Does simulating history matter in OOB?

[PoorOldSpike]

Another way to look at OOB would be to regard it as a "toybox" which we can delve into to have fun experimenting with "what ifs".
For example here are just a few of the dozens of "Specialisations" we can assign to scenarios in the Editor, we can even have (gulp) NUKES if we want them..



How about it Herman?

"I completely lack the bombers capable of round-trip flights to New York with a 5-ton bomb load. I would be extremely happy to possess such a bomber which would at last stuff the mouth of arrogance across the sea."-Herman Goering 1938







A Nazi study of the effects of an atomic blast on NY-

[PoorOldSpike]

Suggested OOB scenario title-

"BLACK WIDOWS OVER THE ATLANTIC"

NEW YORK RADAR CONTROLLER- "12 Amerikabombers coming in high and fast!"
P-61 SQUADRON LEADER- "Okay guys, let's go get 'em!"

[terminator]

I wrote only what would have to be done to make OoB consistent with realities and above all more logical, but I don't have great illusions that such changes will be introduced.
For me, the game doesn't matter, because I modify it for myself
I think everyone noticed that I stopped submitting my proposals and writing here at all. It's a waste of time, you'd better do it all yourself.
I'm disgusted that the Devs have castrated an "unreliable" trait without any consultation with experienced players, but only on the basis of the voices of some random players.
This is not my game anymore and do whatever you want with this
Greetings

Maybe you need a little bit of action with the next DLC ?

[PoorOldSpike]

Simulating "what ifs" can be fun, for example suppose the Nazis had invaded America in strength, a possible scenario blurb could go something like this-
"Having pushed ahead of the main US forces, Captain Simms ordered his recon jeep driver to stop and scrambled to the top of the ridge from where the Shenandoah valley was spread out before him. Putting his binoculars to his eyes he saw a sight that took his breath away, 1st SS Panzer Division "Leibstandarte" deploying for battle"...

[kondi754]

I wrote only what would have to be done to make OoB consistent with realities and above all more logical, but I don't have great illusions that such changes will be introduced.
For me, the game doesn't matter, because I modify it for myself
I think everyone noticed that I stopped submitting my proposals and writing here at all. It's a waste of time, you'd better do it all yourself.
I'm disgusted that the Devs have castrated an "unreliable" trait without any consultation with experienced players, but only on the basis of the voices of some random players.
This is not my game anymore and do whatever you want with this
Greetings

Maybe you need a little bit of action with the next DLC ?

"Looking across a hexagonal grid super-imposed over a two-dimensional map sheet, cardboard counters or plastic miniatures representing German Panthers or Tigers look so much more impressive than the opposing Soviet T-34s. The German tanks’ strengths – long-range firepower and armoured protection – carry great weight in these kinds of simulations, while their main weaknesses – poor mobility and poor mechanical reliability – are only minor inconveniences, if depicted at all. For example, the oft-repeated canards about the Panther’s ‘teething problems’ at Kursk are fobbed off as a temporary issue, costing a wargamer a few movement points, without realizing that the Panther had persistent mobility issues throughout its career that prevented it from conducting the kind of wide-ranging mobile operations required by German maneuver warfare doctrine. The main strengths of the Soviet T-34 – reliable mobility over vast distances on its own tracks and suitability for mass production – are factors that lie outside most tactical-level simulations. Consequently, two generations of Anglo-American history buffs have been presented with numerous simulations that emphasize the superiority of German tanks and the cannon-fodder nature of Soviet tanks."
[...]"As a former tanker myself, commanding M60A3 TTS tanks in the U.S. Army in the Republic of Korea in the mid-1980s, I have an appreciation for how logistics, terrain and weather can affect armour operations and how seemingly minor deficiencies can have major consequences. Having felt the terror of sliding uncontrollably in a tank on an icy downgrade, or the difficulty of recovering tanks mired in deep mud, or fording a boulderstrewn river, I intend to offer an account of tank warfare that encompasses the oft-ignored, but critical, facets of armoured operations that have frequently been missing from other accounts."
Tank Warfare on the Eastern Front 1941-42, Robert A. Forczyk

The thing is that we have to answer the question of whether we want to have a unique game, which is also some kind of basic simulation, or is it to be another Panzer General clone? ...
Thanks, among others "Unreliable" trait, this game was something more than logical puzzles - it was a solution unseen in earlier war games. It added a certain historical and technological depth for the entire game for sure.
Unfortunately, devs have castrated OoB from something really valuable and unique in comparison to other games and that's why I'm mad at them.

[PoorOldSpike]

Historically, tanks did break down of course, some more often than others, but I always felt that OOB's 'Unreliability' trait was TOO severe, so I'm not sorry to see it's gone, and if the devs bring it back in a future patch I hope they'll have reduced its severity.
After all, there was more than one tank in historical tank units (and in OOB units), and they didn't all break down at once, so for the whole unit to go orange if one breaks down is unrealistic.
For example, this Sherman in Normandy is getting an engine change, but the rest of the tanks in its unit are away fighting quite happily.
Meanwhile on the other side of the lines a German tank might be getting an engine change too, so it balances out nicely..




Tiger maintenance, Italy 1944

http://www.mission4today.com/index.php? ... orum&f=134

[kondi754]

Spike, you can fix the engine but will not cause the Panther or Tiger will travel 200 km (even 100 km) without failure
Similarly, you will not be able to make Tiger or Panter cross a bridge with a capacity of up to 30 or 40 tons (EDIT.the majority of bridges on the eastern front had such a maximum capacity)
The thing is that both of these tanks could not be used for a maneuvering war, but only as permanent anti-tank points
Maybe you don't know, but both of these tanks fought only within a radius of 30-40 km from the railway line, because to transport them further rail transport was necessary (also during the German army's retreat as a result of the Soviet offensive in 1944-45). Therefore, many of these tanks were abandoned when the opponent's attack cut them off from the railway stations - potential loading points

I think that "Unreliable" trait MUST return in its current form, but it should be possible to disable it in the game options
(I need this trait to my historical Mods)

[kondi754]

After all, there was more than one tank in historical tank units (and in OOB units), and they didn't all break down at once, so for the whole unit to go orange if one breaks down is unrealistic.

schwere Panzer Abteilung (heavy tank battalion) had a composition calculated deliberately on 45 machines but the level of failure was 65-70%, so only about max 10-15 tanks were available all the time (during heavy fights it was 5-6 vehicles mostly available) and it was the true firepower of Tiger's unit, so "unreliable" trait is legitimate in this game and should not be weakened in my opinion

[PoorOldSpike]

I wonder why the devs removed the Unreliable trait?
Perhaps people didn't like the trait and complained about it like I did, and the devs agreed with us.
Maybe the devs should put up a poll asking-

1- Do you want the trait?
2- Do you not want the trait?
3- Do you want the trait returned, but in a less severe form?

I'd vote '3'..

[terminator]

After all, there was more than one tank in historical tank units (and in OOB units), and they didn't all break down at once, so for the whole unit to go orange if one breaks down is unrealistic.

schwere Panzer Abteilung (heavy tank battalion) had a composition calculated deliberately on 45 machines but the level of failure was 65-70%, so only about max 10-15 tanks were available all the time (during heavy fights it was 5-6 vehicles mostly available) and it was the true firepower of Tiger's unit, so "unreliable" trait is legitimate in this game and should not be weakened in my opinion

I do not think that the understaffing is due solely to reliability problems.

[kondi754]

After all, there was more than one tank in historical tank units (and in OOB units), and they didn't all break down at once, so for the whole unit to go orange if one breaks down is unrealistic.

schwere Panzer Abteilung (heavy tank battalion) had a composition calculated deliberately on 45 machines but the level of failure was 65-70%, so only about max 10-15 tanks were available all the time (during heavy fights it was 5-6 vehicles mostly available) and it was the true firepower of Tiger's unit, so "unreliable" trait is legitimate in this game and should not be weakened in my opinion

I do not think that the understaffing is due solely to reliability problems.

Mostly yes. These were mainly defects of the chassis and drive system.
I read a monograph "Totenkopf Tigers" about the heavy tank company of the SS Totenkopf panzer division, and there, most of the time, two-thirds of the vehicles were always in the so-called "long repairs".
Due to the specificity of the fight in 1943-45, the German heavy tanks damaged on the battlefield remained mostly on the battlefield. There was no time or opportunity to tow them to the field workshop, because the fighting area was most often captured by the opponent.

Spike,
I have 4th question for you:

4 - Do you want this trait returned unchanged but only for modding in the game's editor?

[PoorOldSpike]

Spike,
I have 4th question for you:
4 - Do you want this trait returned unchanged but only for modding in the game's editor?

I don't know what you mean mate, all I know is that when I build scenarios I won't include any tanks that have the old "too severe" Unreliable trait that cripples the unit.
Sure, tanks broke down historically, but not as often as the trait made out, and in all my reading of WW2 armoured operations, I've never seen any crewman say something like "We hated that tank, it was always breaking down, terrible, terrible".
If tanks were as bad as that, they'd have never been put into service in the first place..

PS- Here's my screengrab from Panzerkrieg > Operation Star again, I bought these 3 Tiger H's at enormous expense last year, but as you can see the old Unreliable trait makes them keep breaking down, for example two are orange and are just useless junk, good for nothing, so I'm having to try to pull them out of the town back towards Germany before they get encircled.
(Remember, a 3D tank icon in OOB contains not just one tank, but a whole group of tanks, so for them ALL to break down and go orange at the same time is a bit unrealistic.)

[kondi754]

Everyone can create their own campaign or scenario in the way they want in the editor, that's the point. Don't impose your limitations on me, just as I don't force you how to play

As for the books you read, you probably haven't read the right ones... If you want, I can recommend you a few.
When it comes to the issue of using heavy tanks by the Wehrmacht, the Germans had no choice in 1943 or 1944, they had to live with what they had, there was no technology or resources or time to create a new program of heavy tanks. The only option was to fix ad hoc the mistakes they have made before

EDIT. The fact that the indicator turns orange or red doesn't mean that all tanks are broken but that the level of failure is so large that it affects the strength of the entire unit.
BTW, Spike, don't be lazy, try to learn to play with unreliable trait. It's not so difficult...

[PoorOldSpike]

BTW, Spike, don't be lazy, try to learn to play with unreliable trait. It's not so difficult...

I've tried, but the trait was so unrealistic and non-historical that I've avoided it ever since, so full marks to the OOB devs for getting rid of it..
I mean, because my two Tiger units in that pic have turned orange, their movement allowance has been drastically reduced, making it impossible for them to scoot quickly back to a quiet sector to recuperate. Meanwhile the Russkis are closing in in a feeding frenzy, harassing and bullying them to keep them orange..

[PoorOldSpike]

And consider this-
Heavy tanks like the Kingtiger and Tiger are ALREADY penalised enough on two counts:
Firstly, their speed in open terrain is only 3 hexes (compared to the PzIVH's 4 hexes)
Secondly the heavies suffer from the 'Heavy treading' trait which slaps a severe efficiency penalty on them when they try to move through certain terrain.

Here's the blurb from Terminators excellent 'Traits' listing-
Trait 56- Heavy treading: "The heavy weight and large size characteristics of this unit prevent it from entering certain terrain types."

I just ran a series editor tests (vanilla OOB v 7.1.6) in my laboratory to check things out by plonking the game's terrain types on the map and then running tanks into it to observe the effect-


Note the Kingtiger has the 'Heavy Treading' trait-




And some units have the 'Trait 19- Light Tread: "Lower efficiency loss from terrain disruption"



The following test results were observed-
Only SWAMP incurred an efficiency loss- Kingtiger +2, PzIVH +1, BT-7 0.

All the other terrain incurred no eff loss for any of the 3 tanks (and they were all prohibited from entering Mountain, Dense forest, Rough desert).
For good measure (and fun) I also tested them in Jungle terrain, and obtained the following results-
Kingtiger +4, PzIVH +2, BT-7 +1.

Summary- the big slow, lumbering tanks of all nations suffer enough, so to also slap an "Unreliable" trait on them too would be cruel in the extreme (sniffle)

[krakoburger]

Is it possible to modify the scenarios within a campaign ?

[Horst]

Is it possible to modify the scenarios within a campaign ?

Absolutely! Check out the Scenario Design subforum here to look for tutorials.
This topic here is a good start:
viewtopic.php?f=374&t=70345

[krakoburger]

Is it possible to modify the scenarios within a campaign ?

Absolutely! Check out the Scenario Design subforum here to look for tutorials.
This topic here is a good start:
viewtopic.php?f=374&t=70345

Thanks! Complex but doable. I will spend some time exploring it.

[GabeKnight]

Is it possible to modify the scenarios within a campaign ?

Don't forget you have to copy them scens from the game's base installation folder to the "...\My Games\Order of Battle - WW2\Scenarios" folder - and then back again. And make backups!

[krakoburger]

I'm going to think about the problem of simulating morale in OOB. If I am simulating history within OOB, this is an issue.
I've thought about this because of a couple of books I read on the Winter War after I started playing, and a paper on fighting the Russians in Winter (https://usacac.army.mil/cac2/cgsc/carl/ ... s/chew.pdf) which had a chapter on the Suomussalmi- Raate Road Campaign that made me think that since I was playing the Finns, I had an advantage in morale, what they call "sisu." To simulate it in OOB all I could think to do was replay some of the battles with the AI's level dialed down and then back up as their morale improved. There is also the efficiency factor built in but I can't tell what the AI's condition is. Just wondering.