A needed fix for allied production

Eagle Day to Bombing of the Reich is a improved and enhanced edition of Talonsoft's older Battle of Britain and Bombing the Reich. This updated version represents the best simulation of the air war over Britain and the strategic bombing campaign over Europe that has ever been made.

Moderators: Joel Billings, simovitch, harley, warshipbuilder

User avatar
Nikademus
Posts: 22517
Joined: Sat May 27, 2000 8:00 am
Location: Alien spacecraft

RE: A needed fix for allied production

Post by Nikademus »

ORIGINAL: Reg

I believe GG put production on the map to allow the Allied player to attack and gradually erode the Axis's ability to wage war.

The reason Allied production is fixed off map is that the Ford plant at Willow Run will produce 428 aircraft per month (Aug'44) regardless of what the Axis player does.

However, the one thing I vehemently object to is the ability of the Axis player to use this flexibility to crank up production to ahistorical levels which I believe is tantamount to an exploit of the game system.

Agree. He probably did put it there for the Allies to impact, and then factored in an Axis ability to manipulate as a means for the Axis player to attempt to cope to a degree to the on map bombing.

Unfortunately....best laid plans......the ultimate result of this delicate balance is that in multiple games....spanning all the way back to Gary's 8bit U.S.A.A.F. , which is a direct ancestor of BTR....motivated and clever players can run with the ball on this as Axis and create unbalancing situations. WitP had same problem. AE has reduced it but jury is still out on ultimate result. We'll see what the new patch does here.

kaybayray
Posts: 451
Joined: Fri Jun 01, 2007 4:16 pm

RE: A needed fix for allied production

Post by kaybayray »

Hey Guys [8D]

I dont really want to step into the debate about whether one should or should not manipulate the Production capability or output of either side in this game. IMHO you can do what ever you want to with it. My only real thoughts are, I dont want it changed or modified so that you can not manipulate production as it currently is.

My experience in games are that they all have Rules, limits, capabilities and constraints. Most players tend to stay between the lines so to speak and some tend to see just how far outside the lines they can get. Either way you want to play it is fine by me. Since this game is not a Mass Mulitiplayer Online Game where thousands of players are simultaneously interacting within the exact same game setup, I dont see a need to throw a wall in to keep players from going to the extreme.

If you really dont want to play "Against" a player whos play style is diametrically opposed to yours then dont. But please dont go the the developers and owners of the game and powerwhine to have some kind of controls built to stop players from playing different than you do.

If somebody wants to shut down production and build only Me-262's and force their entry as soon as can possibly be managed within the game.. fine.. I dont really give hoot. If somebody wants to go into the mechanics and mod the game where the Axis has only 262's and the allies only have B-19 Bolo's.. fine by me. I am not playing in their game so it dont matter to me what the heck they want to do. Just please dont go to the developers and make them fix something that just aint broke.

If you guys really want this puppy changed I suggest you go to the Scenario and Mod design forum and learn how to gut this game and make it what you want. The source code to this game is not a National Secret and can be easily opened and manipulated by even my 8 year old Grandkids.

So if some player managed to get the Luftwaffe completely outfitted with Ta-152's by Jan 1943, hey thats awesome... is cool with me. [8D]

Later,
KayBay [8D]
It's all Mind Over Matter....
If you dont mind... It dont matter
User avatar
KenchiSulla
Posts: 2963
Joined: Wed Oct 22, 2008 3:19 pm
Location: the Netherlands

RE: A needed fix for allied production

Post by KenchiSulla »

Hey kaybayray, I agree with you. Players should have the freedom to play the game they want... Houserules in a PBEM game can solve problems you cant possibly solve with code..

However, you wouldnt want to unbalance the gameplay to much.. Being able to produce the best prop fighter the axis designed (in theory) and have it flying in january 44 is a bit to much for me. You could solve it, basicly as proposed bys ome here, to allow allies some manipulation of production. You could also solve it by making research a bit more historical and less of a sure thing! I would like to see the axis player nailbite his way through 4 months of allied bombing attacks without replacement aircraft!
AKA Cannonfodder

"It happened, therefore it can happen again: this is the core of what we have to say. It can happen, and it can happen everywhere.”
¯ Primo Levi, writer, holocaust survivor
Lanconic
Posts: 260
Joined: Tue Jul 01, 2008 8:54 pm

RE: A needed fix for allied production

Post by Lanconic »

ORIGINAL: Reg
ORIGINAL: kaybayray

My thoughts on this topic...

Yeah I was a bit surprised in the original game that the Allies were not able to control production in the same way the Axis is. However the Allies do have some ability to modify the Aircraft of squadrons. You can change the Airframe of any squadron to fill it with that of your choice. But then you are limited by the quantities being produced and deposited into the pool. So you cant really build the Air Force from the Allied perspective that you can from that of the Axis.

I didnt realize that WITP was modeled the same way. I don't really understand that. It seem intuitive that both sides of a Strategic game would have overall similar capabilities with respect to control of Economy, Production, R&D and Force building. Unless of course that was the major point of the game that a particular side had to overcome a particular set of constraints. Perhaps this was the mindset of the original developers. The idea that the Allies overall production plan with Mandatory Targeting constraints was the obstical that had to be overcome to defeat the Axis.

But I dont know....

Later,
KayBay

I have had a views on this topic for quite a while as it closely parallels the WITP/AE debate.

I think that most people totally miss the point of having axis production as an in-game function. One vocal fan boy advocate even went so far as to state that having Japanese (Axis) production on map where it was vulnerable to Allied action was to "PUNISH" the Axis player.

I believe GG put production on the map to allow the Allied player to attack and gradually erode the Axis's ability to wage war. As in the real war, axis war effort can be directly affected by attacks on the factories or by the denial of resources necessary for the war effort. This is not only the cornerstone of Allied strategy but central of any analysis of the conflict!!!

The reason Allied production is fixed off map is that the Ford plant at Willow Run will produce 428 aircraft per month (Aug'44) regardless of what the Axis player does. However the Mitsubishi/Messerschmidt plant output is very dependent on the in-game actions of the Allied player. I think the ability of the Axis player to adjust their factories/economy is quite consistent with this concept and allows the player to adjust and re-balance to minimise the impact of the Allied incursions.

However, the one thing I vehemently object to is the ability of the Axis player to use this flexibility to crank up production to ahistorical levels which I believe is tantamount to an exploit of the game system. If the Axis player is on track to a decisive victory, the best he should ever be able to hope for should be to maintain the current levels (I was going to say historical levels but historically they were in a downward spiral). There should be no way possible for the Axis to be increasing output to 600% of starting figures as reported in some AARs. I suspect this is possible by the economy model ignoring real world constraints that were there for a reason (probably not good ones) but are not reflected in the game.

Edit: Reading a few more posts above, I must agree with the sediment that being able to specialise on one or two aircraft types (the best in 'game' terms) is another case of ignoring the constraints of reality for the very reasons they cite.

Just my 2c [/rant off]

You cant increase the numbers of planes produced. What gave you that idea?
All you can do if change what TYPE of plane is produced.
The way of all flesh
Lanconic
Posts: 260
Joined: Tue Jul 01, 2008 8:54 pm

RE: A needed fix for allied production

Post by Lanconic »

ORIGINAL: Nikademus

ORIGINAL: Reg

I believe GG put production on the map to allow the Allied player to attack and gradually erode the Axis's ability to wage war.

The reason Allied production is fixed off map is that the Ford plant at Willow Run will produce 428 aircraft per month (Aug'44) regardless of what the Axis player does.

However, the one thing I vehemently object to is the ability of the Axis player to use this flexibility to crank up production to ahistorical levels which I believe is tantamount to an exploit of the game system.

Agree. He probably did put it there for the Allies to impact, and then factored in an Axis ability to manipulate as a means for the Axis player to attempt to cope to a degree to the on map bombing.

Unfortunately....best laid plans......the ultimate result of this delicate balance is that in multiple games....spanning all the way back to Gary's 8bit U.S.A.A.F. , which is a direct ancestor of BTR....motivated and clever players can run with the ball on this as Axis and create unbalancing situations. WitP had same problem. AE has reduced it but jury is still out on ultimate result. We'll see what the new patch does here.



Except of course that the allies outproduced the Axis more than 20 to 1

You should allow the allies to produce. or if not, then allow them to have MORE.
The way of all flesh
Speedysteve
Posts: 15975
Joined: Tue Sep 11, 2001 8:00 am
Location: Reading, England

RE: A needed fix for allied production

Post by Speedysteve »

ORIGINAL: Nikademus

Replacement airframes was never an issue. Replacement pilots, life expectancy and morale were the issue. Is he saying that the Allied side is running out of B-17's? Never saw that in the original game, and i'm legendary for my lack of thorough raid planning. Ask Speedy. [:D]

For once Nik I agree with you[;)]
WitE 2 Tester
WitE Tester
BTR/BoB Tester
Lanconic
Posts: 260
Joined: Tue Jul 01, 2008 8:54 pm

RE: A needed fix for allied production

Post by Lanconic »

ORIGINAL: Speedy

ORIGINAL: Nikademus

Replacement airframes was never an issue. Replacement pilots, life expectancy and morale were the issue. Is he saying that the Allied side is running out of B-17's? Never saw that in the original game, and i'm legendary for my lack of thorough raid planning. Ask Speedy. [:D]

For once Nik I agree with you[;)]


It is quite easy to run out of B17-G
Happens in every game I play
The way of all flesh
Deckard777
Posts: 55
Joined: Sun Oct 11, 2009 2:38 am

RE: A needed fix for allied production

Post by Deckard777 »

Both strict historical and 'what if' situations are always fun. 'What if' the Germans had mass-produced the Me-262 by 1943? How would it have affected the war? I think players should have the choice to find out.
FrankE
Posts: 10
Joined: Thu Oct 29, 2009 12:03 am

RE: A needed fix for allied production

Post by FrankE »

ORIGINAL: Hard Sarge

my point is, it is not good game play, it is gamy game play

and yes, you should have a good KD rate, the better Allied planes are not around yet

and the changes made, were not made to combat what a player could explot, it was made to correct what the AI was doing wrong, which the players also could do

hmmmm, 7-1 in losses, from what I remember, one of Swifts Allied wins, he had 1-5 for losses as the Allied, so, don't see where you are really doing so well

plus, as I said, I think your idea of good game play, would be exploted by a good player in PBEM, I already see the weak point, I am sure others have also

There's no way that the allied player could possibly exploit a good axis player accelerating something like Ta152 production. I just checked a save where I first got the 152C, date is 10/8/43 and since I already had 99 planes in the pool, I actually got it a couple of days earlier. This was done without impacting front line plane production. I build over 1800 109s (G5 and G6), 850 190s(A5 and A6), over 400 zerstoerer and 100 190Fs along the way. I even kept the Ga2 and Ga6 in production. Night fighters were switched to HE219A-2 but I don't think I switched any of those over to day fighters.

My production strategy was pretty simple, I switched over all of the research plants and minor ally plants (that weren't producing 109s) to 152C production along with a couple of other plants that I deemed worthless. My production was pretty suboptimal since I made some silly mistakes, in a 2nd game I could do better.

The main problem, I think, is the fact that research is bugged, you don't actually need engines for the planes in order to research them. I was researching about 40 152Cs a turn but my engine production couldn't support close to that since that was where I screwed up. I switched over large engine factories that are taking forever to come online. I might have averaged 15 603L engines a turn during that time which I don't think would have been enough to get me the 152 that quickly. Now that I'm building the 152, I'm building close to 60 a turn but my engine production is only 29. I'm guessing that I 'banked' all of the engines that I built while researching and now I'm drawing them out of a pool to support my production. Either that, or the 152C only take half an engine apiece. [:D]

Engine production seems to be the weak link for the axis since they're concentrated into fewer plants than airframe or parts production. A smart allied player is going to go after the engine plants.

FrankE
Posts: 10
Joined: Thu Oct 29, 2009 12:03 am

RE: A needed fix for allied production

Post by FrankE »

ORIGINAL: Lanconic
Except of course that the allies outproduced the Axis more than 20 to 1

You should allow the allies to produce. or if not, then allow them to have MORE.

20 to 1? You do realize that the Germans produced over 30,000 Me109s durig the war? They had the planes, just not the trained pilots to fly them all (or the fuel) towards the end.
User avatar
harley
Posts: 1700
Joined: Thu Oct 13, 2005 3:21 am

RE: A needed fix for allied production

Post by harley »

ORIGINAL: FrankE

The main problem, I think, is the fact that research is bugged, you don't actually need engines for the planes in order to research them.

This is the second time someone has said "engines aren't used in research" here. It was wrong last time and it is wrong now. Given I was the one who argued that engines weren't used with person X on the old ezboard do you really think it's something I'd allow to continue once I had my hands on the code?

Research needs Engines.

You are partly correct, however. As Lanconic was able to build the TA so fast, I tested his assertion and found that factories undergoing change were still contributing but not just research, day-to-day production as well. I found this after the beta patch was released, so you'll have to wait for the fix.
gigiddy gigiddy gig-i-ddy
Lanconic
Posts: 260
Joined: Tue Jul 01, 2008 8:54 pm

RE: A needed fix for allied production

Post by Lanconic »

ORIGINAL: FrankE
ORIGINAL: Lanconic
Except of course that the allies outproduced the Axis more than 20 to 1

You should allow the allies to produce. or if not, then allow them to have MORE.

20 to 1? You do realize that the Germans produced over 30,000 Me109s durig the war? They had the planes, just not the trained pilots to fly them all (or the fuel) towards the end.

I am quite well versed on the reality of USA production. That is why it annoys me so much
to see that reality ignored in a game, that in theory is supposed to mimic reality.
The 20 to 1 figure is simply quoting James Dunnigan, someone who I respect a great deal.
Frankly I think he understates the disparity.

In March of 1943, all USA production was delibretly throttled back. It didnt have to be that way.

The way of all flesh
User avatar
Hard Sarge
Posts: 22145
Joined: Sun Oct 01, 2000 8:00 am
Location: garfield hts ohio usa
Contact:

RE: A needed fix for allied production

Post by Hard Sarge »

ORIGINAL: FrankE
ORIGINAL: Lanconic
Except of course that the allies outproduced the Axis more than 20 to 1

You should allow the allies to produce. or if not, then allow them to have MORE.

20 to 1? You do realize that the Germans produced over 30,000 Me109s durig the war? They had the planes, just not the trained pilots to fly them all (or the fuel) towards the end.

and of those 30,000 how many did they lose ?

Image
Lanconic
Posts: 260
Joined: Tue Jul 01, 2008 8:54 pm

RE: A needed fix for allied production

Post by Lanconic »

ORIGINAL: Hard Sarge

ORIGINAL: FrankE
ORIGINAL: Lanconic
Except of course that the allies outproduced the Axis more than 20 to 1

You should allow the allies to produce. or if not, then allow them to have MORE.

20 to 1? You do realize that the Germans produced over 30,000 Me109s durig the war? They had the planes, just not the trained pilots to fly them all (or the fuel) towards the end.

and of those 30,000 how many did they lose ?


Alot were on the ground unflown when the Allies overran the depots.
Gas was a problem. They BEST reason to use the Jets. They didnt need refined Gas.
The way of all flesh
User avatar
Hard Sarge
Posts: 22145
Joined: Sun Oct 01, 2000 8:00 am
Location: garfield hts ohio usa
Contact:

RE: A needed fix for allied production

Post by Hard Sarge »

oh, there were planes on the ground, and you could pretty much take your pick if you had orders to pick up a plane at the depot, but still the statement/question is still the same, they made a lot of 109s, they made a lot of 190s, but, still most of them were knocked out

and yes, fuel is a weakpoint
Image
FrankE
Posts: 10
Joined: Thu Oct 29, 2009 12:03 am

RE: A needed fix for allied production

Post by FrankE »

ORIGINAL: harley

ORIGINAL: FrankE

The main problem, I think, is the fact that research is bugged, you don't actually need engines for the planes in order to research them.

This is the second time someone has said "engines aren't used in research" here. It was wrong last time and it is wrong now. Given I was the one who argued that engines weren't used with person X on the old ezboard do you really think it's something I'd allow to continue once I had my hands on the code?

Research needs Engines.

You are partly correct, however. As Lanconic was able to build the TA so fast, I tested his assertion and found that factories undergoing change were still contributing but not just research, day-to-day production as well. I found this after the beta patch was released, so you'll have to wait for the fix.

ok, that would also explain the numbers that I was seeing. My theoretical engine production would have kept up with my plane research but over half of those engine factories were still switching over. Glad you managed to track the problem down.
FrankE
Posts: 10
Joined: Thu Oct 29, 2009 12:03 am

RE: A needed fix for allied production

Post by FrankE »

ORIGINAL: Lanconic

ORIGINAL: FrankE
ORIGINAL: Lanconic
Except of course that the allies outproduced the Axis more than 20 to 1

You should allow the allies to produce. or if not, then allow them to have MORE.

20 to 1? You do realize that the Germans produced over 30,000 Me109s durig the war? They had the planes, just not the trained pilots to fly them all (or the fuel) towards the end.

I am quite well versed on the reality of USA production. That is why it annoys me so much
to see that reality ignored in a game, that in theory is supposed to mimic reality.
The 20 to 1 figure is simply quoting James Dunnigan, someone who I respect a great deal.
Frankly I think he understates the disparity.

In March of 1943, all USA production was delibretly throttled back. It didnt have to be that way.
For your 20-1 figure to be accurate, the allies would have had to produce well over a million planes during the war. That number isn't close to reality.
Lanconic
Posts: 260
Joined: Tue Jul 01, 2008 8:54 pm

RE: A needed fix for allied production

Post by Lanconic »

ORIGINAL: FrankE

ORIGINAL: Lanconic

ORIGINAL: FrankE



20 to 1? You do realize that the Germans produced over 30,000 Me109s durig the war? They had the planes, just not the trained pilots to fly them all (or the fuel) towards the end.

I am quite well versed on the reality of USA production. That is why it annoys me so much
to see that reality ignored in a game, that in theory is supposed to mimic reality.
The 20 to 1 figure is simply quoting James Dunnigan, someone who I respect a great deal.
Frankly I think he understates the disparity.

In March of 1943, all USA production was delibretly throttled back. It didnt have to be that way.
For your 20-1 figure to be accurate, the allies would have had to produce well over a million planes during the war. That number isn't close to reality.

That number is not exclusive to airframes.
And in my opinion, is an understatement.
Trying playing the first edition of the board game, 'War in the Pacific'
Its a real eye opener.

The axis had no chance whatever.
The way of all flesh
Nicholas Bell
Posts: 552
Joined: Mon Apr 10, 2006 5:21 pm
Location: Eagle River, Alaska

RE: A needed fix for allied production

Post by Nicholas Bell »

I tested his assertion and found that factories undergoing change were still contributing but not just research, day-to-day production as well. I found this after the beta patch was released, so you'll have to wait for the fix.

Harley-

Actually it is correct the way it is - from a historical perspective. Research and development of new aircraft did not consume the production capabilities of the plants as depicted in the game. Research involves the engineering departments which have little to do with the production side of the house.

Think about how silly it is to contemplate shutting down a large manufacturing facility which consists of machinery, jigs, dies, etc manned mostly by foreign workers or POWs and all of a sudden they turn into engineers, wind-tunnels and the highly skilled mechanics who hand-craft the prototypes. Maybe it works as a game abstraction, but this type of abstraction does not mesh well with the other detailed aspects of this game.

Research and development should be separated from production totally. The player should be given a certain number of research points which can be allocated for specific engines, parts, etc. This is not a new concept and has been used in numerous other games.

Nick
User avatar
Hard Sarge
Posts: 22145
Joined: Sun Oct 01, 2000 8:00 am
Location: garfield hts ohio usa
Contact:

RE: A needed fix for allied production

Post by Hard Sarge »

that would be fine, but then we could also cut the production numbers by 1/3-1/2

since that is already being taken into account for

Image
Post Reply

Return to “Gary Grigsby's Eagle Day to Bombing the Reich”