Strat movement & game balance

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

Post Reply
Reconvet
Posts: 355
Joined: Mon Jan 17, 2011 8:39 pm

Strat movement & game balance

Post by Reconvet »

Hi. Strat movement (rail/ship) might need some additional programming. At the moment the transport pool is only reduced by the load cost of the transported unit, no matter if you move that unit only 1 hex or half way across the map.

Right now - as I perceive it - one of the main problems of game balance in a pbem is, that early in the game the Soviet player can shift too many of his units too fast and too far while at the same time evacuating industries, because he is not limited by transport distances. Load costs are calculated adequately as is, but ton-miles (strat pool reductions depending on movement distance) are not.

I have no problem with an abstracted strat movement pool (no need to simulate single train engines), but please code it in a way that makes the transport distance of single units/factories relevant.

In my book the player should have to consider if he wants to move 5 units forward 400 miles, or with the same transport pool 10 units only say 200 miles or rather less because of repeated loading/unloading procedures. That is not the case right now, as you only have to pay the cargo points of transported units only once.

Please don't take this post as a rant. This is the strategy game I've been waiting for many years and I absolutely love it. It shows the dedication and talent of the envolved team, and they have done a tremendous job already (special hat off to the guy/s responsible for AI behavior). I just decided to join this forum hoping to help polish this gem.

(title edit)
The biggest threat for mankind is ignorance.

User avatar
Muzrub
Posts: 717
Joined: Fri Feb 23, 2001 10:00 am
Location: Australia, Queensland, Gold coast
Contact:

RE: Strat movement & game balance

Post by Muzrub »

I am finding that Soviet units can withdrawal way to fast- I understand the AI works in such a way, (not defending the cities and such) but it is getting tiresome.

Its at a point where I am fighting 6-7 deep of units (using up movement points and attack with each push) or an entire front runs away for miles, and miles at a time- turn after turn.

And to make it a little more frustrating the ZOC has no effect on undecided hexes, so unit after unit slips on through- then retreats for miles.


I must admit it is getting boring.

Harmlessly passing your time in the grassland away;
Only dimly aware of a certain unease in the air.
You better watch out,
There may be dogs about
I've looked over Iraq, and i have seen
Things are not what they seem.


Matrix Axis of Evil
Reconvet
Posts: 355
Joined: Mon Jan 17, 2011 8:39 pm

RE: Strat movement & game balance

Post by Reconvet »


One consequence of the current strat movement of units is exactly this: The defensive player can swing his reserves around too fast, leading to really deep lines that have to be pierced. Spreading out units for forming and digging in fallback-lines is too easy right now, because transport distances are not adequately factored in.

After turn 1 achieving strategic surprise on the offensive and being able to exploit it is not an easy job because of the current strat transport system.

The biggest threat for mankind is ignorance.

User avatar
TulliusDetritus
Posts: 5581
Joined: Thu Apr 01, 2004 1:49 am
Location: The Zone™

RE: Strat movement & game balance

Post by TulliusDetritus »

I must admit it is getting boring.

LOL! Well, how many Soviet divisions do you want to swallow? 10, 20, 80? The whole Red Army except some lousy reserves in Moscow and Leningrad to make a last, decisive stand...? [:-]
"Hitler is a horrible sexual degenerate, a dangerous fool" - Mussolini, circa 1934
User avatar
Oleg Mastruko
Posts: 4534
Joined: Sat Oct 21, 2000 8:00 am

RE: Strat movement & game balance

Post by Oleg Mastruko »

Your panzers have 50 (thats fifty) MPs per turn, they can spend in week-long trips thru the Russian countryside, practically without any interference from the Soviet player, because of the turn based mechanism.... and you complain about being unable to achieve surprise on the offensive or exploit, or enemy being too fast to plug the gaps using TRAINS?

[X(]
MengJiao
Posts: 209
Joined: Sat Dec 18, 2010 3:32 pm

RE: Strat movement & game balance

Post by MengJiao »

ORIGINAL: Muzrub

I am finding that Soviet units can withdrawal way to fast- I understand the AI works in such a way, (not defending the cities and such) but it is getting tiresome.

Its at a point where I am fighting 6-7 deep of units (using up movement points and attack with each push) or an entire front runs away for miles, and miles at a time- turn after turn.

And to make it a little more frustrating the ZOC has no effect on undecided hexes, so unit after unit slips on through- then retreats for miles.


I must admit it is getting boring.


You could play as the Soviets if you are bored.
MengJiao
Posts: 209
Joined: Sat Dec 18, 2010 3:32 pm

RE: Strat movement & game balance

Post by MengJiao »

ORIGINAL: Reconvet


One consequence of the current strat movement of units is exactly this: The defensive player can swing his reserves around too fast, leading to really deep lines that have to be pierced. Spreading out units for forming and digging in fallback-lines is too easy right now, because transport distances are not adequately factored in.

After turn 1 achieving strategic surprise on the offensive and being able to exploit it is not an easy job because of the current strat transport system.


I don't know. The Axis AI on Normal in 1942 doesn't seem to be able to completely neutralize the Average Tank Army on the Prowl.
User avatar
TulliusDetritus
Posts: 5581
Joined: Thu Apr 01, 2004 1:49 am
Location: The Zone™

RE: Strat movement & game balance

Post by TulliusDetritus »

ORIGINAL: MengJiao

ORIGINAL: Muzrub

I am finding that Soviet units can withdrawal way to fast- I understand the AI works in such a way, (not defending the cities and such) but it is getting tiresome.

Its at a point where I am fighting 6-7 deep of units (using up movement points and attack with each push) or an entire front runs away for miles, and miles at a time- turn after turn.

And to make it a little more frustrating the ZOC has no effect on undecided hexes, so unit after unit slips on through- then retreats for miles.


I must admit it is getting boring.


You could play as the Soviets if you are bored.

Most people on these forums prefer the Axis. Which is of course perfectly repectable. The Soviet side is MUCH more attractive to me. Someone said it very well a few weeks ago. You are on the verge of the total collapse, catastrophe, and then... somehow... you manage to survive and strike back (red flag over the Reichstag) [8D] It's epic. I can't see the epic thing on the Axis side [;)]
"Hitler is a horrible sexual degenerate, a dangerous fool" - Mussolini, circa 1934
Reconvet
Posts: 355
Joined: Mon Jan 17, 2011 8:39 pm

RE: Strat movement & game balance

Post by Reconvet »

ORIGINAL: Oleg Mastruko

Your panzers have 50 (thats fifty) MPs per turn, they can spend in week-long trips thru the Russian countryside, practically without any interference from the Soviet player, because of the turn based mechanism.... and you complain about being unable to achieve surprise on the offensive or exploit, or enemy being too fast to plug the gaps using TRAINS?

[X(]

50 MP is hard to get once you advance deeper into Russia, your comment must have been with tongue in cheek, hm?

Without any interference? Any hexes with rails can be checkerboarded with units from across the map by the soviet within 1 turn because the strat movement pool doesn't suffer if you move units on longer distances.

You really don't see the problem that you can move 30 tank divisions as easily across half the map without gaining any benefit if you only move them 10 hexes? There just has to be a trade-off, it just has to make a difference on the strat movement pool.


The biggest threat for mankind is ignorance.

Reconvet
Posts: 355
Joined: Mon Jan 17, 2011 8:39 pm

RE: Strat movement & game balance

Post by Reconvet »

ORIGINAL: TulliusDetritus

The Soviet side is MUCH more attractive to me. Someone said it very well a few weeks ago. You are on the verge of the total collapse, catastrophe, and then... somehow... you manage to survive and strike back (red flag over the Reichstag) [8D] It's epic. I can't see the epic thing on the Axis side [;)]


I had to smile when I read "... somehow ...". Any correlation with strat movement allowing you to easily swing half your Southwest Front to the defense of Smolensk for example? [8D]


The biggest threat for mankind is ignorance.

PMCN
Posts: 625
Joined: Fri Sep 08, 2000 8:00 am
Location: Germany

RE: Strat movement & game balance

Post by PMCN »

Easily?  It is not easy at all to move an army a long distance by rail.  Loading and unloading takes 40% of your movement allowance for example.  You have new units showing up on the eastern edge of the map which need to rail forward, your change would cripple the Soviet just because of that alone.

Then there is moving factories at 5000 per point or 3000 per point.  That adds up fast; very, very, very fast.

Any turn where I did extensive rail movement, which you need to do at least a few times in the first few turns means you move nearly no factories east those turns.

I think this is very much a case of:  "the grass is always greener."
raizer
Posts: 276
Joined: Mon Dec 06, 2010 1:30 pm

RE: Strat movement & game balance

Post by raizer »

the boiler plate response...if you bored play sovs...hehe
User avatar
Oleg Mastruko
Posts: 4534
Joined: Sat Oct 21, 2000 8:00 am

RE: Strat movement & game balance

Post by Oleg Mastruko »

ORIGINAL: Reconvet
You really don't see the problem that you can move 30 tank divisions as easily across half the map without gaining any benefit if you only move them 10 hexes? There just has to be a trade-off, it just has to make a difference on the strat movement pool.

It should be the other way round, the reverse logic. You probably should get benefits for smaller distances.

Strat movement pool represents rolling stock. It's a week long turn. You can practically move anything within European Russia in a week, the only problem is getting enough rolling stock (railway cars, wagons).

So, moving anything, anywhere, within a week should not be a problem. Are you arguing there should be benefits for moving shorter distances? [:D] There probably should be. In fact units are limited by their organic movement points. You can't move units accross the map using trains, because their original "infantry based" MPs were too low. Now that's unrealistic. If the unit is loaded (enough rolling stock) within a simulated time (one week) it should be able to go anywehere within the area covered by the map.

If you think there are too many strat pool points to begin with, you might have a point, but if you think units, once loaded, move too far without any tradeoff, I disagree.

raizer
Posts: 276
Joined: Mon Dec 06, 2010 1:30 pm

RE: Strat movement & game balance

Post by raizer »

I wish there was some kind of interdiction in the game involving moving units by rail/sea.  I mean to be able to flit about in rail cars or ships with no threat of interdiction is crazy.  And this helps the sovs in the beginning and will help the germans in the end.  Stuff moving strategically gets killed by air/subs/surface ships
raizer
Posts: 276
Joined: Mon Dec 06, 2010 1:30 pm

RE: Strat movement & game balance

Post by raizer »

isnt this engine being used to make a war in the west game?  There has got to be strategic interdiction for that right?
Reconvet
Posts: 355
Joined: Mon Jan 17, 2011 8:39 pm

RE: Strat movement & game balance

Post by Reconvet »

ORIGINAL: Paul McNeely

Easily?  It is not easy at all to move an army a long distance by rail.  Loading and unloading takes 40% of your movement allowance for example.  You have new units showing up on the eastern edge of the map which need to rail forward, your change would cripple the Soviet just because of that alone.

Then there is moving factories at 5000 per point or 3000 per point.  That adds up fast; very, very, very fast.

Any turn where I did extensive rail movement, which you need to do at least a few times in the first few turns means you move nearly no factories east those turns.

I think this is very much a case of:  "the grass is always greener."

As I already wrote: No problem with the load cost itself. But you don't answer my question: Shouldn't rail movement distance matter? Forget loading/unloading consequences on remaining MP. The real point is: Doesn't it disturb you that rail movement of 1 hex or 30 hex has no consequence on the pool?


The biggest threat for mankind is ignorance.

MengJiao
Posts: 209
Joined: Sat Dec 18, 2010 3:32 pm

RE: Strat movement & game balance

Post by MengJiao »

ORIGINAL: TulliusDetritus

ORIGINAL: MengJiao

ORIGINAL: Muzrub

I am finding that Soviet units can withdrawal way to fast- I understand the AI works in such a way, (not defending the cities and such) but it is getting tiresome.

Its at a point where I am fighting 6-7 deep of units (using up movement points and attack with each push) or an entire front runs away for miles, and miles at a time- turn after turn.

And to make it a little more frustrating the ZOC has no effect on undecided hexes, so unit after unit slips on through- then retreats for miles.


I must admit it is getting boring.


You could play as the Soviets if you are bored.

Most people on these forums prefer the Axis. Which is of course perfectly repectable. The Soviet side is MUCH more attractive to me. Someone said it very well a few weeks ago. You are on the verge of the total collapse, catastrophe, and then... somehow... you manage to survive and strike back (red flag over the Reichstag) [8D] It's epic. I can't see the epic thing on the Axis side [;)]

Well, its respectable to play Axis, but if it is so painful to do, why not just play the Soviets? You get so many benefits: you are the despised, sub-human underdog, you get slaughtered by the steppe-load, you produce insanely wonderful gear like the T-34 and the Katyushas, you have a deranged leader far more brutal than Hitler, but with a certain touch of subhuman, animal cunning. You survive the winter like arctic beasts and in the end, you flat out pound the Axis to a pulp.

Can't beat that story line.
User avatar
TulliusDetritus
Posts: 5581
Joined: Thu Apr 01, 2004 1:49 am
Location: The Zone™

RE: Strat movement & game balance

Post by TulliusDetritus »

I had to smile when I read "... somehow ...". Any correlation with strat movement allowing you to easily swing half your Southwest Front to the defense of Smolensk for example?

Actually, er... I was replying to MengJiao. In fact you can see I was quoting him [:)]

Again:

"Its at a point where I am fighting 6-7 deep of units (using up movement points and attack with each push) or an entire front runs away for miles, and miles at a time- turn after turn.

And to make it a little more frustrating the ZOC has no effect on undecided hexes, so unit after unit slips on through- then retreats for miles."


You can easily deduce that er, it looks like he wants to swallow lots of enemy units (but he can't). Or better said, he does not want the enemy units to avoid total destruction [8D]

As for the Soviet rail capacity, I have nothing to say because I have no idea. If you know the number of Soviet divisions moved per week in the real war (I mean by train), then I'd like to know that data... I trust the game developers though. I have to [8D]

EDITED: I was quoting Meng Jiao, not the other person [8D]
"Hitler is a horrible sexual degenerate, a dangerous fool" - Mussolini, circa 1934
jay102
Posts: 197
Joined: Mon Aug 15, 2005 8:01 am

RE: Strat movement & game balance

Post by jay102 »

Ok guys let's not start another fanboy war. After all it's a problem that the Soviet's has unrealistic rail capacity to shift every single division around the whole map in the same time evacuating every single factory.
PMCN
Posts: 625
Joined: Fri Sep 08, 2000 8:00 am
Location: Germany

RE: Strat movement & game balance

Post by PMCN »

Units have 100 strategic movement points.  They loose 35 of them loading and 15 of them unloading so you can only move 50 hexes if you want to both load and unload in a turn.  This is assuming you start with a unit on the rail line.  If they have to move to the rail line you loose proportional to the cost, so if you used 10% of your movement points to get to the rail hex then you have only 90 strategic movement left...less 35, so 55 and if you want to unload that is now 40 hexes...that leaves you with 0 tactical movement left so you are stuck on the rail line.

Post Reply

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