Im playing Prussia and Ive started making huge amounts of chemicals and munitions. I know a small amount of chemicals is used for munitions and I sell the rest. Munitions sells but Im toying with the idea of using massive ammunition numbers on the field. Ideas?
for example, can your artillery guns fire more ( especially on sieges) if youve got an extra stack of ammo?
I never really understood what burns ammunition as I never had that kind of shortage, and imagining an empire with huge ammunition production makes me think of a very scary adversary where enemies are armed to the teeth and artillery barages are totally blastful
is there any way to put my ideas to the game? I think the problem during artillery barage was lack of munitions rather than quantity of firing guns but maybe thats the solution for this game?
please reply with details on what are my options and how munitions are (or can be) used in game
As far as I know, ammunition is only an issue when there is a shortage of it. In you have lots of artillery that participates in lots of battles, you will start burning through it. If you burn at much faster rate than you can replace stocks, consequences can be disastrous (think Russia in 1915). Other than that, I don't think there is a difference between having enough ammunition that your armies can fight non-stop and having so much ammunition that it is rotting away on overfilled depots.
From my experience, problem with supply are far more likely to occur.
From my experience, problem with supply are far more likely to occur.
the change is where artillery barages are careful not to waste ammo and need to stop shortly after start, whereas an unending artillery pounding will leave all supply, and equipment destroyed, fleeing or panicking for men if they arent all dead.
plus as there arent any weapon as a ressource ingame, Im expecting ammo to include guns. if the whole army is well equiped, with correct manoeuvring, they should be deadly
plus as there arent any weapon as a ressource ingame, Im expecting ammo to include guns. if the whole army is well equiped, with correct manoeuvring, they should be deadly
-
SonOfAGhost
- Sergeant
- Posts: 90
- Joined: Tue Jun 28, 2011 12:12 am
- Location: Soviet Socialist Republic of Canuckistan
Logistics should matter.
Artillery ammunition has always been an issue during sustained fighting, and for good reason. It's bulky and heavy.
Oh, and you don't want to keep any more actually on the front lines than you have to, or in one place for that matter.
Almeida 1810 and Halifax 1917 come to mind.
That said, I find resupply not happening as I would expect in enemy territory adjacent to friendly. Putting variables in to make that more realistic though could be a challenge to code and likely near impossible to balance.
Artillery ammunition has always been an issue during sustained fighting, and for good reason. It's bulky and heavy.
Oh, and you don't want to keep any more actually on the front lines than you have to, or in one place for that matter.
Almeida 1810 and Halifax 1917 come to mind.
That said, I find resupply not happening as I would expect in enemy territory adjacent to friendly. Putting variables in to make that more realistic though could be a challenge to code and likely near impossible to balance.
-
OneArmedMexican
- General
- Posts: 582
- Joined: Wed Sep 29, 2010 4:14 pm
My five cents to some of the remarks in this thread:
Ammunition does matter! In protracted battles (or if one of your forces is attacked multiple times during a turn) your troops may very well run out of it. Having an adequate number of supply trains obviously helps in this regard.
On the other hand, I have yet to see a global ammunition shortage in any AGE game (haven't played PON much, perhaps it can happen there). Usually supplies tend to become a problem rather than ammunition.
But I agree with you, that this should happen once war is waged with huge armies for a protracted time in PON (obviously that happened in WW I, but also in earlier wars like the American Civil War).
Ammunition is used by all kind of troops not just artillery!
The game engine hasn't the ability to simulate different approaches to artillery usage (e.g.: ammunition intensitive continous barrage vs. focus short fire)
@SonOfAGhost: take a closer look at the supply system. It works differently than you think: supply is only pushed from depot to depot. Units need to be close to a depot to draw supplies. If you wander into enemy territory and don't take messures to establish a working supply chain (i.e. build or conquer depots) you are bound to run into supply porblems.
Ammunition does matter! In protracted battles (or if one of your forces is attacked multiple times during a turn) your troops may very well run out of it. Having an adequate number of supply trains obviously helps in this regard.
On the other hand, I have yet to see a global ammunition shortage in any AGE game (haven't played PON much, perhaps it can happen there). Usually supplies tend to become a problem rather than ammunition.
But I agree with you, that this should happen once war is waged with huge armies for a protracted time in PON (obviously that happened in WW I, but also in earlier wars like the American Civil War).
Ammunition is used by all kind of troops not just artillery!
The game engine hasn't the ability to simulate different approaches to artillery usage (e.g.: ammunition intensitive continous barrage vs. focus short fire)
@SonOfAGhost: take a closer look at the supply system. It works differently than you think: supply is only pushed from depot to depot. Units need to be close to a depot to draw supplies. If you wander into enemy territory and don't take messures to establish a working supply chain (i.e. build or conquer depots) you are bound to run into supply porblems.
-
yellow ribbon
- Posts: 2245
- Joined: Sun Jun 26, 2011 5:42 pm
the bigger gun...
or: the Phallus problem (his is bigger than mine)
[color="Red"]Artillery / plenty of shells at hand and a bonus of barrages... ???[/color]
as always it depends what we are talking about:
read somewhat more historical sources
in the time PON operates the larger units barely marched more than 10-15 miles a day. Napoleons famous extreme marches were done with few breaks but not with high velocity (commonly forced marched were done with 2-3 miles an hour and 30% losses of troops by fatigue, even the most famous, Vienna-Austerlitz. this numbers are still true in 1914, about the battle of the Marne, VII. Reserve-Korps, 64km in roughly more than 24h)
normally: de-camp, march with advance guard and flankers, camp, cook, rest wait for the rest of the tactical column and that for mile-long columns.
commonly the supply was 1/3 in the mid of the large army, 2/3 in the rear. the first day at Gettysburg, soldiers had not more than at hand, unions artillery even was down to canister, in some spots they couldnt fire back at long and medium range at all.
to bring up more men was more important than carloads of ammo.
next you need also to know that effective combat range was below 500 yards even for the large guns.
(yeah i know, despite it, for hundred years between napoleon and 1.WW guns caused up to over 30% of enemies loses, but you will figure out statistics that muskets needed under certain circumstances to fire up to over 1200 balls (Minié rounds extended the distance from 100 paces to about 400 yards, so changed it in favor to the one who used it on the costs of them who did not have it at hand) to the enemy before someone got killed in 1790, as well as for 1862)
you can harass the enemy with artillery, slow him down, force them to change formation, keep him away from the walls of a fort, and sometimes in the Great War the moral was shaken by fire without pauses, but the later one failed in 1.WW when the opposing side had bunkers of concrete more than once and for other reasons like the NORIA-system of the French)
already Napoleon tried it, putting artillery in the front, direct fire, concentrating it. They did well, in field battles, put the fear into the foe, but not in fixed positions like the crossing of the Danube when Napoleon couldnt feed the canons any longer.
so, mounting numbers of shells does nothing good at all if you are on the march, but only in a fixed, pre-planed battle.
at least not in reality.
[color="Red"]
in PON guns are wasting ammo. they give you bonuses well simulated but were far to accurate up to now.
Since the turn takes 15 days and closeness to a RR or a depot are enough to overcome the shortage in fields you will not see the real life shortages anyway but in the wilderness without any supply at all.[/color]
in 1870s field fortification became more important, in 1880s focus was set to new explosives, in 1890s the rapid fire action got the focus, in 1900s the big guns which DID need ammo dumps to be useful at all...
so any additional bonus from ammo dumps in most time of the game would be unrealistic, the malus from shortage is there!
[color="Red"]Artillery / plenty of shells at hand and a bonus of barrages... ???[/color]
as always it depends what we are talking about:
read somewhat more historical sources
in the time PON operates the larger units barely marched more than 10-15 miles a day. Napoleons famous extreme marches were done with few breaks but not with high velocity (commonly forced marched were done with 2-3 miles an hour and 30% losses of troops by fatigue, even the most famous, Vienna-Austerlitz. this numbers are still true in 1914, about the battle of the Marne, VII. Reserve-Korps, 64km in roughly more than 24h)
normally: de-camp, march with advance guard and flankers, camp, cook, rest wait for the rest of the tactical column and that for mile-long columns.
commonly the supply was 1/3 in the mid of the large army, 2/3 in the rear. the first day at Gettysburg, soldiers had not more than at hand, unions artillery even was down to canister, in some spots they couldnt fire back at long and medium range at all.
to bring up more men was more important than carloads of ammo.
next you need also to know that effective combat range was below 500 yards even for the large guns.
(yeah i know, despite it, for hundred years between napoleon and 1.WW guns caused up to over 30% of enemies loses, but you will figure out statistics that muskets needed under certain circumstances to fire up to over 1200 balls (Minié rounds extended the distance from 100 paces to about 400 yards, so changed it in favor to the one who used it on the costs of them who did not have it at hand) to the enemy before someone got killed in 1790, as well as for 1862)
you can harass the enemy with artillery, slow him down, force them to change formation, keep him away from the walls of a fort, and sometimes in the Great War the moral was shaken by fire without pauses, but the later one failed in 1.WW when the opposing side had bunkers of concrete more than once and for other reasons like the NORIA-system of the French)
already Napoleon tried it, putting artillery in the front, direct fire, concentrating it. They did well, in field battles, put the fear into the foe, but not in fixed positions like the crossing of the Danube when Napoleon couldnt feed the canons any longer.
so, mounting numbers of shells does nothing good at all if you are on the march, but only in a fixed, pre-planed battle.
at least not in reality.
[color="Red"]
in PON guns are wasting ammo. they give you bonuses well simulated but were far to accurate up to now.
Since the turn takes 15 days and closeness to a RR or a depot are enough to overcome the shortage in fields you will not see the real life shortages anyway but in the wilderness without any supply at all.[/color]
in 1870s field fortification became more important, in 1880s focus was set to new explosives, in 1890s the rapid fire action got the focus, in 1900s the big guns which DID need ammo dumps to be useful at all...
so any additional bonus from ammo dumps in most time of the game would be unrealistic, the malus from shortage is there!
-
yellow ribbon
- Posts: 2245
- Joined: Sun Jun 26, 2011 5:42 pm
PS:
i think the problem is shared by the development team as well as the player.
we all are thinking in terms of battle scenarios a la command and conquer.
1/3 build up and 2/3 live and hit and run with the yields from the first third of the game.
anyway, the problem in PON is the long time horizon.
first, you know cities, harbors, depots will supply the troops, you dont need to convert goods to stocks on the map.
second, the stocks on the map are not really perishable.
third, railroads and depots can be build decades in advance
consequence:
units will eventually be refilled to fast / instantly and the sophisticated system is only interesting as long infrastructures lacks
(regarding converting to goods on map, as long the armies do not exceed excessive sizes and, simultaneously, no RRs request supply and ammo from far away depots and cities, given no enemy presence does break the line of supply)
i think the problem is shared by the development team as well as the player.
we all are thinking in terms of battle scenarios a la command and conquer.
1/3 build up and 2/3 live and hit and run with the yields from the first third of the game.
anyway, the problem in PON is the long time horizon.
first, you know cities, harbors, depots will supply the troops, you dont need to convert goods to stocks on the map.
second, the stocks on the map are not really perishable.
third, railroads and depots can be build decades in advance
consequence:
units will eventually be refilled to fast / instantly and the sophisticated system is only interesting as long infrastructures lacks
(regarding converting to goods on map, as long the armies do not exceed excessive sizes and, simultaneously, no RRs request supply and ammo from far away depots and cities, given no enemy presence does break the line of supply)
One thing there should definitely be in the next patch is the fixing of the conversion mechanism. We had a rather long talk about this already.
I believe that converting supplies and ammo should give a rather small amount of private funds, as gems and gold conversion give of state money. Otherwise the buttons are almost useless, although Pocus remarked that ammo (and not supplies as you have said here) actually can get low later in the game. Nonetheless, to my knowledge, commodity [general] supplies and ammo can hardly become limited in a stable peaceful world, especially if you stop converting.
I believe that converting supplies and ammo should give a rather small amount of private funds, as gems and gold conversion give of state money. Otherwise the buttons are almost useless, although Pocus remarked that ammo (and not supplies as you have said here) actually can get low later in the game. Nonetheless, to my knowledge, commodity [general] supplies and ammo can hardly become limited in a stable peaceful world, especially if you stop converting.
-
yellow ribbon
- Posts: 2245
- Joined: Sun Jun 26, 2011 5:42 pm
QUOTING
"I believe that converting supplies and ammo should give a rather small amount of private funds, as gems and gold conversion give of state money. Otherwise the buttons are almost useless, although Pocus remarked that ammo (and not supplies as you have said here) actually can get low later in the game. Nonetheless, to my knowledge, commodity [general] supplies and ammo can hardly become limited in a stable peaceful world, especially if you stop converting."
***************
good kensai,
first, i am one of the fellows who explained others to shut down the conversion ammo and if they desire for supply, but to watch the units then...
the fact that i hate paradox and that i do not write there does not mean that i dont keep an i on the situation., but thanks.
[color="Red"]I KNOW [/color]there was this discussion and you do produce an epic fail here if you omit the fact that Pocus already told the players that this is about AI mainly.
if Ai would plan better and not selling, the conversion would be not necessary in the first place. so far its necessary to transform the stocks AI generates before exporting into field supplies in case of events or/especially extended claims wars
however that has NOTHING to do with the original question or my post up there...
both is about purpose of filled depots and the idea of bonuses from that. that would not make sense at all as long armies are marching
***************
second, bloody hell, SUPPLY is SUPPLY the real world is not the thing which is expressed as term of the PON manual.
Do I REALLY HAVE TOMARK IT, IF I WRITE ABOUT REAL LIFE in here ???
The supply train of an army / the logistic detachment of even bttl. sized forces nowadays take care for the SUPPLY of troops.
If you have no more ammo its bad in real life. i
f you loose 2% of a bodies level on liquids, you loose nearly 20% capacity of the brain: ability of concentration and so on, its EVEN WORSE.
the most fatal problems of military history were caused by lack of supplies in general sense.
stragglers seeking their own food and being in disorder make them the same way useless for the officer in command, than the fact that they have to toss stones to the enemy.... J****F**** christ.
********************
third, nothing easier than that, create domestic demand for the good instead of giving it a value from conversion.
see, beside of the american west and the russian east there were few populations who just run into the next fort and bought military deliveries. defacto, in most countries you would get shot for it if you try to use military goods.
the wages in PON are not simulated but by happiness, thus the production itself is a net calculation of output excluding transport in case of RR, right?!
if you sell the good to the market its the same value than export (till now for most players), thus why the heck someone shall pay for delivering the military goods to forts, depots and so one ?????
export does give you the money, AI buys always in my games, and if it is Hawaii
****************
the major reason that no one sees a shortage IS the fact that goods from 1850 can be used in 1900 and the whole time cities and structures produced new one, as well as events.
why this structures are important has been broadly discussed since summer 2011.
a world without depots an siege of the capital would lead to a disabled army already, for troops could not order military supplies from the capital AND SO ON...
this is and old burden from the scenarios of AGEOD were it was even possible/necessary to move the capital.
so it remains, the necessary infrastructure is there, too many, too early and the produced goods remain in the game for 70 years...
make a 2 years cycle perishable, lower the AI-export-threshold (i have already done it) and problem is gone.
even in the 1.01Qubec/1.02 vanilla game i saw shortage of supply in 1860 due to scripted units demanded more than i could deliver.
and of ammo when CSA tried to break out again and again from Richmond and me having every external battery in this place i could have build at all...
buts only for two turns in case of ammo, a couple of turns for supplies. why? if you have already SCRIPTED depots/cities/harbors for years and no enemy between them and your troops, a simple port or RR will offer you infinite opportunities to regroups and refit the troops.
A unit carries around 8, a supply wagon gives you at least 20. A scripted depot in a city no converted military goods for 10 years and despite it, over 400 units of supply / 190 of ammo will just be forwarded in one or two turn...
as simple as that, if military gear comes for free from structures [color="Red"](not even eating up capital)[/color] the conversion is wasted for the long time horizon of PON.
if one shuts it down, all good fellow player and rookies will overrun the forum for they not even plan to send in supply wagons to colonies or to wait until supporting infrastructure (harbor) is possible...
"I believe that converting supplies and ammo should give a rather small amount of private funds, as gems and gold conversion give of state money. Otherwise the buttons are almost useless, although Pocus remarked that ammo (and not supplies as you have said here) actually can get low later in the game. Nonetheless, to my knowledge, commodity [general] supplies and ammo can hardly become limited in a stable peaceful world, especially if you stop converting."
***************
good kensai,
first, i am one of the fellows who explained others to shut down the conversion ammo and if they desire for supply, but to watch the units then...
the fact that i hate paradox and that i do not write there does not mean that i dont keep an i on the situation., but thanks.
[color="Red"]I KNOW [/color]there was this discussion and you do produce an epic fail here if you omit the fact that Pocus already told the players that this is about AI mainly.
if Ai would plan better and not selling, the conversion would be not necessary in the first place. so far its necessary to transform the stocks AI generates before exporting into field supplies in case of events or/especially extended claims wars
however that has NOTHING to do with the original question or my post up there...
both is about purpose of filled depots and the idea of bonuses from that. that would not make sense at all as long armies are marching
***************
second, bloody hell, SUPPLY is SUPPLY the real world is not the thing which is expressed as term of the PON manual.
Do I REALLY HAVE TOMARK IT, IF I WRITE ABOUT REAL LIFE in here ???
The supply train of an army / the logistic detachment of even bttl. sized forces nowadays take care for the SUPPLY of troops.
If you have no more ammo its bad in real life. i
f you loose 2% of a bodies level on liquids, you loose nearly 20% capacity of the brain: ability of concentration and so on, its EVEN WORSE.
the most fatal problems of military history were caused by lack of supplies in general sense.
stragglers seeking their own food and being in disorder make them the same way useless for the officer in command, than the fact that they have to toss stones to the enemy.... J****F**** christ.
********************
third, nothing easier than that, create domestic demand for the good instead of giving it a value from conversion.
see, beside of the american west and the russian east there were few populations who just run into the next fort and bought military deliveries. defacto, in most countries you would get shot for it if you try to use military goods.
the wages in PON are not simulated but by happiness, thus the production itself is a net calculation of output excluding transport in case of RR, right?!
if you sell the good to the market its the same value than export (till now for most players), thus why the heck someone shall pay for delivering the military goods to forts, depots and so one ?????
export does give you the money, AI buys always in my games, and if it is Hawaii
****************
the major reason that no one sees a shortage IS the fact that goods from 1850 can be used in 1900 and the whole time cities and structures produced new one, as well as events.
why this structures are important has been broadly discussed since summer 2011.
a world without depots an siege of the capital would lead to a disabled army already, for troops could not order military supplies from the capital AND SO ON...
this is and old burden from the scenarios of AGEOD were it was even possible/necessary to move the capital.
so it remains, the necessary infrastructure is there, too many, too early and the produced goods remain in the game for 70 years...
make a 2 years cycle perishable, lower the AI-export-threshold (i have already done it) and problem is gone.
even in the 1.01Qubec/1.02 vanilla game i saw shortage of supply in 1860 due to scripted units demanded more than i could deliver.
and of ammo when CSA tried to break out again and again from Richmond and me having every external battery in this place i could have build at all...
buts only for two turns in case of ammo, a couple of turns for supplies. why? if you have already SCRIPTED depots/cities/harbors for years and no enemy between them and your troops, a simple port or RR will offer you infinite opportunities to regroups and refit the troops.
A unit carries around 8, a supply wagon gives you at least 20. A scripted depot in a city no converted military goods for 10 years and despite it, over 400 units of supply / 190 of ammo will just be forwarded in one or two turn...
as simple as that, if military gear comes for free from structures [color="Red"](not even eating up capital)[/color] the conversion is wasted for the long time horizon of PON.
if one shuts it down, all good fellow player and rookies will overrun the forum for they not even plan to send in supply wagons to colonies or to wait until supporting infrastructure (harbor) is possible...
-
yellow ribbon
- Posts: 2245
- Joined: Sun Jun 26, 2011 5:42 pm
summing up:
- CONVERSION of supply and ammo is a fail-safe for the game and quitehandy for AI and inexperienced players
- REAL life shows us that piling up goods in the wrong place does not do anything good in the hotspot of a short battle
(remembering Jamitars famous "but at the Somme"-arguing, i claim the Britons did terribly bad and ineffective despite ammo dumps, the French did the barrage with high level of expertise concentrating more guns in a smaller grid)
- PONs long turns of two week make it impossible to see real shortages of anything on the battlefield unless totally being cut off
- CONVERSION of supply and ammo is a fail-safe for the game and quitehandy for AI and inexperienced players
- REAL life shows us that piling up goods in the wrong place does not do anything good in the hotspot of a short battle
(remembering Jamitars famous "but at the Somme"-arguing, i claim the Britons did terribly bad and ineffective despite ammo dumps, the French did the barrage with high level of expertise concentrating more guns in a smaller grid)
- PONs long turns of two week make it impossible to see real shortages of anything on the battlefield unless totally being cut off
If the british held out for 2 weeks of bombing at somme instead of one AND HAD GOOD QUALITY AMMO, they would have either blasted the germans, or starved them out as supply lines got cut. at the end of battle it was clear of low quality of shells, as one out of three didnt explode, and there wasnt much big show.
if they could go on for 2 weeks, maybe 3 or 4, they wouldnt even have to send in infantry, the general would walk in there like a park.
if they could go on for 2 weeks, maybe 3 or 4, they wouldnt even have to send in infantry, the general would walk in there like a park.
I know this wasn't the original topic of this thread, bear with me. As I said in the linked thread, yellow ribbon, the making of some private funds (20% the cost of the selling price) could be justified as payment for private contractors, logistics, depot workers, etc. I leave that to your imagination.
So you want to tell me that AGEOD placed a couple of buttons clickable by the player, just because the AI cannot take care of the supply chain? If so, then they better delete them, cause they play no role. I don't know in what apocalyptic war scenarios you ran yourself into, but any major player in the game (from those scripted at least) produces so many supplies and ammo that it is almost impossible to run out of commodity supplies and ammo.
As the newest manual says, almost always supplies is a distribution problem, not a production one. At the moment, the conversion mechanism is a total unjustified waste. At least, let's earn some money out of it otherwise it's almost a cheat: the moment a player fires up a game he should stop conversion and forget about it (while accumulating huge numbers of these goods to later sell). Instead the AI is stuck in conversion and doesn't even earn a dime.
So you want to tell me that AGEOD placed a couple of buttons clickable by the player, just because the AI cannot take care of the supply chain? If so, then they better delete them, cause they play no role. I don't know in what apocalyptic war scenarios you ran yourself into, but any major player in the game (from those scripted at least) produces so many supplies and ammo that it is almost impossible to run out of commodity supplies and ammo.
As the newest manual says, almost always supplies is a distribution problem, not a production one. At the moment, the conversion mechanism is a total unjustified waste. At least, let's earn some money out of it otherwise it's almost a cheat: the moment a player fires up a game he should stop conversion and forget about it (while accumulating huge numbers of these goods to later sell). Instead the AI is stuck in conversion and doesn't even earn a dime.
-
yellow ribbon
- Posts: 2245
- Joined: Sun Jun 26, 2011 5:42 pm
rofl...
ok, neighbor i add:
- if the ammo is crappy, it makes even less sense to simulate a bonus from ammo dumps...
are you originally aware that the Britons had to take even small pillboxes with a high blood toll at the Somme as well as Ypern.
In both cases 60-70% of the barrage had no effect, for they lost the surprise due to "firing for effect" and most trenches and wooden structures were not even manned by the Germans.
A situation the French learned the hard way in the Vosges. But Canadians and Britons never accepted it, due to predominant military doctrine.
spontaneous fire takes and always took more KIAs than a barrage. thats why they were frightened by the Minenwerfer and copied the way with their own trench mortars.
the rest is a matter of could steel, another thing the Allied forces copied, Sturmtruppen
a barrage can only suppress the enemy. they have to dig in
Even better shells wouldnt change it at all.
SEE: COBRA-bombardment about 30 years later.
one single err and all is in vain, and Britons did plenty of them. As Germans did in other places.
You dont want to acknowledge it, not my problem, i was an officer candidate before they dropped me out due medical reasons.
I know the idiocy of barrages and wide area bombardements.
the creeping barrage as method to decimate enemies combat power as well as the combatants willpower nearly failed in all cases in the Great war from China over the Dardanelles to Flanders.
You cant bleed out forces, did not even work in Russia, the drop the arms for other reasons (not even communism or revolution, but for little mens common sense).
Think about the Nato, which planed to carry one the war despite 70% "planned" losses in the first days.
you can get them with the nose in the mud, not more not less. your own superior officer is more dangerous than an artillery shell.
ok, neighbor i add:
- if the ammo is crappy, it makes even less sense to simulate a bonus from ammo dumps...
are you originally aware that the Britons had to take even small pillboxes with a high blood toll at the Somme as well as Ypern.
In both cases 60-70% of the barrage had no effect, for they lost the surprise due to "firing for effect" and most trenches and wooden structures were not even manned by the Germans.
A situation the French learned the hard way in the Vosges. But Canadians and Britons never accepted it, due to predominant military doctrine.
spontaneous fire takes and always took more KIAs than a barrage. thats why they were frightened by the Minenwerfer and copied the way with their own trench mortars.
the rest is a matter of could steel, another thing the Allied forces copied, Sturmtruppen
a barrage can only suppress the enemy. they have to dig in
Even better shells wouldnt change it at all.
SEE: COBRA-bombardment about 30 years later.
one single err and all is in vain, and Britons did plenty of them. As Germans did in other places.
You dont want to acknowledge it, not my problem, i was an officer candidate before they dropped me out due medical reasons.
I know the idiocy of barrages and wide area bombardements.
the creeping barrage as method to decimate enemies combat power as well as the combatants willpower nearly failed in all cases in the Great war from China over the Dardanelles to Flanders.
You cant bleed out forces, did not even work in Russia, the drop the arms for other reasons (not even communism or revolution, but for little mens common sense).
Think about the Nato, which planed to carry one the war despite 70% "planned" losses in the first days.
you can get them with the nose in the mud, not more not less. your own superior officer is more dangerous than an artillery shell.
-
yellow ribbon
- Posts: 2245
- Joined: Sun Jun 26, 2011 5:42 pm
Kensai,
looks like i got me grumpy day for me and you got the lets-be-funny-day
In PON there are no wages, no transportation costs but coal (no one needs RR nor to upgrade ships to trade whole around the country and world), and you get free military deliveries.
AND NOW YOU ARGUE you want to get money from the conversion due to the involved workers... WHILE YOU CAN SELL THE GOODS AT ALL, FOR YOU KNOW THERE WILL BE NO SHORTAGE IN A BALANCED ECONOMY
hush... back to the sketching book, would you...!!?
IT CANT GET MORE RIDICULOUS, one of us is supposed to be drunken to figure that making sense or fun.
however, I got your point in the first post, i know your comments at P.
BTW: get the wrong leader, an ongoing war. a malus of 20% on all production, lack of textiles or coal and voila, the shortage is there... iplay the game for a while, i saw it with supply, and for short runs for ammo
********************************************************
I DISAGREE:
AI cannot handle spontaneous wars due to the fact that (its only one reason) THAT THE LIFE FOR THE PLAYER WAS MADE SO EASY while Ai got defined levels of resources it is supposed to put into the balance sheet only (F4).
AI keeps away from building structures, earning money from exports, building higher levels of depots, investing that early in infrastructure and the only way to react spontaneously on non scripted wars with mass assaults IS TO FILL the depots with converting the stocks...
I WOULD RATHER PAY FOR IT, than earning money from it
the same is true for inexperienced players. IF I CANNOT BUY (for the restricted AI to keep players happy), NEITHER WAIT, I DO HAVE TO POUR THE GOODS OUT FROM THE WAREHOUSE AND SEND THEM INTO THE FIELD
especially since we have such long construction time.
IT IS A FAIL-SAFE unless they come up with better patterns
looks like i got me grumpy day for me and you got the lets-be-funny-day
In PON there are no wages, no transportation costs but coal (no one needs RR nor to upgrade ships to trade whole around the country and world), and you get free military deliveries.
AND NOW YOU ARGUE you want to get money from the conversion due to the involved workers... WHILE YOU CAN SELL THE GOODS AT ALL, FOR YOU KNOW THERE WILL BE NO SHORTAGE IN A BALANCED ECONOMY
hush... back to the sketching book, would you...!!?
IT CANT GET MORE RIDICULOUS, one of us is supposed to be drunken to figure that making sense or fun.
however, I got your point in the first post, i know your comments at P.
BTW: get the wrong leader, an ongoing war. a malus of 20% on all production, lack of textiles or coal and voila, the shortage is there... iplay the game for a while, i saw it with supply, and for short runs for ammo
********************************************************
I DISAGREE:
AI cannot handle spontaneous wars due to the fact that (its only one reason) THAT THE LIFE FOR THE PLAYER WAS MADE SO EASY while Ai got defined levels of resources it is supposed to put into the balance sheet only (F4).
AI keeps away from building structures, earning money from exports, building higher levels of depots, investing that early in infrastructure and the only way to react spontaneously on non scripted wars with mass assaults IS TO FILL the depots with converting the stocks...
I WOULD RATHER PAY FOR IT, than earning money from it
the same is true for inexperienced players. IF I CANNOT BUY (for the restricted AI to keep players happy), NEITHER WAIT, I DO HAVE TO POUR THE GOODS OUT FROM THE WAREHOUSE AND SEND THEM INTO THE FIELD
especially since we have such long construction time.
IT IS A FAIL-SAFE unless they come up with better patterns
okay, maybe trenches change the situation, though a well aimed big explosive should clear that out. what about a very big bonus on artillery damage during fair days if youve got a balloon or similar? it just says + 1 command, are there any specific bonuses?
second, in the battlefield situation, when everyone is out and unprotected, I had the impression artillery did bad damage to russians in ww1
second, in the battlefield situation, when everyone is out and unprotected, I had the impression artillery did bad damage to russians in ww1
-
yellow ribbon
- Posts: 2245
- Joined: Sun Jun 26, 2011 5:42 pm
its not about the trenches, rather that you know that they fire on your position.
Atlanta, the early battle of the crater, parts of the battles around Ypern...they have in common that the foes just digged in deeper and waited till the attack would come or not.
on both edges, Flandern and the Vosgeses the Germans draw back into preplaned positions, even with small concrete bunkers over the earth and more or less well designed systems below the earth.
for the last ones, a direct hit could destroy it, with some luck and a lot of earth already gone due to the creeping barrage for weeks.
thats all.
for instance:
the best i can remember is the success in[color="Red"] Broodseinde [/color]during the battle around Passchendaele
- three weeks preperation
- one week creeping barrage
- supporting creeping barrage (feuerglocke / fire bell)
- supported by tanks
[color="Red"]
- coincidentally the allieds managaed to fire straight into the planed
counterattack of two divisions (their assembling area) and caused losses about 4.000 Germans[/color]
which would be 0,5 to 1% of all losses around this major battle
despite it, Allieds lost about 28.000 men, Germans roughly 20.000 (includes 4.000-5.000 POWs)
gained ground 910m on average, up to 1.700m at all
******************
to absorb the effect of fortifications HOWITZER/early mortars were used for hundreds of years, more explosives in the shell, steeper angle of incoming shell, higher chance of success.
but if you first have to fire for effect, means you fire into a grid and adjust for the commands of a forward observer, you can shoot as much as you want.
like Wellingtons men lying on the ground behind the not-longer-existing-ridge, Atlantas people who dug caves, Monte Cassino where the "ungrateful" German Paratroopers just dug into the rubble...
Atlanta, the early battle of the crater, parts of the battles around Ypern...they have in common that the foes just digged in deeper and waited till the attack would come or not.
on both edges, Flandern and the Vosgeses the Germans draw back into preplaned positions, even with small concrete bunkers over the earth and more or less well designed systems below the earth.
for the last ones, a direct hit could destroy it, with some luck and a lot of earth already gone due to the creeping barrage for weeks.
thats all.
for instance:
the best i can remember is the success in[color="Red"] Broodseinde [/color]during the battle around Passchendaele
- three weeks preperation
- one week creeping barrage
- supporting creeping barrage (feuerglocke / fire bell)
- supported by tanks
[color="Red"]
- coincidentally the allieds managaed to fire straight into the planed
counterattack of two divisions (their assembling area) and caused losses about 4.000 Germans[/color]
which would be 0,5 to 1% of all losses around this major battle
despite it, Allieds lost about 28.000 men, Germans roughly 20.000 (includes 4.000-5.000 POWs)
gained ground 910m on average, up to 1.700m at all
******************
to absorb the effect of fortifications HOWITZER/early mortars were used for hundreds of years, more explosives in the shell, steeper angle of incoming shell, higher chance of success.
but if you first have to fire for effect, means you fire into a grid and adjust for the commands of a forward observer, you can shoot as much as you want.
like Wellingtons men lying on the ground behind the not-longer-existing-ridge, Atlantas people who dug caves, Monte Cassino where the "ungrateful" German Paratroopers just dug into the rubble...
-
yellow ribbon
- Posts: 2245
- Joined: Sun Jun 26, 2011 5:42 pm
well Jamitar,
the weather does already effect the battle, or not... it effects range and modifies penalties
for the balloon it is tricky.
for instance USA can build them but rejected them in field use. thus its simulated to give your commander a better bonus, oversight
the interesting is, by all the techs it should be possible to use balloons later in game, lets say after 1900, really to effect precision of artillery.
since i made good experiences with McNaughtons mod of troops, this would be a way to increase the efficiency of guns later on, back to the normal values... or even simply a event that gives one a modifier.
the weather does already effect the battle, or not... it effects range and modifies penalties
for the balloon it is tricky.
for instance USA can build them but rejected them in field use. thus its simulated to give your commander a better bonus, oversight
the interesting is, by all the techs it should be possible to use balloons later in game, lets say after 1900, really to effect precision of artillery.
since i made good experiences with McNaughtons mod of troops, this would be a way to increase the efficiency of guns later on, back to the normal values... or even simply a event that gives one a modifier.
yellow ribbon, how old are you? 10?
It's a freaking game and we are simply shooting ideas, so don't patronize me as if you are the lead designer for AGEOD games. Yes, Mr. Grumpy, there are no wages and I don't really care for them to be simulated, I just want a darn use for the silly button that is there and doesn't do anything. I told you to "imagine" a justification for the extra money you got, just as an excuse for the human player to keep converting and the AI to get something for having it always on. Otherwise whenever a human player launches the game he stops conversion and no problem until some kind of one-in-a-gazillion astral alignment that would destroy your economy and make supplies and ammo (the commodity ones) disappear.
Right now it's a ready to consume CHEAT for the player. You turn it off and enjoy the treasuring of supplies and ammo to sell to poor AI that doesn't know how to hoard them and doesn't get anything back from the insane conversion that it is stuck with.
You keep talking about other AI shortcomings which I didn't touch in my reasoning, but probably deserve a thread on their own.
It's a freaking game and we are simply shooting ideas, so don't patronize me as if you are the lead designer for AGEOD games. Yes, Mr. Grumpy, there are no wages and I don't really care for them to be simulated, I just want a darn use for the silly button that is there and doesn't do anything. I told you to "imagine" a justification for the extra money you got, just as an excuse for the human player to keep converting and the AI to get something for having it always on. Otherwise whenever a human player launches the game he stops conversion and no problem until some kind of one-in-a-gazillion astral alignment that would destroy your economy and make supplies and ammo (the commodity ones) disappear.
Right now it's a ready to consume CHEAT for the player. You turn it off and enjoy the treasuring of supplies and ammo to sell to poor AI that doesn't know how to hoard them and doesn't get anything back from the insane conversion that it is stuck with.
You keep talking about other AI shortcomings which I didn't touch in my reasoning, but probably deserve a thread on their own.
This had best become civil immediately, or someone may get a few days vacation from these forums,
Opinions are fine, debates are fine, flame wars get time off...
Opinions are fine, debates are fine, flame wars get time off...
Always ask yourself: "Am I part of the Solution?" If you aren't, then you are part of the Problem!
[CENTER][/CENTER]
[CENTER]Visit AGEWiki - your increasingly comprehensive source for information about AGE games[/CENTER]
[CENTER]Rules for new members[/CENTER]
[CENTER]Forum Rules[/CENTER]
[CENTER]Help desk: support@slitherine.co.uk[/CENTER]
[CENTER][/CENTER]
[CENTER]Visit AGEWiki - your increasingly comprehensive source for information about AGE games[/CENTER]
[CENTER]Rules for new members[/CENTER]
[CENTER]Forum Rules[/CENTER]
[CENTER]Help desk: support@slitherine.co.uk[/CENTER]
-
yellow ribbon
- Posts: 2245
- Joined: Sun Jun 26, 2011 5:42 pm
Kensai, i am old enough not to insult you, nor to discriminate ye.
my apologizes if you feel to be put in silent corner for being a naughty kid.
even while putting in ideas into a dark room, there is no basis democracy.
who talks is RESPONSIBLE for his gibberish in-being/as proven. Not the group.
if someone is on the other side of the dark room, someone who can for instance can draw from different experience, different knowledge or just another point of view and re-classifying the approach, it doesnt matter what he is, nor who...
i never pretend to be from AGEOD, quite the opposite i often enough add a line that i dont speak for them and some of them/senior users already joked about it.
i your case i just hate to say that you throw your 2cents into this thread not mentioning that some of the the devs have already approached this topic elsewhere.
there is use of the function on different purposes, you have at least for the US different leaders in different times and different congress situation giving you up to more than 20% penalties to prior economic level, sometimes even 35% and more.
without the existing functions and stored goods it would be impossible to recover from AI taking two, three major cities in the Ohio area.
the AI can even less handle it
i do use and mod their game, and i got training to use the better part of my brain.
if there is a logical or fundamental position why something at least feels wrong, is incomplete or simply the human who uttered it seems to be headily or far worse, i will comment it in case i got the time.
******************
however, you do it again...
again you claim the NON-conversion would be exploitable and giving the gamers a unnatural advantage (in terms of money)...
(then simply dont tell them, since most dont get it anyway but if you tell them)
[color="Red"]...BUT THE VERY MOMENT YOU ASK FOR GIVING CAPITAL FOR FREE as long conversion is on...
[/color]
it would only work if the cash flow would be smaller than the cash flow from EXPORTING IT
right?
otherwise the sooooooooooooooooo bad situation would simply shift from one spot to another.
additionally this must be floating due to the floating amount you get from exports
right ????
thus a schoolkid would figure out that this is wrong as soon he/she knows how to change it / shut conversion off and why...
right?
my apologizes if you feel to be put in silent corner for being a naughty kid.
even while putting in ideas into a dark room, there is no basis democracy.
who talks is RESPONSIBLE for his gibberish in-being/as proven. Not the group.
if someone is on the other side of the dark room, someone who can for instance can draw from different experience, different knowledge or just another point of view and re-classifying the approach, it doesnt matter what he is, nor who...
i never pretend to be from AGEOD, quite the opposite i often enough add a line that i dont speak for them and some of them/senior users already joked about it.
i your case i just hate to say that you throw your 2cents into this thread not mentioning that some of the the devs have already approached this topic elsewhere.
there is use of the function on different purposes, you have at least for the US different leaders in different times and different congress situation giving you up to more than 20% penalties to prior economic level, sometimes even 35% and more.
without the existing functions and stored goods it would be impossible to recover from AI taking two, three major cities in the Ohio area.
the AI can even less handle it
i do use and mod their game, and i got training to use the better part of my brain.
if there is a logical or fundamental position why something at least feels wrong, is incomplete or simply the human who uttered it seems to be headily or far worse, i will comment it in case i got the time.
******************
however, you do it again...
again you claim the NON-conversion would be exploitable and giving the gamers a unnatural advantage (in terms of money)...
(then simply dont tell them, since most dont get it anyway but if you tell them)
[color="Red"]...BUT THE VERY MOMENT YOU ASK FOR GIVING CAPITAL FOR FREE as long conversion is on...
[/color]
it would only work if the cash flow would be smaller than the cash flow from EXPORTING IT
right?
otherwise the sooooooooooooooooo bad situation would simply shift from one spot to another.
additionally this must be floating due to the floating amount you get from exports
right ????
thus a schoolkid would figure out that this is wrong as soon he/she knows how to change it / shut conversion off and why...
right?
The conversion would be to actually help the AI, not the player. It is the AI that is stuck with the conversion while the player can turn it on and off at will. It is not about the free money either: hoarding and then reselling for the full price is a better deal than the 20% I implied in the conversion.
By implementing a small monetary bonus for the automatic conversion we achieve the following:
By implementing a small monetary bonus for the automatic conversion we achieve the following:
- give back some use to the buttons that otherwise are almost useless
- help the AI which is stuck to the conversion anyway
- simulate the payment of the operation as if it was an internal commercial endeavor
-
yellow ribbon
- Posts: 2245
- Joined: Sun Jun 26, 2011 5:42 pm
Kensai wrote:The conversion would be to actually help the AI, not the player.
no, you are still quite mistaken...
1.) AI is extremely restricted to ensure that the player is not economicaly steamrolled within few years by AI.
If you look into the files of a saved game you can analyze how many goods/units of money and capital were generated in AI lead countries.
when Sir Garnet and I did it during an email exchange last late summer, we were actually shocked how far the Ai is downgraded to keep players happy.
Ai would not even trade with anyone, if not coded. it does not need to get such compensation at all.
2.) sagji already explained it to you, first AI IMPORTS to keep up the stocks which are hardcoded to ensure that AI DOES NOT HARM the market by exporting too early too much making it thereby harder to enter the 1850 GC successfully.
then AI converts the goods to refill depots. this is the first problem
2.b) one has to acknowledge how restricted AI moves on with barely building additional railroads, depots and harbors. also it barely upgrades them.
this makes it necessary to have depots fully stuffed, since, depending on the very good simulated logistical system of the engine, there is no insurance that units in provinces far away from this structures get the supply/ammo at all.
Ai couldnt even lead wars against Ai, as soon someone disrupts this fragile supply line.
i have mentioned such a situation before, months ago, regarding another topic:
Crimean War did never end between Russia and UK, Russia did not move more troops to Canada, for the long time to transfer them to the pacific, i guess.
Russias Ai seized the city at the pacific cost, but could never move further than Hudsons Bays edges. the supply wagon moved around, was captured by tribes in Canada. Russian cavalry moved for and back. not holding the border.
Similar happened with the CSA when i could not defend the Indian territory in a GC, for all my troops were automatically moved to San Francisco.
2.c)
so Ai hesitates to build up new structures and railroads!
they depend on existing or captured structures which are going to be isolated from time to time and do not create enough supplies to run a whole corps walking around on a snowy mountain.
now some need to know that supply is distributed once a turn, so literally once in a month, between the turns, in the worst case.
If you block the supply line the very day the supply is computed and send, it is completely enough to create a major bottleneck situation.
If you manage to block the Ais capital, its even worse.
since AI barely improves/extend the depots, it will not be compensated by large stocks in some of the bottleneck situations.
the very moment AI would preplan infrastructure as players do with too many RR too early and so on, players would go on to riot in the forums, for being unable to compete with the AI.
so Ai is sticking with compensation pikes with conversion and cannot afford to disable it the whole 70 years.
3.) the question, i made it already in another thread, is:
IS IT NECESSARY TO ALLOCATE the converted supplies to all depots all the time?
could there be a simple filter in the depots menu? order on/off or even sliders
300 units of supply goods in Africa dont do me anything good if i used up my depots capacity at the Polish border by few large battles while not being reequipped from the capital, for rebels dont allow me to gain military control and/or cavalry blocks the route and i dont own a harbor for i actually besiege it.
...or...or...or...
-
yellow ribbon
- Posts: 2245
- Joined: Sun Jun 26, 2011 5:42 pm
PS:
of course this effect multiplies, as Pocus said, whenever a lot of artillery is participating in the battles.
Ammunition then can be a pain in the neck and a well trained player just exploit it whilst sending in the second line with some delay.
EDIT:
additionally imagine, what happens if you have no sophisticates system of infrastructure and are suffering a 35% penalty on economic output PLUS lack of textiles and thereby production capacity of military equipment maybe till 1880 (or in my case that time, for EIGHT years)
of course this effect multiplies, as Pocus said, whenever a lot of artillery is participating in the battles.
Ammunition then can be a pain in the neck and a well trained player just exploit it whilst sending in the second line with some delay.
EDIT:
additionally imagine, what happens if you have no sophisticates system of infrastructure and are suffering a 35% penalty on economic output PLUS lack of textiles and thereby production capacity of military equipment maybe till 1880 (or in my case that time, for EIGHT years)
Ok what about we stop fighting. Yellow ribbon has been able to counter historically and with precise examples my ideas.
I just feel a bit sad I cant make good use of my munitions (such as lots of munitions= higher quality (?) ) Anyway if any bonuses for artillery were to be added, historical or not, Id love it
By the way yellow ribbon, your examples suggest how inefective it is before a big offensive. as a defensive weapon, it be a lot of pressure for enemies to advance quickly, get blown off or call of offensive. they'd be helpless for cover and to only way to stop artillery would be to pass through machines guns as fast as possible, making death toll higher because of uncautious speed
I just feel a bit sad I cant make good use of my munitions (such as lots of munitions= higher quality (?) ) Anyway if any bonuses for artillery were to be added, historical or not, Id love it
By the way yellow ribbon, your examples suggest how inefective it is before a big offensive. as a defensive weapon, it be a lot of pressure for enemies to advance quickly, get blown off or call of offensive. they'd be helpless for cover and to only way to stop artillery would be to pass through machines guns as fast as possible, making death toll higher because of uncautious speed
-
yellow ribbon
- Posts: 2245
- Joined: Sun Jun 26, 2011 5:42 pm
Jamitar wrote:By the way yellow ribbon, your examples suggest how inefective it is before a big offensive. as a defensive weapon, it be a lot of pressure for enemies to advance quickly, get blown off or call of offensive. they'd be helpless for cover and to only way to stop artillery would be to pass through machines guns as fast as possible, making death toll higher because of uncautious speed
you nail it, thats what they tried.
they tried it in 1870s with using mounted troops to underrun gunfire, what obviously failed.
then they realized that the time between end of barrage and attack need to be as short as possible.
first the rapid fire action was extended, like breach loaded guns and integrated propellant charge (one single piece of cartridge for guns), then the real rapid fire guns like the Canon de 75 mle 1897.
later especially the Canadians became known for attacking under a fire bell, they earned the nickname of dangerous stormtroopers among the German officers, while the Americans just were unpredictable, for noone expected them to do mistakes other opponents had not done for nearly 4 years
all this mere technological and tactical effort is well simulated in PON, unfortunately the artillery is that accurate and strong in the beginning of the GC that you barely "feel" the modifiers, but if opposing a foe who is far more advanced in techs.
really, your ideas have a reasonable core which can be implemented in PON, at least if McNaughtons mod with modded basic values is used.... assuming direct fire stats of the units.
a close look on the modifiers and a new balance of the modifiers would be necessary, which needs more time the devs will be able to spend.
then the huge potential is there. however, probably not as a simple effect of oversupplied units.
you either are supplied or you couldnt carry around it.
i am actually thinking of one kind of additional modifier, which is pretty hard to contriol... since such a barrage with plenty of ammo at hand would make only sense in case of surprise, i ponder if this could be simulated as a non-in-box manipulation of battles outcome.
but i cant see how it could work, since you can get out of ammo while having multiple battles within a turns calculation.... Do you know what i mean?
For this point of history, PON is very good, not deliberately simulating the strict need to recover for weeks between serious battles in that days.
its like Shermans long ride, he was not marching to fight in the heart of the confederate states, he was marching to supply he was promised to get at the coast...
yellow ribbon,
you still don't counter the essence of my post. You keep repeating about how restrained already is the AI in other departments and yet when I talk about correcting one of its minor inabilities (that of to stop converting) you say that I'm mistaken and write, my God, an essay that I frankly don't have the time to read where you [think you] explain me how the AI is working.
sagji and I were talking about a totally different thing in that thread, read more carefully. The fact of the matter is that even AI countries need to trade and are coded to trade for two reasons: first they don't have all resources, second trading produces capital and money by taxation and buying/selling.
I can understand all the handicaps of the AI, but I explained why I think it's almost imperative to make some use of those buttons while giving the CPU a minor bonus from its stuck dis-ability.
you still don't counter the essence of my post. You keep repeating about how restrained already is the AI in other departments and yet when I talk about correcting one of its minor inabilities (that of to stop converting) you say that I'm mistaken and write, my God, an essay that I frankly don't have the time to read where you [think you] explain me how the AI is working.
sagji and I were talking about a totally different thing in that thread, read more carefully. The fact of the matter is that even AI countries need to trade and are coded to trade for two reasons: first they don't have all resources, second trading produces capital and money by taxation and buying/selling.
I can understand all the handicaps of the AI, but I explained why I think it's almost imperative to make some use of those buttons while giving the CPU a minor bonus from its stuck dis-ability.
-
yellow ribbon
- Posts: 2245
- Joined: Sun Jun 26, 2011 5:42 pm
...i solved it for my game, for public PON its exclusively to the devs what they want to set as an focus for their rare, spare time...
all i could add would either be a Ishikawa plot, or it would be sarcasm and i was told not to use it as a free gift...
[color="Red"]if one wants to discuss seriously and not to insult,[/color] you find me behind a bottle of Edradour, exposing it to a 6-σ
all i could add would either be a Ishikawa plot, or it would be sarcasm and i was told not to use it as a free gift...
[color="Red"]if one wants to discuss seriously and not to insult,[/color] you find me behind a bottle of Edradour, exposing it to a 6-σ
Who is online
Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 10 guests