GS v3.01 slight modifications for testing

PSP/DS/PC/MAC : WWII turn based grand strategy game

Moderators: firepowerjohan, rkr1958, Happycat, Slitherine Core

Morris
Major-General - Tiger I
Major-General - Tiger I
Posts: 2275
Joined: Wed Mar 30, 2011 11:00 am

Re: GS v3.01 slight modifications for testing

Post by Morris » Thu Nov 07, 2013 3:09 pm

Kragdob wrote:I think this one will change game a little bit in favor of Germany. +1 survivability and +1 defense for just 1 star is a huge bonus for ground units. +1 survivability for SUB is also a big change. Now 1 or 2 stars (I rarely see more) really means something.

I didn't test that yet but SS/Guards units will now have +2 for attack and +2 for defense due to this change. I agree but on the other side if Red Army manages to produce few more Guards units above 4 they get they will have a powerfull force. I don't know if it changes anything for the fate of the Germany though.

I will try to adjust our current game with Morris wiht that and let you know how it worked.

I agree ! Good news to Axis & bad news to my Allies ! hehehe

trulster
Sergeant First Class - Panzer IIIL
Sergeant First Class - Panzer IIIL
Posts: 362
Joined: Thu Sep 03, 2009 2:20 pm
Location: London

Re: GS v3.01 slight modifications for testing

Post by trulster » Fri Nov 08, 2013 3:54 pm

Kragdob wrote:I think this one will change game a little bit in favor of Germany. +1 survivability and +1 defense for just 1 star is a huge bonus for ground units. +1 survivability for SUB is also a big change. Now 1 or 2 stars (I rarely see more) really means something.
Interesting changes! Likely it will make games a bit more extreme, ie aiding Axis success early in the war with better units. But then when/if the pendulum swings the Allies late war will be even stronger than usual. On the other hand if the Brits are able to early beat up the Italians they will also gain some nice veterancy.

Vokt
Lieutenant Colonel - Panther D
Lieutenant Colonel - Panther D
Posts: 1222
Joined: Tue Jan 29, 2013 3:11 pm

Re: GS v3.01 slight modifications for testing

Post by Vokt » Fri Nov 08, 2013 10:50 pm

Dyle changes are welcomed although some more political penalty wouldn't be bad either.

I am Ok with removing build limit in fighters units. Not sure with touching the XP units thing. Anyway, let's test it first.

Peter Stauffenberg
General - Carrier
General - Carrier
Posts: 4706
Joined: Sun Jul 08, 2007 4:13 pm
Location: Oslo, Norway

Re: GS v3.01 slight modifications for testing

Post by Peter Stauffenberg » Mon Nov 11, 2013 6:16 pm

Vokt wrote:Dyle changes are welcomed although some more political penalty wouldn't be bad either.

I am Ok with removing build limit in fighters units. Not sure with touching the XP units thing. Anyway, let's test it first.
I think the Dyle political penalty is already quite severe. -25% convoy size, no USLL destroyer, -6% US war effort until USA joins the Allies, no early release of the Canadian units.

I think that is enough to make the Dyle a rather dubious option. Maybe if you completely surprise your opponent you can do it. If the Axis player is careful and makes sure he sends units to the west on turn 2 then I think Dyle is not worth the risk.

Maybe the Dyle threat will limit the Axis Scandinavia blitz option. Doing the Scandinavian blitz means you don't have Axis units in the west to respond to a Dyle. Instead these units are close to Denmark. So a British sub spying upon the Axis movements around Wilhelmshaven can be a good indication whether a Scandinavian blitz is going to happen or not.

Crazygunner1
Major - 8.8 cm FlaK 36
Major - 8.8 cm FlaK 36
Posts: 959
Joined: Sun Dec 27, 2009 4:13 pm

Re: GS v3.01 slight modifications for testing

Post by Crazygunner1 » Fri Nov 15, 2013 7:36 pm

Very interesting changes indeed. Certanly with the fighter limit and experience. :D

Plaid
Brigadier-General - 15 cm Nblwf 41
Brigadier-General - 15 cm Nblwf 41
Posts: 1960
Joined: Tue Apr 27, 2010 10:16 pm

Re: GS v3.01 slight modifications for testing

Post by Plaid » Sun Nov 17, 2013 7:13 pm

Kragdob wrote:
I didn't test that yet but SS/Guards units will now have +2 for attack and +2 for defense due to this change. I agree but on the other side if Red Army manages to produce few more Guards units above 4 they get they will have a powerfull force. I don't know if it changes anything for the fate of the Germany though.
As far as I know SS units does not have any bonus experience - they just have as much, as unit had before promotion. It is paratroopers who receive 2 free stars during training.

But well know effect "soviet units become guards before their destruction" (occurs a lot in 1942-43 during German offensives) will become even more annoying. Probably guards should convert at start of allied turn, not right after they reached enough exp.

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

Re: GS v3.01 slight modifications for testing

Post by Cybvep » Sun Nov 17, 2013 7:37 pm

But well know effect "soviet units become guards before their destruction" (occurs a lot in 1942-43 during German offensives) will become even more annoying. Probably guards should convert at start of allied turn, not right after they reached enough exp.
A very good suggestion IMO.

shawkhan
Staff Sergeant - StuG IIIF
Staff Sergeant - StuG IIIF
Posts: 282
Joined: Mon Dec 24, 2007 7:36 pm

Re: GS v3.01 slight modifications for testing

Post by shawkhan » Sun Nov 17, 2013 10:40 pm

Too bad we can't just have an 'option' to make them Guards or not when eligible.

Peter Stauffenberg
General - Carrier
General - Carrier
Posts: 4706
Joined: Sun Jul 08, 2007 4:13 pm
Location: Oslo, Norway

Re: GS v3.01 slight modifications for testing

Post by Peter Stauffenberg » Sun Nov 17, 2013 11:34 pm

You can play with the option to purchase Russian guards. Then you decide which units you want to make guards

Morris
Major-General - Tiger I
Major-General - Tiger I
Posts: 2275
Joined: Wed Mar 30, 2011 11:00 am

Re: GS v3.01 slight modifications for testing

Post by Morris » Sat Nov 23, 2013 1:29 pm

I just load new 3.01 version . I found the production limited in 1942 is terrible for USSR ! It is 5 . UK is 8 & USA is 7 . It really doesnot make sense ! USSR made much more tanks than US & UK in 1942 & also their cost is very cheap comparing with Germany tank & US tank . On oil consumption , it is also terrible . when May 8th 1942 , USSR originally has 14 mechs , since the limit is 5 , it means that even move a mech , it will cost 2.6 oil !!! It almost a tank's oil consumption !

At least USSR should be have the same limit as UK !

So I think I won't like to play the game in such a unreasonable set up . If I am an Axis player , I will badly defeat USSR in 1942 & have the opportunity to take Omsk in 1943 . It swing the balance a little bit too much . :(

Peter Stauffenberg
General - Carrier
General - Carrier
Posts: 4706
Joined: Sun Jul 08, 2007 4:13 pm
Location: Oslo, Norway

Re: GS v3.01 slight modifications for testing

Post by Peter Stauffenberg » Sat Nov 23, 2013 2:46 pm

The limit is based upon you tech Level in industry and organization.

The limit is a soft limit so the extra cost for building above the limit isn't very high for the first 2-3 units you build above the limit.

What is your Russian industry and organization tech in the beginning of 1942? Give us the fractions too.

With a limit of 5 it means you have only 1 extra from techs. That is very low. The base for 1942 is 4.
UNIT_TYPE_BUILD_LIMIT_1942 4

The tech bonus is: Tech industry + 2/ 3 * Tech organization

Russia starts With industry Tech 1 and organization Tech 1. That means the Tech bonus in 1939 is:
1 + 2/3 * 1 = 1.67 = 1 (integer rounds Down)

So your 1942 build limit is as it was in 1939.

If you had managed to bump the industry Tech to e. g. 2 and organization to 2 then you would get the following bonus:
2 + 2 / 3 * 2 = 3.3333 = 3

So With just one higher Tech in industry and organization you would get 2 higher build limit?

My question is then: have you ignored these Techs?

Actually the Russians didn't have their tank reorganization completed until the Summer of 1942. With these rules you see that the Russians would get quite a bit higher build limit from about the Summer of 1942 if they were unlucky With the Tech advances in industry and organization in 1939 to 1942.

So if you still have a Tech limit of 5 you just need to be patient to get your industry and organization Techs to get to the next level.

Morris
Major-General - Tiger I
Major-General - Tiger I
Posts: 2275
Joined: Wed Mar 30, 2011 11:00 am

Re: GS v3.01 slight modifications for testing

Post by Morris » Sat Nov 23, 2013 4:48 pm

Stauffenberg wrote:The limit is based upon you tech Level in industry and organization.

The limit is a soft limit so the extra cost for building above the limit isn't very high for the first 2-3 units you build above the limit.

What is your Russian industry and organization tech in the beginning of 1942? Give us the fractions too.

With a limit of 5 it means you have only 1 extra from techs. That is very low. The base for 1942 is 4.
UNIT_TYPE_BUILD_LIMIT_1942 4

The tech bonus is: Tech industry + 2/ 3 * Tech organization

Russia starts With industry Tech 1 and organization Tech 1. That means the Tech bonus in 1939 is:
1 + 2/3 * 1 = 1.67 = 1 (integer rounds Down)

So your 1942 build limit is as it was in 1939.

If you had managed to bump the industry Tech to e. g. 2 and organization to 2 then you would get the following bonus:
2 + 2 / 3 * 2 = 3.3333 = 3

So With just one higher Tech in industry and organization you would get 2 higher build limit?

My question is then: have you ignored these Techs?

Actually the Russians didn't have their tank reorganization completed until the Summer of 1942. With these rules you see that the Russians would get quite a bit higher build limit from about the Summer of 1942 if they were unlucky With the Tech advances in industry and organization in 1939 to 1942.

So if you still have a Tech limit of 5 you just need to be patient to get your industry and organization Techs to get to the next level.

Thanks for your lesson , Borger ! Since if USSR concentrate the tec to Industry & organization , they have to give up two of arm , air ,infantry .( before 1942 , only the tec with the focus points & with 2 lab is possible to upgrade one lvl in USSR.) Is this the way you want to balance the game ? It will make USSR dead. If USSR is too weak or be kicked out of war in 1943 , the Allies will feel a little bit hopeless .

Peter Stauffenberg
General - Carrier
General - Carrier
Posts: 4706
Joined: Sun Jul 08, 2007 4:13 pm
Location: Oslo, Norway

Re: GS v3.01 slight modifications for testing

Post by Peter Stauffenberg » Sat Nov 23, 2013 5:23 pm

I always build some labs in general. Prior to Barbarossa I get one Level and another soon after Barbarossa.

USSR will certainly NOT be dead even if build limits. I never have more than 5 armor or tac bomber units With USSR in 1942 and I usually win my games. In 1944 I maybe have 8-9 of each. That is more than enough to have a chance to get to Berlin. It will probably break the strategy of just focusing on armor and tactical bombers instead of infantry. If you want hordes of armor units you get more at the expense of the quality (higher techs).

If you decide to ignore labs in general to get industry and organization then you do it to get more techs in armor and air. Then the consequence should be that your production capacity is a bit lower. I don't see the problem with that. If you focus on something you give up something else. The build limit is a soft limit so you can overuse with a slightly higher unit cost.

It's funny that you say that the Axis have no chance to win in GS v3.0 and just by making a slight adjustment to the build limit then suddenly the Allies have no chance? Maybe it's the game strategy used that needs to be altered then.

I have not struggled with a build limit in any of my games. So maybe some kind of blob strategy with tech specialization is still being used by some players.

Peter Stauffenberg
General - Carrier
General - Carrier
Posts: 4706
Joined: Sun Jul 08, 2007 4:13 pm
Location: Oslo, Norway

Re: GS v3.01 slight modifications for testing

Post by Peter Stauffenberg » Sat Nov 23, 2013 5:48 pm

A good thing about investing in industry with the USSR is that you increase the max labs With each extra Tech Level in industry. Since USSR starts With Tech Level 1 in industry then they can have 11 labs (10 + 1). I usually og With 3 labs in infantry, 3 in armor, 3 in air and 2 in general (focus on industry).

With Tech Level 2 in industry you can have 12 labs, With Tech Level 3 you can have 13 labs. So it's possible in 1943 to have 3 labs in infantry, 4 labs in armor, 4 labs in air and 2 labs in general. Then you have the max Levels you can have in armor and air.

So I really don't see the problem here.

If you ignore industry prior to 1942 then you have 3 labs in infantry, armor and air and have 2 spare labs that can't be used on anything unless you waste labs in naval. So I can't really see any Allied player not investing in general labs for USSR.

The remaining question is then WHEN you invest in general labs. If you first build 2 infantry, 2 armor and 2 air before starting general labs then you get a head start on these Techs, but you will get a lower Production limit and late game the head start will be caught up With lower max labs. If you build at least 1 general lab prior to Barbarossa you might not be up to the German Techs in air and armor in 1941 and 1942, but you will long term be stronger since Your industrial capacity is stronger.

I've seen reports from quite a few Axis players complaining that they don't feel they have a tech advantage in GS until 1943. No Wonder why that happens if e. g. the Allied player ignores general labs to build air and armor labs faster. E. g. UK With only armor and infantry labs and USA With air labs. USSR focus on air and armor. Such a strategy is certainly possible, but it should come With a consequence. The consequence is that you ignore Your industrial capacity and thus get lower build limits. I don't see that as a bad thing at all.

If you focus on industrial capacity you get more max labs eventually and will Catch up the initial Tech deficit in infantry, armor and air. So it's like chosing between fast Development for initial gains or a slow Development for a more permanent advantage late game. I like such options. You have similar situations With the Choice of openings in chess. You can go for a quick Development of units, but you need to use Your initiative to get the upper hand or you will eventually lose. Or you can choose the slower, but safer Development that means you will yield initiative to Your opponent, but will be more rock solid and can probably fend off his initial initiative.

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

Re: GS v3.01 slight modifications for testing

Post by Cybvep » Sat Nov 23, 2013 10:08 pm

Considering that it's a soft limit, it can be seen as part of the Soviet mobilisation. Note that IRL the Soviets lost most of their tanks (which in CEAW are represented as ARMs and MECHs) during the first months of war. In fact, they lost most of their army and had to rebuild it. If you save your forces, then I think that it's ok that your build-up will be a bit slower/more expensive. Units have to be maintained, after all. And if you feel that you are in trouble in 1942, then that's good, too. It seems a bit bold to say that this change will mean that Russia will surrender in 1943 O_o.

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

Re: GS v3.01 slight modifications for testing

Post by Kragdob » Sun Nov 24, 2013 9:03 pm

What Morris is referring is Fortress Europe strategy. From my perspective the problem is not the higher cost of units (even with limit 5 USSR has enough MECHS on board, building the horde of ARMs, TACs and FTRs is very expensive and I think this is good) but the amount of oil USSR have in 1942. With 200 at start and very high oil consumption USSR can't do much when Germany invades in 1942. This is what Morris has realized and I think this is bad.

Can't this change also increase soviet oil level to e.g. 500?
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: GS v3.01 slight modifications for testing

Post by Cybvep » Sun Nov 24, 2013 9:48 pm

Maybe increase their oil levels during industrial mobilisation in late 1941, if they are not at war yet?

Peter Stauffenberg
General - Carrier
General - Carrier
Posts: 4706
Joined: Sun Jul 08, 2007 4:13 pm
Location: Oslo, Norway

Re: GS v3.01 slight modifications for testing

Post by Peter Stauffenberg » Mon Nov 25, 2013 9:25 am

It's certainly possible to increase the USSR oil reserves by e. g. 300 when Russia mobilizes if there was no 1941 Barbarossa.

Russia would probably stockpile some oil in 1941-1942 even if not at war. The 200 starting oil was intended to be for a 1941 Barbarossa. I think the Russians started with as low as 50 oil in the vanilla game.

An alternative is to just bump the Russian starting oil from 200 to e. g. 400 in the 1939 scenario. Do we have any data about the Russian starting oil reserves when Barbarossa started?

The biggest problem for Russia is that they don't generate oil at all until they join the Allies. In the real war they would not be idle and not prepare for war at all. An big oil producing country should be able to have some oil reserves.

So what is best.

Bump the oil reserves for Russia from 200 to 400 for all scenarios or bump the reserves from 200 to 500 if no 1941 Barbarossa?

What is the normal DOW time upon USSR in the fortress Europe strategy?

Morris
Major-General - Tiger I
Major-General - Tiger I
Posts: 2275
Joined: Wed Mar 30, 2011 11:00 am

Re: GS v3.01 slight modifications for testing

Post by Morris » Mon Nov 25, 2013 9:49 am

Kragdob wrote:What Morris is referring is Fortress Europe strategy. From my perspective the problem is not the higher cost of units (even with limit 5 USSR has enough MECHS on board, building the horde of ARMs, TACs and FTRs is very expensive and I think this is good) but the amount of oil USSR have in 1942. With 200 at start and very high oil consumption USSR can't do much when Germany invades in 1942. This is what Morris has realized and I think this is bad.

Can't this change also increase soviet oil level to e.g. 500?
Thanks Roman ! You get it ! :)

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

Re: GS v3.01 slight modifications for testing

Post by Cybvep » Mon Nov 25, 2013 9:54 am

What is the normal DOW time upon USSR in the fortress Europe strategy?
April-May 1942. But don't count on that, just increase the oil levels in late 1941 or in the 1939 scenario.

IRL the Soviets had enough oil for their forces, BUT the Germans captured or destroyed much of Soviet fuel stockpiles during the first months of war. So it's ok if the Soviets don't start with much oil in 1941. 1942 is another matter. They would have been better prepared and a German attack wouldn't be so shocking or surprising.

I'm ok with the fact that if the Soviets try to build too many units that consume oil, they will have oil problems, even if they only last for some time. It seems appropriate, considering the logistical considerations, but they should have more oil in 1942 in order not to disrupt the balance of the Fortress Europa scenario etc.

Post Reply

Return to “MILITARY HISTORY™ Commander - Europe at War : General Discussion”