Matrix Games Forums

 Forums  Register  Login  Photo Gallery  Member List  Search  Calendars  FAQ 

My Profile  Inbox  Address Book  My Subscription  My Forums  Log Out

Siberian Reinforcements

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

Logged in as: Guest
Users viewing this topic: none
  Printable Version
All Forums >> [Current Games From Matrix.] >> [World War II] >> Commander - Europe at War Gold >> Siberian Reinforcements Page: [1] 2 3   next >   >>
Login
Message << Older Topic   Newer Topic >>
Siberian Reinforcements - 6/30/2007 11:14:41 PM   
targul


Posts: 449
Joined: 8/25/2004
Status: offline 		There appear to be no Siberian Reinforcements. Russia held out in 42 because of them. Without them verses a competent human play you really have very little chance of holding off the Axis hoards.
Post #: 1
RE: Siberian Reinforcements - 7/1/2007 1:50:20 AM   
Dave Ferguson

 

Posts: 302
Joined: 9/12/2000
From: Kent, United Kingdom
Status: offline 		apparently someone argued in beta that they were a myth!!!

(in reply to targul)
Post #: 2
RE: Siberian Reinforcements - 7/1/2007 2:11:55 AM   
n0kn0k

 

Posts: 564
Joined: 6/23/2007
Status: offline 		The same discussion came up on the BF boards some time ago.
I believe someone quoted Zhukov saying that they had a minor impact.

(in reply to Dave Ferguson)
Post #: 3
RE: Siberian Reinforcements - 7/1/2007 3:57:23 AM   
Lincolns Mullet

 

Posts: 10
Joined: 1/16/2007
Status: offline 		Just because Zhukov didn't use them as well as we can doesn't mean we shouldn't get 'em. ;)

(in reply to n0kn0k)
Post #: 4
RE: Siberian Reinforcements - 7/1/2007 4:11:09 AM   
Warfare1


Posts: 658
Joined: 10/20/2004
Status: offline 		The German 45ths divisional after-action report of June 30 1941 relates:

"The division took 7000 prisioners, including 100 officers. German losses were 482 killed, including 32 officers, and over 1000 wounded."

The magnatude of these losses can be judged by the fact that the total German losses on the Eastern front up to 30th June 1941 amounted to 8886 killed. The citadel of Brest therefore accounted for over 5 percent of all fatal casualties.

Advancing through Byelorussia and the Pripyet marshes in the high summer of 1941, the marching troops and their supply columns faced enemies other than the Russians. The difficulties of the advance and the supply of forward troops during the early phases of operations in the east are related in this passage from the 45.Infanterie-division war diary concerning their advance through the Pripyet Marshes:

"It went on for four weeks, through swamp, dirt and dust,in the direction of Gomel... This was no longer an 'advance', but literally a miserable crawling through 40 to 50 cm deep sand, bottomless morass, thick woods and overgrown brush. In places long corduroy roads first had to be built to make any progress at all. The motor vehicles had inconceivable engine troubles, for the fine sand got into everything and damaged pistons and cylinders. In addition, they were much too low-slung for this terrain, their chassis often hit bottom and they could be moved only with a lot of help on both sides, often enough with a broken axle or fenders, mufflers, brake lines, etc.. torn off... The column drivers in particular did everything humanly possible to move ahead."

Still advancing, the division went on to fight south-west of Moscow, before being pushed back by the overwhelming 'winterized' Siberian reinforcements of Zhukov's December counter-offensive.

http://www.feldgrau.com/InfDiv.php?ID=41

http://www.geocities.com/sonzabird/majorops.html

< Message edited by Warfare1 -- 7/1/2007 4:16:44 AM >

(in reply to Lincolns Mullet)
Post #: 5
RE: Siberian Reinforcements - 7/1/2007 4:32:08 AM   
Forwarn45

 

Posts: 718
Joined: 4/26/2005
Status: offline 		I thought the production / convoys might account for the missing reinforcements (the Soviets can build them). But on the other hand, it would probably be preferable to give the Soviets some actual reinforcements in winter that have 1 or 2 experience levels at start to represent these troops. Also - I wonder if winter shouldn't even be a little harder on the Germans than is currently represented. It is still possible to do some limited advances that seem a little ahistoric.

(in reply to Warfare1)
Post #: 6
RE: Siberian Reinforcements - 7/1/2007 5:52:13 AM   
targul


Posts: 449
Joined: 8/25/2004
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: Forwarn45

I thought the production / convoys might account for the missing reinforcements (the Soviets can build them). But on the other hand, it would probably be preferable to give the Soviets some actual reinforcements in winter that have 1 or 2 experience levels at start to represent these troops. Also - I wonder if winter shouldn't even be a little harder on the Germans than is currently represented. It is still possible to do some limited advances that seem a little ahistoric.


Production does not come close to accounting for them.

They were not shipped in where they were subject to loss by convoy so no again.

They are absoluetely necessary and after playing the Russian it is very obvious the Russian are extraordinarily weak in 42 with a meger at best chance of survival.

I have played thousands of wargames and never have a seen such a weaked Russia. I normally do well with the Russian Army but then all the games have equivelent forces to the war this game without the Siberian Troops is decidely weaker.

This is a game breaker for the Allies without the Russian Army at or close to there historic strength they will be beaten by every competent player in the game.

The winter does seem a little below par also. Since the movement seems to effect both the Soviet and Axis troops it is not an advantage. I know as the Russian player my motorized units were not allowed to move more then 1 hex.

I can understand this but the effectiveness of the Soviets did not seem to go up nor did the effectiveness of Axis drop. They lost a few points one round that seemed to be all. Not positive on the balance of this yet though.

(in reply to Forwarn45)
Post #: 7
RE: Siberian Reinforcements - 7/1/2007 6:33:15 AM   
Major Victory

 

Posts: 84
Joined: 9/23/2004
Status: offline 		Perhaps that same beta tester believes that Russian winters are also a myth!


(in reply to Dave Ferguson)
Post #: 8
RE: Siberian Reinforcements - 7/1/2007 6:41:36 AM   
targul


Posts: 449
Joined: 8/25/2004
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: Major Victory

Perhaps that same beta tester believes that Russian winters are also a myth!



Probably I cant imagine how they missed the reinforcements but it was a real surprise for me.

There isnt a game on the market that I know of other then Making History that doesnt have those reinforcements. But then you cant count making history since it really isnt a WWII game but some fantasy idea of what 39-47 would be if every did everything different then it actually was.

_____________________________

Jim

Cant we just get along.
Hell no I want to kill something!

1st Cav Div 66-69 5th Special Forces 70-73

(in reply to Major Victory)
Post #: 9
RE: Siberian Reinforcements - 7/1/2007 11:56:23 AM   
Dave Ferguson

 

Posts: 302
Joined: 9/12/2000
From: Kent, United Kingdom
Status: offline 		I wonder if there is no way in the game for adding conditional reinforcements or having units already on the production track, if so they have a problem. Historically the germans were VERY lucky in winter 41 as the russians tried to attack everywhere and never quite succeeded, so are the winter effects strong enough?

Perhaps a one time shot of additional pp might help.

(in reply to targul)
Post #: 10
RE: Siberian Reinforcements - 7/1/2007 12:52:51 PM   
Phatguy

 

Posts: 1348
Joined: 3/1/2006
From: Buffalo,ny
Status: offline 		I dont think having units just show up since it happened in reality is the answer. Then you have to start doing that for all participants.When do you stop with these one off reinforcement surges? If the devs kow-tow to the "Siberia" crowd, I know full well and good I'm getting on my rickety soapbox and screaming for Anders Polish Corps to show up for the British as a reinforcement. And so on.

Maybe a one time point dump between nov and jan of the 1st winter might be an answer. I just don't know.

(in reply to Dave Ferguson)
Post #: 11
RE: Siberian Reinforcements - 7/1/2007 6:06:40 PM   
IrishGuards


Posts: 542
Joined: 12/7/2006
Status: offline 		I just want to know .. Since all I have done is beat up on Russia pretty good even against a HP ... 4 turns you kill wacks of stuff ...

I am not going to even begin to say what I would do .. But...
Where is Russia in Labs .. upgrades ... resources ..
What are they doing with there dough .. PP Level .. Builds ..
Ratio .. Oil Manpower ..
IDG

(in reply to Phatguy)
Post #: 12
RE: Siberian Reinforcements - 7/1/2007 6:06:40 PM   
Sweeper

 

Posts: 6
Joined: 1/10/2002
From: Stockholm, Sweden
Status: offline 		Guys!

I think 1 or 2 here have fallen into the "siberian myth". It is true that the forces from Siberia was a pretty large force BUT they did not arrive all in one big HORD in 1941 and turned the tide as some here think, rather arriving division after division over an extended period of time. People tend to think that the siberians turned the tide when infact their contribution to the battle of moscow was rather small propotionally, they were spread out and ordered into various sectors of the russian front.

Zhukov himself which commanded the battle of moscow don't see their arrival as the rescue. He almost not mention it at all. The rescue was and remain the fact that russian production combined with the STAVKA holding back reserves for a counterblow, overwhelmed the exhausted germans december 5th 1941.

This is also very clear to all consistent readers of David Glantz which is undoubtedly the number one western expert on the eastern front, who worked hard on reveling the myths and misunderstandings of the eastern front.

This myth is like the one with the polish cavalry charging german tanks which were originally italian propaganda and something you can read about in schools books still today when infact this was not the case. What happened was that a polish cavalry charge on german infantry were counterattacked by panzers in a MINOR encounter and voila we got a myth!

After Richard Sorge's spyring reveiled Japan's plans to Stalin formations from various forces were sent west. This happened also earlier but on a smaller scale. Beginning in october 1941 the russians started transfering siberian and transbaikal forces which continued all into november.

Since this is not a division sized game the game works perfectly historical.

< Message edited by Sweeper -- 7/1/2007 6:20:41 PM >

(in reply to Phatguy)
Post #: 13
RE: Siberian Reinforcements - 7/1/2007 6:28:51 PM   
targul


Posts: 449
Joined: 8/25/2004
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: apathetic lurker

I dont think having units just show up since it happened in reality is the answer. Then you have to start doing that for all participants.When do you stop with these one off reinforcement surges? If the devs kow-tow to the "Siberia" crowd, I know full well and good I'm getting on my rickety soapbox and screaming for Anders Polish Corps to show up for the British as a reinforcement. And so on.

Maybe a one time point dump between nov and jan of the 1st winter might be an answer. I just don't know.



So do you somehow believe the Soviets and African forces should be shorted because it is too easy to give reinforcements. As for the Polish, New Zealand, Aussies, South African, and Indians which where the primary forces of Africa from 40 to 42 you believe they should not arrive? As I said on this issue I do not mind if they send a single corps or infantry to account for these forces but I dont think the Allies should be forced to defend Eygpt short most of its army with absolutely no control of supply which allows unlimited Axis forces to oppose them. Remember they already dont have the air they had there you cant expect them to hold verses potentially the entire Axis army without even having what they had in the war.

Soviet Union Siberian Transfer was critical. Not sure why someone would deny the equivelent of 2 corps of armor and 4 of infantry with a hoard of artillery. These forces where the forces used in 42 to defend the Soviet Union.

I recommend you do get on you soapbox and demand the forces not be eliminated from there historical placement. I would fight just as hard for the Axis if they where missing armies.

You cant have balance if you do not provide historical forces. You cant hold Russia without what they had in the real war they barely survived now you want them to do it with significant less and it wont happen verses a comptetent player.

AI is not even near as important as correctly balancing the game so it is fun and playable for both sides. Human vs Human play will be impossible without this correction.



_____________________________

Jim

Cant we just get along.
Hell no I want to kill something!

1st Cav Div 66-69 5th Special Forces 70-73

(in reply to Phatguy)
Post #: 14
RE: Siberian Reinforcements - 7/1/2007 6:35:21 PM   
Sweeper

 

Posts: 6
Joined: 1/10/2002
From: Stockholm, Sweden
Status: offline 		Mr Targul. Read my message again.

You are speaking about numbers that did not arrive as you want them too. If Russia can't be held well thats another issue that needs to be fixed.

But wanting a hord arrive with juicy stuff is simply wrong. Do you want the designers to get them in division by the division!!!!

(in reply to targul)
Post #: 15
RE: Siberian Reinforcements - 7/1/2007 7:42:12 PM   
targul


Posts: 449
Joined: 8/25/2004
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: Sweeper

Guys!

I think 1 or 2 here have fallen into the "siberian myth". It is true that the forces from Siberia was a pretty large force BUT they did not arrive all in one big HORD in 1941 and turned the tide as some here think, rather arriving division after division over an extended period of time. People tend to think that the siberians turned the tide when infact their contribution to the battle of moscow was rather small propotionally, they were spread out and ordered into various sectors of the russian front.

Zhukov himself which commanded the battle of moscow don't see their arrival as the rescue. He almost not mention it at all. The rescue was and remain the fact that russian production combined with the STAVKA holding back reserves for a counterblow, overwhelmed the exhausted germans december 5th 1941.

This is also very clear to all consistent readers of David Glantz which is undoubtedly the number one western expert on the eastern front, who worked hard on reveling the myths and misunderstandings of the eastern front.

This myth is like the one with the polish cavalry charging german tanks which were originally italian propaganda and something you can read about in schools books still today when infact this was not the case. What happened was that a polish cavalry charge on german infantry were counterattacked by panzers in a MINOR encounter and voila we got a myth!

After Richard Sorge's spyring reveiled Japan's plans to Stalin formations from various forces were sent west. This happened also earlier but on a smaller scale. Beginning in october 1941 the russians started transfering siberian and transbaikal forces which continued all into november.

Since this is not a division sized game the game works perfectly historical.


The Siberian Transfer is not a myth. Those forces where much larger then a division. They where larger then a corps. There where 50,000 infantry combat veterans, 1000 T34 new tanks with there support troops and 1000 fresh air with men transferred from Siberia again with there support. It was specifically these forces winter trained that attacked at Moscow and broke the siege in 41. Do you believe that 1000 tanks is not equivelent to at least a corps of armor? Do you think 1000 aircraft is less then a corps of fighters or bombers? How about 50000 troops is that merly a division? This was a deciding factor at Moscow according to Zurkof and these and more forces where used to defend throughout 42.

No these men and equipment where not myths but real men who fought in some of the most horrendous battles of the war.




_____________________________

Jim

Cant we just get along.
Hell no I want to kill something!

1st Cav Div 66-69 5th Special Forces 70-73

(in reply to Sweeper)
Post #: 16
RE: Siberian Reinforcements - 7/1/2007 8:21:44 PM   
IrishGuards


Posts: 542
Joined: 12/7/2006
Status: offline 		Probably best If I don't say anything at all ...
IDG

(in reply to targul)
Post #: 17
RE: Siberian Reinforcements - 7/1/2007 9:25:56 PM   
Ancient One

 

Posts: 178
Joined: 7/1/2000
From: Winnipeg, Manitoba, Canada
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: targul
So do you somehow believe the Soviets and African forces should be shorted because it is too easy to give reinforcements. As for the Polish, New Zealand, Aussies, South African, and Indians which where the primary forces of Africa from 40 to 42 you believe they should not arrive?

This should be, and already is accounted for with the production that the British get.

quote:

Remember they already dont have the air they had there you cant expect them to hold verses potentially the entire Axis army without even having what they had in the war.

The Italians don't get the air they had there either.

quote:

Soviet Union Siberian Transfer was critical. Not sure why someone would deny the equivelent of 2 corps of armor and 4 of infantry with a hoard of artillery. These forces where the forces used in 42 to defend the Soviet Union.

I think the point is not that they didn't exist, but rather that their arrival was much more gradual than is widely believed, and can be woven into the existing production system.

quote:

You cant have balance if you do not provide historical forces. You cant hold Russia without what they had in the real war they barely survived now you want them to do it with significant less and it wont happen verses a comptetent player.

I don't think Russia is as weak in the game as you do. For one thing I've noticed that the Axis advance is slower than in real history.

(in reply to targul)
Post #: 18
RE: Siberian Reinforcements - 7/1/2007 9:53:06 PM   
targul


Posts: 449
Joined: 8/25/2004
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: Zagys

quote:

ORIGINAL: targul
So do you somehow believe the Soviets and African forces should be shorted because it is too easy to give reinforcements. As for the Polish, New Zealand, Aussies, South African, and Indians which where the primary forces of Africa from 40 to 42 you believe they should not arrive?


This should be, and already is accounted for with the production that the British get.

If it is then why are there no increases as each of the divisons arrived. Do you think those units where sent to England and then redeployed to Africa. No they were reinforcements from the varying countries and should not be subject to axis uboats trying to deploy them where they historically where.

quote:

Remember they already dont have the air they had there you cant expect them to hold verses potentially the entire Axis army without even having what they had in the war.


The Italians don't get the air they had there either. This maybe true since they should definitely have a tactical bomber squadron so they should give them one at start.

quote:

Soviet Union Siberian Transfer was critical. Not sure why someone would deny the equivelent of 2 corps of armor and 4 of infantry with a hoard of artillery. These forces where the forces used in 42 to defend the Soviet Union.


I think the point is not that they didn't exist, but rather that their arrival was much more gradual than is widely believed, and can be woven into the existing production system.

I didnt say they all had to arrive at once but they should arrive. And no the present system does not give them points for those armies in Siberia you only get the points from the cities on the map. So if we get the points which would still be wrong where do they come from. Dont tell me by convoy because that is subject to interdiction which the Siberian transfer was not.

quote:

You cant have balance if you do not provide historical forces. You cant hold Russia without what they had in the real war they barely survived now you want them to do it with significant less and it wont happen verses a comptetent player.

I don't think Russia is as weak in the game as you do. For one thing I've noticed that the Axis advance is slower than in real history.


I dont know who you play but I am playing 6 games at a time and the advance is very historical in all of them. The problem appears in 42 not 41. Uhm, might be the result of a lack of 1000 tanks 1000 air and all the infantry and artillery from Sibera.

If you feel the Allies already have all they need and it will play out historically. I invite you to play me. I will play the Axis a force I do not normally play and show you the weaknesses. If you win I will agree with you. If you lose then you need to agree with me. Sounds fair to me.


_____________________________

Jim

Cant we just get along.
Hell no I want to kill something!

1st Cav Div 66-69 5th Special Forces 70-73

(in reply to Ancient One)
Post #: 19
RE: Siberian Reinforcements - 7/2/2007 12:59:27 AM   
Warfare1


Posts: 658
Joined: 10/20/2004
Status: offline 		Hi guys:)

A couple of points:

1) The good news is that the weather effects on the Axis in the USSR can be modded very easily.

2) According to Alan Clark, the noted historian, in his classic book, Barbarossa (1995), he states on page 170:

"The transfer of troops from the Far East had begun in earnest in the first days of November, and by the time that the German offensive got under way again Zhukov had more than doubled his strength....

"The total brought from the Far East in the winter of 1941 included seventeen hundred tanks and fifteen hundred aircraft, which was made up" of 17 infantry/cavalry divisions and 8 tank brigades.

The Germans were stopped cold in early December just 30 km from Moscow, and then were driven back a further 200 km. Had the Germans not heeded Hitler's order to stand and fight, the retreat most likely would have turned into a rout.

< Message edited by Warfare1 -- 7/2/2007 1:04:08 AM >

(in reply to targul)
Post #: 20
RE: Siberian Reinforcements - 7/2/2007 5:47:55 AM   
IrishGuards


Posts: 542
Joined: 12/7/2006
Status: offline 		Well yes I must say my advances in Russia have been a little slower than normal ... Against a HP ..
I keep getting held up moving my maximum distance by those Russian guys I am sending to the Allmighty ...

4 turns into Russia .. 2.25 Mil dead 2600 Tanks destroyed .. To say nothing of the fact of the decimated units Russia has limping to the rear ...
The only lines I see are the ones on the map ..

Captured .. Odessa .. Brest .. Kiev .. Minsk .. Riga .. Den and some Ore
3 more turns I will be in Rostov ...
The damage I have taken has been very minor ... easy to repair as well as build more pointy units ...
IDG


(in reply to Warfare1)
Post #: 21
RE: Siberian Reinforcements - 7/2/2007 5:58:07 AM   
SMK-at-work

 

Posts: 3396
Joined: 8/28/2000
From: New Zealand
Status: offline 		Yeah but the "Siberians" did not arrive en masse, or even all on the Moscow Front, and nore were most of htem from "Siberia.  Zhukov himself writes in his memoirs that the number of troops transfered from the East was unimportant (17 rifle/Cavalry divisions??  well Cav divisions are small anyway, and the SU had 200 or so divisions at the time.....8 Tank brigades?  About the output of 2-3 weeks, only current output was modern types, any transfered from "Siberia" were already obsolete!) and most of hte troops used in hte Moscow counterattacked were carefully husbanded reserves of new units and production made up over Winter.

What stopped the Germans was supply - in December 1941 they still had more men in Army Group Centre than the Sov's had opposite them by a half-million or so.....but they had no supplies.

(in reply to IrishGuards)
Post #: 22
RE: Siberian Reinforcements - 7/2/2007 7:17:09 AM   
targul


Posts: 449
Joined: 8/25/2004
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: Sweeper

Mr Targul. Read my message again.

You are speaking about numbers that did not arrive as you want them too. If Russia can't be held well thats another issue that needs to be fixed.

But wanting a hord arrive with juicy stuff is simply wrong. Do you want the designers to get them in division by the division!!!!


No where have I said anything about how they should arrive. I just said they need to arrive. I do not know of any game that gives them all to you at once. But I also have not played any game where they were simply not provided at all until this one.

_____________________________

Jim

Cant we just get along.
Hell no I want to kill something!

1st Cav Div 66-69 5th Special Forces 70-73

(in reply to Sweeper)
Post #: 23
RE: Siberian Reinforcements - 7/2/2007 7:30:21 AM   
Phatguy

 

Posts: 1348
Joined: 3/1/2006
From: Buffalo,ny
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: targul


quote:

ORIGINAL: apathetic lurker

I dont think having units just show up since it happened in reality is the answer. Then you have to start doing that for all participants.When do you stop with these one off reinforcement surges? If the devs kow-tow to the "Siberia" crowd, I know full well and good I'm getting on my rickety soapbox and screaming for Anders Polish Corps to show up for the British as a reinforcement. And so on.

Maybe a one time point dump between nov and jan of the 1st winter might be an answer. I just don't know.



So do you somehow believe the Soviets and African forces should be shorted because it is too easy to give reinforcements. As for the Polish, New Zealand, Aussies, South African, and Indians which where the primary forces of Africa from 40 to 42 you believe they should not arrive? As I said on this issue I do not mind if they send a single corps or infantry to account for these forces but I dont think the Allies should be forced to defend Eygpt short most of its army with absolutely no control of supply which allows unlimited Axis forces to oppose them. Remember they already dont have the air they had there you cant expect them to hold verses potentially the entire Axis army without even having what they had in the war.

Soviet Union Siberian Transfer was critical. Not sure why someone would deny the equivelent of 2 corps of armor and 4 of infantry with a hoard of artillery. These forces where the forces used in 42 to defend the Soviet Union.

I recommend you do get on you soapbox and demand the forces not be eliminated from there historical placement. I would fight just as hard for the Axis if they where missing armies.

You cant have balance if you do not provide historical forces. You cant hold Russia without what they had in the real war they barely survived now you want them to do it with significant less and it wont happen verses a comptetent player.

AI is not even near as important as correctly balancing the game so it is fun and playable for both sides. Human vs Human play will be impossible without this correction.




No not at all. I think if the programmers add one type, be it Siberian reinforcements or whatever, the others should not be shortchanged. Personally I think the Siberians should be in there but maybe not as a set of troops(ie X corps of inf and Y corps of Armor, with experience stars!) I'm looking at something more like a large random supply dump between Oct-Jan. Gives a bit of randomness to the whole thing. let me choose what I build. After all, If I want history to repeat itself I'll just read a book.


< Message edited by apathetic lurker -- 7/2/2007 7:34:36 AM >

(in reply to targul)
Post #: 24
RE: Siberian Reinforcements - 7/2/2007 7:44:34 AM   
targul


Posts: 449
Joined: 8/25/2004
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: apathetic lurker

quote:

ORIGINAL: targul


quote:

ORIGINAL: apathetic lurker

I dont think having units just show up since it happened in reality is the answer. Then you have to start doing that for all participants.When do you stop with these one off reinforcement surges? If the devs kow-tow to the "Siberia" crowd, I know full well and good I'm getting on my rickety soapbox and screaming for Anders Polish Corps to show up for the British as a reinforcement. And so on.

Maybe a one time point dump between nov and jan of the 1st winter might be an answer. I just don't know.



So do you somehow believe the Soviets and African forces should be shorted because it is too easy to give reinforcements. As for the Polish, New Zealand, Aussies, South African, and Indians which where the primary forces of Africa from 40 to 42 you believe they should not arrive? As I said on this issue I do not mind if they send a single corps or infantry to account for these forces but I dont think the Allies should be forced to defend Eygpt short most of its army with absolutely no control of supply which allows unlimited Axis forces to oppose them. Remember they already dont have the air they had there you cant expect them to hold verses potentially the entire Axis army without even having what they had in the war.

Soviet Union Siberian Transfer was critical. Not sure why someone would deny the equivelent of 2 corps of armor and 4 of infantry with a hoard of artillery. These forces where the forces used in 42 to defend the Soviet Union.

I recommend you do get on you soapbox and demand the forces not be eliminated from there historical placement. I would fight just as hard for the Axis if they where missing armies.

You cant have balance if you do not provide historical forces. You cant hold Russia without what they had in the real war they barely survived now you want them to do it with significant less and it wont happen verses a comptetent player.

AI is not even near as important as correctly balancing the game so it is fun and playable for both sides. Human vs Human play will be impossible without this correction.




No not at all. I think if the programmers add one type, be it Siberian reinforcements or whatever, the others should not be shortchanged. Personally I think the Siberians should be in there but maybe not as a set of troops(ie X corps of inf and Y corps of Armor, with experience stars!) I'm looking at something more like a large random supply dump between Oct-Jan. Gives a bit of randomness to the whole thing. let me choose what I build. After all, If I want history to repeat itself I'll just read a book.



That would certainly satisfy me. I just want the game to have a historic bases. I dont mind some shifting ideas of how to do that.

If fact since no one else does it that way I would really like to try that.


_____________________________

Jim

Cant we just get along.
Hell no I want to kill something!

1st Cav Div 66-69 5th Special Forces 70-73

(in reply to Phatguy)
Post #: 25
RE: Siberian Reinforcements - 7/2/2007 2:53:35 PM   
Hard Sarge


Posts: 22741
Joined: 10/1/2000
From: garfield hts ohio usa
Status: offline 		I think there may be a point of view issue here

what about the manpower numbers the USSR gets ? or the production numbers ?

are not these to show the replacements they should get, and allow you to build the replacements when and where you should be getting them ?, instead of trucking or railing them in ??

when I played as the Allies, I never felt like I was being shortchanged as the Russian

you get a pretty good Production base, and massive manpower numbers, and each time one of the Convoys pulls into port, it is time to party

I think the real hassle may be the Russian is not able to set his defence line until the war starts, and then his main line is already broken, if the player then tries to hold or plug the line, he is just tossing away troops for nothing and he is never able to build up a 2nd or 3rd line, and then it looks like he didn't get the troops he needed

besides, the human Allies player job is to slow down the GE long enough, that they can't begin the attack in the East on time (which of course, maybe easier said then done)




_____________________________


(in reply to targul)
Post #: 26
RE: Siberian Reinforcements - 7/2/2007 7:35:46 PM   
targul


Posts: 449
Joined: 8/25/2004
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: Hard Sarge

I think there may be a point of view issue here

what about the manpower numbers the USSR gets ? or the production numbers ?

are not these to show the replacements they should get, and allow you to build the replacements when and where you should be getting them ?, instead of trucking or railing them in ??

when I played as the Allies, I never felt like I was being shortchanged as the Russian

you get a pretty good Production base, and massive manpower numbers, and each time one of the Convoys pulls into port, it is time to party

I think the real hassle may be the Russian is not able to set his defence line until the war starts, and then his main line is already broken, if the player then tries to hold or plug the line, he is just tossing away troops for nothing and he is never able to build up a 2nd or 3rd line, and then it looks like he didn't get the troops he needed

besides, the human Allies player job is to slow down the GE long enough, that they can't begin the attack in the East on time (which of course, maybe easier said then done)





Setup is a hassle but no the real problem is the lack of replacements in the Winter of 41/42 that actually arrived are simply not in the game. If they were in some form added to your forces during that period it would give that needed push to keep the Soviets from being destroyed.

Without those fresh troops the army is still using troops they started with at war start. There is very little opertunity to build new units as the German is pounding you everywhere and to put up even a meager defense you must restore those front line units or they will disappear.

Many say just run the Russians did. Well running works a little but panzers are fast and foot soldiers not so those panzer will catch you and destroy you in a single hit especially if you are running since you are not entrenched.

Those troops from Siberia give the Axis that little umph needed to get through the toughest period of the war and aids in then establishing a line to defend.


_____________________________

Jim

Cant we just get along.
Hell no I want to kill something!

1st Cav Div 66-69 5th Special Forces 70-73

(in reply to Hard Sarge)
Post #: 27
RE: Siberian Reinforcements - 7/2/2007 8:58:29 PM   
Sweeper

 

Posts: 6
Joined: 1/10/2002
From: Stockholm, Sweden
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: targul


That would certainly satisfy me. I just want the game to have a historic bases. I dont mind some shifting ideas of how to do that.

If fact since no one else does it that way I would really like to try that.




Well the problem is Targul, that your opinion lack all sort of historical base.

(in reply to targul)
Post #: 28
RE: Siberian Reinforcements - 7/2/2007 9:19:59 PM   
targul


Posts: 449
Joined: 8/25/2004
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: Sweeper


quote:

ORIGINAL: targul


That would certainly satisfy me. I just want the game to have a historic bases. I dont mind some shifting ideas of how to do that.

If fact since no one else does it that way I would really like to try that.




Well the problem is Targul, that your opinion lack all sort of historical base.




I agree with you but your complaint stemmed from thinking that the Siberian reinforcement was a myth.

It was not a myth and those troop are sincerly needed but since this is a game if they wish to mod in those replacements in another manner I dont care as long as they show up. Variances in timing and optional things happening are fun. I would not even mind if sometimes they didnt arrive as long as a message came that an attack by the Japanese is still expected. Options are okay long as they are possibilities but to simply ignore things because someone thinks they are a myth is just silly.

Yes we did land on the Moon. Yes there have been space flights. Yes there was actually a holocast. Yes the world really is round not square. No these are not myths either.


_____________________________

Jim

Cant we just get along.
Hell no I want to kill something!

1st Cav Div 66-69 5th Special Forces 70-73

(in reply to Sweeper)
Post #: 29
RE: Siberian Reinforcements - 7/2/2007 10:23:31 PM   
Hard Sarge


Posts: 22741
Joined: 10/1/2000
From: garfield hts ohio usa
Status: offline 		way can't you just build the replacements like it is planned ? why do they need to give them to you ?

why don't we then give the GE all the SS Armor Divs they should get later on in the war, they are going to need them too, while we at it, what about the increase in the LW, they need that too




_____________________________


(in reply to targul)
Post #: 30
Page:   [1] 2 3   next >   >>
All Forums >> [Current Games From Matrix.] >> [World War II] >> Commander - Europe at War Gold >> Siberian Reinforcements Page: [1] 2 3   next >   >>
Jump to:





New Messages No New Messages
Hot Topic w/ New Messages Hot Topic w/o New Messages
Locked w/ New Messages Locked w/o New Messages
 Post New Thread
 Reply to Message
 Post New Poll
 Submit Vote
 Delete My Own Post
 Delete My Own Thread
 Rate Posts


Forum Software © ASPPlayground.NET Advanced Edition 2.4.5 ANSI

0.797