Some thoughts about OoB

Order of Battle is a series of operational WW2 games starting with the Pacific War and then on to Europe!

Moderators: The Artistocrats, Order of Battle Moderators

dumb_user
Lance Corporal - Panzer IA
Lance Corporal - Panzer IA
Posts: 13
Joined: Sun May 26, 2019 4:41 pm

Some thoughts about OoB

Post by dumb_user » Fri Dec 20, 2019 6:40 pm

Hi
I already posted this in the Matrix OoB forum. The moderator there told me the Slitherine forum is more frequented, so I hope this will not be seen as double posting.
OoB is great, I really like it. So far I played Boot Camp, Morning Sun, Rising Sun, Blitzkrieg and Panzerkrieg. Some features though could be improved, I think.
• Bug: Clicking on the symbol to toggle between air and land view when there is a unit beneath the symbol will activate the unit instead of toggeling.
• Bug: The crosshairs symbol with the combat result forecast sometimes appears in the center of the screen and won't go away until you leave and restart a scenario.
• Objectives are sometimes unclear, so you don’t know what exactly the victory criterion is. For example, in one scenario in “Rising sun” it was something like “Cripple the US Navy or Airforce”. It is unclear when that objective is accomplished. There are more examples like that, also in other campaigns, but I don’t remember them right now.
• In the German versions of all campaigns I played there are mistakes in the scenario objectives (whereas the English versions seem to be ok): Names of cities to be captured sometimes are wrong, e. g. in Panzerkrieg, Kursk South, not Lomowo, but Werchni Olschanets must be captured, sometimes the wrong number of turns when an objective must be accomplished is wrong. All the objectives in German language in all campaigns and scenarios should be doublechecked.
• Why can’t mine fields be attacked with airplanes or ranged weapons? Certainly not the optimal way, but when your engineers are busy somewhere else why not?
• Mechanized units will not use their vehicles on short distances. I would like to be able to decide that myself. Infantry will fight better when afoot, but AA or AT guns etc., for example, sometimes are weaker than their (armed) vehicles. And again, shouldn't it be my choice whether they use a vehicle or not?
• Mechanized units should be able to be reinforced while mounted. A possible reason why they can't is that it is harder to reinforce them while they are in transit. But I can reinforce tanks and infantry afoot after they haved moved, and they are also in transit.
• Heavy Artillery, especially because you need to pay for a heavy truck, too, is much too expensive, compared to its impact and compared to other weapons costs, even when taking into account the effect on enemy efficiency rather than the killing strength.
• The AI in some cases doesn’t act as efficiently or effectively as it could:
- It doesn’t always use ranged weapons before attacking at close range.
- It often doesn’t retreat heavily damaged units, but leaves them where they are or even attacks with them. In some cases that makes sense to slow you down, but mostly it looks like the AI doesn’t “know” better.
- Sometimes the AI uses airplanes to attack certain targets, although better targets are in range, e. g. a hard-to-destroy bunker instead of a weak bomber or artillery.
- Or it attacks units protected by anti-aircraft guns, although unprotected units are available.
• It should be possible to save more than 2 files per turn. As a work-around I can rename the files in the Windows Explorer, which is less convenient.
• You should be able to reinforce units with as few reinforcements as you like. For example, you have to add at least 2 strength points (unless the unit has got already 9) even if you have got only enough resources for 1 point. Units that haven’t moved must sometimes be given 5 strength points, unless you move them. But maybe I don’t want to move them and I want to give them only 3 points.
• Destroying a bridge costs 10 credits, the same as building one. Shouldn’t building be more expensive?
• To win a scenario in less than the maximum number of turns has got no advantages (unless there is an objective stating that explicitely). So to earn more resource points you have to delay your victory until the last possible turn. If you are quicker you should get the RPs you would have earned if you won in the last turn. I just played Mlawa in Blitzkrieg again. I won in 22 of 25 turns and received 291 RPs in the next scenario. Then I started again with turn 22 and played all 25 turns before winning: I got 306 RP. The Matrix forum moderator said there was a formula to avoid that. Maybe the reason for the extra money was that in the 3 extra turns I damaged some enemy units?
• It should be made visually clearer which units have already moved or fought. The difference in the emblems is hard to recognize.
• German SS were elite troops (only talking about their combat value, not their sick ideology). They should have higher combat values than regular Wehrmacht units.

Hoping for some feedback.
Hagen

bru888
Order of Battle Moderator
Order of Battle Moderator
Posts: 4786
Joined: Sun Jan 10, 2016 5:39 pm
Location: United States

Re: Some thoughts about OoB

Post by bru888 » Fri Dec 20, 2019 8:19 pm

Heh, thought you could escape me by running over here, eh? Not a chance! :wink: Here are my responses once again (use full screen for legibility):

post.jpg
post.jpg (936.53 KiB) Viewed 1610 times

As I mentioned to you, there will probably be more discussion over here. Feel free to re-post your follow-up responses, if you wish. Welcome to this side of OOB.
- Bru

dumb_user
Lance Corporal - Panzer IA
Lance Corporal - Panzer IA
Posts: 13
Joined: Sun May 26, 2019 4:41 pm

Re: Some thoughts about OoB

Post by dumb_user » Sat Dec 21, 2019 12:36 pm

Hi Bru
Not trying to escape you, just following your advice to try out this forum.
Incidentally, I already took your comments in the Matrix forum into account when posting this here and changed some of my remarks.
And did you notice my reply in the Matrix forum about losing resource points when winning a scenario too quickly?
Hagen

bru888
Order of Battle Moderator
Order of Battle Moderator
Posts: 4786
Joined: Sun Jan 10, 2016 5:39 pm
Location: United States

Re: Some thoughts about OoB

Post by bru888 » Sat Dec 21, 2019 1:59 pm

dumb_user wrote:
Sat Dec 21, 2019 12:36 pm
Hi Bru
Not trying to escape you, just following your advice to try out this forum.
Incidentally, I already took your comments in the Matrix forum into account when posting this here and changed some of my remarks.
And did you notice my reply in the Matrix forum about losing resource points when winning a scenario too quickly?
Hagen
Heh, if you are going to frequent this forum, you will need to get used to my wry (rye?) sense of humor. :)

Yes, you said the following:

- You were right about the costs of building resp. destroying bridges: They are both 10 RP.
- I just played Mlawa in Blitzkrieg again. I won in 22 of 25 turns and received 291 RP in the next scenario. Then I started again with turn 22 and played all 25 turns before winning: I got 306 RP. In the 3 extra turns I damaged some enemy units. Did that earn me the extra money?
- About the costs for strategic bombers: I guess repairing them will be more expensive than repairing tactical bombers. This adds to the higher purchasing price (I didn't say anything of the kind about artillery).


The part about the "money" (resource points) goes against my understanding of the situation. That certainly is not to say that I am right and you are wrong. This game is deceptively complicated under the hood and there could be "extenuating circumstances" at play. For example, this specialisation might account for the extra points:

Forced Labor • Damaging enemy units on 0 supply and efficiency generates Resource Points.

Now that I enticed you here, I hope that others will confirm what I said about that resource points formula and provide their own enlightened commentary.
- Bru

CoolDTA
Master Sergeant - U-boat
Master Sergeant - U-boat
Posts: 523
Joined: Sun Mar 16, 2014 11:52 am

Re: Some thoughts about OoB

Post by CoolDTA » Sat Dec 21, 2019 7:11 pm

bru888 wrote:
Fri Dec 20, 2019 8:19 pm
Heh, thought you could escape me by running over here, eh? Not a chance! :wink:
Ha ha, no one expects the Spani... I mean Bru. ;)
bru888 wrote:
Sat Dec 21, 2019 1:59 pm
Yes, you said the following:

- I just played Mlawa in Blitzkrieg again. I won in 22 of 25 turns and received 291 RP in the next scenario. Then I started again with turn 22 and played all 25 turns before winning: I got 306 RP. In the 3 extra turns I damaged some enemy units. Did that earn me the extra money?


The part about the "money" (resource points) goes against my understanding of the situation. That certainly is not to say that I am right and you are wrong. This game is deceptively complicated under the hood and there could be "extenuating circumstances" at play.

Well, from my experience there is one ground rule: thou shalt not doubt what Bru says. :) Notwithstanding, I think (not) dumb_user raises a good point. My explanation: while in OoB you are not forced to play all turns like in PzC to not lose many, many RPs, by playing to the end, you actually gain one extra turn worth of RPs. In case of Mlawa you get 15 RPs per turn and the difference between 291 RP (end turn 22) and 306 RP (end turn 25) is just that. The game awards you an additional per turn RPs for turn 26, although it is never played. I'd say it is sort of a bug or because it is OoB, a feature. ;)

GabeKnight
Lieutenant-General - Do 217E
Lieutenant-General - Do 217E
Posts: 3200
Joined: Mon Nov 27, 2017 10:24 pm

Re: Some thoughts about OoB

Post by GabeKnight » Sat Dec 21, 2019 8:19 pm

CoolDTA wrote:
Sat Dec 21, 2019 7:11 pm
My explanation: while in OoB you are not forced to play all turns like in PzC to not lose many, many RPs, by playing to the end, you actually gain one extra turn worth of RPs. In case of Mlawa you get 15 RPs per turn and the difference between 291 RP (end turn 22) and 306 RP (end turn 25) is just that. The game awards you an additional per turn RPs for turn 26, although it is never played. I'd say it is sort of a bug or because it is OoB, a feature. ;)
Yeah, wasn't there another user mentioning the same thing? The explanation makes sense, if you play to the very last turn, you'll usually end up with one additional turn, something like 26/25.


Nice post, Dumb, I'll try to give some feedback:
dumb_user wrote:
Fri Dec 20, 2019 6:40 pm
• Bug: Clicking on the symbol to toggle between air and land view when there is a unit beneath the symbol will activate the unit instead of toggeling.
I've always used the "Tab" key for that...
dumb_user wrote:
Fri Dec 20, 2019 6:40 pm
• Bug: The crosshairs symbol with the combat result forecast sometimes appears in the center of the screen and won't go away until you leave and restart a scenario.
Yeah, the "floating preview" bug's been around for some time now, too. :roll:
dumb_user wrote:
Fri Dec 20, 2019 6:40 pm
• Mechanized units will not use their vehicles on short distances. I would like to be able to decide that myself. Infantry will fight better when afoot, but AA or AT guns etc., for example, sometimes are weaker than their (armed) vehicles. And again, shouldn't it be my choice whether they use a vehicle or not?
Good point, was discussed earlier, but still a good idea. Same with some "waypoints" for unit pathing, so that my units could drive around some city/forest hex, except right through it...
dumb_user wrote:
Fri Dec 20, 2019 6:40 pm
• Heavy Artillery, especially because you need to pay for a heavy truck, too, is much too expensive, compared to its impact and compared to other weapons costs, even when taking into account the effect on enemy efficiency rather than the killing strength.
Don't agree. Arty's really powerful in this game. The impact on enemy efficiency is not to be underestimated.
dumb_user wrote:
Fri Dec 20, 2019 6:40 pm
• The AI in some cases doesn’t act as efficiently or effectively as it could:
- It doesn’t always use ranged weapons before attacking at close range.
- It often doesn’t retreat heavily damaged units, but leaves them where they are or even attacks with them. In some cases that makes sense to slow you down, but mostly it looks like the AI doesn’t “know” better.
- Sometimes the AI uses airplanes to attack certain targets, although better targets are in range, e. g. a hard-to-destroy bunker instead of a weak bomber or artillery.
- Or it attacks units protected by anti-aircraft guns, although unprotected units are available.
I'm not saying that the AI of this game is some kind of "Wunderwaffe", but I think it's still very efficient. You have to take into account, that many aspects of the AI behaviour are scripted within the scens and various parameters can be adjusted:
- Upping the "aggression" setting, for example, can make enemy units suicidal, instead of retreating and repairing/resting.
- Air units can be given specific targets, e.g. arty or AT only, or to ignore recon planes, and such...
- Different, numbered AI teams, which are executed sequentially (in some kind of order :shock: )
- And it may sound a bit strange at first, but a couple of "dumb/stupid" moves of the AI are somewhat wanted. You don't want no lengthy stalemate situations or a too clever AI you couldn't beat... :wink:
dumb_user wrote:
Fri Dec 20, 2019 6:40 pm
• It should be possible to save more than 2 files per turn. As a work-around I can rename the files in the Windows Explorer, which is less convenient.
?
You can save as many savegame files per turn as you wish.
dumb_user wrote:
Fri Dec 20, 2019 6:40 pm
• German SS were elite troops (only talking about their combat value, not their sick ideology). They should have higher combat values than regular Wehrmacht units.
This was also been discussed in lengths. Favoured by some, but discarded by the devs, I think.

CoolDTA
Master Sergeant - U-boat
Master Sergeant - U-boat
Posts: 523
Joined: Sun Mar 16, 2014 11:52 am

Re: Some thoughts about OoB

Post by CoolDTA » Sat Dec 21, 2019 9:00 pm

GabeKnight wrote:
Sat Dec 21, 2019 8:19 pm
Yeah, wasn't there another user mentioning the same thing? The explanation makes sense, if you play to the very last turn, you'll usually end up with one additional turn, something like 26/25.
Yep, that's it.

Agree with Gabe and Bru about arty. There's also to remember the huge range of certain hvy arty pieces. I'm also glad the devs didn't give higher combat values to SS. While there were some very good, even elite units, there were also really, really poor units. Maybe adding an SS commander or two could be considered.

Spotlight22
Corporal - Strongpoint
Corporal - Strongpoint
Posts: 69
Joined: Mon Oct 28, 2019 2:52 am

Re: Some thoughts about OoB

Post by Spotlight22 » Sat Dec 21, 2019 9:53 pm

I agree with what GabeKnight and others have responded to, but doing so to show that other people have read this thread as well!

I'm also glad the devs didn't give higher combat values to SS. While there were some very good, even elite units, there were also really, really poor units. Maybe adding an SS commander or two could be considered.
Highly agree, very well handled as it is imo.

bru888
Order of Battle Moderator
Order of Battle Moderator
Posts: 4786
Joined: Sun Jan 10, 2016 5:39 pm
Location: United States

Re: Some thoughts about OoB

Post by bru888 » Sun Dec 22, 2019 12:32 am

Cool and Gabe, thanks for confirming that resources formula. I hadn't thought of that 26/25 turns wrinkle; good point. The formula, then, is correct.
- Bru

prestidigitation
Sergeant - 7.5 cm FK 16 nA
Sergeant - 7.5 cm FK 16 nA
Posts: 222
Joined: Sat May 27, 2017 1:24 am

Re: Some thoughts about OoB

Post by prestidigitation » Sun Dec 22, 2019 1:22 am

The devs are absolutely correct, the SS was not an elite formation and in fact performed worse than standard wehrmacht despite better equipment due to fanaticism and poor quality officers. This has been covered in numerous recent operational histories. Their chief (omnipresent, really) flaw was that they did not understand or practice tactical or operational maneuver. They also tended to take much higher casualties and committed many warcrimes.

And that's just the combat SS formations. The garrison ones were abysmal and absolutely vile toward the civilian population.

Arty and strategic bombers are extremely powerful once you get used to how they work. I've suggested a few times that an additional cost be added because they are so strong. I play on the higher difficulties and definitely crutch on these units.

Zekedia222
Staff Sergeant - StuG IIIF
Staff Sergeant - StuG IIIF
Posts: 295
Joined: Mon Dec 17, 2018 9:30 pm
Location: Somewhere between Chattanooga and Anchorage

Re: Some thoughts about OoB

Post by Zekedia222 » Sun Dec 22, 2019 3:10 am

Yeah, I agree. When I started, I didn’t understand artillery. Why would you use it? It doesn’t do squat. Then I realized that its focus isn’t on damage, but destroying efficiency, effectively removing a unit from play and making it more vulnerable to attack. A constant bombardment is even better, as the unit is unable to regain efficiency. And all this is from a relatively bad OoB player. Heavy arty is strong, and so are heavy bombers. In some ways I agree that heavy bombers may be too expensive, but it is true to life. A B29 Super-Fortress will be much more expensive than a P51 Mustang. It just makes sense.
Klinger, you're dumber than you look, and THAT boggles the MIND.
- Charles Emerson Winchester III

dumb_user
Lance Corporal - Panzer IA
Lance Corporal - Panzer IA
Posts: 13
Joined: Sun May 26, 2019 4:41 pm

Re: Some thoughts about OoB

Post by dumb_user » Sun Dec 22, 2019 2:48 pm

bru888 wrote:
Sat Dec 21, 2019 1:59 pm

The part about the "money" (resource points) goes against my understanding of the situation. That certainly is not to say that I am right and you are wrong. This game is deceptively complicated under the hood and there could be "extenuating circumstances" at play. For example, this specialisation might account for the extra points:
Forced Labor • Damaging enemy units on 0 supply and efficiency generates Resource Points.
That can't be the explanation, I haven't got any specialisation yet in Blitzkrieg (Mlawa being the first scenario).

dumb_user
Lance Corporal - Panzer IA
Lance Corporal - Panzer IA
Posts: 13
Joined: Sun May 26, 2019 4:41 pm

Re: Some thoughts about OoB

Post by dumb_user » Sun Dec 22, 2019 2:56 pm

GabeKnight wrote:
Sat Dec 21, 2019 8:19 pm

dumb_user wrote:
Fri Dec 20, 2019 6:40 pm
• It should be possible to save more than 2 files per turn. As a work-around I can rename the files in the Windows Explorer, which is less convenient.
?
You can save as many savegame files per turn as you wish.
Now that you mention it: I never realized that I can type in my own file names. I always just saved a game, overwriting the previous file. (I knew there was a reason why I picked my nickname ...)

dumb_user
Lance Corporal - Panzer IA
Lance Corporal - Panzer IA
Posts: 13
Joined: Sun May 26, 2019 4:41 pm

Re: Some thoughts about OoB

Post by dumb_user » Sun Dec 22, 2019 3:12 pm

Wow, overwhelming feedback (no irony)! Thanks everybody.
I think I will try heavy bombers in the next campaign.
And you are right about the SS not being real elite troops: They were more fanatic, hence fiercer in attack, but incurred high casualties.

bru888
Order of Battle Moderator
Order of Battle Moderator
Posts: 4786
Joined: Sun Jan 10, 2016 5:39 pm
Location: United States

Re: Some thoughts about OoB

Post by bru888 » Sun Dec 22, 2019 4:49 pm

Told you it would be better over here! Now stick around, private, and earn your first promotion. ;)
- Bru

Zekedia222
Staff Sergeant - StuG IIIF
Staff Sergeant - StuG IIIF
Posts: 295
Joined: Mon Dec 17, 2018 9:30 pm
Location: Somewhere between Chattanooga and Anchorage

Re: Some thoughts about OoB

Post by Zekedia222 » Sun Dec 22, 2019 8:50 pm

Recommendation: use only one or two heavy bombers. I only ever have 1 or 2 as they are expensive and [usually] you don’t need insane amounts. I, of course, am relatively inexperienced in OoB.
Klinger, you're dumber than you look, and THAT boggles the MIND.
- Charles Emerson Winchester III

Erik2
Order of Battle Moderator
Order of Battle Moderator
Posts: 7781
Joined: Thu Jul 14, 2011 12:59 pm
Location: Norway

Re: Some thoughts about OoB

Post by Erik2 » Mon Dec 23, 2019 11:55 am

Maybe the Waffen SS (infantry) could have something like the Banzai specialisation?
The devs need to fix the SS specs anyway, it lacks just about every land spec available for the Wehrmacht.
But SS do have the air specs :roll:

GabeKnight
Lieutenant-General - Do 217E
Lieutenant-General - Do 217E
Posts: 3200
Joined: Mon Nov 27, 2017 10:24 pm

Re: Some thoughts about OoB

Post by GabeKnight » Mon Dec 23, 2019 7:46 pm

Erik2 wrote:
Mon Dec 23, 2019 11:55 am
Maybe the Waffen SS (infantry) could have something like the Banzai specialisation?
Yeah, that's a good idea. Or some special commander, maybe?

Erik2 wrote:
Mon Dec 23, 2019 11:55 am
The devs need to fix the SS specs anyway, it lacks just about every land spec available for the Wehrmacht.
But SS do have the air specs :roll:
You realize that the Waffen-SS units are a spec of the Ger. Wehrmacht, right? The Waffen-SS is not a separate faction (per se) in any of the official content and has no spec tree and no spec points. Nothing to "fix" here... :)

You just use them differently with your custom campaigns, that's all. And the spec as everything else is easily moddable. I think you should've created some "Erik"-mod yourself a long time ago. :wink:

Erik2
Order of Battle Moderator
Order of Battle Moderator
Posts: 7781
Joined: Thu Jul 14, 2011 12:59 pm
Location: Norway

Re: Some thoughts about OoB

Post by Erik2 » Tue Dec 24, 2019 12:25 pm

GabeKnight wrote:
Mon Dec 23, 2019 7:46 pm
Erik2 wrote:
Mon Dec 23, 2019 11:55 am
Maybe the Waffen SS (infantry) could have something like the Banzai specialisation?
Yeah, that's a good idea. Or some special commander, maybe?

Erik2 wrote:
Mon Dec 23, 2019 11:55 am
The devs need to fix the SS specs anyway, it lacks just about every land spec available for the Wehrmacht.
But SS do have the air specs :roll:
You realize that the Waffen-SS units are a spec of the Ger. Wehrmacht, right? The Waffen-SS is not a separate faction (per se) in any of the official content and has no spec tree and no spec points. Nothing to "fix" here... :)

You just use them differently with your custom campaigns, that's all. And the spec as everything else is easily moddable. I think you should've created some "Erik"-mod yourself a long time ago. :wink:
I beg to differ re Waffen specs. Why should'nt the various pak-specs be available for instance?
Just because the SS is not used as a separate faction in any official scenarios does not mean that it should be able to use it as a proper core in (custom) campaigns. I did this in my German Bulge-campaign, but the SS units are kind of nutered due to missing spec possibilites.
I know it is easy to mod this, but I don't want to fix the mod every time there's an official update.

bru888
Order of Battle Moderator
Order of Battle Moderator
Posts: 4786
Joined: Sun Jan 10, 2016 5:39 pm
Location: United States

Re: Some thoughts about OoB

Post by bru888 » Tue Dec 24, 2019 2:31 pm

Yeah, Gabe, I'm with Erik on the subject of mods at least (this is a "Some thoughts about OOB" thread, so some rambling is permissible). I have utmost respect for what you have accomplished with yours - it seems quite successful - but I prefer to live in the official OOB-world myself. Here's the reason: With all of the custom campaigns and scenarios that I am accumulating, it would be a nightmare having to go through all of those to fix them with each official update if they had all been adapted to my private mod, or somebody else's mod. And if I did not adapt them to a mod, I would need to play them with vanilla OOB so what would be the sense of having the mod?

I am sure that you have overcome these concerns and adapted accordingly. It's a matter of choice, of course, and part of the reason why I am saying this is to explain why I have never taken a real interest in your or anybody else's general mod. Specific mods are another matter. Somewhere on a back burner is my redevelopment and expansion (a follow-up scenario) of the Battle of Britain mod. And I wish, wish, wish, that guy with the Spanish Civil War mod would reappear and continue development. If not, I'm thinking of taking it over and trying my hand.

There, how's that for "some thoughts"?
- Bru

Post Reply

Return to “Order of Battle Series”