Matrix Games Forums

The Germans had almost no weather forcast once their weather stations in the Arctic had been eliminated. If we have random weather maybe one could make it less random, however, with a forecast what each period's chances may be.

In V4V the forecast could be lying but not that much concerning next turn.

The Germans were surprised by mud and snow because they never prepared for it and hoped to end Barbarossa in summer. But that's something different than launching your offensive without knowing next week weather at all. Sometimes it may even help the defenders because the attacker will postpone his attack knowing the next turn will be mud. That way mud will be working for two turns: on first psychologically and on the next normally

First time to this thread, so forgive me if it's in the first 7 pages, which I have not read.

Would it be possible to setup a toggle for manual air resupply missions so that the supplies can be dropped to a particular unit in the stack? Especially important for HQs: if an infantry brigade is stacked with a panzer corps, and the Luftwaffe drops 100 tons of fuel, about half that will be delivered to a unit that doesn't need it.

There is a manual work-around for this, but it requires you to move either the HQ or its stacked guard, then airdrop, then move the two back together as a stack. Either way, this costs the moving unit some supplies.

This work-around creates a handicap in isolated pockets, or narrow pincers especially. I'd like to see some better logic applied to how supplies get dispersed to the units in the supplied hex.

I would agree with this now that there is a heavier attrition penalty for movement.

My suggestion.

The ability to use Admin Points to cancel Historical Withdrawal dates. Make it an option.
Those that want to play historical Reinforcement/Withdrawals should not be forced to use this.

ORIGINAL: Sabre21
That would really take a huge expenditure in time and testing in order to get something like a random unit location feature in place. Honestly i don't see the devs taking the time for this when an editor is available that will allow for all kinds of set-ups. I know this isn't quite the same, but it is what we have.

Fair enough, it was just a thought for something that could be nice, but hardly a must have.


On a different token, what about Light Mud?

The spring and fall mud in Russia was notorious, and despite the complaints I have seen, the full mud rules are appropriate in those periods. Not a lot happened when the ground was like that.

BUT, that mud required the heavy run off of a large amount of melting snow, or the heavy rains of spring. Mud outside those periods (in random weather) shouldn't be that severe. Either because the ground is still mostly frozen and you just have a bit of a mid-winter thaw (what around here we call an 'Indian Summer' or a 'Chinook') - its a mess but not as bad as a full melt. Or for summer rains, the rain won't be severe enough for the ground to turn to complete soup.

And if feeling really complete, between winter and summer, or summer and fall there could be a period where the mud isn't as heavy (either when its starting to dry out, or the rains have only started to really set in). For that period though, I would only have a week of light mud between the full mud and clear weather.

Basically Light mud would have a moderate impact on movement (maybe half as severe as full mud), a small effect on air missions, and a very small effect on ground combat (if any at all).

Russia Beseiged used Light Mud as an intermediate point and I thought it a good feature.

ORIGINAL: heliodorus04

First time to this thread, so forgive me if it's in the first 7 pages, which I have not read.

Would it be possible to setup a toggle for manual air resupply missions so that the supplies can be dropped to a particular unit in the stack? Especially important for HQs: if an infantry brigade is stacked with a panzer corps, and the Luftwaffe drops 100 tons of fuel, about half that will be delivered to a unit that doesn't need it.

There is a manual work-around for this, but it requires you to move either the HQ or its stacked guard, then airdrop, then move the two back together as a stack. Either way, this costs the moving unit some supplies.

This work-around creates a handicap in isolated pockets, or narrow pincers especially. I'd like to see some better logic applied to how supplies get dispersed to the units in the supplied hex.

+1!

I find it a tad annoying when for some reason one unit in a stack needs supplies really badly, so I drop some in there, and yet the other units who aren't in as severe need grab their share anyway! Someohow I don't think the Wehrmacht was run by former kindergarten teachers (now everyone, remember to share!) While I'm sure there was hoarding going on and every commander would fight for every thing possible to make sure his command was in the best shape possible, there would still be a higher command saying "General, your unit it listed at 80% supply, not perfect but pretty good. The 142nd however is listed at 47%, I think they need the food and ammunition we are going to drop just a little more than you do!"

There would probably be some 'slippage' to other units, but you should be able to pick a single unit to get the lion's share of a care package.

Similarly, how do you supply a pocket when there is no HQ? I think you have to drop supplies on each hex, which is a bit silly. Not sure how this would work, but it would be good if players could spawn a "pocket HQ" or something which could then serve as a supply hub for all of the units in the pocket.

ORIGINAL: morvael

Such simple thing as weather forecast is badly needed. It was in V for Victory, even with variable efficiency for both sides of the conflict (allies > germans > soviets), because of weather usually moving from west to east. It's extremely frustrating to launch an offensive stopped dead when there is mud next turn. Surely at least 1 week forecast is a minimum required, especially with random weather on. Just "roll die" for weather a turn earlier and show it somewhere to the player.

This will probably have to wait for a later edition of the game. Of course you could open the manual, look at the random chart and have an idea of what to expect. You could even roll a die yourself and be about as accurate as many forcasters I know...lol.

ORIGINAL: heliodorus04

First time to this thread, so forgive me if it's in the first 7 pages, which I have not read.

Would it be possible to setup a toggle for manual air resupply missions so that the supplies can be dropped to a particular unit in the stack? Especially important for HQs: if an infantry brigade is stacked with a panzer corps, and the Luftwaffe drops 100 tons of fuel, about half that will be delivered to a unit that doesn't need it.

There is a manual work-around for this, but it requires you to move either the HQ or its stacked guard, then airdrop, then move the two back together as a stack. Either way, this costs the moving unit some supplies.

This work-around creates a handicap in isolated pockets, or narrow pincers especially. I'd like to see some better logic applied to how supplies get dispersed to the units in the supplied hex.

That's a pretty fair idea and I'll add it to the list, don't hold your breath too long though...poor Pavel has several full plates of stuff he is working on as is.

ORIGINAL: WarHunter

My suggestion.

The ability to use Admin Points to cancel Historical Withdrawal dates. Make it an option.
Those that want to play historical Reinforcement/Withdrawals should not be forced to use this.

That's been brought up already and unfortunately due to how involved the German reinforcement/withdraw schedule is, it would mess up a lot of things allowing for something like this. For this version of the game, the system is pretty much locked in stone when it comes to this. Hopefully when War in Europe ever comes around, we will see a much more player involved production system.

ORIGINAL: neuromancer

ORIGINAL: Sabre21
That would really take a huge expenditure in time and testing in order to get something like a random unit location feature in place. Honestly i don't see the devs taking the time for this when an editor is available that will allow for all kinds of set-ups. I know this isn't quite the same, but it is what we have.

Fair enough, it was just a thought for something that could be nice, but hardly a must have.


On a different token, what about Light Mud?

The spring and fall mud in Russia was notorious, and despite the complaints I have seen, the full mud rules are appropriate in those periods. Not a lot happened when the ground was like that.

BUT, that mud required the heavy run off of a large amount of melting snow, or the heavy rains of spring. Mud outside those periods (in random weather) shouldn't be that severe. Either because the ground is still mostly frozen and you just have a bit of a mid-winter thaw (what around here we call an 'Indian Summer' or a 'Chinook') - its a mess but not as bad as a full melt. Or for summer rains, the rain won't be severe enough for the ground to turn to complete soup.

And if feeling really complete, between winter and summer, or summer and fall there could be a period where the mud isn't as heavy (either when its starting to dry out, or the rains have only started to really set in). For that period though, I would only have a week of light mud between the full mud and clear weather.

Basically Light mud would have a moderate impact on movement (maybe half as severe as full mud), a small effect on air missions, and a very small effect on ground combat (if any at all).

Russia Beseiged used Light Mud as an intermediate point and I thought it a good feature.

I'm hoping to eventually see changes in the weather system, smaller zones for instance, but for now we have what we have.

ORIGINAL: 76mm

Similarly, how do you supply a pocket when there is no HQ? I think you have to drop supplies on each hex, which is a bit silly. Not sure how this would work, but it would be good if players could spawn a "pocket HQ" or something which could then serve as a supply hub for all of the units in the pocket.

I actually prefer to drop supplies to the unit itself rather than to an Hq, but that's an interesting idea, spawning an hq when isolated if one doesn't exist. A lot of pockets usually end up getting killed off within a turn and for those really large pockets, there's usually multiple Hq's available. None the less it might be something to consider, especially if the pocket survives more than a turn or 2.

That's been brought up already and unfortunately due to how involved the German reinforcement/withdraw schedule is, it would mess up a lot of things allowing for something like this. For this version of the game, the system is pretty much locked in stone when it comes to this. Hopefully when War in Europe ever comes around, we will see a much more player involved production system.

Sabre21,

Thanks for the reply. Looking forward to a more player involved production system. [8D]

One historical issue I have with the game after reading David Glantz' Barbarossa Derailed is how relatively restrictive the admin point cost is for reassigning units, especially corps and army Hq and particularly for the Axis side. For example, Glantz on 380-4 lists changes to Army Group Center's OOB for a few weeks in August (from abolishing Fourth "Panzer" Army to creating Armygruppeguderian and changes in seemingly every other infantry formation in between), which (with a little exaggeration) probably would cost a good six months worth of admin points in game terms. Glantz does cite here the "extreme flexibility" of the German command structure.

In game terms, I think the biggest ahistorical issue is that it costs too much to switch a corps HQ or an army HQ--- perhaps more historical might be having a nominal cost (as low as 1-3 admin points) on top of the cost of the subordinate units (which may be a bit too high as well). A good in-game example where I think problems with the admin costs is evident is the start of Case Blau scenario, where the Germans must spend the vast bulk of their admin points to clean out a very messy CnC structure based on the initial break through plans--- hardly the "extreme flexibility" Glantz argues, and nor a CnC issue that would seem to plague the Germans historically in 1942.

A wider problem (and one probably more for the "next game" in the series) is that I think it is problematic that admin points control both OOB and more supply orientated aspects such as HQ build up or the creation of Soviet units. I could see a strong case being made that the Axis should have the ability to switch around units nearly at will (and the Soviets perhaps a bit more than they can now), but with a much more limited ability to create supply build ups. Perhaps breaking admin points into two separate categories might be a good solution, and allow a bit more historical fine tuning of the two sides relative capabilities.

ORIGINAL: map66

One historical issue I have with the game after reading David Glantz' Barbarossa Derailed is how relatively restrictive the admin point cost is for reassigning units, especially corps and army Hq and particularly for the Axis side. For example, Glantz on 380-4 lists changes to Army Group Center's OOB for a few weeks in August (from abolishing Fourth "Panzer" Army to creating Armygruppeguderian and changes in seemingly every other infantry formation in between), which (with a little exaggeration) probably would cost a good six months worth of admin points in game terms. Glantz does cite here the "extreme flexibility" of the German command structure.

In game terms, I think the biggest ahistorical issue is that it costs too much to switch a corps HQ or an army HQ--- perhaps more historical might be having a nominal cost (as low as 1-3 admin points) on top of the cost of the subordinate units (which may be a bit too high as well). A good in-game example where I think problems with the admin costs is evident is the start of Case Blau scenario, where the Germans must spend the vast bulk of their admin points to clean out a very messy CnC structure based on the initial break through plans--- hardly the "extreme flexibility" Glantz argues, and nor a CnC issue that would seem to plague the Germans historically in 1942.

A wider problem (and one probably more for the "next game" in the series) is that I think it is problematic that admin points control both OOB and more supply orientated aspects such as HQ build up or the creation of Soviet units. I could see a strong case being made that the Axis should have the ability to switch around units nearly at will (and the Soviets perhaps a bit more than they can now), but with a much more limited ability to create supply build ups. Perhaps breaking admin points into two separate categories might be a good solution, and allow a bit more historical fine tuning of the two sides relative capabilities.

This was brought up in testing multiple times. It used to cost a lot more ap's than it does, but they were reduced to where they are now. I know it isn't as flexible as some would like it, but it is what we have more for game balancing at this point.

Can we have the weekly logistics report show the arrival of new leaders into the leader pool?

ORIGINAL: Sabre21

ORIGINAL: map66

One historical issue I have with the game after reading David Glantz' Barbarossa Derailed is how relatively restrictive the admin point cost is for reassigning units, especially corps and army Hq and particularly for the Axis side. For example, Glantz on 380-4 lists changes to Army Group Center's OOB for a few weeks in August (from abolishing Fourth "Panzer" Army to creating Armygruppeguderian and changes in seemingly every other infantry formation in between), which (with a little exaggeration) probably would cost a good six months worth of admin points in game terms. Glantz does cite here the "extreme flexibility" of the German command structure.

In game terms, I think the biggest ahistorical issue is that it costs too much to switch a corps HQ or an army HQ--- perhaps more historical might be having a nominal cost (as low as 1-3 admin points) on top of the cost of the subordinate units (which may be a bit too high as well). A good in-game example where I think problems with the admin costs is evident is the start of Case Blau scenario, where the Germans must spend the vast bulk of their admin points to clean out a very messy CnC structure based on the initial break through plans--- hardly the "extreme flexibility" Glantz argues, and nor a CnC issue that would seem to plague the Germans historically in 1942.

A wider problem (and one probably more for the "next game" in the series) is that I think it is problematic that admin points control both OOB and more supply orientated aspects such as HQ build up or the creation of Soviet units. I could see a strong case being made that the Axis should have the ability to switch around units nearly at will (and the Soviets perhaps a bit more than they can now), but with a much more limited ability to create supply build ups. Perhaps breaking admin points into two separate categories might be a good solution, and allow a bit more historical fine tuning of the two sides relative capabilities.

This was brought up in testing multiple times. It used to cost a lot more ap's than it does, but they were reduced to where they are now. I know it isn't as flexible as some would like it, but it is what we have more for game balancing at this point.

Good point brought up by Map66!

The Soviets are at present much more flexible than the Germans in command structure in the game. Reassigning a Soviet division rarely costs more than 1 AP, while reassigning a German division might cost 6 or 7 if you don't make the roll, and 3 if you do. And the Soviets usually have more APs (although the Soviets might have an AP pinch in 1942 due to the need to rebuild and recombine units). I don't think this feels entirely allright. Not that the Soviets weren't flexible, they were, but that it should cost 6 or 7 times more APs fo the Germans to reassign a division, that feels wrong!

Thanks for the reply Sabre, and I understand why loosening up OOB issues might cause balance issues.

Still, I do think the slider might be moved a little bit further towards Axis flexibility, and agree with Tarhunnas it just doesn't feel right. To use a specific in-game example from the period of Glantz's Barbarossa Derailed, it just doesn't feel right in the Road to Smolensk scenario that one really needs to think ahead if one is going to switch that infantry corps out of Guderian's over-burdened Panzer Corps to, for example, von Weich's Second Army. Here, in my last game I needed to not allocate as many SUs as I would have liked in the previous turn to save up enough points to switch the corps in the following turn. To give a historical counter-example, per Glantz, the Germans "spur of the moment" during the Minsk encirclement divided up Army Group Center into two groups, Fourth "Panzer" Army with some infantry to keep going east and another group around Minsk to envelop the pocket. The OOB change would seem to be largely based on where units happened to be at the moment of the decision, and encompassed virtually all of AGC.

But again, I agree that changing the system too drastically probably would unbalance the game. Again, from my original post, maybe for the next game, dividing up admin points into "OOB points" and "supply points" for things like HQ build up might work to resolve the issue. For example, the Germans could have virtually unlimited OOB points but low supply points, while in the late war the Soviets might have a huge number of "supply points" to simulate build up for offensives but a relatively more restrictive OOB. I imagine this might also be a useful mechanism on the Western Front, given the even more decisive supply advantage of the Western Allies opposed by flexible ad-hoc German Kampfgruppes.

An alternative solution, that might be just possible to easily implement within the WITE engine without too much work (or not... ), would be to add in a "strategic reallocation" option. So, for a cost of say, 50 admin points, a player could cause all of Army Group Center's units to be assigned to OKH, allowing him then to regroup all his underlying armies/corps/divisions (kinda like what happens when Army Group A and B are formed). This might do a good job of simulating the German's ability to quickly modify their force structure for a change of strategic plan, while not making more admin points available for use of an ahistorical amount of HQ buildup and such.

As for myself I'd like to see:

(a) A change in the stacking limit rule; the current rule just doesn't make sense - stacking 3 regiments gets you some 4,000 soldiers in an hex, while stacking 3 divisions gets some 45,000 soldiers in the same hex. It's absurd that both are equally full. Just exclude Rgt/Bde from the stacking limit, and it will be cool.

(b) Gimme an option of daily/half-week turns. This alone would make the game much more Grognardey. Just divide everything by 7 for daily turns and let's go.

(c) Add a counter for Aircrafts Lost in the Air Unit screen

Everything else is pretty cool.

Thanks,
fbs