Matrix Games Forums

ORIGINAL: Helpless

Then why not make it 70 at start (german NM in 1942)?

To increase the post count on the forum..

ORIGINAL: Helpless

Then why not make it 70 at start (german NM in 1942)?

To increase the post count on the forum..

Is there a plan to address the 'March madness' problem in the next release?

Yes.

ORIGINAL: Deserted Fox

ORIGINAL: Flaviusx

ORIGINAL: redmarkus4

I would have thought that the WiTP December 8 start would provide the obvious answer to this problem. Start the game on 23 June 1941 with the historical soviet losses on the ground already applied. Then there is no need for a complex set of calculations that attempt to replicate an anomaly - just abstract it.

This solution would make a lot of folks unhappy. They actually like to micromanage the Luftwaffe strikes and run up the score, it is practically its own minigame. (I'm one of these people who considers the whole air war a bother and am not fond of micromanaging it, but tastes vary.)

+1

Ahmen Flav.[;)]

I like to play the Russians but will try the Germans soon against a friend. My biggest headache is having to micro airfield attacks first turn.

Pavel - this would only affect the air war. Ground combat would commence on 23 June (or better still, at 0900 on 22 June AFTER the airfield strikes) and would be treated exactly as it is now. Luftwaffe capabilities would be reduced on turn one to account for the airfield strikes having gone in.

No major research should be needed. To address the views of different players on levels of Soviet AC losses during the first week, an option box could be added that allows the player to select 'high', 'historical' or 'low', with 'historical' being based on a named source, such as Glantz etc. In MP, this setting would need to be agreed between the players as with other settings such as weather. The selection would affect the percentage of LW sorties used prior to the start of the game.

ORIGINAL: Helpless

Do the developers/testers have any plans to make changes re the Lvov pocket opening move ?

ORIGINAL: jamesm

I was trying to assign Level bomber and then fighter bomber to different airfields using the type selector in the assign screen.  I first deselected all and choose the type mentioned and I had trouble closing the window unless I selected a second group namely tactical bombers and then reopening the window and deselecting the second group.  Also it worked after just doing the normal method a couple of times (closing the window and reopening it).  I have not noticed this issue in previous versions.

ORIGINAL: Bobswanson53

Thanks for your continued support of this great game.

+1 The "Assign an air unit from National Reserve" aircraft type filter function is broken in 1.05.53

ORIGINAL: Helpless

+1 The "Assign an air unit from National Reserve" aircraft type filter function is broken in 1.05.53

It seems that "slider bar" of inactive window in background is resetting mouse clicks. I'm able to replicate it. The workaround till we fix it would be to click on the area which is not overlapping with slider bar - right/top.

ORIGINAL: Andrew Loveridge

19) AI Changes – Improved AI to be more aggressive attacking victory objectives in later turns of smaller scenarios. Improved the AI command and control so that it tries to assign areas for each German Army or Soviet Front, and keep the units within those areas attached to appropriate HQs. Ongoing improvements in attack selection AI. Improved AI use of ground support especially when attacking fortified units. Improved defensive line routine (greatly reduced chance of failure in line building) and increased Soviet attack aggressiveness in mid/late war. Improved AI rail repair.

ORIGINAL: redmarkus4

ORIGINAL: Joel Billings
Losses during airbase attacks have come down at least twice during the past few months. The most recent reduction was probably mostly due to the restriction on airfield attacks that the air group must have flown less than 1/3 of their available miles to fly the mission (this had been 1/2 before the recent change - other smaller changes probably had a minor impact here and there). There was always debate internally on what the appropriate loss numbers on turn 1 should be. A human player that knew what they were doing was usually able to kill more aircraft than the historical numbers. The AI, which isn't quite as smart, would kill less, but was still usually over the historical total. Of course there was always some price to using up your aircraft flying airfield attacks as you were limited in your ground support. We think the numbers that can be achieved on turn 1 are still in the right historical range, although there's no doubt debate on exactly what that number should be. We felt the reduction on turn 1 was ok, and wanted to further limit the problems that were being reported with the abuse of airbase attacks during the rest of the game.

I would have thought that the WiTP December 8 start would provide the obvious answer to this problem. Start the game on 23 June 1941 with the historical soviet losses on the ground already applied. Then there is no need for a complex set of calculations that attempt to replicate an anomaly - just abstract it.

ORIGINAL: Rasputitsa

I am not sure about this, maybe copying the historical German strategy is the obvious thing to do, but if a player wants to choose a different strategy, there should be the possibility of different results.

If a player chooses to make an all-out airfield attack, ignoring all other potential air tasks, then it should be possible to achieve higher than the historical results. How much of the German air effort was directed against airfields on the 22nd June, because we cannot compare a player's maximum effort on airfields against an historical German plan, which may not have directed all their effort against airfields.

I hope it's not 'this is what happened on the day, so this is what must happen in the game'.[:)]

ORIGINAL: redmarkus4

ORIGINAL: Rasputitsa
I am not sure about this, maybe copying the historical German strategy is the obvious thing to do, but if a player wants to choose a different strategy, there should be the possibility of different results.

If a player chooses to make an all-out airfield attack, ignoring all other potential air tasks, then it should be possible to achieve higher than the historical results. How much of the German air effort was directed against airfields on the 22nd June, because we cannot compare a player's maximum effort on airfields against an historical German plan, which may not have directed all their effort against airfields.

I hope it's not 'this is what happened on the day, so this is what must happen in the game'.[:)]

WiTE Scenario 1 - June 22 Start (historical)
WiTE Scenario 2 - June 23 Start (historical)
WiTE Scenario 3 - June 22 Start (Northern focus)
WiTE Scenario 4 - June 22 Start (Southern focus)
WiTE Scenario 5 - June 22 (?) Start (Soviet preemptive strike)
Etc...
WiTE Scenario 90 - Modded Scenario 1
Etc.

We've been through all this with WiTP. I'm surprised it's still up for debate.

ORIGINAL: redmarkus4

Secondly, I may have missed it, but I can't spot any reference to the game breaking "March '42 Madness" problem, whereby Soviet capabilities mysteriously collapse in relation to Axis combat capabilities, regardless of the strategic turn of events.

ORIGINAL: Flaviusx

ORIGINAL: redmarkus4

Secondly, I may have missed it, but I can't spot any reference to the game breaking "March '42 Madness" problem, whereby Soviet capabilities mysteriously collapse in relation to Axis combat capabilities, regardless of the strategic turn of events.

This is being addressed, have no fear.