Matrix Games Forums

ORIGINAL: Aurelian

ORIGINAL: redmarkus4

ORIGINAL: LiquidSky


Why dont they just double the CV values displayed on the German counters, then...that way they will be wrong (halved) only a few times, instead of being wrong now (doubled) most of the time.

While you are at it, just halve the Russian defense values for the same reason. That way when you run into Zhukov, you will know it.

I am partial to removing the CV altogether off the counter, and replacing it with..umm... Remaning ToE %.

Nooo! Then it might play out like (God forbid) GDW Fire in the East or some other waste of space table-top board game...

SPI was known for East front games that had all the Sov units as untried. Didn't know what they were until they fought. In Proud Monster Deluxe, not only are they untried, but you can't examine the unit stacks.

That would make some people's heads explode.

I like it. The untried stacks, not the exploding heads, though that would cool as well

ORIGINAL: randallw

Perhaps the CV on friendly units should be closer to 'accurate' than enemy units.

Friendly units could show the expected CV, enemy units just the unit type and some info regarding composition etc, subject to detection levels. The player then needs to make a judgement about the likely outcome rather than (a) relying on meaningful enemy CV values or (b) looking at meaningless enemy values. Better FoW rather than very misleading numbers that a new player (consumer, customer, word-of-mouth marketer, etc.) believes to be somewhat accurate.

The bigger issue for the Soviet player is the way that his CV values leap up during the winter and plummet again come March '42. Soviet CVs should not change during this period - it's the Axis CVs that need to plummet in Dec '41 and slowly creep up again in the New Year.

ORIGINAL: Jeffrey H.

ORIGINAL: Aurelian

ORIGINAL: redmarkus4




Nooo! Then it might play out like (God forbid) GDW Fire in the East or some other waste of space table-top board game...

SPI was known for East front games that had all the Sov units as untried. Didn't know what they were until they fought. In Proud Monster Deluxe, not only are they untried, but you can't examine the unit stacks.

That would make some people's heads explode.

True and there were others that used the same technique. But once the unit was exposed to combat, it was flipped over and it's strength was known.

Yeah. But neither player can ever examine the other's stacks to see what's under the top unit. At least in PMD.

ORIGINAL: redmarkus4

ORIGINAL: Aurelian

ORIGINAL: redmarkus4




Nooo! Then it might play out like (God forbid) GDW Fire in the East or some other waste of space table-top board game...

SPI was known for East front games that had all the Sov units as untried. Didn't know what they were until they fought. In Proud Monster Deluxe, not only are they untried, but you can't examine the unit stacks.

That would make some people's heads explode.

I like it. The untried stacks, not the exploding heads, though that would cool as well

Gotta have the exploding heads. Adds color.

ORIGINAL: Flaviusx

Toidi, if we did as you suggested, the displays would be equally if not more deceptive.

All displayed CVs in this game are provisional, at best. Too many factors depend on in combat effects that cannot be fully predicted ex ante.

Also, March madness is very very weird. You shouldn't use that as a data sample to predict what happens at any given point in the war. I'm not exactly sure what's up with March of 42, but it's off somehow.

Is the March '42 'Madness' problem fixed yet? Complete game breaker for me.

It's been fixed more or less. Germans have an offensive penalty now in snow turns during this period. They can still slap around the Soviets but not nearly so much as before.

ORIGINAL: Flaviusx

It's been fixed more or less. Germans have an offensive penalty now in snow turns during this period. They can still slap around the Soviets but not nearly so much as before.

But Soviet CV still collapses? Regardless of how the Soviets have performed during the winter? Even if they reached Warsaw, for example?

I think it's more a case of a bunch of blizzard junkies going through withdrawal symptoms once the blizzard juice wears off.

If the Soviets do well during the winter, it's almost inevitably going to be the case that they will have a bunch of threadbare and exhausted divisions at the leading edge, and probably with sketchy supply. You can win yourself to death during the blizzard and burn out the Red Army. (Even now this is possible. Kamil may have done it in his present game.)

The blizzard effects cover up that weakness, so when it goes away, you're left with a really bad hangover.

The displayed CV still changes back to normal, having been shown as doubled during blizzard.

I find that the number of attacking troops gives me a better feel than anything else; even in the mud I can can predict victory: 100,000 versus a division always seems to win unless behind a river in fort, etc.

Marquo

ORIGINAL: johnnyvagas

my pet peeve is people who feel the need to say "pet peeve".

My pet peeve escaped the house last month and now I have peeve kittens.

The world is divided into two kinds of people.
Those who divide everything into two categories and those who do not.

I've played wargames (including Fire in the East) for more than 40 years. I've gone from the time of complete knowledge and understanding to what will happen (factor countering to that magical 3 to 1) to the hidden unit values that flip in the SPI games to the early computer games when you literally didn't have clue to what would happen.

In many, if not most, computer games, the random events in the combat table (or combat factors) are really just guessimates by the players.

So I'm having a problem with the whole CV value issue. As long as the game provides relatively consistent results that seem close to historical norms (some extremes are needed to add uncertainity), then its fine. After that, its just a matter of getting use to the numbers to get close to an expectation.

I actually don't use the CV values at all or very very little. I try to get a feel for the number of men, approximate arms (tanks, artillery) and other factors (how well supplied I expect everyone to be, fort level). And then make my attacks. I just haven't found them that valuable EXCEPT for giving me an idea of how strong a unit is - for the Soviets, a division with a CV 1 is weak, 2 regular, 3 strong and greater than 3 is very strong. And I'm used to seeing them and would like to continue to see them.

I like this game - a lot, and its taking up a large part of my spare time. And while I'm new to the game, the CV value seems relatively minor compared to some other issues (like the air combat system).

I understand the frustration over the potential CV error, but have a hard time getting that worked up over it. Anyone buying this game isn't a going to play this for a couple of hours, but will invest a lot of time in it. Or no time at all.

I think the issue here though was that the CV shown after battle, actually ARE after battle, and therefore cannot be compared to the values shown before the battle..that is not misleading, but rather after the results of the battle, unless I misunderstand it.

ORIGINAL: danlongman

The world is divided into two kinds of people.
Those who divide everything into two categories and those who do not.

The world is divided into 10 kinds of people.
Those who understand base 2 and those who don't.

While I much prefer combat resolution systems in which more info is available to the player (Korsun Pocket and that Matrix series are great examples), I understand the design decision, but it is difficult as a player to begin to get a good idea on what will happen in any given combat.  I prefer combat values which are not generated at combat, but where the combat results are randomized off of an Odds chart.  Such a system still alows modifications for terrain, morale, fatigue etc., and for me, is easier to understand.  It's certainly not less 'realistic' than the WiTE way of handling combat resolution, just different.  For me, I'd prefer to lose after making my combat decision on an odds chart and cursing the digital die for rolling a one.  Something about the 'man behind the curtain' system where most (all) of the intermediate resolutions are a complete unknown is tough to deal with.  Note that both methods can easily account for a wide variety of results and be as unpredictable as the designer wants.
 
 

I agree that WitE's combat system is not more realistic than a simple CRT, just more complicated. And I think it produces unrealistic results in situations such as attacks on fortified locations and cities (as well as a general bias towards the attack).

I like the system. Better it than spending all that time looking for those 3-1 odds.

There are definite problems with the combat system - just try having the Axis attack an NKVD border regiment in June or July 41.

ORIGINAL: elmo3

The world is divided into 10 kinds of people.
Those who understand base 2 and those who don't.

Now that's brilliant. I love it.