Strat movement & game balance

[Zort]

Yea, siding length dictates the length of the trains. I understand that. So I guess at 'railhead', multiple sidings were placed so several trains could unload. And I guess the trains that were heading back to germany were backing since there probably wasn't a roundabout to turn the engines around. Managing a rail system is fairly complex even now with all the radios/gps. So just wondered how they managed it back then.

[TulliusDetritus]

Muzrub, this balance thing is a sort of déjà-vu... In the War in the Pacific forum this issue "balance vs REALISM" appeared too... Thanks god those who wanted balance were defeated. UTTERLY defeated [8D] Most of the community agreed: WitP is too serious (because it delivers an amazing simulation of that conflict aka no Japanese invasion of Panama, West Coast, etc.). Don't mess with it.

In fact the Admiral's Edition was another nail in the coffin of "balance". More realism instead... Ah, the paradise...

You are obviously allowed to want a balanced (we could call that game War in The Twilight Zone) as opposed to a realistic game. I hope you will be utterly defeated though. Literally [8D]

[Reconvet]

ORIGINAL: Zort

Yea, siding length dictates the length of the trains. I understand that. So I guess at 'railhead', multiple sidings were placed so several trains could unload. And I guess the trains that were heading back to germany were backing since there probably wasn't a roundabout to turn the engines around. Managing a rail system is fairly complex even now with all the radios/gps. So just wondered how they managed it back then.

No idea how they proceeded back then. One possible solution:



Somehow I didn't manage to embed the picture in this post. Click to upload is clear, I also see the "image"-button on the message editor, but couldn't make it work. Can anybody give a tip what I'm doing wrong?


Edit: Thanks to TulliusDetritus I managed to embed my fist pic here. [&o]

[TulliusDetritus]

Sure, Reconvert.

Make sure the file isn't enormous (BMP files are).

[alfonso]

Reconvet

You have not answered my question:

If transporting a Division from Moscow to Leningrad has a cost of 1000, what should be the cost to transport it to Orel?

Your question: yes, the train going 50 miles away could make more than one trip. I doubt it should be allowed to make 10 times the number of trips of the other train. I doubt even more that a 50 mile example has anything to do with STRATEGIC movements. A more valid example would be 500 vs 800 miles. You seem to think that the 500 mile trip should allow to transport 60% more stuff or consume 37.5% less strategic points than the other trains, but again, you forget that railpoints are an abstraction for a lot of things, and many of those things are the same for a 500 mile trip than for a 800 mile trip

Another example: the "complexity" (looking timetables, booking online, facturation, printing board passes, going to the airport with time enough, passing security controls, boarding...) of flying from Mallorca to Madrid is not only half (or 36%) of the complexity of flying from Mallorca to London.... Yes, it is more "complicated" to go from here to Sidney than to Ibiza, but for "normal" ranges, "complexity" is only marginally affected by distance. This is how I envisage rail points, as an abstract measure of "complexity", including more or less everything..

[Reconvet]

ORIGINAL: TulliusDetritus

Muzrub, this balance thing is a sort of déjà-vu... In the War in the Pacific forum this issue "balance vs REALISM" appeared too... Thanks god those who wanted balance were defeated. UTTERLY defeated [8D]

If I may drop my 5 cents: Realism for strat transport in WitE is impossible (lack of data) and nobody sane would ask the programmers for a simulation of every single train engine and wagon). But an approach to let it feel a bit more real instead of the current artificially abstracted numbers for pool and pool usage would be more than welcome.

[Reconvet]

ORIGINAL: TulliusDetritus

Sure, Reconvert.

Make sure the file isn't enormous (BMP files are).

Aaaaaaaaaah, I didn't know I had to include "https://www.matrixgames.com/forums/upfiles/...", thanks. [:)]

Didn't get any hint of the path after the upload, filesize 4k is well below the limit. I'll try again.

[TulliusDetritus]

Reconvert, As I have said I don't know how many Soviet divisions could be transported during the war, especially on the first 6 months of the war. I know that historically the Soviets sent (STAVKA reserves) 150 divisions and 44 brigades to the front from 22 june to 1 december. I guess by train...

But as far as I know NO one -on this thread- could say "hey, I've got the answer, I know they could only tranport x divisions per week. FACT!".

So, given that NO one gave us that answer, we have what we have on the game. And as I said, I DO trust the game developers. No one is perfect and they could have it wrong, true. But until someone proves them wrong, I trust them [:)]

[Reconvet]

ORIGINAL: alfonso

Reconvet

You have not answered my question:

If transporting a Division from Moscow to Leningrad has a cost of 1000, what should be the cost to transport it to Orel?

Your question: yes, the train going 50 miles away could make more than one trip. I doubt it should be allowed to make 10 times the number of trips of the other train. I doubt even more that a 50 mile example has anything to do with STRATEGIC movements. A more valid example would be 500 vs 800 miles. You seem to think that the 500 mile trip should allow to transport 60% more stuff or consume 37.5% less strategic points than the other trains, but again, you forget that railpoints are an abstraction for a lot of things, and many of those things are the same for a 500 mile trip than for a 800 mile trip

Another example: the "complexity" (looking timetables, booking online, facturation, printing board passes, going to the airport with time enough, passing security controls, boarding...) of flying from Mallorca to Madrid is not only half (or 36%) of the complexity of flying from Mallorca to London.... Yes, it is more "complicated" to go from here to Sidney than to Ibiza, but for "normal" ranges, "complexity" is only marginally affected by distance. This is how I envisage rail points, as an abstract measure of "complexity", including more or less everything..

I know some degree of abstraction is unavoidable. One 500 mile trip can't be equalled with ten 50 mile trips, we surely agree there. Put a malus on shorter transports, a certain percentage on loading cost, decreasing with longer trips? I don't quite see the usefulness of discussing concrete numbers at this point. But some degree of relevance of transport distance on pool usage could and should be implemented.

[Reconvet]

ORIGINAL: TulliusDetritus

Reconvert, As I have said I don't know how many Soviet divisions could be transported during the war, especially on the first 6 months of the war. I know that historically the Soviets sent (STAVKA reserves) 150 divisions and 44 brigades to the front from 22 june to 1 december. I guess by train...

But as far as I know NO one -on this thread- could say "hey, I've got the answer, I know they could only tranport x divisions per week. FACT!".

So, given that NO one gave us that answer, we have what we have on the game. And as I said, I DO trust the game developers. No one is perfect and they could have it wrong, true. But until someone proves them wrong, I trust them [:)]

Let's say that's 200 large units in half a year, that would be an average of less than 10 per week? How many big units can you move right now in a week? [8D]

I do trust the developers too, I absolutely have full faith in their longtime dedication with this still young game. But they did take a shortcut when programming strat movement, and I sure hope they'll eventually make this aspect feel a tad mor realistic. I'm definitly NOT asking for a historically accurate solution here, just to make life not overly easy for Soviet pbem players in the first year.

[TulliusDetritus]

ORIGINAL: Reconvet

Let's say that's 200 large units in half a year, that would be an average of less than 10 per week? How many big units can you move right now in a week? [8D]

Nope [:)] That number is simply the number of divisions and brigades sent to the front. We still don't know the Soviet capacity, sorry. So that would be a minimum if you want.

[Muzrub]

ORIGINAL: TulliusDetritus

ORIGINAL: Muzrub

Surely you've played the game and dealt with the frustration of magically moving Soviet lines?

"an entire front runs away for miles", "then retreats for miles", that's what you said. On my book that means you aren't swallowing a lot of Soviet units. And you are apparently unhappy because of that. Hey, NOT my fault [:)]

NO, I haven't played this game at ALL. You're 100% correct [8D]

Indeed that is what I said- thanks for pointing that out.

The problem I have with a line that constantly retreats (with apparently no penalty) is that for the most I feel the game is like a Sunday drive in the country- Yes indeed, a nice little Sunday drive with no red lights, stop signs and your very own police motorcade.
The game has two defences 7-8 hex deep lines or running 7-8 hexes.

But I figure your a man who likes rose coloured glasses- enjoy

[Muzrub]

Hmmm TulliusDetritus,

Realism hey, I don't see the realism in this game at all.
And there is certainly no balance- which is not what I am calling for thank you.

Your concerned about realism, well geewiz! So am I- now all we have to do is look forward to a game that provides some and not fanboy it up so nothing improves.

If your blind to the issues here- please don't bother replying back- your wasting my time and yours TulliusDetritus.

[Mynok]

I know some degree of abstraction is unavoidable. One 500 mile trip can't be equalled with ten 50 mile trips, we surely agree there. Put a malus on shorter transports, a certain percentage on loading cost, decreasing with longer trips? I don't quite see the usefulness of discussing concrete numbers at this point. But some degree of relevance of transport distance on pool usage could and should be implemented.

All you are basically saying is you want a reduction in the Soviets strat move pool and you propose a complicated means of doing that. There's little point in that.

The basic premise of the game is that MP = Time. This works just as well for the strat move side of things as it does for the land move side of things, and indeed it ought to work the same. It already pro-rates the speed of trains vs land.

Argue for a reduced strat move pool if you want. You may have a point there. But don't muck up a very playable and elegant way of representating capacity.

[TulliusDetritus]

for the most I feel the game is like a Sunday drive in the country- Yes indeed, a nice little Sunday drive with no red lights, stop signs and your very own police motorcade

I very much doubt it's a "Sunday drive in the country" for my German PBEM opponent...

Cheers [:)]

[Muzrub]

I don't doubt PBEM games different- I will be trying that out with some friends when I get the chance.

My issue is with the AI, and how the AI deals with situations.

cheers[:)]

This is a lot nicer.

[Reconvet]

ORIGINAL: Mynok

All you are basically saying is you want a reduction in the Soviets strat move pool and you propose a complicated means of doing that. There's little point in that.

The basic premise of the game is that MP = Time. This works just as well for the strat move side of things as it does for the land move side of things, and indeed it ought to work the same. It already pro-rates the speed of trains vs land.

Argue for a reduced strat move pool if you want. You may have a point there. But don't muck up a very playable and elegant way of representating capacity.

Another shot from the hip, and a wide miss. Nope, I'm asking for more than a pool reduction.

Once more: If a train transports something for a fraction of the max range, then this train should be available for more trips in the same week. What's complicated about that? Paying the same price (transport cost as in the unit detail screen) for a 5 hex transport and for a 50 hex transport makes no sense whatsoever.

MP only deals with the time of the transported unit, not with the time of trains and ships. If the unit has some time for action left after transport, then trains should have some time left too, which should be mirrored in a reduced transport cost (speak: pool deduction reduction) for short transport distances. These are absolutely two different aspects, and throwing both in the same pot neglects the very basics of logistical realities.

Tweaking the early Soviet early rail capacity is an easy feasible short term measure. Adapting the basic strat pool concept goes beyond that, will take a programming and renewed balancing effort, but it would correct an ugly design oversight (train time IS a basic element for logistics).


Edit: Typo

[jomni]

ORIGINAL: TulliusDetritus
It's epic. I can't see the epic thing on the Axis side [;)]

I can see the EPIC FAILURE! Lol!

BTW, I guess you just have to fight the game system for now. Make sure you cut those rail lines so that the Soviet's can't use them retreat.
I believe the massive MP allocation of your Panzers can pull this off. Just have to plan on where they go.

This will foil any withdrawal plans of the Russians as I experienced in my current campaing (I'm playing Russians).

[alfonso]

ORIGINAL: Reconvet



I don't quite see the usefulness of discussing concrete numbers at this point.

Probably because they might show that your idea will have a negligible effect in terms of game balance. In the meantime you can cheaply complain about "design oversights" without having to provide a real alternative, besides repeating the irrelevant example of the 5 and 50 hexes to make grandiloquent points ("makes no sense whatsoever"), which at least are a lack of respect to the designers, and in the process ignoring all other considerations.

If a trip from Moscow costs 1100 to Leningrad and 900 to Orel, do you think it is critical that the game assigns 1000 for both? And if the costs are 1050 and 950? What are the differences that bother you so much, forgetting that there should be some degree of reasonable simplification? You will have to show more to convince me, but based in hard facts, please.

[Reconvet]

ORIGINAL: alfonso

ORIGINAL: Reconvet



I don't quite see the usefulness of discussing concrete numbers at this point.

Probably because they might show that your idea will have a negligible effect in terms of game balance. In the meantime you can cheaply complain about "design oversights" without having to provide a real alternative, besides repeating the irrelevant example of the 5 and 50 hexes to make grandiloquent points ("makes no sense whatsoever"), which at least are a lack of respect to the designers, and in the process ignoring all other considerations.

If a trip from Moscow costs 1100 to Leningrad and 900 to Orel, do you think it is critical that the game assigns 1000 for both? And if the costs are 1050 and 950? What are the differences that bother you so much, forgetting that there should be some degree of reasonable simplification? You will have to show more to convince me, but based in hard facts, please.

Seems like you took "makes no sense whatsoever" personal, sorry for that, was not intentional. I meant it in a sense that there had to be a consensus first to build in train time, before discussing concrete numbers. And once more: I have utmost respect of the tremendous job developers and testers have done, but they did oversimplify strategic movement.

You want a concrete example, ok. I’m dead tired right now, so I hope I get the numbers right:

In one Soviet game versus AI I have a tank div in hex 109,45, just east of Moscow. Transport cost as in the unit detail screen is 2379. Max transport range (with loading, without disembarking at trip end) is what I’d take as 100% for transport cost (pool point cost, this train is used to his max capacity). A 40 hex trip to just south of Leningrad (hex 82,19) leaves 30 strat move points (SMP), minus disembarking cost of 15 leaves 15 of 100 SMP. So let’s calculate with 15% train capacity left after this transport (we could reduce this further because of additional coordination efforts for using leftover capacity or whatsoever, but let’s keep things simple right now). 15% reduction of transport cost: 2379*.85 results in a pool point reduction (transport price) of 2022 (rounded down) for this transport.

Example same unit to Orel hex: 47 SMP left after transport, minus 15 disembarking cost leaves 32 SMP left, 23 hexes travelled. This train has a leftover capacity of 32% for the rest of the week. 32% reduction of transport cost: 2379*.68 results in a pool point reduction (transport price) of 1617 (rounded down) for this transport.

So a transport distance of 23 hexes versus a transport distance of 40 hexes makes a difference of (2022-1617=) 405 transport cost points. Compare the fix cost of 2379 as it is right now for any distance with above examples (40 hex travel 2022, 23 hex travel 1671). That’s a difference that could and should matter in my book, not negligible at all… Facts concrete and hard enough?