Matrix Games Forums

ORIGINAL: Flaviusx

MT, I still believe that capping morale at 45 in 41 is the sweet spot so far as that goes given current design. But the game is essentially finished and this is where it wound up at, along with many other imperfections.

If this morale bug had been caught much earlier I think the adjustment would have gone in, there would have been time to observe the effects of having much of the Red Army zoom to 50ish morale. And yeah, shame on me for not noticing this as a tester. It never occurred to me that morale wasn't rising quickly enough compared to the rules as written. It felt right the way it was before.

ORIGINAL: Flaviusx

Well, Pelton, it was right for the Soviets, but wrong for the Germans. Now, it's the other way around. So it goes.

This may be the first time anybody has accused me of being a yes man. I think my personal sins lie in the opposite direction if anything.

ORIGINAL: Michael T
I agree. Soviet morale in 41 should top out at 45. 50 is too much. If we could crank back Soviet morale by 5 for 41 only I think all would be ok. But the morale settings are for the whole game. And apparently too hard to change [8|]

ORIGINAL: janh

ORIGINAL: Michael T
I agree. Soviet morale in 41 should top out at 45. 50 is too much. If we could crank back Soviet morale by 5 for 41 only I think all would be ok. But the morale settings are for the whole game. And apparently too hard to change [8|]

Might be Soviet morale is growing too quickly now. Much depends on which tuning goal you have, where you personally want the balance to be. I think Somkindave is actually doing fairly well here and just experienced the break that occurred due to lack of infantry support, but else it seems fairly good. Sure, not the super advances that you show in your AARs, but something more able to create a "suspense of disbelief".

Soviet morale growth should be easy to change again for the devs via the national moral threshold I guess. In an ideal world, they'd have that one included as a setup parameter in the scenarios, but WitE isn't that modding friendly.

I am not sure that tuning it down goes the right direction, though. I begin to think something needs to be done to put more importance into the southern Soviet zone, that makes it more worth fighting for it. In the center and south, Sapper withdrew largely to chose the terrain of defense himself, so he was not exactly aggressive or forward committed, but also did not just flee straight. Just in the south...
Sapper is piling up units north, and even neglecting the little delay of a few MPs that Riga cost, is extremely strong there. Sure, I know, it is the poor defensive terrain south, the lack of combatants after Lvov relative to such a large area, and simply hindsight that the war is won or lost with AGN and AGC, but if the Soviet player had not been able to redirect so much reserves north, the going there would be less tough, and the fighting south be harder such as it probably should be like in the case of not abandoning the vast open grain region.

Maybe there should be limits placed on the redirection of forces north and the distribution of reserves generally? Or somehow more value to the southern sector that increases force needs there as well? With the Red Army stretched out across all 3 German AGs, instead of concentrating to stop two, the game will have a very different balance.

ORIGINAL: OddBall2

Mr Dave, Newbie question, Regarding AAR post AGS 6/19/13. How do you flip all the hexes between the Romanian tank unit on the rail line east of the Bug river and the German tank division just across the Sinyukha river. Do people run a tank division down one row of hexes for eight hexes and the curve over three rows and run back down another 8 hexes? Kind of painting the hexes green with zones of control?

ORIGINAL: juret

i like aar. keep it up reading all your updates to my morning cofee
good luck