1.12.0 Problems/Bugs

Gary Grigsby’s War in the East: The German-Soviet War 1941-1945 is a turn-based World War II strategy game stretching across the entire Eastern Front. Gamers can engage in an epic campaign, including division-sized battles with realistic and historical terrain, weather, orders of battle, logistics and combat results.

The critically and fan-acclaimed Eastern Front mega-game Gary Grigsby’s War in the East just got bigger and better with Gary Grigsby’s War in the East: Don to the Danube! This expansion to the award-winning War in the East comes with a wide array of later war scenarios ranging from short but intense 6 turn bouts like the Battle for Kharkov (1942) to immense 37-turn engagements taking place across multiple nations like Drama on the Danube (Summer 1944 – Spring 1945).

Moderators: Joel Billings, elmo3, Sabre21

User avatar
xhoel
Posts: 3339
Joined: Sat Jun 24, 2017 7:46 pm
Location: Germany

RE: 1.12.0 Problems/Bugs

Post by xhoel »

ORIGINAL: morvael

I'm not sure they will rout with the new code, it won't pick offset move path over water :)

I sure hope they don't rout. It is very gamey and unrealistic and this goes for both sides, even for Germans defending East Prussia in the later war years.
ORIGINAL: morvael

It's possible I'll tie bonus engineer strength multiplier to final odds multiplier (so forts will drop faster with very high odds, which will solve the problem of placing very weak defenders inside).

Good, that seems like a change that might help. Add the unit cap too and remove the bonus for rough and mountain hexes and we might have something to work with.

AAR WITW: Gotterdammerung 43-45
tm.asp?m=4490035
AAR WITE: A Clash of Titans 41-45
tm.asp?m=4488465
WitE 2 Tester and Test Coordinator
chaos45
Posts: 2015
Joined: Mon Jan 22, 2001 10:00 am

RE: 1.12.0 Problems/Bugs

Post by chaos45 »

Will wait for the must fix stuff to be fixed before I delve any time into this patch.

Of note, hopefully the additional permanent loss of soviet manpower from losing all the HQ/support units is being factored in the new balance. This is predominantly a very large Soviet nerf for all of 1941. As well it gives the German player even more Hiwis to replace losses with in 1942. As usually you could save about 40% give or take of support unit and HQ manpower from the border HQs....this also will compound as typically additional german encirclements in 1941 will snag more HQ units so longer term this is a huge soviet nerf and wont really bother the Germans until probably 1943 or later. As not only is this more Soviet manpower gone...this is all more new units with no training that will have to be re-trained to be useful.

Not complaining about it yet, just hoping it was considered in the balancing of this patch as its a bit of a big deal as far as CV loss goes for 1941 for soviets, and a bonus to German manpower in 1942+.
User avatar
morvael
Posts: 11763
Joined: Fri Sep 08, 2006 9:19 am
Location: Poland

RE: 1.12.0 Problems/Bugs

Post by morvael »

ORIGINAL: xhoel
Here is the best unit in the Soviet Army, outnumbered 42:1 in men and they still hold the port. Look at the odds 470:1. Engineers at 184 and Arty at 72. Look at the fort drop, only 0.06 drop.

Made some changes for the hotfix. However, I would like to point out that levels other than 4/5 should drop pretty fast, the drop will not be as slow for all levels. Remember the build cost.
User avatar
thedoctorking
Posts: 2958
Joined: Sat Apr 29, 2017 12:00 am

RE: 1.12.0 Problems/Bugs

Post by thedoctorking »

Weather doesn't seem to be working, or at least random weather. In one game, we've had two turns where the prediction was for mud in one or more regions and when my opponent opened the game, there was clear across the whole front. I can email a save file if anybody wants.
User avatar
morvael
Posts: 11763
Joined: Fri Sep 08, 2006 9:19 am
Location: Poland

RE: 1.12.0 Problems/Bugs

Post by morvael »

Weather and forecasts haven't changed for years. Bear in mind it may be deliberately misleading. Especially in periods of very variable weather (mud season).
User avatar
thedoctorking
Posts: 2958
Joined: Sat Apr 29, 2017 12:00 am

RE: 1.12.0 Problems/Bugs

Post by thedoctorking »

ORIGINAL: morvael

Weather and forecasts haven't changed for years. Bear in mind it may be deliberately misleading. Especially in periods of very variable weather (mud season).
Twice in a row? And I might add, only the second time in a long history of playing this game when I've encountered false predictions? Might be worth checking.
chuckfourth
Posts: 253
Joined: Wed Oct 26, 2011 5:25 am

RE: 1.12.0 Problems/Bugs

Post by chuckfourth »

Hi Morveal thank you for your reply, Yes that would help to solve that issue but more precisely being able to attach Artillery, Mortar and Rocket units directly to CU in the same way as other SU types attach, so they participate in every assault or defense of that CU unit, the same way as other attached units do, is what is needed. On the same topic It would also be very useful to be able to exclude some units from being randomly selected from the SU pool. In particular the AT and SPGun category of SU units. These units often get committed to attacks on infantry elements and so get worn out unnecessarily, they need to be, and were, preserved for use against armour. Random selection of these units favors the Soviets as these quality German assets are squandered in attacks where they make little difference. Exclusion would also allow the hoarding of German AA assets for when they are actually needed, when Soviets have air supremacy, rather than being slowly ground away participating in infantry assaults. AT, SPGun (Stugs excluded) and AA are fundamentally defensive assets and shouldn't be randomly wasted participating in attacks. AA is expensive and wherever possible was kept to its correct role as largely defending rear area assets form air attack.

Ok so forts, once again there is a fundamental element missing. Where is Gustav and Dora? Gustav destroyed Sevastopol pretty much singlehandedly. Destroying forts is exactly what it was designed for. In fact all the German railway guns are missing. why I hear you ask? A cynic would say railway guns aren't in the game because the Soviets didn't have any.
Anyway that brings me back to railways, So in my thread "How to fix the game" I provide references that clearly show the game has a German rail repair rate less than half what was achieved historically. I notice that even though rail is now cosmetic in the new 1.12.00 beta the rail repair rate remains less than half what it historically was. Obviously in relation to fortresses that halves the time it takes for Gustav to get to Sevastopol. That is of course if the Germans are allowed to have there railway guns back again at some stage.
Have you read this article
https://www.allworldwars.com/Comments-o ... -Bork.html
in this article
Gen. Lt. a.D, Max Bork a Branch Chief in the Transportation Division of the German Army General Staff says
"As a result of this planning and the measures taken the Germans succeeded in maintaining that part of the road net which was vital for their operations and in improving it sufficiently to meet all demands." referring to Army group north in the Baltic states. I would point out that no one has been able to show that this is wrong when it was raised in my "How to fix the game thread".
In light of this isn't it important that the historical (correct) Baltic boundary is used rather than just a rough approximation. Not surprisingly the boundary favors the Soviets. Narva is incorrectly excluded, the line between Vilnius and Daugavpils is straight not bent into the Baltic, From Vilnius the boundary runs west should be southwest. Vilnius and Daugavpils are about 3 hexes in from the border not on it. All in all the Baltic looses about 100 hexes of its area.
The article also says this
"Rail traffic was not disrupted at any time in the area of Army Group South since there were no partisans there"
I would suggest that if no one can supply any information confirming partisan activity (in particular rail disruption) in Army Group South's area then this comment should be taken seriously and implemented.
Ethnically German populations existed in the Ukraine at this time and many Ukrainians welcomed the Germans.

Despite all the detail this game continues to have holes in it as big as barn doors. All you need to do is get the details right in the first place and the holes will disappear. For example the "Surprise" rule. The Germans were clearly not twice as effective in week one than in week two. So this rule is a fantasy. It's had to be created because the basic detail is wrong in the first place. So lets fix the detail and we don't need the rule anymore. So what do we do? we replace the Surprise rule with weaker Soviet units (or Stronger German units). How weak I hear you ask? well that is simplicity itself, You just run the game without the surprise rule and with the now weaker Soviet units until the Germans are able to get where they got historically in the first few weeks or so. So you have now got rid of a Bogus rule that has no basis in reality and have used the initial German assault to CORRECTLY CALIBRATE the Soviet unit strengths vis a vis the Germans, because we know how far the Germans got in the first few weeks.

http://samilitaryhistory.org/vol124lw.html
Gustav destroyed Sevastopol on its own.
Best Regards Chuck
chuckfourth
Posts: 253
Joined: Wed Oct 26, 2011 5:25 am

RE: 1.12.0 Problems/Bugs

Post by chuckfourth »

PS the obvious way to make the Soviet units weaker is to make fortification strength multiplication factors less OR engineer and Artillery effects greater on Fortifications.
Best Regards Chuck
User avatar
morvael
Posts: 11763
Joined: Fri Sep 08, 2006 9:19 am
Location: Poland

RE: 1.12.0 Problems/Bugs

Post by morvael »

chuckfourth, I believe 600mm Karl mortar is in the game as a support unit of two guns. I spent some time in the past and this time as well to make them effective against forts.
User avatar
morvael
Posts: 11763
Joined: Fri Sep 08, 2006 9:19 am
Location: Poland

RE: 1.12.0 Problems/Bugs

Post by morvael »

ORIGINAL: thedoctorking

On turn 2 of a 41GC, as the Soviets, I'm seeing a lot of German units with -1 Supply Path reported even though they are clearly within 100 movement points of an Axis rail head. Is this WAD? It's a server game, against Model, so I don't think I can send a save file, but maybe you can look at it from your end.

Please provide a screenshot or even better a save. I can't confirm this on my end.
chaos45
Posts: 2015
Joined: Mon Jan 22, 2001 10:00 am

RE: 1.12.0 Problems/Bugs

Post by chaos45 »

The germans have a bunch of siege gun battalions an such....if you want to take forts concentrate them in a siege HQ...this has been done to good effect in the game for a long time. Pelton even talks about doing it in his games from way back to take Leningrad an such.....you have to go far back in batreps like 5 years ago.

As to the current new fort rules....idea in principle sounds good just not sure how its going to play out since everything in the game is odds dependent.
User avatar
thedoctorking
Posts: 2958
Joined: Sat Apr 29, 2017 12:00 am

RE: 1.12.0 Problems/Bugs

Post by thedoctorking »

Soviet rail capacity is much lower in 1941 than before. I don't know if this is intentional, but it makes it pretty much impossible to evacuate factories. Just opened the July 3rd turn and my rail cap, before any movement, is 25955. That means that if I don't move anybody by rail, I can evacuate 5 armaments factories.
User avatar
morvael
Posts: 11763
Joined: Fri Sep 08, 2006 9:19 am
Location: Poland

RE: 1.12.0 Problems/Bugs

Post by morvael »

Yes, I have to do something about it. Aside from ignoring the fact that some lines had single tracks, so movement in any direction was using common "rail capacity", factories were evacuated by trains going in opposite direction than trains moving supplies. Currently there is one rail capacity measured used mostly by movement towards the front. Perhaps another capacity will have to be introduced, for factory evacuations.
User avatar
thedoctorking
Posts: 2958
Joined: Sat Apr 29, 2017 12:00 am

RE: 1.12.0 Problems/Bugs

Post by thedoctorking »

ORIGINAL: morvael

Yes, I have to do something about it. Aside from ignoring the fact that some lines had single tracks, so movement in any direction was using common "rail capacity", factories were evacuated by trains going in opposite direction than trains moving supplies. Currently there is one rail capacity measured used mostly by movement towards the front. Perhaps another capacity will have to be introduced, for factory evacuations.
Maybe just create a historical script for factory evacuations, where factories move according to their historical time frames, and if a city gets overrun before it "should", or a city gets overrun that wasn't historically, the factory is automatically evacuated at a high level of damage? Or would that be too much of a code change?
chaos45
Posts: 2015
Joined: Mon Jan 22, 2001 10:00 am

RE: 1.12.0 Problems/Bugs

Post by chaos45 »

Historical script most likely wouldn't work as the Axis typically take more earlier than historical in just about every game. So unless this patch slowed the Axis down would very hard if not impossible for the soviet players to compensate for this. Not to mention if the axis take different main routes you usually evacuate those areas first as a priority.

So only historical option would be to slowly reduce soviet factories through 1941 by script then put them to historically what was left in 1942 by script. Would effectively remove factory destruction from the game though.
User avatar
xhoel
Posts: 3339
Joined: Sat Jun 24, 2017 7:46 pm
Location: Germany

RE: 1.12.0 Problems/Bugs

Post by xhoel »

@morvael: I think there is no need to introduce so many new things to WitE since the game is in a very good condition now. New features means more bugs and problems. The main goal should be to squash all the current bugs and keep the game stable. There is no need to fix what isn't broken. What the game needs now is to be bug free and run properly thus enabling both sides to have a realistic campaign.

I am against the automatic factory evacuation since it removes an interesting part of the game but if rail capacity for the Soviets is so low it should be increased accordingly.
AAR WITW: Gotterdammerung 43-45
tm.asp?m=4490035
AAR WITE: A Clash of Titans 41-45
tm.asp?m=4488465
WitE 2 Tester and Test Coordinator
User avatar
morvael
Posts: 11763
Joined: Fri Sep 08, 2006 9:19 am
Location: Poland

RE: 1.12.0 Problems/Bugs

Post by morvael »

Factory evacuation will remain as is, but as it was one of the Soviet successful operations during the 1941 debacle it must be possible to execute in the game as well. Indeed with the new setup there will be little rail capacity available to do it. There are a few choices: add more rail capacity (but it can be used by the Soviet player to shift units faster towards the front and have their forces better supplied), reduce factory evac cost (so that remaining capacity could be used to evacuate similar number of factories), or introduce special capacity just for factory evac (to better control the whole process without affecting unit movement and resupply at all).
User avatar
morvael
Posts: 11763
Joined: Fri Sep 08, 2006 9:19 am
Location: Poland

RE: 1.12.0 Problems/Bugs

Post by morvael »

Preview of some fixes I have been working on. I hope these address issues reported:
https://docs.google.com/document/d/1T8m ... sp=sharing

As to whether German logistics penalties will need to lessen, we'll have to find out once this more stable version will allow you to play a few Barbarossas.
chuckfourth
Posts: 253
Joined: Wed Oct 26, 2011 5:25 am

RE: 1.12.0 Problems/Bugs

Post by chuckfourth »

Hello again
Morvael if you think it is a good idea to create lets call them "super forts" don't you think it would also be a good idea to give the Germans the weapons they specifically designed to destroy super forts, Super guns? Ok the heavy Mortars Karl etc are in the game but that doesn't justify leaving out all the German railway guns. And Chaos45 just because the Germans have been allowed to have a some of their larger guns doesn't justify not having all their siege weapons.
So have a look at
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Siege_of_ ... 80%931942)
Here is a list of heavy artillery the Germans deployed at that siege and which doesn't even exist in the game.

One 80cm Gustav
Three 28cm railway guns
Two 42cm Howitzers
Fourteen 28cm howitzers

The Germans also had many captured French railway guns. A French 52cm railway gun was used at Leningrad. Needless to say this isn't in the Game either.

If Germans can't have super guns then the Russians shouldn't be allowed to have super forts. Its clearly unfair.
Railway guns need to be in the game. There is no substitute for a 80cm gun. This also means that the German railway repair rate needs to be historic rather than sacrificed on the alter of "play balance" so that railway guns can be moved about as needed.
Best Regards Chuck
chaos45
Posts: 2015
Joined: Mon Jan 22, 2001 10:00 am

RE: 1.12.0 Problems/Bugs

Post by chaos45 »

Don't know why I was singled out on this lol...have never complained about historical forces being allowed for either side.

The only thing I would say is then you need to research dates on when they arrived and when they were withdrawn....as well as try to figure out the combat effects. Then the next game decision is are they new on-map siege unit like Soviet artillery BDEs or do they continue to be support units.

The RoF on many of the German siege guns is abit laughable but should have some effect if given enough weeks/months of shooting.

All for it just up to Morveal on how it could be implemented....as well if it works with the current game engine as I know some limit was reached awhile back either on unit or equipment types or some such. IF equipment limit was reached might be why they weren't added but could always add more of the other guns to siege units to make up for it as long as game effect is about the same as real life.
Post Reply

Return to “Gary Grigsby's War in the East Series”