WitE 2

[Peltonx]

So the fun begins now.

morveal has the answers but will 2by3 be keep being stuborn?

Yes silly I love to keep misspelling stuffffff to find out who the teachers are

Forumbane

[RedLancer]

Have you ever stopped to consider that what you are asking may not actually be possible? There is more than code at play - there is also time and resources. In 5 years whilst you have identified the symptoms you have been unable to suggest how a 'cure' might be delivered.

If you want to get someone to do something that you cannot do, telling them that they are stupid, stubborn, lazy and biased is not a good basis for your request and crosses an unacceptable line.

[Mehring]

ORIGINAL: Pelton

ORIGINAL: Mehring

ORIGINAL: Pelton




The problem is the game was designed around the thought of tring to get players to attack attack attack as Hitler and Stalin did.

Which is why the retreat lose combat model - which has never gotten close to historical loses and has never worked as it forces players to turtle. Because there is no reward for Germany to attack WitE or WitW.

So the design to make players attack makes them turtle?
Theoretically possible but in spite of its faults, completely untrue in the case of WitE. Turtling is a choice, and a bad one.

DoH your as stupid as the designers.

If I attack and win and the ratio is 1 to 1

If I do nothing and defend and lose the ratio is 1 to 1

If I do nothing and win and the ratio is 1 to 3

you have to be Theoretically, ignoranant

Bro your just wrong as GG is, red is and all the other pro people area for the last 5 yrs.

BUT IN MT WORDS THE revolutionary thought for these guys.

Get off your lazy asses and fix the problem or keep being REDFAN BOYS

Love being called ignorant by pelton. He seems to have forgotten that though ratios have their place, war is ultimately an art, that only the artless will drown in self pity at the one sided examination of a problem that appears to favour the 'other' side.

As for 'REDFAN BOYS' I enjoy both sides but generally play Axis, at which I have never lost a game yet.

"Boo-hoo, Gary made it too difficult for me" [8|]

[swkuh]

KUDOS @ Michael T & Morvael for the latest fuel exploit and the expected fix.

Wonder how many more there are that are not reported.

[SigUp]

I'm a bit curious just how the relationship between morale, experience and combat looks like. From my (philosphical) point of view I'd suggest a division between morale and experience along the lines of:

morale: impacts the 'stubborness' of a unit attacking and defending ground, determining how many shots/combat rounds are needed before the unit breaks off and retreats. Also determines the number of MP needed to cross into enemy held territory. No influence on the combat performance of a unit.

experience: determines the combat performance of a unit, the rate at which the unit takes losses per shot/combat round and the losses inflicted per shot/combat round.

Along these lines we'd have,

German units: high morale and high experience
Finnish units: medium morale (with bonus when fighting on home soil) and high experience
Soviet units: high morale and low experience
Other axis allies: low morale and low experience (morale bonus when fighting on home soil)

So in effect if we have a German unit fighting a Soviet unit in the early stage of the war, the Soviets deal significantly less damage than the Germans and suffer far more because of the gap in experience. However, with their high morale they can drag out a fight leading to higher combat delays and higher losses when defending. When attacking the Soviets can push back a German unit if they bring enough units simply by outlasting the Germans - with the cost being units at the brink of exhaustion.

[Mehring]

ORIGINAL: Red Lancer

We are currently reworking production to centre on chassis production from which variants will then build. This has distinct advantages in the setting of historical production. Within a fixed chassis production should we allow players the ability to change variant numbers?

If it goes hand in hand with the ability to choose ground unit equipment from a list of historically available/ToO&E compatible elements as per current air units, that would be a great step forward.

While on the subject of ToOE. Are late upgrading units ever going to jump over obsolete ToOEs straight to the latest in stead of plodding through the obsolete upgrade to get to the latest? Can't see any historical basis for this outside of Stalinist/Menshevik "two-stage theory" which isn't even relevant.

[Peltonx]

ORIGINAL: Red Lancer

Have you ever stopped to consider that what you are asking may not actually be possible? There is more than code at play - there is also time and resources. In 5 years whilst you have identified the symptoms you have been unable to suggest how a 'cure' might be delivered.

If you want to get someone to do something that you cannot do, telling them that they are stupid, stubborn, lazy and biased is not a good basis for your request and crosses an unacceptable line.

Many many many people have over the years.

.08 fixes the ratio issue.

5 yrs after the fact, it was never that hard to fix in the first place.

[Peltonx]

ORIGINAL: SigUp

I'm a bit curious just how the relationship between morale, experience and combat looks like. From my (philosphical) point of view I'd suggest a division between morale and experience along the lines of:

morale: impacts the 'stubborness' of a unit attacking and defending ground, determining how many shots/combat rounds are needed before the unit breaks off and retreats. Also determines the number of MP needed to cross into enemy held territory. No influence on the combat performance of a unit.

experience: determines the combat performance of a unit, the rate at which the unit takes losses per shot/combat round and the losses inflicted per shot/combat round.

Along these lines we'd have,

German units: high morale and high experience
Finnish units: medium morale (with bonus when fighting on home soil) and high experience
Soviet units: high morale and low experience
Other axis allies: low morale and low experience (morale bonus when fighting on home soil)

So in effect if we have a German unit fighting a Soviet unit in the early stage of the war, the Soviets deal significantly less damage than the Germans and suffer far more because of the gap in experience. However, with their high morale they can drag out a fight leading to higher combat delays and higher losses when defending. When attacking the Soviets can push back a German unit if they bring enough units simply by outlasting the Germans - with the cost being units at the brink of exhaustion.

.08 starts to finally address exp so it finally matters not just all morale

[Peltonx]

ORIGINAL: Mehring

ORIGINAL: Pelton




The problem is the game was designed around the thought of tring to get players to attack attack attack as Hitler and Stalin did.

Which is why the retreat lose combat model - which has never gotten close to historical loses and has never worked as it forces players to turtle. Because there is no reward for Germany to attack WitE or WitW.

So the design to make players attack makes them turtle? Theoretically possible but in spite of its faults, completely untrue in the case of WitE. Turtling is a choice, and a bad one.

No its simple math and we have seen the disaster of german players attacking from 42 on when pockets are not possible.

You can last 4-6 months longer doing nothing but RR set-up this has been proven yrs ago

Old news

[Peltonx]

ORIGINAL: rrbill

KUDOS @ Michael T & Morvael for the latest fuel exploit and the expected fix.

Wonder how many more there are that are not reported.

HMM what?

MT has reported fuel exploit after fuel exploit over the yrs and morveal has removed all off them and other people have reported.

Be pro active not just negative, report issues, give feed back ect.

How many have you reported?

[Mehring]

ORIGINAL: Pelton

No its simple math and we have seen the disaster of german players attacking from 42 on when pockets are not possible.

You can last 4-6 months longer doing nothing but RR set-up this has been proven yrs ago

Old news

Have we? And of course it's impossible to launch a major attack through the Ardennes. Truth is history is littered with people of limited vision being bested by others who think outside the box.

As someone who cultivates their image of "best" Axis WitE player, you will be humbled to learn, actually be reminded, that I have no problem forming pockets in 42-43. I can't say for 44 as no Russian opponent has lasted that long though I think Smokey will. A rough count of eliminated units in our current game from T100-110 is 60-70.

[Erik Rutins]

Hi Pelton,

Along the line of things that we've all had plenty of information on to address over the past five years is the use of personal insults on the forum to try to get your way. You've long since been told that is unacceptable according to the forum rules and you've seen enough both on the outside and inside to know that it doesn't work or help. Passion, enthusiasm, persistence, criticism even to the point of being a pain is fine, insults are not. Given the number of warnings on this you've had in the past, we're back to an enforced cooling off period. You've got a two week vacation from the forum, please e-mail me when you feel you are ready to resume the discussion while keeping things civil.

Regards,

- Erik

[Great_Ajax]

One thing I have been advocating is strategic reserve holding boxes. Once you place a unit off-map into one of these boxes, I would like to see the unit drop outdated equipment and have priority for current OB requirements. This should encourage the player to pull units voluntary off the front and ship them back west for a refit.

Trey

ORIGINAL: Mehring

ORIGINAL: Red Lancer

We are currently reworking production to centre on chassis production from which variants will then build. This has distinct advantages in the setting of historical production. Within a fixed chassis production should we allow players the ability to change variant numbers?

If it goes hand in hand with the ability to choose ground unit equipment from a list of historically available/ToO&E compatible elements as per current air units, that would be a great step forward.

While on the subject of ToOE. Are late upgrading units ever going to jump over obsolete ToOEs straight to the latest in stead of plodding through the obsolete upgrade to get to the latest? Can't see any historical basis for this outside of Stalinist/Menshevik "two-stage theory" which isn't even relevant.

[Mehring]

ORIGINAL: el hefe

One thing I have been advocating is strategic reserve holding boxes. Once you place a unit off-map into one of these boxes, I would like to see the unit drop outdated equipment and have priority for current OB requirements. This should encourage the player to pull units voluntary off the front and ship them back west for a refit.

Trey

ORIGINAL: Mehring

ORIGINAL: Red Lancer

We are currently reworking production to centre on chassis production from which variants will then build. This has distinct advantages in the setting of historical production. Within a fixed chassis production should we allow players the ability to change variant numbers?

If it goes hand in hand with the ability to choose ground unit equipment from a list of historically available/ToO&E compatible elements as per current air units, that would be a great step forward.

While on the subject of ToOE. Are late upgrading units ever going to jump over obsolete ToOEs straight to the latest in stead of plodding through the obsolete upgrade to get to the latest? Can't see any historical basis for this outside of Stalinist/Menshevik "two-stage theory" which isn't even relevant.

I like what you're driving at but can't help feeling that holding boxes are a relic of board games. To get the reserve question and any benefits right I think you have to look at why units were withdrawn and I'm not entirely sure of the answer. Possible reasons that occur to me are combinations of garrison duty, morale recovery, rest, training, and, as you say, reequipping, but this is largely speculation. I do know that German units in the West often received a compliment of new AFV in dribs and drabs over months, so there's a question mark in my mind as to how much benefit being in a quiet sector might give.

I would add to my post above the proviso that, to reduce player omnipotence, choosing equipment types for ground units should probably not be automatically successful. Distance from the front or a units presence in its home country or non-active area might help increase morale/experience and the chance of re-equipping success.

[Tejszd]

ORIGINAL: Red Lancer

ORIGINAL: No idea

Better tools for micromanagement should be among top priorities, imho. Simply shuffling support units is a pain. It would be far, far quicker an easier if there were two windows (like in the microsoft OS) and you could drag and drop

Great idea but I'm pretty sure drag and drop is a coding impossibility unfortunately.

Why would it be impossible to have a split screen or two windows to move things between?

Many applications/games do that....

[Higgins001]

Did Pelton really get booted for calling someone 'ignoranant' or am I missing something?
That's a pretty wimpy(if not humorous) insult to be tossed over, I think.
You know he pretty much argues with his same type. I'd cut them some slack. just saying.

[Mehring]

ORIGINAL: Higgins001

Did Pelton really get booted for calling someone 'ignoranant' or am I missing something?
That's a pretty wimpy(if not humorous) insult to be tossed over, I think.
You know he pretty much argues with his same type. I'd cut them some slack. just saying.

I kind of agree with with what you say regarding ignorarant but I'd have you booted for calling me Pelton's type. Expletives to you, pal.

[Erik Rutins]

ORIGINAL: Higgins001
Did Pelton really get booted for calling someone 'ignoranant' or am I missing something?
That's a pretty wimpy(if not humorous) insult to be tossed over, I think.
You know he pretty much argues with his same type. I'd cut them some slack. just saying.

He edited his post after the fact to make it less offensive. The ban was warranted.

[Michael T]

The fact is despite Pelton's sometimes colorful language he has done more for the current state of WITE than any other poster on this forum. This forum will be boring for the next two weeks [:D]

[Michael T]

Also, most of his adversaries have done absolutely nothing for the game in terms of catching bugs or exploits yet they deride his opinions while benefiting from his research. I could describe them in only the most derogatory terms myself quite happily but then I would be banned also.....

praise be to Pelton [&o][&o][&o]

we await your return [&o][&o][&o]