Matrix Games Forums

 Forums  Register  Login  Photo Gallery  Member List  Search  Calendars  FAQ 

My Profile  Inbox  Address Book  My Subscription  My Forums  Log Out

A Different Strategy?

 
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 >> A Different Strategy? Page: [1] 2   next >   >>
Login
Message << Older Topic   Newer Topic >>
A Different Strategy? - 8/24/2011 6:15:24 AM   
usersatch

 

Posts: 400
Joined: 6/1/2005
Status: offline 		I am finishing up a book on the combat history of the 2nd SS Panzer. I get the (biased) impression that their defensive role was more devastating to the russians than their offensive role, especially in light of lousy russian corps leadership and the role of the SS, Wehrmacht, and AT guns around Moscow and Kharkov.

Has any Axis player tried a "defensive" Barbarossa, where the focus is on capitulation/destruction of soviet units in 1941 (instead of capturing land) and a strong defensive front in early 1942 (perhaps fortifying around Kiev/Smolensk) to bleed the russians dry in 1942/1943?

Is it even possible to bleed the russians "dry"?
Post #: 1
RE: A Different Strategy? - 8/24/2011 6:23:06 AM   
HCDawson

 

Posts: 8
Joined: 8/17/2011
Status: offline 		The 1:1+1 advantage of the Soviets really would limit a pure bleed white defense, even along the main river lines. Adjustments to how supplies are handled would also likely be required for a backhand blow style tactic to play out -- as it stands right now, any supply is basically full combat supply.

(in reply to usersatch)
Post #: 2
RE: A Different Strategy? - 8/24/2011 8:55:29 AM   
stone10


Posts: 238
Joined: 9/20/2008
Status: offline 		The russians get 150k manpowers each turn, so it is impossible to dry russians vs. human player.

(in reply to HCDawson)
Post #: 3
RE: A Different Strategy? - 8/24/2011 9:46:07 AM   
karonagames


Posts: 4712
Joined: 7/10/2006
From: The Duchy of Cornwall, nr England
Status: offline 		I think there is some merit in the advance as far as you can in 1941 and not making an all all out attack in 1942, but rather building up reserves of manpower and equipment that can absorb the Soviet steam roller in 1943/44/45.

The downside is that you will not be Applying "AP pressure" on the SU in 1942, forcing them to spend APs on replacing dead units, and allowing them to build their rifle corps/artillery/mechanised Juggernaut unmolested.

It is inevitable that attrition will get the axis to their shatter point (2.3m OOB/16k rifle squads)- if you can prevent this from happening until about February 1945 and your front is still holding at the original start line, then you may get a decent draw out of the game, which most axis players would consider a "win".

(in reply to stone10)
Post #: 4
RE: A Different Strategy? - 8/24/2011 2:54:16 PM   
herwin

 

Posts: 6059
Joined: 5/28/2004
From: Sunderland, UK
Status: offline 		By 1944, the Red Army was having manpower problems.

_____________________________

Harry Erwin
"For a number to make sense in the game, someone has to calibrate it and program code. There are too many significant numbers that behave non-linearly to expect that. It's just a game. Enjoy it." herwin@btinternet.com

(in reply to karonagames)
Post #: 5
RE: A Different Strategy? - 8/24/2011 3:49:06 PM   
Peltonx


Posts: 7250
Joined: 4/9/2006
Status: offline 		I have tried the defensive "tragedy" an it is a disaster, because of the unhistorical 1v1=2v1 rule. I have finished 9 campiagns an have 4 on going.

As the German player you must destory at least 100 armerment pts and 3 million men by Jan 1942 and keep your loses below 1.5 million by March 1942.

Then during the summer of 42 you must destory "capture" at least 100 units.

This will give you the upper hand and the Red army can't recover. Right now their is really zero middle ground, by July 42 the out come is disided. If the German player is unable to pocket allot of Russian units and get better then 2.6 to 1 ratio then its over. Between turn 70 and 90 the Russian player can easly grind the German army down.

As the German player you must get atleast a 2.6 to 1 ratio in manpower to control the Red Machine from grinding you down. This can only be done if you are caturing evemy units.

As of right now unless you have an amazing 41 summer the Red player should be in Berlin by early 44.

The game is wieghted heavly in the Russian favor and the VP conditions are a joke to say the least. As long as the Russian player simply trains out Arm PTS and runs from the Germans during 41 they win. The German player can capture Leningrad/Moscow/Tula to Rostov and still get steam rolled in early 44. Check out the Q-ball vs Tarhunnas AAR as a good example.

If I was you I would not waste any time starting a game until after the 1.05 patch.

Pelton



< Message edited by Pelton -- 8/24/2011 3:56:43 PM >

(in reply to usersatch)
Post #: 6
RE: A Different Strategy? - 8/24/2011 3:58:23 PM   
Jakerson

 

Posts: 565
Joined: 8/15/2006
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: herwin

By 1944, the Red Army was having manpower problems.


This is already simulated in game start years building up of Red army is limited by armament points but as years go on Soviet side gets less menpower eatch year. In the end there will be arms to wield all menpower even for Soviets.

Soviet allways get more men than Germany but that is historical.

If German can hang on decently sized army until 45 Soviet have a lot of problems from logistics as lend lease vehicles drop from 6000 per turn to 1000 per turn this is large drop as Soviet own production is only about 1500 vehicles per turn.

Soviet have to be able to collapse German army before that.

(in reply to herwin)
Post #: 7
RE: A Different Strategy? - 8/24/2011 4:13:43 PM   
Speedysteve

 

Posts: 15998
Joined: 9/11/2001
From: Reading, England
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: Pelton

I have tried the defensive "tragedy" an it is a disaster, because of the unhistorical 1v1=2v1 rule. I have finished 9 campiagns an have 4 on going.

As the German player you must destory at least 100 armerment pts and 3 million men by Jan 1942 and keep your loses below 1.5 million by March 1942.

Then during the summer of 42 you must destory "capture" at least 100 units.

This will give you the upper hand and the Red army can't recover. Right now their is really zero middle ground, by July 42 the out come is disided. If the German player is unable to pocket allot of Russian units and get better then 2.6 to 1 ratio then its over. Between turn 70 and 90 the Russian player can easly grind the German army down.

As the German player you must get atleast a 2.6 to 1 ratio in manpower to control the Red Machine from grinding you down. This can only be done if you are caturing evemy units.

As of right now unless you have an amazing 41 summer the Red player should be in Berlin by early 44.

The game is wieghted heavly in the Russian favor and the VP conditions are a joke to say the least. As long as the Russian player simply trains out Arm PTS and runs from the Germans during 41 they win. The German player can capture Leningrad/Moscow/Tula to Rostov and still get steam rolled in early 44. Check out the Q-ball vs Tarhunnas AAR as a good example.

If I was you I would not waste any time starting a game until after the 1.05 patch.

Pelton




It's lucky you're in charge of PR and Marketing for WitE Pelton....don't know what we'd do without you bud

_____________________________

WitE 2 Tester
WitE Tester
BTR/BoB Tester

(in reply to Peltonx)
Post #: 8
RE: A Different Strategy? - 8/24/2011 4:30:04 PM   
Peltonx


Posts: 7250
Joined: 4/9/2006
Status: offline 		It is what it is at this point.

There are allot of games(AAR's) 40 or 50 atleast that show the out come of the game with the present rule set. So its not like its a big secret.

I can tell the guy the truth or fill him full of bull.

I am still playing games, there is allot to learn.

If your playing to learn the mechanics of the game - great
If your playing an posting data on the AAR to help the dev team - great
If your playing the end game for wins and loses then not so great.

The game is basicly in public beta its not a finished product by any means.

Which by the way is nothing new for any game the last 20 yrs.

It takes at least a yr to get a game close to "done" after it goes gold.

The AI for this game is light yrs better then anything esle out there so one can play the computer, while the dev crew irons out the player vs player issues.

Pelton

< Message edited by Pelton -- 8/24/2011 4:31:02 PM >

(in reply to Speedysteve)
Post #: 9
RE: A Different Strategy? - 8/24/2011 5:06:42 PM   
Q-Ball


Posts: 7336
Joined: 6/25/2002
From: Chicago, Illinois
Status: offline 		I've said before, it took 6 years to get another Gary Grigsby game, WITP-AE, "Right".

This engine is not as complex as that one, but a year or so should be the minimum expectation, IMO. It's in better shape at this stage than WITP was...



_____________________________


(in reply to Peltonx)
Post #: 10
RE: A Different Strategy? - 8/25/2011 5:50:25 AM   
usersatch

 

Posts: 400
Joined: 6/1/2005
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: Speedy


quote:

ORIGINAL: Pelton

I have tried the defensive "tragedy" an it is a disaster, because of the unhistorical 1v1=2v1 rule. I have finished 9 campiagns an have 4 on going.

As the German player you must destory at least 100 armerment pts and 3 million men by Jan 1942 and keep your loses below 1.5 million by March 1942.

Then during the summer of 42 you must destory "capture" at least 100 units.

This will give you the upper hand and the Red army can't recover. Right now their is really zero middle ground, by July 42 the out come is disided. If the German player is unable to pocket allot of Russian units and get better then 2.6 to 1 ratio then its over. Between turn 70 and 90 the Russian player can easly grind the German army down.

As the German player you must get atleast a 2.6 to 1 ratio in manpower to control the Red Machine from grinding you down. This can only be done if you are caturing evemy units.

As of right now unless you have an amazing 41 summer the Red player should be in Berlin by early 44.

The game is wieghted heavly in the Russian favor and the VP conditions are a joke to say the least. As long as the Russian player simply trains out Arm PTS and runs from the Germans during 41 they win. The German player can capture Leningrad/Moscow/Tula to Rostov and still get steam rolled in early 44. Check out the Q-ball vs Tarhunnas AAR as a good example.

If I was you I would not waste any time starting a game until after the 1.05 patch.

Pelton




It's lucky you're in charge of PR and Marketing for WitE Pelton....don't know what we'd do without you bud


LOL...that's what I was thinking. I appreciate honesty, but damn! Seriously, though, I appreciate the honest assessment. Q-ball is right, I was with WitP from the beginning, so I can certainly appreciate the advance between the "beta" version vs. the "polished" version of WitP AE.

Call me a revisionist, but I'm convinced that russia should have lost the war, except for 1) a-hole Hitler's control freak status, 2) the same idiot's obsession with Stalingrad/6th Army, and 3) OKW's foolish Citadel venture (a massive soviet bombardment 30 minutes before the operation...DUH!!!). I'd love to prove it...somehow...without the use of victory points.

_____________________________


(in reply to Speedysteve)
Post #: 11
RE: A Different Strategy? - 8/25/2011 1:39:20 PM   
mmarquo


Posts: 1376
Joined: 9/26/2000
Status: offline 		"There are allot of games(AAR's) 40 or 50 atleast that show the out come of the game with the present rule set. So its not like its a big secret"

Where are the 10 AARs which have played the game through to the bitter end? Show me one AAR where the Hammer and Sickle is flying over the Reichstag; until then one coull easliy surmise that the game is not winnable as the Soviet, given the time constraints of the game.

Think about this: it took about 2 years (1941 - 1943) to end up at Kursk, and then 2 about years (1943 - 1945) to get to Berlin. What is wrong with a game which actually allows this to happen?

Marquo

(in reply to usersatch)
Post #: 12
RE: A Different Strategy? - 8/26/2011 2:37:03 AM   
Farfarer61

 

Posts: 713
Joined: 7/21/2004
Status: offline 		If it sucks so bad, why is it so much fun to play? Do I need an intervention? :)

(in reply to mmarquo)
Post #: 13
RE: A Different Strategy? - 8/28/2011 6:30:01 PM   
Bearcat2

 

Posts: 577
Joined: 2/14/2004
Status: offline 		After reading, Manstein by Mungo Melvin; I don't see how Russia could lose. What surprised me was the number of Russian counterattacks in the first 2 weeks and the lack of stategic focus by the German high command which started to have problems 1 week into the advance. It is hard to believe that the Germans didn't have clear operational objectives 1 week into the campaign for their armies. I was also surprised at the fact they had to withdraw a panzer division to deal with partisans in JULY.

_____________________________

"After eight years as President I have only two regrets: that I have not shot Henry Clay or hanged John C. Calhoun."--1837

(in reply to mmarquo)
Post #: 14
RE: A Different Strategy? - 8/28/2011 8:53:05 PM   
Peltonx


Posts: 7250
Joined: 4/9/2006
Status: offline 		The game is winable on VP pts by the German.

A few of us have had it withen reach, but the Red player quit.

The only reason it can happen, is because the German player is a vertern an the Red player is new.

So to your point, dam straight the Germans can win np, but only if the Russian player doesn't have a chear understanding of the game mechanics and the German player does. The Russian player makes mistakes and the German player make none.

Now all things being equal the game is in favor of the russian side at this time.

If you sit around during 42 the red army grows by 110,000+ a week and the German army grows by 30,000. Which is a losing ratio.

The only way for the German to win at this time is to destory allot of industry during 41, then destory allot of Russians during 42 then hang on for a draw if your lucky vs an equal player.

Pelton

(in reply to Bearcat2)
Post #: 15
RE: A Different Strategy? - 8/28/2011 11:13:32 PM   
Michael T


Posts: 4443
Joined: 10/22/2006
From: Queensland, Australia.
Status: offline 		Don't let yourself become influenced by the rants of one disenchanted player. WITE is a fun game and very winable for the Axis if your good enough. IMO it is maybe slightly in favour of the Soviets if they survive 41.

_____________________________


(in reply to Peltonx)
Post #: 16
RE: A Different Strategy? - 8/29/2011 12:05:20 AM   
Farfarer61

 

Posts: 713
Joined: 7/21/2004
Status: offline 		I think a Sov player, in their player "heart of hearts", is OK with the loss of Leningrad, even Moscow and the Donbas if the industry was saved, as this means it is a 'game' after the blizzard. Your opponent will likely stick around, and not march to the firing squad of of Valkyrie Force in Berlin. Even a strong Sov in 42 has to be careful as warfare outside the fort belts is not their strong suits. The grand sweep by your CV4 Guards Tank Corps has nowhere near to isolated survivability of a morale 99 SS Mot Div.

(in reply to Michael T)
Post #: 17
RE: A Different Strategy? - 8/29/2011 4:55:26 AM   
Reedster

 

Posts: 45
Joined: 7/25/2009
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: Pelton
The only way for the German to win at this time is to destory allot of industry during 41, then destory allot of Russians during 42 then hang on for a draw if your lucky vs an equal player.


Assuming the 'equal' Russian player plays along

_____________________________

'Well, Comrade Boldin, this is the third time you've gotten yourself encircled by the Germans. Don't you think that's a bit much?' - Zhukov, late 1941

(in reply to Peltonx)
Post #: 18
RE: A Different Strategy? - 8/29/2011 5:09:14 AM   
Klydon


Posts: 2251
Joined: 11/28/2010
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: Michael T

Don't let yourself become influenced by the rants of one disenchanted player. WITE is a fun game and very winable for the Axis if your good enough. IMO it is maybe slightly in favour of the Soviets if they survive 41.


I assume you refer to Pelton as the "disenchanted player".

Thing is, that while some don't like how harsh he is, the fact is he has a lot of experience as the Germans and is spot on in a lot of his comments.

If the Russians survive the initial onslaught while getting most of their industry out in 1941, in most cases, they should be able to kick the crap out of the Germans during the winter (as they should and if the Germans are silly enough to try to hold everything) and as long as they don't do anything stupid during 1942 like get half their army wiped out, then they are going to start to bang on the Germans in earnest. I have seen too many AARs look like 1943 rather than 1942 for the Germans and it just accelerates from there.

The announced changes for 1.05 look terrific and would seem to indicate a more balanced and better game will be around the corner, but right now I think the cards are stacked a bit more heavily against the Germans than they should likely be. (Disclaimer, I am still not a "fanboy" of either side and won't be. I play both sides and yes, the Germans should have a tough go if they expect to get an outright victory).

(in reply to Michael T)
Post #: 19
RE: A Different Strategy? - 8/29/2011 5:22:13 AM   
Reedster

 

Posts: 45
Joined: 7/25/2009
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: Klydon
I play both sides and yes, the Germans should have a tough go if they expect to get an outright victory).



IMHO it's not so much an outright German victory per se, I believe it should indeed be tough for the Axis to win by KO, but in my observation/experience it's that mid-late 1942 feels more like historical 1943 for the Axis and 1943 feels like... well, 1944


_____________________________

'Well, Comrade Boldin, this is the third time you've gotten yourself encircled by the Germans. Don't you think that's a bit much?' - Zhukov, late 1941

(in reply to Klydon)
Post #: 20
RE: A Different Strategy? - 8/29/2011 5:54:52 AM   
Michael T


Posts: 4443
Joined: 10/22/2006
From: Queensland, Australia.
Status: offline
quote:

The only way for the German to win at this time is to destory allot of industry during 41, then destory allot of Russians during 42 then hang on for a draw if your lucky vs an equal player.


Wouldn't you expect a game between equal players to be a draw? Also there is more than one way to win in 41, Pelton seems to think mad charges toward industrial centres is the only way to do it. I disagree.

Sure some points he makes are good. But others not so. Like the one above. If no one refutes it, it becomes accepted.



_____________________________


(in reply to Peltonx)
Post #: 21
RE: A Different Strategy? - 8/29/2011 8:22:25 AM   
Encircled


Posts: 2024
Joined: 12/30/2010
From: Northern England
Status: offline
quote:

The announced changes for 1.05 look terrific and would seem to indicate a more balanced and better game will be around the corner,


If you are a German player, then yes, of course it will be more balanced!

Lets have a look at this from the perspective of a Soviet player

-Morale starts at 50 (good) but drops to 45 (not so good). So you have decent units turns 1-5 (most of which get encircled) and when you really need them, you have morale 45 units all along the front in the crucial mid to late '41 turns

-Less morale in the winter than currently, means a weaker Soviet counter offensive. If the German is mad enough to fight in the open, then that might be okay, but how many German players are going to do that?

-Airbase attacks nerfed, so untouchable Luftwaffe for god knows how long

-Soviet production drops by a 1/3, so you have a much slower rate of re arming the Soviet army

-Forts drop to Lvl 2, unless you build fortified zones at 16 VP each (thats 4 VP's less than a Tank Army ffs!)and are next the Germans. How many German players are going to politely wait next to your 1-1 infantry division whilst the Lvl 3 fort is built?

Add that to the nerfed Swamps, so Tanks can drive unhindered through the unpassable forest of Northern Russia to encircle Leningrad from about 1,000 miles away, and it doesn't look that great does it?

Oh, and add the plans to get rid of the 1 v 1 rule (without it, any German unit stronger than "5" will probably be invincible) and the ridiculous idea that OKW would send 2 to 3 motorised divsions to certain death just to grab some factories, and you have a game that will have German fanboys coming in their pants.


*DISCLAIMER* This is not actually what I believe, but I'm putting it together like certain German players would, exaggerating the problems and not listing enough examples of how this will affect the long term play in the game..

I hope the changes make '42 more interesting, but at the cost of destroying '41, '43, '44 and '45?, and thats where I have my concerns.

Lots and lots of testing required by us all to see the long term effects is required

_____________________________


(in reply to Michael T)
Post #: 22
RE: A Different Strategy? - 8/29/2011 9:17:23 AM   
Michael T


Posts: 4443
Joined: 10/22/2006
From: Queensland, Australia.
Status: offline
quote:

-Soviet production drops by a 1/3, so you have a much slower rate of re arming the Soviet army


I am a little worried about this one too. But we shall see I guess.

_____________________________


(in reply to Encircled)
Post #: 23
RE: A Different Strategy? - 8/29/2011 11:17:32 AM   
Jakerson

 

Posts: 565
Joined: 8/15/2006
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: Michael T

Don't let yourself become influenced by the rants of one disenchanted player. WITE is a fun game and very winable for the Axis if your good enough. IMO it is maybe slightly in favour of the Soviets if they survive 41.


All I can speak about my experince.

I have won many scenarios and even my first campaign against human opponent while playing Axis side. I won it very stunningly I was able to destroy 95% of Soviet army and occupied virtually every hex of game map up to auto victory. More you kill Soviets easier it become to make new pockets in the future it is part of Game dynamic.

I think game gives Axis side better logistics that was historically possible but that is probably to make game more fun to play as axis.

I have also lost some games especially when I played my first games against human opponents it is easy to do very big mistakes and game truly punish you from those making it even harder to repair them later.

(in reply to Michael T)
Post #: 24
RE: A Different Strategy? - 8/29/2011 12:49:24 PM   
76mm


Posts: 4688
Joined: 5/2/2004
From: Washington, DC
Status: offline 		Obviously impossible to say how things will turn out at this point, but I'm rather concerned about the changes to forts and the production decrease. I think the fort changes should be accompanied by a reduction in the 1941 cost of FZs, right now they are crazy expensive.

If they get rid of 1:1 as well, then the balance in 1942 will certainly shift, with the Germans pretty much invulnerable in their fortified positions and the Russians unable to create effective defenses.

(in reply to Jakerson)
Post #: 25
RE: A Different Strategy? - 8/29/2011 1:59:01 PM   
Klydon


Posts: 2251
Joined: 11/28/2010
Status: offline 		While the Russians may have a weaker army to fight in the blizzard, the fact that German level 3/4 forts will likely be few and far between should help out a lot as the Russians have no issues at all slicing through level 2 forts and below. That also means the Germans will not get the benefit of blizzard attrition reduction because there will be far fewer level 3+ forts.

I also agree trying to get 1942 "fixed" without messing up 1941, 43, 44, and 45 will be tough, but time and lots of testing will tell and I think the proposed changes get the game closer to the mark.

The Russian armaments issue will now require more careful monitoring/management on the part of the Russian player. Before, they typically had no real issues with both manpower and armaments being in plentiful supply in game for the most part.

As far as Pelton and his armaments point, the easy way to refute it is prove him wrong. Show an AAR where the German player didn't bag 90-100 armaments, but that they still stand a good chance of winning the game, even by game standards of keeping the Russians out of Berlin. So far, it has been pretty much what he said so while it may be a bold statement, it could also be a key piece to what the Germans need to accomplish in order to have a chance at victory.


(in reply to 76mm)
Post #: 26
RE: A Different Strategy? - 8/29/2011 1:59:24 PM   
Flaviusx


Posts: 7750
Joined: 9/9/2009
From: Southern California
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: 76mm

Obviously impossible to say how things will turn out at this point, but I'm rather concerned about the changes to forts and the production decrease. I think the fort changes should be accompanied by a reduction in the 1941 cost of FZs, right now they are crazy expensive.

If they get rid of 1:1 as well, then the balance in 1942 will certainly shift, with the Germans pretty much invulnerable in their fortified positions and the Russians unable to create effective defenses.


I flat out do not think FR are worth building in 1941 at 16 APs a pop. I'm undecided at this point whether the cost should be lowered in 41, however.

The point of the changes here are to make the Germans not sit in their invulnerable forts in 1942. (Which, point in fact, are now more vulnerable.) We're trying to get away from this whole maginot line 1942 business.

_____________________________

WitE Alpha Tester

(in reply to 76mm)
Post #: 27
RE: A Different Strategy? - 8/29/2011 2:26:39 PM   
76mm


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

ORIGINAL: Flaviusx
I flat out do not think FR are worth building in 1941 at 16 APs a pop. I'm undecided at this point whether the cost should be lowered in 41, however.

The point of the changes here are to make the Germans not sit in their invulnerable forts in 1942. (Which, point in fact, are now more vulnerable.) We're trying to get away from this whole maginot line 1942 business.


I generally agree about the 16 AP FZs, although they will become more valuable if they are the only way to build fortifs beyond level 2. I think the Sovs will have a hard time holding a line anywhere if they can't entrench beyond level 2.

As for the Germans, I think that most German players will have huge stockpiles of AP after the blizzard and will be able to build plenty of FZs, allowing them to fortify to level 3 and 4. Couple this with the decreased Sov production and particularly getting rid of the 1:1 rule, and I think the Sovs will be unable to make any dent in German lines, except where the Germans decide to leave their fortified positions to attack.

Is this what the devs are trying to achieve?

< Message edited by 76mm -- 8/29/2011 2:27:26 PM >

(in reply to Flaviusx)
Post #: 28
RE: A Different Strategy? - 8/29/2011 2:44:41 PM   
Flaviusx


Posts: 7750
Joined: 9/9/2009
From: Southern California
Status: offline 		76mm, here's the thing: if the Germans are advancing, they are not fortifying. And unoccupied forts disappear very very quickly now.

Portions of the map may indeed settle down into trench warfare, particularly up north. But down south, maneuver is reintroduced for both sides, as the terrain favors movement.

If the Soviet can weather the storm, stretch the German out, and introduce his reserves, then the German is perfectly vulnerable to counterattacks.







_____________________________

WitE Alpha Tester

(in reply to 76mm)
Post #: 29
RE: A Different Strategy? - 8/29/2011 3:20:11 PM   
Peltonx


Posts: 7250
Joined: 4/9/2006
Status: offline 		My pts are made on data not feelings. I have tracked data from most of my games (12) to-date, unlike allot of poeple so I can comment on what is needed to "win" as the German based on data.

Check out Q-balls and Tarhunnases AAR and compare to Pelton vs ARSTAVIDIOS, Pelton vs Hoooper,

Its mostly about industry. Citys mean very little unless they have production in them. Manpower is effected very little for the Russian player even if the German takes all the major centers. The size of the Red army by turn 30 means little also. The production output hugely effects the Russian players army after 1941.

Pelton vs Larry Fulkerner
T-30 Loses
SHC 3.5 mil men 17000tanks 52000 art
GHC 550000 men 2200 tanks 4000 art
OOB
SHC 4.1 mil troops 2300 tanks 34000 art 7000 planes
GHC 3.5 mil troops 2700 tanks 37500 art 3300 planes
Destroyed all Factories in Leningrad and Moscow.
Destroyed 132 AP and 65 HVY
Resigned

Pelton vs Hoooper
T-30 Loses:
SHC 3.7 mil men 17000 tanks 51000 art 13000 planes
GHC 1.2 men 3450 tanks 10000 art 1500 Planes
OOB
SHC 5.4 mil troops 6000 tanks 62000 art 9500 planes
GHC 3.0 mil troops 2150 tanks 35000 art 3400 planes
Destroyed all Factories in Leningrad
Destroyed 76 AP and 37 HVY lowest arm score to date lossing.
Ongoing

Pelton vs Arstavidous
T-30 Loses:
SHC 3.1 mil men 16100 tanks 45700 art
GHC 1.1 men 3850 tanks 12300 art
OOB
SHC 5.8 mil troops 5900 tanks 61000 art 8299 planes
GHC 2.7 mil troops 2000 tanks 32000 art 3370 planes
Destroyed 140 AP and 57 HVY - I took Leningrad, but he had moved factories. Did not take Moscow.
Ongoing

Pelton vs Cyclops
T-30 Loses:
SHC 4.3 mil men 16600 tanks 58000 art
GHC 1.0 men 2950 tanks 8200 art
OOB
SHC 4.0 mil troops 3350 tanks 48500 art 4770 planes
GHC 2.5 mil troops 2400 tanks 35000 art 2255 planes
Destroyed all Factories in Leningrad and Moscow.
Destroyed 128 AP and 62 HVY
MIA turn 50

I have 2 others that will hit turn 30 this week
4 others quit before turn 30 and the first 2 games I played I did not keep records and both resigned before turn 50.
In all six I had over 100 armerments pts pocketed.

I have done as many other exp German players have tried the Defend from 42 on and it just don't work no matter the tactics. The Russian player simply uses the 1v1=2v1 rule to bleed the German army between turns 70 and 90.
Then at that pt its over game set match by 44.

The German player must destory allot more industry then histirocal under 1.04 to have a chance for a draw or better.

Q-ball vs Tarhunnas is very close to historical in production destoryed (arm/HVY) and Tarhunnas loses are close to historical also. The results are clear, Q-ball will be in Berlin by 44 under 1.04. 1.05 will help Tarhunnas some, but is not going to save him.

So yes based on data the game is stacked in the Russian favor all things being equal.

If you don't blitzkrieg and bag close to 100 arm pts your not going to have a chance as the German player for atleast a draw. Patch 1.05 will in my option about balance the game.

I think that the Russian production level might have to be tweaked again and the game engine at some pt, but over-all it should about 90% right.

Pelton

< Message edited by Pelton -- 8/29/2011 3:24:53 PM >

(in reply to Michael T)
Post #: 30
Page:   [1] 2   next >   >>
All Forums >> [New Releases from Matrix Games] >> Gary Grigsby's War in the East Series >> A Different Strategy? Page: [1] 2   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

1.297