RELOADS and HQ Build Up

[Mike29]

Dear Developers!

Is it possible to do something with check of reloads in PBEM and server games? In my opinion ability to reload most important situations or even each attack kills the game - no strategy skills required for Germans, just reload and push. Of course everyone would say he plays honestly, but as usual we play with unknown opponent and spend a lot of time. Even for me I would prefer not to have temptation of replaying some moments and all we know that even one reloaded attack can change situation significantly. I am not a programmer, but may be would possible to create some system of save|load check, or autosave after any move etc.

The second issue is Bould-up of HQ. This option looks like cheat. As you know, if you make build-up all movement points of units subordinated to HQ nullify only if they are in range of HQ, so it is possible to move them first (out of HQ range), than make build-up. With this option there is no need to have rail-road near, no need in air-transports. I do not think that 35+ movement points of fast German units every two turns is historical. Last several games played shows that German using different strategies can take Leningrad, Moscow, Rostov without any serious problems before the Mud. With such option is possible even to take Stalingrad or Gorky in 41. I don't think that playing without Moscow in 42 is the target of balance of the game.

Thank you for your attention.

[Mike29]

Regarding reloads problem, my suggestion is to enable option of "super PBEM" - save shall be possible only after end of turn. And thats all, easy. Who wants hardcore game set this option and start to think on strategy, operations and movement points. Every move is important, every attack is principal. German will make more prepared attacks, and Russian will have chance of heroic defense.

Regards,
Mike

[fetmun]

nevermind

[BletchleyGeek]

If that's a concern to you guys, play on the server. I prefer to trust my opponents and enjoy the greater flexibility (in my opinon) of classic PBEM.

PS: However, having a pop-up telling you how many times did your opponent save the turn, would do the trick as well.

[Guru]

Well, I haven't played PBEM yet, but that's a concern!
Does this mean that anyone is ACTUALLY able to replay every move or assault untill he gets a satisfying result?

I mean, in all other games I have played PBEM, that was precisely the one thing that was impossible, and for good reason.
That's terrible!!!!!! That's terrible - should be fixed ASAP!!!

Not only would I not invest the amount of time necessary for a game with an unknown PBEM opponent if I have not some garantee that he cannot cheat all along the game, but it's even perverse the other way round - if my perfectly honest opponent is remarkably successful I could be tempted to believe he's cheating

not cool not cool

[marty_01]

ORIGINAL: Mike29

Dear Developers!

Is it possible to do something with check of reloads in PBEM and server games? In my opinion ability to reload most important situations or even each attack kills the game - no strategy skills required for Germans, just reload and push. Of course everyone would say he plays honestly, but as usual we play with unknown opponent and spend a lot of time. Even for me I would prefer not to have temptation of replaying some moments and all we know that even one reloaded attack can change situation significantly. I am not a programmer, but may be would possible to create some system of save|load check, or autosave after any move etc.

+1

[vlcz]

ORIGINAL: Bletchley_Geek
If that's a concern to you guys, play on the server. I prefer to trust my opponents and enjoy the greater flexibility (in my opinon) of classic PBEM.

PS: However, having a pop-up telling you how many times did your opponent save the turn, would do the trick as well.

Only partially, the number of loadings of each savepoint would be of much more interest.

[JAMiAM]

ORIGINAL: vlcz

ORIGINAL: Bletchley_Geek
If that's a concern to you guys, play on the server. I prefer to trust my opponents and enjoy the greater flexibility (in my opinon) of classic PBEM.

PS: However, having a pop-up telling you how many times did your opponent save the turn, would do the trick as well.

Only partially, the number of loadings of each savepoint would be of much more interest.

This.

It often takes me days to play a turn, with several *sequential* loadings of the game. If each turn had to be played in a single setting, there would be no way I could play this game. Too much thought is involved per turn, and there is too little uninterrupted time in my busy life. Being able to open the game, view the map, strategize, fiddle with a few units and settings here and there, and then being able to shelve it until the next time you can get back to it is key (to me) in being able to enjoy turn-based gaming.

[BletchleyGeek]

ORIGINAL: JAMiAM

ORIGINAL: vlcz

ORIGINAL: Bletchley_Geek
If that's a concern to you guys, play on the server. I prefer to trust my opponents and enjoy the greater flexibility (in my opinon) of classic PBEM.

PS: However, having a pop-up telling you how many times did your opponent save the turn, would do the trick as well.

Only partially, the number of loadings of each savepoint would be of much more interest.

This.

It often takes me days to play a turn, with several *sequential* loadings of the game. If each turn had to be played in a single setting, there would be no way I could play this game. Too much thought is involved per turn, and there is too little uninterrupted time in my busy life. Being able to open the game, view the map, strategize, fiddle with a few units and settings here and there, and then being able to shelve it until the next time you can get back to it is key (to me) in being able to enjoy turn-based gaming.

It is, indeed. Good points, James & vlcz. This wouldn't be something that would require much work, would it?

[Harrybanana]

I agree with Mike that I would like some feature that prevents players from replaying the same attack until they get the result they want. I think the number of cheaters is probably very small, but it would be nice not only to be assured that my opponent is not cheating but also to know that my opponent is assured that I am not cheating. On the other hand, I personally am a very meticulous player and I will often spend several hours playing just one turn. This is usually not done at one sitting but often over 2 to 4 sittings in the course of a day or even two. Of course I save the game between sittings and then reload later. Is there some proven way (other than server) of making a game cheat proof other than just counting the number of reloads?

I have no problem with HQ Buildups, but do have a problem with what is commonly called HQ Chaining. This is where a player (usually the Axis but I suppose it could be the Russian) empties an unmoved HQ of all attached units on one turn and performs an HQ Supply Buildup (at I believe a cost of only 5 APs). This causes the HQ to recieve a massive buildup of supplies with nowhere to go. On his next turn he moves the HQ forward (even beyond 20 mp from railhead) and than attaches several panzer/motorized units to the HQ. On hs next turn these units will have 45+ mps. I believe this is what Mike is referring to. I personally believe this is an exploit, but to date I have not seen any post by Joel or anyone one else on the Development team stating their opinion. It would be nice to know if the game designers think this is WAD or an exploit, and if the latter what if anything will they be doing about it.

[janh]

I thought they had anchored the seed for the random/dice functions in the save for PBEM, much as they did in AE? Not that you couldn't break that either, but the gains there are much more limited. That would be good, also for playing against AI -- I sure am guilty of reloading turns sometimes. In PBEM, though, both sides posses the ability to "optimize" their turns...

ORIGINAL: Harrybanana
I have no problem with HQ Buildups, but do have a problem with what is commonly called HQ Chaining.
...
I personally believe this is an exploit, but to date I have not seen any post by Joel or anyone one else on the Development team stating their opinion. It would be nice to know if the game designers think this is WAD or an exploit, and if the latter what if anything will they be doing about it.

I consider it borderline, but since it in principle is available to both sides (and will have bigger benefits for the side with most AP and number of usable HQs...), I am not to concerned. What bothers me more is that the defending units just sit there simultaneously and watch in idleness.
HQ chaining could be a representation of smart prepositioning of supplies by a specially formed supply detachment. Like a large, detached logistics battalion or mobile supply dump unit. In principle the Germans could have thought that much ahead, and probably could have reserved vehicle capacity for it. The crux is the 45+ MP, which give an enormous movement radius -- or in other words, that the base range is 50 MP (500 miles, which is 70 miles a day -- quite a distance for a mobile column of that size, no?). That combined with the the idleness of the non-phasing units, and the ease with which the supplies are distributed to subordinate units very quickly. Same as supply gets too easily to units also on the regular route, enabling charges over large distances at a high frequency.

[johnnyvagas]

ORIGINAL: Harrybanana

I agree with Mike that I would like some feature that prevents players from replaying the same attack until they get the result they want. I think the number of cheaters is probably very small, but it would be nice not only to be assured that my opponent is not cheating but also to know that my opponent is assured that I am not cheating. On the other hand, I personally am a very meticulous player and I will often spend several hours playing just one turn. This is usually not done at one sitting but often over 2 to 4 sittings in the course of a day or even two. Of course I save the game between sittings and then reload later. Is there some proven way (other than server) of making a game cheat proof other than just counting the number of reloads?

I have no problem with HQ Buildups, but do have a problem with what is commonly called HQ Chaining. This is where a player (usually the Axis but I suppose it could be the Russian) empties an unmoved HQ of all attached units on one turn and performs an HQ Supply Buildup (at I believe a cost of only 5 APs). This causes the HQ to recieve a massive buildup of supplies with nowhere to go. On his next turn he moves the HQ forward (even beyond 20 mp from railhead) and than attaches several panzer/motorized units to the HQ. On hs next turn these units will have 45+ mps. I believe this is what Mike is referring to. I personally believe this is an exploit, but to date I have not seen any post by Joel or anyone one else on the Development team stating their opinion. It would be nice to know if the game designers think this is WAD or an exploit, and if the latter what if anything will they be doing about it.

I agree with both these points. The reload issue has been brought up numerous times on this forum. It's an obvious exploit and it would be nice if the good people at 2by3 could somehow fix this particular problem. Like everyone who has posted above and for those that have posted about this issue in the past, I'd also like to know that my PBEM opponents are on the straight and narrow. Unfortunately with the current PBEM system there are always lurking doubts.

It would also be nice if the HQ chain thingy could somehow be eliminated.

[traemyn]

A (simple?) solution to the reloading the game is to code it so that on the first action (action = Recon, Attack, Move, etc) of the player communicates to the server the load number. The load number is incremented every time the game is loaded from the server. The server then holds on to this load number and validates it against the load number passed to it during save. If these do not match it would mean the player has loaded, completed an action, and did not Save the action.

This method would allow you to open the game and view the map, view units, etc without 'cheating' as long as you didn't do any of the actions that will send the load number. It would also let people play their turns in as many chunks as needed.

[IainMcNeil]

Hi guys

the server does actually track all this already. At the moment we have to manually check the stats for unusual behaviour but we are currently testing an automated system which monitors suspicious activity, notifies the users involved we are watching and then notifies us so we can take action. This is already active on our test server for Battle Academy. Next week we hope to roll out the changes to the live server for one game to test it out and if all goes well expand it to other games.

Basically if you are replaying turns we already know and if you don't stop you could find yourself banned from the PBEM++ servers entirely.

[heliodorus04]

My take on this as an avid game player on all media is that a high enough proportion of people cheat that you always have to approach a game with that in mind.  I will not play PBEM against anyone I don't know well around the forums.  I think American game players cheat and exploit and do everything they can to 'win in novel ways'. 

The only advantage PBEM has over server for a playing medium is that with a PBEM you can always re-load and check stuff.  It would be better for me and my need for security that server games have some sort of function that allows you to open your game from the end of your last turn so you can review information, if nothing else. 

[CarnageINC]

ORIGINAL: heliodorus04

My take on this as an avid game player on all media is that a high enough proportion of people cheat that you always have to approach a game with that in mind.  I will not play PBEM against anyone I don't know well around the forums.  I think American game players cheat and exploit and do everything they can to 'win in novel ways'. 

The only advantage PBEM has over server for a playing medium is that with a PBEM you can always re-load and check stuff.  It would be better for me and my need for security that server games have some sort of function that allows you to open your game from the end of your last turn so you can review information, if nothing else. 

+1

I second this ability to reload from a server based game. I like to look at things and do my AAR's at my pace instead of holding up my partner just so I can do a AAR. Good idea Helio [;)]

[sillyflower]

ORIGINAL: CarnageINC

ORIGINAL: heliodorus04

My take on this as an avid game player on all media is that a high enough proportion of people cheat that you always have to approach a game with that in mind.  I will not play PBEM against anyone I don't know well around the forums.  I think American game players cheat and exploit and do everything they can to 'win in novel ways'. 

The only advantage PBEM has over server for a playing medium is that with a PBEM you can always re-load and check stuff.  It would be better for me and my need for security that server games have some sort of function that allows you to open your game from the end of your last turn so you can review information, if nothing else. 

+1

I second this ability to reload from a server based game. I like to look at things and do my AAR's at my pace instead of holding up my partner just so I can do a AAR. Good idea Helio [;)]

+2

[sillyflower]

ORIGINAL: Harrybanana

I have no problem with HQ Buildups, but do have a problem with what is commonly called HQ Chaining. This is where a player (usually the Axis but I suppose it could be the Russian) empties an unmoved HQ of all attached units on one turn and performs an HQ Supply Buildup (at I believe a cost of only 5 APs). This causes the HQ to recieve a massive buildup of supplies with nowhere to go. On his next turn he moves the HQ forward (even beyond 20 mp from railhead) and than attaches several panzer/motorized units to the HQ. On hs next turn these units will have 45+ mps. I believe this is what Mike is referring to. I personally believe this is an exploit, but to date I have not seen any post by Joel or anyone one else on the Development team stating their opinion. It would be nice to know if the game designers think this is WAD or an exploit, and if the latter what if anything will they be doing about it.

I think chaining is an exploit. It gets around the 2 penalties/restrictions of buildup: distance and higher AP cost. I won't use it and will not play anyone who does as it distorts the balance too much. There is no downside to it as ther would be IRL as supplies would have to be diverted from other units to achieve it. I suppose an easy fix is that for the next 2 turns a new unit cannot be attached to an HQ that has used Build up. Trouble is some players would then have a rota of empty HQs doing it. Perhaps a better solution is fixed buildup cost of say 30 APs, no matter how many units attached

That said, if both players agree chaining is OK, I then have no problem with it

[Peltonx]

ORIGINAL: Harrybanana

I have no problem with HQ Buildups, but do have a problem with what is commonly called HQ Chaining. This is where a player (usually the Axis but I suppose it could be the Russian) empties an unmoved HQ of all attached units on one turn and performs an HQ Supply Buildup (at I believe a cost of only 5 APs). This causes the HQ to recieve a massive buildup of supplies with nowhere to go. On his next turn he moves the HQ forward (even beyond 20 mp from railhead) and than attaches several panzer/motorized units to the HQ. On hs next turn these units will have 45+ mps.

Thats muling supplies and not chaining. It is a real waste of trucks and is not nessary. Its been used by poeple but only works when you really have a russian over matched.

I have explained chaining more then once but here we go again.

I got the idea from the opening 2 turns of the game I am not smart enough to figue it out myself so basicly every sigle person thats played as a German has used it. HQ builds last 2 turns.

Chaining is when you HQ up one corps at a time over 4 or 5 turns. You start close to the border or on a railhead and work your way away from it over several turns.

AGN is never done
AGC turns 10-14 ish depends on when railheads get to front. New rules conserning rail repair have nerfed this somewhat. So taking Moscow is much harder.
AGS vs a runner you start turn 2 vs normal tactics (evac and run)you start turn 3.
Vs fighting forward russians of which there are few who have the skills to do this Hoooper, Kamil and Flaviusx only 3 I know of that can, you start turn 4 or 5.

The one HQ switching ect thing does not work like that at all. The fuel does not sit there for turns, they bleed off ect. Not sure why, but they dont just sit there for ever.

Muling is stupid doesn't work.

Chianing works because it keeps pressure on the enmey for 3 to 5 turns.

There is nothing amazing about it 1 HQ build up per turn I dont see it as cheating or even exploiting. It can be countered, but requires skills.

If your having an issue with chaining and can't figure out how to stop it, ask Kamil/Hoooper/TDV or Flaviusx for some advise.

M60 was doing fine then assumed I was going to start digging in for blizzard and let his guard down for a few turns.

Chianing is not some uber tactic that wins every game hehehehe.

I agree nerf muling no ones doing it, but sure nerf it. MT and I both dont mule its a waste of time, trucks and supplies.

The rail repair nerf is going to make taking Moscow and Rostov much harder now even with chaining,because its tied to the railhead.


So all the 1.05 games that were started before the nerf was put in is not a true reflextion of how hard it will be to take Moscow and Rostov now.

Leningrad is still easy, but that is a true reflextion of history. Germans were there early, but assummed the russians would surrender,which was a stpid move by Hitler and OKH.

Pelton

[Peltonx]

ORIGINAL: sillyflower

ORIGINAL: Harrybanana

I have no problem with HQ Buildups, but do have a problem with what is commonly called HQ Chaining. This is where a player (usually the Axis but I suppose it could be the Russian) empties an unmoved HQ of all attached units on one turn and performs an HQ Supply Buildup (at I believe a cost of only 5 APs). This causes the HQ to recieve a massive buildup of supplies with nowhere to go. On his next turn he moves the HQ forward (even beyond 20 mp from railhead) and than attaches several panzer/motorized units to the HQ. On hs next turn these units will have 45+ mps. I believe this is what Mike is referring to. I personally believe this is an exploit, but to date I have not seen any post by Joel or anyone one else on the Development team stating their opinion. It would be nice to know if the game designers think this is WAD or an exploit, and if the latter what if anything will they be doing about it.

I think chaining is an exploit. It gets around the 2 penalties/restrictions of buildup: distance and higher AP cost. I won't use it and will not play anyone who does as it distorts the balance too much. There is no downside to it as ther would be IRL as supplies would have to be diverted from other units to achieve it. I suppose an easy fix is that for the next 2 turns a new unit cannot be attached to an HQ that has used Build up. Trouble is some players would then have a rota of empty HQs doing it. Perhaps a better solution is fixed buildup cost of say 30 APs, no matter how many units attached

That said, if both players agree chaining is OK, I then have no problem with it

When you chain you never HQ build up the same Corp HQ's more then once during the chain.

Panzer Corp XXXX HQ's turn 3
Panzer Corp XIV HQ's turn 4
Panzer Corp XX HQ's turn 5
Panzer Corp XXXXXXXXX HQ builds up turn 6, if its even possible most times your out of range of a railhead.

Chaining is not muling.

I just fail to see how 1 HQ build-up per turn is an exploit or cheating. Thats like saying every russian player that only evac armaments is cheating becaus they know hvy means nothing and armament points everything.

Its how the game is designed and all russian players evac only hvy, just like all german player use HQ build-ups.

Pelton