Matrix Games Forums

I always post allot of data to support my positions

I have never seen any real data from you in this forum. Where is this data?

In the past I have looked at numerous battles on resolution level 7 just to see what is going on under the hood. It takes forever and is not really that informative. Planes are dropping bombs, artillery is firing, tanks are shooting, rifle squads are firing all the way down to hand grenades and satchel charges etc. The problem is all this has very little effect on combat losses. The losses during combat are very low. The weapons mostly hit nothing. After combat, I guess, CV is calculated, the winner is determined and the loser retreats and at this moment most of the losses occur. But to me it is totally obscure how this is calculate and why it has to be this way. Shouldn't the combat losses be higher than the retreat losses. Is it historical that retreat losses are higher than combat losses?

I would also like to point out that the combat odds seem to have absolutely no effect on the battle results. Why? If a Panzer division attacks an NKVD Regiment with 99:1 odds the result is most often a normal retreat with 100+ men lost. This makes no sense to me. In a case like this the regiment should always shatter. Maybe there is a way to use the combat odds to increase losses? And maybe the combat odds could be used to determine when a unit should route or shatter?

Withdraw losses should be influenced by leader abilities (admin or morale check?), experience should play a key role, morale not that high. Exhausted fuel should play a role for motorized units.

Excellent suggestions. How are withdraw losses calculated right now?

Bring in an organisation Level.
Idea: 10.
After each combat, everybody losses his "odds". Means after a battle I win with 4:1, I loss 1 organization and the other side losses 4. If the defender has 0, he will retreat. The attacker should be only allow to attack if he had at least 4.
If you had odds 10:1 you get it after the first attack else you must attack multiply times.
This will adds combat losses.
If active, you can change some MP for organisation. This means you couldn't endless attack with your troops.
After some combats you need a break.
For sure, the attack cost must be lower. You had than four attacks for a succesfull break.

Alternativ:
If everybody feels, that the casualties are too low, lets made two combat "rounds". You will double the casualties with this.

Alternativ II: Give the soviets the special ability that they didn't lost Moral for unsuccesfull attacks (like the old special soviet attack doctrine, maybe from 41-43). This will allow the soviet, if they wish, to attack every turn and so adds more losses for both sides. That can simulate the soviet attacks.
So the soviet player can decide to attack every time he wishes and so reduce the manpower pools from booth sides.

ORIGINAL: Pelton
.05 changes have killed the game 43-45 based 100% on the combat results from my last few turns. The tweaks to combat results has made ratios Middle Earth from what I am seeing alrdy.

As you do a bit too frequently, you aren't backing up your claims with anything. You may have a completely valid point, but if you don't support it with screenshots at least, you are not likely going to get the support you are looking for on the forums.

basicly for yrs 2by3 has tried to control the tempo of the game by the logistics model when the issue has always been combat loses to both sides.

The logistics of WitE remains fundamentally the same, I look forward to a better model in WitE 2. That said, combat losses ARE undeniably ONE OF A NUMBER of issues which detract from realism. To slow operational mobility by reduced supply throughput will undoubtedly make the game worse if the combat model and other things- leadership evolution for just one example- is not overhauled concurrently. Losses are too low, and Pelton is not the only person to have noticed this. Less operational mobility= less combat= less losses. To make the game work, a new, realistic supply throughput only makes addressing the low losses problem more urgent.

ORIGINAL: Mehring

basicly for yrs 2by3 has tried to control the tempo of the game by the logistics model when the issue has always been combat loses to both sides.

The logistics of WitE remains fundamentally the same, I look forward to a better model in WitE 2. That said, combat losses ARE undeniably ONE OF A NUMBER of issues which detract from realism. To slow operational mobility by reduced supply throughput will undoubtedly make the game worse if the combat model and other things- leadership evolution for just one example- is not overhauled concurrently. Losses are too low, and Pelton is not the only person to have noticed this. Less operational mobility= less combat= less losses. To make the game work, a new, realistic supply throughput only makes addressing the low losses problem more urgent.

+1

@RedLancer:

Playing your "WIN42-43" scenario now. I'd ask for more but respect your time. KUDOS

Now it is official the next game will be Wite2... will new features be introduced or it will be just like Wite plus the logistic and air system of WitW.

We know the 10 mile weekly turns IGOUGO will be kept, but are new ideas coming?

I know it is early development but come on, give us something while waiting to the fanboys wars of Wite2[:D]

I just hope 2 by 3 will take the trouble to go through the 20+ pages of the game suggestions thread with the attention they deserve.

ORIGINAL: M60A3TTS

ORIGINAL: Pelton
.05 changes have killed the game 43-45 based 100% on the combat results from my last few turns. The tweaks to combat results has made ratios Middle Earth from what I am seeing alrdy.

As you do a bit too frequently, you aren't backing up your claims with anything. You may have a completely valid point, but if you don't support it with screenshots at least, you are not likely going to get the support you are looking for on the forums.

I have started a thread alrdy and now I am seeing that 42 ratio is 1.7 to 1 also when they were 3 to 1 some time 4 when u won.

and why is it I have to prove my point when I am write over and over and 2by3 does not have, when they are wrong more times then write?

Both combat engine give the same results that's a give as they know

ORIGINAL: Mehring

basicly for yrs 2by3 has tried to control the tempo of the game by the logistics model when the issue has always been combat loses to both sides.

The logistics of WitE remains fundamentally the same, I look forward to a better model in WitE 2. That said, combat losses ARE undeniably ONE OF A NUMBER of issues which detract from realism. To slow operational mobility by reduced supply throughput will undoubtedly make the game worse if the combat model and other things- leadership evolution for just one example- is not overhauled concurrently. Losses are too low, and Pelton is not the only person to have noticed this. Less operational mobility= less combat= less losses. To make the game work, a new, realistic supply throughput only makes addressing the low losses problem more urgent.

The Russian do not require many MP's to attack as the germans are tring to hold the lines.

So logistics mean little to Russian and everything to Germany, basic Blitz stuff.

The new logistics system slows play to WW I as can be seen when fighting gets to France I personally have several WitW AAR's

I have played both systems

ORIGINAL: Pelton

ORIGINAL: M60A3TTS

ORIGINAL: Pelton
.05 changes have killed the game 43-45 based 100% on the combat results from my last few turns. The tweaks to combat results has made ratios Middle Earth from what I am seeing alrdy.

As you do a bit too frequently, you aren't backing up your claims with anything. You may have a completely valid point, but if you don't support it with screenshots at least, you are not likely going to get the support you are looking for on the forums.

I have started a thread alrdy and now I am seeing that 42 ratio is 1.7 to 1 also when they were 3 to 1 some time 4 when u won.

and why is it I have to prove my point when I am write over and over and 2by3 does not have, when they are wrong more times then write?

Both combat engine give the same results that's a give as they know

Pelton

The WitE and WitW combat systems are not the same. Even with the changes introduced in WitW Alpha after the code split 3 years ago the comprehensive change logs for morvael's excellent improvements show numerous code changes. Your own thread on 42 ratio changes demonstrates how different results can be between WitE updates let alone two different games. Please stop pedalling your own perceptions and opinions as the one and only truth; it's not that simple.

Everyone Else

I've got the message that for WitE2 we need to check the loss ratios and I have asked for constructive ideas on how to increase losses in a historic manner (rather than some blanket modifier). To re-emphasise for WitE2.0 Dev I am not interested in any WitE game stats because the game differences are so great the data has no value for WitE2. Many thanks to those who have posted their suggestions - they are now in my good ideas notebook.

I am also going through the suggestions thread and so far almost everything has already been introduced or is outside the remit of 2by3. For those looking for a snippet of recent change gossip - you'll know in WitW that hex road quality is set on a country by country basis; we have recently set the ability to set the road quality by individual hex.

Make sure major roads (line of hexes with better road level) is separate from rail lines, if this is allowed by scale. To funnel panzers away from clearing rail, like it was in history, since they went via roads. This was a source of delay for rail resupply.

For those looking for a snippet of recent change gossip - you'll know in WitW that hex road quality is set on a country by country basis; we have recently set the ability to set the road quality by individual hex.

Cool.

With all its flaws I still think Wite is the best wargame about the russian campaign ever made.

Realy looking forward to Wite2. Please, keep the colour manual update and the steam key. I do not mind paying a premium purchasing the game through Matrix if that supports the development of future games but I really apreciate the convenience of Steam.

we have recently set the ability to set the road quality by individual hex.

Sorry Pelton, 2 by 3 DO listen. They just take an awful long time to make some of the changes.


Now, not a biggy in WitE as Strategic air war doesn't really figure, but about clearly readable/changable FB load out designations for WitW, any movement?


As for WitE(2) low stats for at-start Russian leaders has been discussed somewhere and makes infinite sense to many of us. How about finally unhooking 'morale' from doctrine/training, it strikes me as an unholy union. If two such characteristics need to be fudged, a doctrinal cap on experience gain makes more sense to me.

ORIGINAL: Mehring

we have recently set the ability to set the road quality by individual hex.

Sorry Pelton, 2 by 3 DO listen. They just take an awful long time to make some of the changes.


Now, not a biggy in WitE as Strategic air war doesn't really figure, but about clearly readable/changable FB load out designations for WitW, any movement?


As for WitE(2) low stats for at-start Russian leaders has been discussed somewhere and makes infinite sense to many of us. How about finally unhooking 'morale' from doctrine/training, it strikes me as an unholy union. If two such characteristics need to be fudged, a doctrinal cap on experience gain makes more sense to me.

'We' take time because we haven't managed to code an extra hour in our day. As for FB loadouts I do remember the discussion but I'm not sure how many changes we have made since you last played WitW and what you are suggesting we do.

Suggestion WitE2 to encourage both sides to be more aggressive/take risks which could cause them to get burned/hurt without forcing the player to do it would be to award points for holding victory locations every turn with a larger amount for hold it at the end (like the old Atomic World at War series of games). Another reward for taking capitals and or a large number of cities would be a hit to the other sides morale or even a country surrendering....

What about making victory locations semi random.

When the game begins victory points awarded for holding certain hexes are determined within a range of victory points.

Not two games will be the same. I find the first turns of the game repetitive.

Is there any possibility that you will extend the map all the way to Murmansk in WitE 2, and include the units fighting there?

i still only have 20 hours logged on WITE, but over 200+ for WITW so look forward to the WITE2 and will focus then the same amount of time and effort into that, look forward to the return to the the beast lair and see then how it goes, the bear with claws is a mighty beast once awoken...

[&o][&o][&o]