Game Balance - Giving Germany a chance

[randallw]

Even if there are tweaks to help the Axis player; if the Axis player can get an auto-win around 20 wins in, that could decrease the fun factor for the Soviet player.

In the long run, no matter what is done or not done, it may be very rare for human vs human campaigns to reach near the full turn length.  One side will feel doomed about his current situation and just give up, or neither player may have enough VPs to win and the game ends in a draw.  All those hours invested for a draw?  Much disappointment all around.

[Aurelian]

As I read somewhere, if you win, it's only a game. If you lose it was a big frigging waste of time.

[Aurelian]

ORIGINAL: heliodorus04
Spoken like a bourgeoisie paternalist.

Is that the best you can do?

[Aurelian]

ORIGINAL: heliodorus04

I'm not trying to be a douche because I'm some internet troll

Not something you really have to try....

Maybe I need to speak slowly. This.................is..........................not.............................a............................game.............................of....................say...............HPS.............................Gettysburg.

A...............................division..................................is..................................not...................................lined.......................................up..................like....................................a.......................................regiment........................................of...............................Heth's........................................division................You...............................have.......................................a.....................................much........................................larger...........................unit..............................in......................which................................................its.......................................entire........................................strength...........................is.................not....................in........................................................a.......................................pretty........................................line.

You.............................also....................................have................................it..................................influemce.................................the.........................area.................................................around...................................................it..................................................Called.................................ZOCs.


If..................................you................................want...................................examples.....................................we......................................can..................start......................................with................................Tactics...............................II........................................to..................................Panzer.....................Blitz.....................................................to............................................Stalingrad..................................................to...........................all....................................the.......................................editions............................................of...................................Russian.................................Campaign..............................................or................................Third......................Reich..............................Both................editions.....................of.............War................in....................the.......................East...........................................War...........................in..............................the................................West.........................War..........................in................................Europe...................................to...........................Russia.........................Beseiged.

Was that slow enough?

[heliodorus04]

Recognize your betters, Aurelian, and move on.
This is the last I'll address your over-inflated sense of importance.
You're not in my league, and you know full well that to be true.
You have no substance, and are just noise.

[bloomstombs2]

Aurelian,

How come you used gettysburgh as an example and not toaw? I would say toaw and this game have alot more in common than that.

And Toaw also has divisions,even scenarios on corps level.

And flank attacks.

How can you have a incredibly detailed combat log where flanking never comes into play?

Lets put it this way.

When a units are encircled, theres a huge penalty.

So why not some what penalty for a partial surround. Thats flanking attacks.

Thats why it was implemented in toaw and many other similar genres.

[Aurelian]

Ok.

Stalingrad, all editions. Russian Campaign, all editions. Secomd Front IIRC. Russia Beseiged. Stalin's War. The SPW series. (in that one, IIRC, the defender gets to chose the terrain modifier when attacked across multiple sides. So I guess WiTE should have that then? By the logic that is being espoused, it should.) Panzerblitz/Leader. Third Reich. SPI's War Between the States. War in the East (!st and 2nd) War in the West. War in Europe. Imperium Romanim. Dozens more, but if some don't get it by now...............

I see that there is no flank or rear attack during air combat either. And yet, no complaints.

TOAW? Isn't the current version the one in which your turn could end at any time?

Tell me. In Gettysburg, Waterloo, any game of that ilk, it is possible to get a flank bonus on a batallion or a regiment. Do these units exert a ZOC in all six hexsides?

Are you telling me that a division equipped with weapons that are far superior to a musket or a 12lbr is going to line up in a neat line? Tell me, just how could it have a zone of control in the six surrounding hexes if it's facing everything in one direction.

And if your precious unit gets a +1, whu not get a -3 for exposing it's rear end to a unit it may ignore?

I said that it doesn't work at this scale. This isn't a tactical level game.

[saintsup]

ORIGINAL: Aurelian

Ok.

Stalingrad, all editions. Russian Campaign, all editions. Secomd Front IIRC. Russia Beseiged. Stalin's War. The SPW series. (in that one, IIRC, the defender gets to chose the terrain modifier when attacked across multiple sides. So I guess WiTE should have that then? By the logic that is being espoused, it should.) Panzerblitz/Leader. Third Reich. SPI's War Between the States. War in the East (!st and 2nd) War in the West. War in Europe. Imperium Romanim. Dozens more, but if some don't get it by now...............

I see that there is no flank or rear attack during air combat either. And yet, no complaints.

TOAW? Isn't the current version the one in which your turn could end at any time?

Tell me. In Gettysburg, Waterloo, any game of that ilk, it is possible to get a flank bonus on a batallion or a regiment. Do these units exert a ZOC in all six hexsides?

Are you telling me that a division equipped with weapons that are far superior to a musket or a 12lbr is going to line up in a neat line? Tell me, just how could it have a zone of control in the six surrounding hexes if it's facing everything in one direction.

And if your precious unit gets a +1, whu not get a -3 for exposing it's rear end to a unit it may ignore?

I said that it doesn't work at this scale. This isn't a tactical level game.

I don't think the real point of previous posters is to introduce a frontage for units but that an attack coming simulteanously from several hexsides should lead to some penalty for the defender which AFAIK is not the case in this game.

I agree with that proposition and this has nothing to do with me conjuring the image of a division forming in line led by Lannes or Murat in a one day battle. I think it's quite intuitive that including within the scale of this game, if you have to defend against several axes of attack you have to spread more your forces, keep more reserves, ...

Besides it could be a rule limiting the impact of 'checker board' defense.

The argument consisting of listing some old wargame is not good because design choices specifically for non-computer wargame are always a balance between playability and plausability. With a computer wargame you can add as much automated rule or calculation as you think appropriate.

And btw I found each and any of your post in this thread rude, agressive and condescending which is quite unusual in this forum.

[Magnum88]

I think just adding a bonus to attacks from several hexes will not have an appreciable effect on the checkerboard defense because currently the only way to attack from several hexes is to do deliberate attacks, which would be a huge waste of MPs against relatively weak opponents. Perhaps a malus for a defender who is adjacent to multiple enemy units would have a greater effect, simulating the need for the unit to keep some forces to guard against multiple potential threats. It would allow hasty attacks to benefit as well as deliberate attacks.

[timmyab]

ORIGINAL: Aurelian
Are you telling me that a division equipped with weapons that are far superior to a musket or a 12lbr is going to line up in a neat line? Tell me, just how could it have a zone of control in the six surrounding hexes if it's facing everything in one direction.

The lines may not be very neat, but yes, divisions do form lines which are designed to meet threats from specific directions.The narrower the frontage, (lower number of hexsides in game terms),the more the division can concentrate it's firepower and hold back reserves.If a division is surrounded these lines have to be thinned out and reserves committed in order to meet the threat from multiple directions.Note you don't have to be attacked, just the threat of an attack is sufficient.This inevitably makes the front lines easier to breach and once breached a surrounded division is in serious trouble because it has nowhere to go.

[Aragorn69]

Hi everboby,

Coming to the forum but having played 3 full GC as russian against IA
I have several comments to summit.

First GC starting 41 in normal. Not knowing the game and reading the rules while learning the tricks i have found ia challenging until the mud season. Then game over for germany in september 1943 (i go for a while to see tanks army that never appeared). after winter i give IA no FOW, and 115 on setup.

Second GC starting 42 with 110 no FOW for IA. Indeed this is most challenging for russia than the GC41. So Wermacht player's should try this GC, there are in good condition to do interesting things.

Third GC starting 41 with 110 for parameters but logistic (not historic in my point of view) no FOW for IA. This time i ran onto IA strategic blunders ( not tacking into account the weather of next turn, bad flanks)

I think balancing shall wait a little. Why ?

Air War need to be fixed (i hope in next patch)
Some OOB issue will be fixed in next patch
Russian capacity to field more divisions will be divided by two from nov 1941 to dec 1942 in next patch (i fear this one)
Russian capacity to build corps will be divided by two.
And the true strenght of mother russia are those two last points.

After the next patch i think russian players will start to say "that's bad".

One last comment :

Does the first turn of the GC41 and GC42 with optimized mouvement by german without reaction by russian is fair.

As i read forum i said no, this is truly unbalaced and it's linked to the game system.
I accept it.

If i remembered history : russian tanks division (4th i think) had smashed against a panzer Div (4th?) in AGN and there was a crisis. Because T34 et KV crushed the outguns Pz.
I don't found that in GC 41 at this time. How to implement that ?

I suggest that against uber optimized german first turn at least somme russian unit should be put in reserve status to give some variations in defense in turn 1. Otherwhise why should play against a german as a russian in GC41, with everybody testing the best first move with no russian counter.

An alternative should be like in WITP a GC starting a Turn 2.

So waiting 1.03 is the best thing to do. ;o)

Regards

[timmyab]

ORIGINAL: Durin69
If i remembered history : russian tanks division (4th i think) had smashed against a panzer Div (4th?) in AGN and there was a crisis. Because T34 et KV crushed the outguns Pz.
I don't found that in GC 41 at this time. How to implement that ?

I suggest that against uber optimized german first turn at least somme russian unit should be put in reserve status to give some variations in defense in turn 1. Otherwhise why should play against a german as a russian in GC41, with everybody testing the best first move with no russian counter

A couple of good points here I think.
I'd like to see the Soviet tank units given just a bit more power so that they have a small but tempting chance of inflicting a retreat result on German units.
Agree that the Soviet player should be able to adjust the positioning of some of his rear units to a limited degree in order to prevent the German first turn becomming formulaic.

[Aragorn69]

I found something that could give some supplementary material here :

http://www.dtic.mil/cgi-bin/GetTRDoc?Location=U2&doc=GetTRDoc.pdf&AD=ADA428697

It's the link to a thesis about anti tank warfare in eastern front. I know that the first exemple Lithuania, 24 June 1941 is rather tactical, but it gives some indication about difficulties germans troops encoutered.

For one KV2 (luckily there were not in great numbers), it took several AT guns and crew down to finally kill the monster. KV1 & T34 were also a big problem for germans. Why do they bother to field Tiger I ?

balancing at tactical level ? on a week span ? not so easy but i truth in developpers ;o)

regards.

[sillyflower]

ORIGINAL: bloomstombs

ORIGINAL: heliodorus04

How about this:
Routed units go to 99 fatigue and can't recover for 1 full turn.
(Or maybe, if you prefer): routed units who are forced to perform a displacement move)

Applies to both sides throughout the game.

Right now, Routing a unit is worse than not attacking it in a great many situations.

Yeah, this is a big problem.

You should never be happy "YES!!! MY UNIT GOT ROUTED! JUST WHAT I NEEDED!"

Which is often the case.

I agree

[Gonnosuke]

ORIGINAL: Encircled

Have a look at the QBall - VanBeenie AAR, and the Germans are doing fantastically, against a human opponent who hasn't really made any major mistakes.

I suspect that the game referenced above will actually end up strengthening the OP's point. The last time I checked, Qball had a stellar opening -- as good an opening as I've ever seen -- but the winter had yet to take it's toll. Post blizzard, when Qball's forces are decimated and all forward momentum has been lost, we'll point to that game as a demonstration in futility. No matter how well the Germans start the game, they just can't win...

I don't want to get into the whole Detail vs Realism debate here but this is a game and as such I'd like to go in feeling like I have a chance to secure a meaningful win. Simulation be damned...I want it to be fun. To be fun, I have to have a chance. The outcome can't be inevitable. Maybe some people find the experience of losing as slowly as possible fun but I'm not one of those people.

[randallw]

The larger the chance is for Germany to grab cities in '41, the less fun for the Soviet player, getting pushed around with no respite. 

[Klydon]

We will see how Q-Ball does if both players agree to adapt the beta-3 patch that just got posted.

There are two huge battles missing in terms of causing Soviets massive losses: Kiev and the opening of Typhoon. Between them, they knocked out around 1.2 million more troops. Of course, most Russians won't get caught by such things.

[heliodorus04]

ORIGINAL: Gonnosuke
I don't want to get into the whole Detail vs Realism debate here but this is a game and as such I'd like to go in feeling like I have a chance to secure a meaningful win. Simulation be damned...I want it to be fun. To be fun, I have to have a chance. The outcome can't be inevitable. Maybe some people find the experience of losing as slowly as possible fun but I'm not one of those people.

Eloquently said.
+1 from me on that.

Fun games sell more copies, too.

[Wild]

I couldn't disagree more. I want realism. Which i believe is fun for most people who buy these types of games. Besides i am in no way convinced that the Germans have no chance.It is just too early to say that.
I agree with JAMiAM on this, and am watching his AAR's with ComradeP and Flaviusx with great interest.


Edit for sp.

[1275psi]

here is my two cents for what it is worth
I play german -i capture moscow - i rout the russians----i place leningrad under siege , i dig in -the winter comes -i get destroyed


????????????????????????????????????????????

Whats the point of capturing moscow -of doing anything -if UNDER EVERY circumstance -my army is destroyed in the first blizzard.
I am currently experimenting with a game where I dont actually invade the first year -if my army is destroyed by the winter in these circumstance -well, i will go back to WITPAE..............