the a**hole.

Not sure what the differences mean.

Low oil might mean less operation points. It is very likely I will use a different operation point system for air and naval.

The new system uses it for naval. 24 opts.
movement is 1 point per hex.
Attacks cost X points.

But there is intercept along the way. So if you get intercepted early you can turn around and go back.
Or run a short range mission and go back BUT still be intercepted if they are there.

Thinking something like this with air also.

Like Ju87 had short range but flew often
B17 had long range but flew not as often.

I voted for new both. In theory I think a more granular system is better. If you have computers that do all the calculation there is no reason not to use them. One problem could be a wish to prioritize. So for example instead of having 2 units at 70% oil maybe one would like to have one at 100% and the other at 40% but one can also just ignore that I guess and spread it evenly but obviously in real life some kind of priority was used quite often.

I know it is just an example but maybe make Manpower a little bit more granular 40-95% seems there could be another break in there somewhere.

/MM

I voted new oil but old MP. I think the proposed system (with the proposed numbers threshold) will not punish low MP enough. In a way the actual MP is granular already, even more so as it scale down more smoothly by 1% experience loss (under 50% MP) and I think it is in a more realistic way (at least under the said 50%)

As long as the new systems are not binary.

For manpower / experience I like the change but maybe something more gradual as suggested.

WHEN manpower hit 60% do the following.

Experience = 100% - (Manpower % + 30%) with a minimum of 30%....IF < 0 then 100%

Or something like that.

I have to use my math powers to set it right...

I voted to delete both.

Not trying to start a controversy, but you did ask for feedback. My $0.02 is that the current approach does not capture the true constraints both manpower and oil had in WWII.

Manpower: Each nation began with a population base which included a pool of draft eligible soldiers. These large pools are then augmented by small numbers of youth who reach the draft age each year. There are a number of dilemmas each power must confront as it mobilizes for war as each soldier not only requires equipment and supply, but are also removed from the economy and thus no longer available to industry to produce civilian or military goods. As the drafts increase and the reservoir begins to be consumed there should be an impact on troop quality (experience) and industry as more of the most productive people are removed from the economy.

Oil: For all powers the initial stockpile should be much larger and each turn's production should be much smaller. As stockpiles are consumed the ability to move / fight oil dependent units needs to decrease and industry needs to be impacted. Further, each port should have an oil storage capacity which allows oil dependent units to refuel. I realize players would now have to ship oil from production centers to ports where it will be consumed, but that should work within the current convoy system.

I know you dislike adding layers of complexity which make the game difficult to embrace for new players and you have always striven to keep the core gaming experience free of clutter. However, both the manpower and oil systems have issues and should be reconsidered. After all V2's are ALWAYS BIGGER and BETTER.

I believe what you have created is remarkable and I really enjoyed War Plan. I will be thrilled to get my credit card out on release date for WP2. September 1, 2023 will be the 84th anniversary of the start of WWII. {Subtle Hint}

Take care.

-Rob

Cad908 wrote: ↑Fri Mar 31, 2023 11:14 pm Not trying to start a controversy, but you did ask for feedback. My $0.02 is that the current approach does not capture the true constraints both manpower and oil had in WWII.

Manpower: Each nation began with a population base which included a pool of draft eligible soldiers. These large pools are then augmented by small numbers of youth who reach the draft age each year. There are a number of dilemmas each power must confront as it mobilizes for war as each soldier not only requires equipment and supply, but are also removed from the economy and thus no longer available to industry to produce civilian or military goods. As the drafts increase and the reservoir begins to be consumed there should be an impact on troop quality (experience) and industry as more of the most productive people are removed from the economy.

I absolutely love that idea. Taking men working in the industry to convert them into soldiers should lower a given country production. We can also say that these soldiers have not a big war experience. And as such, incorporating them into units, without training, should lower the fighting units experience. In WP, all units are the same. I think they should be rated A, B, C.

Without training... here, we can imagine a training pool to train men to become soldiers. If a country is in hurry, like USSR in 1941 or Germany in 1944, it could have the possibility to bypass that pool to take new soldiers immediately. But, their fighting units will suffer an experience drop until fighting experience will improve it again (or not).

ncc1701e wrote: ↑Sat Apr 01, 2023 9:39 am I absolutely love that idea. Taking men working in the industry to convert them into soldiers should lower a given country production. We can also say that these soldiers have not a big war experience. And as such, incorporating them into units, without training, should lower the fighting units experience. In WP, all units are the same. I think they should be rated A, B, C.

Without training... here, we can imagine a training pool to train men to become soldiers. If a country is in hurry, like USSR in 1941 or Germany in 1944, it could have the possibility to bypass that pool to take new soldiers immediately. But, their fighting units will suffer an experience drop until fighting experience will improve it again (or not).

Sure, you could present the player with the option to create a "Milita" unit which would be available in 2 turns at 50% of the national experience level or a "Regular" unit in 6 turns at 80% of the national experience level. (# of turns and % experience to be set after play testing) This would model the dilemma faced by the USSR in response to Barbarossa.

A related question - and likely difficult to implement into the current economy model - would be the armaments supplied to these newly created units. In an ideal world each power's economy would produce supplies (Food & Munitions) and armaments. These would be separate pools with armaments drawn as units are created / reinforced / upgraded and supplies as units move / fight.

This requires a more complex economic model which necessitates more management by the players. Balancing be tradeoffs between realism - complexity - playability is not a simple matter and I have not yet seen any game that really hits the perfect note. I wish Alvaro well.

Take care

-Rob