Play balancing

[simovitch]

Fatigue recovery and therefore stamina on long marches was improved in the previously released patch.

[GoodGuy]

I see. Thanks Simo.

@Dave: Now what about some option for the human player like say "split troops" for the type of split movement/assault you envisioned in a previous posting? Would be pretty useful.

[decaro]

ORIGINAL: Arjuna

Frost's 2nd Para Bn route ran along the southern minor road not the main road that ran through Hartenstein.

Is Hartenstein on the HttR map?

I sent Frost East in column at no rest and by-pass unto a minor road just North of the Rhine near Hevadorp, then successfully ran him North of the Rail Bridge at Osterbeek.

Was this the route you were referring to?

After Osterbeek, the road soon ran into a major highway on which Frost's column was held-up by only one Axis unit at West Arnhem, even after hitting the unit with arty and an air strike.

The lone Axis unit was soon joined by several SS units, effectively stopping Frost's men in their tracks.

My paras in the North didn't fare well either, with entire columns being held-up by a handful of Axis units that could have been easilly by-passed or driven-off.

In short, IMO, the paras seemed a bit too slow and unwieldy, while the Axis responded far too quickly for what should have been a surprise assault.

Maybe there should be a (brief) order's delay for the Axis?

[wodin]

ORIGINAL: Joe D.

ORIGINAL: wodin

I think when your making a wargame about a battle where one side performed exceptionally well beyond what would normally be expected it is very hard to replicate that in a game especially if the engine is designed with other battles in mind. The only way around it I think would be to increase the modifiers when dealing with unit and leader abilities ...

You may have hit the nail on the head; John Frost's abilities don't seem to be that much better than that of his peers, but shouldn't they be, considering Frost was one of the most experienced and determined para battalion commanders?

IMO, boosting Frost's and other Allied cdr's abilities could help balance this scenario.

What I'm saying aswell is I think the higher attribute levels should have even greater bonus modifiers than they already do..so a unit with a leader with lots of blue in it's attributes in charge of another unit also with very high attributes should really make that unit maybe upto twice as good as a similar unit but with average levels or average \poor leader. I'd like it if unit attributes both leaders and actual units did have a pretty big impact in game..it appears to me that these attributes at the moment don't have a massive impact, when really it would be cool if they did, this way when we have a unit that in real life performed exceptionally it will perform exceptionally yin the scenario..rather than be abit better than normal. To be honest though I don't think I've witnessed anything in game that shows me the attributes actaully really do anything. I'm sure they do but not enough for me to notice.

[Arjuna]

ORIGINAL: Joe D.

ORIGINAL: Arjuna

Frost's 2nd Para Bn route ran along the southern minor road not the main road that ran through Hartenstein.

Is Hartenstein on the HttR map?

I sent Frost East in column at no rest and by-pass unto a minor road just North of the Rhine near Hevadorp, then successfully ran him North of the Rail Bridge at Osterbeek.

Was this the route you were referring to?

After Osterbeek, the road soon ran into a major highway on which Frost's column was held-up by only one Axis unit at West Arnhem, even after hitting the unit with arty and an air strike.

The lone Axis unit was soon joined by several SS units, effectively stopping Frost's men in their tracks.

My paras in the North didn't fare well either, with entire columns being held-up by a handful of Axis units that could have been easilly by-passed or driven-off.

In short, IMO, the paras seemed a bit too slow and unwieldy, while the Axis responded far too quickly for what should have been a surprise assault.

Maybe there should be a (brief) order's delay for the Axis?

Yes that's the route.

Had you ordered the 2nd Para bn to Move with speed = fastest and Rest = No Rest?

BTW historically Kraft's Bn was on the move within the first hour of sighting of the para drops. He discounted the southern approach and focussed on the Hartenstein road and the road heading NW to Ede. Hence why 2nd Para was able to slip by unopposed. Now in our game the engine will look at the possible routes and attempt to block them if it can. So yes it does make it a little harder for the southern route but easier for the centre and northern approaches.

One thing to remember here is that our engine is designed to simulate operational land warfare not recreate historical outcomes. There is a lot of probability factors impacting on the selection of tasks, the allocation of forces to those tasks and the timing in execting those tasks. In most cases historical outcomes can be achieved but in this instance the chance of the German's allocating forces to different tasks may be such that this opportunity for the 2nd Paras to get through only occurs rarely.

[decaro]

ORIGINAL: Arjuna

Had you ordered the 2nd Para bn to Move with speed ...

Out of habit I didn't set it to fast, so we'll try again at higher speed.

[Arjuna]

IIRC John Frost's Bn averaged 6kph on their move into Arnhem, allowing for a couple pauses. To achieve that you need to set speed to fastest.

[decaro]

ORIGINAL: Arjuna

IIRC John Frost's Bn averaged 6kph on their move into Arnhem, allowing for a couple pauses. To achieve that you need to set speed to fastest.

OK, but after setting them to fastest, progress was halting at best, apparently because the "bypass" setting isn't bypassing enemy units; Frost's units are actively engaging Axis forces both North and South of their line of march -- on the minor road between the highway and the rail bridge -- when they should be infiltrating instead.

The paras to the North didn't fare much better; entire columns are slowed by token Axis resisitance, and when they finally start-up again, other Axis units are able to fill the breach and block the way to Arnhem.

Under the old HttR, I was usually able to get at least some paras into Arnhem, but now I can't even get them close to the objective.

[Arjuna]

Try setting the Agro to Min. That should minimise the amount of firing they do.

[GoodGuy]

ORIGINAL: GoodGuy

@Dave: Now what about some option for the human player like say "split troops" for the type of split movement/assault you envisioned in a previous posting? Would be pretty useful.

Dave: I guess you missed my question, so I hope you don't mind me posting it again. [:)]

[Phoenix100]

Won't the problem just be another instance of the 'halting' issue? That's what it looked like when I last mailed you about this issue, Dave - bypass etc didn't really work due to unexplained halting.

For what it's worth I have found that the only thing I can do in FTMTTR and RDOA that is a successful strategy for the Brits is to really go for the Arnhem rail bridge. If you take that first then it's quite easy to take the road bridge from the sth approach. The pic I posted on the thread re 'halting...aargh!' shows that I was doing ok getting both bridges in this way before I (again) got thoroughly sick of the long lines of units just standing around doing nothing (or nothing explained) with 'halting' messages in their log. I have NEVER got near the road bridge by going for it from the nth, any route, with the new version (it was possible to do this no probs in old HTTR).

As has been remarked before, the Axis seems keen in the initial stages of FTMTTR (and, I assume, therefore RDOA too) to get units through Arnhem, over the bridge and down to Nijmegan. This seems to be their priority. Until I could work out a way of stopping this i couldn't take the Nijmegan bridges either (until XXX Corps got up there, I mean) - just too great an Axis force got through. If you take the Arnhem rail bridge then you can block the Axis advance on Nijmegan without taking the road bridge just by setting up a defensive force on the road down from the road bridge - somewhere east of Snodenhoek.

But I'm afraid I've never managed to finish RDOA or FTMTTR yet because I just get too frustrated by the halting behaviour. FTMTTR is slow enough anyway (and I have a good system). I can't imagine playing it on slow speed all the way through. It would take weeks, with little happening, I think. I really need that patch to fix the 'halting' behaviour!! Any news, Dave? Any ETA?

[decaro]

ORIGINAL: Arjuna

Try setting the Agro to Min. That should minimise the amount of firing they do.

OK, and after two tries, I managed to get Frost's Co B into Arnhem, but the unit didn't last long as the rest of the Bn was strung-out behind it along the road from West Arnhem.

Frost was able to shortly occupy West Arnhem until a host of Axis units soon swarmed the area like angry like bees.

Frost's Bn did better at bypassing and even changed direction twice, but the delays -- the halting issue? -- cost it precious time that it couldn't make-up before the rest of the Axis responded to the advance.

Despite the continued failures, I think this shows promise, but in the older HttR, it was easier for the Allies to get to its objectives.

[Arjuna]

Yes it could be useful but it will have to wait its turn.

BTW GoodGuy have you finally bought BFTB or are you still sitting on the fence?

[Central Blue]

ORIGINAL: Joe D.

ORIGINAL: wodin

May also help if your struggling with a certain scenario or feel the AI may need alittle boost on others.

For some of the new HttR scenarios, the Allied AI needs a big boost; playing as the Axis in the old Red Devils over Arnhem scenario was more slaughter than game.

I was concerned that the greater accuracy in this remake would adversely affect the play balance, and it did.

I haven't started on the Arnhem scenarios. And I can't address the other issues discussed in this thread due to lack of experience. But I can say that for the Ardennes scenarios I have played so far, it helps a great deal to make sure that the Allies have all of their historical attached artillery. 4th Armored has a much better chance of relieving Bastogne if you add the 253rd and 274th AFA, 177th and 776th 155H, 559th and 561st 155G, and 578th 8H.

[simovitch]

ORIGINAL: Central Blue
4th Armored has a much better chance of relieving Bastogne if you add the 253rd and 274th AFA, 177th and 776th 155H, 559th and 561st 155G, and 578th 8H.

Except for the 253rd and 274th, my sources showed most of these FAB's deployed further to the East, some even as far away as 4th Infantry Division sector. I'll look into this a bit more, thanks.

[Central Blue]

ORIGINAL: simovitch

ORIGINAL: Central Blue
4th Armored has a much better chance of relieving Bastogne if you add the 253rd and 274th AFA, 177th and 776th 155H, 559th and 561st 155G, and 578th 8H.

Except for the 253rd and 274th, my sources showed most of these FAB's deployed further to the East, some even as far away as 4th Infantry Division sector. I'll look into this a bit more, thanks.

I recommend Armor at Bastogne: A Research Report Lt Col. Robert R. Summers, et. al., General Instruction Department, The Armor School, 1949. A digital copy is on line at the Combined Arms Library. It led me to the 402nd Artillery Group. And it confirms the 177th and 776th (as well as the 253rd and 274th) listing in the order of battle published by the ETO Office of the Theater Historian. Great maps too. Their source for the artillery line up was the G3 journal of the 4th Armored.

The ETO OOB can be contradictory, and incomplete, so I always look for backup. For example, they show the 177th, 253rd, and 775th directly attached to the 4th Armored through December 31, but also as part of 193rd artillery group attached to the 6th Armored starting December 29. But that doesn't affect the Battered Bastards scenario.

Widening the Corridor is a bit of a jig saw puzzle though. I assign the assets to whom they ended up with, like the companies from 3rd Chemical Mortar going to the 134th and 137th; and then make arbitrary decisions on which of the two 155(H) battalions attached to the 101st is firing south, and which north.

BTW, CARL also has the original report by Marshall, et. al., that became Bastogne, The First Eight Days.

[decaro]

Hypothetically, all I can say is that if FM Montgomery had this game, he would have never launched Op Market Garden; the Axis AI is too good for any chance of attaining play balance in the RDoA scenario.

[Arjuna]

Joe D,

I have been running through a saved game Richard Simonitch sent me on RDOA. In particular he drew my attention to an attack he had ordered the KOSB to undertake and that had stalled. I have been paying close atention to the units as they attempted this attack and have discovered a few anomolies. First off the lead assault company changed facing as soon as it halted. It shouldn't do this in an assault as this decreases its cohesion and wastes valuable time. Next thing I noticed was that the KOSB mortars were firing at targets away from the objective. Upon investigation these mortars were supporting an adjacent formation because the ArtDirectFireOnly option had not been checked in the attack order. I have since made it default to be checked for attacks and probes. So this got the mortars now firing at those pesky German light flak units that were suppressing the assault companies.

However, the mortars were lucky to put in one minute of fire before they lifted. So I stepped through the code and found that it was because the vast majority of the five mintes of bombardment time alloted was being used to register the target. I have now ensured that the fire time is increased by the remaining registration time. So now the mortars get to pound the German lt flak and forced them to retreat thus enabling the assault companies to continue their assault. Yee ha!

But then I noticed that the mortars ran out of ammo just as the assault units got to the objective. This was very unfortunate. Now the code called for a standard bombardment time of five minutes per oncall shoot. Most arty has an allotment of 45 minutes of fire per day. So this would see around nine shoots, which should be enough for an attack. But the glider units don't land with a full load.

So what needs to be done is to reduce the bombardment time by the ratio of available arty ammo to estab arty ammo. I started to do so on Friday but ran out of time as this solution necissitates adding data to several classes ( ie we need to store the estab arty ammo for a unit ). Hopefyully I will complete this on Monday and then we should see the KOSB attack succeed.

Here is a list of the fixes I have done so far:

• Prevent face changing for assaulting units and those moving in road column
• Default the task settings for ArtyDirectFireOnly to true for attacks and probes
• Added the registrationTime to remainingDuration in bombardment events. This ensures that the arty unit fires for at least the specified number of minutes.
• Now cap maxSuppression to 75% for direct fire and to 85% for indirect fire when the target is in covered terrain.
• Reduced max registration times from 15 to 5 minutes and increased the range denominator from 200 to 500. Rego time = min( 5, range / 500 ). The overall effect is to reduce registration times for arty fire. Fatigue and training can increase time by up to 56% to a max of 8 minutes.

I will also take a look at the initial orders delay imposed upon the Germans at scenario start.

[Arjuna]

Oh and one other thing I forgot to mention above was that I have placed a cap on the amount a unit can be supressed if they are in covered terrain. this ensures that if they do Halt they can stiull return some fire.

[Phoenix100]

This all going into the patch which is due out any minute now, Dave?

And - since you're playing all this on an already patched version with THE HALTING ISSUE fixed, right? - is it the case that you don't see any of that halting behaviour now - ie has that worked?