Help with GPW re-working needed

[Mehring]

Hi, I'm reworking GPW in a number of ways in addition to some of the changes already being used in our multi-player command game. Some of these are way beyond my knowledge and experience of the engine so any help/pointers/collaboration in the following fields would be very welcome-

1. Modifying map- this will include adding and changing labels and hopefully also adding a railway terrain type separate from roads.

2. Anyone know where to find a table of Russian unit compositions for 1941 including brigades/divisions of any or all types?

3. Adding numerous new unit types, including assault guns, light tank destroyers, infantry support tanks, assault engineers.

4. Reducing engineers’ road building capacity.

5. Altering the movement and combat bonus for the “Blitz” to make it shorter and with greater movement benefits.

6. Altering various units’ movement allowances.

7. Making “extreme winter” a random event.

8. Increasing research costs and changing research paths/possibilities for various unit types.

9. Enable research upgrades of on map SFs to jump levels. ie. Level 1 to level 3 without passing through level 2.

10. Change arrival hex for Siberian reinforcements.

11. Prevent motorised/mechanised units moving in swamp during mud.

12. Preventing self-rebuild of forts.

[Barthheart]

I can help you out with most of this stuff. I could collaborate with you. Send me a pm or an email it you still have my address and we'll talk.

[Mehring]

Jay Doubleyou made two suggestions-
 
1. Change SS volunteers to SS people from Axis minors (I disagree, this is historical as is)
2. Add a reinforcement schedule for the Germans to supplement production- a great idea- and also a withdrawal schedule following Italian/French invasions.

[Joshuatree]

@2
 
Maybe you have some luck here concerning Russian OOB.
 
http://forum.axishistory.com/viewtopic.php?f=79&t=128745

[Jay Doubleyou]

Great initiative Mehring.
I'm not a programmer/modder at all, but if you need testing or anything gimme a shout.
I see some very good fields you will change that will greatly improve GPW.

The suggestions I have are based on quite a few games.
In one of them I reached august 1942, when the Russians surrendered. I noticed that powerpoints on both sides quickly drop. Start PP of the Germans is around 16K, while the Russians start at > 20K. At the end of the winteroffensive both armies were down to 8-9K. When I planned my summeroffensive I had to pull every available unit to the southeast to create at least some offensive power. Armies were at that time down to 6-7K.
Not really historical if you ask me.

To solve this it would be great to introduce reinforcements in a historical schedule. Adjusting production also helps. But I would rather see a lower production while at the same time introducing reinforcements.

About the SS:
Germany now has only 3 productioncenters for SS troops, 1800 production points in total. The smaller ones pump out Axis minor troops. A german player soon finds himself without SS units this way. And I think the volunteers from eastern europe in the SS fought a lot better then regular Axis minor troops.

[Mehring]

Thanks, nice try Joshuatree, but I not espeaka da Russian, capischi?

[TheArchduke]

Mehring, if you are interested, BoronX and me have played the GPW 20+ times over the last year.

We have made our own adaption of the GPW with numerous small changes. If you want we can discuss co-operation.

[Mehring]

Sure Archduke, I'm all ears.

Some more ideas from discussion with JayDoubleyou-

About SS production:
Still the volunteers from all the countries fought a lot better then Axi, since they fight at around 80% effectiveness. So I think you should make them SS. Or keep them SS, but increase the SS output of the regular (600)centers.

SS performance was variable, from trash to the best and a whole lot in between. Even the Baltic divisions, which had many volunteers, were fleshed out with soldiers who were "given offers they couldn't refuse." Most of these divisions really were not as good as a regular German division.

SS production is supposed to increase by 20% a year, while the other German production remains unchanged. I think that may suffice for historical SS divisions, including the elite divisions, which didn't really increase till early 1943. February 1943 was when a lot of the second wave of elite SS divisions was formed and there should be a 40% increase in SS output by then.

I've removed, among other divisions, Florian Geyer and Prinz Eugen which weren't around in 1941, so that's 2 less divisions to maintain, and de-motorised Polizei which was a foot division in 1941.

It might be an idea to create a new people to represent some of the conscript SS but I'd like to do a few tests with the existing changes first.

What I noticed during that game is that both Russia and Germany end up with very small armies, especially compared to the mapscale. At the end of the winteroffensive we were both around 8000 Powerpoints, While the scenario starts with 16k German and 20K Russian PP. Not exactly historical.
By the time the summeroffensive started PP dropped to 6000 for the Russians and 7000 for the Germans, which is even less historical. I almost pulled every unit to that area to create some offensive power.

I thought about how to fix it.
Boosting production on both sides is of course one of them. But this might end up in just more units slaughtering each other and still gradually declines armypower.

Reinforcements might be better. They boost armypower at a historical date and with complete experienced units. So maybe it's an idea to lower production a bit instead of increasing it and at the same time introduce reinforcements.
 
Interesting. I agree that more troops will just mean more slaughter and I can't see that reinforcements will change that. I like the idea from an historical perspective and that it gives the Germans boosts as well as the drip, drip of replacements.

In addition, the Germans were constsntly rotating divisions to and from the front, so you need to "net out" the additions and subtractions. The reinforcement schedule for "War in the East", the East front section of the game I mentioned, has a reinforcement schedule that does this and as soon as I get it again, I'll use it.

As for how to stop the slaughter, perhaps the reverse solution is needed in a game that rewards attack. Armies need supplies to attack and both sides can gain a virtually unlimited amount- through supply centres, recruitment centres and hand cards. Germany can also throw supply as far east as it can control terrain, without regard to historical logistical problems. All this is ridiculous and needs addressing.

With any luck Vance has a solution to the railway/road problem. Another one might be to increase the AP for off-road supply. Otherwise I think it would be worth trying a game in which there are no hand cards and recruitment centres cannot make supplies. If that doesn't work or is unbalanced, the supplies can be tweeked.

[Mehring]

Anyone volunteer to make some unit symbols for light tank destroyers and StuGs?
 

[TheArchduke]

Ok, I was asked for the scenario file. I have summed up some of the scenario changes in 1-2 of my smallish AARs, but will do so again.

Scenario File

Changes include:

Basically the initial force setup stays the same to the GPW Szenario apart from:

- Many more VPs over the map, every turn you are awarded one PP for VP under your control. Initial situation 85:130 Axis:Soviets.
- Edited Combat efficiency: SS 125%, Soviet Guards 100%, Germans 100%, Finns 95%, Russia 90% and Axis Minor 80%
- To make up for this, the soviets have increased production capacities all over the SU.
- Siberia 42 and Siberia 43 productions joins the Sowjetunion much alike Russia 41.
- A land connection to Finnland over Norway.
- Soviets can not have fighter IV
- The initial deployment and OOB are nearly the same as the vanilla GPW.
- Supply Centers are conquerable, Production is not!

- The biggest one: The Axis first turn only sees 400% combat efficiency, after that there is no bonus. Makes for more realistic defense of Kiev, Riga and Minsk and a much more interesting game right off the bat. There is NO movement bonus even in the first turn.

For a bit of a better overview over our initial situation here is a production screenie and I provide the raw data:

Axis Factories: 24k (12 factories)
Axis Recruits: 10k (5 recruit centers)

Axis M Fact.: 6k
Axis M Recr.: 8k

SS: 8k
Finns: 4k

Overall Axis:
Production: 60k
Supply: 33k


Soviet Fact.: 52k (26 factories)
Soviet Recr.: 58k (29 factories)

Overall Sov:
Production: 110k
Supply: 48k

This may seem like a big advantage but in contrast to the vanilla GPW more production is vulnerable to the invader. About 40k are in reach if the Axis player manages to gain the ground he did historically in 41 equalizing their production if not for the Sibirian production going online in 42 and 43.

[Jay Doubleyou]

Nice, downloading it asap to try it.

[TheArchduke]

I am playing the scenario with Charles Rowe quite heavily at the moment and have played it about 5-6 times with BoronX. I think it would be great if we could work together and create a better GPW.

If you like, Jay, we can start a game.

[Mehring]

- Many more VPs over the map, every turn you are awarded one PP for VP under your control. Initial situation 85:130 Axis:Soviets.

I like the idea of spreading resources over the map but that's a lot of PPs you're giving each side.

- Edited Combat efficiency: SS 125%, Soviet Guards 100%, Germans 100%, Finns 95%, Russia 90% and Axis Minor 80%-

Excellent idea. How do you edit these values?


To make up for this, the soviets have increased production capacities all over the SU.
- Siberia 42 and Siberia 43 productions joins the Sowjetunion much alike Russia 41.


Is there a way to make a factory transportable or to make the activation of the eastern factories conditional upon western factories being destroyed or captured?

A land connection to Finnland over Norway.
Why?
- Supply Centers are conquerable, Production is not!

I like that, given that supply centres are more historically distributed.

- The biggest one: The Axis first turn only sees 400% combat efficiency, after that there is no bonus. Makes for more realistic defense of Kiev, Riga and Minsk and a much more interesting game right off the bat. There is NO movement bonus even in the first turn.

There, I'm headed in the opposite direction. I want to decrease combat bonus and increase the movement bonus to enable German mech units to accomplish their historical encirclement of Minsk in the first week (and crossing the Dvina, capturing Riga, I think) and to give the Germans a combat incentive to make the encirclement. If a frontal assault crushes the Russians, why bother? That's how it was, a rapid attack followed by weeks of mopping up and infantry catching up.

Once I get a clear picture of the map scale, I may well increase movement allowances too, giving added incentive to defend in depth. If off road supply is more difficult, supply will be the brake on advance, as it often was.

[TheArchduke]

The PPs are burned through Research (more costly) and Industrial Upgrades (1500PP for 5% increase of overall production).

It also provides all those normally TOTALLY useless minor cities with at least a little incentive to hold onto them.

You can edit combat efficiencies under people tab.

[Mehring]

ORIGINAL: TheArchduke

The PPs are burned through Research (more costly) and Industrial Upgrades (1500PP for 5% increase of overall production).

It also provides all those normally TOTALLY useless minor cities with at least a little incentive to hold onto them.

Nice touch.

[Mehring]

Just found some good information on Russian tank and rifle divisions, still lacking cavalry and the brigade sized formations.
 
I've now added Italians, Hungarians, Bulgarians, Spanish and Volksdeutsche as seperate people with their own combat values.

[TheArchduke]

Sounds to me like the worst idea ever.

Having three different people (SS, Germans, Finns, Axis Minors already produces headaches). Axis Minor nicely produces the desired results for the small guys, why overcomplicate matters?

[Mehring]

 
 
I've never found a war game that lumps so many nationalities together as one, and their separation never gave me a headache, I have to say. In my view it's an historical detail that adds flavour to any game. 
 
The Finns were possibly the most accomplished soldiers of modern times, and merit better combat values than the elite SS, even, though they should not have access to the same equipment. The Italians on the Eastern Front fought much better than those in other theatres though they were hampered as usual by poor equipment. The Spanish Blue Division fought better than your average German division, though it was equipped as one. Jay Doubleyou has highlighted the excellent performance of some of the non-elite SS divisions, which are better than Axis minors. Bulgarians? I don't know, pure historical flavour and they won't appear untill the Russians advance into the Balkans.
 
With an historical reinforcement schedule there is no need to create production facilities for any of them, though some fielded sufficient forces to warrant such facilities.
 
Do you have answers for any of the questions I put to you, it would be much appreciated.

[TheArchduke]

The game only allows 8 units per subformation, which means you can not mix any units. With the low production at the moment production would get even more fragmented. If you raise production so each of your nationaliy can establish full units the next issue is that this will make a micromanagment intensive scenario even more so.

Or in other words I think you open up several issues for low gain.

All units subpar compared to the germans are axis minor. All better are SS. The Finns are included. Anything above that subtracts from the experience as when you add the Italians, you have to add the rest.

As I said, one of the worst ideas I heard so far. I am probably going to continue to tweak my own scenario then.

[Mehring]

Yes, 8 SFs per unit constrained me a little in re-working some unit compositions, but the addition of new nationalities will generally impose only upon people who wish to use their nationalities in quite ahistorical combinations. Put another way, if you want to combine more than 2 nationalities in a single unit, you are taking liberties with history and I make no apologies for removing such gamey flexibility.

If you read my post, you will see that nationalities providing small contingents which had no regular reinforcements can have an historical reinforcement schedule instead of production. No added complication there. As for units fighting at full strength, show me a unit that consistently did so?

As for your rudeness, I think we all know where that's coming from. [;)]