Directive 21 1941-1945 (V4.61)

[sPzAbt653]

Guys, I am lost on these newer versions as I was not involved and don't have any of the files on my computer, so I can't be of much help. I can tell you that Rick had made custom terrain for Finland - Deep Forest and Wilderness. They functioned well and looked very good in III, but sadly they were not supported by IV. Therefore, for the newer version [not yet released] I have had to remove all that stuff, which is a real shame. So we go back to using Badlands and Major Escarpment. As far as I can tell, there are no graphics files used for D21 by IV, so I think you can delete them all if they look wonky.

[sPzAbt653]

I think it's too early to start a new thread on what is being worked on, but I wanted to ask opinions about something. I am playtesting and in this version by May 1943 all of the Shock Levels are equaled at 100%. For the purpose of this scenario, Shock is used to reflect different levels of effectiveness. For example, the Soviets were more effective in winter combat than the Axis, therefore the Soviets get Positive Shock during the winter. Another example is the Soviet Airforce, it was never as effective as the Axis Air Forces, so the Axis gets positive Air Shock.

So having all Shock Levels equal by May 1943 [or ever for that matter] seems a little off. Does anyone else have an opinion?

[BigDuke66]

Well according to the readme Soviet Air Shock will go up to 110, and the Axis suffers shock penalties in Winter. That is not that much for the rest of the game but at least something. What other shock should be depicted?

[sPzAbt653]

I'm spitballing the thought that if the Luftwaffe is 100% Effective, at what level is the Red Air Force? And if the Wehrmacht is 100% Effective, at what level is the Red Army? That is with respect to all else being equal, or rather unequal at times.

So the Red Air Force and Red Army at at low Shock Levels at the start of Barbarossa, but these levels rise as the scenario progresses. The Red Air Force does reach 110% by the end of the scenario, while the Luftwaffe is at 100% at the same time. I think that raises the question 'Was the Red Air Force 10% more effective than the Luftwaffe in 1945?'.

Along the same lines, at the first winter the Wehrmacht was markedly less effective than the Red Army, but was the Red Army equally effective as the Wehrmacht from 1943 on?

The Shock Settings are used in this scenario to reflect Force Effectiveness, so these settings are necessarily scrutinized.

[Edwire]

Personally, I think "Shock level" should only be used for global event, such as Winter Offensive, opening Case Blau, etc. But to reflect "effective", that should be in the proficiency of each unit. So in normal circumstances, both side should have 100% shock level.

CMIIW lower proficiency also make units prone to "re-organizing"

[Zovs]

CMIIW means ?

[Edwire]

correct me if I'm wrong

[sPzAbt653]

lower proficiency also make units prone to "re-organizing"

Yes it does, along with other things, so that is why I am trying to keep the Shock as the separate measure of Effectiveness. There are also Force, Formation and Unit Proficiency's, which have their separate usefulness. I agree with you on the 'global event' thought, and the thinking is that Effectiveness is a Global Event.

So in normal circumstances, both side should have 100% shock level.

This is part of what I am reviewing here, because the overall [global] Effectiveness is something in addition to the various Proficiency Ratings.

[sPzAbt653]

Let me add some stuff to clarify, and so that we are all on the same page as far as looking for the proper way to gauge Effectiveness.

In reference to a 400 turn scenario with quite heavy combat activity, Unit Proficiency is good for about the first couple turns only, by turn 20 all units are up to 100% anyway. Plus take into account the proficiency of reconstituted units and Unit Proficiency hardly means anything.

Formation Proficiency is a gauge on how long a Formation will stay in combats [how many rounds] before it could go into re-organization.

Force Proficiency is a gauge on how long before a Force will end the turn [after how many rounds].

[Curtis Lemay]

ORIGINAL: Edwire

Personally, I think "Shock level" should only be used for global event, such as Winter Offensive, opening Case Blau, etc. But to reflect "effective", that should be in the proficiency of each unit. So in normal circumstances, both side should have 100% shock level.

CMIIW lower proficiency also make units prone to "re-organizing"

But only due to combat reorganization - troops are so beaten down that they have to reorganize.

Shock reorganization, however, can represent C&C issues - crummy commanders or disrupted communications, etc.

[76mm]

ORIGINAL: sPzAbt653
...Unit Proficiency is good for about the first couple turns only, by turn 20 all units are up to 100% anyway...

Is that for German units, or for Soviet units as well? And that assumes that all of them have engaged in significant combat? And finally, presumably if units get replacements, presumably they would water down the proficiency?

[larryfulkerson]

ORIGINAL: 76mm

ORIGINAL: sPzAbt653
...Unit Proficiency is good for about the first couple turns only, by turn 20 all units are up to 100% anyway...

Is that for German units, or for Soviet units as well? And that assumes that all of them have engaged in significant combat? And finally, presumably if units get replacements, presumably they would water down the proficiency?

That's my understanding as well. Each successful combat gives each of the attacking participants a tiny boost in proficiency so that it increases over time for each unit so that by T20 or so Steve is saying that they are probably all near 100% and I concur. And the same thing happens for both sides ( simultaneously ). And as a unit gets replacements of a lower proficiency than the unit, the proficiency of the unit is reduced a tiny bit or a lot depending on the number of replacements and their individual proficiency. There's some kind of mathematical formula to give the resulting unit proficiency but I'm not sure what it is. Some kind of weighted average or something.

[sPzAbt653]

Right right right what Larry says. I am exaggerating for emphasis, but for real, if a German unit starts at 80% and is in combat for 20 turns, it is at 100%. Most 'at-start' Soviet units won't last more than a few combats at most. However, when they reconstitute, they are somewhere between their original prof and the formation prof, then they are set to Untried, then when they have first combat the prof can go +/- 30, so ... most of them end up over 90% even after reconstitution.

EDIT: Not +/-30, but actually 33%. So if a unit is at 80%, and is destroyed, and its Formation is at 80%, it will most likely reconstitute at 80% [untried]. At first combat it could end up anywhere from 55% to 100%.

[sPzAbt653]

the proficiency of the unit is reduced a tiny bit or a lot depending on the number of replacements and their individual proficiency.

I wasn't sure about this so I had to check. I think this is the only effect:

If a Veteran unit receives large quantities of replacement equipment, there is a chance that the unit will lose its Veteran status.

This actually happens in D21 to all of the divisions [Panzer] that undergo refits. It's the lesser of all evils.

[rhinobones]

ORIGINAL: sPzAbt653

If a Veteran unit receives large quantities of replacement equipment, there is a chance that the unit will lose its Veteran status.

Why would a unit lose its veteran status due to an equipment change or replacement, especially when the new equipment is considered an upgrade? After all, it is the people who are the veterans, not the equipment.

What’s the logic behind the status downgrade?

Regards, RhinoBones

[BigDuke66]

For equipment it could be the time to adapt to the new stuff.
For replacements it's of course that with enough new men coming in I can't call the whole unit veteran anymore even if a lot veterans are still in it.

[BigDuke66]

Back to proficiency, what really justifies a 100% unit proficiency?
Wouldn't only very few units reach this level of perfection?
If so, could the engine be adjusted to make it proportional harder from 90% on to gain a 1%.
I think the closer to perfection one gets the harder it is to improve further, and I would say this counts for pretty much everything in the world.

And this +/-33% seems way overdone for untried units, +/-15% gives a range of 30% what is more than enough, everything beyond feels like lottery.

[larryfulkerson]

What does this R stand for?

[StuccoFresco]

Reinforcements hex, IIRC: it's where red side reconstituted units re-enters the map.

[Zovs]

Larry my version does not have a big R on the map on that hex.

If I am not mistaken the 'R' only shows up in edit mode and its for the 'reentry point' or the place where reconstituted units for either side 1 (blue generally) or side 2 (red generally).