A complete overhaul and re-development of Gary Grigsby's War in the East, with a focus on improvements to historical accuracy, realism, user interface and AI.
It is also worth noting that, ideally, I would rather not have deployed all those units all in one place all at once like that. I would rather that they be able to train in reserve and be deployed gradually at various places when they are actually trained up. But unfortunately, that is not a viable option at the start of the StB scenario for Soviets. You really HAVE to deploy all the units, despite them not being ready trained up there, because on the very first German turn, Germany can ahistorically attack against frozen Soviet units and do this:
Although that is with using motorization to get infantry to Kaluga, they can do pretty similar without. The scenario is not balanced to enable Soviets to be able to defend with what they have on the map at the start in places where, historically, Axis had no real ability to do a large scale offensive like that, that is the problem here as much as the deployment of reserves in one place (they are both problems IMO, but in this case the one would not have occurred without the other). If you want Soviet players to not have to do this, then start the scenario so that Germany can't do this before Soviets have real time to react to it and defend against it.
You can always spread your reserves out along the front, in different hexes. If you have several places you want troops, put down the number of units you want in one hex, then change your TB Reserve hex to somewhere else and then put down however many you want in the hex. There's no limit to how many times you can change the Reserve hex each turn. Saves railing them long distances and you don't suck up all the local supply.
On my first Soviet multiplayer game, I was playing against Bread. Bread was going hard for Leningrad, eventually sending up to 3 Panzergruppe north to try and take Leningrad.
At around turn 6-8 or so, after Kiev was taken and the Dnepr was breached, I decided that having lost the Dnepr defense line, there was really no point in trying to defend anything from roughly between Kiev and Dnepropetrovsk. And I also needed more troops in Leningrad.
So, what I did was simply to take ALL the divisions defending along the Dnepr between Kiev and Dnepropetrovsk, and I sent them ALL to national reserve. This was probably at least 30-40 divisions or so.
2-3 turns later, I deployed them ALL up around the Volkhov river somewhere, and they then helped to ensure that Leningrad held in subsequent turns.
The fact that that is possible seems quite unrealistic to me. In reality, the logistical capacity to transfer so many divisions, so quickly, from the Kiev-Poltava area all to Leningrad would have been limited, because there was only limited rail capacity available to Leningrad in particular. That would be less the case if I were transferring troops to somewhere like Moscow, where there are more rail lines, but it is a lot less realistic for transferring troops en masse to somewhere like Leningrad (or later, perhaps to somewhere like the Caucasus).
To me, that sort of thing seems like an issue, and I think that is the problem with mass deployment of reserves in one place, more so than the particular example in the StB scenario (where, again, the Soviets have little choice but to do that due to problems with the initial scenario design that allow for ahistorical Axis encirclements taking advantage of Soviet troops that start the scenario frozen for several turns and unable to respond.
Poor Soviets, now good luck to rail those units to place where they are needed. Spawning huge number of units in one place is exact opposite of benefit(except the case when you want all units in one place).
Regarding the implausibility, reserve TB is not some specific place in Soviet Union but virtual to make handling certain things easier. You can look at this specific situation like all these 33 conscript divisions were built near Tula.
See in your first sentence you hit on something. I have read items in both the BETA forums & on the main forums that talk about Soviets having too good of supply for 41. You have Reserves to the map and the Movement of the factories not having a hit on the rail system that I know of. Maybe they did maybe they did not. I don't know but to me it does not seem it. This situation goes hand and hand and "Eyes" have not seen that this subject matter of this thread is a direct correlation. Maybe it is abstractly modeled but is it accurate? To me it doesn't seem to fit very well.
Hhahahahahahahahahahaha, 33 Soviet divisions (there were 31 in the picture) all being trained in the Tula area! Lets just switch this and say there were 31 GERMAN divisions in that area that were being built to not to try and have people "blinded" because SOOOOO many people get so defensive protecting a side when you need to look at cause and effect. These Divisions, that are German now in my example, never took up supply, rail or anything else while it was happening. You can't recon them to see because they fall out of the sky from the gawds. But they mysteriously show up in the right place at the right time even to delay at a minimum. If you don't question that then you are playing a fantasy.
People will figure it out soon enough just like I said on many many many other things which have come to fruition. This will get shoved under the rug as already being fair but I am sorry to say this, "but many are not thinking deep enough on how this can be used". I will wait as I always do since I don't want to bang heads with closed minds.
I have more important things to do like "kicking the cats".
Poor Soviets, now good luck to rail those units to place where they are needed. Spawning huge number of units in one place is exact opposite of benefit(except the case when you want all units in one place).
Regarding the implausibility, reserve TB is not some specific place in Soviet Union but virtual to make handling certain things easier. You can look at this specific situation like all these 33 conscript divisions were built near Tula.
exactly, next turn they are going to be struggling to get MP over 8, and any attempt to redeploy will be difficult due to having to rely on local rail capacity.
but ... lets have another thread on how biased the game design is [&:]
Sigh..... You are still missing the point what I wrote. Did you read it? I think not.
The second sentence you yet again drag the subject down to a "bias" which does not help in any way to the conversation. It is not Soviet side German side but how it is modeled. Does the model fit, I believe you think it does. To me, it is modeled like angels from heaven(the divisions) come at the right place at the right time without having any effect on resourse on the map until after the fact. So you are right about game design BUT NOT the bias. Please keep the conversation to that and get BIAS out of this.
Something has to be abstracted somewhere, it's got nothing to do with bias or trying to screw the axis. As carlcay notes it's not without serious consequences. There has to a a viable alternative to getting this many troops out of reserves and into the field. I'm sure many things were considered, having a limit to how many should be able to turn up each turn at any given point might be simple(ish), or a few fixed mobilisation points around national supply points that could be selected via a TB drop down same way as TB transfers but instead to points on map that reflect divisions mustering. But never going to be able to get around that units will appear somewhere whether you call or magic or abstraction.
In WITE1 it was much more realistic! Divisions were created in those cities where they were historically created or arrived at the eastern edge of the map, received supplies and replenishment there, and then moved along the railway to the front. Everything was very clear and practical.
You left out the old spooky interaction at a distance of quantum entanglement of how SUs can move seemingly travel faster than light.
The other day, I proved SUs are particles not waves as they have mass. I was using the old trick to set every HQ to zero so that SHAEF would be holding all of them next turn. Well, to my irritation, Ike's HQ had become so massive that he was over the 90K tons and over the port limit of Algiers.
Who says there are no quantum affects in games?
Yes, SU's are another item. They should take up rail & other resources and delay between HQ's to get to their respective destination. The programming for that will never be implemented I am sure.
What about stacking? HQ stacking should be free in my eyes in a hex. Three regiments taking up a hex the same as where 3 divisions would go just isn't right. Should be stacking points placed on units in the game something like HQ=0, Battalion = 1/2, Regiment = 1, Division = 3, Corps = 4 with a stacking point for a hex = 6 or 7. This is another item I feel should be in the game right now but this will never be programmed. But getting back to the SU's I think they should be on the map but that will never happen since the counter density itself would make this game unbearable to play for many. But I would love to see it.
It was part of the design to have the reserve simplify things. Now the Soviets did mass many reserve armies around the Moscow area in November 1941 and only released a few when Tula was threatened. In game they would be in the reserve box, while in reality many of them were hanging out just to the east of Moscow, IIRC. Yes the reserve box is an abstraction and likely subject to some abuse. But the Germans around Moscow were probably wondering where the heck those Soviet armies came from when they got released in Dec 41.
All understanding comes after the fact.
-- Soren Kierkegaard
SU on map == Excess of micromanagement. But I do agree there should be a mobility form of tax and the delay like there was in WITE1 (Unless the shift is of 1 tier. One can freely shift from Corp HQ to Division and back in same turn, or Corp HQ to Army HQ and back in same turn, etc). If I assign something... right now it just teleports on the spot. As Axis I use that a lot on situational dependancy and issue the SU back to OKH next. [I think this will hurt a lot Germans in '41]
Stacking Values per unit per hex == Other games but it's implemented in other games pretty much yes.
I've a game ongoing where I am Russian and I shoved huge chunks of reserves anywhere was needed (Well in that case it was Leningrad sector). They can be assigned on the spot to a leader; they are decently supplied and moved of 8-12 MPs.. so nothing out of the ordinary from the 'already on map' Soviet forces.
So I am in for a Freight Cost on reserves, they ought to move from a NSS to the spot / location where needed and that counts as freight.
Additional Freight can be placed at the start of the scenario to help out in some sectors of Mother Russia to enable a better moving of Reserves on the initial few turns but that should be it. (Pratically the extra freigh in place offsets the 'missed freight' that Moscow would send there or there as instead reserves are moved).
Something has to be abstracted somewhere, it's got nothing to do with bias or trying to screw the axis. As carlcay notes it's not without serious consequences. There has to a a viable alternative to getting this many troops out of reserves and into the field. I'm sure many things were considered, having a limit to how many should be able to turn up each turn at any given point might be simple(ish), or a few fixed mobilisation points around national supply points that could be selected via a TB drop down same way as TB transfers but instead to points on map that reflect divisions mustering. But never going to be able to get around that units will appear somewhere whether you call or magic or abstraction.
In WITE1 it was much more realistic! Divisions were created in those cities where they were historically created or arrived at the eastern edge of the map, received supplies and replenishment there, and then moved along the railway to the front. Everything was very clear and practical.
Reading all this back and forth, and Joe's response, why NOT have units spawn where and when they were formed? WitE did that, easy to do here. I mean to me this is the solution to the problem, other than TB abuse.
Something has to be abstracted somewhere, it's got nothing to do with bias or trying to screw the axis. As carlcay notes it's not without serious consequences. There has to a a viable alternative to getting this many troops out of reserves and into the field. I'm sure many things were considered, having a limit to how many should be able to turn up each turn at any given point might be simple(ish), or a few fixed mobilisation points around national supply points that could be selected via a TB drop down same way as TB transfers but instead to points on map that reflect divisions mustering. But never going to be able to get around that units will appear somewhere whether you call or magic or abstraction.
In WITE1 it was much more realistic! Divisions were created in those cities where they were historically created or arrived at the eastern edge of the map, received supplies and replenishment there, and then moved along the railway to the front. Everything was very clear and practical.
Reading all this back and forth, and Joe's response, why NOT have units spawn where and when they were formed? WitE did that, easy to do here. I mean to me this is the solution to the problem, other than TB abuse.
AlbertN has a good solution for TB abuse also.
Therefore, I have already proposed to designate the place of arrival of troops from the reserve, the right edge of the map for the Russians and the left edge for the Germans. And let the new troops arrive directly at the map, and not in the reserve! This would solve the problem of abuse of the reserve theater.
Therefore, I have already proposed to designate the place of arrival of troops from the reserve, the right edge of the map for the Russians and the left edge for the Germans. And let the new troops arrive directly at the map, and not in the reserve! This would solve the problem of abuse of the reserve theater.
Rail is limiting factor for such solution. Soviets receiving lot of units and moving all of them from map edge would take half a year.
