Different cost in AP to create cavalry corps

[Stamb]

i fully agree with AlbertN

such things must be validated by a game
there is not even a point to discuss if you should trust or not trust some other player

what do you even classify as an abuse?

1. is using naval HQ to block supply an abuse? i found this info by reading manual
so looks like its not an abuse, or not?
2. is using airborne brigades to create guards RD an abuse? i found this info by reading manual
so looks like not an abuse if you create 1 guards RD, and 2 divisions also looks ok
what about 3? 4? 5? 20?
3. this theory that i proposed here, and that was confirmed by other player, is probably an abuse, but what if other player is not in this forum and you just accepted some random game from a game menu and you have no way to communicate with other player?
4. i was posting a lot about Soviet super abilities when i was playing as an Axis and i was even claimed as an Axis moaner
is it an abuse just to play as Soviets before panzers fix? in my opinion yes (and despite only 1 game as a Soviets i am ready to play against any top Axis player on an pre panzer fix patch)
while other people were saying that Soviets are not overpowered

why this validations are not done, its another question
lack of development time/just forgotten/nobody thought about it/etc..
its all fine

but there should be no question about trust for an online game for a reason that i described above

[AlbertN]

I and Stamb do not see eye to eye for the 'panzers'. I think they're fine now he thinks they're OP.
We've our own disagreements.

But I believe it's universal that on an internet game it's down to the company producing the game to fix the bugs and the holes allowing exploits.

The supposed 'obscure' formula I suggested is rather simple and if it is 'obscure' for anyone playing WITE2 I suspect they struggle with the game all together.

CAV.Corp = 3 Each
CAV.Div = 1 Each
Total CAV.Units allowed = X

X can be divided among Corps and Divs as a player see fit. IF X = 60, there can be 60 divisions, OR 20 corps, OR 10 corps and 30 divisions OR any other combination that does not exceed 60.
That solves the abuse.

OR once a Corp is formed it cannot be split anymore. That is even easier to code and to understand.

If basic math is obscure, pardon me, but one best go play Mario Bros or Tetris or so...

[loki100]

...

If basic math is obscure, pardon me, but one best go play Mario Bros or Tetris or so...

thank you - I will take your advice and find a game suitable for my level

[FortTell]

CAV.Corp = 3 Each
CAV.Div = 1 Each
Total CAV.Units allowed = X

X can be divided among Corps and Divs as a player see fit.

Does not really work. The idea behind the original limit was to stop the production of new cav divs come 1942, as the limit plummets from 68 to 13. 99% of the time, the Soviet player will have more than 13 cav divisions remaining. Yet the player should still have the opportunity to create their 14 cav corps. If a player is allowed to create corps, they should be allowed to create them from scratch, as the other types of corps allow them to. This means that your proposed X must be above 14*3 (for corps) + ~40-50 (cav divs around January 42).

However, ~15 of those divs are locked in the Far East and will disband slowly throughout 1942. Which will free up 15 capacity points for extra divs. But the idea was to mostly forbid creating new divisions in 1942 and later. So how would your formula work then?

[AlbertN]

CAV.Corp = 3 Each
CAV.Div = 1 Each
Total CAV.Units allowed = X

X can be divided among Corps and Divs as a player see fit.

Does not really work. The idea behind the original limit was to stop the production of new cav divs come 1942, as the limit plummets from 68 to 13. 99% of the time, the Soviet player will have more than 13 cav divisions remaining. Yet the player should still have the opportunity to create their 14 cav corps. If a player is allowed to create corps, they should be allowed to create them from scratch, as the other types of corps allow them to. This means that your proposed X must be above 14*3 (for corps) + ~40-50 (cav divs around January 42).

However, ~15 of those divs are locked in the Far East and will disband slowly throughout 1942. Which will free up 15 capacity points for extra divs. But the idea was to mostly forbid creating new divisions in 1942 and later. So how would your formula work then?

Each Corp = 3 Cavalry Div.

14 Corps = 42 divisions in terms of math. Down to the player if to use on map divisions or create corps from scratch. So that plus 13 mundane division the CAP should be 55.
Anything above the CAP gets disbanded prioritizing what was historically disbanded (is labelled to disband).
Otherwise it gets disbanded at random.
It litterally avoids abuse at this point of inflating beyond the historical limits. IF that is what is wanted.

That helps with the fact someone can just form up corps and split them in divisions.

[FortTell]

Anything above the CAP gets disbanded prioritizing what was historically disbanded (is labelled to disband).
Otherwise it gets disbanded at random.

And that is where it gets complicated. This is entirely new logic for the game, because we cannot reuse the standard "build corps from existing divisions" routine, as it is not allowed to build corps from units with a disband date. Neither is using units from TB to create units elsewhere.

The implementation will require significant programming attention.

[AlbertN]

Then all that suffices is that a Corp once formed sticks to be a Corp forever and cannot be split.
Easily justificable as the Soviet command chain is both cumbersome AND they were abandoning the divisional standard to move to 'corps' sized stuff - and it' ought to be simple to code.

It's no different of other units that cannot be split.
It will also solve the forming, breaking down, forming up again of Rifle Guard Corps.

There is a problem and the problem must be solved or it's prone to abuse.
One can do the harder way, the simpler way, etc - but a problem present should be erased.

[Stamb]

It will also solve the forming, breaking down, forming up again of Rifle Guard Corps.

i do not think this is a problem
otherwise players will stop at 6 wins
and try not to use guards rifle corps until a real NEED, to preserve free slot for other divisions
which will be a total nightmare

[AlbertN]

That is a level of micromanagement I'd not want to get to - but I still feel it would be iffy.

I'd just have Guard Rifle Corps formed up by 3 Guard Divisions and it cuts the whole ordeal.
But IF someone wants to keep behind their own quality hammer to keep that division that is mundane, from upgrading to guard, kudos to the German player that needs not to worry of the red beast to attack their forces!