I hate the new refit rules

[Oleg Mastruko]

Am I the only one who hates new 1.04 refit rules? I think they only add more micromanagement (a lot more) for no visible gain in realism nor enjoyment.

I don't get why units in contact with the enemy would not get men and equipment? Didn't that happen historically? Not allowing upgrades to new TOE while in contact with the enemy - that I can understand, units were probably pulled back, reorganized, equipped with new stuff, then sent back to the front, but simple refits? Why??

This is probably a faction-neutral issue, but playing as Soviet I can keep constant pressure on the frontline, I just need to micromanage more. It's probably harder for Germans as they have less units, and need to pull back to refit. So, count this Soviet fanboy in the "bring us the old refit rules back even if it helps Germans more than it helps Soviets!" club.

Am I missing something here? Do I misunderstand the rule? Honestly I would expect far larger outcry against this as it really is one irritating change...

[Klydon]

I think they still get replacements; they just don't have the priority that the "refit" option gives.

Honestly, I think it makes sense and keeps both sides from "reorganizing on the march" compared to pulling a unit out of the line and putting it on refit status.

[cpt flam]

for me too
they continue to receive some replacement
others in refit will recive more,possible increse in moral ,change TOE

[Sabre21]

ORIGINAL: Oleg Mastruko

Am I the only one who hates new 1.04 refit rules? I think they only add more micromanagement (a lot more) for no visible gain in realism nor enjoyment.

I don't get why units in contact with the enemy would not get men and equipment? Didn't that happen historically? Not allowing upgrades to new TOE while in contact with the enemy - that I can understand, units were probably pulled back, reorganized, equipped with new stuff, then sent back to the front, but simple refits? Why??

This is probably a faction-neutral issue, but playing as Soviet I can keep constant pressure on the frontline, I just need to micromanage more. It's probably harder for Germans as they have less units, and need to pull back to refit. So, count this Soviet fanboy in the "bring us the old refit rules back even if it helps Germans more than it helps Soviets!" club.

Am I missing something here? Do I misunderstand the rule? Honestly I would expect far larger outcry against this as it really is one irritating change...

Whoaaaa!!! Slow that horse down. Oleg..I think you misunderstand how it now works. All refit does is set a priority on who gets replacements first and if you have morale below 50, it gives a slight boost. If you are on the frontline, you still get replacements normally, regardless whether you have refit on or not, you just don't get the priority nor the morale boost. That only occurs providing you are not adjacent to an enemy controlled hex and in refit mode.

I reckon the only downside would be that if those in refit away from the front use up all available replacements, then some of the frontline units might not get any.

[pompack]

ORIGINAL: Sabre21

ORIGINAL: Oleg Mastruko

Am I the only one who hates new 1.04 refit rules? I think they only add more micromanagement (a lot more) for no visible gain in realism nor enjoyment.

I don't get why units in contact with the enemy would not get men and equipment? Didn't that happen historically? Not allowing upgrades to new TOE while in contact with the enemy - that I can understand, units were probably pulled back, reorganized, equipped with new stuff, then sent back to the front, but simple refits? Why??

This is probably a faction-neutral issue, but playing as Soviet I can keep constant pressure on the frontline, I just need to micromanage more. It's probably harder for Germans as they have less units, and need to pull back to refit. So, count this Soviet fanboy in the "bring us the old refit rules back even if it helps Germans more than it helps Soviets!" club.

Am I missing something here? Do I misunderstand the rule? Honestly I would expect far larger outcry against this as it really is one irritating change...

Whoaaaa!!! Slow that horse down. Oleg..I think you misunderstand how it now works. All refit does is set a priority on who gets replacements first and if you have morale below 50, it gives a slight boost. If you are on the frontline, you still get replacements normally, regardless whether you have refit on or not, you just don't get the priority nor the morale boost. That only occurs providing you are not adjacent to an enemy controlled hex and in refit mode.

I reckon the only downside would be that if those in refit away from the front use up all available replacements, then some of the frontline units might not get any.

Well now ...
First I have to say that I totally agree with what has been done because to me "refit" should mean refit. Historically that means you pull out of the line and pump in lots of replacements and new equipment and you let the replacements and the survivors get to know each other a bit before you pour them back into the inferno. To me, the way that it used to work seemed too much like the way the US Army did things in WWII and it certainly didn't work well at all.

Now while I agree with what has been done, I find that I now have a problem with the "normal" replacement rate. Before it was not an issue since you put a unit into refit mode if it needed replacements and it got them if they were available. Now you receive replacements only at the "normal" rate if you are in contact. The trouble is that this "normal" rate seems to be a bit less than the attrition that you suffer from being in contact.

Example: Summer of 42, Germany vs AI @ 1.04. 25k+ German manpower points in the pool. After taking a beating during the 41-42 winter, the 16th and 18th armies have been holding the same line all summer with no Russian attacks. Yet I find that I have to pull units off the line and put them into refit to get anyone above 60% (and yes I have everyone set at 100% TOEmax). While I have not taken the effort to track individual TOE levels over the multi-month period, my feeling is that TOE levels are very gradually decreasing, not increasing. And the German manpower pool is yet another clue: it was over 35k (armament pool over 100k) when the blizzard was over and it has gradually decreased to 24.5k by Aug42. Refit works extremely well in that three turns on a rail line will usually boost an inf div from 40% to 70% but it is very difficult to free up enough units fo move into refit and actually use more manpower than is produced.

While this is only a single case, it feels like the "normal" replacement rate may be a little low.

My question is "How long should it take a unit less than five hexes from a rail line in clear weather to increase it's TOE level by one percentage point if it is in contact with the enemy but not engaging in combat assuming adequate pool levels for manpower, armament and other equipment?"

[kirkgregerson]

I hate the new refit rules too. I think they took maybe 0.5 steps forward for balance with new blizzard rules and 2 steps back with refit rules. Yes, axis have it worse now IMO.

Also, I've very disappointed with the 'new' attrition rules and think they are bugged and bogus. Why? Because after going through 13 turns of blizzard I found to my horror that units never attacked were still down to 15%-25% rifle squads? WTF? I read the figures for even the worse times on the east front that Dec 41 and loses were not that high. We're talking about 75% or more just to attrition for units that were never attacked. That's insane, the loses due to exposure alone for units were at most 50%? I had units starting at 16k and ending T38 with 4K men which had not been attacked. Also, I saw units in Urban (never attacked) lose 50% of strength when on the frontline. What is that about? Another little surprise was the 63k loses on the 2nd turn into March when the majority of axis and sov units were not even adjacent. That just doesn't seem possible, 64k loses two turns after blizzard is over?

Whiling I'm ranting, lets forget that a Soviet unit (or axis too) can get 'Routed' and still only lose 20% of their artillery. Why does routing have to be such a joke. I hope someday it's addressed before WitW. Routed units should ALWAYS lose a MIN of 50% artillery and 25% of vehicles.

This game has all the potential in the world, but for whatever reason IMO just keeps falling short in a few places where you would least expect it. To this date I have no idea what to make of combat or even how to calculate it. Just a big black box that nobody knows entirely how it works. Here's a example of what I mean (game vs AI):

30k Germans, 300 arty, 30 bombers, good inf general in range, no penalties in battle screen (same corps), units in good supply (ammo, etc) attacking a clear hex in snow
vs
12k Sov, 150 arty, 10 bombers, in a fort 1

Now here's where it gets weird
German loses 1.7k, 32 arty, and 2 bomber
Sov loses 1.3k, 20 arty, and 1 bombers

The odds were like 10:1 and yes the Sov unit did retreat, but this was 1941 and how could the Sov inflict more loses even when outnumber and outclassed? To me that result should NEVER happen in those circumstances. Also, I just don't think this would have been historical and we know the game is all about being historical .. just like blizzard has to be as tough or tougher then historical.

Sorry just had to rant. I'm just very frustrated right now, and yes nobody forced me to upgrade to v1.04 as we all know it's in beta. So I brought this on myself and have nobody else to blame.

[:(]


Found a source with some info on winter combat loses in that first winter:

http://www.allworldwars.com/Effects-of-Climate-on-Combat-in-European-Russia.html

Here's something on 4th Army which suffered the most that winter, mostly due to combat (yes the below figure does not account for Dec 41, but rather includes March 42):

"Fourth Army suffered 96,535 casualties between 1 January and 31 March 1942, of which 14,236 were frostbite cases."

Ok did find info on Dec 41

"By 5 January, when temperatures had risen somewhat, Fourth Army counted 2,000 frostbite casualties and half as many from enemy action."

So about 16k (includes March). I had one div loses 12k in those 3 months of blizzard. After comparing t25 vs t37, my 4th Army lost 48k, of which only 5k was from combat. I know there's still normal attrition even in clear weather turns, but I still think attrition due to blizzard is too high.

[morvael]

I'm afraid they made Soviets too weak in 41 (I'm saying this from Axis player perspective) so they had to compensate this with harsh winter rules and later, enormous production. 1941 seems to easy for the Germans, Leningrad and Moscow are really possible targets, whereas winter is too hard and from 42 you have nothing to look for against hordes of Soviets in level 4 forts. 42 is a stalemate year and later it's downhill. I believe the authors really wanted to create the historical flow of campaign, but the German strength is exaggerated in 41, while Soviet in later years. Closing in the two elements would bring a much more entertaining play IMHO.

[Rafo35]

Il like the new refit rule.

Whiling I'm ranting, lets forget that a Soviet unit (or axis too) can get 'Routed' and still only lose 20% of their artillery. Why does routing have to be such a joke. I hope someday it's addressed before WitW. Routed units should ALWAYS lose a MIN of 50% artillery and 25% of vehicles.

How can someone be so sure of what should always happen for a mechanic that is almost completely artificial and that can happen for a number of reasons (some of them being a pure IGO YOUGO artifice) ?

Here's something on 4th Army which suffered the most that winter,

Umh, at least ealy on (December), 4th Army didn't suffer more than the other armies, on the contrary. Due to Kluge thinking the 4th army was in no condition to attack in late November (and nobody forcing him to act noetheless), it is the unit that was the less overextended when came december 5th.

[Aditia]

agree with Oleg, prioritizing reinforcements using refit mode was an easy way for the player to play the game. Now people tell you to use the commanders report and adjust TOE constantly. Well, I am too busy for that and just wont play v1,04

[Mehring]

Yes, the Germans are too strong in summer 41, and the refit rules will crucify the Russians further as they have to throw everything into the line towards late summer. Hope it hits the germans too. Maybe the Russians are too strong in winter to compensate.

Looks like Pompack may have found an issue to resolve the refit issue though, just raise the 'normal' replacement rate. Refit should be for refitting not a way of being.

Frankly, if you don't have time to micromanage in many areas, I'm not sure you have time for this game. A better designed UI could greatly shorten many aspects of micromanagement, but attention to details is in this game's blood. Example: Why, when you assign units from National Reserve to an airfield, do you do it from a special window which gives you less information and filters than the commanders report and doesn't allow you to inspect the unit you're considering transferring? The UI's full of this crap, as was Bombing the Reich, it's very frustrating. I even did a new production management spreadsheet for the latter which was supposed to be patched into the game. It wasn't that hard.

@ Kirkgregerson
Yes, an interesting resource. I used the same in support of my argument for the addition of roads to the map.

[Aditia]

ORIGINAL: Mehring

Looks like Pompack may have found an issue to resolve the refit issue though, just raise the 'normal' replacement rate. Refit should be for refitting not a way of being.

Says who? Just talking about prioritizing replacements, refit mode was perfect for that and this game should give the player an easy tool for it, instead of jumbling around with TOE. Don't get too caught up on the word refit.

As for the needing copious amounts of time for this game; what a load of cr#p. Games with an elegant interface are better, at least if the developers actually want to make some money

[squatter]

Looking at the new refit rules from the perspective of an Axis player in early '43.

I'm receiving around 50k to 70k replacements per turn.

I'm rotating units from the front line to refit.

Let's say around 55k go to the refit units, 5k go to non-refit (ie frontline). This means that essentially no replacements go to frontline units, as 5k divided by, say, 100 units probably doesnt even replace attrition losses. So what Oleg is saying is more or less true.

Added to this, the way refit works now practically makes using reserve mode an impossibility for the Axis in 43. Under pressure from the Soviet juggernaut, any unit not in the front line must be on refit to get anywhere near replacing the losses the Soviet grinder inflicts every turn. I cannot afford the luxury of placing an 80% panzer division into reserve, because that means no (or next to none) replacements.

It's tricky because I agree using refit across an entire army to get the moral bonus was gamey.

My suggestion would be to reinstate refit replacements going to units in refit in the front line, only remove the moral training bonus to those front line units in contact with the enemy.

Another question regarding replacements: what factors determine the overall number of replacements being sent to units? Let's say you have 500,000 men in the pool, and 500,000 armaments - why will you get 40k replacements the one turn, and 80k the next? What are the factors at play?

[morvael]

ORIGINAL: pompack

While this is only a single case, it feels like the "normal" replacement rate may be a little low.

tm.asp?m=2807691

Too many units in refit?

[Mehring]

ORIGINAL: Aditia

ORIGINAL: Mehring

Looks like Pompack may have found an issue to resolve the refit issue though, just raise the 'normal' replacement rate. Refit should be for refitting not a way of being.

Says who? Just talking about prioritizing replacements, refit mode was perfect for that...

I do, for one. There are too many other functions associated with refit mode, and rightly so, for it to be used just to prioritise replacements.

ORIGINAL: Aditia ...and this game should give the player an easy tool for it, instead of jumbling around with TOE.

That's been said, and a lot of other easily designed tools for managing various game functions. That said, it will still demand time and attention to detail to play well. It's just not a 'beer and pretzels' game.

[deoved]

I can remember great War in the Pacific, where i must use several side programms to do turns cleverly. Interfaces are general 2by3 problem.

[Oleg Mastruko]

ORIGINAL: squatter

My suggestion would be to reinstate refit replacements going to units in refit in the front line, only remove the moral training bonus to those front line units in contact with the enemy.

That would be perfect.

[Flaviusx]

These new refit rules imo are bad news for the German. At the end of the day, even in 1941, it's not hard for the Soviets to pull stuff from the very front line. From 1942 onwards, the Sovs literally don't have enough room on the front to put their army (even if they 3 stack along the entire front.) The Germans, however, don't have anything like this sort of luxury and now are unable to properly prioritize replacements on units that are stuck on frontline duty.

I agree that the morale/training boost ought to be available only at the rear. I disagree with the replacement limitation, however.

I'm not sure why people think the Soviets are so weak in 1941. I've noticed a lot of newbie Soviet players in the recent AARs making rookie mistakes. Not enough checkerboards.

[Oleg Mastruko]

Flavio welcome back!

Motherland was a sad place without you.

[Flaviusx]

I'm slowly getting back into the game. Have enough time now to do some solo gaming. Been putzing around with 1.04 GC, 125/100 custom settings, German v. Sovs, took it to midsummer 42. Have the Germans stalemated along the whole front.

The new winter rules are a great improvement. It was much too easy before as the Soviet. I used to be able to get similar results as above at 125/85, now I have to crank the Sovs up to 100 even against the AI to achieve the mid 42 stabilization.

[Oleg Mastruko]

In 43 scenario I am slowly grinding German defences along the front turn after turn after turn after turn.

Now I don't normally feel sorry for Germans in game, nor do I feel they are too weak or anything.... but I do feel sorry for them regarding these new rules. No refit for frontline units is probably irritating for both of us, but as Soviet I simply bring new units to front each turn (as Flavio says I don't even have space for all of them there), keeping the constant pressure.

I feel sorry for my German opponent, as I am beating him turn after turn and he can't even bring the newcoming guys in significant numbers where they are needed the most - to frontline units. Does not seem neither fair nor realistic to be honest....

I am surprised there aren't more late war German players complaining about this (a Soviet fanboy had to start the pro-Axis thread, what's the world coming to? [:D])