Help with GPW re-working needed

[TheArchduke]

That is your interpretation. Please keep your comments to yourself.

Adding a [;)] to bait a reaction is not okay.

Anyway, I still think 4 nationalities is more then enough.

[Mehring]

Sounds to me like the worst idea ever.

Do you have answers for any of the questions I put to you, it would be much appreciated.
 
As I said, one of the worst ideas I heard so far. I am probably going to continue to tweak my own scenario then.

..............
 
Using this thread to denigrate my, or anyone's ideas, instead of discussing improvements to GPW and how to implement them, is not OK.
 
Kindly keep off this thread.

[TheArchduke]

If you can not cope with criticism, I am sorry. But you do not decide where I post and where I do not. Your insistence on getting personal is annoying to say the least.

[Mehring]

To anyone wondering why TheArchduke is disrupting and hijacking this thread-
 
TheArchduke was a member of our GPW Russian command side which I lead. After ten game turns I had to relieve him of direct command of his Fronts as over time he proved incapable of implementing command decisions and I was getting fed up with finishing his turns for him, where I was able. After pulling his chestnuts out of the fire a few times he went off on a reckless escapade which once again completely flouted our decisions and damaged our prospects. In an effort to hold the team together I offered him an advisory role with no direct command which he declined and he instead resigned.
 
I'm at a loss to percieve any personal attacks against him in this thread. Were it not for his insistant provocation which demands explanation I would also keep the circumstances of his removal from command amongst the players. I can only understand his accusation as an inversion of the truth. In this light, while he has declined to answer questions which I put to him in post #12 and 17, answers to which I would find useful to develop GPW, he seems to have found something more important to him, an idea of mine which he denigrates and denigrates again. I never made such a comment to him which passes beyond criticism to outright personal rudeness.
 
Interestingly, after denigrating my idea to increase the nationalities a second time, TheArchduke posted-
"I am probably going to continue to tweak my own scenario then."
only then to accuse me of baiting a reaction with a [;)]. In the same post he tells me to "Please keep your comments to yourself." only now to tell me "But you do not decide where I post and where I do not."
 
And all because he couldn't take criticism?


 
 
 
 

[TheArchduke]

If you do not think a comment like "As for your rudeness, I think we all know where that's coming from. " is a slight provocation, I can not help you.

On the GPW teamgame, I am not too interested in doing everything exactly like you wanted. It would be easier for you to play the GPW 6a alone, but I guess that you had two people already leaving on you is statement enough. Note that I did not want to start this discussion here, but you did, twice.

In any case, I have seen my fair share of trolling and I will not fall for it from you. Refrain from provoking me and I will happily stay out of the thread. Demanding it, will not do.

If you want constructive input, I provided more then enough, that you take my criticism of the different nationalities is unfortunate. I still think it adds a complicated feature to the game without providing much gain apart from historical accuracy. Sometimes less is more.

[Mehring]

 
If you do not think a comment like "As for your rudeness, I think we all know where that's coming from. " is a slight provocation, I can not help you.
 
And where is your rudeness coming from? Oh! It's not rudeness! It's just criticism! And I, according to your email, should "get over the GPW game."

Unfortunately for all your twisted arguments we have a written record.

A sample of your disagreements- Orders discussion TheArchduke wrote-

17th August turn- "I disagree heavily, the 1st Shock Army must stay on the W Front."

10th August turn- "Actually, no, I wouldn´t do that. By the time the enemy goes north Gomel will be long taken by the enemy coming from the west through Bobsuisk. I rather hold the line in the north, but SW Front needs to worry." ... "Actually, no, as I am quite sure the enemy wants to encircle Kiev and not attack W Front."

3rd August turn- "Whilst in theory a good plan, I am not so sure it will work out..."

I could go on, but I think the above examples demonstrate beyond a shadow of doubt that TheArchduke knows perfectly well how to express disagreement and criticism in a civilised manner. That he should now use a phrase like "[font=verdana]Sounds to me like the worst idea ever." and it's reiteration "As I said, one of the worst ideas I heard so far" in a public forum and not bother to answer questions put to him on the subject of this thread is deliberate rudeness and provocation. [/font]

[font=verdana]On the GPW teamgame, I am not too interested in doing everything exactly like you wanted. It would be easier for you to play the GPW 6a alone.but I guess that you had two people already leaving on you is statement enough. Note that I did not want to start this discussion here, but you did, twice. [/font]
[font=verdana][/font] 
[font=verdana]As demonstrated above, you provoked this exchange with your rudeness.[/font]
[font=verdana][/font] 
[font=verdana]That you are not interested in adhering to command decisions suggests it's you who should be playing on their own.[/font]
[font=verdana][/font] 
[font=verdana]When the issue was first raised, in December, you stated "I agree that if I am in doubt or if I am doubting your judgement I seem to lean towards doing the orders my way... ...I will strive to voice my objections more during the organization and turn phase." [/font]
[font=verdana][/font] 
[font=verdana]In truth, the decisions you neglected to implement were your own or had your hand in their making. Your failure to implement them, unless you are suffering from a serious mental disorder, is not explained by disagreement.[font=verdana] [font=verdana]All I wanted was for the decisions WE arrived at to be implemented. The command system and therefore the team game is otherwise rendered pointless.[/font][/font][/font]
[font=verdana][/font] 
[font=verdana]Two people leaving the game states what? One has disappeared without trace from several games. One was sacked like you and what did you have to say on it?[/font]
[font=verdana][/font] [font=verdana]
"Nods, ********* has a peculiar way to play judging from my pbems with him. Shame though." and later you stated, for your own part against the written record, "[font=arial]I disagree with that I aligned with **********, I actually argued against him, as I knew from a pbem game that he was unreliable." You went on to add, in answer to my letting you know you can challenge me for leadership of the side "So please, continue to lead our forces as STAVKA" [/font]
[/font][font=verdana][/font] 
[font=verdana]In any case, I have seen my fair share of trolling and I will not fall for it from you. Refrain from provoking me and I will happily stay out of the thread. Demanding it, will not do.
 
Oh have you seen your fair share of trolling, now? If presenting a factual record to you and anyone else inclined to read it is provocative trolling, you might as well hang in here, there's plenty more. And where do I demand anything of you? Ever? I did remove you from your command. Sorry, would have been irresponsable not to. Is it about power? You couldn't stop me sacking you but I can't make you piss off from this thread? What a hollow victory. Bless you.
[/align]
If you want constructive input, I provided more then enough...[/align]
Enough for whom? Clearly not for me who started this thread and needs help implementing changes to GPW, so must be enough for yourself. And that's the thread that runs through all your argument. Selfishness, inability to co-operate, at times masked with obsequious politeness, now the real ugly content on full display to all.[/align] [/align]I still think it adds a complicated feature to the game without providing much gain apart from historical accuracy.[/align]Yes, I think we got that.[/align][/font]

[Grymme]

Mehring/Archduke. Give it a rest. I know from personal experience this doesnt help anyone. Least of all yourselves.
 
 

[Joshuatree]

ORIGINAL: Mehring

Just found some good information on Russian tank and rifle divisions, still lacking cavalry and the brigade sized formations.

I've now added Italians, Hungarians, Bulgarians, Spanish and Volksdeutsche as seperate people with their own combat values.

Glad you did find the information you were looking for. I didn't realize the link I posted was in written in Russian, sorry for that.

[Mehring]

Thank you Grymme, sometimes it takes a third party to break the deadlock.

@Joshuatree
Still looking for cavalry and all independent brigade formation leads if you have any.

[Joshuatree]

No I don't have any... yet. Problem is, I do have links that provide the info you want, but as my pc and especially my browser are totally f*&ked up the pages won't load, heck many times I can't even log in on this site [:@]
But help is on it's way, I bought a new pc last week, will get it wednesday, thursday (with a spanking bright new 24 inch HP LP2475w monitor [:D] ).
With Vista and the browser.... maybe I should try out FireFox this time,  all new installed I hope my surfing will commence once again.
 
Take for instance this site: http://www.battlefield.ru/  it has an english translation section... but all it does on MY screen is show a brown empty space... duh.

[Mehring]

Hey, I'll burn you XP if you don't get on with vista

Thanks for the link, not what I was looking for, for GPW, but loads of interest there.

[Mehring]

Could anyone tell me how to delete locTypes and edit map text?



Here's the new Crimea, so far without railways and missing a few details.

[TheArchduke]

I think you look for Loctype, it is in the upper bar between settings and people´s. You can delete them there.

With Map Text, I guess you mean City Names or Airfield Names? I think that is done with the Hex Button also in the upper bar.


On a whole other note, Mehring, did you check out the map near Leningrad? I think the Vanilla GPW is awfully swampy there, whilst google maps seems to put heavy forest there. The mass of swamp seems artifical to me in the Vanilla GPW.

[Mehring]

Thanks for that but I worked it out in the end.
 
I've been over google earth too, other detailed war game maps, contemporary RAF maps and some Deutche Heereskarte stuff too. My conclusion is to start the map again from scratch but I think I'll be doing it within the Ostfront mod of GPW. This has already effected many of the changes I'm aiming at as well as some other ones which are very interesting. Looks like I'll have to start again though and wipe out all the new units only to recreate them on the new map.
 
This is a lot of work and will take a loing time.

[TheArchduke]

Good luck. Boron and me made a 200x200 Russia map, but test games resulted in turns taking too long. I will upload it.

[BvB]

Why not also look at the Ostfront scenario for ideas on OOB?  Since it has a totally different set of units you could not incorporate that part, but just for the unit names and reinforcement schedule that he put a lot of work into...

[Mehring]

I'm working through the scenario at the moment. So far I've found what I suspect are a couple of innacuracies in the OOB (Politzei shouldn't be motorised, RFSS Brigade didn't form until 1943) but I'm generally so impressed by it I'm looking at making a new map for Ostfront and adapting the reinforcement schedule to the new map rather than borrowing some ideas from it to make a new mod.
 
I'm also considering the relative historical accuracy vs playability of the supply system and Russian mech corps having their own HQs. Each player turn takes one hell of a long time to get through with any attention to detail and that really detracts in a PBEM with anti-cheat on.
 
My view so far, fantastic mod but needs  some tweeks for playability.

[BvB]

Yes Matt recommended not having anti-cheat on as the turn was so large he thought it best to give one a chance to save and take a break. I think as long as you play with folks you trust that is fine. And mandatory if you were to play with multi players per side...

[Captain Cruft]

Hi guys,

I'm all for Mehring or indeed anyone else developing Ostfront in whatever way they choose. It was only ever intended to be a starting point really, though it turned out to be a bit of a beast [;)]

As to the OOB, it was basically ripped off (with permission) from two TOAW scenarios. I have very little clue on that front, my motivation was mostly to do with the game mechanics and having a vaguely realistic and rich set of SFTypes.