💥 1941 Global Command Decision - Official Thread

[TheDog]

@black_elk
Your ps. re tutorialize
That will be way in the future for me to do, when more people contribute their opinions and I can see the map gaining more favour/traction.

I know that their are a lot of viewers/views on their thread, way more than probably all my maps so far combined, so thats impressive.

I wonder if it will continue?

[TheDog]

@Black_Elk

pps. Command icons, I think I should maybe try a transparency blend around the circumference of the circles for the little portrait icons.

Yes, do what you think is right, we can always put it back/change it again.

Yes bizarre, now that you point out the look of the same image across the map, purchase panel, unit help panels. One for the Devs, but it low on their list

[TheDog]

@Black_Elk
Yes, a turn 0 could be the way to randomise the start moves. I like random starts.

As an aside for those you like to purchase units
The USA starts with a small military force and therefore has more PU to buy new units, remember that each unit costs 1 pu per turn to upkeep/maintain.
Germany starts with 221-188 units leaving 33pu for purchasing
USA starts with 202+18 (factories produce more pu than the units deduct) leaving 220pu for purchasing.

As a player the USA has the option to expand their economy, they have territories that can have Industry-Med built on them that generate even more PU. So what do they do economy or units or both from the get go?

[Black_Elk]

Yeah I don't think I ever got to the USA's turn when I was doing the all-human solitaire, but I did notice the maintenance once I hit the second round in the game as Axis vs the HardAI.

The effect is interesting, since it creates a bit of haziness around the unit replacement stakes round to round. Basically trying to anticipate how many hitpoints or fodder units are likely to die in the near term, so you don't just blow the wad and hit the maintenance ceiling prematurely. It creates an incentive for conquest and maybe even more of an incentive for attrition of your own forces, like if you're near that limit where the maintenance and income are going to hit parity. To me this might favor Low Luck, since there the attrition rate can be more predictable, and you can peg your losses based on the pips as the attacker. But then I'm a diceman at heart, and so don't really dig LL all that much outside of playbalancing openers. An LL theme there wouldn't quite do it for me hehe. I'm more of a masochist and enjoy the crushing variability of diceplay for sure. The tricky part though, is that it's still sort of a guessing game for me there with the maintenance, until I've played as the opposing faction as well. This is similar to regular A&A play, in the sense that I wouldn't exactly know what to do on G1 in v3, till I saw some R1 counters, and how the stacks measure up after the purchases and bonuses or whatever are factored in. Sort of the old A&A dilemma of going in a bit blind, before you can see what's happening and learn how to play well in response, just to get a sense of how the playpattern unfolds out the opener. I'm not quite there yet, but it's fun anytime it's something new like this.

Glad you were feeling the round zero idea. I've only ever tried it in AA50, and pretty measured there in the totals. Like I think the highest I ever tried for a universal bid was like 20-30 PUs to everyone, but at the income scale of AA50 and with the unit start they had there, that was definitely enough to entirely change the state of the board on G1 and reset the play out of the first round pretty much completely. The way I did in FtF play was basically the secret purchase type method (behind the screen basically), where each player-nation would do the purchase phase simultaneously write down their placement location, then everyone would reveal at the same time. This was done to prevent the tit for tat placement, and to create an element of surprise and tension. Keep the players sweating over whether be conservative and safe and defensive, or do something more audacious and higher risk and aggressive. This was on top of the standard unit set up mind, so not like the whole entire starting forces revamped, but enough new hitpoints in the mix to keep it spicy.

People seemed to enjoy the vibe and the element of unpredictability, but then my friends were pretty HR friendly and willing to indulge me lol. The prob with trying to replicate something similar in tripleA, is that here everything is structured by the sequential game round and information is saved in the game history, so it's harder to create that "behind the screen" or hidden ballot buy situation. One thought I had was to maybe just split the phase up. So maybe everyone does the purchase, and you can see what people bought, but don't know where it will be placed. So you get that arms race effect. This privilege's the player-nations at the end of the turn order sequence, since they'd have more info to go on when their turn to purchase/place came up. When I tried this concept for a variable start AA50 game (where the nation that started the game would change position based on a first roll) my solution to that kink was to give a larger pile of cash to the nations that went earlier in the sequence, and a smaller pile to the player-nations that went at the end of the sequence, rationalizing it that the player who goes last can make the most focused buy with more information going into it, since they can see what everyone else placed. Not sure if something like that would fly here, but I always enjoyed the idea haha.

Sounds good! Now that we got a kickass templet and I can trial the unit images inside the actual game, should be easier to make stuff look as clean as possible.

I definitely think that would be a top thing to fix in the graphics department, to make sure that the units in the purchase/help screen look sharp. I'm surprised I didn't notice it really before. I mean I think I may have noticed, but it didn't jump out till I sat with the screen up for a while.

I don't think the images are different between the Purchase and Unit help screen, but the fact that the Unit Help appears against the lighter colored background, makes the pixilation more noticeable than when it's over the darker gray of the purchase window.

Perhaps there's a way to tweak the display for unit help to be darker as a stopgap? If they looked like the Purchase unis or the Battle Calc (which has the same going on) set against the grey, Unit Help would look better, but it's definitely doing something to the images there. Maybe cause it has to open em in a separate window and that's where the compression enters in? No clue honestly, but it'd be cool if we could get em to look the way they do on the map somehow.

That'd be a plus for sure, if it's happening across all the maps, since the purchase screen is like one of the main ways the player interacts with units, it'd be nice to have those be among the largest/cleanest/best in show version hehehe. I don't know, but maybe a dev will take it up, since it's pretty front and center for the overall visual appeal.

[Black_Elk]

For the G1 tactic, with the set up as is, I thought the most reliable seemed like all-in sz 109 with the air from Picardy, to try to smoke that Brit pocket fleet with as few losses as possible, and force the main Brit fleet back to mop up with their DDs or tie down with the subs the survive. I think I got in with 14 unit remaining when I sent all the subs, but that was maybe way overkill haha. So just sort of winging it with the remaining sub spawns in that one. I got 3 I extra I think in the first drop. Tricky part there is that visually they look the same as the starting uboats till you click and try to move em. So if like me, you're not quite paying attention at first, and aren't quite familiar yet with main sub spots from the standard setup, it might be cool to have a special graphic for those maybe. Not sure if it'd work, but maybe a glow halo or something for that?

Anyhow that was my first run attempt, to just bang into sz 109 like a champ. I thought about breaking off one of the Naval commands, or doing a fan out to force an allied spread, but seemed like smoking the transports was more important. Cause managing 2 transports on UK1 counter felt manageable, but 4 seemed bad for business hehe. I did 1 destroyer from the baltic fleet to sz 110 B just to make me feel safer, since I knew the air in 109 would have to land back on the coast but it was probably unnecessary.

On the Eastern front I wasn't quite sure if I should press north or south, but decided North might be safer just to deadzone the spots immediately adjacent to the front line factories. I figured for the middle that a strafe and jet might work, so as not to screw the Italians over too hard, and hold the Russians there in stasis, while trying to inch up towards Leningrad, which old habits seemed to recommend lol.

For N. Africa I just advanced towards El Alamein, since it seemed like the only real play down there. Going all in felt like danger, so kinda rambled in waiting for the Italians. Maybe Rommel would have been bolder, but I chickened out lol. I think if it was a bit of a choice between racing toward Egypt or securing Tunisia/Algeria for production, it might have been a bit of a tossup to go west or east, but I couldn't reach Tunisia so just went creeping east. I'll probably have to do it like 20 times or more, before I get my bearings haha

[TheDog]

@black_elk
Check this out
Game> Engine Settings
UI Theme tab
Change Look and feel to Substance Mist Silver (my PCs setting)

Then observe the UI especially the Purchase panel, then do your own thing and find the Look and feel that works for you.

.
N. Africa options
For N. Africa the Germans on G1 could invade Tunisia and the following turn build a Industry-Lgt? (I know chronologically a bit early.)
Think of this German Industry as building up a massive supply depot, by air and sea without the player having to keep moving the air and sea unit transports to achieve it.

[Black_Elk]

My power went down earlier so I couldn't get online, but I played G openers till the laptop battery ran down heheh.

The map is pretty fun! The only thing I wasn't really feeling was the cap on battle rounds. I think it's 3 on land, 2 at sea, 1 in the air right? I can get into most of the other changes, but that one was maybe a bridge too far for my brain lol. Coming out of A&A, combat round limits are I guess the hardest thing to get my head around, especially for the naval combats, as I'm just so used to the attacker being able to press the attack at their discretion until they win, die, or elect to withdraw lol. I understand the mechanic at play, but it's so different, that it felt like the rug kept getting pulled out from under me right before the fireworks went off hehe. I found that it also made it pretty hard for me to parse the likely outcomes with the battle calc, like for anything on the margins, so I didn't really use it. The effect on the play I think, was to make me not want to run any battle that I couldn't sweep outright, with overwhelming force. So basically no 50/50 gambles or gambits. Or at least not at sea, for sure. But I had the same impression on the Eastern Front with the ground game. Like if I couldn't crack it in the opening salvo with overwhelming booms, it seemed better not to tempt fate. Maybe I'm too cautious though. I kinda miss dragging things out or getting dicey with the nail biters, but the battle round thing kept giving me pause and second guessing.

Anyhow, last rando thought for the night. Gotta save the juice in case the power goes down again! I'll check those UI spec though for sure!

Catch ya next round

[TheDog]

@black_elk said in 1941 Global Command Decision - Official Thread:

3 on land, 2 at sea, 1 in the air

Yes, 321 produces a different style of play, encouraging you to over commit to ensure a victory in a turn. It also allows battle fronts to hold, like Kursk if you dont have enough to punch through in 3 rounds, you weaken your forces and can be counter attacked, I think more realistic and less like Risk. It does take a bit of getting used to.

[Black_Elk]

Yeah quite different I'd say lol. I'd guess this is the principle motivator behind wanting to limit the stack sizes? Cause clearing a large force in just 2 or 3 combat rounds can be a pretty tall order, and clearing a smaller force can sometimes be even more difficult. By smaller I mean engagements where there are only a couple hitpoints involved on either side.

Just as a quick example, in A&A attacking with 2 inf units vs 1 inf unit defending is fairly reliable, roughly 70% odds to the attacker. Like I'd almost always run that attack in A&A. But with a battle round limit those odds drop dramatically, pushing it well out of range, even for peeps who aren't particularly risk averse I'd wager heheh. Other similar battles, small engagements with fewer units that are more high risk/high reward, would be off the table for me under such a scheme.

This is different enough from standard expectations that I'd maybe put it among the top lines in the notes, like as a scenario defining feature. Also to help highlight and explain how it's meant to work. Though I'll admit I'm not sure where I fall on this one really, since it breaks my mental math pretty hard lol.

I get the rationale, like probably nobody enjoys a battle that just drags forever waiting on a single infantry unit to stop shooting duds hehe. I think Iron War had a limit as well right? I think it was 10 combat rounds there, though I'm struggling to recall might have been 6. But the dynamic was that after the round limit, the attacking units became like frozen in the TT, and treated like defenders on the opponent's follow up turn. This worked reasonably well I guess, though sometimes it'd throw me. A human would just withdraw after 9 battle rounds I'd suppose and throw in the towel, though the machine would often just hit the limit since I don't think it knows what to do there.

My initial thought is that 3, 2, 1 a bit brief, and I might enjoy something more like 6-4-2, but then I am curious so don't want to judge too quickly. It's a novel dynamic. I think I could get into it as a feature of the air game for sure, since it's not too dissimilar from the escort/intercept or sub opening strike type situation. Or perhaps if the limit was the same across types, like I don't know capped at 5 battle rounds or something so it's not quite as extreme? Well anyhow, it was sorta my main hangup for the second round of starters. I've mostly just been trying the first 2 game rounds and then restarting, so I really haven't seen USA2 yet hehe.

Oh one other thing I noticed, just cause I've tooling around with the battle calc a fair bit. I think the situation where G inf are trained or elite but Soviet are conscripts 1-1-1 or elite on G1 can be confusing. When I pull up the calc Russian Trained-Inf don't appear, so it's kinda hard to parse at a glance. I think having an example on the board of every unit type available on the round 1 purchase is helpful for the player. So that basically the player can parse what the opponent has at their disposal, based on comparison with the player's own unit roster. But where the units are different (cost/abilities) of the same type, to me this can make the map hard to read at a glance. I think in this situation giving the Soviets some regular infantry for parity might work, so the player can see that there's a difference between the conscripts and the reg inf. I haven't played LL at all yet, since it's not my favorite mode, but even there I find conscripts make it challenging for me to count pips in my head since I'm so used to 1-2-1 lol.
In this game baseline Inf (trained) is A1, D2, M1, Cost 4. So similar for the attack/defense count, but different for the TUV calculus. This is fine for me. Conscripts are 1-1-1 cost 3 (USSR/China exclusive right?) Elites are 2-2-1 cost 5, so in my head I think of them as like A&A naked artillery and that sorta works in for me in my head. Anyhow, the challenging part is running through the G inf vs R conscripts, since the main fodder pip is different by sides there, which is kinda tricky for me. Anyhow that's where I'm at. Power's back up. Still having fun!

[Black_Elk]

Ps. Tooled around with the UI themes, I didn't even know that feature existed! I've been using Substance Graphite I guess, for years lol

Odd the upvote feature doesn't seem to be working properly today for this thread. I tried to up vote your post above but it was showing as a -1 for some reason. Weird.

I like the Tunisian stronghold idea. I always thought a factory in Algeria or Libya would be a cool idea for A&A, as a way to anchor the fighting in N. Africa. Especially since in a lot of WW2 games, G has a strong incentive to abandon the N. African theater to focus on Russia, and the Allies often have such a strong incentive to go north to Scandinavia that the theater kinda gets short shrift.

I dig the idea of Germany having some skin in the game in the region, and not necessarily needing transports to funnel units there, so the Tunisia idea definitely works for me. Though my suspicions were that if I doubled back then the Italians might fold hehe.

I think giving the French overseas territory to Germany would work for this start date, basically treating Vichy as Axis. Like everything except French Equatorial Africa could work, Syria and Madagascar and such, though I'd probably leave them empty of units. I think this would motivate the British player to conquer those TTs over other similar neutrals , which would be kinda thematic for the period.

I'd just do de Gaulle in Gabon and FEA as British units maybe to highlight the split after the fall of France. But anyhow, for the N. African territories that declared for Vichy, I think you could put a German garrison there and a starting base to help jumpstart the action and it'd seem pretty reasonable. Cause otherwise it's a 3 round delay to get going. 1 round to take the neutral TT, and then another round to build the production center, so you wouldn't get to produce till G3. Also the question of whether to leave the spot for the Italians to take. Though I feel like seeing the French TTs in German hands would feel somehow better than them going Italy, which is maybe likely if they're in neutral hands from the outset hehe.

I could be wrong, but I think Algeria was administered differently than other French colonies. Like where it was considered part of metro France until the 1960s. Cernel might know. But either way I think giving Algiers and such to G could make sense under occupation the way Paris is handled.

I gotta game up now watching the AI hammer against itself while I cook dinner. Just started. It's fun to watch!

Anyhow, back to battles! Catch ya in a few

pps. Nevermind, I thought the upvote was being weird, but was just someone else on the thumbs down there. Not sure why though?

[beelee]

@black_elk said in 1941 Global Command Decision - Official Thread:

someone else on the thumbs down there. Not sure why though?

my bad

I hit the wrong thingy. Should be back to zero now.

Its a medicinal thing

[Black_Elk]

@beelee all good, I think you just zero'd it like I did for the Dog's above. I was hella confused earlier lol

Anyway here is my quick G1 opener in case you wanted to see. I wasn't able to reach Tunisia for an attack on G1, so I did the walk-in to Timbuktu with 1 dude and sent everything else forward towards Egypt. For the Eastern Front, I cleared everything except Bresk doing the northern push, just going like head-to-head, TT to opposing TT down the line. Probably taking more hits than if I double teamed a couple, but since the battles were all high 90% range to clear the tile I just tried to see what the line would look like after. For the subs I wasn't quite sure, so just did the all in 109 thing again. Still seemed like overkill, but in this game I failed all the initial sub spawns rolls, so figured to just launch everything lol. Doesn't show the Finland moves since I forgot those. I restarted after I noticed haha. But basically just pushed there the same way 1 to 1 along the whole front to do the dash on Leningrad I guess.

2023-1-8-1941-Global-Command-Decision.tsvg

2023-1-8-1941-Global-Command-Decision_non com.tsvg

here's another with the Finland move, pretty similar result down the rest of the line. I just followed the default casualty selection order, which will nix the art first I think. Wasn't sure, so I just let hit return and rolled with it.

2023-1-8-1941-Global-Command-Decision non com 2.tsvg

ps. third time's the charm.... In this one my sub spawn hit 3 so that felt solid hehe. I remembered Finland that time, but forgot Africa lol. Still that might not have been half bad, since I was nervous about El Alamein anyway heheh.

2023-1-8-1941-Global-Command-Decision non com 3.tsvg

[TheDog]

For reference Iron War has 10-10-2 rounds, all my testing has been on 3-2-1 rounds, so I am reluctant to change it, however I value your opinion and if more players express an opinion I would change it

When I pull up the calc Russian Trained-Inf don't appear,

Look lower down the list/or scroll, Trained-Inf are listed;

.
So USSR does have Inf-Trained although they as a nation/player cannot buy them. Every turn their national theme(code) buys for them, Im simulating their command economy and their national doctrine.
2x Inf-Trained
1x Artillery-Hvy
1x Anti-Tank
and deducts 21pu, as this is their cost. The Inf-Trained represent Guard Infantry, so survivors, as they had better morale and equipment.

.
National Themes;

• Germany gets free subs in the Atlantic and later in the game more HQ-Army
• Japan gets Bunkers, this is to help the AI buy Bunkers for island defence.

In the next beta release USSR will get Industry-Hvy in Khanty-Mansiysk & Tomsk automatically placed on turn 3, I forgot to include these
Simulating the move of Heavy Industry over the Urals.

[TheDog]

@Captain-Crunch
You down voted this post (at the top of the page)

Yes, 321 produces a different style of play, encouraging you to over commit to ensure a victory in a turn. It also allows battle fronts to hold, like Kursk if you dont have enough to punch through in 3 rounds, you weaken your forces and can be counter attacked, I think more realistic and less like Risk. It does take a bit of getting used to.

Is that because you dont like 321 rounds?

[Black_Elk]

Nice! Must have missed that. Yeah I need to settle in for the long haul just to see how it comes together round on round. I was kinda just dipping the toes by running G1 a bunch of times lol.

So is the basic idea to have the Germans just kinda sweep the whole line on G1 and force a general Soviet retreat there? I felt like north was the cleaner push, but like landing the fighters to reinforce Italy/Romania maybe, and just leave the USSR player like "what, you really want to counter attack now with just the dudes in Brest?" heheh. Not sure if that's the best play. Leningrad seems like a stack into Vyborg would force me to bounce if I was playing, especially with the Lithuania units coming up, but I expect the AI maybe kinda sticks it out.

I do feel like the lack of a garrison in the west of France gives me minor panicky attacks haha. Like I see the naked fighters over there and those Brit transports hovering about and I get pretty nervous lol.

I've been hanging out on Italy and Japan now trying to get my bearings. Catch you in a few

[TheDog]

So is the basic idea to have the Germans just kinda sweep the whole line

Yes, but it will fail, pick your battles, I would push to Leningrad otherwise the Finland northern force will never take Leningrad.

Hold in Krakow-Lublin as it blocks/borders 3-4 Russian TTs.

Elsewhere check the TT terrain type, ignore the Prypiat Marshes(you have to, as only infantry can enter) look at the status bar to see the terrain effect. The Battle Cals takes the terrain into account Im told.

Push hard in the south to get to the Steppes as those TT have no defensive terrain and drive for the oil fields.

Sound familiar

I do feel like the lack of a garrison in the west of France gives me minor panicky attacks

lol, the Germans must have felt the same, you can reinforce the west but I would not.

Decisions decisions, the Atlantic subs, the French coast, The battle of Britain, Russian invasion, the Desert, who got us into this mess
Oh yeah the Fuhrer.

.

I failed all the initial sub spawns rolls

There are 6 SZ for u-Boats with a 33% chance to appear in each one, so to get none, UNLUCKY !!!

[Black_Elk]

Right on! I expect my play to be super sloppy heheh. This is a J1 from earlier tonight...

I found this one a puzzler, because I couldn't find any attack to run in China that wouldn't be suicidal lol. Like all the China battles were out of range I think, and the hit on Pearl seemed out of range too. So Japan was kinda on their heels. What do you imagine for the J1? Looking at the board, I don't know like maybe a little push in Burma, but not sure what else to do hehe. With the fleet I guess bounce to Truk or home waters? Not sure, I'll have to sit with it for a few I guess haha

global command J1.tsvg

[TheDog]

@black_elk
Japan, so I too dont know what to do for the best?
Its coded that USSR will not attack Japan, they had a non aggression pact.
Have I put too many US defenders on the Philippines?

Mainland I would take Anhwei, then Wuhun.

Be aggressive with the sea/air units v US sea/air units.

Move on Calcutta.

Get an invasion force for Borneo from Japan.

[Black_Elk]

I didn't show any units that could reach Philippines on J1 so I figured the timeline was maybe more pre-1941 there or something? I was going to nail Guam with the transport, cause Hong Kong seemed too deadly with the bunkers. Bunkers always give me pause lol. But it could just be my expectations, like stomping on J1 hehe.

For this one, I could be over-reliant on the battle calc, but I didn't see any battle I could run at odds in China on J1 hehe. So like for Anwhei, bringing everything in range I got 2% odds for attacker with like a 96% draw hehe. But even the TTs with just a couple naked bunkers show out of range, so maybe I'm just not sorting it correctly in my head? The calc on Pearl shows 8% to the attacker 92% draw. Maybe I'm just not parsing the calc correctly though, cause I'm used to the draw being narrow I guess.

Yeah I'm pretty sure that's what was messing me up. I don't think I was reading the battle calc percentages correctly lol.

I'll have to start again cause I accidentally kami'd all my fighters in the pearl attack hehe. I swept the attack but got smoked using the auto casualty with nowhere to land lol. I noticed I was able to move the Bangkok infantry pretty far afield with a connect to Kunming, so that might be one. Here is the save of the attack I was about to run...

Global command J1 kunming.tsvg

Oh also, unrelated to the gameplay, but I saw another spot I need to fix for the relief. The lines by the netherlands also were showing the older draft same as west texas. I made a note to clean it up on the next pass.

I've been using the map details on, but blends off. Though one thing I noticed is that blends will show the underline from the base, so when I was testing that out I noticed the other issue in the low countries. Wouldn't be surprised if I missed something else somewhere lol

ps. well I got murdered a bunch of times in a row from that position. My best case was a pair of stalemates in the ground attacks. For pearl I had one sweep with nowhere to land, but every other time I ran the attack the IJN went down hard, so didn't seem reliable for a J1. I think I would take everything and pull back probably - not run any attacks, or at least that's what my instincts keep telling me heheh. The damage I can inflict on the US going all in doesn't seem worth the hits I'm taking on the clap back, so I'd be inclined to withdraw I think and make the US player chase me instead of trading the TUV. Anhwei felt similar, like pretty heavy losses when I brought everything. Couple times I got in with a fair number of units surviving, but never managed to clear the TT.

This was the one I was trying. Pearl heavy with the carrier too.
Global command J1 pearl heavy.tsvg

But I was definitely defeated everywhere hehe. Like I just got rocked to the floor more than a few times haha.

My A&A brain tells me to do something more like this... which was pretty much all non coms.
Global command J1 stack and run.tsvg

[TheDog]

Headline - redoing the Pacific
Thanks for testing the Japanese, I think I have made it too hard for them, that is not fun from the start. I dont use the Battle Calc much, so I started looking at the odds you are correct, they are not good.

I am redoing the US Philippines defence as Dec 41 and will give Japan a Formosa-Philippines invasion force.

Im thinking of randomising the US carrier fleet location, one where the Japanese can go for it, one where its safe, thoughts?

Japan will always have the option to get Pearl Harbour or maybe the US carriers.