Slitherine

quote:

ORIGINAL: 76mm
if you have thin lines the Germans will punch through them very easily, encircle an army or two or three, kill them, and do it all over again. Your reserves will not be able to save them. and pretty soon your "reserve" will be manning the frontline because of all the troops you've lost in pockets...

quote:

For those pointing to a successful Stalingrad offensive as "proof" of Russian offensive capability to refute Pelton's claims, I would ask/remind said players as to who exactly the Russian offensive hit, because it didn't include very many Germans at all. (IE, the Russians kicked the snot out of Axis minor allies, which they can do even in 1941). Can the Russians really attack a section of a fortified German line that has good troops in it in 1942 and expect success? Was there any major shifting of the lines during all of 1942 north of Voronezh? The Russians tried several operations and pretty much got bloody noses for their efforts.

quote:

ORIGINAL: TulliusDetritus
Humm, either I wasn't very clear or you haven't understood The only German attack that matters is the one which involves Panzers. As I have said there should be maximum only two main attacks. No sir, the German Panzers will N O T be attacking a thin front-line. They will be facing 1/2 of the Strategic Reserves + lots of Corps... defending in DEPTH... Much more forces than a mere carpet may give you... Because you will necessarily know where the Panzers are concentrated. No magic tricks. And then some tchouk-tchouck.

quote:

ORIGINAL: BigAnorak
another incentive for Axis players to consider a strategy that does grab real estate in the South and defend it with a German army that has not over-extended and weakened itself, because without +1 I would go as far as saying the Soviets can't get it back

quote:

ORIGINAL: TulliusDetritus
You're a carpet psycho, I'm an ex-carpet psycho, everyone is happy, that's all

quote:

Or the Germans could just dig in where they are, in which case it will be even harder for the Sovs to get it back.

quote:

ORIGINAL: Klydon

For those pointing to a successful Stalingrad offensive as "proof" of Russian offensive capability to refute Pelton's claims, I would ask/remind said players as to who exactly the Russian offensive hit, because it didn't include very many Germans at all. (IE, the Russians kicked the snot out of Axis minor allies, which they can do even in 1941). Can the Russians really attack a section of a fortified German line that has good troops in it in 1942 and expect success? Was there any major shifting of the lines during all of 1942 north of Voronezh? The Russians tried several operations and pretty much got bloody noses for their efforts.

quote:

ORIGINAL: 76mm

quote:

ORIGINAL: Bletchley_Geek
Raiding the Caucasus and destroying huge chunks of the Red Army is the best bet for the Axis.

Raiding the Caucauses is the best bet if the Germans want to lose. I don't think they can really pose a credible threat to Baku, and an attempt puts them in a much more hazardous position than the Sovs. As a Sov player I would like nothing more than to have my German opponent try that... I have actually tried to lure Germans down there but they were too smart to take the bait.

The best German bet in 1942 is to encircle large chunks of the Sov carpet and kill them, without any grand strategic designs. And I'm not even sure if that will be possible if the Sovs have a huge army in 1942 because they were able to avoid large casualties by retreating.

quote:

ORIGINAL: Baelfiin

I think you have hit the main point of 1.05xxxxx BG

Real estate is cheap( for both sides) fort levels are nice, but really not the be all and end all of any defence.

quote:

ORIGINAL: lycortas

Oskkar, you are in danger of becoming the Russian Pelton. Uranus was launched against a German (allied) line that was so attenuated that it had to fail. What were the 3rd Romanian Army frontages? IIRC each Romanian battalion had like 15km of front!!!! Insane. Very few German players will be that stupid. We cannot adjust our game so that Soviets win because Soviets historically won.
That way leads to madness.

Sorry, i have always wanted to say that.

Anyway, I support the 1:1 change as a good rule. 76mm, you hit it on the head, the Germans have no incentive to move in '42. That has to change.

I am one of the creators of CHS for WitP and that game has a lot of problems, but i enjoy playing it. This game i have not played one vs human game because it is not fun.
I hope that can be fixed.

Michael

quote:

ORIGINAL: Ketza
Now if there was some major strategic goal that could be obtained that would lower Soviet capabilities for the duration of the game I would weigh whether or not the casualties incurred in obtaining that goal would be worth the negative impact on Soviet forces. Once the Soviet has evacuated all of the factories there really is no way you can impact them other then taking manpower centers.

quote:

ORIGINAL: Pelton

Sticking with history, which we all know runnian players hate to do.

I am sorry that the I win button was taken away from the Red players, but the game needed to be based on history and not fairytales.

Ask Hoooper for a few pointers and stop cring for your I win button back.

Pelton

quote:

ORIGINAL: Q-Ball

I think it will be difficult to draw alot of conclusions until we get well into 1944 in a couple games.

One difference between WITE and RL, is the importance of Forts. IMO, we might see Germans consistently hold ground ahead of historical objectives in 1943, but what's really happening is that they are holding onto forts they built. I think rather than retreating to unprepared ground, German players are going to choose/be forced to fight forward in Fortifications. I think German players will grind grind grind in forward lines rather than retreat, until the Germans reach a collapse point, THEN it will be a runaway faster than history.

If I am right, 1943 will look like a pro-German stalemate, and 1944 will be a bigger disaster for the Germans than it was IRL

Of course, I could be wrong, but we really need to get there. That's my point.

quote:

ORIGINAL: stone10

theoretical, you could retreat gradually. However, the Soviets can simply follow and when can you get the time to dig in? how much ground can you afford to lose?

quote:

ORIGINAL: Q-Ball
One difference between WITE and RL, is the importance of Forts. IMO, we might see Germans consistently hold ground ahead of historical objectives in 1943, but what's really happening is that they are holding onto forts they built. I think rather than retreating to unprepared ground, German players are going to choose/be forced to fight forward in Fortifications. I think German players will grind grind grind in forward lines rather than retreat, until the Germans reach a collapse point, THEN it will be a runaway faster than history.

quote:

ORIGINAL: Bletchley_Geek

What are the reasons for not being that a realistic prospect?

quote:

ORIGINAL: Bletchley_Geek
What grand-style encirclements can they make in the wake of dug-in Soviet Armies in depth? And if they breakthrough, why would anybody stay put, say, between Kharkov and Voronezh in 1942?

quote:

ORIGINAL: Bletchley_Geek
Sincerely, you'd hate seeing how your forces are surrounded and destroyed on the steppes while the German motorized divisions dance around you. Try the Operation Blue scenario against a human and you'll see what I mean.

quote:

ORIGINAL: Bletchley_Geek
Oil production can't be moved, very much like manpower.

quote:

ORIGINAL: 76mm

quote:

ORIGINAL: Q-Ball
One difference between WITE and RL, is the importance of Forts. IMO, we might see Germans consistently hold ground ahead of historical objectives in 1943, but what's really happening is that they are holding onto forts they built. I think rather than retreating to unprepared ground, German players are going to choose/be forced to fight forward in Fortifications. I think German players will grind grind grind in forward lines rather than retreat, until the Germans reach a collapse point, THEN it will be a runaway faster than history.

As far as I know, the Germans have tons of AP and will basically create as many FZ as they want to create fall-back fortifications. So why do you think they will hit a collapse point?

quote:

ORIGINAL: Ketza
To me it boils down to math.

In order for me to risk Axis troops getting out of their entrenchments there has be some type of incentive. If that incentive does not involve creating situations where I can get 3-1 casualty ratios or better against Soviet troops then there is no point doing it because that is the average of casualties when Soviets attack me in my trenches.

quote:

ORIGINAL: ComradeP

For starters, I would say the Soviets were not, on average, capable of launching a strategic offensive (where "strategic" is not meant the way the Soviets understood it, but in game terms of an offensive of 10 hexes gained or more) in summer 1942 at the same time as the Axis summer offensive.

In previous versions, Axis summer offensives in 1942 were either unlikely to start to begin with or were unlikely to succeed due to the presence of significant numbers of forts and the ease with which the Soviets can move reserves around (essentially making them very good at backhand blows in the process).

I personally believe that the Soviets can still make limited (counter)attacks, even if they require an army to do so, but in order to dislodge dug-in German divisions, they'd need artillery divisions and corps-sized units. Considering that prior to summer 1943, the Soviets had made only limited gains in terms of recapturing territory that was lost pre-summer 1942 (keeping in mind that during the winter 1942-1943 offensive, they mostly recaptured areas lost during summer 1942, the Axis lines in summer 1943 were fairly similar to where they were a year ago in summer 1942 aside from in some areas), I don't consider it to be a problem from a historical perspective that the Soviets can't launch their first sustained/sustainable offensive along the entirety of the frontline in 1943.

However, if they can't do so now, that's a problem.

Aside from Soviet unit quality and quantity, the main things determining whether a Soviet offensive can work are the TOE% status of German units in the area, their number and their morale.

The Soviets in 1942 have not just been "hit" with the removal of the odds modifier, but also with lower national morale, which may or may not have a significant influence on their chances of launching a successful offensive on the other hand. To compensate by 1944 their Rifle corps CV's will be (very) high and in 1943 your Guards corps should start to get some impressive CV's. As the Soviets will have a fair amount of high ROF elements in their corps, they'll also inflict more casualties than they ever do in 1941-1942.

The Germans now get Hiwi's, which eases their manpower problems, and it might very well be that they get too many Hiwi's, which can be a problem even though there's only an X amount of Hiwi's that can be in the game at any point (because it's limited to the quantity of support squads).

There's a good chance further changes will be made, but I am not in favour of a return of the odds modifier. Slightly improving overall Soviet unit quality: OK, but a return of the odds modifier would in my opinion be a bad thing for balance reasons, as it would make it too easy to wreck the Axis through low odds attacks and the resulting retreat attrition.