tyrone vs eskuche v12.05.

Matrix Games Forums

Forums Register Login Photo Gallery Member List Search Calendars FAQ

My Profile Inbox Address Book My Subscription My Forums Log Out

tyrone vs eskuche v12.05.

View related threads: (in this forum | in all forums)

Logged in as: Guest

Users viewing this topic: none

Printable Version

All Forums >> [New Releases from Matrix Games] >> Gary Grigsby's War in the East Series >> After Action Reports >> tyrone vs eskuche v12.05.

Page: [1]

Message

<< Older Topic Newer Topic >>

tyrone vs eskuche v12.05. - 10/3/2020 3:15:22 PM

tyronec

Posts: 4940
Joined: 8/7/2015
From: Portaferry, N. Ireland
Status: offline

I wasn�t intending to have another game of WITE but Eskuche made the offer and we worked out some house rules.
No airbase bombing after Axis T1, no unit bombing. So will be mostly GS and some Interdiction.
Eskuche�s random deployment system, that he has written up elsewhere.
No paras or naval invasions.
Random weather.
Full Blizzard.
No bonus.
We are using enhanced CV, wouldn�t be my preference but not a big deal.

T01.
Much the same opening as usual.
AGN seem to have caught a few more units in Courland than usual.

AGC had a few problems from the random deployment, pocket looks Ok but am not 100% sure.

AGS was the most difficult. It didn�t look possible to do the advanced pocket and trap all the tank divisions around Shepetkovka so gave up on that part way through. L�Vov pocket completed OK though it took an extra Panzer division to clear the way, hopefully all pockets are secure.

About 6k aircraft kills, my Stuka moves could have been better.

From playing this turn my thoughts on the random deployment are: all good/no bad. It adds some uncertainty to the play, makes securing pockets a little more difficult and brings some variation to T1. I think it forces Axis to be a little more conservative. I did do maximum recon over the relevant areas but several units remained unspotted or was uncertain of their type.
It was 20% units moving, could try it with a little more (30% ?) but this was fine, would maybe not move the forts. The distances moved seemed about right. There were no significant holes in the Soviet front line.

Attachment (1)

< Message edited by tyronec -- 10/11/2020 6:14:22 AM >

Post #: 1

T2 after recon. - 10/3/2020 3:33:16 PM

tyronec

Posts: 4940
Joined: 8/7/2015
From: Portaferry, N. Ireland
Status: offline

All pockets have held, no attacks from the Soviets

AGN. A thin screen of what looks like weak units on the front line. Restricts the usual drive to Pskov as I either have to pocket them or rout them to protect my flanks. Am thinking to drive towards Pskov with one Panzer Corps, routing whatever is in the way, and screen the flanks with another two corps. Aiming to leave the way open for a couple of infantry Corps to advance full speed on T3.
And just ignore most of the units North of Riga, have another turn to clear the rail line.

AGC. Again there are a few units hanging around near Minsk. Will pocket these and drive towards Vitebsk with at least one Panzer Corps. A couple of my rail conversion hexes for this turn got flipped but don't think it will slow down an FBD.

AGS. Soviets have pulled back to two huddles, one North of Zhitomir and one near Odessa. A couple of units left on the Romanian border, guess it is to stop me moving Panzers through Romania. Will aim to pocket them, tidy up the pockets and advance as far as possible.

Attachment (1)

(in reply to tyronec)

Post #: 2

RE: T2 after recon. - 10/4/2020 1:58:42 AM

Seminole

Posts: 2105
Joined: 7/28/2011
Status: offline

Trying to grasp why there are uncovered Soviet airbases in AGN�s axis of advance.
Some are in swamp. They automatically displace when you approach. What is the gain for the losses?

(in reply to tyronec)

Post #: 3

RE: T2 after recon. - 10/4/2020 2:16:13 AM

redrum68

Posts: 1202
Joined: 11/26/2017
Status: offline

Its to try to influence retreat path with non-combat units so that combat units retreat into say swamps or other better defense terrain.

(in reply to Seminole)

Post #: 4

RE: T2 after recon. - 10/4/2020 5:11:00 AM

tyronec

Posts: 4940
Joined: 8/7/2015
From: Portaferry, N. Ireland
Status: offline

Does it work, I thought the retreat path rules were broken in 12.05 ?

(in reply to redrum68)

Post #: 5

RE: T2 after recon. - 10/4/2020 2:19:48 PM

Seminole

Posts: 2105
Joined: 7/28/2011
Status: offline

Thanks, that didn�t stand out to me previously.

Appendix A - retreat scoring
Valid hexes in retreat/displacement move range are determined and scored. Scores range from 0.0 for worst value amongst valid hexes to 1.0 for best value amongst valid hexes. Scores are later multiplied by weights and added together. The following factors are used:
● range to supply source
○ lower better, weight 10
● MP to supply source
○ lower better, weight 9
● number of units in target hex
○ lower better, weight 2 (0 for displacement moves)
● number of combat units in target hex
○ lower better for combat units, weight 5 (4 for displacement moves)
○ higher better for non-combat units, weight 6 (5 for displacement moves)
● number of non-combat units in target hex
○ higher better for combat units, weight 6 (5 for displacement moves)
○ lower better for non-combat units, weight 5 (4 for displacement moves)
● number of adjacent enemy-controlled hexes
○ lower better, weight 8
● terrain and fortification defensive bonus
○ higher better, weight 4 (3 for displacement moves)
○ airbases treat terrain other than clear, light woods, and city as having a score of 0
● retreat range
○ lower better, weight 24
● retreat MP cost
○ lower better, weight 23
● distance to HQ
○ lower better, weight 3 (6 for displacement moves)
● population in hex
○ higher better, weight 0 (2 for displacement moves)

● distance to enemy-controlled hexes ○ higher better, weight 7
● x coordinate
○ lower better for Axis units, weight 1
○ higher better for Soviet units, weight 1
○ always scored in range between 1 and 184

(in reply to redrum68)

Post #: 6

End - 10/11/2020 6:17:18 AM

tyronec

Posts: 4940
Joined: 8/7/2015
From: Portaferry, N. Ireland
Status: offline

This game has ended.
Back to WITE2 for me for now, here's hoping there will be a new patch.

(in reply to Seminole)

Post #: 7

RE: End - 10/11/2020 3:27:12 PM

redrum68

Posts: 1202
Joined: 11/26/2017
Status: offline

Oh what happened? Seemed like a pretty interesting game...

(in reply to tyronec)

Post #: 8

RE: End - 10/11/2020 3:35:19 PM

tyronec

Posts: 4940
Joined: 8/7/2015
From: Portaferry, N. Ireland
Status: offline

It was to do with air dropping units behind the front line, eskuche thought what he did was fine but I was not happy with the way he went about it.

(in reply to redrum68)

Post #: 9

RE: End - 10/11/2020 3:52:12 PM

Seminole

Posts: 2105
Joined: 7/28/2011
Status: offline

It's limited to 8 hexes from the front line, what did he do?

Was it breaking a rail line, or completing a pocket?

(in reply to tyronec)

Post #: 10

RE: End - 10/11/2020 5:17:32 PM

eskuche

Posts: 1094
Joined: 3/27/2018
From: OH, USA
Status: offline

Since we have discussed the game ending over email, I am looking in this thread now. We have a disagreement over what is allowed with regards to air TRANSPORT, which was not house-ruled. I was moving units from inside pockets to outside of pockets (leaving them as ~300 men shells). Based on Tyronec's response here, I am not sure if we are on the same page as to what I actually did.

Tyronec (feel free to correct me if my interpretation is wrong) feels this exploitative similar to paradrops. We decided to exclude paradrops completely as part of house rules, after I suggested doing limited paradrops only within 4 hexes of front line. I had no such knowledge beforehand that air transports are looked down upon because I am using them exactly as stated in the manual (not even into pending hexes as I did in the sillyflower game), and it is not such a wildly drastic difference in input-output as cutting rail with paradrops is (no skill/planning, huge consequence). There was a glitch in my turn 1 rescue of a cavalry division due to >1000 battles which I deflected to explain completely (hoping it would just appear as the supply drop icon on the battle map and be ignored to have a flanking division for turn 2) but the cavalry was surrounded and, being depleted, dies next turn. Since this flanking maneuver failed, I explained in completion the next turn in which I rescued 4 counters from the Lvov pocket. Since we are at an impasse, we have unfortunately not continued the game.

(in reply to Seminole)

Post #: 11

RE: End - 10/13/2020 1:35:15 AM

chaos45

Posts: 1889
Joined: 1/22/2001
Status: offline

Rescuing units via air transport should be a completely viable soviet tactic. It really isnt all that easy to do do on T1 and T2. Due to how fast the Germans move and what I believe only 1 soviet Air transport unit even starts on the map. I messed with it some and it seems difficult to save more than a handful of soviet units--as the units have to be located with an airbase and you need an area outside the pocket to send them to. So often you can only rescue a couple units and even this will expose the soviet transport airbase to air strikes or being overrun most likely.

Next those units are only 300 man shells...so their experience will get crushed initially with the influx of replacements...IMO a pretty weak reason to end a match, if that was the only reason.

(in reply to eskuche)

Post #: 12

RE: End - 10/13/2020 1:16:53 PM

Shupov

Posts: 286
Joined: 2/7/2004
From: United States
Status: offline

I probably share the opinion of many watchers who are sorry to see these two AAR's end. The quality and level of detail provided by two great players are the best I've seen in years, if ever. Had it continued they would have been great candidates for above-the-line AAR's.

< Message edited by Shupov -- 10/13/2020 1:37:12 PM >

_____________________________

STALINADE

The real RED soda!

(in reply to chaos45)

Post #: 13

RE: End - 10/13/2020 1:41:42 PM

tyronec

Posts: 4940
Joined: 8/7/2015
From: Portaferry, N. Ireland
Status: offline

The issue was not what eskuche was doing with air transports. It was that he denied that he was using air transports - if he had come clean about it then we could have worked out some sort of an agreement.

(in reply to Shupov)

Post #: 14

RE: End - 10/13/2020 3:37:20 PM

eskuche

Posts: 1094
Joined: 3/27/2018
From: OH, USA
Status: offline

This is not how I see it, and this (@ readers) is why we are at an impasse. I am posting this screenshot solely to preserve my reputation, as without further evidence it can be inferred by viewers that I'm trying to do sketchy things under the table. Here is our relevant conversation through email, with the bugged screenshot in question. If you asked me if I was doing an air transport yes/no and that we need to address this, I would have answered yes. Instead, you asked me why there were German troops and losses, which I cannot conceivably answer correctly because this is a known bug when battles go above 1000. I am really sorry this game ended this way because I spent many, many hours on my AAR already and do not have any intention of cheating. Readers can make their own conclusions from here. To be clear, I am not bashing Tyronec, who has been an excellent opponent otherwise, and I am grateful to his willingness to try out the randomized start.

Attachment (1)

(in reply to tyronec)

Post #: 15

RE: End - 10/13/2020 5:26:58 PM

sillyflower

Posts: 3509
Joined: 8/4/2010
From: Back in Blighty
Status: offline

Well, I've looked at this with my litigation lawyer hat on.

My conclusions from the emails are:

1 T thought it was an air transport but could not understand the combat report (nor do I)

2 In the light of T's email, I can understand why E did not feel the need to reiterate the fact that it was an air transport, and there is no basis to construe his response as a denial. However his response was at best rather an unfortunately worded and inadequate response to T's serious question.

I do not see any evidence of bad faith on either side, but the emails could have been written better. This is a major trouble with emails which tend to be dashed off quickly. From memory a written communication only conveys a tiny %age of a conversation where the speakers can see and hear each other.

One of those unfortunate misunderstandings

_____________________________

web exchange

Post: I am always fearful that when I put this game down on the table and people see the box-art they will think I am some kind of neo-Nazi

Reply: They already know you're a gamer. What other shame can possibly compare?

(in reply to eskuche)

Post #: 16

RE: End - 10/13/2020 10:40:59 PM

Seminole

Posts: 2105
Joined: 7/28/2011
Status: offline

What happens to the manpower during this kind of a transport?

Does it go to the pool as if the unit couldn�t all be transferred on �in supply� terrain?

Or does it add to losses in some fashion?

Might be an unintended benefit.

(in reply to sillyflower)

Post #: 17

RE: End - 10/13/2020 10:59:47 PM

chaos45

Posts: 1889
Joined: 1/22/2001
Status: offline

pretty sure the manpower is lost which is why doing air transfers of in supply units is a waste...the best use I can think of for the air transfers is trying to save 1-2 of the mountain divisions in the south but its tricky to pull off really....also you really risk having the soviet air transport fleet decimated.

(in reply to Seminole)

Post #: 18

RE: End - 10/14/2020 8:49:23 AM

tyronec

Posts: 4940
Joined: 8/7/2015
From: Portaferry, N. Ireland
Status: offline

quote:

pretty sure the manpower is lost which is why doing air transfers of in supply units is a waste...the best use I can think of for the air transfers is trying to save 1-2 of the mountain divisions in the south but its tricky to pull off really....also you really risk having the soviet air transport fleet decimated.

There is the possibility of transporting units to locations which they would otherwise not be able to reach, and then using them to seal off/break pockets and/or cut rail lines on subsequent turns.

(in reply to chaos45)

Post #: 19

RE: End - 10/14/2020 12:41:06 PM

chaos45

Posts: 1889
Joined: 1/22/2001
Status: offline

pretty sure they are unready after the AT tho...so no zoc....and no movement after the airtransport....I really dont see where this is causing a huge issue....also havent attempted it but i dont believe u can AT to an enemy location, if you can thats a bug not a feature of AT.

(in reply to tyronec)

Post #: 20

RE: End - 10/14/2020 12:47:35 PM

AlexSF

Posts: 183
Joined: 9/2/2013
From: France
Status: offline

Well, airtransporting units (in particular mountain divs out of the Lvov pocket) is a genius idea actually and i'll try it next time !

(in reply to chaos45)

Post #: 21

RE: End - 10/14/2020 1:13:39 PM

eskuche

Posts: 1094
Joined: 3/27/2018
From: OH, USA
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: chaos45

pretty sure they are unready after the AT tho...so no zoc....and no movement after the airtransport....I really dont see where this is causing a huge issue....also havent attempted it but i dont believe u can AT to an enemy location, if you can thats a bug not a feature of AT.

While not the issue at hand, everything chaos has said is correct. The units are transported as depleted, not even unready, shells, to their destination, which has to be a friendly hex. The majority of the manpower is transferred generally to the airbase TOE or if possible a unit that the transportee is normally capable of merging with. For units in pockets, there is no secret benefit of rescuing manpower. There is absolutely zero usage as paratroopers because like chaos says they muster no ZOC and in the current game the AT�d cavalry was merely bypassed and stuck due to no reinforcements.

The technique is very difficult to pull off because you only have limited range, and indeed I lost 20-30 transports getting 3 mountain divisions and an antitank out to north of Zhitomir by the marshes, which in our game was de facto inaccessible to Germany turn 3 due to shifting all of the armor to Odessa, and there Vinnitsa corps being all completely being surrounded. The threat of doing this also puts pressure on the Axis to actually clear pockets instead of screening them and delaying unit respawn. Most people who have seen my posts should be aware I am in favor of a dynamic give and take within a fair game that is historically plausible, which is why I am resistant to house ruling out too many things, especially working as intended (paradropping onto rail again being an egregiously disproportionately strong tool).

(in reply to chaos45)

Post #: 22

RE: End - 10/14/2020 1:53:46 PM

Seminole

Posts: 2105
Joined: 7/28/2011
Status: offline

quote:

There is the possibility of transporting units to locations which they would otherwise not be able to reach, and then using them to seal off/break pockets and/or cut rail lines on subsequent turns.

I�m always amused by German expectations of a �clockwork� campaign in �41.

I thought the appeal of this scenario was that Germans couldn�t anticipate the starting position and therefore reactive capacity of the entire Soviet army for the first month of the war.

�Can they do that?�
- garrison of Fort Eben-Emael on May 10, 1940.

(in reply to tyronec)

Post #: 23

RE: End - 10/14/2020 3:17:45 PM

timmyab

Posts: 2044
Joined: 12/14/2010
From: Bristol, UK
Status: offline

quote:

I lost 20-30 transports getting 3 mountain divisions and an antitank out

Well worth it in my opinion. I would happily swap 2 or 3 hundred transports for them, but that's just me probably. Mtn divs and cav corps are your sword in the blizzard.

(in reply to eskuche)

Post #: 24

RE: End - 10/14/2020 3:58:15 PM

chaos45

Posts: 1889
Joined: 1/22/2001
Status: offline

If you got 3 mnt div and an AT out thats pretty awesome...the issue I had practicing the move is having enough transport planes with enough miles to get more than 1 division out. As the game seems to lag when can use trasnport planes as well after they transfer in from reserves.

So I noticed you can use the on map air transport regiment immediately, but for some reason the ones I transferred in from reserves wouldnt allow me to conduct missions until T3 but was just messing around so maybe I did something wrong...could be I used the wrong airbase type...would have to test it again.

I mainly just practiced enough to rescue a couple mountain divs...but again this depends on how fast/far the German panzers move and how quickly they reduce the pocket.

< Message edited by chaos45 -- 10/14/2020 9:54:18 PM >

(in reply to timmyab)

Post #: 25

RE: End - 10/14/2020 5:31:34 PM

Seminole

Posts: 2105
Joined: 7/28/2011
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: chaos45

If you got 3 mnt div and an AT out thats pretty awesome...the issue I had practicing the move is having enough transport planes with enough miles to get more than 1 division out. As the game seems to lag when can use trasnport planes as well after they transfer in from reserves.

So I noticed you can use the on map air transport regiment immediately, but for some reason the once I transferred in from reserves would allow me actually conduct missions until T3 but was just messing around so maybe I did something wrong...could be I used the wrong airbase type...would have to test it again.

I mainly just practiced enough to rescue a couple mountain divs...but again this depends on how fast/far the German panzers move and how quickly they reduce the pocket.

More importantly, does it work in WitE2...

(in reply to chaos45)

Post #: 26