Gamey or not? Opinions sought

Matrix Games Forums

Forums Register Login Photo Gallery Member List Search Calendars FAQ

My Profile Inbox Address Book My Subscription My Forums Log Out

Gamey or not? Opinions sought

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 >> Gamey or not? Opinions sought

Page: [1]

Message

<< Older Topic Newer Topic >>

Gamey or not? Opinions sought - 12/13/2011 12:17:32 AM

PaulWRoberts

Posts: 897
Joined: 4/22/2001
Status: offline

Very simple question:

When starting a turn as German, do you

1) Lead with your Panzer units, moving them first and clearing the way for slower follow-on forces?

or

2) Use your slower units to push resistance out of the way and claim some hexes, thus maximizing the distance your Panzer units will be able to travel?

My instinct is to do 2, but I've started to wonder if this is gaming the movement mechanics somehow. Historically, shouldn't my armor be making the breakthrough?

Post #: 1

RE: Gamey or not? Opinions sought - 12/13/2011 12:20:47 AM

elmo3

Posts: 5820
Joined: 1/22/2002
Status: offline

Neither is gaming the system.

_____________________________

We don't stop playing because we grow old, we grow old because we stop playing. - George Bernard Shaw

WitE alpha/beta tester
Sanctus Reach beta tester
Desert War 1940-42 beta tester

(in reply to PaulWRoberts)

Post #: 2

RE: Gamey or not? Opinions sought - 12/13/2011 12:42:40 AM

Flaviusx

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

2 is the pro way to do it. Not gamey, either. In fact, that's the way it ought to be: infantry opens up the holes, and the mobile units exploit.

_____________________________

WitE Alpha Tester

(in reply to PaulWRoberts)

Post #: 3

RE: Gamey or not? Opinions sought - 12/13/2011 1:06:32 AM

ragtopcars_slith

Posts: 66
Joined: 8/2/2004
Status: offline

Agree... not gamey... infantry opens the hole and the armor pours through!

(in reply to Flaviusx)

Post #: 4

RE: Gamey or not? Opinions sought - 12/13/2011 1:43:26 AM

Aurelian

Posts: 3916
Joined: 2/26/2007
Status: offline

Were not both methods used at Kursk by the Germans? A bit hazy on that am I.

(in reply to ragtopcars_slith)

Post #: 5

RE: Gamey or not? Opinions sought - 12/13/2011 1:47:58 AM

Flaviusx

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

Yeah, but this was more due to force of circumstances than doctrine. The landsers got separated from the panzers as time went on, and the Germans were forced to rely on heavy tanks with little infantry support to force the advance. Not an ideal situation. The Tiger was reasonably good at this if it didn't break down. Then there was the elephant...

_____________________________

WitE Alpha Tester

(in reply to Aurelian)

Post #: 6

RE: Gamey or not? Opinions sought - 12/13/2011 3:08:14 AM

PaulWRoberts

Posts: 897
Joined: 4/22/2001
Status: offline

My fuzziness on this comes from the fact that, whether or not I move my armor or infantry first, both moves are supposed (in reality) to be simultaneous. Two units that use up all of their movement points are both busy throughout the whole week, regardless of whether I touched them first or last in my turn.

I guess choosing to move one or the other first reflects certain local (daily) tactical choices about who engages and who exploits.

There! Now I'm satisfied. ;)

(in reply to Flaviusx)

Post #: 7

RE: Gamey or not? Opinions sought - 12/13/2011 3:54:25 AM

krieger

Posts: 38
Joined: 1/13/2011
Status: offline

A combination of both depending on the requirements of the sector in question. Coperation between diferent panzer corps is sometimes essential (in this case move first the corps that is further from the attack point so the other corp(s) will have more MPs to get into the breach than otherwise would be the case) and others neglectable. The enemy force you're facing in your plan determines the force to be used too so it's imposible to come up with a rule of thumb for this. The only one would be trying to adapt to the situation and you need good recon for it too. A 4vs1 odds in favor of the attacker is recomended in the manual if you want a good attack. Before all this you have to know your geographic objectives clearly and also how to best achieve them in strategic and tactical terms. If you choose a wrong strategy it may be imposible to take some sectors later on or at least much more dificult (like Leningrad or Krimea).

(in reply to PaulWRoberts)

Post #: 8

RE: Gamey or not? Opinions sought - 12/13/2011 4:53:25 AM

wadortch

Posts: 259
Joined: 3/19/2011
From: Darrington, WA, USA
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Paul Roberts

Very simple question:

When starting a turn as German, do you

1) Lead with your Panzer units, moving them first and clearing the way for slower follow-on forces?

or

2) Use your slower units to push resistance out of the way and claim some hexes, thus maximizing the distance your Panzer units will be able to travel?

My instinct is to do 2, but I've started to wonder if this is gaming the movement mechanics somehow. Historically, shouldn't my armor be making the breakthrough?

You adapt as needs arise based on where you need to get to with each arm. I have found that tanks way out ahead of the infantry can be spectacular but rarely create a sustained and powerful offensive over time on their own. Combined arms. Tanks creating pockets that infantry can reduce the following turn is the recipe for success. If your tanks sit for a turn stalled because they are mobbed by Soviets you have moved them out too far.

_____________________________

Walt

(in reply to PaulWRoberts)

Post #: 9

RE: Gamey or not? Opinions sought - 12/14/2011 9:49:02 AM

Monsieur Pinke

Posts: 4
Joined: 12/18/2010
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Paul Roberts

Very simple question:

When starting a turn as German, do you

1) Lead with your Panzer units, moving them first and clearing the way for slower follow-on forces?

or

2) Use your slower units to push resistance out of the way and claim some hexes, thus maximizing the distance your Panzer units will be able to travel?

My instinct is to do 2, but I've started to wonder if this is gaming the movement mechanics somehow. Historically, shouldn't my armor be making the breakthrough?

Hi Paul

Option 2 is the way to go if there is judged to be no real defense in depth and capturing territory is your goal. Otherwise a combination of the two options to suit the situation, as several of our colleagues have mentioned in this post.

At this point I just want to mention that this aspect of the game, is for me, the one real weakness of this great game. Troops of an armoured division that wait around for the best part of a week for an infantry division to move up and attack from over a hundred miles away, still have their full movement allowance when in reality, they would only have the MP's remaining for the fraction of the week left after the combat. They can proceed through the combat hex after the above mentioned combat as though no time has passed. It would be more realistic to have combat zone movement penalties in hexes where combat has taken place to prevent the above happening. It was used in a favourite boardgame of mine, "Trial Of Strength". Worked a treat.
Cheers All.

(in reply to PaulWRoberts)

Post #: 10

RE: Gamey or not? Opinions sought - 12/14/2011 12:58:33 PM

JJKettunen

Posts: 3530
Joined: 3/12/2002
From: Finland
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Flaviusx

Yeah, but this was more due to force of circumstances than doctrine. The landsers got separated from the panzers as time went on, and the Germans were forced to rely on heavy tanks with little infantry support to force the advance. Not an ideal situation. The Tiger was reasonably good at this if it didn't break down. Then there was the elephant...

Not really. Model used method 2 (north) and Hoth method 1 (south). Their success or lack thereof was dependent on the force ratios. Soviets had more troops concentrated against Model. Tiger tanks didn't have any significant role although some fantasy books claim so.

_____________________________

Jyri Kettunen

The eternal privilege of those who never act themselves: to interrogate, be dissatisfied, find fault.

- A. Solzhenitsyn

(in reply to Flaviusx)

Post #: 11

RE: Gamey or not? Opinions sought - 12/14/2011 7:21:43 PM

Mehring

Posts: 2179
Joined: 1/25/2007
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Paul Roberts

Very simple question:

When starting a turn as German, do you

1) Lead with your Panzer units, moving them first and clearing the way for slower follow-on forces?

or

2) Use your slower units to push resistance out of the way and claim some hexes, thus maximizing the distance your Panzer units will be able to travel?

My instinct is to do 2, but I've started to wonder if this is gaming the movement mechanics somehow. Historically, shouldn't my armor be making the breakthrough?

Anyone who knows how the game works uses method 2 if they can. It is to some extent historical, but many tank comanders claim it was often forced upon them by higher command. They wanted to lead with tanks to make a rapid breakthrough and avoid taffic snarl ups associated with one unit passing through another.

< Message edited by Mehring -- 12/14/2011 7:22:19 PM >

_____________________________

�Old age is the most unexpected of all things that can happen to a man.�
-Leon Trotsky

(in reply to PaulWRoberts)

Post #: 12

RE: Gamey or not? Opinions sought - 12/14/2011 9:16:06 PM

gingerbread