Please vote: Rail conversion rule in Russia

[Peter Stauffenberg]

I can store a value in gamestate that tells which year Barbarossa was launched. Then we can adjust the ranges according to that. So if you launch Barbarossa in 1940 then you get -1 in 1941, -2 in 1942 and so on. If you start in 1942 you get -1 in 1943, -2 in 1944 and so on.

That means the turn zones you get depend on year from when Barbarossa started.

[Peter Stauffenberg]

I looked at the following interesting solution.

We store in gamestate the turn number Barbarossa started.

The Axis rail hubs start at hex column 107. Actually they started at hex column 101, but the first 6 columns where in Eastern Poland where only repairs and not rail gauge conversion was needed. So the speed was faster there.

The hex column increases by 2 hexes eastwards per turn in fair weather and 1 hex eastwards per turn in mud, winter or severe winter. The rail head column will not move east of the easternmost Axis city in core Russia. This allows for the rail heads to catch up with the front line, but not move past it. It also means that if the Russians push the Germans westwards the rail heads will be moved westwards too.

Regardless of these rules a city will not be able to use until the turn after it was captured regardless of the location of the rail heads.

[Peter Stauffenberg]

Then we have the following scenario.

Barbarossa starts
Turn 1: 15.05.1941. End of turn cities linked up: Vinnitsa, Minsk, Pskov
Turn 2: 02.06.1941. Odessa, Leningrad, Vitebsk
Turn 3: 22.06.1941. Kherson, Kiev, Gomel, Novgorod
Turn 4: 12.07.1941. Smolensk, Petrozavodsk
Turn 5: 01.08.1941. Bryansk, Sevastopol
Turn 6: 21.08.1941. Kalinin, Dnepropetrovsk
Turn 7: 10.09.1941. Kerch, Kharkov, Kursk, Orel, Moscow
Turn 8: 30.09.1941. Stalino, Tula, Yaroslav, Vologda, Archangel
Turn 9: 20.10.1941. Krasnodar, Rostov, Ryazan, Vladimir


If Barbarossa starts 02.06.1941 then the rows of cities shift one down. If Barbarossa starts 22.06.1941 then the rows of cities shift 2 down.

[ncali]

I like your new idea! This is more on the lines of what I was thinking.

[TotalerKrieg]

I like that idea too. Would we need to restart games if Barbarossa hasn't happened yet?

[Peter Stauffenberg]

Yes, because I need to store new values in gamestate.class. That will invalidate all save games.

[Peter Stauffenberg]

Please notice that the hex column with the rail heads will determine the easternmost column you can rail to and from. So you can't rail units that start east of this column. They're not near a standard gauge rail track that can rail them to their destination.

[Morris]

I see that the trend is for me to add the change, despite invalidating all save games. That is fine with me. I will make the changes now and then we can send RC9 out this evening.

Is there a vote ? I did not find it . Do you mean we have to halt all present pbems & restart from the very beginning ?! Is it possible to make it be able to restart from the start of Babarosa ? please try to save some time for us !

Actually , I really don't think my present Babarosa strategy need such a adjustment . ( please forgive me if my words is inpolite )This is not a normal Babarosa which every player can launch it & drive it well . Even if without this change , Allies also have great chance to win the game without too many mistakes but a close game a minor victory in 1944 or 1945 . We should give the Axis player opportunity to win more advantage in 1941 so that they will gain the chance to be survived longer .
I wondered why we always try to make Axis player feel hopeless before 1943 ? I have to stress that the present balance is almost perfect . Don't change it because of a small probability event . Morris is easy to defeat (Sean & Zechi have done it well ),but balance is difficult to recover !

[Peter Stauffenberg]

I can make a two-way system since I can store the location of the rail heads. That means we simulate the same for the Russians.

We will have 2 sets of rail heads. Russian broad gauge and German standard gauge.

The standard gauge will move eastwards 2 hexes per turn in in fair weather and 1 hex per turn in mud/winter, but not further than the easternmost core Russian city/resource that's Axis controlled. The limit will be the column of the city + 1.

The broad gauge will move westwards 2 hexes per turn in in fair weather and 1 hex per turn in mud/winter, but not further than the westernmost city/resource that's USSR controlled. The limit will be the column of the city - 1.

I know the rail heads are a simulation because they expect a vertical front line. That's why we have 2 rail heads, one that benefit each side the most. Usually the front line will straighten itself because it's easier to defend, but some times you get a breakthrough in one section like 1942 Case Blue.

With that system we don't need rules for Russia paying to send units to the west. Now they need instead convert their captured / liberated cities to broad gauge.

[Peter Stauffenberg]

Please notice that Russian captured cities are checked everywhere and not in core Russian territory. The reason is that everywhere except Russia had standard gauge so the Russians needed to convert the rail lines there. Germany didn't need to change the rail lines in captured hexes outside Russia.

For Germany we only check core Russian hexes because those were the ones with broad gauge. It's very unlikely that Russia will manage to push the Germans into Poland / Germany and then the Germans push the Russians back into Russia. If that happens then all German and Polish cities will be available for the Germans the turn after conquest. I don't think that's a problem.

What do you think? Should we have a double rail head system? One for the Russians and one for the Germans?

[Peter Stauffenberg]

One thing we could do is to store the rail gauge in each hex and check that vs the the unit that should be railed to / from a hex. Russian units can only rail within broad gauge and Axis units only within standard gauge. Allied units can use both because some Allied minors can move in Russian territory (like liberated Romania and Bulgaria).

We can then draw an image in the hexinfo with the rail gauge in that hex. This way you can click on hexes on the map to find where the rail heads are.

Actually if we store the rail gauge in the hex then we could actually have a very accurate way to let the gauges flow. In fair weather we could let the gauges paint all adjacent friendly hexes of the other gauge to the same side both at the end of the Axis and the Allies turn. In non-fair weather you only paint the adjacent hexes at the end of your own turn.

This way we don’t need to deal with hex columns with rail heads. We just let the railheads from the front line.

At the start of each scenario (1939-1941) I will pain all non-core Russian hexes as standard gauge and all core Russian hexes as broad gauge. At the start of the 1942 + scenarios I pain the gauge according to the hex owner. Russian = broad gauge and all others = standard gauge.

Hexes that can't be used for rail movement (swamp, mountain and dune) will, of course, not get a rail image.

You can only rail to / from a hex with the same rail gauge as the side. Axis = standard, Russian = broad, Allies =standard

What do you think?

[Cybvep]

If I got it right, you want to implement province-based pictures depicting rail gauge? If this is your intention, then I think that it will be a great interface improvement.

[Peter Stauffenberg]

I meant a symbol in the hexinfopanel showing broad gauge or standard gauge. Railheads can have a different symbol.

This way you can click on hexes to check the gauge used in that hex.

[Kragdob]

I meant a symbol in the hexinfopanel showing broad gauge or standard gauge. Railheads can have a different symbol.

This way you can click on hexes to check the gauge used in that hex.

Is it possible to do a minimap option for that?

How about rare (but not impossible) situation when Soviets or their Allies (e.g. Romanians) capture some city far West, e.g. Casablanca. Then regardless of the change of front line Soviets will have constant progress in expanding their rail network I think you should include only Europe or better just certain set of countries that count.

[Peter Stauffenberg]

The latter won't be an option because the rail heads will spread from existing rail heads. Since there is no land connection between captured far away city and the unit you can't rail there.

So we will not use the hex column rule, but instead advance 2 hexes (fair weather) per turn from existing rail heads.

[Peter Stauffenberg]

Another rule we could have is to flag hexes that are not within the same rail gauge as the side with a truck image and use supply image for those hexes that are e. g. within 10 hexes of a rail head.

Units within this range can have supply level 4 or 5. Units outside the range can max have supply level 3.

This would simulate trucks supplying units between rail heads and the front line. The truck range can be 10 (set in general.txt). When you get above 40 hexes from a major capital the supply would drop to 3 anyway because of the long distance to send supplies.

So the rule would simulate that e. g. the Axis army would rely upon trucks to get supply until the rail heads get nearby. The same for the Russians when they advance westwards. Truck supply would only be used where you are in a hex with a different rail gauge than what your side can use. Once you're within the same side rail gauge you get rail supply instead.

[metolius]

Another rule we could have is to flag hexes that are not within the same rail gauge as the side with a truck image and use supply image for those hexes that are e. g. within 10 hexes of a rail head.

Units within this range can have supply level 4 or 5. Units outside the range can max have supply level 3.

This would simulate trucks supplying units between rail heads and the front line. The truck range can be 10 (set in general.txt). When you get above 40 hexes from a major capital the supply would drop to 3 anyway because of the long distance to send supplies.

So the rule would simulate that e. g. the Axis army would rely upon trucks to get supply until the rail heads get nearby. The same for the Russians when they advance westwards. Truck supply would only be used where you are in a hex with a different rail gauge than what your side can use. Once you're within the same side rail gauge you get rail supply instead.

I like this direction –– it is a distinct improvement on the supply model.

[Peter Stauffenberg]

That would certainly limit the very swift advance into Russia where you don't regard the distance to the rail heads. It would feel more accurate as well.

[ncali]

I like it very much! A good idea that I see as being easy to understand and follow (once you start playing with it).

[Peter Stauffenberg]

I've already coded initializing the rail lines and rail heads. Tomorrow I will work on making the advance of the rail heads and also the truck lines and heads.

For truck supply we need to discuss the range we should use. One proposal can be the following:
Truck range from a rail head.
Fair = 6 (maybe possible to extend with industry tech)
Mud = 2
Winter = 4
Severe winter = 0 for Axis and 4 for Russia

In mud terrain the roads were very difficult to drive on. In winter the roads were good, but the engines suffered a bit. In severe winter the engines suffered a lot for the Axis, but not so much for the Russians. So Russians can treat severe winter as winter while the Germans struggle with no truck range at all.

I've coded so you can see both the rail and truck status for each hex in the hexinfopanel and also the unitpanel. Where else do you want to have info about the rail heads etc.? Do you want to use the minimap (not very easy to see where the units are compared to the heads) or should we draw info directly in the hexes (could clutter the map)?