Matrix Games Forums

ORIGINAL: Berkut

ORIGINAL: Derfel

The basic problem is that there is only so many "shells" that can hold Tigers in the game.

Well, no - the basic problem is that the games production system averages out production over the production life of the item, rather than tracking ACTUAL production which almost certainly varied greatly, and likely (at least for something like a Tiger) was heavily weighted toward the middle and end of the production life cycle.

So you end up with more Tigers being produced early in its production life than were actually produced, and hence some overbuild, with the surplus sitting in the pool until the shells come into the game that can hold them.

What is funny about the claim that this is a travesty because it is ever so historically inaccurate to have the number "200" in a pool that doesn't effect the game in any way whatsoever, is that the "solution" being demanded is that the user should be allowed to use them in combat units. Which most certainly WOULD be historically inaccurate!

Which is more historically accurate - 200 Tigers that never existed running around blowing up T-34s, or the number "200" sitting on a page somewhere that has zero effect on the game at all, and represents Tigers that were not actually built yet, but will be in the future...you know, when they were actually built?

The production system is a system that combines an somewhat abstract production model with nominally historical arrival dates for the units that use that production. The problem is that people are looking at just a portion of the system, the production model, ignoring the other part of the system, the historical arrival dates of the units that consume what is produced, and then deciding that there is some terrible injustice because there are some bits and pieces produced that they cannot use RIGHT NOW.

Those Tigers don't exist yet. Ignore them. Be happy when you get the units that use them. Until then, it doesn't mean anything that they are "in the pool".

ORIGINAL: Berkut

ORIGINAL: Aurelian

Not to mention that the TOEs changed due to losses. Hard to have a division with a 1941 authorized strength of 10,000 if by 1945 you don't have the troops to give it more than 5,000.

Russians had the same problem. Many divisions in 45 were down to 2,000 men.

Indeed. Both sides realized that while the 10k man division might be ideal, a division at 50% strength of a 19k division was NOT ideal, and you were better off designing for the smaller size, rather than having a 10k TOE at 50% strength.

In other words, a division designed to be 6000 men at full strength is better than a division designed to be 10,000 men at 60% strength.

The germans did this a LOT with their Panzer divisions. By the end of the war the "Panzer" division TOE was what, half the number of tanks? And less in reality?

I remember noting that a typical US infantry division in late 1944 had more AFVs directly attached to it than most Panzer divisions.

ORIGINAL: Steelers708

Here are the Tiger I production figures.



The argument over these 200 Tiger I's being historical or not is irrelevant, the game is only historical in the sense that the Divisions etc that were on the Eastern Front are on the whole on the Eastern Front. As soon as you start playing the game it becomes 'ahistorical', why do I say that? Well the German divisions are tied to the games defined TOE, you have no control over individual Pz Abt, your Pz divs' are what they are until the TOE changes when they all change at once and this is once again just plain 'ahistorical'.

Allow to explain further, the TOE's do not take into account that some Pz Divs' had 3 Pz Abt whilst the rest had 2, it also doesn't take into account that from mid 1943 onwards most Pz Divs' fighting on the Eastern Front fought with only a single Pz Abt as the other one would either be refitting(usually in France) with Panthers, or detached to another Pz div' or to act as HeeresTruppen.

Talking of units re-equipping with Panthers, in game they all appear to re-equip with the introduction of the March '44 TOE and yet some Pz Abt. received them in September/October 1943 whilst some even later(than March 44) e.g. July 1944.

In terms of the fixed TOE it has the advantage that at times units will be stronger than they actually were, but at the same time it has the disadvantage that units may be weaker than they actually were, one example is the 101st Pz Brigade which arrives in August 44 and is never withdrawn, when in reality it was disbanded and integrated into the 20. Pz division in October 1944.

Personally I hate the fixed TOE concept, If I'm doing historically better in say late 1944- early 1945 and I have the required stocks, e.g. 3000 Pzkpfw IV & 2000 Panthers, and relatively no fuel or transport problems why on earth would I choose in real life to change to the '45 Pz Div TOE, and after losses, give each Pz Div just 20 of each tank. The same can be said for any period though, if you have the required stocks you should be able to either bring forward or more importantly delay/not implement a later TOE if it is detrimental to your forces..

If you have the equipment/manpower then you should be able to use it.

ORIGINAL: BleedingOrange

The send your units into combat more so you can have higher tank losses just to be able to access those tanks makes no sense.

You'll never convince me that it's not dumb as heck for any game to allow for 200 tanks of any type to sit in a 'pool'. It just never would have EVER happened, so why would the game allow for it? That's what is disturbing to me.

ORIGINAL: kirkgregerson

I'm not sure why some people can't understand the solution is simple. Just allow for either side some control over creating units (div/rgt/bat) with surplus units (production) at cost of APs. Good luck trying to argue it will cause any imbalance. If you have the equipment/manpower then you should be able to use it. You'll never convince me that it's not dumb as heck for any game to allow for 200 tanks of any type to sit in a 'pool'. It just never would have EVER happened, so why would the game allow for it? That's what is disturbing to me.

I know at some point the developers will allow for this feature to be in the game. It won't happen any time soon as there's bigger fish to fry <*cough* air campaign>, but it will happen. So I'm not sweating it.

Please don't make a fool out of yourself and say that hundreds of valuable tanks would have been sitting around waiting for units to lose tanks in order for them to ever be sent to the front .. for either side in this campaign.

In fact the Germans were in many cases sending tanks to the front well before they were even properly put through their trial runs. Just look at the early panther models.

The Editor Manual claims that production is on-demand and adjusts, is that true?

ORIGINAL: BleedingOrange
Since the game doesn't cover any other fronts and it's been stated that these tanks are for the East it still makes no sense that they would sit in a pool and not be used. If the game provided for overages to be "used" on other fronts to improve the Axis situation I wouldn't mind it, but the game doesn't.

ORIGINAL: BleedingOrange
If the Germans would have had that many noncommitted Tigers I don't think there is any doubt they would have formed additional units and that the majority would have been sent East...The problem is that the German player is not rewarded for conserving his forces..."

ORIGINAL: BleedingOrange

...the Soviets on the other hand can create additional units so they have the use of additional forces they historically didn't have. They should either give the Germans the same ability or remove it from the Soviets. I hope they will fix this soon.

ORIGINAL: 76mm

Then, as many others have suggested, the solution is simple--you simply lose any Tigers if your TOE is at 100%, to represent them being sent to other fronts--is that better? At least this way you can build up a reserve of Tigers and use the heck out of them during the war. As stated over and over and over again in this thread, the buildup in the pool is a function of a rather simple production function. Why are some of you so fixated on this issue?

ORIGINAL: 76mm

Really? I don't know how you could know such a thing. Moreover, in many large organizations, including militaries, there is a principle known as "use it or lose it"--in this instance, they gave you 100 Tigers, you didn't lose any, so apparently you are not using them as you should and don't need anymore. Instead, the Tigers should be given to someone who fights with them, not keeps them in the motorpool all the time, as you apparently do. Like it or not, there is a certain logic to this argument.

ORIGINAL: 76mm


I seriously doubt they will "fix" this because I am not sure that it is such a big issue; at least there are not that many people complaining about it, at least until the "200 Resting Tigers" appeared...