WAW serial - few toughts

[cveta]

Cannot wait for At Gold. Hope it will be great.
Just to mentioned Kondor early opening on Su I alked before. It ended wrongly for Germany. Early attack boost Su production to 100% and I menage to slow down GErmans and make a counterofensive retaking Leningrad and Helsinki.
Germany must fight in France and then in Greece and in Africa simultaneusly with Su, so it is better not to wake Su until GErmany is completly redy.

[SMK-at-work]

What is the purpose of the Warlord HQ in China?  Or is it something left from a previous build that has been forgotten about?

[ernieschwitz]

ORIGINAL: SMK-at-work

Another thing that needs to be done is to limit factories to a single product - you can't take a tank factory and change it to making aeroplanes overnight and vice versa!

Hi,

I´ve been looking over this thread a few times, and i thought you might want some answers. Though, i am not going to program them, i know what is achievable, in some cases. Your wish for making factories that could only produce say tanks is quite possible. You don´t need code for it even, the editor (in AT) is able to make any location, produce as little or as much as you would want.

[ernieschwitz]

ORIGINAL: ehzorg

Another thing that needs to be done is to limit factories to a single product - you can't take a tank factory and change it to making aeroplanes overnight and vice versa!

Agreed, there should be some benefit to choosing an SFT and leaving it in your production queue. Perhaps when changing the SFT in a production slot, production slowly ramps up to 100% capability over the course of a few months. Again, might not be possible given the current game engine.

Don´t think that the ramping up feature of a factory would be very easy to achieve. I think it would require some rather heavy coding, and the setting of a fixed people type pr. factory that is built. And I am not sure that is exactly what you want to achieve... Might be that the new AT Gold editor has some possibilities in this area, ... I haven´t seen it yet, but i doubt it will...

[ernieschwitz]

ORIGINAL: SMK-at-work

What is the purpose of the Warlord HQ in China?  Or is it something left from a previous build that has been forgotten about?

I believe that it is a HQ that allows for transfer of Supplies (maybe PP, not sure) from SU to China.

[ernieschwitz]

ORIGINAL: ernieschwitz

ORIGINAL: ehzorg

Another thing that needs to be done is to limit factories to a single product - you can't take a tank factory and change it to making aeroplanes overnight and vice versa!

Agreed, there should be some benefit to choosing an SFT and leaving it in your production queue. Perhaps when changing the SFT in a production slot, production slowly ramps up to 100% capability over the course of a few months. Again, might not be possible given the current game engine.

Don´t think that the ramping up feature of a factory would be very easy to achieve. I think it would require some rather heavy coding, and the setting of a fixed people type pr. factory that is built. And I am not sure that is exactly what you want to achieve... Might be that the new AT Gold editor has some possibilities in this area, ... I haven´t seen it yet, but i doubt it will...

Just when i thought it was near impossible i figured out a way to do it, with coding. It would require that the factory being built was of one type, then after a turn, it would be upgraded to a location (another factory, same time) with larger production capacity, and so on, until it got to maximum production... Interesting how there always seems to be a way (well most of the time) to solve a problem with the editor AT is pretty unique...

[SMK-at-work]

ORIGINAL: ernieschwitz

ORIGINAL: SMK-at-work

What is the purpose of the Warlord HQ in China?  Or is it something left from a previous build that has been forgotten about?

I believe that it is a HQ that allows for transfer of Supplies (maybe PP, not sure) from SU to China.

Maybe - I didn't notice it when I played. Someone else suggested it stops China surrendering?

[SMK-at-work]

What is the naval scale, in terms of ships per counter?

I notice in recent game the Italian Navy gets 6 cruiser units, but only had 22 Cruisers - of which 3 were WW1 vintage.  Counting only the 19 "modern" ships thats 1 CA per 3 ships.  And not all the Italian ships had particularly good AA either - the Fiumes were apparently short of space on their superstructure & never had radar fitted, & the AA guns were slow to traverse & had not very good fire control according to Wiki - they probably should be a separate type that cannot be upgraded

And as an aside 1-turn upgrades of ships almost certainly need to be a lot slower :/

The Royal Navy, OTOH, had 63 Cruisers at the start of WW2 (and 23-25 under construction, depending on where you read), but (assuming I count correctly), gets 7 units in the game, + 2 CAII as reinforcements.  Assuming I got the count right that's 1 cruiser unit per 9 ships, and the 2 CA's received as reinforcements as 1 per 11 or 12.

I thought it might apply to only Heavy Cruisers, since the ships are "CA" - but even there the Brits had 15, including 2 Australian, to 7 Italian.

The French Fleet had 7 each BB's/BC's &  heavy cruisers, which are not represented at all before the fall of France - the Vichy fleet scuttled at Toulon had 3 BB's, 7 cruisers, 16 destroyers, 13 Torpedo boats and 15 subs - a couple of subs got away to Nth Africa, but the whole is represented, I think, by 2 BB, 2 CA and 2 DD units.

[SMK-at-work]

FYI there's a nice page that lists every ship in the RN and where it was stationed at the outbreak of war here

There are a few discrepancies - even allowing that many ships might be assumed to be included in various other units:

BB's:  In the game there are 10 in home waters (7 Home Fleet, 3 Channel), which is more or less correct (1 of the 10 was refitting but was back in service at Scapa in early September), although it should be 8 and 2.  There are 4 in the Med when there should only be 3, and 1 in the Far East when here should be none - 2 BB's refitting in the UK seem to have made it into the order of battle some time before they were ready - they did not become available until Feb 1940 and Jan 1941.

CV's - there are 5 in the game - 1 each Home, Channel and Far East fleets, 2 in the Med Fleet.  Actual deployment was 1 in Home, Med and Far East (ie China Station) Fleets, 2 in the Channel, 1 at Rosyth (Edinburgh more or less) on training duties made into a front line unit, for a total of 6.

Cruisers:  28 Cruisers in the Home, Channel, North Atlantic & Med Fleets are represented by 9 Cruisers.  At an average of, say, 3 Cruisers per strength point, the British are missing about 10 Cruiser points scattered around the world - particularly from Asia/Pacific and Sth Atlantic.

Destroyers: the RN had about 110 modern and 70 old destroyers in service at the start of the war.  Some of the old ones were being converted the "escort ships".  Many others were scattered in squadrons around the coast of England and at stations empire wide.  There are 7 units in the game representing all "deployable" destroyers.

Submarines:  3 submarine units 1 each at home, Med & Far East, represent over 50 modern submarines.

A quick Summary for the Kriegsmarine:

3 BB's seems reasonable for 2 Scharnhorsts, 2 "Pocket Battleships" and 2 old pre-dreadnought BB's in service in Germany 1939 (Graf Spee was of course, famously, not there at the time!).

2 CA's for 2 heavy and 6 light cruisers is not unreasonable (viz 1 per 3 cruisers for known UK numbers they could arguably get 1 more)

2 DD's for 22 Destroyers gives a strength of about 11 DD's per point - in which case the UK should get about 4 more.

6 Sub II's for 62 subs (6 Type IIA, 18 Type IIB, 2 Type IA, 10 Type VIIA, 8 Type IXA, 11 Type VIIB, 7 Type VIC ) means the UK should get 2 more

The Italian fleet gets 3 BB II's and 1 BB1, 6 cruisers, 4 destroyers and 10 subs when it joins the war.  This represents 4 old reconstructed WW1 era BB's, and 2 new BB's.  The Roma joins later as a BBII.  The WW1 era BB's were only armed with 12" guns - and even reconstructed they probably should not be BBII's.

Andrea Doria and Caio Duilo's rconstructions were not finished until October 1940, so they should not be in the initial fleet, but should arrive in November 1940.

Given that much larger British "Super Dreadnoughts" of the Queen Elizabeth & "R" class are only BBI's, there is no case for the WW1 era Italian ships to be BBII's - the fleet should start with 2 BBI's and 2 BBII's, and get 2 more BBI's in November of 1940.

the 6 cruisers represent 19 heavy and light cruisers - there were also 3 pre-WW1 era old cruisers I don't count.  This seems reasonable if other navies are given Cruiser units at the same ration of about 1 per 3 ships - which means a lot more for the RN!

4 Destroyers cover 57 destroyers - at 1 per 11 they rate 1 more.

10 Submarines represent no fewer than 116 submarines - so is pretty close to the ratio for the Kriegsmarine - but again if the ratio is to be followed the RN needs about 3 more units.

[tweber]

After getting creamed by Cveta in a couple of games, I would say that the German and Italian navies are too strong relative to the French and British navy's

[cveta]

French nawy dont exist at all in WAW. That is a problem. And again I belive that Germayn is too strong. Especilay since subs are faster than ships. LOL. And there is no point in using German subs in killing suplay. They have better use like warships.
And best defence against Germany subs II or III are DD III, Thouse ships kills subs without problem even when subs II outnumber them 3 to 1. So when you play as west against Germany that like subs ( that me ) build DD III ASAP.
Secons thougt about ships - I wont argue about historicaly number of ships. We all know that and internet have no secrets. But the question is how to put expiriance os soldiers in the game. In Mediteranean theathre - Italians ws Britis nawys - we all know about daring DD atacks on stronger ships wich forces Italians to withrow. We know how well Britis plains performed in attack on Italian nawy. So I would like to say that Italians should be crippled by some way.
But the greter problem with this game is weak Su.
I think that SU dont stand a chance against prepared Germany attack. And it may be done in 1941. So basicly to restore balance germany subs should be slower amnd Italian nawy should be weaker. But Su should have 50% more production capacity and some tank uits initialy.

[srndac]

ORIGINAL: cveta

French nawy dont exist at all in WAW. That is a problem. And again I belive that Germayn is too strong. Especilay since subs are faster than ships. LOL. And there is no point in using German subs in killing suplay. They have better use like warships.
And best defence against Germany subs II or III are DD III, Thouse ships kills subs without problem even when subs II outnumber them 3 to 1. So when you play as west against Germany that like subs ( that me ) build DD III ASAP.
Secons thougt about ships - I wont argue about historicaly number of ships. We all know that and internet have no secrets. But the question is how to put expiriance os soldiers in the game. In Mediteranean theathre - Italians ws Britis nawys - we all know about daring DD atacks on stronger ships wich forces Italians to withrow. We know how well Britis plains performed in attack on Italian nawy. So I would like to say that Italians should be crippled by some way.
But the greter problem with this game is weak Su.
I think that SU dont stand a chance against prepared Germany attack. And it may be done in 1941. So basicly to restore balance germany subs should be slower amnd Italian nawy should be weaker. But Su should have 50% more production capacity and some tank uits initialy.

I totally agree with this.
SU should be stronger than it is now.
There's no way SU can withstand the German attack in WaW as it is now. Fighting in 1941 is suicide.

Historically, in winter 1941, Germans lost because:
1. their units were whittled by fighting during Barbarossa down to 20% of their original strenght. So, an, let's say, 16000 man Division was reduced to a 3200 man Regiment.
2. these units then had to hold 30 or 40 km of front each (about 100 men per km)
3. they were totally unprepared for the Russian winter and had to get warmer. And the only place to do that was in a village.
And so the Germans huddled in the houses, while the 1 km wide gaps between them swarmed with Soviets ... okay, not literally, but you get the picture ... for Soviets, smuggling supplies to the partisans and getting men out of encirclements was slightly more dangerous than going to the store ... or crossing the road ...

The end result: when a (theoretically) reinforced (but practically battered) Soviet Regiment of 1000 men and 10 tanks attacked on a (usual) 1 km wide front, it only had to detach a few men to sorround the tiny German force, and then drive on to the German rear 'till the petrol runs out ...

Right now, SU has no power to whittle down the Germans - even if it has the room for maneuver and breakthroughs ... and the Russian winter hits it as hard as the Germans - something that isn't historical at all ...

Then again, the historical Soviets had to fight against Hitler ... not the kind of super-geniuses that inhabit these forums ...

cheers!
srndac

[SMK-at-work]

Yeah I'm just throwing a few ideas out here - whether hey are able to be implemented or not I have no idea

The Italian fleet is easy to fix (I think...not knowing how much work it actually is...) - reduce their cruisers to 2-3 units and make them a unique type that can't be upgraded to CAII so the fleet doesn't have almost total immunity to air attack -that gives the Brits a chance to attack the Fleet with naval air - which is at least something close to historical and not obviously weird!

One of the things that makes the scenario play like a machine if the German player is up to it is that in the scenario  Germany knows that it is safe if it has 1499 PP on the border IIRC - which cveta has done.  Germany knows exactly what benefit it gets from an early attack - it should not - a bit of uncertainty would be a good thing IMO.

I honestly don't know what a believable restraint would be in the context of AT tho.

I don't agree with srndc's analysis of the reasons why the germans got bogged down - AFAIK it had more to do with lack of supplies - the units at the tip of the attacks were simply exhausted and could fight no more.

The roads were a mess, much of the motor transport had broken down & WaW has no effect for the mud that bogged down the Germans at some inopportune moment.

Could there perhaps be a "mud" effect like winter, in which all motor transport becomes immobilised and has 0 supply capacity for a turn??

[srndac]

ORIGINAL: SMK-at-work

I don't agree with srndc's analysis of the reasons why the germans got bogged down - AFAIK it had more to do with lack of supplies - the units at the tip of the attacks were simply exhausted and could fight no more.

The roads were a mess, much of the motor transport had broken down & WaW has no effect for the mud that bogged down the Germans at some inopportune moment.

Ooops - yeah, I forgot to mention supplies ...

Railroads were the main means of transport during WW2, and Soviet rails had different gauge than German - so the Gerries coudn't use them for their trains - and the Soviet trains were either blown up or pulled back - so, they (Germans) got next to no supplies.
Now - if this could be inserted in WaW - it would simulate the Russian front much better.
Also, winter clothing for ALL German troops on the Russian front was actually available - but still in depots in Poland, and with no way in hell of getting it to the front, where it's most needed.

Also, the siberians were no elite troops at all - only a fresh reserve to throw into the fight. And with both armies worn out and shot to pieces, some hundred thousand fresh siberians must have looked like a tsunami ...
Besides - the side which is the last to commit it's reserve - wins! And since the Siberians were the last reserve on both sides ...

cheers!
srndac

[SMK-at-work]

The Siberians are a great topic of discussion - I had some arguments with people on the CEAW boards about them - they absolutely refused to accept that the Siberians were anything other than fresh troops straight from the east - even when presented with information uncovered in the last 15-20 years about exactly which divisions were bought across and where they fought, how few troops actually fought at Nomonhan, and the fact that they had all served there 2 years by he time of Barbarossa and were in reserve - IIRC there was a division or 2 in the Ukraine where most of them were known to have been called back to?

the myth of the Siberians is deeply inculcated in wargamers - especially those who like to play the side of the Germans - they cannot believe that the Communists actually raised fresh troops who were able to defeat their nice uniforms and good looking tanks [:D], therefore they must have had reserves of elite spetnaz trained supertroops![8|]

But the sheer numbers of Soviet manpower are astonishing - IIRC they had 5 million troops in July, they lost 5 milloin in 1941, and hte army was actually 6 million strong at the end - so they lost the entire army but ended up with more!  Sure they were not so well trained or armed....but they were enough.

[srndac]

ORIGINAL: SMK-at-work

The Siberians are a great topic of discussion - I had some arguments with people on the CEAW boards about them - they absolutely refused to accept that the Siberians were anything other than fresh troops straight from the east - even when presented with information uncovered in the last 15-20 years about exactly which divisions were bought across and where they fought, how few troops actually fought at Nomonhan, and the fact that they had all served there 2 years by he time of Barbarossa and were in reserve - IIRC there was a division or 2 in the Ukraine where most of them were known to have been called back to?

the myth of the Siberians is deeply inculcated in wargamers - especially those who like to play the side of the Germans - they cannot believe that the Communists actually raised fresh troops who were able to defeat their nice uniforms and good looking tanks [:D], therefore they must have had reserves of elite spetnaz trained supertroops![8|]

But the sheer numbers of Soviet manpower are astonishing - IIRC they had 5 million troops in July, they lost 5 milloin in 1941, and hte army was actually 6 million strong at the end - so they lost the entire army but ended up with more!  Sure they were not so well trained or armed....but they were enough.

"Quantity has a quality of it's own." - in Stalin's own words. [:D]

Even though I'll take that 6 millions Soviets with a pinch of salt, they did outnumber that (approx.) 1 million Germans at about 2 (or 3) to 1 ratio ... and with clever deployment - that ratio grows even bigger. Russian swarms indeed.

Besides, the only elite-spetznaz-trained-supertroops in the Soviet army during that time were NKVD border guards ... and they were bigger danger to their own troops than to the Germans - being the proud descendants of the infamous Cheka. Their main expertise being: shooting deserters, shooting stragglers, shooting a few shirkers 'per encourageur les autres' (as Voltaire put it) ... well, you get the picture ... [8|]

cheers!
srndac

P.S. Well, the Germans did have nice tanks ... but as for uniforms - I'll quote the most famous Prussian of them all: "If peace had lasted beyond 1740, the soldiers would have probably worn rouge and beauty spots by now." [:D]

[SMK-at-work]

For much of the whole "Battle of Moscow" (from Oct 41 to Feb 42) the Germans outnumbered the Russians on the Moscow front, or were only slightly outnumbered by them - another one of those myths long held by war gamers.

However when the Soviets attacked they were able to achieve superiority at selected points - which is something hte attacker vcan usually do.

I think it is a very hard dynamic to simulate in a wargame.

[cveta]

Nice historical discussion you two have. I must say that I agree with bouth of you. And I hope that new AT gold will fix some of problems in WAW scenario we mentioned.

[kondor]

ORIGINAL: SMK-at-work

Yeah I'm just throwing a few ideas out here - whether hey are able to be implemented or not I have no idea

The Italian fleet is easy to fix (I think...not knowing how much work it actually is...) - reduce their cruisers to 2-3 units and make them a unique type that can't be upgraded to CAII so the fleet doesn't have almost total immunity to air attack -that gives the Brits a chance to attack the Fleet with naval air - which is at least something close to historical and not obviously weird!







The roads were a mess, much of the motor transport had broken down & WaW has no effect for the mud that bogged down the Germans at some inopportune moment.

Could there perhaps be a "mud" effect like winter, in which all motor transport becomes immobilised and has 0 supply capacity for a turn??

This ^.

Italian fleet should be attackable from CAG-s (air), and a few mud turns before and after winter would help making SU stronger which SU desperatly needs...

+mass arty&air units are way to strong in destroying ground forces...