How to create PBEM Equilibrium

[PvtBenjamin]

ORIGINAL: Hubert Cater

Thanks for the feedback everyone and Bill and I are discussing any potential changes. Keep in mind that we have to be careful as what we have found is that new players to the game more often than not tend to find the Axis side harder, but over time, and once they learn the nuances of the game engine and workable strategies, will eventually come around seeing that things are not as one sided as it may have initially seemed. For example, some of our most harshest criticisms of the game over at Steam all stem from the idea that the Allies are too strong and that the Axis simply cannot win.

Another critical item, and essentially the main reasons we have differing Infantry stats and Infantry Warfare research for the USSR in this release is that when we had it setup as we had done in the past, initial testing during Beta found that players simply were not able to break through or maintain any type of historical objective timeline as the Axis when first invading the USSR. So going back to those numbers would just exasperate the idea that the Allies are too tough for new players and would be more or less a non starter at this point in terms of potential changes.

The original idea was to ideally weaken the USSR for the initial stages of Barbarossa so as to allow the Axis side the ability to push deep as they did historically, but to eventually give the USSR enough tools and ability to start to push back and counter attack. If the latter portion is the bigger problem in the grand scheme of things, then that is where I believe we should put more effort into fixing than anything else. That and possibly boosting the UK to hold out a bit better between the Fall of France and the start of Barbarossa as well.

We have a list of ideas based on all the feedback and once we narrow things down on our end to hopefully an ideal set of changes that keeps in mind all of what I've written above and addresses the concerns stated here, then I think we should be good to go.

Thank You Hurbert

Given the very wide range of players abilities I don't think there is any change that will create PBEM equilibrium

I think creating some type of "handicap" (like in golf) would improve the experience for all types of players


Two ideas

1) Offer three 1939 PBEM versions (novice, intermediate and expert ) each making the Axis more difficult (like in AI). There would have to be an honor system, we will always have to deal with the seasoned player who creates a new ID and says they are new.

2) Have a game self handicap system, so seasoned players are slowed down & newer helped. Im just throwing out some ideas you know better than me.

Seasoned players attack Holland/Belgium/Lux prior to April '40 newer players don't. If someone attacks one of three the prior to March '40 USSR & US +5-8%.

France falls prior to June '40 USSR & US +5%. It would have to be more complex than Paris falling because players would just wait to take Paris with no French troops remaining.

Maybe if Axis gets a certain amount of experience at a certain date(s) US & USSR move towards Allies or get troops/research.

There are many more.

3) Some PBEM tutorials (just a few turns) that help new players practice important events like declaring war on Holland/Belgium or the initial USSR attack.

Lastly I think you lose peoples interest when the game disconnects from historic possibilities. Please consider my prior posts on adding air bases (mass bombing) and early amphibious ability (newer players rarely use either).

I ask contributors to this thread to make suggestions that would improve PBEM equilibrium not your personal game strategy.

[KorutZelva]

There already some kind of 'harder mode' for the Axis. There are events to delay axis income (the severity ranging from a couple of months to late in the war). I don't think many people are aware of it and even fewer use it though. Now that I think about it, I'll probably give it a whirl in my next axis game.

Too many arbitrary restriction on game strategies shouldn't be considered imo.

[Sugar]

Probably a simple houserule could improve balancing in PbEMs: the Axis player is not allowed to create the DAK. If he wants a DAK, he has to create and ship it himself, thereby seriously weakening Barbarossa. This would also prevent him from extending the forcepool of fighters, tanks and tac. bombers by +1.

[KorutZelva]

ORIGINAL: Sugar

Probably a simple houserule could improve balancing in PbEMs: the Axis player is not allowed to create the DAK. If he wants a DAK, he has to create and ship it himself, thereby seriously weakening Barbarossa. This would also prevent him from extending the forcepool of fighters, tanks and tac. bombers by +1.

I doubt they remove it after they went into all that trouble to have all those deployment variation depending on the situation in NA. [:)]

Maybe the middle ground would be not to tie it to a particular date other that it only fires if the UK achieve some gains in NA (and after France as fallen)?

[crispy131313]

I think one solution for the North African front could be to implement variable supply/morale scripts should the Axis unit count exceed a certain threshold with range of either Tripoli or Tobruk. Some quick numbers off the top of my head; 10 units maximum within 10 hexes of Tobruk for example. Any more and the Axis would suffer supply (towns not ports) and Morale (unit) penalties randomly similar to how Malta works. A type 2 Decision event (has ability to unit count within range) and accompanying Supply/Morale scripts would facilitate this.

I should mention that the key here is the morale scripts which would get around HQ chaining.

[elxaime]

As a still relatively new player, I have to agree with the opening comment that a more experienced Axis player will make a huge difference. I am playing games now as Axis and Allied of the same scenario. My talented Axis opponent is doing very well and I am learning a lot by watching replays of his moves. As Axis, I feel comparatively bogged-down...I am sure I am not getting as much horsepower out of the same machine as he is! So, IMHO, the simplest approach is to keep things as they are generally, but I'd add a suggestion for players that if one player is more experienced than the other, they should take the Axis side. You don't want newcomers to shy off PBEM because they get badly pummeled by an expert the first time. On the other hand, playing against a better player is the only way to learn and get better yourself.

On the UK situation between the fall of France and Barbarossa - not sure. I think there are counters to an Axis heavy emphasis on the Middle East. But isn't it historically accurate that if Der Fuhrer declared an all out attack on the Middle East he would have very likely succeeded?

[Taxman66]

Korut, that would be a good starting point, but would be much more helpful if it was part of/more obvious in the game setup than having to go to the advanced options and poking around to find the exact script to turn on.

I had my own suggestions (wont bother repeating them here), but I after reading some other AARs... I don't know what would be best. Cutting Axis MPP doesn't necessarily do it (in my game, although not over, I lucked out and Spain never joined the Axis... doesn't seem to hurt the Axis too much). In another AAR massive increase in Allied, particularly USSR, MPP didn't stop them either.

The advantages German units have in tech, experience and HQ quality are so much that they don't get hurt much when attacking and are all but immune to Soviet units even when in poor supply and morale. When Soviet tanks show up and do counter attack they then get targeted for anihilation.

Meanwhile the US and UK are faced with the choice of building up with units behind on tech, or buying tech to catch up without building units.

Throwing some other ideas that haven't been mentioned yet (just brainstorming):

Siberians appear with elite strength already applied.

All Siberians appear on rail hexes so can be opperated immediately.

Bonus MPP with Siberians, so they can be opperated without hurting Soviets builds.

Harsher Soviet Winter. All Axis units (except Finns) take a minnimum of 1 damage.

Modify the USSR no tech sharing to be that the USSR can benefit from the UK and US sharing, but not the reverse.

Some new USSR DEs that allow some tech to be bought at a discount and paid over several turns (e.g. C&C, Arty, Logistics, Industry, Unit discount Tech)

Something that should scare the Germans and not let them play the waiting game of I'm building 500-600 mpp worth of units and the Soviets are building 130 mpp worth of units, that are not as good as mine. I can afford to delay Barbarossa...

[Taxman66]

How about making Malta a size 8 city with fortifications (if it doesn't already have them) and possibly making the AA unit elite (to represent the fighter wing statuoned there).

[PvtBenjamin]

All good ideas on how to improve the game.

My point is instead of Bill and Hurbert continuously trying to tweak the game for some unattainable (because of player ability) utopia have the game balance skills. Get the game so two equal B (A,B,C,D) players find it winnable. Then have the game adjust to peoples skills either from the game origin or within the game.

ex: France falls prior to June '40 Malta becomes a 12 AA. Just an example could be multiple events.

I have been a huge SC since its origin and looked forward to the new release. I was real good player in prior versions vs the AI.

I really looked forward to playing the new PBEM. When I first started playing this PBEM I almost quit (considering that I didn't is a whole other problem) because I was getting obliterated ( I played Allies) and many events I felt just weren't possible in WW2. I think SC loses many PBEM players initially for those two reasons.

I think the objective here to improve the PBEM experience so newer players stick with the game and seasoned players of different skills can have a competitive game.

When I play someone of equal skill the game is an absolute blast. Unfortunately, A large percent of my games I am either destroying or being destroyed.

[room]

I do agree that a special expert scenario who be the best way to go.

A list of small changes I'd like: (took freely in your ideas)

1) France get an elite Garnison pop up in Monaco and the hex above Monaco wich should be fortified when Italy joins Axis. Italy never could go far in French territory while in game to achieve that you need to sacrifice north France whcih you cannot do or you get Vichy too early. Reallisticallly France should also have some thec chits already invested but it would not work as palyers would redeemed them.

2) UK should get an elite AA in Malta (it would not change the outcome imo but still make it a bit more expansive for the axis to take it). Transjordan, Egypt and Israel should have a corps build possible each (indian, NEW Z and Australian) that could then be rebuild much closer to action. UK could get a FREE French corps event that cost 50 to deploy in UK and 75 to deploy in NA.

3) Turkey deployment of units should be different if it goes on the allied side... It makes no sense that all there armies are on the USSR frontier then.

4) When GER attacks either Tunisia/Algers or Vichy, the penalty should be harsher for GER... There are breaking the treaty so it should be more international outrage (Turkey/USSR/USA) and tyhe french unattaked territories should be sick worry and mobilize (meaning one additionnal corps in Algers and one more army in Vichy)

5) USSR had the best spy network then had thec sharing from allies via the lend lease. I'd give USSR thec 1 achieved in Spying and thec sharing with allies when lend lease starts (not both way: just USSR benefits). That would not change at all USSR thec before war starts but it would help getting thec quicker afterwards. Add 2 corps to USSR at start to give it more delaying power (and rebuilding potential).

6) Just make the DAK a bit less of a bargain: could cost 700 MPPS (still cheap considering there is no transport cost)

7) London cannot be defended against a decided air assault. If the air war cannot be change, make the axis have to hold London for 1 turn. Or maybe just give London +2 defense against bombers so that it may hold (maybe?)

[PJL1973]

I was going to suggest that experience gain and tech bonuses be looked at again as a cause of whether the Axis are getting too strong. However given examples either in this thread or in the Tourney one, would seem to rule this out as a serious concern.

One thing that no-one has mentioned yet is the effect of National Morale on units, the effect of which are as follows

The Importance of National Morale
Majors with reduced National Morale will suffer a small penalty to their Unit Morale, while those with National Morale of higher than 110% will benefit from a small boost.
§§ If National Morale < 40% then Unit Morale is multiplied by 0.85.
§§ If National Morale < 75% then Unit Morale is multiplied by 0.90
§§ If National Morale < 95% then Unit Morale is multiplied by 0.95.
§§ If National Morale > 110% then Unit Morale is multiplied by 1.10

Could there be a bug in the code which are magnifying these effects? If not, perhaps these figures could be toned down to stop an Axis snowballing effect. Even as they are I can easily see the Axis, particularly the Germans getting an effective 15% bonus on unit morale. Another question is that the unit morale display may not be taking into account the effect of National Morale.

[James Taylor]

Still believe that the advantage overall goes to Allies.

The only thing I can see that would be in the Axis bias is the ability to magically transport the DAK across a contested body of water.

Even with this it remains a tough go for the Axis in NA given a competent Allied opponent.

Examining the screen shot from Sugar's game leads me to believe there is a definite anomaly, especially the advancement of air and tank tech levels to 4 in 1942 with all fighters built and most probably the rest of the Luftwaffe build limits maxed.

[Taxman66]

Then you should look at my current AAR.

[LiquidSky]

The allies do have the advantage...the problem is they take a player with a very good imagination to play.

The allies have the advantage of knowing pretty much exactly where and what the Germans are doing..and what they need to achieve. All you have to do is derail it. You don't have to try and stop it like a brick wall..just nudge it off the tracks.

For example take the BEF. It shows up in France but it doesnt have to stay there. You can send a handful of militia to play the part of shoring up French Morale....whilst the BEF goes on the offensive where the Axis least suspect it. I once set it up on the Italian border and took those Italian morale cities in the north.....and their morale stayed down even though I left right after.

A more favourite destination of mine is Egypt.....my friend doesnt bother wasting money on DAK anymore because it either some of it sets up on map out of supply, or back at Tripoli..if I havent reached it yet.

The norwegian adventure thing gives you and the french an SF. I once landed the English in Copenhagan just after they surrendered by event to the Germans...that opened up the baltic to immediately land the French in Kiel. The British navy had some fun for a turn sinking a lot of hapless German navy.

In another game I took Sicily with the SF's...I wish I had used the BEF in Northern Italy, I may have gotten them to surrender....or to the point where all I had to do was take Tripoli to knock the Italians out.

Subs a problem? Don't chase them..let them come to you!....put a picket line of a destroyer/light cruiser every couple of hexes in a line. Let them bump into you...it uses up most of their action rating, and causes them some damage. Then seriously hurt them with carrier air. Random pickets out in the Atlantic are fun against adventerous axis. I rarely have the fleet in port.

The key to defence is the entrenchment level. Make sure that no allied/russian city ever falls without a unit in it. The secret weapon is the garrison unit. It is cheaper for them to build then for the Germans to repair a hit on an armour unit. It will seriously slow their advance down if they have to clear every city out. Same with the French...put all those armies in the cities in the north...let the Maginot be corps. And dont move them EVER. Doesnt matter if he gets around them...he still has to kill them to get to Paris...and if a valuable HQ or airplane gets close because he bypassed the city..well......have fun!

I won't bother telling you the fun you can have with Russian SF or paratroopers and what happens to Finland....or what the British can do in Yugoslavia/Greece. You get the idea! The allies have a plethora of options available to them....the Axis don't. You know what they are doing....and all you have to do is delay delay delay.

Also pay attention to what type of units they buy, if he goes tank heavy, research AT etc......and don't neglect putting AA in every city/port in range. I moved a CV for upgrading into the London port midgame....unknown to me he had the Italian and German naval planes in range. He bombed the carrier with like 4-5 aircraft and did almost nothing as the London port was level 3 AA, and the CV was level (soon to be 3). I think it is only 10 mpp's per level to upgrade. Malta is another good place to upgrade the facilities. Russian cities at your fallback line.

A lot of these tricks (and others) may only work once...but they do make your Axis player less adventerous. Losing Turin and Genoa to the BEF in spring '40 is a good way to keep the Italians out of Africa next game.....where you might have an easier time in the desert. I guarentee the Germans will buy a lot of cheaper infantry units to sit uselessly in garrison after a game they lose Hamburg/Kiel/Copenhagon plus half the German navy...

[KorutZelva]

ORIGINAL: LiquidSky

The allies do have the advantage...the problem is they take a player with a very good imagination to play.

The allies have the advantage of knowing pretty much exactly where and what the Germans are doing..and what they need to achieve. All you have to do is derail it. You don't have to try and stop it like a brick wall..just nudge it off the tracks.

For example take the BEF. It shows up in France but it doesnt have to stay there. You can send a handful of militia to play the part of shoring up French Morale....whilst the BEF goes on the offensive where the Axis least suspect it. I once set it up on the Italian border and took those Italian morale cities in the north.....and their morale stayed down even though I left right after.

A more favourite destination of mine is Egypt.....my friend doesnt bother wasting money on DAK anymore because it either some of it sets up on map out of supply, or back at Tripoli..if I havent reached it yet.

The norwegian adventure thing gives you and the french an SF. I once landed the English in Copenhagan just after they surrendered by event to the Germans...that opened up the baltic to immediately land the French in Kiel. The British navy had some fun for a turn sinking a lot of hapless German navy.

In another game I took Sicily with the SF's...I wish I had used the BEF in Northern Italy, I may have gotten them to surrender....or to the point where all I had to do was take Tripoli to knock the Italians out.

Subs a problem? Don't chase them..let them come to you!....put a picket line of a destroyer/light cruiser every couple of hexes in a line. Let them bump into you...it uses up most of their action rating, and causes them some damage. Then seriously hurt them with carrier air. Random pickets out in the Atlantic are fun against adventerous axis. I rarely have the fleet in port.

The key to defence is the entrenchment level. Make sure that no allied/russian city ever falls without a unit in it. The secret weapon is the garrison unit. It is cheaper for them to build then for the Germans to repair a hit on an armour unit. It will seriously slow their advance down if they have to clear every city out. Same with the French...put all those armies in the cities in the north...let the Maginot be corps. And dont move them EVER. Doesnt matter if he gets around them...he still has to kill them to get to Paris...and if a valuable HQ or airplane gets close because he bypassed the city..well......have fun!

I won't bother telling you the fun you can have with Russian SF or paratroopers and what happens to Finland....or what the British can do in Yugoslavia/Greece. You get the idea! The allies have a plethora of options available to them....the Axis don't. You know what they are doing....and all you have to do is delay delay delay.

Also pay attention to what type of units they buy, if he goes tank heavy, research AT etc......and don't neglect putting AA in every city/port in range. I moved a CV for upgrading into the London port midgame....unknown to me he had the Italian and German naval planes in range. He bombed the carrier with like 4-5 aircraft and did almost nothing as the London port was level 3 AA, and the CV was level (soon to be 3). I think it is only 10 mpp's per level to upgrade. Malta is another good place to upgrade the facilities. Russian cities at your fallback line.

A lot of these tricks (and others) may only work once...but they do make your Axis player less adventerous. Losing Turin and Genoa to the BEF in spring '40 is a good way to keep the Italians out of Africa next game.....where you might have an easier time in the desert. I guarentee the Germans will buy a lot of cheaper infantry units to sit uselessly in garrison after a game they lose Hamburg/Kiel/Copenhagon plus half the German navy...

Call me Thomas but I need to see to believe. Get in that Tourney and climb the pyramid going on an allied tear. That's valid invitation for all 'Allied wizards' out there. [:)]

From the outside, and apart from a few valid but common knowledge advice (ala entrench and don't move and picket the sea for sub interception) I don't see strategies that are likely to work against non-scrubbish Axis opposition (with the notable exception of moving the BEF to Egypt).

A garrison defense in the USSR is free xp training camp. By the time you want to counter-attack, you'll be facing a 3 pip Axis army across the board. 50% chance of a successful intervention in finland, potentially tanking USSR readiness, is a bad gamble.

[PvtBenjamin]

Agreed Korut. I once played someone (Axis) that I took Rome in early '41 I dont use that game as an example of a viable strategy.

Currently the game isn't winnable by Allies against a top Axis player period.

Again from my initial post and intent in this thread.

"I ask contributors to this thread to make suggestions that would improve PBEM equilibrium not your personal game strategy."

[Taxman66]

I think the only time a mass of Russian GAR defense might be useful is if Germany went heavy on tech/quality (i.e. fewer but already high level experience units).

[James Taylor]

Are you referring to the game with Rannug?

If so and I read it correctly, did you not initiate any action with the Commonwealth in NA after the Italians first joined in May of 40?

[James Taylor]

The point is we do not see an Axis bias, so there are no suggestions for establishing equilibrium.

[James Taylor]

What happened to the bidding system? When a side is perceived as having an advantage by both players have them bid MPPs for playing that side.

The winner spots his opponent with the MPPs he bid for that side.