Matrix Games Forums

 Forums  Register  Login  Photo Gallery  Member List  Search  Calendars  FAQ 

My Profile  Inbox  Address Book  My Subscription  My Forums  Log Out

RE: what is the opinion on this 1 to 1 retreat result for the Russian's

 
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 >> RE: what is the opinion on this 1 to 1 retreat result for the Russian's Page: <<   < prev  1 2 3 [4] 5   next >   >>
Login
Message << Older Topic   Newer Topic >>
RE: what is the opinion on this 1 to 1 retreat result f... - 6/29/2011 4:05:38 AM   
cookie monster


Posts: 1693
Joined: 5/22/2005
From: Birmingham,England
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: Oleg Mastruko


quote:

ORIGINAL: Ketza
It makes more sense that the Soviets from 1942 on just need to make proper attacks and take thier licks when they do not.


This was a "proper attack" mate, by any measure known to man! Look at the numbers outside the game, and forget the damn 2:1 odds presented by the software!

Are you saying 94k men, 1350 tubes, 120 aircraft and some tanks, wasn't a "proper attack" vs half the number of men, three times less arty tubes, no forts and NO aircraft??

It was a proper attack, just try to ignore the way game used to reach the 2:1 odds presented to you. Turn the report level to 0 if that would help




< Message edited by cookie monster -- 6/29/2011 4:06:42 AM >

(in reply to Oleg Mastruko)
Post #: 91
RE: what is the opinion on this 1 to 1 retreat result f... - 6/29/2011 4:07:29 AM   
KamilS

 

Posts: 1827
Joined: 2/5/2011
Status: offline
quote:

Oleg Mastruko

It appears to me that playing with Report level set to 0 would solve most of the problems players have with this game. No overanalysing the combat reports and looking for "perks" that helped the enemy, just accepting the final battle results as they come...


I think it is great idea. We should not see combat reports. But it is not enough. To make this game truly great we should not see units too.

I have got even better idea. We should not see that game at all.


I think, that we will know if +1 attack bonus for Soviets is good idea or not in 2015 (hopefully), when people will start finishing their campaigns and final patch 1.49 will be released.

< Message edited by Kamil -- 6/29/2011 4:18:33 AM >

(in reply to Oleg Mastruko)
Post #: 92
RE: what is the opinion on this 1 to 1 retreat result f... - 6/29/2011 4:19:50 AM   
Ketza


Posts: 2227
Joined: 1/14/2007
From: Columbia, Maryland
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: Oleg Mastruko


quote:

ORIGINAL: Ketza
It makes more sense that the Soviets from 1942 on just need to make proper attacks and take thier licks when they do not.


This was a "proper attack" mate, by any measure known to man! Look at the numbers outside the game, and forget the damn 2:1 odds presented by the software!

Are you saying 94k men, 1350 tubes, 120 aircraft and some tanks, wasn't a "proper attack" vs half the number of men, three times less arty tubes, no forts and NO aircraft??

It was a proper attack, just try to ignore the way game used to reach the 2:1 odds presented to you. Turn the report level to 0 if that would help


I am unconvinced it was a proper attack.

A 2-1 advantage of infantry attacking armor in the open would be a slaughter if you look at this outside the game. Even with air support and a 3-1 artillery advantage.

Try a scenario of that type of Cross of Iron and tell me how that works out for ya.

Just saying.

(in reply to Oleg Mastruko)
Post #: 93
RE: what is the opinion on this 1 to 1 retreat result f... - 6/29/2011 4:28:28 AM   
gradenko2k

 

Posts: 935
Joined: 12/27/2010
Status: offline
quote:

Try a scenario of that type of Cross of Iron and tell me how that works out for ya.

I'm pretty sure Close Combat Cross of Iron doesn't represent battles of that scale. You can examine the results of a couple dozen rifle squads against a couple of tanks, but nothing that would represent 90 thousand men at one time.

Perhaps TOAW or JTCS?

(in reply to Ketza)
Post #: 94
RE: what is the opinion on this 1 to 1 retreat result f... - 6/29/2011 4:29:50 AM   
Wild


Posts: 364
Joined: 12/10/2007
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: Oleg Mastruko


quote:

ORIGINAL: Ketza
It makes more sense that the Soviets from 1942 on just need to make proper attacks and take thier licks when they do not.


This was a "proper attack" mate, by any measure known to man! Look at the numbers outside the game, and forget the damn 2:1 odds presented by the software!

Are you saying 94k men, 1350 tubes, 120 aircraft and some tanks, wasn't a "proper attack" vs half the number of men, three times less arty tubes, no forts and NO aircraft??

It was a proper attack, just try to ignore the way game used to reach the 2:1 odds presented to you. Turn the report level to 0 if that would help



The problem is i love seeing all of the combat reports and statistics. I'm a history nut.
For my sanity i just hope they find an acceptable way to get rid of this rule without nerfing the Soviets. Maybe that way we could all be happy.

(in reply to Oleg Mastruko)
Post #: 95
RE: what is the opinion on this 1 to 1 retreat result f... - 6/29/2011 4:35:50 AM   
jomni


Posts: 2827
Joined: 11/19/2007
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: Ketza
I am unconvinced it was a proper attack.

A 2-1 advantage of infantry attacking armor in the open would be a slaughter if you look at this outside the game. Even with air support and a 3-1 artillery advantage.

Try a scenario of that type of Cross of Iron and tell me how that works out for ya.

Just saying.


So you think the Soviets won't use smoke to conceal their advance?


_____________________________

My Blog
Random Wargame Name Generator

(in reply to Ketza)
Post #: 96
RE: what is the opinion on this 1 to 1 retreat result f... - 6/29/2011 4:45:08 AM   
Mynok


Posts: 12108
Joined: 11/30/2002
Status: offline
1350 tubes. That was the killer IMO. When some of you guys play more in the later years you will understand how utterly devastating arty is for the Soviets. You'll get battles where they have 5k tubes. And lots of Germans will die.



_____________________________

"Measure civilization by the ability of citizens to mock government with impunity" -- Unknown

(in reply to jomni)
Post #: 97
RE: what is the opinion on this 1 to 1 retreat result f... - 6/29/2011 4:50:48 AM   
Ketza


Posts: 2227
Joined: 1/14/2007
From: Columbia, Maryland
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: Wild


quote:

ORIGINAL: Oleg Mastruko


quote:

ORIGINAL: Ketza
It makes more sense that the Soviets from 1942 on just need to make proper attacks and take thier licks when they do not.


This was a "proper attack" mate, by any measure known to man! Look at the numbers outside the game, and forget the damn 2:1 odds presented by the software!

Are you saying 94k men, 1350 tubes, 120 aircraft and some tanks, wasn't a "proper attack" vs half the number of men, three times less arty tubes, no forts and NO aircraft??

It was a proper attack, just try to ignore the way game used to reach the 2:1 odds presented to you. Turn the report level to 0 if that would help



The problem is i love seeing all of the combat reports and statistics. I'm a history nut.
For my sanity i just hope they find an acceptable way to get rid of this rule without nerfing the Soviets. Maybe that way we could all be happy.


My one and only point is the Soviets do not need this odds bump in 1942 and beyond. They already have an immense advantage.

And I say that not as an Axis or a Soviet fan but a fan of the game.

(in reply to Wild)
Post #: 98
RE: what is the opinion on this 1 to 1 retreat result f... - 6/29/2011 4:51:23 AM   
delatbabel


Posts: 1252
Joined: 7/30/2006
From: Sydney, Australia
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: Mynok

1350 tubes. That was the killer IMO. When some of you guys play more in the later years you will understand how utterly devastating arty is for the Soviets. You'll get battles where they have 5k tubes. And lots of Germans will die.



5k tubes. Amateurs. In my last 43 campaign I was routinely hitting with 10k tubes and 400 bombers in areas where I could concentrate a stack of arty divs. You don't have to worry too much about starting CVs when you hit with that number, because the German CVs and fort levels will spiral down to zero anyway.


_____________________________

--
Del

(in reply to Mynok)
Post #: 99
RE: what is the opinion on this 1 to 1 retreat result f... - 6/29/2011 4:57:04 AM   
Mynok


Posts: 12108
Joined: 11/30/2002
Status: offline
5k will do the trick. Oleg has done very well putting sufficient artillery behind his attacks. Less tubes per attack means more attacks and he's been very efficient at that.



_____________________________

"Measure civilization by the ability of citizens to mock government with impunity" -- Unknown

(in reply to delatbabel)
Post #: 100
RE: what is the opinion on this 1 to 1 retreat result f... - 6/29/2011 5:08:29 AM   
Ketza


Posts: 2227
Joined: 1/14/2007
From: Columbia, Maryland
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: delatbabel


quote:

ORIGINAL: Mynok

1350 tubes. That was the killer IMO. When some of you guys play more in the later years you will understand how utterly devastating arty is for the Soviets. You'll get battles where they have 5k tubes. And lots of Germans will die.



5k tubes. Amateurs. In my last 43 campaign I was routinely hitting with 10k tubes and 400 bombers in areas where I could concentrate a stack of arty divs. You don't have to worry too much about starting CVs when you hit with that number, because the German CVs and fort levels will spiral down to zero anyway.



Exactly.

(in reply to delatbabel)
Post #: 101
RE: what is the opinion on this 1 to 1 retreat result f... - 6/29/2011 5:17:36 AM   
Mynok


Posts: 12108
Joined: 11/30/2002
Status: offline
Exactly what should happen.


_____________________________

"Measure civilization by the ability of citizens to mock government with impunity" -- Unknown

(in reply to Ketza)
Post #: 102
RE: what is the opinion on this 1 to 1 retreat result f... - 6/29/2011 5:35:36 AM   
heliodorus04


Posts: 1647
Joined: 11/1/2008
From: Nashville TN
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: Oleg Mastruko

It appears to me that playing with Report level set to 0 would solve most of the problems players have with this game. No overanalysing the combat reports and looking for "perks" that helped the enemy, just accepting the final battle results as they come...

Joel, I hope you're reading this, never let the players know they have some "perk" applied against them, I do agree that it's psychologically bad thing to see, even though the results are OK otherwise.


Look, the fact that the +1 odds modifier exists is evidence that their magical and hidden calculations are not good enough to suit their own design purposes, so in effect they created a cheat. Hidden or not, people will find ways to complain. The air war mechanics are hidden: how many people are happy with it?

On to the subject at hand:
At initial glance, I think this attack by the Soviets deserved a chance to succeed, and as someone else said, probably around a 30% probability. If we could run a monte carlo simulation, perhaps we could see what the distribution curve is of wins-to-losses, and casualties with standard deviations.

Thinking about the idea that this is 1350 tubes, though, Oleg, MIGHT be misleading: How many of these artillery tubes are actually direct fire, short range weapons like 45mm AT & 76mm AT and Infantry guns? How many of them were 122mm & 152mm indirect tubes? How many 50mm and 82mm mortars? That creates a more discerning method for looking at the actual tubes. Unless the 122mm and 152mm tubes were far, far higher in quantity, the likelihood of the smaller 45mm, 50mm, and 76mm guns being effectively deployed in an attack would be somewhat low, I believe.

I'm left to trust that in this particular attack, there are vast quantities, say 800 or more, of the large-caliber indirect weapons. Those would indeed force 150 1942 German tanks to think twice about staying in the open.

Now, many of you have faith that the algorithm for the combat engine works realistically. I do not share that faith. If it worked realistically, a simplistic "+1 to Soviets" would not be necessary.

But my antagonistic criticisms of WitE's failures aside, I do think these results are an example of the game being okay. I suspect that 1 fort-level would have radically changed the result, and I am almost certain that a butt-load of passed Soviet leader checks went into this, and that is a rare day for the Red Army in 1942.

< Message edited by heliodorus04 -- 6/29/2011 5:37:06 AM >

_____________________________

Fall 2021-Playing: Stalingrad'42 (GMT); Advanced Squad Leader,
Reading: Masters of the Air (GREAT BOOK!)
Rulebooks: ASL (always ASL), Middle-Earth Strategy Battle Game
Painting: WHFB Lizardmen leaders

(in reply to Oleg Mastruko)
Post #: 103
RE: what is the opinion on this 1 to 1 retreat result f... - 6/29/2011 7:48:48 AM   
76mm


Posts: 4688
Joined: 5/2/2004
From: Washington, DC
Status: offline 		Whew, I'd missed this debate till now...

When I launched this attack I figured I had a decent chance of success because of my arty and aircraft advantage (actually I expected a lot more aircraft to participate--like a couple of hundred bombers--not sure why they didn't). My general approach for attacks is if I can get sort of close to 1:1 on initial CVs and have at least 1000 tubes and air support, I'll go for it. I don't recall what sort of arty particiipated, but I don't buy any AT or light arty units, so I suspect is was mostly 122mm and up.

People have not commented on the one aspect of this battle: While I was pleased with the retreat in this battle, his losses were rather low, so all this really battle really represents is his mobile defense ceding an essentially meaningless hex of empty space, at the cost of fairly heavy casualties to me. To me this seems rather realistic, and if he wants the hex back next turn I don't see any real difficulties for Ketza. While I admit that this result could, and probably should, have been different if Ketza could have ordered a "hold at all costs" type order, we cannot do so in this game and really in this instance I don't see why he would want to.

In my AAR and in some correspondence with Ketza I've bitched about how final CVs are calculated, or rather how I have absolutely no inkling of how they are calculated. I've stopped complaining at this point, because now I realize that CV inflation/deflation generally seems to favor the attacker, at least if they have an advantage in arty/aircraft.

< Message edited by 76mm -- 6/29/2011 7:49:45 AM >

(in reply to heliodorus04)
Post #: 104
RE: what is the opinion on this 1 to 1 retreat result f... - 6/29/2011 7:51:20 AM   
Chunnetter

 

Posts: 3
Joined: 6/29/2011
Status: offline 		I wouldn't mind seeing the 1-1 thing go away after 42.
Trust me...the Soviets don't need it after that.
Indeed I do not recall it ever being a factor in  the 43 campaign with Oleg I'm playing.


_____________________________

outlook 2010 Online
Microsoft outlook 2010
Buy Microsoft office 2010

(in reply to Ketza)
Post #: 105
RE: what is the opinion on this 1 to 1 retreat result f... - 6/29/2011 12:22:43 PM   
Oleg Mastruko


Posts: 4921
Joined: 10/21/2000
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: heliodorus04
Look, the fact that the +1 odds modifier exists is evidence that their magical and hidden calculations are not good enough to suit their own design purposes, so in effect they created a cheat.


You call it a cheat, I call it giving sides some "flavor" to differentiate them from each other as they were different historically (not too different in fact, but somewhat different).

If that's a "cheat", then increased Sov losses from German fire is a cheat too. There are probably other "cheats", some hidden from the player, some (foolishly) described in the manual.

I really do think it would be for the better if they never described those things so the people would analyze ONLY the end result, not the process. I am not saying the end results are always perfect, but in this case presented by Ketza they surely look fine to me.

quote:

The air war mechanics are hidden: how many people are happy with it?


It's OK to complain is the end results are wrong. It's not OK to complain if the end results are fine (as in latest Ketza example), you just don't like the way game reached those results.

(in reply to heliodorus04)
Post #: 106
RE: what is the opinion on this 1 to 1 retreat result f... - 6/29/2011 12:45:29 PM   
Peltonx


Posts: 7250
Joined: 4/9/2006
Status: offline 		Its called an exploit poeple, its what things like this have been called for hmm 20 yrs. Its not cheating. Its simply exploiting an area of a game that is poorly designed. Its no fault of the players if the devs have porrly designed an area of a game.

heliodorus04 hits the nail right on the head. The devs have designed an area of the game that is poorly designed and have taken the lazy way out and tried fixing it with a +1 for the Russians.


Most times someone finds the exploit and then word gets out and soon 90% of the players are using the exploit and game becomes basicly unplayable until the exploit is addressed by the developers.

This has been going on for yrs. I am sure some of you guys have played- AC/DT,Shadowbane,WoW, DaoC, ect ect

As these exploits become more public, like they have become the last few weeks the game starts to become less and less active as this one is becoming the last few weeks. Players start spending more and more time complaining then playing. At some point the player base starts leaving the game an never return.

Any hard work 2/3 is doing on War in The West will be a waste of time if some of these major exploits are not addressed withen a few weeks.

If you done any beta testing and then seen the game go public their is one good general rule:

What works in closed beta never works when a game goes public.

Changes are always required.

Like any war the best plans are always thrown out the window when the battle starts.

The devs have done a great job so far fixing exploits and poorly designed areas of the game.

I fully beleive these areas that seem weak will be addressed as soon as possible.

Pelton

< Message edited by Pelton -- 6/29/2011 1:04:35 PM >

(in reply to Oleg Mastruko)
Post #: 107
RE: what is the opinion on this 1 to 1 retreat result f... - 6/29/2011 1:40:56 PM   
Ketza


Posts: 2227
Joined: 1/14/2007
From: Columbia, Maryland
Status: offline 		Wow Pelton did you play on Asherons Call Darktide?

I played there 5 years characters were Aztek and the Imortal Captain Dasha.

http://pk.trophyhunteronline.com/player-details.php?name=Captain Dasha&server=Darktide


(in reply to Peltonx)
Post #: 108
RE: what is the opinion on this 1 to 1 retreat result f... - 6/29/2011 1:59:42 PM   
heliodorus04


Posts: 1647
Joined: 11/1/2008
From: Nashville TN
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: Oleg Mastruko


quote:

ORIGINAL: heliodorus04
Look, the fact that the +1 odds modifier exists is evidence that their magical and hidden calculations are not good enough to suit their own design purposes, so in effect they created a cheat.


You call it a cheat, I call it giving sides some "flavor" to differentiate them from each other as they were different historically (not too different in fact, but somewhat different).

If that's a "cheat", then increased Sov losses from German fire is a cheat too. There are probably other "cheats", some hidden from the player, some (foolishly) described in the manual.

Fair point.
The +1 odds shift only bothers me in the sense that it's an artifice when so many other things attempt to be realistic and deep. I simply wish it was gone after some time point in the game. At a certain point for the Soviet, good TOE types, elements in the pool, and experience/morale obviate the true need for it.

My standpoint on game vs. simulation is based on what Pelton said: In a human vs. human game, areas in the game that provide great incentive (Leningrad, which is not a bad example, and Soviet hasty withdrawls in 1941, also not a bad example) will be pursued every time. THe problem with WitE is there are only a couple incentives for Germany to do anything, making replayability very low, IMO.

Areas with great leverage, like the Air War situation we're seeing develop, and the +1 odds shift, will be leveraged to maximum advantage. The levers in the game favor the Soviet; aside from HQ Buildup, now sensibly nerfed, I can't think of any German levers. I'm not happy with how this +1 shift can be leveraged to push the German out of forts that he will desperately need in 1943-1945.



_____________________________

Fall 2021-Playing: Stalingrad'42 (GMT); Advanced Squad Leader,
Reading: Masters of the Air (GREAT BOOK!)
Rulebooks: ASL (always ASL), Middle-Earth Strategy Battle Game
Painting: WHFB Lizardmen leaders

(in reply to Oleg Mastruko)
Post #: 109
RE: what is the opinion on this 1 to 1 retreat result f... - 6/29/2011 2:04:19 PM   
Klydon


Posts: 2251
Joined: 11/28/2010
Status: offline 		Obviously I have been watching this thread. I have had mixed emotions on it and a growing indifference to the game and its issues.

One comment I saw by Ketza was those were heavy losses for the Russians. Maybe, but as a Russian I would take those results all day long. Look at your loss ratios compared to what the Germans lost, especially considering it was against panzer forces. You lost less than 2-1 on manpower and artillery and forced nearly a 1-1 loss on tanks. In this case, both sides lost about 6.7% of their manpower in the battle.

This is the same type of stuff I saw when I was messing around later in the war with the Russians. You line up an attack with about 120K attackers against a 12K division and while the Russians take far more casualties (say 5k vs 2.5k), the German unit took close to 20% casualties to the unit. I am not saying it is right or wrong, but it doesn't take a rocket scientist to figure out what is going to happen in the long run.

Basicallly, one of the issues I see is there is too much emphasis on "winning" the battle because of the resulting retreat losses are typically nasty. I would like to see some sort of check to see if a unit can "retreat in good order" and take fewer losses. Essentially, there should be 4 levels of retreat with increasing losses as you go along: retreat in good order, hasty retreat, rout, shatter.


(in reply to Oleg Mastruko)
Post #: 110
RE: what is the opinion on this 1 to 1 retreat result f... - 6/29/2011 2:13:22 PM   
heliodorus04


Posts: 1647
Joined: 11/1/2008
From: Nashville TN
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: Klydon

Obviously I have been watching this thread. I have had mixed emotions on it and a growing indifference to the game and its issues.

One comment I saw by Ketza was those were heavy losses for the Russians. Maybe, but as a Russian I would take those results all day long. Look at your loss ratios compared to what the Germans lost, especially considering it was against panzer forces. You lost less than 2-1 on manpower and artillery and forced nearly a 1-1 loss on tanks. In this case, both sides lost about 6.7% of their manpower in the battle.

This is the same type of stuff I saw when I was messing around later in the war with the Russians. You line up an attack with about 120K attackers against a 12K division and while the Russians take far more casualties (say 5k vs 2.5k), the German unit took close to 20% casualties to the unit. I am not saying it is right or wrong, but it doesn't take a rocket scientist to figure out what is going to happen in the long run.

Basicallly, one of the issues I see is there is too much emphasis on "winning" the battle because of the resulting retreat losses are typically nasty. I would like to see some sort of check to see if a unit can "retreat in good order" and take fewer losses. Essentially, there should be 4 levels of retreat with increasing losses as you go along: retreat in good order, hasty retreat, rout, shatter.



Excellent points.

I think the game features a huge problem where it's not possible to cause Soviets casualties at rates that are comparable to history, while it IS possible to cause historic casualties to the German.

_____________________________

Fall 2021-Playing: Stalingrad'42 (GMT); Advanced Squad Leader,
Reading: Masters of the Air (GREAT BOOK!)
Rulebooks: ASL (always ASL), Middle-Earth Strategy Battle Game
Painting: WHFB Lizardmen leaders

(in reply to Klydon)
Post #: 111
RE: what is the opinion on this 1 to 1 retreat result f... - 6/29/2011 2:50:42 PM   
76mm


Posts: 4688
Joined: 5/2/2004
From: Washington, DC
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: Pelton

Its called an exploit poeple, its what things like this have been called for hmm 20 yrs. Its not cheating. Its simply exploiting an area of a game that is poorly designed. Its no fault of the players if the devs have porrly designed an area of a game.


Eh? Using the +! modifier is hardly an exploit, as it was deliberately devised by the devs.

An exploit is a loophole or unintended flaw in the design of a game that allows for unforeseen consequences. You can agree with the +1 modifier or not, but it is very clear that it's inclusion was a deliberate decision by the devs, not some kind of oversight. Moreover, Sov players simply cannot play without utliziting this "exploit" to some degree, since before launching an attack they never know if the final odds will be 1:2, 1:1, 2:1, etc.

< Message edited by 76mm -- 6/29/2011 2:52:17 PM >

(in reply to Peltonx)
Post #: 112
RE: what is the opinion on this 1 to 1 retreat result f... - 6/29/2011 3:10:34 PM   
timmyab

 

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

ORIGINAL: Klydon
Basicallly, one of the issues I see is there is too much emphasis on "winning" the battle because of the resulting retreat losses are typically nasty. I would like to see some sort of check to see if a unit can "retreat in good order" and take fewer losses. Essentially, there should be 4 levels of retreat with increasing losses as you go along: retreat in good order, hasty retreat, rout, shatter.

Yes, this is a very good point.In my opinion, the likelyhood of a retreat and also the losses suffered by retreating units should depend on a combination of factors especially leader morale/initiative and unit morale/experience.

(in reply to Klydon)
Post #: 113
RE: what is the opinion on this 1 to 1 retreat result f... - 6/29/2011 3:17:09 PM   
hfarrish

 

Posts: 734
Joined: 1/3/2011
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: timmyab


Yes, this is a very good point.In my opinion, the likelyhood of a retreat and also the losses suffered by retreating units should depend on a combination of factors especially leader morale/initiative and unit morale/experience.



Add to that (particularly relevant in this case) mobility, if it's not already factored in. I would agree that this is not an "exploit," since, as a largely Sov player like 76 I have no clue what my odds are going to look like so I can hardly position my forces to try and get the most 1:1 results possible.

Right now the difficulty in 42 and beyond is that results are pretty binary...either the Soviet attack fails, and has some absurd loss ratio (like 100:1) or it succeeds, and it is always a 1:1 or 1:2 loss ratio which over time will annihilate the German army a lot quicker than it actually went down. There should be more high casualty successful attacks and a greater range of outcomes on failed attacks as well (IMO).

(in reply to timmyab)
Post #: 114
RE: what is the opinion on this 1 to 1 retreat result f... - 6/29/2011 3:34:40 PM   
76mm


Posts: 4688
Joined: 5/2/2004
From: Washington, DC
Status: offline
quote:

Right now the difficulty in 42 and beyond is that results are pretty binary...either the Soviet attack fails, and has some absurd loss ratio (like 100:1) or it succeeds, and it is always a 1:1 or 1:2 loss ratio which over time will annihilate the German army a lot quicker than it actually went down. There should be more high casualty successful attacks and a greater range of outcomes on failed attacks as well (IMO).


I've noticed this as well, losses resulting from combat seem too uniform. While I don't think I've seen 100:1 losses in a Sov defeat, it is pretty much always 8:1 to 10:1 when the Sovs lose, and somewhere between 1:1 and 2.5:1 if the Sovs win.

While I don't really have an opinion on the +1 modifier, I really don't like the fact that I have absolutely no understanding of how combat resolution occurs, with the single exeption that if I get 1:1, the Germans will retreat. Rather unsatisfying to play like this...

(in reply to hfarrish)
Post #: 115
RE: what is the opinion on this 1 to 1 retreat result f... - 6/29/2011 3:42:43 PM   
Peltonx


Posts: 7250
Joined: 4/9/2006
Status: offline 		Here is some data.

Hooopers been attacking lvl 4 to 2 forts which have 30 to 50 CVs and he has won 86.5%.
The losses the russian player takes should not be equal to the german losses when defending in lvl 2-4 forts. Thats a joke.
Attacks Retreats Held This is from last 5 turns
SHC 134 96 18 86.5% are wins 11-12/42

Look at the first battle as an example, a blob of 96k attack 12k, I have more art.

Attackers losses are 2% and defenders are almost 10%.

Can you honestly tell me thats historical and not just a joke?

All these losses are caused because the defender had to retreat. aka per the 1v1 = 2v1. I get the retreat thing they are pushing on us, but the losses are a JOKE. The losses should be 10% for both sides, which would be along historical lines of 1 dead German for 5 dead Russian and not 1 dead German for 1 dead Russian.

You can keep the 1v1 = 2v1, but do something about the losses. Thats just nothing going to fly with the general playing public.

2/3 is tring to tell everyone that the attacking Russians were taking 1/5 % of the losses the Germans were when attacking?

I am sorry, but we can all see the emperor has no clothes

Pelton





Attachment (1)

< Message edited by Pelton -- 6/29/2011 3:56:11 PM >

(in reply to 76mm)
Post #: 116
RE: what is the opinion on this 1 to 1 retreat result f... - 6/29/2011 3:56:36 PM   
Oleg Mastruko


Posts: 4921
Joined: 10/21/2000
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: Pelton

Here is some data.



The only thing I can conclude from your post is that the artillery was the deciding factor in all those battles, he concentrated 1000+ tubes for most battles, which is a lot for 42, and obtained significant arty superiority, obviously negating your fort defensive advantages.

Arty being the decisive factor is very realistic for WW2 east front.

Did all those battles end with 1:1 pushed to 2:1? If not how are they relevant for this thread?

quote:


Look at the first battle as an example, a blob of 96k attack 12k, I have more art.


???

Where is that battle? Are you sure you are reading the table correctly? There is not a single battle on your screenshot where Germans had more arty.

I see one battle where he attacked with 96k men, ALMOST 2000 ARTY and 109 AFV.

You had 12k men, 119 guns and 0 AFV.

His arty superiority in that battle was something to the tune of 15:1.

I cannot believe you have the nerve to complain about the result, really.

You Axis fanboys need to lay off the coffee.... If you can't accept that 96k men with 2000 tubes will annihilate 12k men with measly 120 guns, even if they sit in level 4 fort, you will probably never accept any result this game has to offer, short of Germans capturing Vladivostok in August 41......

(in reply to Peltonx)
Post #: 117
RE: what is the opinion on this 1 to 1 retreat result f... - 6/29/2011 4:09:47 PM   
Ketza


Posts: 2227
Joined: 1/14/2007
From: Columbia, Maryland
Status: offline 		Oleg you really detract from the discussion when you start tossing "Axis fanboy" around.

My input in this thread is based on trying to improve the game not attempting to "buff" or "nerf" one side or the other. I am sure others feel the same way.


(in reply to Oleg Mastruko)
Post #: 118
RE: what is the opinion on this 1 to 1 retreat result f... - 6/29/2011 4:14:51 PM   
Oleg Mastruko


Posts: 4921
Joined: 10/21/2000
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: Ketza

Oleg you really detract from the discussion when you start tossing "Axis fanboy" around.

My input in this thread is based on trying to improve the game not attempting to "buff" or "nerf" one side or the other. I am sure others feel the same way.




Pelton guy posted some COMPLETELY WRONG OR IRRELEVANT DATA, in fact he mis-read or misunderstood his own table!

He should apologize in fact.

But hey, I am the problem because I called him Axis fanboy? Tell me mate how do you call the guy who refuses to admit 96k men with 2000 guns should win over 12k men with 100 guns? Is he an Axis fanboy, or simply blind, or crazy?

In any case it's the people posting garbage like above who are "detracting the discussion" and waste our time, not me.


(in reply to Ketza)
Post #: 119
RE: what is the opinion on this 1 to 1 retreat result f... - 6/29/2011 4:29:14 PM   
Ketza


Posts: 2227
Joined: 1/14/2007
From: Columbia, Maryland
Status: offline 		I suppose I am still naive enough to believe that is is possible to have a discussion on the internet with different points of view and not call people names.

Thats just me.

(in reply to Oleg Mastruko)
Post #: 120
Page:   <<   < prev  1 2 3 [4] 5   next >   >>
All Forums >> [New Releases from Matrix Games] >> Gary Grigsby's War in the East Series >> RE: what is the opinion on this 1 to 1 retreat result for the Russian's Page: <<   < prev  1 2 3 [4] 5   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

4.438