Helio's Axis AAR (v Cannonfodder Soviet)

[ComradeP]

Pelton, for starters the latest version is a lot more favourable to the Axis in 1941 than previous ones were.

And this:

I have bitched about this to no end. German national moral is 50 and the devs love it and even try to defend this joke of a sytem.

remains a lie no matter how often you repeat it.

I've asked you a number of times to actually prove the point that German national morale is 50, but you have failed to present even a single scrap of evidence.

[Peltonx]

ORIGINAL: ComradeP

Pelton, for starters the latest version is a lot more favourable to the Axis in 1941 than previous ones were.

And this:

I have bitched about this to no end. German national moral is 50 and the devs love it and even try to defend this joke of a sytem.

remains a lie no matter how often you repeat it.

I've asked you a number of times to actually prove the point that German national morale is 50, but you have failed to present even a single scrap of evidence.

Ok remove you head from sand.

Russian morale goes up to nation morale. Just a plain fact,
German morale does not go up to national morale level. It can go below 50 but rises to 50. If its 69, 55,51, 67 and national morale level is 75 or 70 it will never rise to the national morale level. Thats the fact.

So German national moral is simply 50 by default.

Again the facts are the facts ignoring them does not make them go away.

German national morale is 50. Because in the words of the devs it gravitaes to the national moral level.

The only number the German morale gravitates to is 50.

Pelton

[heliodorus04]

ORIGINAL: ComradeP

Pelton, for starters the latest version is a lot more favourable to the Axis in 1941 than previous ones were.

And this:

I have bitched about this to no end. German national moral is 50 and the devs love it and even try to defend this joke of a sytem.

remains a lie no matter how often you repeat it.

I've asked you a number of times to actually prove the point that German national morale is 50, but you have failed to present even a single scrap of evidence.

I'm not certain that calling it a 'lie' is accurate. German morale may not be 50, but what we can clearly see given the math algorithm for morale increases, the 1941 German army is bound to lose morale on balance during the campaign rather than garner it. The probability for morale increases becomes lower and lower for Germany the higher a unit's morale is above 75. The probability of it becoming lower remains basically constant no matter your morale.

By virtue of the principal of Regression to the Mean, Germany's army is always going down.

The game mechanics for refit, for morale increases when below national morale, all point to a trend where, also through Regression to the Mean, the Soviet Morale is almost always going up on the aggregate by virtue of Held results (almost certain to increase Soviet morale) and rest (much lower chance per turn of increase, but average pattern will be increasing morale).

I don't know how it is you don't recognize these patterns being hard-coded into the morale mechanics.

I don't know whether it's right or wrong: I just know that it's hopeless for Germany to expect his morale to go up over time, and whenever each year arrives, it instantly becomes worse for Germany.

[heliodorus04]

ORIGINAL: ComradeP

Pelton, for starters the latest version is a lot more favourable to the Axis in 1941 than previous ones were.

And this:

I have bitched about this to no end. German national moral is 50 and the devs love it and even try to defend this joke of a sytem.

remains a lie no matter how often you repeat it.

I've asked you a number of times to actually prove the point that German national morale is 50, but you have failed to present even a single scrap of evidence.

I'm not certain that calling it a 'lie' is accurate. German morale may not be 50, but what we can clearly see given the math algorithm for morale increases, the 1941 German army is bound to lose morale on balance during the campaign rather than garner it. The probability for morale increases becomes lower and lower for Germany the higher a unit's morale is above 75. The probability of it becoming lower remains basically constant no matter your morale.

By virtue of the principal of Regression to the Mean, Germany's army is always going down.

The game mechanics for refit, for morale increases when below national morale, all point to a trend where, also through Regression to the Mean, the Soviet Morale is almost always going up on the aggregate by virtue of Held results (almost certain to increase Soviet morale) and rest (much lower chance per turn of increase, but average pattern will be increasing morale).

I don't know how it is you don't recognize these patterns being hard-coded into the morale mechanics.

I don't know whether it's right or wrong: I just know that it's hopeless for Germany to expect his morale to go up over time, and whenever each year arrives, it instantly becomes worse for Germany, and it's another place where the Soviet doesn't have to think about managing this aspect of his army because it will improve over time without management.

[Peltonx]

I am not debating about if or of not national moral goes up or down because of combat.

The issue is when a unit is ten hexes from the front, it has a chance of a moral increase.

When a russian unit is 10+ from the front almost every turn there is a moral increase 1-3 pts.

When a german unit is 10+ from the front there is a 1.4% chance of a moral increase of 1 pt.

I tested this myself in my game vs Kamil and a few other things.

I withdrew 38 units from the front to Germany and sat them 4 full turns and only 2 gained back a moral pt. All of the units were from 50 to 65 moral. 2 were under 50 and both gained back moral each turn until they hit 50.

Russian moral gravitates to what ever the national moral level is by simply sitting. It can gain or lose moral based on combat.

German moral gravitates to 50. Because its pointless to sit a German unit 10+ hexes from front to gain back 1 pt of moral every 76 turns on average.

Therefor based 100% on the math German national moral is 50.

This is one of many things that are stacked against the axis side.

It is by design like this, but its avery poor design as was 1v1=2v1.

Pelton

[ComradeP]

German morale does not go up to national morale level. It can go below 50 but rises to 50. If its 69, 55,51, 67 and national morale level is 75 or 70 it will never rise to the national morale level. Thats the fact.

No, that is not a fact, and for the record: you can't test it correctly in any case as German national morale is never higher than what can be gained through resting to begin with.

I already explained the reason for why it's easier for the Soviets to get to 50, but I'm not going to repeat it again as I was wasting my time trying to explain it to you before, so I'm not going to waste my time again.

So German national moral is simply 50 by default.

No.

I don't know how it is you don't recognize these patterns being hard-coded into the morale mechanics.

Take a look at what you wrote, you're missing something.

German morale starts higher than the national morale for the majority of your combat units. As such, as gaining morale to levels higher than national morale is difficult, morale isn't likely to rise by much. This goes for both sides. If you lose a battle you may or may not lose a point of morale. Recently, a change was included in a patch which made whether or not you lose morale depend on (presumably) a dice roll linked to whether you're above or below the national morale level. This applies to both sides, again.

I don't doubt the idea of regression towards the mean, nor have I ever said I doubted that for the latest versions as far as I know. What I'm saying is that the mean isn't 50, which is what Pelton is missing.

It is only logical that morale, over time, lowers or increases to the national morale level. It's essentially what the feature is for, like it or not.

However, what you wrote doesn't, in any way, support the theory of German national morale being 50.

Your idea that Soviet morale always goes up is also incorrect, because the mean is lowered in 1942 and there is only a small chance of morale going up if it's above the national morale level.

I don't know whether it's right or wrong: I just know that it's hopeless for Germany to expect his morale to go up over time, and whenever each year arrives, it instantly becomes worse for Germany.

The last part of this sentence is false. There is no direct relation between national morale and morale where if one of the two changes, the other changes too. There is only an indirect relation where unit morale will gravitate towards the mean.

-

Pelton, I'll try to tell you this one more time, even though you have simply ignored it every single time I tried to tell you before.

If you have a problem with something or think something is broken, create an argument backed up by either in-game evidence or a very detailed explanation. Now you're mostly making short posts centered on arguments that are not backed up, but which you keep repeating. That is, over time, costing you credibility.

I believe you're often trying to contribute your share towards making WitE a better product for all of us, but it would be a lot better for both you and the rest of us if you'd do that with an actual case backed up by arguments instead of creating posts that come down to something like "German national morale is 50" and you hitting the OK button.

[heliodorus04]

ComradeP, you appear to be fixated on the single mathematical formula for increases in morale, and not fully considering the probabilities given the way the game plays.

By virtue of the automatic loss of morale for a retreat, and
the high probability of a Soviet morale increase for a defending Held result, and
the high probability of a Soviet morale increase for an attacking success

Germany will always be doing a downward morale shuffle (the probability of it going down is comparatively much greater than the probability of a German unit's morale ever going up).

Soviets will always be doing an upward morale shuffle.

And on a separate note: If you cannot test your claims, how am I to believe their veracity, no disrespect intended. You said you can't test this national morale issue.

I guess I'm not fixated on national morale so much as I am the fact that the die roll formula has the effect of being extra punitive on the German side over the course of the war. Whenever national morale goes down, if a German unit's morale is above NM, it's chance of morale increases has immediately been reduced.

[janh]

ORIGINAL: heliodorus04
Germany will always be doing a downward morale shuffle (the probability of it going down is comparatively much greater than the probability of a German unit's morale ever going up).

Soviets will always be doing an upward morale shuffle.

As probabilities are treated on equal footing on both sides, the moral should converge on NM. And that's probably exactly what this whole functionality is to do? Since "moral" is in fact a convolution of "experience/training and will to fight", the upward trend for the Soviets (though slow) probably represents increasing training and skill over the years, as well as recovering will to beat the Germans after the slashing defeats of 41 and 42. The Germans, on the other hand, cut back on training new recruits in the course of the war, and the experienced cadres thinned out badly until the end. Moreover, with the notion that the offensive war failed, and defeats on other fronts accumulating, their will to fight for the Führer and his fantastic ideas also decreased after 41.
So why exactly should this not be represented in game?

[ComradeP]

By virtue of the automatic loss of morale for a retreat

False. It would help if you actually read what I post.

the high probability of a Soviet morale increase for a defending Held result

Only if below their national morale.

the high probability of a Soviet morale increase for an attacking success

Again, only if below their national morale.

Germany will always be doing a downward morale shuffle (the probability of it going down is comparatively much greater than the probability of a German unit's morale ever going up).

It's not an automatic process, it depends on how you play. Infantry morale is much more likely to decline than mobile unit morale due to the infantry generally being at the frontline and the mobile units being behind it somewhere.

Soviets will always be doing an upward morale shuffle.

Not necessarily and not at the rate you and Pelton are suggesting.

And on a separate note: If you cannot test your claims, how am I to believe their veracity, no disrespect intended. You said you can't test this national morale issue.

You and Pelton are talking about German and Soviet national morale, not just the German national morale. You can't really test the German national morale because most units start above it. You can test Soviet national morale because many units either start below it, are below it over time and because Soviet national morale goes down in 1941-1942 before it goes up again in 1943-1944.

I guess I'm not fixated on national morale so much as I am the fact that the die roll formula has the effect of being extra punitive on the German side over the course of the war.

It isn't extra punitive.

You're still missing the, rather simple, point that German national morale is lower than the morale of most of their units, so the die roll isn't "extra punitive" in a hardcoded manner. It's less likely to succeed because German units generally start with a morale higher than their national morale.

I don't know why that simple fact is extremely difficult to grasp for both you and Pelton.

[heliodorus04]

Okay, you're starting to hear the point I'm trying to get at. I'm reading what you're saying. Your pedantic posturing isn't helping me understand you and is making you look capriciously mean.

It is 'extra punitive' that Germany's national morale is artificially set so low (it is extra punitive that the Soviet 1941 morale is also thrown into a trash can arbitrarily in 1942).

Let's take the mechanic of morale change out of it for a second, because while you seem to think I don't understand it, I think we agree on how it works.

The simple difference between the national morale and the average infantry division (or non-elite division) morale for Germany is an artifice that serves to set Germany immediately on a downward morale spiral starting on turn 1.

Why is the difference between the average infantry morale and national morale so great IF NOT to artificially make the German weaker regardless of his level of competence, efficiency, and success in play?

Why does the morale change in January of each year? Why does it change in January of 42 when the blizzard conditions are already working fine on bringing down German morale?

Germany already has TOE changes that make it weaker, replacement schedules that make it weaker, production multipliers that make it weaker, historic withdrawl schedules that make it weaker - all regardless of any outcome other than the passage of time on a calendar. It's another hard-coded handicapping measure that works to bring DOWN the German (because national morale is almost always going to be lower than average morale per unit) and brings UP the Soviet (because national morale will more often be above unit morale, and because the resting mechanic can often benefit Soviet units while, while German units can expect to be above morale of 50 unless whole swaths of the front are collapsing each turn.

It's another example of the Soviet having failsafes and the German having the opposite of a failsafe, whatever that's called...

[heliodorus04]

Stated another way:
Why is the die roll set at a starting point of 75 in determining the final probability? Why not 100? Or even 85, the high average of the better German infantry?

Because they want to ensure regression to the mean forces down German morale.

The Germans are programmed to suck regardless of what either player does well or poorly.

[M60A3TTS]

ORIGINAL: heliodorus04

Germany already has TOE changes that make it weaker

I am ready to be the first one to sign an online petition to allow players to defer TO&E changes. I would love to build some Soviet tank divisions with over 200 T-34s authorized in that formation.

production multipliers that make it weaker

The manual says German muntiplier is 100 in '41 and 380 in '44, unless that changed since. The Soviets went from 100->200 after 1941 under v1.0.4, that's since been reduced to 100-> 130 in 1.0.5

historic withdrawl schedules that make it weaker - all regardless of any outcome other than the passage of time on a calendar.

Um, yeah. The Allies are still invading Normandy on June 6, 1944 and the Axis forces there need help. Your point is?

It's another hard-coded handicapping measure that works to bring DOWN the German (because national morale is almost always going to be lower than average morale per unit) and brings UP the Soviet (because national morale will more often be above unit morale, and because the resting mechanic can often benefit Soviet units while, while German units can expect to be above morale of 50 unless whole swaths of the front are collapsing each turn.

The German leadership promised a quick war in the east, and they didn't deliver on that promise. As time went on, German morale in general was reduced as there was no successful end in sight and Allied forces strengthened and closed in on the Fatherland, along with the bombing campaign over the Reich, failed result with U-Boats, etc. Contrary to what some Axis players might hope for, I don't think it's a matter that as the Axis you send your panzertruppen on vacation in Garmish for the winter and expect them to come back in time for the Spring offensive with the same belief in victory and morale level that they had on June 22, 1941. They knew the brutal conditions they were living under daily on the Eastern Front and one might argue that their increased morale came from a grim determination to fight regardless of the odds, expecting no quarter for them or their people should their enemy make their way into the Reich itself. You want to increase morale? Win battles. It's not that hard to do in many cases.

It's another example of the Soviet having failsafes and the German having the opposite of a failsafe, whatever that's called...

The Soviet side has it's blemishes as well. There's a certain degree of fantasy involved that the Russians will surrender Moscow to a minimal attack if surrounded/out of supply. But the game provides for it, and the Soviet player has to live with it.

[heliodorus04]

M60, that's all well and good as a rationalization, but "Morale" in game terms is not what Morale means to a commanding officer (or so I've been told).  WitE "Morale" is a measure of combat effectiveness, so I can't have a discussion around your points.  Your points are irrelevant to game mechanics.

[Peltonx]

ORIGINAL: janh

ORIGINAL: heliodorus04
Germany will always be doing a downward morale shuffle (the probability of it going down is comparatively much greater than the probability of a German unit's morale ever going up).

Soviets will always be doing an upward morale shuffle.

As probabilities are treated on equal footing on both sides, the moral should converge on NM. And that's probably exactly what this whole functionality is to do? Since "moral" is in fact a convolution of "experience/training and will to fight", the upward trend for the Soviets (though slow) probably represents increasing training and skill over the years, as well as recovering will to beat the Germans after the slashing defeats of 41 and 42. The Germans, on the other hand, cut back on training new recruits in the course of the war, and the experienced cadres thinned out badly until the end. Moreover, with the notion that the offensive war failed, and defeats on other fronts accumulating, their will to fight for the Führer and his fantastic ideas also decreased after 41.
So why exactly should this not be represented in game?

Great point man. We are replaying history.

If as the German you are doing better then history you are punished still because of the pts heliodorus04
makes.

Your good or bad game play is not rewarded or punished.

The very same goes for the Russian player, if your playing like crap your still rewarded with higher national moral?

So better then historical game play by the German is punished with hard coded lowering of national moral.

Worse then historical game play by the Russian is rewarded with higher national moral.

Moreover, with the notion that the offensive war failed, and defeats on other fronts accumulating, their will to fight for the Führer and his fantastic ideas also decreased after 41.
So why exactly should this not be represented in game?

Its always a very good idea to read what you write from not only your side but the other side. An open mind looks at the issue from both sides and not just 1 side.

So what if the notion that the offensive war is working, Leningrad/Moscow/Tula/Kursk/Kharkov/Stalino/Rostov were taken, their will to fight for the Fuhrer and his good ideas should also increase after 41.

So why exactly should this not be represented in Game?



Thank you for making heliodorus04 and my point

By design German national moral gravates to 50 no matter how good the game play of the German player is.
By design Russian national moral gravitaes to the national moral level that increased every year no matter how crappy the Russian game play is.

Only a closed minded person can see this as far and logical.

Citys need to have some effect on national moral, therefor giving poeple something to fight for and making for much more interesting games.

Rewarding poeple for crappy game play and punishing poeple for good game play is just a plain poor design.

Pelton

[Strv103C]

I'm afraid that I don't understand the national morale thing. I'm playing soviet and have progressed to may 42 and when i refit units (10+ hexes away) the regular units tend to reach morale, 52 given enough time, but shouldnt this number be 42 (national morale)? Now if i get 10 extra morale points then the german player should get to morale 85 (national morale +10) when refitting, no?

[wosung]

ORIGINAL: heliodorus04

M60, that's all well and good as a rationalization, but "Morale" in game terms is not what Morale means to a commanding officer (or so I've been told).  WitE "Morale" is a measure of combat effectiveness, so I can't have a discussion around your points.  Your points are irrelevant to game mechanics.

Wrong again.

German troop quality in WITE on average should sink during the war, because that's what it did IRL. And it did so from 1942 onwards. For German personnell management Barbarossa was everything but the kitchen sink. Beside of those yearly age cohorts of 17 to 18 year old fresh recruits (AFIR several 10.000), all other reinforcements were of continuously sinking physical quality. And the former had less and less training. Reports from Ersatzheer and Offiziersausbildung tell volumes. Thus, regardless of how good you play German troop quality in WitE on average should sink. Because even victories just don't cure stomach illness.

I'll spare you citations and references, because, well, you just ... "hate historians".

[janh]

ORIGINAL: Pelton

Great point man. We are replaying history.

If as the German you are doing better then history you are punished still because of the pts heliodorus04
makes.

Your good or bad game play is not rewarded or punished.

The very same goes for the Russian player, if your playing like crap your still rewarded with higher national moral?

So better then historical game play by the German is punished with hard coded lowering of national moral.

Worse then historical game play by the Russian is rewarded with higher national moral.

Moreover, with the notion that the offensive war failed, and defeats on other fronts accumulating, their will to fight for the Führer and his fantastic ideas also decreased after 41.
So why exactly should this not be represented in game?

Its always a very good idea to read what you write from not only your side but the other side. An open mind looks at the issue from both sides and not just 1 side.

So what if the notion that the offensive war is working, Leningrad/Moscow/Tula/Kursk/Kharkov/Stalino/Rostov were taken, their will to fight for the Fuhrer and his good ideas should also increase after 41.

So why exactly should this not be represented in Game?

I am surprised, for once I have to agree with you, at least partly. There was a discussion about this on the forum a while ago, where people including me suggested that it would be neat if national moral would bounce up and down with major victories and cities captured. Unfortunately they have convoluted true moral (as I posted above) with combat experience/training, which confuses things. Hopefully they will undo that in the next titles.

If it were purely will to fight, the NM should follow the Axis/Allied successes of the war. That would automatically lower Soviet NM with the big pockets of 41 and the city losses, and would also make a nice victory indicator (if NM fell below a threshold). In turn, Axis expected a quick offensive victory, so as soon as the Barbarossa offensive stalls, and especially once the last Axis campaign in 42 fails, the Axis should take moral blows as necessary victories numbers erode and own losses rise for insignificant returns. Further, as Allies score victories on other fronts, German NM should drop, while with any step the Soviet gets closer to Berlin, their should rise.

Even though combat experience is tied in, that would still largely be a good concept. German training time for new recruits was reduced, and experienced cadres of officers and, importantly, NCO's got depleted by the fighting into 42. So the quality of the German soldier declined, while simultaneously the Soviets got better training, doctrine etc. That is the same trend. So again, I agree with the way this is designed in game, even though I prefer playing Axis and this won't work to my advantage. It simply is sound.

In an ideal world, excessively poor or good play by either side would be rewarded. There should be a causal connection between true moral and successes/defeats, and training/EXP and troops losses. However, until we get to "War in Europe", the home front, North Africa, Italy and France are still out of our reach, and, thus, the Axis has to be assumed to lose the war there (~>withdrawals always stick to historical timelines). Plus, Axis unit quality and combat value will necessarily erode with rising losses. So for the Axis I see only one valid trend: downwards, even he can beat the Russians, since Axis still will loose the war in this game. So even if there was some feedback loop here from captured cities, destroyed units, and own losses to NM, the trend would necessarily still have to be tuned such that German NM goes down. In contrast, for the Soviets there could be potential to go further up, or down.

In a "War in Europe", where Germany might really do better than history, a true causal coupling of successes and defeats to NM and losses to experience would make a lot more sense, though.

[Peltonx]

ORIGINAL: wosung

ORIGINAL: heliodorus04

M60, that's all well and good as a rationalization, but "Morale" in game terms is not what Morale means to a commanding officer (or so I've been told).  WitE "Morale" is a measure of combat effectiveness, so I can't have a discussion around your points.  Your points are irrelevant to game mechanics.

Wrong again.

German troop quality in WITE on average should sink during the war, because that's what it did IRL. And it did so from 1942 onwards. For German personnell management Barbarossa was everything but the kitchen sink. Beside of those yearly age cohorts of 17 to 18 year old fresh recruits (AFIR several 10.000), all other reinforcements were of continuously sinking physical quality. And the former had less and less training. Reports from Ersatzheer and Offiziersausbildung tell volumes. Thus, regardless of how good you play German troop quality in WitE on average should sink. Because even victories just don't cure stomach illness.

I'll spare you citations and references, because, well, you just ... "hate historians".

Yes as you know troop quality started tanking during 44, women an young poeple filling out units, so using your input Russian morale should start going down in late 44 - 45.

Again you have made my pt thank you very very much.

As the russian or German player we are tring to change history and not be stuck 100% following it.

I have had many games were I have far far llower then historical losses so the kiddys never are needed in the front, therefor the moral and health of front line units should not auto degrade just because of history. Thats the hole pt of playing the game in the first plase is seeing if we can change history.

Again instead of being close minded about the game, have and open mind and look at both sides of the issue.

Thanks for supporting my side of the issue with your responce.

Again the German player is punished for better then historical game play and the russian player is rewarded for worse then historical game play.

Pelton

[heliodorus04]

Wosung, you're on my blocked list, so whatever you said sounds like Charlie Brown's teacher. Blah blah blah... Please leave your oleaginous BS out of my personal AAR.

There are a great many design decisions in WitE that were lazy. Weather and supply are the two easiest examples. But the degradation of German combat effectiveness is one of them.

Hell, half the game's problems could be assuaged, if not fixed outright, by halving the time scale to 3.5 days per turn. That'll probably be War in the East 2, though, right?

[heliodorus04]

In another example of fine air war mechanics, I tried to send a fuel supply run to 40.Panzer, and this is the result: Note that ALL of the bombers were shot down. I've never seen this happen before.

Note also that it says the air mission was for supply, when it was for fuel.

It's a lovely game, working as intended...




How did this happen (zero escorts was something I could do nothing about, because I'm apparently not smart enough to understand why fighters sometimes fly and sometimes don't). If I could transfer aircraft at any time, rather than only at the start of a mission, I could put fighters on bases when this kind of forced-no-escort BS happens, but that's not the way the game was designed. It was designed lazily.

Makes me glad that all those Ju-52s got shipped over to Romania and Hungary (who last turn formed Ju-52 groups)...

How much do you think that will affect the next two turns?