Please Sir, send the 105mm AA guns to the front!

[76mm]

ORIGINAL: BleedingOrange
You refer to someone else fighting them, but as has been pointed out it's only the East front so there is no logic to keeping it from the player however he choses to use his units.

I really don't understand why the German players are so worked up about this tiny issue in a huge game. If the Tiger batt TOE is at 10% and there are still 200 Tigers in the pool, OK, fair enough to complain. Othewise, while you're complaining about not getting 200 Tigers as soon as they arive in the pool, may I complain about the 1.1 MILLION men, and 150+ tanks in my pool at the beginning of 1942? I would certainly trade your problem for mine.

[Berkut]

This is really rather funny.

No matter how many times it is pointed out that the "problem" such as it is is that there are TOO MANY Tigers at some particular point, the fanbois still INSIST that the only possible solution is to get those Tigers to the front.

MOAR TIGGERS PLZ!!!!

The solution to that problem is to create a more fine grained production model that has production varied by month, so that production matches historical use.

Sorry - but there is not "realistic WW2 eastern front" solution that will involve giving you guys more Tigers to play with - if that is what you need, simply create a new scenario where you have however many Tigers and the units to use them that you need to be satisfied. You will be happy, and the rest of us will be happy. Everyone is happy!

[karonagames]

Tiger fetish is a curable condition - therapy and counseling classes will commence shortly.

[Berkut]

ORIGINAL: stevie

Or simply let the player decide if he wants to create a new additional unit and spent the required APs. Add some weeks or month of delay and the players will be careful to use the option. It is, by the way, something the russian player is allowed to do and leads to ahistorical scenarios anyway.

This is not a bad suggestion - and on the face of it makes some sense. Why not let the German player create new support units in the fashion the Soviet player does?

However, I would argue against it - although I will also admit straight up that my argument is very subjective.

But here it is...

One thing I really like about WitE is that opening up the game as the German player is *vastly* different than opening it up as the Soviet player. The two sides are ridiculously asymetrical - almost to the extent that you are playing two different games.

Playing the Germans, you are handed this incredibly well designed, capable, and powerful tool, and then expected to achieve some pretty amazing results with that tool. The tool (the Wehrmacht) is very powerful, but also very precise. You do not have much flexibility in how it is organized, or how it is designed. The challenge is to make it work the best way possible, but within the rather severe limits that the tool is designed around.

And there is kind of a problem - the tool is really freaking awesome, but it isn't quite the *right* tool for the job. Seems the guys who made the tool didn't exactly understand the task that it was designed to solve. So while the tool is powerful, resilient, and well organized, it doesn't quite fit the task at hand. Your challenge is making it work anyway.

The Soviets are totally different. Here your tool is a piece of shit. It doesn't work at all! It is unwieldy, has all the moving parts in the wrong place, most of the moving parts don't even move, and it breaks every-time you try to do something with it.

But...you have a huge workshop at your disposal. You have lots and lots and lots of war material, and while the tool you have is almost certainly going to be destroyed, you get to try to organize, design, and deploy a new tool, one better suited to the task at hand. THAT is the challenge of playing the Soviets - how do you make the Red Army actually work?

So that is why I don't want to see the German player be allowed to create new units in the manner the Soviet player can - it would take away what I personally see as the unique challenge of each side. The Germans already have an incredibly potent war machine - letting the player tweak and over-optimize it is just going to make them that much more powerful, and in a fashion that fundamentally changes what makes the German job so hard, despite their incredible army.

The Soviets get that capability, but then, they are starting with utter crap. Turning their crap army into something that actually works is the entire fun of playing the Soviets - why play them if the Germans get a better army, AND can turn around and fix its flaws as well?

[Great_Ajax]

Weapon systems that use armament points are on-demand such as mortars, anti-tank guns, howitzers, etc. Vehicles have their own factories which continue to churn out x units each turn.

Trey

ORIGINAL: pad152

The Editor Manual claims that production is on-demand and adjusts, is that true?

[Berkut]

ORIGINAL: BigAnorak

Tiger envy is a curable condition - therapy and counseling classes will commence shortly.

If the designers of this game cared about the players, they would combine both of these problems into one, and get a truly awesome fix:

Fantasy units that can use those Tigers...but modified with the 10.5cm guns that are extra! Of course, there are 400 extra guns, and only 200 extra Tigers. So they would need to either make another 200 extra Tigers, or maybe just put two guns on each Tiger.

[Oleg Mastruko]

ORIGINAL: Berkut

Fantasy units that can use those Tigers...but modified with the 10.5cm guns that are extra! Of course, there are 400 extra guns, and only 200 extra Tigers. So they would need to either make another 200 extra Tigers, or maybe just put two guns on each Tiger.

I nominate this for Post of the Week [&o] [:D]

Of course don't forget surplus 81mm mortars that would be mounted in quad-tube mounts on top of these vehicles. The resulting vehicle would be employed as mothership to launch obsolete mini-tanks like Pz IIs or Czech P38s, which would be towed to the deployment area behind the mothership Tiger.

Hitler the proto-megalomaniac would love these ideas!

[JAMiAM]

ORIGINAL: Oleg Mastruko

ORIGINAL: Berkut

Fantasy units that can use those Tigers...but modified with the 10.5cm guns that are extra! Of course, there are 400 extra guns, and only 200 extra Tigers. So they would need to either make another 200 extra Tigers, or maybe just put two guns on each Tiger.

I nominate this for Post of the Week [&o] [:D]

Actually, I think that the following post by Berkut is better. So, I will nominate it for Post of the Month!

ORIGINAL: Berkut

ORIGINAL: stevie

Or simply let the player decide if he wants to create a new additional unit and spent the required APs. Add some weeks or month of delay and the players will be careful to use the option. It is, by the way, something the russian player is allowed to do and leads to ahistorical scenarios anyway.

This is not a bad suggestion - and on the face of it makes some sense. Why not let the German player create new support units in the fashion the Soviet player does?

However, I would argue against it - although I will also admit straight up that my argument is very subjective.

But here it is...

One thing I really like about WitE is that opening up the game as the German player is *vastly* different than opening it up as the Soviet player. The two sides are ridiculously asymetrical - almost to the extent that you are playing two different games.

Playing the Germans, you are handed this incredibly well designed, capable, and powerful tool, and then expected to achieve some pretty amazing results with that tool. The tool (the Wehrmacht) is very powerful, but also very precise. You do not have much flexibility in how it is organized, or how it is designed. The challenge is to make it work the best way possible, but within the rather severe limits that the tool is designed around.

And there is kind of a problem - the tool is really freaking awesome, but it isn't quite the *right* tool for the job. Seems the guys who made the tool didn't exactly understand the task that it was designed to solve. So while the tool is powerful, resilient, and well organized, it doesn't quite fit the task at hand. Your challenge is making it work anyway.

The Soviets are totally different. Here your tool is a piece of shit. It doesn't work at all! It is unwieldy, has all the moving parts in the wrong place, most of the moving parts don't even move, and it breaks every-time you try to do something with it.

But...you have a huge workshop at your disposal. You have lots and lots and lots of war material, and while the tool you have is almost certainly going to be destroyed, you get to try to organize, design, and deploy a new tool, one better suited to the task at hand. THAT is the challenge of playing the Soviets - how do you make the Red Army actually work?

So that is why I don't want to see the German player be allowed to create new units in the manner the Soviet player can - it would take away what I personally see as the unique challenge of each side. The Germans already have an incredibly potent war machine - letting the player tweak and over-optimize it is just going to make them that much more powerful, and in a fashion that fundamentally changes what makes the German job so hard, despite their incredible army.

The Soviets get that capability, but then, they are starting with utter crap. Turning their crap army into something that actually works is the entire fun of playing the Soviets - why play them if the Germans get a better army, AND can turn around and fix its flaws as well?

Well said, indeed!

[marty_01]

Not to belabor this any more than it already has been, but I still have a question about production averaging – even after reading back through El Hefe’s posts. I agree, everyone posting to this thread should re-read his posts on Page-1 of the thread to be in tune with the averaging aspect of equipment production and what the equipment pool numbers thingy represents in-game vs. what we – or at least I -- was intuitively thinking the pool numbers represent. Moreover, like various things in this game, what we see being represented is sometimes counter-intuitive to our own particular thought processes (ala some of the Air Doctrine settings took awhile for me to get used to). But once I see the design intent or designers notes or an in-depth (hopefully rational and friendly) forum discussion it becomes a bit more clear what to do and how to do it in-game.

This is from the Game Manual on page 249 – which also sort of says the same thing:

However, simply having the ground element equipment and manpower available doesn’t mean they will get to the unit that requires replacements. The unit must pass several checks to see that they actually get replacements, and how many they get. As a special case, it will generally be harder for Axis units to receive replacements during the first winter (22.3). This results in ground element equipment and manpower remaining in the pool even though there are units that need them as replacements. In addition, while some ground element equipment requiring armament points are built and sent out during the replacement segment based on unit demand, other equipment is automatically built during the production phase that is not immediately used and eventually may end up being scrapped if the ground element becomes obsolete and too much equipment stacks up in the pool relative to the number of units still using that type of ground element equipment. This system allows for the realistic production of armaments ahead of time, that often end up never being used, instead of having a perfect just in time production system.

Unfortunately I’d be willing to bet that this same question is going to be asked again -- and maybe again and again -- on this forum as a result of new players buying the game and subsequently getting into the nutz and boltz of the game. Be that as it may…

But like I say, I still have a question regarding the production averaging thingy described on page-1 of this thread as well as what is sort of stated (see above) in the game manual on page-249. If our virtual Albert Speer produces the same numbers of Tiger tanks per week with the number some sort of average of total historical production (if you don’t wanna talk Tigers than insert whatever piece of equipment you like into the blank), what is the point of the German armament points and such? The manual indicates the following on Page- 246

The production system builds the individual AFV, combat vehicle or devices from armament point production and places them in the pools, which is what is reflected on the production screen.

& Page-249

In order for units to receive replacement ground elements, there must be either in the pool, or alternatively for ground elements built from armaments points, there must be sufficient armament points in the pool to build the devices associated with that type of ground element.

My question is: If the Germans don’t produce as many armament points as whatever average was used to develop the “baseline” or “pseudo-Historical” German production rates for all the various forms of equipment their units are being provided with, how does the in-game production model go about compensating and rebalancing equipment and supply production when in-game armament point production drops below the “pseudo-Historical" baseline figure? In other words, if the Soviets start capturing German industry in 1943 or whatever, does virtual Albert Speer still get to produce 9-tiger tanks per week (or whatever the Tiger Tank production figure is)?

I assume this could happen given the right in-game circumstances and two players that still want to press on to the bitter end inspite of the Russians being in Germany in 1943.

[karonagames]

does virtual Albert Speer still get to produce 9-tiger tanks per week (or whatever the Tiger Tank production figure is)?

If there is a shortage of fuel and/or resources when the production cycle starts, then factories' scheduled production will not happen - on a random basis, so yes, the total production will be reduced as a result, and I am pretty certain Pavel will have linked total production to an assumed amount of resource contribution from captured locations - hence the implied need to follow the historical strategy of going for the Oil in the south.

[marty_01]

ORIGINAL: BigAnorak

does virtual Albert Speer still get to produce 9-tiger tanks per week (or whatever the Tiger Tank production figure is)?

If there is a shortage of fuel and/or resources when the production cycle starts, then factories' scheduled production will not happen - on a random basis, so yes, the total production will be reduced as a result, and I am pretty certain Pavel will have linked total production to an assumed amount of resource contribution from captured locations - hence the implied need to follow the historical strategy of going for the Oil in the south.

Thanks BigAnorak.

I don't know enough about what the game is doing for production -- i.e. the balancing act between Armament points -- fuel -- raw materials(?) etc. From your answer it seems conceivable that the Germans could be placed in a situation where they are producing fewer Armament Points than what the Designers have set as the "pseudo-historical" armaments production figure -- the baseline figure that would presumably result in a completely historic set of reinforcements and replacements being pooped out by our virtual Albert Speer.

I have a follow-up question: Is it possible within the current game model for the Germans to produce more armament points than the "pseudo-historical" baseline figure for arms points production? Like as you suggest the Axis capture Baku (or whatever)?

[Lrfss]

ORIGINAL: Berkut

ORIGINAL: stevie

Or simply let the player decide if he wants to create a new additional unit and spent the required APs. Add some weeks or month of delay and the players will be careful to use the option. It is, by the way, something the russian player is allowed to do and leads to ahistorical scenarios anyway.

This is not a bad suggestion - and on the face of it makes some sense. Why not let the German player create new support units in the fashion the Soviet player does?

However, I would argue against it - although I will also admit straight up that my argument is very subjective.

But here it is...

One thing I really like about WitE is that opening up the game as the German player is *vastly* different than opening it up as the Soviet player. The two sides are ridiculously asymetrical - almost to the extent that you are playing two different games.

Playing the Germans, you are handed this incredibly well designed, capable, and powerful tool, and then expected to achieve some pretty amazing results with that tool. The tool (the Wehrmacht) is very powerful, but also very precise. You do not have much flexibility in how it is organized, or how it is designed. The challenge is to make it work the best way possible, but within the rather severe limits that the tool is designed around.

And there is kind of a problem - the tool is really freaking awesome, but it isn't quite the *right* tool for the job. Seems the guys who made the tool didn't exactly understand the task that it was designed to solve. So while the tool is powerful, resilient, and well organized, it doesn't quite fit the task at hand. Your challenge is making it work anyway.

The Soviets are totally different. Here your tool is a piece of shit. It doesn't work at all! It is unwieldy, has all the moving parts in the wrong place, most of the moving parts don't even move, and it breaks every-time you try to do something with it.

But...you have a huge workshop at your disposal. You have lots and lots and lots of war material, and while the tool you have is almost certainly going to be destroyed, you get to try to organize, design, and deploy a new tool, one better suited to the task at hand. THAT is the challenge of playing the Soviets - how do you make the Red Army actually work?

So that is why I don't want to see the German player be allowed to create new units in the manner the Soviet player can - it would take away what I personally see as the unique challenge of each side. The Germans already have an incredibly potent war machine - letting the player tweak and over-optimize it is just going to make them that much more powerful, and in a fashion that fundamentally changes what makes the German job so hard, despite their incredible army.

The Soviets get that capability, but then, they are starting with utter crap. Turning their crap army into something that actually works is the entire fun of playing the Soviets - why play them if the Germans get a better army, AND can turn around and fix its flaws as well?

I see your point, however why not allow for the game to expand it's horizons for at least Support Unit creation for the Germans. If polled by far I suggest most would vote, yes on this subject matter? After all if it's an option you can choose to have it or not and I'm sure there will be plenty of people happly playing with the option on or off...simple as heck I would think, no?

If it were me, I would have the "option" that either side could do equal in so far as production tweaks and unit creation period. Bottom line is allow the "Player's/Buyer's" of this product the choice to choose! Most people like having choices in life/games (LOL) and not be forced down one path in particular when they know that path will lead to one outcome which will likely be worse than possible otherwise...

I VOTE TO GIVE >POWER TO THE PEOPLE< [:D]

Now is all we need is for some intelligent bored to death person to make a poll so we can vote and start a GG Revolt if necessary...[8|]

[Emx77]

ORIGINAL: Oleg Mastruko

ORIGINAL: Berkut

Fantasy units that can use those Tigers...but modified with the 10.5cm guns that are extra! Of course, there are 400 extra guns, and only 200 extra Tigers. So they would need to either make another 200 extra Tigers, or maybe just put two guns on each Tiger.

I nominate this for Post of the Week [&o] [:D]

Of course don't forget surplus 81mm mortars that would be mounted in quad-tube mounts on top of these vehicles. The resulting vehicle would be employed as mothership to launch obsolete mini-tanks like Pz IIs or Czech P38s, which would be towed to the deployment area behind the mothership Tiger.

Hitler the proto-megalomaniac would love these ideas!

[Baron von Beer]

Ok, why beat around the bush.   http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Landkreuzer_P._1500_Monster

MELT the 200 tigers and make 7 of these babies. No quad mortars on the roof, this will have quad TIGERS mounted on top.

[Berkut]

LOL.

On 23 June 1942 the German Ministry of Armaments proposed a 1,000 tonne tank – the Landkreuzer P. 1000 Ratte. Adolf Hitler himself expressed interest in the project and go-ahead was granted. In December the same year, Krupp designed an even larger 1,500 tonne tank – the P 1500 Monster. In 1943, Albert Speer, the Minister for Armaments, cancelled both projects.

That Speer guy was such a wet blanket.
Sometimes I am just kind of stunned the Nazis ever got as far as they did. What a bunch of fruitloops.

[Lrfss]

ORIGINAL: Baron von Beer

Ok, why beat around the bush.   http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Landkreuzer_P._1500_Monster

MELT the 200 tigers and make 7 of these babies. No quad mortars on the roof, this will have quad TIGERS mounted on top.

Would be fun to make those seven or so and see what they could do in a "Last Stand In Berlin" scenerio...lol!

[Lrfss]

ORIGINAL: Berkut

LOL.

On 23 June 1942 the German Ministry of Armaments proposed a 1,000 tonne tank – the Landkreuzer P. 1000 Ratte. Adolf Hitler himself expressed interest in the project and go-ahead was granted. In December the same year, Krupp designed an even larger 1,500 tonne tank – the P 1500 Monster. In 1943, Albert Speer, the Minister for Armaments, cancelled both projects.

That Speer guy was such a wet blanket.
Sometimes I am just kind of stunned the Nazis ever got as far as they did. What a bunch of fruitloops.

Actually, he no doubt did many great things for the Third Reich, all those awesome buildings, amazing deco and gathering the labor forces together to make all this cool stuff[X(]

[sillyflower]

ORIGINAL: Berkut

One thing I really like about WitE is that opening up the game as the German player is *vastly* different than opening it up as the Soviet player. The two sides are ridiculously asymetrical - almost to the extent that you are playing two different games.

Playing the Germans, you are handed this incredibly well designed, capable, and powerful tool, and then expected to achieve some pretty amazing results with that tool. The tool (the Wehrmacht) is very powerful, but also very precise. You do not have much flexibility in how it is organized, or how it is designed. The challenge is to make it work the best way possible, but within the rather severe limits that the tool is designed around.

And there is kind of a problem - the tool is really freaking awesome, but it isn't quite the *right* tool for the job. Seems the guys who made the tool didn't exactly understand the task that it was designed to solve. So while the tool is powerful, resilient, and well organized, it doesn't quite fit the task at hand. Your challenge is making it work anyway.

The Soviets are totally different. Here your tool is a piece of shit. It doesn't work at all! It is unwieldy, has all the moving parts in the wrong place, most of the moving parts don't even move, and it breaks every-time you try to do something with it.

But...you have a huge workshop at your disposal. You have lots and lots and lots of war material, and while the tool you have is almost certainly going to be destroyed, you get to try to organize, design, and deploy a new tool, one better suited to the task at hand. THAT is the challenge of playing the Soviets - how do you make the Red Army actually work?

So that is why I don't want to see the German player be allowed to create new units in the manner the Soviet player can - it would take away what I personally see as the unique challenge of each side. The Germans already have an incredibly potent war machine - letting the player tweak and over-optimize it is just going to make them that much more powerful, and in a fashion that fundamentally changes what makes the German job so hard, despite their incredible army.

The Soviets get that capability, but then, they are starting with utter crap. Turning their crap army into something that actually works is the entire fun of playing the Soviets - why play them if the Germans get a better army, AND can turn around and fix its flaws as well?

I agree. If I'm doing well enough to have these stocks, I shall just be grateful as I know I will need them later. If I don't end up needing them, it will be because I won.

[Zort]

I'm bored so I thought I would chime in on this.&nbsp; Didn't Hitler refuse giving Guedarian 400 engines for his tanks or something like that?&nbsp; So if the germans are doing better then why would Hitler give away tanks when he would use them somewhere else?&nbsp; Ok I know we all want to be able to play with the production.&nbsp; Play Bombing the Reich (or the new one) and micro manage a/c engines.&nbsp; I hope the grand campaign game will allow us to change factory production (not build anything before it was available), ie, stop building panzer 2's&nbsp; and also have the option to not change the TOE when it comes available.&nbsp; At some time the germans will have to change TOE's just because they don't have enough manpower.&nbsp;&nbsp;

[marty_01]

**Bump**

I have a follow-up question to BigANorak's Reply (see above): Is it possible within the current game model for the Germans to produce more armament points than the "pseudo-historical" baseline figure for arms points production? Like as you suggest the Axis capture Baku (or whatever)?