Increase German PPs income

Moderators: firepowerjohan, rkr1958, Happycat, Slitherine Core

Kragdob
2nd Lieutenant - Panzer IVF/2
2nd Lieutenant - Panzer IVF/2
Posts: 678
Joined: Sat Aug 20, 2011 7:55 pm
Location: Poland

Increase German PPs income

Post by Kragdob » Mon Mar 18, 2013 8:11 am

Since looks like version 2.2 is coming I would like to propose slight change to improve the game balance a little bit. I would like to suggest a change to increase Germany PPs income by ~10% (so they start not with 67 but 75).

This has two main reasons:
=> to improve the balance: Allies will have a little bit difficult, so the Axis will have chances to win closer to 50/50 then they have now.
=> historical reason: GDPs of Germany & USSR is in approprieatly different in favour of the latter.
Never in the field of human conflict was so much owed by so many to so few.

Cybvep
Lieutenant Colonel - Panther D
Lieutenant Colonel - Panther D
Posts: 1259
Joined: Wed Sep 07, 2011 1:38 pm

Re: Increase German PPs income

Post by Cybvep » Mon Mar 18, 2013 11:08 am

It seems a bit risky to me, because it's too generic. A 10% boost will help the Axis in everything and can have many unintended consequences. More focused changes are preferable, I think.
=> historical reason: GDPs of Germany & USSR is in approprieatly different in favour of the latter.
Most of the time, the SU outproduced the Germans in virtually every category, despite the fact that Germany controlled most of Europe and a good chunk of western SU. Don't concern yourself with GDP too much. It's not the most relevant factor when determining the country's ability to wage total war.

Kragdob
2nd Lieutenant - Panzer IVF/2
2nd Lieutenant - Panzer IVF/2
Posts: 678
Joined: Sat Aug 20, 2011 7:55 pm
Location: Poland

Re: Increase German PPs income

Post by Kragdob » Mon Mar 18, 2013 11:55 am

The main reason is to improve balance IMHO, since we are testing can't we test all changes and see what is the result?

But the historical background shows that such change would be more in line with real historical numbers. The very rough comparison is on http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Military_p ... rld_War_II. SU is vastly empowered comparing what was the reality, but the rality was also that USSR received hudge help and I am find with current USSR production.
Never in the field of human conflict was so much owed by so many to so few.

GogTheMild
Master Sergeant - Bf 109E
Master Sergeant - Bf 109E
Posts: 455
Joined: Sun Aug 12, 2012 8:44 pm
Location: Derby, UK

Re: Increase German PPs income

Post by GogTheMild » Mon Mar 18, 2013 12:09 pm

Cybvep wrote:Most of the time, the SU outproduced the Germans in virtually every category.
Actually that needs qualifying. Before Russia joined the war things were more balanced. To take just two key areas:

Aircraft
Russia 1939: 10,382 1940: 10,565 1941: 15,735
Germy 1939: 8,295 1940: 10,247 1941: 11,776
Tanks
Russia 1939: 2,950 1940: 2,794 1941: 6,590
Germy 1939: 1,300 1940: 2,200 1941: 5,200

Obviously this ignores any differences in quality and any other areas of armament production. (Such as Germany's investment in surface naval units and U boats.)

The Russians do produce more in the first 2½ years of the war, but there is not a lot in it.

Edit: that's an interesting Wiki site but I would tend to agree with Cyvep re GDP. I must look at it more though :) .
Last edited by GogTheMild on Mon Mar 18, 2013 12:44 pm, edited 1 time in total.
We sleep peaceably in our beds at night only because rough men stand ready to do violence on our behalf.

Cybvep
Lieutenant Colonel - Panther D
Lieutenant Colonel - Panther D
Posts: 1259
Joined: Wed Sep 07, 2011 1:38 pm

Re: Increase German PPs income

Post by Cybvep » Mon Mar 18, 2013 12:22 pm

Before Russia joined the war things were more balanced.
How surprising :D.

http://ww2total.com/WW2/History/Product ... uction.htm
http://ww2total.com/WW2/History/Product ... uction.htm

Have fun.

BTW some interesting facts:
German tank production 1939-1942 - 10320
Soviet T-34 (only T-34s!!!) production in 1942 - 12553

German artillery production 1939-1945 - 159,144+
Soviet artillery production 1939-1945 - 516,648

German fighter planes production in 1942 - 5,515
Soviet fighter planes production in 1942 - 9,924

If you want to have a laugh, check the US ship production and compare it with Japan's ship production - http://www.combinedfleet.com/economic.htm . Very informative.

GogTheMild
Master Sergeant - Bf 109E
Master Sergeant - Bf 109E
Posts: 455
Joined: Sun Aug 12, 2012 8:44 pm
Location: Derby, UK

Re: Increase German PPs income

Post by GogTheMild » Mon Mar 18, 2013 12:55 pm

I would like to know where that site sources its information. According to R Overy Why the Allies Won (Random House 2006) the Germans produced 9,200 tanks in 1942 alone. (Interestingly, adding his figures for 1939 to 1945 they are close to the total give by Wiki for that period.) Agreed, a lot less than the Russian 24,500 for the year; out of which 12,400 T34s seems about right.

Edit: Overy is one of the Wiki sources. (Although for some reason using his 1997 edition.)
We sleep peaceably in our beds at night only because rough men stand ready to do violence on our behalf.

Cybvep
Lieutenant Colonel - Panther D
Lieutenant Colonel - Panther D
Posts: 1259
Joined: Wed Sep 07, 2011 1:38 pm

Re: Increase German PPs income

Post by Cybvep » Mon Mar 18, 2013 12:59 pm

the Germans produced 9,200 tanks in 1942 alone
There is a question of classification. It depends on what you consider to be a "tank". Many authors count tank destroyers, self-artillery guns, assault guns etc., too.

http://ww2total.com/WW2/History/Product ... uction.htm - if you look here, you will see that the total number for 1942 in German AFV production is 10,745 (Soviet total number of armoured vehicles produced in 1942 is 24,690). This is surprisingly close to the 9,200 figure. When you substract semi-tracked armoured vehicles, demolition vehicles etc. from the total number, you will get similar figures.

pk867
Sr. Colonel - Battleship
Sr. Colonel - Battleship
Posts: 1601
Joined: Fri May 08, 2009 3:18 pm

Re: Increase German PPs income

Post by pk867 » Mon Mar 18, 2013 1:22 pm

The game is centered around playing the historical timeline. That is how we try to balance the game. We have yet to get any data on those results.

Very few players play the historical timeline. So anything done differently meaning when, where, and how will change the balance. With a production type game of
this sort with no hard limits on what can or was produced. This is difficult. we looked at numbers too.
Yes the Germans have a difficult time if they play out of the box so to say.
Try one of the other scenarios. They have more units than you could have in a 1939 game, but is still based on the historical outcome we setup.

Peter Stauffenberg
General - Carrier
General - Carrier
Posts: 4710
Joined: Sun Jul 08, 2007 4:13 pm
Location: Oslo, Norway

Re: Increase German PPs income

Post by Peter Stauffenberg » Mon Mar 18, 2013 3:58 pm

It's possible to discuss the game balance forever. People will always have different opinions about which side has the upper edge.

I think people should be more focused on the "journey" to the end and not just the end. When you play the Axis you expect to be able to launch several offensives and be quite successful in them. The Allied player expect to initially be on the defense and eventually get the upper hand and do his own offensives.

The game is flawed in my mind if you can't simulate this. If you follow the historical path then you would hope the end result is almost like the historical one. I feel that this is happening now.

If you try alternative options (Sealion, go for Middle East, 1942 Barbarossa) you should still be able to feel you're on the offensive pushing your opponent hard. Maybe he will eventually become too strong and you will succumb to the pressure and lose Berlin slightly earlier than May 1945. Still, both players have had a lot of fun playing the game and had hopes they could do better historical.

If the game balance is made so the Germans would be on the defensive as early as 1942 or Russia crumbles completely in 1942 in most games. THEN we have a problem. I don't this is happening in most GS games. In the BJR mod it was not unlikely for the Axis to take Omsk. Now you can only dream about that against inferior players, but you can still take Leningrad, Moscow and/or Stalingrad. That is surely better than the real Germans did.

So the success of GS is partly based upon how fun it is for each side to try alternate strategies. All the AAR's I see show that alternate strategies certainly have merit. Not all of them work in the end, but they surely make their opponent sweat a bit.

People look at game balance by only determining when Germany surrendered. There are many factors that can affect the end result. Weather in the final turns is one of them. There are random factors that can decide the outcome just like it happened in the real war. E. g. a lucky attack on Leningrad in 1941 can capture the city and altering the prospects for 1942. If the city had survived in 1941 then maybe Russian counter offensives could have restored supply to the city etc. and held it till the end.

You have similar situations in chess. You choose an opening. Some are rather passive and would often end in draw. Some are sharp and you don't know who will eventually win. Some are deliberate sacrifices where you will probably lose unless you can capitalize on the initiative you get from the sacrifice.

Regardless of game balance I think the difference is player quality is much bigger than difference in strength between each side.

The important question we should ask ourselves is: Is it fun to play GS both as the Axis and the Allies?

richardsd
Lieutenant Colonel - Fw 190A
Lieutenant Colonel - Fw 190A
Posts: 1127
Joined: Sat Nov 03, 2007 5:30 am

Re: Increase German PPs income

Post by richardsd » Mon Mar 18, 2013 9:15 pm

Stauffenberg wrote:It's possible to discuss the game balance forever. People will always have different opinions about which side has the upper edge.

I think people should be more focused on the "journey" to the end and not just the end. When you play the Axis you expect to be able to launch several offensives and be quite successful in them. The Allied player expect to initially be on the defense and eventually get the upper hand and do his own offensives.

The game is flawed in my mind if you can't simulate this. If you follow the historical path then you would hope the end result is almost like the historical one. I feel that this is happening now.

If you try alternative options (Sealion, go for Middle East, 1942 Barbarossa) you should still be able to feel you're on the offensive pushing your opponent hard. Maybe he will eventually become too strong and you will succumb to the pressure and lose Berlin slightly earlier than May 1945. Still, both players have had a lot of fun playing the game and had hopes they could do better historical.

If the game balance is made so the Germans would be on the defensive as early as 1942 or Russia crumbles completely in 1942 in most games. THEN we have a problem. I don't this is happening in most GS games. In the BJR mod it was not unlikely for the Axis to take Omsk. Now you can only dream about that against inferior players, but you can still take Leningrad, Moscow and/or Stalingrad. That is surely better than the real Germans did.

So the success of GS is partly based upon how fun it is for each side to try alternate strategies. All the AAR's I see show that alternate strategies certainly have merit. Not all of them work in the end, but they surely make their opponent sweat a bit.

People look at game balance by only determining when Germany surrendered. There are many factors that can affect the end result. Weather in the final turns is one of them. There are random factors that can decide the outcome just like it happened in the real war. E. g. a lucky attack on Leningrad in 1941 can capture the city and altering the prospects for 1942. If the city had survived in 1941 then maybe Russian counter offensives could have restored supply to the city etc. and held it till the end.

You have similar situations in chess. You choose an opening. Some are rather passive and would often end in draw. Some are sharp and you don't know who will eventually win. Some are deliberate sacrifices where you will probably lose unless you can capitalize on the initiative you get from the sacrifice.

Regardless of game balance I think the difference is player quality is much bigger than difference in strength between each side.

The important question we should ask ourselves is: Is it fun to play GS both as the Axis and the Allies?
but I hate playing as the Axis - hate hate hate :(

then again thats just me, not the game

Kragdob
2nd Lieutenant - Panzer IVF/2
2nd Lieutenant - Panzer IVF/2
Posts: 678
Joined: Sat Aug 20, 2011 7:55 pm
Location: Poland

Re: Increase German PPs income

Post by Kragdob » Tue Mar 19, 2013 7:00 am

Well - if you coun't what number of PPs Germans needs to launch a Barbarossa and buy all labs you relize you have nothing to make other investments. This is why I am not surprised people does not go for Egypt, you simply does not have PPs for extra units etc. Also any investment like Sealion is deadly in such case.

Basing on my game experience Germans PPs is too little which is especially true in 1939/1940.
Never in the field of human conflict was so much owed by so many to so few.

Peter Stauffenberg
General - Carrier
General - Carrier
Posts: 4710
Joined: Sun Jul 08, 2007 4:13 pm
Location: Oslo, Norway

Re: Increase German PPs income

Post by Peter Stauffenberg » Tue Mar 19, 2013 10:31 am

Kragdob wrote:Well - if you coun't what number of PPs Germans needs to launch a Barbarossa and buy all labs you relize you have nothing to make other investments. This is why I am not surprised people does not go for Egypt, you simply does not have PPs for extra units etc. Also any investment like Sealion is deadly in such case.

Basing on my game experience Germans PPs is too little which is especially true in 1939/1940.
Don't you think the extra PP's will go for an even stronger Barbarossa instead?

Kragdob
2nd Lieutenant - Panzer IVF/2
2nd Lieutenant - Panzer IVF/2
Posts: 678
Joined: Sat Aug 20, 2011 7:55 pm
Location: Poland

Re: Increase German PPs income

Post by Kragdob » Tue Mar 19, 2013 11:13 am

Not really, from some point the returns on investments are yelding diminishing returns. Especially that you have limits on numbers of heavy units you can buy.

So putting extra INF/TAC/7th tank may not make your barbarossa stronger in any significant way, but I may have decent number of SUBS or invest in Afika Korps to put the pressure on UK.
Never in the field of human conflict was so much owed by so many to so few.

Cybvep
Lieutenant Colonel - Panther D
Lieutenant Colonel - Panther D
Posts: 1259
Joined: Wed Sep 07, 2011 1:38 pm

Re: Increase German PPs income

Post by Cybvep » Tue Mar 19, 2013 12:29 pm

ATM there is no real reason to go for Egypt in the standard scenario, so I seriously doubt that extra income would be spent there. In fact, you would be playing into the UK's hands - what a great opportunity to grind the Axis down by attrition!

Kragdob
2nd Lieutenant - Panzer IVF/2
2nd Lieutenant - Panzer IVF/2
Posts: 678
Joined: Sat Aug 20, 2011 7:55 pm
Location: Poland

Re: Increase German PPs income

Post by Kragdob » Tue Mar 19, 2013 12:52 pm

Cybvep wrote:ATM there is no real reason to go for Egypt in the standard scenario, so I seriously doubt that extra income would be spent there. In fact, you would be playing into the UK's hands - what a great opportunity to grind the Axis down by attrition!
Exactly my point. Axis have no PPs to invest in engaging UK in 1940 and it becomes strong early.
Never in the field of human conflict was so much owed by so many to so few.

Cybvep
Lieutenant Colonel - Panther D
Lieutenant Colonel - Panther D
Posts: 1259
Joined: Wed Sep 07, 2011 1:38 pm

Re: Increase German PPs income

Post by Cybvep » Tue Mar 19, 2013 2:47 pm

Except that it most likely wouldn't do that even if had greater income. Let's be honest here, the in-game alternatives are much better - you have more PPs for repairs and upgrades, you can build more subs, create a nice reserve in Germany etc. In NA, you just adopt a defensive stance. Going for Egypt is simply not lucrative enough.

I only go for Egypt when the UK is falling apart, e.g. when GB is being conquered and Spain is about to join the Axis. Then the UK will lack resources to defend Egypt properly and it should be easy pickings. Many players withdraw to Iraq immediately. Even in this case, the only reason I'm doing it is because I can - 1942 defensive Barbarossa is a piece of cake, so you have enough time to conquer most of the map.

Peter Stauffenberg
General - Carrier
General - Carrier
Posts: 4710
Joined: Sun Jul 08, 2007 4:13 pm
Location: Oslo, Norway

Re: Increase German PPs income

Post by Peter Stauffenberg » Tue Mar 19, 2013 3:33 pm

If you want to do anything about the Middle East options we could maybe look into the southern convoy size being reduced if Port Said is Axis controlled. When USA join the Allies you can switch so the central convoy is reduced if Port Said is Axis controlled.

That means the UK will hurt because their convoys can't sail through the Suez and must instead sail via the Cape of Good Hope.

Would that encourage the Axis going after the Middle East?

I don't see any other downsides for UK by losing the Suez?

If we do this, then how much should the UK lose? 10% of the convoy size? More? Maybe 10% if Port Said is lost and an additional 10% if Basra is lost?

What do you think?

Peter Stauffenberg
General - Carrier
General - Carrier
Posts: 4710
Joined: Sun Jul 08, 2007 4:13 pm
Location: Oslo, Norway

Re: Increase German PPs income

Post by Peter Stauffenberg » Tue Mar 19, 2013 3:36 pm

Going after Iraq is an option for the Axis and the gains there will mostly be access to more oil. I think that is encouragement enough for trying that option if you go into Egypt in the first place.

Maybe we could link Port Said with slightly more income to Italy because they can now send resources from Italian East Africa to Italy via the Red Sea and Suez? Let's say Italy gains something like 5 PP's per turn if Port Said is Axis controlled?

pk867
Sr. Colonel - Battleship
Sr. Colonel - Battleship
Posts: 1601
Joined: Fri May 08, 2009 3:18 pm

Re: Increase German PPs income

Post by pk867 » Tue Mar 19, 2013 4:44 pm

The convoys would not have to go through Suez. Going around the Cape of Good Hope with spread out the convoys to maybe 5 turns apart but not reduce the supplies.
The Panama canal would probably let traffic increase coming from the Pacific.

Cybvep
Lieutenant Colonel - Panther D
Lieutenant Colonel - Panther D
Posts: 1259
Joined: Wed Sep 07, 2011 1:38 pm

Re: Increase German PPs income

Post by Cybvep » Tue Mar 19, 2013 7:45 pm

Reducing the frequency of southern convoy spawns or the number of PPs in the southern could work. Maybe a one-time hit to war effort in order to represent the initial chaos and shock of losing Suez would be ok, too. Not sure how much impact it would have, but it would certainly be SOMETHING. At the very least, the Allied player would have to be a bit more cautious in NA, because losing Egypt would have greater repercussions.

About oil - I don't remember the last time I had oil problems in the game.

Post Reply

Return to “Commander Europe at War : GS Open Beta”