Force Balence Question?

Warhorse · Post by **Warhorse** » Thu Oct 05, 2000 11:51 pm

Reuter, this is not entirely true, yes the German tanks were very well armored, and the guns were excellent, but fuel shortages, and declining workmanship were present in their field also, the first Panthes had a nasty tendency to burn up from faulty wiring, the Tiger had a lousy fuel pump, but this aside, I think the model is pretty good myself. You will not always score a hit, and a kill with a Tiger, unlike common fallacy would suggest, remember these tanks are not sitting still most the time, all you have to do is plug in Panzer Commander some time, roll along at 12mph, and try to hit something else stationary at range, let alone a moving target!!! The Sherman slopes are pretty sharp on the front, so, an 88 shell could very easily richochet if it doesn't hit just right.

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

Warhorse · Post by **Warhorse** » Thu Oct 05, 2000 11:52 pm

Reuter, this is not entirely true, yes the German tanks were very well armored, and the guns were excellent, but fuel shortages, and declining workmanship were present in their field also, the first Panthes had a nasty tendency to burn up from faulty wiring, the Tiger had a lousy fuel pump, but this aside, I think the model is pretty good myself. You will not always score a hit, and a kill with a Tiger, unlike common fallacy would suggest, remember these tanks are not sitting still most the time, all you have to do is plug in Panzer Commander some time, roll along at 12mph, and try to hit something else stationary at range, let alone a moving target!!! The Sherman slopes are pretty sharp on the front, so, an 88 shell could very easily richochet if it doesn't hit just right.

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

victorhauser · Post by **victorhauser** » Fri Oct 06, 2000 9:28 am

P.S. Charles. Remember that I also let the AI capture my Victory Flags before fighting back in earnest when I'm delaying and defending, therefore mines and dragon's teeth and barbed wire would serve to impede the AI. However, I've noticed that with breakdowns turned ON, I can't be as liberal with the AI as I used to (as an aside, I think breakdowns occur too often, or at too high a percentage probability, but I live with it the way it is).

All in all I think that v4.2 of SPWaW is the best version of Steel Panthers ever. (Now, if they would only figure out a way to give AA guns kill credit when they shoot down planes!)

zombie · Post by **zombie** » Fri Oct 06, 2000 12:55 pm

Here is a tentative idea, how about forcing the AI to buy battalions and regiments of troops instead of companies/platoons/sections? This would take a bit of programming (probably a lot actually) but would force the computer to use more realistic OBs.

Arralen · Post by **Arralen** » Fri Oct 06, 2000 1:41 pm

Originally posted by zombie:
Here is a tentative idea, how about forcing the AI to buy battalions and regiments of troops instead of companies/platoons/sections? This would take a bit of programming (probably a lot actually) but would force the computer to use more realistic OBs.

he, zombie, newbie, you ... sit back and think again .. what's the biggest formation SPWaW can handle ??

Companies!

And that's OK this way. Why? Because every unit is modeled speratly .. so there's a limit on formations/unit which both sides can have - and this won't change for SP, as it would basically mean re-writing the game engine (if you're interested how many units are possible, search the other threads ..)

You wouldn't like to spend your entire 5000 (10.000?) points for a battalion that is "set in stone", so you -and every other player- has to play with the same "Us Army Armored Battalion 1944/45", would you ??

In fact, SPWaW is played at company level, so the trick is to create Co.-formations that reflect the actual appearance of troops in the field.

The OOB team is working on this right at the moment .. looks like we all agree about creating these "in-field formations", so you'll have them with the set of "official final OOBs" .

Some examples from the discussion:

French Inf. Co. might receive medium tanks, as french doctrine saw the tank as infantry support weapon. (So no more Battle Tank Co. of Char B-1 !!)

US Army Rifle Co. gets 1 AT gun each (historically got it from Batt. HQ, but there isn't any use in adding this HQ Co., as in combat the euipment was "distributed" to the 3 Rifle Co on the Batt. !!)

hope you can get the idea ..

Arralen

zombie · Post by **zombie** » Fri Oct 06, 2000 2:47 pm

Nice to newcomers aren’t you?

Okay if the biggest unit that game can handle is a company, then why can I buy a tank rgt from support points in my campaign as a Russian in 41? I understand that the Russians `overstated` their units, calling a rgt what other nations called a battalion, perhaps I should have mentioned this in my post.

I am interested in how many units are possible; I will check that out, I didn’t know there was a formation limit cap.

No I wouldn’t like to see things set in stone, but I wouldn't mind the option of being able to buy a larger unit if I had enough points available.

Yes I can get almost any idea, and I hope you can as well

Nikademus · Post by **Nikademus** » Fri Oct 06, 2000 6:22 pm

Originally posted by zombie:
Here is a tentative idea, how about forcing the AI to buy battalions and regiments of troops instead of companies/platoons/sections? This would take a bit of programming (probably a lot actually) but would force the computer to use more realistic OBs.

A good idea, the problem is that many (i might even say most) players dont have realistic OB's for their core forces, so somehow manhandling the AI into choosing historical OB selecitons would only make playing against the AI that less challenging.

Not sure if it has been suggested already, but in the case of overwhelming #'s picked by the AI, could'nt this be overcome by setting a cap on the battle points it can use during the campaign?

Charles22 · Post by **Charles22** » Fri Oct 06, 2000 6:30 pm

Victorhauser: I didn't remember your peculiarity in the allowance of letting flags go. I'm all for smashing the enemy as best I can, with hopefully all the difficult historic choices I might make with a 'limited' force. Actually, not letting the enemy capture important areas would just further realism for the most part.

Ah, but how the new versions change things. You can no longer afford to give away timed hexes on the front, should they be present. Not only that, but it's forced my hand on buying for the Gerry campaign, a platoon of commandos in core to hope to take some timed hexes quicker. Have you ever actually shut the enemy out in SPWAW, Victor? The least SPWAW points I ever allowed was 1, and it came on one of those games where the AI concentrated all of his effort in an advance on only one of the objective clusters, so that I had to move an awful lot of stuff off the other areas. To make matters worse, it was the first battle I had played where the bombardment acuteness had been upped considerably, and I did get bombarded too. I still don't know how I did it; only suffering one point loss. Anytime you allow only one point, that has to be your most exaggerated victory margin, but the second highest victory margin was the one I described above, strangely enough, the same basic formula; they were battles in considerably difficult situations, not just the easy attack all three objecitive clustera at the same time type. It sure does say something for not bolting from the battles before you've even lost more than a tank or two.

BA Evans · Post by **BA Evans** » Fri Oct 06, 2000 7:58 pm

Originally posted by Nikademus:

Not sure if it has been suggested already, but in the case of overwhelming #'s picked by the AI, could'nt this be overcome by setting a cap on the battle points it can use during the campaign?

The AI needs those points to balance out your upgraded units and their high experience. A Tiger with 120 experience (Elite) is much more effective than a Tiger with 75 experience (Regular crew). With True Troop Cost on, the Elite Tiger costs a lot more than the Regular Tiger, which makes sense? The AI needs more points when tackling these tough units.

The AI either needs to purchase more experienced units to match your force, or they are forced to buy hordes of troops to make up for their lack of experience.

BA Evans

victorhauser · Post by **victorhauser** » Fri Oct 06, 2000 9:33 pm

Charles, I've never shut out the AI in SPWaW. In fact, most of my battles tend to be rather bloody affairs. Even when I manage to win a decisive victory, it's usually by the slimmest of margins. The reason is since I give the AI so many advantages, even small errors or bad luck on my part tend to result in my units paying a high price in "blood".

The only time I ever shut out the AI was when playing SP3 many moons ago in the Vietnam campaign where I had a totally airmobile force that the campaign was not intended to deal with. In that campaign I won battle after battle with ridiculous scores like 6683 to 6 and 5972 to 3, stuff like that. But that was taking advantage of SP3's inability to deal with airmobile operations rather than any real skill on my part.

Charles22 · Post by **Charles22** » Fri Oct 06, 2000 11:15 pm

victorhauser: I recall my Panzer Strike days, where I could probably lose at least a tank ot two in pursuit of the routed enemy, because my idea was the total destruction of the other side, be they attacking or not; something I did manage to pull off a few times. In SPWAW, however, there's no way to smash a routed enemy because he surrenders before any pursuit proper can gather steam.

That was a fairly boring part of Panzer Strike because you spent so much time moving every unit, in order to not only destroy all the enemy units, but also to exit all of them off the board. So, as my philosophy isn't too terribly different from Panzer Strike, the surrendering enemy is enabling me not to destroy more of my tanks, thus ensuring that the scores may take on greater differentials.

If you've been campaigning, have you seen any exit hexes yet (perhaps they can't happen in campaigns)?

DownUnder · Post by **DownUnder** » Mon Oct 09, 2000 1:44 am

The AI needs those points to balance out your upgraded units and their high experience. A Tiger with 120 experience (Elite) is much more effective than a Tiger with 75 experience (Regular crew). With True Troop Cost on, the Elite Tiger costs a lot more than the Regular Tiger, which makes sense? The AI needs more points when tackling these tough units.

The AI either needs to purchase more experienced units to match your force, or they are forced to buy hordes of troops to make up for their lack of experience.

BA Evans

What I would like to see is the AI purchase units with equipment and skill equivalent (maybe a little higher) to my own and then have the ability to take me on with a reasonable fight.

Predominantly I would like to see the AI improved beyond the "charge" tactic it uses now. I know this is difficult but it would vastly improve the game.

Arralen · Post by **Arralen** » Mon Oct 09, 2000 2:06 am

Originally posted by DownUnder:
Predominantly I would like to see the AI improved beyond the "charge" tactic it uses now. I know this is difficult but it would vastly improve the game.

Agree on this one. Did already some suggestions about this when V2.0 came out, but never received a real answer to this from the programming folks, you know what I mean?
Seemingly there's nothing what can be done to improve the old SP engine

Arralen

[This message has been edited by Arralen (edited October 08, 2000).]

john g · Post by **john g** » Mon Oct 09, 2000 6:04 am

Originally posted by Arralen:
Agree on this one. Did already some suggestions about this when V2.0 came out, but never received a real answer to this from the programming folks, you know what I mean?
Seemingly there's nothing what can be done to improve the old SP engine

Arralen

[This message has been edited by Arralen (edited October 08, 2000).]

What I would like to see is the ai doing tricky items like airdrops or commando infils. The usual charge across open ground with masses of arty and airpower is more akin to WWI. Any time that I get a defend or delay in my campaign, I just set up a continous line of infantry backed by tanks (acting as pillboxes) and proceed to destroy any targets in front of me.
thanks, John.

victorhauser · Post by **victorhauser** » Mon Oct 09, 2000 8:37 am

Originally posted by Charles22:
In SPWAW, however, there's no way to smash a routed enemy because he surrenders before any pursuit proper can gather steam.

If you've been campaigning, have you seen any exit hexes yet (perhaps they can't happen in campaigns)?

Charles: Now you know one of the reasons why I let the AI capture and or hold Victory Flags until the very end of the battle. That way it cannot surrender and I can wipe them all out (or as many as I care to). But you are also correct that the Points-per-Turn Victory Flags make things more interesting and challenging.

Also, I have not encountered Exit Hexes yet in any of my campaign battles.

victorhauser · Post by **victorhauser** » Mon Oct 09, 2000 9:04 am

Originally posted by DownUnder:
What I would like to see is the AI purchase units with equipment and skill equivalent (maybe a little higher) to my own and then have the ability to take me on with a reasonable fight.

Downunder: There are ways to get the AI to do this. The most efficient way is to: 1) turn Historical Ratings OFF and manually set the AI Troop Quality; and 2) then set the AI to a value corresponding to the troop quality you want to fight against.

For example, by the 7th game of almost any campaign I'm fighting (I use a progressive increase from battles #1 through #6 to enhance AI parameters) the AI in my campaigns have the following parameters (which I keep for the rest of the campaign excapt that I also increase AI Tank toughness to 120% at around the midpoint of the campaign):
AI set to 200
AI Advantage turned ON
True Troop Cost turned ON
AI Rout/Rally set to 200%
AI To-Hit set to 200%
AI Troop Quality set to 60
AI Tank Toughness set to 110%
AI Infantry Toughness set to 200%
AI Sighting set to 80% (to offset increase in average AI unit quality, 80% of 140 = 112 which is still extremely effective)
All other settings at 100%
All my settings at 100% except that my Troop Quality is set to 80 and my sighting is set to 110% (gives me a mediocre chance to spot AI 140 infantry).

The above settings give the AI an average unit quality of 140 (max) and further increases its fighting power by 200% for hitting and rallying and infantry toughness. And it does this at a per-unit cost of 60 rather than encyclopedia cost of 70, thus giving the AI approximately 14% more units than it would normally get, even with AI Advantage and True Unit Cost turned ON, so I will be outnumbered even more and by the highest quality AI troops. I used to max the AI out at 250% but I've discovered that with breakdowns turned ON I can no longer be so generous to the AI and still have an outside chance to win decisive victories (most of my battles end up as Marginal Victories ending on the final turn, with a few Draws and a few Decisive Victories tossed in).

Charles22 · Post by **Charles22** » Tue Oct 10, 2000 5:37 pm

victorhauser: Well thank you Victor, there's a method to your madness afterall. I can see how letting them take something could be advantageous. The only time I ever considered letting them take something was when the opponent is known in advance to likely be way too dominant, so that my fire could be more concentrated to hold two areas instead of three, and then to move on the third when the other areas were obliterated.

It makes it a lot easier if the unguarded area is in a valley and you are on a hill behind it, but thats not terribly common. Maybe the best thing when on the defensive in an assault, would be to heavily guard the relatively timed area with infantry alongside ATGs and some tanks you wouldn't mind moving up, which would need to be hidden, so as to avoid taking fire without returning any.

Hmmm, ahhhh, (don't want to sound too much like Floyd the barber here) now I can see VERY good use for dragons teeth for such a situation. Let the enemy take one lousy hex and then start blazing away so as to level the units that try to remove the dragons teeth. To help keep the enemy tanks from bothering the infantry, tanks laden with smoke charges could be positioned so as to frustrate tank attempts to rout the infantry beyond the dragons teeth.