2nd question RE reserves

[sjohnson]

Michael - never said you were. You are launching the ultimate in wave attacks; nothing gamey at all about them - nothing gamey in what Pelton is doing to counter in maximizing SU commitment and reserves. You have two good players here pushing the engine to the limit. A perfect game to watch.

Strategically you have Pelton in a pickle because on an operational-strategic level he has little to no space to trade before things get serious. Doesn't mean though that the model can't be improved tactically.

I'm not going to get into a debate on whether or not the Soviet 42 army (bloodied or not) should be able to achieve 1:2 or 1:3 loss ratios on the 42 German army (bloodied by winter 41 or not). Historically, my gut tells me no based on mounds of OR studies and casualty reports but it seems a sensitive subject as players get emotionally wrapped up in the game.

Won't argue with you on this point though - I can't imagine Hitler or anyone in OKH/W for that matter would have approved a pre-emptive 300 mile withdrawal during winter without someone in command being shot...Unfortunately, the game doesn't impose these types of strategic bounds on players; but, that is a separate matter than the tactical-operational modelling of the game.

[Michael T]

I am somewhat sensitve in this matter because I have invested 100's of hours in to this game. I am not going to sit idle while Pelton tries to wriggle out of his certain defeat with claims of it being broken or that I am exploiting it somehow. I was warned about this very early on by a former opponent so I have been very careful to avoid *anything* that could be perceived as cheese or otherwise.

[Helpless]

Pavel, I think people are wanting to know what this ammo fix is.

I hope it will show up soon. The major part of it is denial of huge ammo usage spikes produced by the heavy guns.

[morvael]

So the heavy guns will remain silent, when the attack will be at low odds? Seems OK to me.

[Helpless]

So the heavy guns will remain silent, when the attack will be at low odds? Seems OK to me.

There is also a change which makes heavy guns usage more restrictive once you are expending ammo. It is still possible to drain ammo of defender, but it takes a lot more efforts and can be very expensive.

[Peltonx]

ORIGINAL: Michael T

I am somewhat sensitve in this matter because I have invested 100's of hours in to this game. I am not going to sit idle while Pelton tries to wriggle out of his certain defeat with claims of it being broken or that I am exploiting it somehow. I was warned about this very early on by a former opponent so I have been very careful to avoid *anything* that could be perceived as cheese or otherwise.

Our game is fine. I trust you and respect your game play as I have stated in our personal emails/PM's ect

I don't beleive I have ever questioned your game play, but have only stated the fact that your the best GHC and SHC 41-42.

We keep on doing 1 turn per day, unless your RL slows it down or my RL work. Which has happened to both of us and we have both taken the time and told each other a head of time about RL issues.

I am not going any wheres and my offer of a draw is still on the table.

Thanks for the ammo fix, but thats not fixing the soaking issue, which will work in witw as an exploit also. Thats is how TDV does the uber blizzard time and time again. 2 ants attack a stack of 20+CV germans which disrupts allot more alrdy disrupted squads and sucks off what ever ammo they had then a single rifle div or cav corp causes a retreat to 2 infantry divisions.

At some point get some new testers already

SJ would be a great fit as he sees EVERYTHING in detail, but yet sees the exploits and loopholes that the 2by3 team seems to be totally blind to time and time again.

[Peltonx]

Thanks again for your hard work and effort to make wite better with each patch, best game ever and I will be buying witw.

[&o] Helpless

[mevstedt]

ORIGINAL: Pelton
Thats like exploit heaven for Russians.

Not only the russians can utilize this tbh. Germans use it on the Leningrad back door for example, attacking with broken down divisions to trigger reserve activations before the main assault.

[Peltonx]

ORIGINAL: mevstedt

ORIGINAL: Pelton
Thats like exploit heaven for Russians.

Not only the russians can utilize this tbh. Germans use it on the Leningrad back door for example, attacking with broken down divisions to trigger reserve activations before the main assault.

Hitman has a better way now, cleaner less loses.3 big bombing runs which disrupte defenders.

You can still do it Mt's way by doing 2 infantry assaults followed by a panzer assault. These are deliberate assaults not hasty and Corp size.

You can also do my standard old way. Load up 6 divisions with sappers/art and drop the fort 1 -2 each turn.

Soaking attacks worked 50% of the time first assault. High cost quick results, off to Moscow.

[mevstedt]

Well, thas wasn't the point though Pelton. Leningrad can be captured by frontal assault also.

The point was that the tactic isn't SHC specific as it can be used by germans as well =).

[Peltonx]

ORIGINAL: mevstedt

Well, thas wasn't the point though Pelton. Leningrad can be captured by frontal assault also.

The point was that the tactic isn't SHC specific as it can be used by germans as well =).

Because of limited counters and the huge down side, poor up side GHC can or should only do this in a few special cases.

SHC can do it 20 times a turn because of poor morale and allot more arm pts ect

[Joel Billings]

After discussing with Pavel and Gary we've concluded the manual is wrong on this and it should be 1:10, not 1:2. It's been that way since release and is what we used when testing and balancing other changes. We can't explain how it got to be 1:2 in the manual, but clearly we never had a tester put the spotlight on it like sjohnson has (thanks for that). Remember, as Pavel says there is significant randomness, and fogged up defender CV values can be very high so this makes the 1:10 not quite the extreme it seems.

For those of you wondering about the public beta changes re ammo and wave attacks, they are:

6. Changes to Combat Formulas
a) Reduced the fire of artillery elements during bombardment (2-hex) combat (primarily reduced the fire of defending artillery).
b) Defensive fire will be reduced to conserve ammunition if the attacker is relatively very small (roughly less than half the size of the defender).
c) If an artillery element is firing with its non-main gun devices only, 1/10 of the standard ammunition is used.
d) Removed very large ammo usage spikes by artillery ground elements in battle.

[Peltonx]

ORIGINAL: Joel Billings

After discussing with Pavel and Gary we've concluded the manual is wrong on this and it should be 1:10, not 1:2. It's been that way since release and is what we used when testing and balancing other changes. We can't explain how it got to be 1:2 in the manual, but clearly we never had a tester put the spotlight on it like sjohnson has (thanks for that). Remember, as Pavel says there is significant randomness, and fogged up defender CV values can be very high so this makes the 1:10 not quite the extreme it seems.

For those of you wondering about the public beta changes re ammo and wave attacks, they are:

6. Changes to Combat Formulas
a) Reduced the fire of artillery elements during bombardment (2-hex) combat (primarily reduced the fire of defending artillery).
b) Defensive fire will be reduced to conserve ammunition if the attacker is relatively very small (roughly less than half the size of the defender).
c) If an artillery element is firing with its non-main gun devices only, 1/10 of the standard ammunition is used.
d) Removed very large ammo usage spikes by artillery ground elements in battle.

So that means cheesy unrealistic/historical stuff like this is ok?

tm.asp?m=3230677

Talking reserve mode reactions. the odds were over 1;10 in both cases of reactions as were SJ's


If the battle is on the plains defender has LOS for miles and miles some times 10+. So they know if the forse attacking is 1/10th the size and will not be asking for help.

Am I reading your post right?

Also if your redusing defensive fire that only helps attacker because of less disrupted attackers, yes?

Attacking fire is uneffected and defensive fire is reduced in all cases?

I could be miss understanding, but the patch seems to help the wave attack more then hurt it as I see it, 6. Changes to Combat Formulas

It makes cheesy tactics ( link) like attacking (12 times) with brigades or divisions one at a time to trigger reactions easyer. Am I wrong?

Reaactions now over the 1:10 seem normal also, so in game its clearly not 1:2 but some wheres over 1:10 already.

Am I wrong?

[Peltonx]

It would make attacks like MTs wave assaults harder and up the combat ratio as losses will not tapper off like they do.

The losses are basicly like this now as defenders run out of ammo - 5k/2k/1k/1k
They will look more like this after patch - like 5k/4.5k/4k ect

Which will up the ratio from 3:5:1 ish into the 5-6ish:1 I think the first assault will have a slightly better chance to win, but the held losses for attacker will not drop off as they do now.


I do agree with that, but the ant soaking will be easyer will it not?

I think thats(ant attacks) the unhistorical cheese no one wants to see. I dont see how that (6.) stops that. So the only way is again for the player base to have to again put in house rules to stop the sillyness (ant attacks) because of short coming in the rule set?

I all ready see as JS, triggers over 1:10.

are you sure the engine is not already set at 1:10 and not 1:2?

Am I wrong about the cheesy ant attacks?

Just asking.

[Helpless]

I all ready see as JS, triggers over 1:10.

You don't see the odds used to determine reserve reaction. These are random CV generated prior the battle, which can be significantly different from the those in reports.

Besides odds are not the only and not the most decisive factor in reserve activation code.

[Peltonx]

Ok I agree with the "random" stuff, but does the new patch address these chessy tactics- which was the hole point of this thread to begin with?

It had nothing to do with redusing defending art fire or ammo usage, but ant attacks to get RMA like in the link.

I do like the idea of the large historical wave attacks taking high losses every wave I must say, but I don't see how it addresses SJ's and others consern about triggers.

[Helpless]

I see no issue here. Don't set units to reserve mode if you don't want them to be activated.

[timmyab]

Surely the original intention must have been 1:2.No commander, not even an AI one, is going to be daft enough to commit his reserve to a 1:10 attack.

[sjohnson]

Hi Joel & Pavel - these beta changes look really good and realistic. I like it - looking forward to seeing how it plays! Thanks for the great work.

[Flaviusx]

Pavel, this ammo fix looks pretty good, but I wonder if it would be simpler to merely make such low odds attacks cost no ammo at all to the defender. As things stand it will still be possible to run down a defender's ammo if you launch enough attacks...a much larger number with this fix than before, sure, but still a finite amount.

Somebody will contrive to figure out what that number is. Maybe the number should be infinite.

The 1:10 reserve trigger seems very low to me as well and begging for abuse. The concern here is that people will cheese the reserve activations by using ants to draw them out, and then throw in the big attack once the reserves are exhausted. Obviously the defender wants reserves to be used against attacks that actually matter.