Amazing moved factory recovery times

[Helpless]

supposed to be something Axis players actually have to do?

I meant bombing done by the player.

[heliodorus04]

ORIGINAL: Helpless

supposed to be something Axis players actually have to do?

I meant bombing done by the player.

Hmm, I thought player bombing was considered "over-powered" at present?

[sillyflower]

ORIGINAL: Helpless

David,

It is considered that moving all the factories should be very difficult. We do not pretend that everything is in perfect balance, therefore in coming patch rail costs are doubled. So to move 60 T-34 factories you will need 84000 RC's which is ~70% of the whole turn rail capacity. That's a big price.

Also believed or not, there is task on the list to randomize factory damage and make it less predictable. Also some bombing damage should be carried over as well. So there could be some adjustments, but in general the idea will be the same - the more you move the less damage on the destination.

1 I hope you are right, especially as I'm playing Germans by PBEM as soon as patch comes out.

2 I had not spotted that rule. That may explain partly why I was only getting 50% damage. I have only ever moved a complete factory. Serves players right if they leave all the machine tools for the last train which never comes.

3 It's clearly getting better all the time and the ban on 22/6 moves will also help.

Thanks for the education and for your maasive contribution to the game. Pity I don't run a 'nose of the week' competition because you would always win that as well

[DBeves]

ORIGINAL: heliodorus04

ORIGINAL: Helpless
Now the most complicated. Since we keep all the production distributed among many locations and we have the same build limit, we can't have factories to produce at the different rates. Therefore all the rates are greatly approximated towards the averages.

Here we speak about just one type and one factory, but there were thousands of them, with different evacuation and recovery rates. So it can get only more complicated if we'll try to model it better.

What I've learned from this factory discussion is what Helpless says, which is that the WitE system approximates factory relocation, factory damage, and factory production toward the historical average.

Looking at the probability distributions (which don't factor damage greater than 50 percent at all), the system works pretty f***in well in that regard, and I'm impressed by that.

DBeves, you seem like a reasonable person. Respectfully, and if you'll pardon my bluntness, you seem to want to take umbrage with systems that are more complicated than your recreational work ethic. You don't want it to be THAT hard to follow. That's fine, but if you don't understand the modeling under the engine, you're going to be out-played by people who do. Almost all of us have to work at understanding the models. It's not a simple game.

Poker is a simple game, but if you're not going to learn the statistics behind it, don't expect to win tournaments.

The vast majority of people playing the game aren't interested in the 'obtuse' statistical formulae behind the engine, and it's hard to find technical writers who can explain them (I'm not all that sure I did a cohesive, efficient, simple job in my attempt above).

But some of it IS in the manual (for example I'm pretty sure it already says: damage bad, no-damage good), and even with a reasonable (for an American) math background, I have to stop and think it through. Most of the time I don't bother, and just play because it's so much easier. Occasionally I go back and it makes more sense after playing a few times.

People here are more than willing to share the product of what you acknowledge is 'hard work' when they decipher a game mechanic. It would be nice if that didn't lead to "this game is too complicated" criticisms. It's a simulation of the largest theater of the largest conflict in human history.

The manual tells you how to play (and pretty well, too). It's your job to figure out how to win. And that is work.

Not sure why simple posts draw such antipathy from some but hey ...

You miss my point ... I was once involved writing software for a large charter airline. One program concerned the scheduling of the routes for there 30 or so aircraft - if you want complicated you should see the variables involved in that . Point is - the program couldnt simply say plane A flies from point b to point c on wednesday - the person operating the software had to be given reasons for why the route was structured that way. I couldnt simply say to them - well if you want to know that you have to sit and work it out. I had to provide them with an easily understandable explanation. So it was basically a middle tier of information. that is what is missing from this game and also WITP if it comes to that.

I know it will take some time to load a ship - top tier ... but I dont want to have to work out some labyrinthine formula to know how many days - the system should present me with that - that is after all - largely the point of playing computer games over board games ... ie you dont have to work things out manually. What I was trying to suggest was the the games would be a lot more accessable to a lot of people if this middle tier was presented to them. ie - yes - it will take some time to load a ship - due to x,y,z it will take 3.5 days ... its not difficult to do - nor a concept that should be alien to anyone who writes software - but noticeble by its absence in these games.

[heliodorus04]

Okay, bonus points for using 'labyrinthine' in a sentence correctly!
Well done.

But on to the substance of your post.
Not all games share their formulae.
Not doing so becomes an area where some players have advantages over others, as in my poker analogy.
And I don't hold you in any antipathy (there's a couple posts around here where I use my antipathy voice, but those are always 3 sentences or less )

[sillyflower]

ORIGINAL: DBeves


I know it will take some time to load a ship - top tier ... but I dont want to have to work out some labyrinthine formula to know how many days - the system should present me with that - that is after all - largely the point of playing computer games over board games ... ie you dont have to work things out manually. What I was trying to suggest was the the games would be a lot more accessable to a lot of people if this middle tier was presented to them. ie - yes - it will take some time to load a ship - due to x,y,z it will take 3.5 days ... its not difficult to do - nor a concept that should be alien to anyone who writes software - but noticeble by its absence in these games.

I don't want to get caught between you and Heliodorus ( and you can sort it out between you which is the dog and which the lampost) but I do think we have a good balance here.

We do know how long it takes to move a ship -15 strategic movement points which is what we need to know to play, which is essentially 1 day 'irl'. The incredibly complex supply rules are clear from the manual ( as give as much detail as most human eyeballs can bear anyway) and after a bit of play and remembering the basic numbers from the manual, one can have a pretty good idea what things will look like at start of next turn. I suspect game is probably more predictable than real life in this regard

I suppose this is a long way of saying I agree with the principle of what you are saying but I think this game gets as close to what you are asking for as is reasonable to expect.

@Helio - I'm not sure poker is the best analogy. Has some similarities of course but this game is much more complex and far less psychological. Caveat: I write as someone who has never played and has only seen it being played in westerns! WiTE also seems to have a much lower death rate amongst the players than poker which is one of the reasons I shall stick to this game.