Panzers and Game Balance

[Rasputitsa]

ORIGINAL: doomtrader
Currently there is a common mechanism for the rail damage, it would be hard to implement different setting for wide rails.

I suspected that it would be the case and not expecting a change in the whole game system, but if it could be modded to increase the overall rail repair times beyond the existing 3 turns, or increasing the odds of rail damage occurring, to be used by those who want it. It would be less realistic for Western Europe, but the supply effects are not so significant there.

Otherwise, I would mod rail repair to go to max delay for all weather conditions, e.i. all repair takes 3 turns, as the best for now.

Does the common mechanism 'hard' to change, mean never, or maybe sometime. [:)]

[jjdenver]

ORIGINAL: doomtrader
Currently there is a common mechanism for the rail damage, it would be hard to implement different setting for wide rails.

Have you thought of doing something like rail damage that affects all rails? It would probably have little effect in Western Europe but the right effect in the East....

[doomtrader]

Actual mechanism is located in consts.ini file
[Railroads]
MaxRepairTimeAfterOwnerChange = 3
RepairChanceForWeather = 90;35;50

First value represent maximum time after which the rails will be auto repaired.
Second line values are describing % chance to repair the rails earlier, dependable on the weather.

[Razz1]

The railroad repair rate is fairly accurate.
One problem is the SR movement.

We need a parameter to define the range a unit can Strategically Redeploy from one hex to another.

According to German calculations, on the average, a supply or troop train could cover about 500 miles a day.

So that's about 38 hexes per turn.

This doesn't solve the big problem but will help.

A bigger problem is capacity. Capacity was not there.

The only way to limit this is to reduce the the availability of SR points. You could put a cap on it but an easier quick fix would be to reduce the SR points at start of game for Germany and then increase the cost to buy more SR points or increase the SR cost to move a unit using.

[Rasputitsa]

ORIGINAL: doomtrader
Actual mechanism is located in consts.ini file
[Railroads]
MaxRepairTimeAfterOwnerChange = 3
RepairChanceForWeather = 90;35;50

First value represent maximum time after which the rails will be auto repaired.
Second line values are describing % chance to repair the rails earlier, dependable on the weather.

Thanks, looking at that. [:)]

[Rasputitsa]

ORIGINAL: Razz
This doesn't solve the big problem but will help.

A bigger problem is capacity. Capacity was not there.

Thanks, somewhere in here are adjustments that may come near to an historical perspective. [:)]

[JLPOWELL]

If anything Razz understates the limitations, but perhaps overestimates the distances.

US army estimates for trains was (War Department publication TM-E 30-451 dated 15 March 1945)

"The average German movement appears to average from 150 to 200 miles per day for long movements within Germany, and about 60 miles daily in areas near the combat zone."
This is West Front under Allied air interdiction late in the war, but other references within the same document indicate that much more than 400-500 miles per day is a practical maximum if unimpeded and that near enemy lines 100 mi per day is an effective maximum. Further that the rail heads tended to be 50+ miles behind the front line (somewhat more during offensive operations. Loading and unloading of a unit takes up a day as well. So in a week you are looking at something closer to 2100 miles (1/2 day load; 1/2 day unload; 5 days at 400mi; one day at 100 mi) This is just under 3400km.

Using this much lower estimate (compared to the 500 miles per day or 3500 miles or about 5600 km) The road distance between between Cologne Germany (Far West) and Kazan Tatarstan (former USSR) which is about as long a trip as one would contemplate in ToF could be done in a week with a road distance of 3272 km.

All that said accommodation of this in the game may add more complexity than its worth. Most rail movements simply are not going to be this far.

The more important point Razz makes is that rail capacity is the limiting factor. In ToF it is pretty cheap and Germany IMO gets too much while other contries are significantly short changed the UK for example and my favorite USA which is given 4[X(] REALLY 4???? Less than Romania try giving them 34 then cut it in half (for PTO vrs ETO)and you still underestimate relative to Germany getting 16 IMO) And of course giving USSR only 4 points is an absolutely amazing underestimation of capacity(at least relative to German capacity or Romanian LOL[X(]). I expect this can best be tweaked by changing the strategic movement allowances (at start) and the cost of extra capacity. Perhaps strategic bombing could 'kill' capacity points forcing rebuilds (reference the 'transportation plan')

It is worth noting that SR points are also used for aircraft Strategic Movement (with a $ cost added)

Razz's suggesting regarding SR points looks like the best and simplest to implement way to address this.

ORIGINAL: Razz

The railroad repair rate is fairly accurate.
One problem is the SR movement.

We need a parameter to define the range a unit can Strategically Redeploy from one hex to another.

According to German calculations, on the average, a supply or troop train could cover about 500 miles a day.

So that's about 38 hexes per turn.

This doesn't solve the big problem but will help.

A bigger problem is capacity. Capacity was not there.

The only way to limit this is to reduce the the availability of SR points. You could put a cap on it but an easier quick fix would be to reduce the SR points at start of game for Germany and then increase the cost to buy more SR points or increase the SR cost to move a unit using.

According to German calculations, on the average, a supply or troop train could cover about 500 miles a day

[JLPOWELL]

Just took a look at the SR numbers in ToF Wow what an eye opener. See below:

Germany 16
Italy 9
France 9 (really same as Italy???)
Romania 6
UK 6 (you got to be kidding same as Romania... REALLY)
USA 4 (this is the most amazing number I have seen in this game and there are some doozies but WOW four Wow California likely had 10 not to mention the remaining 47 states)[X(][X(][X(][X(][X(]
USSR 4 Seriously 66% of Romania [X(][X(][X(]
Slovakia 3 Wow almost as much as the USA

I had no idea Romania was such a transportation super power (my best guess is actual capacity was about 2-3% of US capacity to haul freight) so relative to US Romania should get about a tenth of a SR point if US gets 4.

Does anybody proof this stuff?

[Razz1]

1) I calculate hexes to be just over 13 miles, hence 38 hexes per turn.

An average turn is 8 days so that comes out to about 500 miles per week.

This is very close to you 60 miles per day. 60*8= 480miles per turn or close to 38 hexes.

If there was a parameter to limit the distance of SR it won't hurt either side much as usually you don't have to cover a long distance of 38 hexes. It is usually 15 to 20 maximum.

Most of the time it is less distance.

2) Limiting deployment cities to 5 in Germany and 6 in Russia could fix that issue. If you have to deploy from that distance a limit on SR distance would become a factor as a few times it would take two turns to SR to the Front. However, there is a problem with this. In real life the Germans captured a major RR hub in Estonia which is much closer to the front. That distance is close enough to do it in one turn.

3) Concerning RR drop off point being 50 to 60 miles from the front... we already have this as the last few hexes you captured are being repaired, so the drop off point is be well behind the front unless you wait a couple of turns.
So it looks like we are in agreement.

Third Reich already has increased capacity limits and slightly increased repair time for RR. [8D]

[Razz1]

No big deal.. UK has several trains. Romania built most of the trains in the war.
France also uses several trains.

USA.. there's no place to use trains.. Besides they have enough PP's to buy anything.

Also SR does not represent trains. It represents all forms of strategic movement, barge boats ships etc...

This is why it costs SR to move planes.

ORIGINAL: JLPOWELL

Just took a look at the SR numbers in ToF Wow what an eye opener. See below:

Germany 16
Italy 9
France 9 (really same as Italy???)
Romania 6
UK 6 (you got to be kidding same as Romania... REALLY)
USA 4 (this is the most amazing number I have seen in this game and there are some doozies but WOW four Wow California likely had 10 not to mention the remaining 47 states)[X(][X(][X(][X(][X(]
USSR 4 Seriously 66% of Romania [X(][X(][X(]
Slovakia 3 Wow almost as much as the USA

I had no idea Romania was such a transportation super power (my best guess is actual capacity was about 2-3% of US capacity to haul freight) so relative to US Romania should get about a tenth of a SR point if US gets 4.

Does anybody proof this stuff?

[JLPOWELL]

Lets just throw out some SR numbers which may make more sense:
Looks like the designers gave everyone 3 so they could transport an infantry corps.

Looking primarily at transportation infrastructure and GDP for my guide
USA 20 (just for the ETO portion total would be at least 40)
GE 14
USSR 10
UK 10
FR 9
IT 6
PO 4
Everyone else 3 or 1 if really small practically speaking the minors would be using an allied major's capacity.

[JLPOWELL]

SR is an abstraction for transportation infrastructure. Primarily rail but other types as well. Effectively the US could fly long range aircraft to re-base. The game allows ftrs which was not as accurate but you can get a fighter to or for that matter any light aircraft to Europe its been done with Cessna 150's which are pretty limited performance aircraft. In ToF the most common use of SR for UK and US is aircraft re-positioning which really cost's more than it should in game terms and is really more of supply issue than a unit movement issue in any case.

Razz, Your statement "Romania built most of the trains in the war." makes no sense as written it implies Romania made more than half of all trains in the world. To even imply they made more than either USSR or USA of course is not accurate. Locomotive or rolling stock production is not particularly relevant to this except as a secondary indicator. The idea that Romania had 150% of Soviet transportation capability (by any measure) is BEYOND ABSURD.


The main area where this breaks down is looking at USSR vrs German transport capacity 4 vrs 16 which is absolutely silly.

ORIGINAL: Razz

No big deal.. UK has several trains. Romania built most of the trains in the war.
France also uses several trains.

USA.. there's no place to use trains.. Besides they have enough PP's to buy anything.

Also SR does not represent trains. It represents all forms of strategic movement, barge boats ships etc...

This is why it costs SR to move planes.

ORIGINAL: JLPOWELL

Just took a look at the SR numbers in ToF Wow what an eye opener. See below:

Germany 16
Italy 9
France 9 (really same as Italy???)
Romania 6
UK 6 (you got to be kidding same as Romania... REALLY)
USA 4 (this is the most amazing number I have seen in this game and there are some doozies but WOW four Wow California likely had 10 not to mention the remaining 47 states)[X(][X(][X(][X(][X(]
USSR 4 Seriously 66% of Romania [X(][X(][X(]
Slovakia 3 Wow almost as much as the USA

I had no idea Romania was such a transportation super power (my best guess is actual capacity was about 2-3% of US capacity to haul freight) so relative to US Romania should get about a tenth of a SR point if US gets 4.

Does anybody proof this stuff?

[gwgardner]

ORIGINAL: JLPOWELL

Just took a look at the SR numbers in ToF Wow what an eye opener. See below:

Germany 16
Italy 9
France 9 (really same as Italy???)
Romania 6
UK 6 (you got to be kidding same as Romania... REALLY)
USA 4 (this is the most amazing number I have seen in this game and there are some doozies but WOW four Wow California likely had 10 not to mention the remaining 47 states)[X(][X(][X(][X(][X(]
USSR 4 Seriously 66% of Romania [X(][X(][X(]
Slovakia 3 Wow almost as much as the USA

I had no idea Romania was such a transportation super power (my best guess is actual capacity was about 2-3% of US capacity to haul freight) so relative to US Romania should get about a tenth of a SR point if US gets 4.

Does anybody proof this stuff?

Just to address some of those points:

I believe the listings of country resources at start of the Grand Campaign scenario are not accurate. In the Case Gelb game I'm currently playing (later in the war), for instance, Romania has 4 SMPs, Russia 6, Germany something like 24.

It was a design decision to give minors, such as Slovakia, a minimum of 3 SMPs to allow for the rail movement of at least 1 corps. Having a corps, and not being able to move it anywhere, is no fun.

Romania has 4 because of that design decision mentioned above, and I guess the developers gave it one more because of a higher production capacity than some of the other minors?

Why Russia has only 6: again, design decisions, reflecting less efficiency in rail movement, NOT simply how many miles of track were available. Perhaps because of the much longer distances of transport, poorer upkeep, etc. I do know that the scenario designers spent a lot of time trying to make OOBs and resources on map as historically realistic as possible. The SMP totals were not chosen out of thin air, but had multiple factors built into them.

I've never noticed how many SMPs the US has early in the game. It's insignificant because only a tiny portion of the US is on the map, and strategic movement within the US is simply not part of the game. If it were, then of course the SMPs for the US would be far higher. For later in the war, when the US is on the ground in Europe, that lower SMP figure makes sense. To get more, the US player/planner has to budget for more in his invasion planning.

As both you and Razz have discussed, the distances a unit can travel on rail in one turn are indeed not accurate in the game. I would like to see a distance per turn limit.

[JLPOWELL]

Gary,

Dispute my opinions if you will this game is an abstraction after all. But you may have noticed that when it comes to verifiable facts I have a pretty good track record (find a factual error in any of my posts there may be some but I bet they are VERY RARE) Facts like "The road distance between between Cologne Germany (Far West) and Kazan Tatarstan" I used are easy to verify and I generally quote my sources when the information is a bit obscure.

See responses to your points after each point....

ORIGINAL: gwgardner

ORIGINAL: JLPOWELL

Just took a look at the SR numbers in ToF Wow what an eye opener. See below:

Germany 16
Italy 9
France 9 (really same as Italy???)
Romania 6
UK 6 (you got to be kidding same as Romania... REALLY)
USA 4 (this is the most amazing number I have seen in this game and there are some doozies but WOW four Wow California likely had 10 not to mention the remaining 47 states)[X(][X(][X(][X(][X(]
USSR 4 Seriously 66% of Romania [X(][X(][X(]
Slovakia 3 Wow almost as much as the USA

I had no idea Romania was such a transportation super power (my best guess is actual capacity was about 2-3% of US capacity to haul freight) so relative to US Romania should get about a tenth of a SR point if US gets 4.

Does anybody proof this stuff?

Just to address some of those points:

I believe the listings of country resources at start of the Grand Campaign scenario are not accurate. In the Case Gelb game I'm currently playing (later in the war), for instance, Romania has 4 SMPs, Russia 6, Germany something like 24. - JLPOWELL sorry WRONG this is easy to verify just open up a new GC game and check (see below)

It was a design decision to give minors, such as Slovakia, a minimum of 3 SMPs to allow for the rail movement of at least 1 corps. Having a corps, and not being able to move it anywhere, is no fun. - JLPOWELL I addressed this point in my original post and agree

Romania has 4 because of that design decision mentioned above, and I guess the developers gave it one more because of a higher production capacity than some of the other minors? - JLPOWELL Romania has 6 like other small minors IMO even three is artificially high compared to Great Powers

Why Russia has only 6: again, design decisions, reflecting less efficiency in rail movement, NOT simply how many miles of track were available. Perhaps because of the much longer distances of transport, poorer upkeep, etc. I do know that the scenario designers spent a lot of time trying to make OOBs and resources on map as historically realistic as possible. The SMP totals were not chosen out of thin air, but had multiple factors built into them. - JLPOWELL I disagree the SMP totals were not given much thought IMP and again check your facts USSR has 4

I've never noticed how many SMPs the US has early in the game. It's insignificant because only a tiny portion of the US is on the map, and strategic movement within the US is simply not part of the game. If it were, then of course the SMPs for the US would be far higher. For later in the war, when the US is on the ground in Europe, that lower SMP figure makes sense. To get more, the US player/planner has to budget for more in his invasion planning. - JLPOWELL They are allocated 4 which is absolutely off the wall US had infrastructure and economy of the next two largest combined and then some why make someone 'budget for' something they already had in abundance? BTW IMO the US economy is underestimated in comparison to all others in the game by almost any measure

As both you and Razz have discussed, the distances a unit can travel on rail in one turn are indeed not accurate in the game. I would like to see a distance per turn limit. - JLPOWELL as I indicated Razz had some mathematical problems with his argument (500 miles per day somehow morphed into 500 miles per week) I included the math used in my post arithmetic like any fact is easy to check....

[Razz1]

I don't know what you are trying to illustrate in your post.

The arrow is SR points. The picture of the transport is ship transport points.

Re-read my post. I suggested 500 miles per week based upon 60 mile a day concerning capacity problems

[battlevonwar]

I skimmed through the Transport Capacity argument that arose here. I'd say stick the balance issues.

The only way to be realistic with Transporting is price. Penalizing a player for jumping around...limit movement too too much and you will have a very WW1 Style game. I admit it's very odd to see 500,000 --- a Million men relocate in a game turn. : )

If it cost 2 Turns with of PPs though : )

[battlevonwar]

I have taken onto a new war more interesting than my past 4. A PBEM game again designed to see if the Axis can be thwarted on all Majors Hard vs JLPowell.

Well, instantly both ran into normal hurdles. Long War with France, great fun. Balanced enough. Early Russian Invasion(he crashed his moral too early and stalled) Events started firing, left right and center. Issue is now that the events are following a history we have changed a little too closely. I was winning in North Africa got DAK(not complaining, I can hold the whole continent of Africa with that and without it I'd be out)

Secondly, I have found that Tac Air is too powerful for this reason. You own all coastal waterways and since the map is only so big, that is most of the map. I shall post up in our AAR how many Naval losses to ship on ship or Carrier based. Tac Air is the Sniper of the Navy in TOF. I attribute at least 50 Navy deaths to it of Surface ships on all sides or 100 by games end if we make it there.(which is nearly every ship but the few that wander out to do other business)

Most importantly and finally a stalemate has erupted. I wonder though is this historical. Germans penetrated deep enough on the Eastern Front(near original borders with Poland mud in Ukraine), but due to scripts we both have dug in and hold the line. He's getting units he doesn't need and I'm only killing what I figure I need to. I cannot penetrate in Russia in 1941, impossible... Panzer Korps can get a few cities but they and they alone own the field. Masses of other units are fodder. Without Russian Panzer Korps he cannot mount any offensives, so it will be up to the Western Allies to develop this super weapon or 20 bombers could win?

So my point is partially proved. Panzers own the field and they do break the monotony of WW1 style trenches and I can see how the scripts were invented to prevent that from happening and keep the game from getting frozen. Even they cannot run forever but the other units don't do much. The Russians have no Back Breakers. Wonder if they later develop these?

I would think that to even the game up, as our game looks like a stalemate until an Atom Bomb, I would suggest a similar weapon for the Allies at some point plus self choice in Multi player at least for the very very decisive events.

[JLPOWELL]

Pretty much what I see . CRAAAAzy events only subtracting from the game (Don't care much for fighting the 'instant UBER level 3 panzer teleported into Africa)but on overall balance its not the main problem.

Ships are sitting ducks to tac air (Germany hardly sunk ANYTHING during the war). What is worse ships can't kill other ships. Takes about 10 carrier airstrikes to kill a single surface ship beyond silly. Sure subs were hard to find. But CV attacks were absolutely deadly during WW2. Carriers are mostly harmless in ToF and surface ships vrs surface ships is like watching toddlers fighting with pillows absolutely no harm done whatsoever for weeks in the same zone. What was Raider thinking during the actual war why was the Bismark not shelling London. OH I remember it got blasted when it poked its nose out (effectively in a single ToF turn). In ToF you can park the RM in the channel with a bit of ftr cover and essentially camp out without fear of surface attacks. And yes the US is near the second 'star' for 'the bomb'. If the Germans can't break a line of Russian infantry corps in 41 who is going to push thru a row of German level 4 infantry corps later in the game. Like BattleVonWar says the only solution may be the 'Los Alamos' solution... I do have a few ideas I want to try however so stay tuned...

BTW we are playing on Hard and are awash in cash (I don't have an exact count but I have Killed 3-4 German armor corps and still see about 6 or so with more building I am sure. I expect to see 50 or so by 1944 LOL just don't trip that infantry size limit or you will go bust.... LMAO. I notice that Germany has given up on offensive operations in the USSR. They have attacked Switzerland and Greece 'for the PP' no doubt.

I am fortifying the UK pretty heavily as Germany could still try an invasion (Heck I worry they could invade the US Invasions ALWAYS get thru. If a few (perhaps only one?) essentially unescorted German divisions can take (then loose to counter attacks as as I had quite a few units nearby as well) a defended Alexandria with 4 aircraft carriers and a lot of BB CA and SS (not to mention 3 ftrs to cover did I mention we have plenty of $$ on hard?) in the zone NOTHING will stop an invasion.

ORIGINAL: battlevonwar

I have taken onto a new war more interesting than my past 4. A PBEM game again designed to see if the Axis can be thwarted on all Majors Hard vs JLPowell.

Well, instantly both ran into normal hurdles. Long War with France, great fun. Balanced enough. Early Russian Invasion(he crashed his moral too early and stalled) Events started firing, left right and center. Issue is now that the events are following a history we have changed a little too closely. I was winning in North Africa got DAK(not complaining, I can hold the whole continent of Africa with that and without it I'd be out)

Secondly, I have found that Tac Air is too powerful for this reason. You own all coastal waterways and since the map is only so big, that is most of the map. I shall post up in our AAR how many Naval losses to ship on ship or Carrier based. Tac Air is the Sniper of the Navy in TOF. I attribute at least 50 Navy deaths to it of Surface ships on all sides or 100 by games end if we make it there.(which is nearly every ship but the few that wander out to do other business)

Most importantly and finally a stalemate has erupted. I wonder though is this historical. Germans penetrated deep enough on the Eastern Front(near original borders with Poland mud in Ukraine), but due to scripts we both have dug in and hold the line. He's getting units he doesn't need and I'm only killing what I figure I need to. I cannot penetrate in Russia in 1941, impossible... Panzer Korps can get a few cities but they and they alone own the field. Masses of other units are fodder. Without Russian Panzer Korps he cannot mount any offensives, so it will be up to the Western Allies to develop this super weapon or 20 bombers could win?

So my point is partially proved. Panzers own the field and they do break the monotony of WW1 style trenches and I can see how the scripts were invented to prevent that from happening and keep the game from getting frozen. Even they cannot run forever but the other units don't do much. The Russians have no Back Breakers. Wonder if they later develop these?

I would think that to even the game up, as our game looks like a stalemate until an Atom Bomb, I would suggest a similar weapon for the Allies at some point plus self choice in Multi player at least for the very very decisive events.

[aspqrz02]

Given that we have an AI that is ... less than stellar ... perhaps one way of making that work to make the game more historical in gross outcomes is to increase the detection and combat values of allied warships massively and let the German AI produce lots of ships that will get sunk quickly.

For human vs human games, well, the Axis characters will soon realise that they are simply wasting PP and stop building anything but Subs, at least the canny ones will [;)]

The wasted PP will, at least, not be spent on uber-panzers, and may make the game more believable.

As for the DAK, have the event make it appear in Rome, and require the Italians to transport it across in the face of the improved Allied Navies [8D]

Phil

[gwgardner]

If you've killed 3 or 4 of his Panzer Corps, and you see six more in the field now, then you can be assured your opponent is failing to spend elsewhere as needed.

I'm playing on hard level as Germans. I've never had more than 8 Panzer corps, because I cannot afford to build them. I have to spend on reinforcements, subs, occasional STPs. After that, in order to afford a Panzer corps, I have to save every other available PP for at least 5 turns to get enough to purchase a Panzer Corps. And then there's a 16 week production cycle.

So let him have his extra Panzer corps or two, and go exploit whatever else he is failing to purchase that he desperately needs, like subs.

And this bit you guys keep mentioning about 'uber panzers.' I have level three Panzers at full strength, with 30 experience points and a good commander, and their strength is around 30. That goes down quickly as the unit takes losses or gets reduced supply. My level 3 infantry is at about 10 strength points. So my Panzers are around 3 times the strength of my infantry - exactly where Doomtrader said was reasonable.