Future plans re a 1.05 version

[DorianGray]

ORIGINAL: Helpless

This may be a result of the STATIC formations not able to go into REFIT

This is the only reason you should get less replacement then unit on refit, but there is no limitation for the static units as such.

A couple of thoughts came to mind about STATIC units that make them somewhat unique.

1. STATIC units have been stripped of organic vehicles.

Is there anything in the game engine that takes number ( or percentage ) of vehicles assigned to a unit into consideration when it comes to distribution of replacements?

2. STATIC units MPs have been reduced to one.

Is there anything in the game engine that takes number ( or percentage ) or movement points left in a unit into consideration when it comes to distribution of replacements?

[Helpless]

1. No
2. No

[Jakerson]

ORIGINAL: delatbabel
OK, I'm going to take your word for it but it just doesn't seem to be working for me.

Active units, not on refit, get replacements. Static units in the same hex or in adjacent hexes aren't getting replacements.

I have 100K+ manpower in the pool. How do I tell how much of that is "active"?

There is active pool and transition pool on default it show all pools together active and transition. You have to click that show all pools button to see transition and active pools. If active pool is zero there is no men in pool. Most of the cases active pool is empty as replasement drain it empty.

I suggest you read more about the concept from manual.

[Joel Billings]

ORIGINAL: 76mm

ORIGINAL: delatbabel
I now refuse to perform airfield bombing because it's too easy.
[quote

While it is too easy, at least for me, it is the ONLY way I can inflict any air losses on the Germans, who suffer zero losses when intercepting my GS or interdiction missions, even if heavily outnumbered. I hope that this is also being looked into?

My understanding is that German fighters dominated the airspace they were in and racked up very large kill ratios. Considering how outnumbered they were they did very well. As for the airfield bombing, one changes is that air recon will never cause the DL of an airbase to go higher than 5, so that will cut down on losses on the ground.

[KenchiSulla]

Soviet losses in 1941 and 1942 were huge.. but the axis lost machines too! However, axis could create air superiority even in the face of overwhelming soviet numerical superiority. I do believe the game is accurate in that regard.

I don't have exact numbers but I do know the russians could sustain the losses, the germans could not - especially not once the western allied air offensive started..

[Jakerson]

ORIGINAL: Cannonfodder

Soviet losses in 1941 and 1942 were huge.. but the axis lost machines too! However, axis could create air superiority even in the face of overwhelming soviet numerical superiority. I do believe the game is accurate in that regard.

I don't have exact numbers but I do know the russians could sustain the losses, the germans could not - especially not once the western allied air offensive started..

Yeah if Soviet can get 1:2 loss ratio they do good. If they can get 1:1 they do very good.

On the other hand germans need to get 1:3 or 1:4 ratio or even better to keep Soviet air force in check.

[KenchiSulla]

Actually I don't think 1 : 4 will cut it in the end...

[delatbabel]

"Air superiority" is a very vague term. Taking a quick look at the numbers available (from Glantz et al) in the well documented battles and you'll see a few fairly common themes through mid to late 43 for example:

* Soviets put more planes into the air than the Germans.
* Germans had better pilots, and shot down more Soviet fighter planes than did the Soviets, in those cases where they were able to get good numbers of planes into the air locally.
* German tactical bombers (Stuka et al) weren't well equipped to continue a run in the face of enemy fire. On the other hand, the mid to late model Il-2s were heavily armoured and quite well equipped to stand up to enemy fighter cover, and in any case did so in such numbers so that the losses sustained in the air by Sturmovik units didn't greatly diminish their effectiveness against ground targets.

Throwing some ficticional but not entirely unrealistic numbers out there -- 20 FW-190s escorting 20 Stukas meet 100 Yak-9s escorting 150 Il-2M3s. 15 Yak-9s and 8 Sturmoviks are downed, for the loss of 2 FW-190s and 4 Stukas, with 10 of the remaining Stukas and 20 Sturmoviks aborting their run. The Luftwaffe pilots return home and boast of a great victory in the air, but down on the ground 25 Panzer 4s and 5s are now smoking ruins after sustaining fire from the remaining Sturmoviks. Who had air superiority?

I don't find the air system in WitE as it currently stands to be extroadinarily unrealistic or unworkable. As the Soviet player I find myself constantly rotating air groups back to national reserve to catch up on morale, recover some losses, and fly a few training missions, then once I have reasonable numbers of units fitted out with decent planes and pilots I can go toe-to-toe against the Luftwaffe. At first this happens on a local level, where I transfer in a large number of air groups into a small concentration of air bases in one turn, start causing havoc with them for a few turns then fly out again, and then later in the game I find I can do it up and down the front.

Sure, I'm often taking 2x, 3x, or even 4x the losses that I inflict in the air, but the Soviet production system can handle that, and in those cases I'm putting together large locally focussed air groups I can often clear anywhere between 300 and 500 bombers into a battle, which usually results in high German losses and a retreat even at the cost of high losses in my air groups. That's not radically different to how the VVS actually operated for much of the war, as far as I can tell from my reading.

[delatbabel]

ORIGINAL: Helpless
I was using fresh 1942 GC and looked in the debugger. You may start a topic on tech forum with attached save files. I can check them to see if there is anything wrong.

Will do. Alas I am without access to the game for a couple of weeks but after then I'll take a look. I note a number of other players are reporting a reduction in the replacements going to static units so I think it's not just me.

ORIGINAL: Helpless
Yes, currently static and refit are mutually exclusive, although it can be changed in the code to provide extra replacements to static units.

Yes, that would be extremely useful. I don't want to have to supply trucks to a unit just to get it into refit mode. Pulling a static unit back one hex then applying the refit flag to it without having to activate it (and spend APs) would save a lot of the paper shuffling required to keep your front line units intact. Currently I probably waste about half of my APs putting static units into active mode then putting them into refit mode, only to put them back into static mode a couple of turns later once they've received their reinforcements.

That and a reduction in the cost of putting static units into active mode (and I assume that would include a reduction in the AP gain to make units static in the first place) would be the top two things on my list of things I'd like to see for 1.05.

Joel said earlier in the thread that no units would be able to be put into static mode in 1941 -- I assume this is to nuke the Soviet capability to rack up APs in 1941 by putting their motorised units into static mode for a large gain in APs then spend many fewer APs later to activate them when they turn to rifle divisions. Why not just reduce (or eliminate) the gain in APs to make a unit static in the first place? To my way of thinking, putting units into static mode should be done to help them fortify faster and to recover the trucks, and not just to gain extra paperwork points.

The game would still be playable if it was 0 APs to put a unit into static mode and 1 AP to take it out again -- have a look at Keke's 1943 scenario where he's eliminated the mass of Soviet static units and made them frozen for a number of turns instead. It's a much better scenario than the stock 1943 scenario, and doesn't rely on having lots of static units for the Soviets to activate over a period of a year or so when the APs can be obtained.

[Encircled]

Is there any danger of a pocket of encircled troops being able to attack strongly out of the pocket with air supply?

[Joel Billings]

As long as they have ammo, there is a chance of it. However, unless they are getting a huge amount of air resupply, it will be hard to maintain much fighting as the ammo stocks will drop quickly during high intensity combat.

[Tarhunnas]

That sounds reasonable.

[delatbabel]

ORIGINAL: Joel Billings

As long as they have ammo, there is a chance of it. However, unless they are getting a huge amount of air resupply, it will be hard to maintain much fighting as the ammo stocks will drop quickly during high intensity combat.

So we're talking about having encircled units retain much of their defensive capability but lose offensive capability? That does sound reasonable.

[Attack]

This is the best wargame I´ve never played before! Thanks to developpers!

r Somme sugestions:

-There are some home rules generally accepted. Why don´t to introduce them in the code? I.e: past first turn, an airport or city only can be air attacked one time, no disembarks past Odessa when Odessa is conquered, not disembarks past Sebastopol when Sebastopol is conquered. And no Riga gambit!

-Do factories more difficult to evacuate. I.e, to move a  factorie should long for 3 weeks. If the city is isolate or conquered in this time, then will be no evacuation. IMHO, now it´s too easy to evacuate near all factories, and then the soviets are too strong in 42. This will force the soviets to carefully plan their factories movements, and abandon someones.

-I´d don´t evacuate the manpower of a city if isolated. I think that Germans don´t allow pass trough their lines to people in military age.

-The routed units should not be capable of retreat trough enemy controled hexes.

-I think that the fall of Moscow should be politically important. I.e: less A.P. and less moral to the soviet player until Moscow will be retaken.

But as I said, this is the better game I´ve never played.
-I´d like  supply Partisan supply manually, not only automaticaly (without appearing any sign in the German screen, of course). This way, the Soviet will can give more suppies to his more important Partisan units.

Anyway, this game

[Encircled]

Cheers Joe

Was slightly concerned as you want to cut off units so there is actually some effect to their combat potential