Changing AFV equipment

[jomni]

For those comparing to WITP, you also cannot swap tanks in the game.

[FredSanford3]

I agree with alfonso's 3 Buts. My suggestions are to make the process as analogous to the aircraft swap system, addressing the 3 Buts like so:
1. Morale and experience issues exist regardless of whether the player initiates the change or it happening automatically. There should be some 'familiarization' impacts, but not that bad. AP costs are comparable to what it costs to change a gruppe's planes- say each category of vehicle changed is 1 AP.
2. Definitely agree on TOE limitations. Lt tank for Lt tank, Medium for Medium, etc. No Tiger Divisions. No production changes, either. Somebody's going to use the Pz-35's and -38's.
3. When airgroups change aircraft, they lose their turn. How about the same thing? Like HQ Buildup's effect. It would make it most efficient to change all of a division's vehicles at once if the production pool permits.

[Mynok]

2. Definitely agree on TOE limitations. Lt tank for Lt tank, Medium for Medium, etc. No Tiger Divisions. No production changes, either. Somebody's going to use the Pz-35's and -38's.

I'm no expert but this makes sense in light of what I've learned (mostly second hand here) about TOEs. Even though the Germans were immensely flexible in putting together Kampfgruppen that really didn't ascribe to any standard Wehrmacht TOE, they still had a mix of unit types because this simply worked the best. There are missions that need to be performed by any combat unit that require specific types of units. You don't send a Tiger rolling down the road scouting ahead of the main force. That's what ACs and light tanks were for.

There's no reason in my limited perspective to not have multiple TOE options for units. If I want to keep a corps or two with the 39 German infantry TOE, should I be forced to change? I'll have issues because the changes were driven by losses and the inability to replace (as I understand it), but if I'm doing better than historically, it seems reasonable to be able to keep some this way. I'm mostly seeing things from the German perspective as I understand their historical situation much better than the Soviets.

Just thinking out loud here.

[Aurelian]

The TOE didn't apply just to German units in Russia, but also to those in France, Italy, Yugoslavia, and so on. So yes, you should be forced to change. Just like the Russians are.

Doing "better" historiaclly should also have consequences. Units were transferred West because Hitler feared the West would invade to take pressure off Russia.

I'm just thinking myself.

[Skanvak]

There should be administration cost too. I prefer the solution to have alternative TOE than swapping of tanks (even if I woud be pleased scrapping the Tiger I). The production is relater to the TOE which in turn depend of theorical debate about weapon use and therefore unit training. It is gamey to think you can change everything, the general below and soldiers will simply reject it (hence we have to add a moral cost in some case).

But, the soviet in later time, did keep old TOE (at least old tanks) to have more divisions to field.

Side note : I hate the micromanagement of WitP, so unless the interface is greatly user friendly or that a true multiplayer for one side is implemented, I will be against in too much increased in mocromanagement.

Beside historical porduction is the best to put Hitler influence in the game as some ask.

[jomni]

Advanced Tactics lets the player micromanage the TOE, replancement, and reinforcement.  It's a fun and novel concept but it's quite tedious.  Also not historical.

[janh]

ORIGINAL: jomni
For those comparing to WITP, you also cannot swap tanks in the game.

Right, but tanks weren't that important, imho, and the focus is on air and naval management. Though being able to manipulate AFVs would have been a nice addition, there wouldn't be much point for doing so in the Pacific theater.

There is lots of great idea and "thinking out loud" in this thread! Hopefully the devs are reading it and will consider it when going for the next titles.

The suggestion to keep tank slots /light/medium/heavy is a good one. These were decisions made for optimal force economy before the war, I believe, to organize the new tank formations, but they were also adapted continuously during the war (i.e. the heavy tanks didn't exist in Poland). I think it is detailed somewhere on wiki as well how the ToE were derived. Since divisions are the main counter in this game it makes sense to take these basic ToEs as organizational unit, but give it a little room for flexibility (would kind of mimic the more flexible Kampfgruppen a bit, if you like).

As such, it would be nice if the player would be forced to stick with the doctrinal considerations and exchange device against similar device. But in the long term, if Gary and Co do the whole war from 1939 to 45, one also would need the ability to change those slots to upgrade the ToE's. It would therefore also be nice to have the option to adjust these slots by cost of AP points or so. I like Skanvaks suggestion here. Given the disadvantages that "too heavy" or "too light" formations would have (above discussion; after all, if there were no disadvantages, I would bet that the war would have seen a completely "heavy" LAH or TK, so the game should aim to mimic these disadvantages, not to forbid it generally), a player could use his freedom to create them, but would need to weigh carefully against all the other (better?) things his AP could do.

Besides, for whoever would prefer to stick to historical ToE developments, and equipment, all this could be made optional. Same as this can be selected in WITP/AE for the production and R&D system, or the plane upgrades, but I don't think many players really stick to the historically fixed course since something more fun is available. I can't recall an AAR within this "historical" setting.

[Schmart]

I also agree with alfonso's 3 rules.

The equipment upgrade shouldn't be hard-coded fully manual (ie: no upgrades unless the player actions it). It should be pretty much the way it is WIR: auto-computer controled, untill the player over-rides, or have it as an option check-box in the preferences screen (auto vs manual AFV upgrade), or even still, as it is for air units (toggle button in unit info screen). This way, a player can choose to play with auto upgrade if he chooses not to manage it, or have the option to manage it manually if he wishes. As the game is even now, there are plenty of micro-management options for players to use, but the game is still very playable if a player does not do any micro-managing. I think having option features like this gives the game a bit more 'chrome' than other games and adds to re-playability value, but doesn't force micro-management down the throats of players who don't want it.

[molchomor]

ORIGINAL: squatter

Totally agree with OP.

Presumably those making arguments against manual AFV replacement also wish that there was no aircraft manual replacement in the game too. Perhaps they should start a thread arguing that the developers should withdraw that function in the next patch.

There's no question this was one of the abiding pleasures in WiR.

+1

i was one of those ranting about this missing feature a year ago...hopefully they will have time to implement it...then this ranting will stop [:D]

[molchomor]

ORIGINAL: Schmart

I also agree with alfonso's 3 rules.

The equipment upgrade shouldn't be hard-coded fully manual (ie: no upgrades unless the player actions it). It should be pretty much the way it is WIR: auto-computer controled, untill the player over-rides, or have it as an option check-box in the preferences screen (auto vs manual AFV upgrade), or even still, as it is for air units (toggle button in unit info screen). This way, a player can choose to play with auto upgrade if he chooses not to manage it, or have the option to manage it manually if he wishes. As the game is even now, there are plenty of micro-management options for players to use, but the game is still very playable if a player does not do any micro-managing. I think having option features like this gives the game a bit more 'chrome' than other games and adds to re-playability value, but doesn't force micro-management down the throats of players who don't want it.

+1

[Skanvak]

According to the way the system and army worked, one should first design a TOE, the affect equipment within this TOE.

After reading the game design note and the part on the TOE evolution of the German army, I do think that we should be able to chose to keep the old TOE if we want, as the 44 and 45 TOE reflect a losing Germany that might not be the case.

But manually changing everything will add way too much micro-management and will need to put several interaction into action. May be for some AP the player can design had hoc Kampfgruppe with the desired TOE. Bottom line any change should cost AP.

[latosusi]

AI is unfortunately not using all available models...I have thousands of lend-lease tanks
but only 2 units use them. And only light tanks not medium ones.

[randallw]

The game is set up so that the computer swaps out ground equipment for the same class of types; light tanks out, light tanks in, medium artillery out, medium artillery in, etc.

[molchomor]

ORIGINAL: Skanvak

According to the way the system and army worked, one should first design a TOE, the affect equipment within this TOE.

After reading the game design note and the part on the TOE evolution of the German army, I do think that we should be able to chose to keep the old TOE if we want, as the 44 and 45 TOE reflect a losing Germany that might not be the case.

But manually changing everything will add way too much micro-management and will need to put several interaction into action. May be for some AP the player can design had hoc Kampfgruppe with the desired TOE. Bottom line any change should cost AP.

Hi I think you missed the point here, which is that *optional* control is asked for. Not that the average player deciding to use this optionality would mess around with all units and production, probably only with a few pet or key units and afv models. Reasons to do this would be many, just to mention two: increased replayability ("what if") and to correct stupid decisions made by the current automatic system that is evident in posts in all forum sections.

[jomni]

ORIGINAL: latosusi

AI is unfortunately not using all available models...I have thousands of lend-lease tanks
but only 2 units use them. And only light tanks not medium ones.

With a lot unused T34's in your pool, you wouldn't need those lend-lease medium tanks in the first place.
The lend-lease light tanks are used becuase Soviet production cannot cope with the rate of destruction.