Altaris
Posts: 216
Joined: 8/14/2009
Status: offline
|
<Rant>So in the third turn of my first winter in a PBEM, and watching as what started as a fairly decent fighting force completely melt within 3 turns, along the entire front, seemingly irregardless of whether the combat units fight or not. They all have fallen at least 40% of TOE in 3 turns, and honestly, it's not much different between units that have been in combat and those that haven't. It's really rather absurd, and having no way of effectively controlling losses is close to making me want to put this game away for a loooong time until some serious changes are made.</Rant>
But beyond that, probably the biggest beef I have is the ridiculously low CVs the Germans are forced to deal with. This takes any flexibility out of defense or offense, and makes the whole winter a matter of just backing up in increments to avoid encirclement. To me, this is the real problem. The attrition, while too high IMO, isn't really the problem. It's that I can fully stack a lvl 2 light wood hex with 3 infantry divisions, and still get wiped if it's in deliberate attack range of the Soviets. That shouldn't happen, IMO. If I'm willing to invest in defending a hex (which will naturally put other parts of the front at risk), I should have a reasonable chance of holding it, at least for a turn or two.
In my mind, it would make more sense, and be more accurate, if the CVs weren't modified. Instead, certain ground elements could have a chance not to fire, thus seriously reducing the ability of that ground element to hurt the Soviets during the firing phase. With enough of these failures, it should gradually give the Soviets a realistic edge in dealing damage and casualties (historical), but shouldn't force an automatic retreat/route everywhere the Soviets attack at a whim along the whole front (ahistorical). This makes a lot more sense to me than the heavy-handed, deus ex machina method of raping the German's CV values.
I'd say attrition losses should be largely tied to combat as well. Some attrition (say, 2-5% of TOE per week) should be automatic due to lack of winter gear. But the rest of the attrition should be tied to how many battles the unit is in. Maybe have the unit suffer an additional 2-5% TOE loss to attrition at the beginning or end of each battle it is in. In that way, units at the front that are forced into fights would really take a beating, but it wouldn't hit the entire front like a sledgehammer.
Lastly, I think deliberate attacks in general should be harder to pull off when attacking from multiple hexes and/or commands. I like to think of it in terms of WitP air battles. Would be nice if deliberate attacks required leadership rolls during individual combat rounds to pull in parts of the attacking forces. This would help replicate the Red Army's infamously bad coordination well throughout 1941 and 1942. As it stands now, the Reds have absolutely no problem launching a 100K+ man attack across a 30+ mile front, something it rarely pulled off successfully in the first year of the war (and certainly would've been difficult to do in the winter of 1941). But that's probably too major a change to be considered.
|
Printable Version
Some thoughts about winter and combat - 
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