Some German units to add

Charles22 · Post by **Charles22** » Fri Jun 23, 2000 9:55 pm

Panther: It was I who made the comment about someone else's approach to playing only defensive battles. I was making the comment under the belief that they were advocating such a scheme while playing against AI in a campaign.

I agree with you on what you say about rare units. Sure, if I will only play Gerry, I might wish every rare unit available, but when you have to fight a nation in a campaign which is the equivalent of the sci-fi force from Hell, what's the point in playing it? The user can be disciplined enough to rarely use rare units, but the AI is the problem, and if rare units cannot be stopped from disproportionate selection then eliminating it from choosing those units is quite practical. I don't think we should sacrifice history to the altars of the hypothetical. For hypothetical buffs, I'm sure "Sudden Strike" will fill the desire.

victorhauser · Post by **victorhauser** » Fri Jun 23, 2000 10:07 pm

Seth, I wasn't trying to goad you into anything. I was leading up to something that Tomo serendipitously implied (and Moonwolf, too, just now).

It's human nature to look for an edge when participating in any competitive endeavor. And one of the ways we do it in SPWAW is to look for the biggest bang for our SPWAW buck (to paraphrase Tomo). As carefully as the SPWAW staff tries to calibrate the point costs of units, there are always some that are "overpriced" (not cost effective) and "underpriced" (extremely cost effective). And if I'm playing a nation that has 300+ units to choose from, then chances are that I'll have more opportunities to find "underpriced" units than if i have only 200 or less units to choose from. That's what I was leading up to when I claimed that having 300+ units to choose from gave me an advantage over somebody that had only 200 or less to choose from. I still claim that, actually.

BA Evans · Post by **BA Evans** » Fri Jun 23, 2000 10:12 pm

Originally posted by victorhauser:
How does somebody go about setting up a fair tournament when one nation has 300+ different unit types to choose from but all the other nations have 200 or less? For that matter, how does one go about arranging a fair PBEM game under the same circumstances?

The number of units available has nothing to do with play balance. The important considerations would be:

1. Date of introduction: Panthers in '39 would be a problem

2. Cost of unit vs. unit effectiveness: Panther cost = 1 point would be a problem.

Don't equate number of units in a particular OOB with the strength of that army. Just because a particular OOB has 300+ variants of the Horse Drawn Wagon, doesn't mean it is a superior OOB.

BA Evans

Larry Holt · Post by **Larry Holt** » Fri Jun 23, 2000 10:16 pm

I was surprised (terrified?) when the AI chose over 100 French Char-Bs to advance against my puny, inexperienced PzKpwIIIe's early in my campaign. From this I know the feeling of frustration when the AI chooses lots of something that historically wasn't there (the French just didn't mass them as the AI did). But you know what? I beat the AI. (surpise, surprise) That just shows that tactics more than equipment wins battles. This thread has focused on a nation having an advantage by having a larger variety of equipment than another. Seth said that "tanks are tanks" and that training is the thing (to paraphrase him). Seth's got it right! In WWII the allied equipment was often better and more numerous than the German's was but the Germans could do things that their opponents just couldn't (until the end of the war when training broke down). I don't mean to advocate for or against OOB changes but to remind all that its the people, not the equipment, that wins. If the AIP/human player romps over you, review your tactics not your equipment.

------------------
An old soldier but not yet a faded one.
OK, maybe just a bit faded.

Moonwolf · Post by **Moonwolf** » Fri Jun 23, 2000 10:30 pm

Originally posted by Larry Holt:
If the AIP/human player romps over you, review your tactics not your equipment.

My point, and my line of thought, has nothing to do with winning or losing, but with having a game that allows us to play the "minor" countries and have as much fun as those who play the "major" countries. i would not ask for that if this game was billed as an East Front game, or a West Front game, or a PanzerBlitz game, etc. But it is billed as a World War game.

The Germans remain the best professional soldiers of the lot. I have no problem with that. I also have no problem losing to a better tactician than I am -- regardless of the country he uses.

I have won as the Belgians, and have lost as the Germans (just for example). I can't agree more with the statement that it is the strategy behind the equipment that is important. But I also agree that if a country is poorly represented in its equipment (&/or its soldiers), it is then starting at a disadvantage regardless of the gamer's competency.

krull · Post by **krull** » Fri Jun 23, 2000 10:33 pm

Since I am a nice guy
I just want to mention Variants are nice.Because some people get tired of fighting the same battle over and over .
What IF challenges are very funId love to see HUGE equipment list in ht egame. Mainly because I was a Simper Fi My father was one and My grandfather and My great Grandfather was a Cherokee Scout for the army. I have heard many tales of things,eq, incidents and have seen many. You must think of others who like historical yes but alos others who like What If things with out those a game can ebcome very boreing quickly and if you think PBEM's are What Ifs alot if they are not based on historical battles.

I think matrix has done a great job and hope they will keep it up so does My wifey who thanks to some of WB's crazy tactics she learned From TGN and posts. She and I have some very Nice battles here at Home.

Please continue to listen and produce quality stuff because we will bye them as soon as they are available.

Seth · Post by **Seth** » Fri Jun 23, 2000 10:35 pm

[QUOTE]Originally posted by victorhauser:
Seth, I wasn't trying to goad you into anything. I was leading up to something that Tomo serendipitously implied (and Moonwolf, too, just now).

Oh, don't worry, I didn't see it that way. I see what you mean about the pricing, but that is really such a minor thing, especially now that they're fixing the clearance priced Polish inf., etc. Yes, you could maybe find a 'deal', but in all likelihood, the country with a larger selection will win anyway because a larger selection almost always means a more advanced military, backed by a good industry. Those sort of countries tend to have better troop quality too. So the country with more units is a safer bet to win with, but not really because of the bigger unit list, just what it says about that country.

Charles22 · Post by **Charles22** » Fri Jun 23, 2000 10:57 pm

testing

Charles22 · Post by **Charles22** » Fri Jun 23, 2000 11:36 pm

Hmmm. My logonid wasn't being recognized on the last post I attempted, but the test one just did.

Somewhat like Larry, I faced 150 S-35's out of 170 French tanks and I couldn't believe that I beat the snot out of them, as they folded after so many losses. It was a disproportionate battle. The point isn't that I won, but that I faced something of a sci-fi force.

Take for example what I did with the Poles. They were getting 75mm AA guns too numerously and too cheaply, so I raised the cost to what might should be 45. What did they do after that? They went and picked 8 of them; far disproportioante if you ask me (oh I reduced it's range I think to 96 or something too because it had something like 248). I suppose running into a Polish force that has that many isn't too terrible, but the fact that they still pick it after I raised it to 45 expense, means that their force had little more than the silly flaks, making them quite lopsided. Would the Poles do this all the time? Imagine the French scenario where the AI campaign opponent is picking as Gerry and picks 8 or more flaks, or worse yet, picks 100-150 Elefants, and you see the problem; it turns into a sci-fi battle.

You see, facing the very best unit in HUGE proportions from France, Poland, Italy and the like, may not matter too much, but when you're facing Gerry or Rusky..... Adding Gustavs and V-2's? Don't even get me started.

I appreciate the need for fighting with the odd unit in scenarios, but must it turn campaigns into sci-fi battles?

Warhorse · Post by **Warhorse** » Fri Jun 23, 2000 11:44 pm

Originally posted by victorhauser:
What is going on here?

Are we refighting WW2 over the OOBs? Are the smaller OOBs being swallowed up by the Germans in their OOB quest for lebensraum? Are the smaller OOBs having their OOB genetic structure altered by the introduction of German OOB "DNA"?

And if this isn't a flagrant case of Germanic glorification, then why aren't these issues being discussed in Paul Vebber's topic "Make OOB Comments Here"?

This is getting ridiculous. With the new version 2.0, the possibility of having 600 units in the game makes most of these Germanic OOB "requests" extremely problematic. I mean, now it will be possible to buy dozens of units of the same type. But if there were only a handful of a certain weapon produced (for instance, the Sturmtiger) the game can now be corrupted since a player can have dozens of them in his game. This makes no sense. And corrupting other nations' OOBs to make available these obscure and limited variants of German war production makes even less sense.

I advocate forcing players who wish to include these deviants from German mainstream war production alter their own OOBs to do this, rather than forcing their wishes upon the rest of us who don't.

Please keep the structure of the existing OOBs free from alteration by outside nationalities.

Hello, I wasn't trying to alter DNA, or anything of the sort! I just like to make icons, had no more room in the German file, because of all the forts and stuff, so we put them TEMPORARILY in the Philipino oob. They have radio code of '3', so the computer PA player will not purchase these. I will certainly make icons for ANT country, I actually prefer the Axis Minors to the Germans, you can tell, if you view the Hungarians,Rumanians, Bulgaria, etc. The Netherlands have not even been touched as far as icons!! Lots to do there, but don't have all day to sit in front of the computer. My intention is not to start international incidents over the oob's, so lets just realize the game is nowhere near complete, we are listening, and striving to make it ever better! My icon list is limited only by available slots, which are starting to dwidle, after getting some of the Allied Minors, and other stuff done, then we can see where we are at;-) Thanks for all you folks input,

------------------
Mike Amos
Meine Ehre Heisst Treue

Tombstone · Post by **Tombstone** » Fri Jun 23, 2000 11:48 pm

That AI purchasing thing is a pain though... I swear it's straight silly when you have the game the daylights out of the AI killing B1-bis after B1-bis. The fact that tactics outweigh equipment is illustrated rather well by the germans in 1940 against the french. But the germans wouldn't have had a prayer if hundreds of s-35's and b1's came bearing down on their panzer divisions.
Sorry for the rant, but I just had to go through that..

Tomo

Warhorse · Post by **Warhorse** » Sat Jun 24, 2000 3:11 am

Originally posted by Tombstone:
That AI purchasing thing is a pain though... I swear it's straight silly when you have the game the daylights out of the AI killing B1-bis after B1-bis. The fact that tactics outweigh equipment is illustrated rather well by the germans in 1940 against the french. But the germans wouldn't have had a prayer if hundreds of s-35's and b1's came bearing down on their panzer divisions.
Sorry for the rant, but I just had to go through that..

Tomo

No rant, I hate that so much now that at the beginning of every battle in a campaign, I save and go in the editor with the save as a scenario, and rebuy the computer forces, with more realistic units, then hit auto deploy, so at least I don't know where something is! This works well, I even like to stack the odds against myself with the Soviets, just to see if I can make it through a nightmare once in a while;-)

------------------
Mike Amos
Meine Ehre Heisst Treue

Supervisor · Post by **Supervisor** » Sat Jun 24, 2000 3:34 am

You are right, one 15" shell will not a Gustav shell make but a salvo of 8 or 9 15" shells form an offshore battleship would simulate the devastation of one Gustav shell

BTW, Brent mentioned 15" shells. No way 15" shells compare to the Gustav, no way. The Allies didn't go on frantic air searches for the Gustav because it was just another 15" gun.

[This message has been edited by Charles22 (edited 06-23-2000).][/B][/QUOTE]

------------------
Grenadier
SPWAW Beta Team

victorhauser · Post by **victorhauser** » Sat Jun 24, 2000 3:38 am

Originally posted by Warhorse:
No rant, I hate that so much now that at the beginning of every battle in a campaign, I save and go in the editor with the save as a scenario, and rebuy the computer forces, with more realistic units, then hit auto deploy, so at least I don't know where something is! ...

How do you keep the game linked to the campaign after you edit it from a campaign battle to a scenario? I tried to do this back when I was playing SP3 and gave up.

Supervisor · Post by **Supervisor** » Sat Jun 24, 2000 3:38 am

That was what helped Germany lose the war. They had hundreds of weapons that needed spares while the Soviets merrily chugged along with the T-34 and KV-JS chassis for all of their weapons.

Some comments have been made concerning the Germanic focus of OOB expansion. The Germans were the tactical inovators of WWII and had more special equipment than the others. Now I realize that the Western Allies also produced a number of special tanks (sometimes refered to as funnies). but I don't think they had the all around number of varients that the Germans did. I could be wrong & if I am then by all means suggest additonal Allied units (but in a nice way please).

[/B][/QUOTE]

------------------
Grenadier
SPWAW Beta Team

Supervisor · Post by **Supervisor** » Sat Jun 24, 2000 3:50 am

EWhat is fascinating about the wargaming community is their fascination with the german military. How many wargames out there do not have a German reference in their title? Close Combat? TAOW? The rest have some German connection, Steel Panthers, Tigers on the Prowl, Kampfgruppe, Panthers in the Shadows, Secret Weapons of the Luftwaffe, Panzer Commander, i Panzer 44, Panzer Battles. Looka at the box art for most of the games as well. Lets face it, Germany sells or no one would use the connection. You don't see any WW2 games called Sherman Commander or Armor Battles.

I don't want to see SPWAW become dominated by ANY ethnocentric viewpoint. When I use the word "advocate", that is not synonymous with self-coronation. [/B][/QUOTE]

------------------
Grenadier
SPWAW Beta Team

Moonwolf · Post by **Moonwolf** » Sat Jun 24, 2000 3:58 am

Originally posted by Brent:
Some comments have been made concerning the Germanic focus of OOB expansion. The Germans were the tactical inovators of WWII and had more special equipment than the others. Now I realize that the Western Allies also produced a number of special tanks (sometimes refered to as funnies). but I don't think they had the all around number of varients that the Germans did. I could be wrong & if I am then by all means suggest additonal Allied units (but in a nice way please).

It's not parity anybody is looking for. It's not even units for the Allies anybody is looking for. It's just better OOBs for the other countries, regardless of who they are. Italy's OOB is missing a lot of things, and what it does have is frequently wrong.

That's just an honest observation, I'm not putting anybody down. The Spanish OOBs are very vanilla OOBs -- and they should have a vast variety of weapons and units - before and during WWII. The Canadians are missing the Grizzly tank (among other units) and their unit formations are not near the variety they had. The list goes on and on. The OOB threads destify to the work that needs to be done on ALL the OOBs -- not just the Germans or the Americans.

That's all I'm saying. That there is a lot of work that has to be done on all the OOBs. The German OOB is the most complete. Maybe it's time to put them down for a while, and bring the rest of the world up to snuff.

I'm not saying abandon the Germans, but that maybe it's time to concentrate on the other countries.

------------------
Ed Mortimer

Meglio un Giorno da Leone

Charles22 · Post by **Charles22** » Sat Jun 24, 2000 4:01 am

Nope, sorry Brent, even if you piled consequtive 15" shells on the same spot, you just wouldn't penetrate as the Gustav did. We're talking about it shattering "underground" bunkers here 100' below the sea bed. If what you were saying were true, don't you think that they would have just made a rail device to house multiple 15" guns instead? Afterall, they did already have those shells and guns somewhat mass produced on some of the ships.

Just to put the Gustav in a little perspective, it was a 800mm gun. Reading the following, qouted from "The Military History of World War II" I may had read it wrong, but here's what it says pg. 115,

"Schwere Gustav" was again in action on 6 June, initially against Fort Molotov. Seven shells demolished that structure and then it was the turn of the target known as 'The White Cliff'. This was the aiming point for an underground ammunition magazine under Severnaya Bay, and so placed by the Soviets as to be invulnerable to conventional weapons. It was not invulernable to the 80-cm K (E), for nine projectiles bored their way down through the sea, through over 100' of sea bottom and then exploded inside the magazine. By the time 'schwere Gustav' had finished it's ninth shot the magazine was a wreck, and to cap it all a small sailing ship had been sunk in the process."

BTW, elsewhere it mentioned that it's shell was a 7100-kg concrete-piercing one. To look at a picture of the shell, it looks to be about 12' long.

[This message has been edited by Charles22 (edited 06-23-2000).]

victorhauser · Post by **victorhauser** » Sat Jun 24, 2000 5:52 am

Originally posted by Brent:
EWhat is fascinating about the wargaming community is their fascination with the german military. How many wargames out there do not have a German reference in their title? Close Combat? TAOW? The rest have some German connection, Steel Panthers, Tigers on the Prowl, Kampfgruppe, Panthers in the Shadows, Secret Weapons of the Luftwaffe, Panzer Commander, i Panzer 44, Panzer Battles. Looka at the box art for most of the games as well. Lets face it, Germany sells or no one would use the connection. You don't see any WW2 games called Sherman Commander or Armor Battles.

I think there are a variety of explanations for this phenomenon. One is that the words "panzer", "tigers", "panthers", have a more exciting sound and evocative appeal than bland words like "armor". Words like "Patton", "leatherneck", "OVERLORD", also have an exciting sound and are also appealing. But that's not the real reason people like "panzer", is it? Nope.

The "Star Wars" movies would not have been the same without Darth Vader. Without a powerful and formidable villain, the ultimate success of the Han, Luke, Leia, and the others would not have been so gratifying in the end. The hard fought victories are usually the most satisfying. And the Germans in WW2 were certainly formidable villains.

Of course, those of you who've read some of my earlier posts might notice my concerns that many WW2 players don't see the Germans as villains at all. In fact, to these players the Germans are the ultimate conquering heroes it seems. The best of the best. Perhaps they even believe that the Germans should have won the war. Whatever. And given human fascination with the dark aspects of our collective psyches, this is not surprising. {Don't misunderstand me. I am not calling all Germans villains, nor even all WW2 Germans villains. I'm referring to the Nazi War Machine, and, by implication since they carried out their orders, the German Armed Forces which were the instrument of that Machine. Note also that I realize that a small number of German soldiers opposed the conduct of the War Machine for which they fought, and did their best to fight with honor and clean conscience for an unclean Regime.}

In any event, admitting or embracing or excusing that darkness as "the way it is" or "Germany sells", to me seems ultimately unsavory.

Moonwolf · Post by **Moonwolf** » Sat Jun 24, 2000 6:15 am

Originally posted by victorhauser:
In any event, admitting or embracing or excusing that darkness as "the way it is" or "Germany sells", to me seems ultimately unsavory.

Thank you.

------------------
Ed Mortimer

Meglio un Giorno da Leone