RE: The Great Patriotic AAR II

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: The Great Patriotic AAR II

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 >> After Action Reports >> RE: The Great Patriotic AAR II

Page: << < prev 5 6 [7] 8 9 next > >>

Message

<< Older Topic Newer Topic >>

RE: The Great Patriotic AAR II - 6/8/2012 12:09:11 AM

notenome

Posts: 608
Joined: 12/28/2009
Status: offline

I'm getting rather tired of people posting a forward defense is inviable as the Soviets when a lot of Soviet playrs use it. The trick is to know when to run and when to fight.

(in reply to M60A3TTS)

Post #: 181

RE: The Great Patriotic AAR II - 6/8/2012 12:17:35 AM

TulliusDetritus

Posts: 5521
Joined: 4/1/2004
From: The Zone�
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: notenome

I'm getting rather tired of people posting a forward defense is inviable as the Soviets when a lot of Soviet playrs use it. The trick is to know when to run and when to fight.

Show me an AAR in which the Soviet player has lost circa 6 million soldiers (among them 3 million prisoners)... and Moscow and Leningrad are in Soviet hands and a blizzard offensive is launched...

Also note that -to emulate his counterparts- Tarhunnas should have 1 million more men trapped... Do you think this is possible, counting his counters?

Are you serious?

Ok, everything is perfect! Don't fix anything

No problem: I will NEVER fight like the Red Army fought.NEVER. Not as long as they don't fix this lunacy...

< Message edited by TulliusDetritus -- 6/8/2012 12:18:44 AM >

_____________________________

a nu cheeki breeki iv damke

(in reply to notenome)

Post #: 182

RE: The Great Patriotic AAR II - 6/8/2012 12:31:28 AM

governato

Posts: 1079
Joined: 5/6/2011
From: Seattle, WA
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: TulliusDetritus

quote:

ORIGINAL: notenome

I'm getting rather tired of people posting a forward defense is inviable as the Soviets when a lot of Soviet playrs use it. The trick is to know when to run and when to fight.

Ok, everything is perfect! Don't fix anything No problem: I will NEVER fight like the Red Army fought.NEVER. Not as long as they don't fix this lunacy...

This was an interesting experiment, but should we really expect the results to be much different? The SU tried an aggressive forward defense in real life with disastrous results. Why should this strategy work any better against a very competent German player with full hindsight? There are surely many things to improve, but I'd rather see this as a positive test of the game engine.

(in reply to TulliusDetritus)

Post #: 183

RE: The Great Patriotic AAR II - 6/8/2012 12:35:33 AM

Flaviusx

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

M60, in any defensive situation the restriction on reserves will also hurt the Axis. But Michael obviously contrived things so that no such situation would ever arise.

Don't try this as the Axis in the 1943 scenario. Actually, most of these house rules would suck pretty badly for the Axis in the 1943 scenario.

The game engine is systemically biased in favor of the offense. The only interesting question is who is on the offense. The house rules are preposterous in light of said bias.

< Message edited by Flaviusx -- 6/8/2012 12:41:04 AM >

_____________________________

WitE Alpha Tester

(in reply to governato)

Post #: 184

RE: The Great Patriotic AAR II - 6/8/2012 12:38:27 AM

TulliusDetritus

Posts: 5521
Joined: 4/1/2004
From: The Zone�
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: governato
This was an interesting experiment, but should we really expect the results to be much different? The SU tried an aggressive forward defense in real life with disastrous results. Why should this strategy work any better against a very competent German player with full hindsight? There are surely many things to improve, but I'd rather see this as a positive test of the game engine.

And yet the Red Army held Moscow and Leningrad and kept fighting with much much much more losses (as this is rather pertinent)... whilst on the game Tarhunnas sees no point continuing...

Can't you see something is really wrong here?

_____________________________

a nu cheeki breeki iv damke

(in reply to governato)

Post #: 185

RE: The Great Patriotic AAR II - 6/8/2012 12:46:33 AM

Flaviusx

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

quote:

ORIGINAL: notenome

I'm getting rather tired of people posting a forward defense is inviable as the Soviets when a lot of Soviet playrs use it. The trick is to know when to run and when to fight.

Notenome, the house rules afforded the Soviet player no such choice, it was all forward defense all the time. The results of this are fairly predictable.

_____________________________

WitE Alpha Tester

(in reply to notenome)

Post #: 186

RE: The Great Patriotic AAR II - 6/8/2012 12:48:56 AM

governato

Posts: 1079
Joined: 5/6/2011
From: Seattle, WA
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: TulliusDetritus

Can't you see something is really wrong here?

- make the Lvov pocket harder to achieve
- give a reason for the SU to defend forward in 1941
- make the supply logistics a little harder when on the offensive
- implement a local railway capacity

I suspect the developers cannot add one feature at the time without unbalancing the game, so I guess it will have to wait for WITE.2

(in reply to TulliusDetritus)

Post #: 187

RE: The Great Patriotic AAR II - 6/8/2012 12:56:54 AM

Flaviusx

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

Big changes are going to have to wait until WITE2, yeah. WITE has been taken as far as it can without an extensive redo that will require equally extensive testing. The game may see some tinkering around the edges and bug fixes, but basically, what you see now is what you'll have until the next iteration.

WITW is the test bed for the these changes.

_____________________________

WitE Alpha Tester

(in reply to governato)

Post #: 188

RE: The Great Patriotic AAR II - 6/8/2012 1:11:16 AM

timmyab

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

No need to feel bad about being beaten by Michael.He's an excellent player and even small inbalances in player ability can quickly snowball in this game.
Your defensive technique would have to be virtually faultless to stand forward against him, even then you'd probably lose quite a bit of stuff in 41.
To be frank, I think your forward defensive technique can improve as i'm sure you've learnt in this game.As an example, your checkerboard in the South on turn 1 is asking to have a hole blown through the middle of it followed by a major encirclement.It's particularly vital that you don't lose significant numbers of units in the opening turns so that your force density increases steadily and your defense becomes ever more solid so making pockets ever more difficult.This is the snowball effect of this game in reverse.A well positioned and totally committed picket/MLR/strongpoint technique is the only way that I know to achieve this.The next best strategy is to simply run away to the Axis logistics dead zone and accept the loss of a lot of territory in 41.I would try the first against him and adopt the second if my force density dropped to critical levels.
As Flav says, certainly don't accept any unfavourable house rules when playing him, he doesn't need any help.

(in reply to Tarhunnas)

Post #: 189

RE: The Great Patriotic AAR II - 6/8/2012 2:20:41 AM

hfarrish

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

quote:

ORIGINAL: notenome

I'm getting rather tired of people posting a forward defense is inviable as the Soviets when a lot of Soviet playrs use it. The trick is to know when to run and when to fight.

I wish this were true - I used to be in favor of fighting as much as possible, but the rules post fort nerf enable a German who knows how to handle panzers properly to simply tear such a defense to ribbons. Even the no reserve rule is, I'm afraid, not what cost Tarhunnas the loss - in a fluid situation like this battle reserves would have been activated on a very limited basis anyway. The loss is due to the fact that the Germans have a lot of movement points and the Soviets have few, and under an IGOUGO system this will result in big pockets for a Soviet who does not fall back to terrain/forts that favor some kind of defense.

(in reply to notenome)

Post #: 190

RE: The Great Patriotic AAR II - 6/8/2012 2:55:13 AM

hfarrish

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

And just to put some meat on those bones, I recently had a game where I had lost 3M men by turn 14, which was probably roughly where the real life Red Army was...and believe me, there was no point in continuing. I could maybe have held Moscow, but only at the cost of having the German army romp all over the SE (Stalingrad and South of the Don) through the snow turns.

< Message edited by hfarrish -- 6/8/2012 3:16:43 AM >

(in reply to hfarrish)

Post #: 191

RE: The Great Patriotic AAR II - 6/8/2012 3:04:51 AM

RCHarmon

Posts: 322
Joined: 1/19/2011
Status: offline

I think this challenge is only half done. I hope Tarhunnas accepts the offer to change sides and play again with the same rules. As I see it, this is unfinished.

Before conclusions are set in stone, I'd like to see what damage Tarhunnas can do as the Axis. I'd like to see what Michael can do with the Soviets.

This experiment needs to be seen to its completion.

(in reply to hfarrish)

Post #: 192

RE: The Great Patriotic AAR II - 6/8/2012 3:18:10 AM

hfarrish

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

I agree with that - MT has always said he would play as Sovs under the same rules, but no one has taken him up on it; would be an interesting match to see for sure.

(in reply to RCHarmon)

Post #: 193

RE: The Great Patriotic AAR II - 6/8/2012 3:26:35 AM

Klydon

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

A interesting game to say the least and congrats to Michael on the win against a very skilled opponent.

I am sure Tarhunnas learned quite a bit on this go around, which is saying something as he is a very tough Russian player, no question.

Thank you both for a very entertaining AAR.

(in reply to hfarrish)

Post #: 194

RE: The Great Patriotic AAR II - 6/8/2012 5:05:51 AM

Walloc

Posts: 3141
Joined: 10/30/2006
From: Denmark
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: TulliusDetritus

Show me an AAR in which the Soviet player has lost circa 6 million soldiers (among them 3 million prisoners)... and Moscow and Leningrad are in Soviet hands and a blizzard offensive is launched...

By the very nature of it, this wont ever happen. U start with 4m man and get around 3 to 3,5mil manpower in reinforcement/replacement before the start of the blizzard. This is set high not low. Thats around 7 mil in all. If u lose 6 mil u wouldnt have any thing left in ur combat forces.
What u get in game arent close to the historic mobilization numbers. Hench u cant lose historic numbers and have any thing left. If u have no troops u ofc cant defend/hold any thing.

quote:

ORIGINAL: hfarrish

And just to put some meat on those bones, I recently had a game where I had lost 3M men by turn 14, which was probably roughly where the real life Red Army was...and believe me, there was no point in continuing. I could maybe have held Moscow, but only at the cost of having the German army romp all over the SE (Stalingrad and South of the Don) through the snow turns.

See above.....

Kind regards,

Rasmus

< Message edited by Walloc -- 6/8/2012 5:07:22 AM >

(in reply to hfarrish)

Post #: 195

RE: The Great Patriotic AAR II - 6/8/2012 5:16:48 AM

Michael T

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

I am continuously astonished at the number of venomous shots that are fired my way at this site. I am not going to be drawn in to even try to defend/deflect that rubbish anymore. But I will say a few things to set the record straight in relation to this game.

First the rules agreed to in this game were of Tarhunnas own design bar two. The Reserve limit and No runaways. These were my requests. All others his. Tarhunnas was free to reject mine and play someone else. Ultimately we are all free to play under whatever rules we like. And contrary to the opinion of others I do not deliberately stack the deck in my favour. I honestly try to evoke a better, more fun, more stimulating game from these house rules. I do not try to deceive anyone.

The stock reserve rules, IMO are rubbish. I do not believe putting the entire Soviet Army, or German Army in reserve mode is ok. Hence the more realistic limit. As for its effect on this game, it is a non issue because we did not get to a point where the possible abuse could have made any difference at all.

The run away rule. IMO this is the biggest failing of the game. There is nothing in the game that dissuades running by either side. I am not going in to theories and fixes here. But when I play a game that is supposed to represent a 1941 Barbarossa situation I want to actually fight the enemy, not chase them across a map devoid of units and never get a chance to come to grips with them. That is not my idea of a fun 1941 game. No matter which side I play.

Muling nullified this running ploy. It allowed me to punish a runner. Now that muling is gone I will only play as German with some kind of penalty for Russians who run (Fredrik and I did discuss some political rules that involved penalties for running, on both sides) or my opponents word not to. I also believe that the run ploy, in capable hands guarantees a victory for the SU. I absolutely refuse to sit down and play a game, spending hour upon hour, knowing that I am dooming myself to some desperate defensive game in 1943/44. No thanks. If other players are happy to do that well good for them.

For me in 1941, as German, I want to think I have some chance to pull off the win, or set it up for 1942 or even 1943. If I get to have my shot in 41/42 and fail I am more than happy to then try to survive in to 44/45. But I want my chance at victory first. Running Soviets rob me of that chance/fun. The Soviet only players want to have their winter 41 fun and 44/45 fun but deny the German players their chance at victory and the fun of actually fighting the 1941 Russian Army. Soviet units that disappear in to the depths of Russia should be something for 1942.

I will be more than happy to play *anyone* as Soviet with no house rules. Sounds like a nice relaxing game to me. But I would honestly prefer mirrored games with the limited reserve and no run rule. And as of now a para limit rule as well. I truly hope WITE 2 does a better job at simulating the desperate war of 1941 that occurred. As it stands, the Soviets in WITE can run whenever they feel any heat at all, not much desperation there at all.

A final thing about the house rules. I am willing to play under the same conditions as Russian against any player who will let me play German under those very same conditions. Fredrik has declined the return match at this stage. He has valid reasons. One of which is not having played German for some time. I fully understand this. However, Fredrik I am willing to wait a week or two for you to get up to speed, even longer if you are keen on the return match. I had my fun, you have every right to have yours.

I don't know what else I can say about the rules. If I were saying I will only play German under those conditions then sure that�s pretty sad. But I am willing to play Fredrik again as Soviet with said very same rules.

As for this game. It was the most challenging I have faced. His defensive method was intimidating and it was no walk in the park. It took hours to figure out how to unravel it. Even my wife commented on the time it was taking for a move. A first. This is the great myth, winning as Axis is easy. What rubbish. Winning as the Soviets is easy when you can run for hills at the slightest sign of trouble. The Soviet only crew can never appreciate the effort, pressure, stress and time commitment it takes to achieve the results the good Axis players do. If you don't apply yourself fully against a good Russian player its curtains by late summer.

I think Tarhunnas forward strategy may well work with some tweaking. More than a few of my advances were almost stopped. With a breakthrough coming only with the last throw of the dice. A 2.2 : 1 win or some such. The thing the German must have is momentum. As soon as it stops, trouble.

Tarhunnas has been a great opponent. I truly enjoyed the game. I wish him well in his other games. But I hope he takes up my offer of the mirror. I can wait.

_____________________________

(in reply to Walloc)

Post #: 196

RE: The Great Patriotic AAR II - 6/8/2012 5:39:26 AM

Flaviusx

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

Micheal, nothing personal, strictly business.

But you are deluding yourself if you think these house rules are ok just because you are willing to play a mirror match with them. They're not. Given two equal opponents, or even two comparable ones, you'll get similar results as here. Only a huge disparity in skill would result otherwise.

Tarhunnas could have done some things better, Timmyab I think summed it up well, but in the end, it wouldn't have mattered much and possibly the things he's looking at doing (and I would also do) are simply not compatible with your house rules. A picket and MLR strategy with the occasional runaway isn't a forward defense as such. A Soviet player adopting a limited liability defense would be accused of not standing and fighting.

_____________________________

WitE Alpha Tester

(in reply to Michael T)

Post #: 197

RE: The Great Patriotic AAR II - 6/8/2012 6:02:38 AM

76mm

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

Michael T, very impresive game. i dont think anyone is saying winning as axis is easy< but the fact is that against a good german, the sov player is just along for the ride.

As i read more about the opening months of this campaign, i have become more convinced that the game simply doesnt model the red army very well. under certain circumstances, it could put up a much stiffer fight than in this game. at the same time, C&C was much worse. in game, the germans can simply run roughshod over all sov units, but in the real capaign the sovs were able to actually hold ground in some cases.

(in reply to Flaviusx)

Post #: 198

RE: The Great Patriotic AAR II - 6/8/2012 6:23:20 AM

Michael T

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

@ 76mm in most wargames I have played that do Russia 1941, C&C is way more chaotic than in WITE AND Soviet units are stronger than in WITE (along with Romanians I might add). So your reading and my reading/gaming agree here. It is WITE that is different (in many things other than C&C and units strength too). But some people just don't want to hear that. They dismiss game other than WITE as archaic and all literature written by anyone other than Glantz as simply wrong or biased. WITE 2 will not improve until a much more open/wider view is taken. I just don't have confidence that will occur.

_____________________________

(in reply to 76mm)

Post #: 199

RE: The Great Patriotic AAR II - 6/8/2012 8:44:01 AM

invernomuto

Posts: 986
Joined: 10/8/2004
From: Turin, Italy
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: RCH
This experiment needs to be seen to its completion.

+1

_____________________________

(in reply to RCHarmon)

Post #: 200

RE: The Great Patriotic AAR II - 6/8/2012 9:47:30 AM

Apollo11

Posts: 24082
Joined: 6/7/2001
From: Zagreb, Croatia
Status: offline

Hi all,

"Tarhunnas", how much time and effort (i.e. battles) did yor opponent "Michael T" spend on dealing with pockets he made?

Leo "Apollo11"

_____________________________

Prior Preparation & Planning Prevents Pathetically Poor Performance!

A & B: WitW, WitE, WbtS, GGWaW, GGWaW2-AWD, HttR, CotA, BftB, CF
P: UV, WitP, WitP-AE

(in reply to Tarhunnas)

Post #: 201

RE: The Great Patriotic AAR II - 6/8/2012 9:57:38 AM

janh

Posts: 1216
Joined: 6/12/2007
Status: offline

Congrats to Michael, and thanks to Tarhunnas. It was a nice match to watch, though somewhat frustrating.

quote:

ORIGINAL: hfarrish
I agree with that - MT has always said he would play as Sovs under the same rules, but no one has taken him up on it; would be an interesting match to see for sure.

+1

I'd also vote for a rematch. Tarhunnas is an excellent player, beyond question among the most experienced on the Soviet side. Michael knows the rule set very well, and knows to maximize its benefits. A rematch would not be very useful now.

(in reply to hfarrish)

Post #: 202

RE: The Great Patriotic AAR II - 6/8/2012 10:18:03 AM

janh

Posts: 1216
Joined: 6/12/2007
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: governato
This was an interesting experiment, but should we really expect the results to be much different? The SU tried an aggressive forward defense in real life with disastrous results. Why should this strategy work any better against a very competent German player with full hindsight? There are surely many things to improve, but I'd rather see this as a positive test of the game engine.

It should not work better (unless the Axis player ignored hindsight and made worse mistakes), correct.

But keep in mind that the Russians did even counterattack furiously at many locations, and at various unit scales, not only at regimental level or below. And they suffered terribly with that, but they inflicted attrition with turned out to be important to slow Axis, and probably also set it up for the winter counteroffensives. More so than the lack of winter equipment, I believe. But this did not set Axis up for huge pockets and quick advances, either.

Tarhunnas also counterattacked, and quite impressively so. It cost Michael something like 1 turn across the board altogether, but that's it. Tarhunnas did not even counterattack at the rate the Russians did, else he'd ended up a lot worse because he'd have had even more troops forward. He already had to little depth behind his MBTL, as the pocketing showed. I am more assured now that the Russian side simply does not have the means to repeat the Russian feat in this game, even if the Axis would act more conservatively as if he wouldn't know about the Red Armies numbers, units, reinforcement/rebuild rules etc.

By end of August, the Axis side had loss in excess of 400,000 men, and some units were significantly depleted, especially in Panzergruppe 1. Most AARs also show this number to be roughly half, just as the Soviet losses won't amount to 6Mio, but more like 3-4M. Part of that probably is due to the uncertainty in numbers and differences in categorizing "truly permanent casualties", Glantz being at the upper limit of studies, while others using different sources or different criteria are significantly lower. I don't think this per se is telling anything.

But I am sure that getting so far in barely 7 weeks shows that the supply model is really in favor of offensives. And that reducing pockets is not a rate limiting factor either. It also shows that if Axis can use hindsight to make such gains, it also necessitates that the Soviet player accepts lessons, and one is that already just a forward defense is a very big "va banque" game. It may work against the right opponent, but it is a lot riskier and playing the "ground versus time" game.

Unfortunately there won't be a blizzard counteroffensive, nor would Tarhunnas probably be in any shape for it. The house rules Michael suggested seem like a "double-chance" for mutilation. First the Soviets, and during blizzard perhaps the Wehrmacht, assuming that Soviets survive in first place. It is the opposite of allowing both sides hindsight and withdrawals during the respective periods, which would be force conservation. Since this war was all about destroying the Red Army, and keeping the Wehrmacht intact, it guess hindsight points toward the withdrawals.

< Message edited by janh -- 6/8/2012 10:32:26 AM >

(in reply to governato)

Post #: 203

RE: The Great Patriotic AAR II - 6/8/2012 10:57:27 AM

TulliusDetritus

Posts: 5521
Joined: 4/1/2004
From: The Zone�
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Walloc

quote:

ORIGINAL: TulliusDetritus

Show me an AAR in which the Soviet player has lost circa 6 million soldiers (among them 3 million prisoners)... and Moscow and Leningrad are in Soviet hands and a blizzard offensive is launched...

By the very nature of it, this wont ever happen. U start with 4m man and get around 3 to 3,5mil manpower in reinforcement/replacement before the start of the blizzard. This is set high not low. Thats around 7 mil in all. If u lose 6 mil u wouldnt have any thing left in ur combat forces.
What u get in game arent close to the historic mobilization numbers. Hench u cant lose historic numbers and have any thing left. If u have no troops u ofc cant defend/hold any thing.

Hey, I hadn't thought about that! Thanks

So what do we have? The Red Army [according to some players] has to fight like their counterparts (and thus necessarily take more or less historical losses) when on the game they do NOT even have the men they had to stop the Germans in 1941... now that's funny

This we have clearly seen on this game. Compare Tarhunnas's losses vs historical and now just count the Soviet counters [not yet] annihilated...

In other words, a dwarf is supposed to do the giant's work... Rite, it makes a lot of sense...

Houston...

_____________________________

a nu cheeki breeki iv damke

(in reply to Walloc)

Post #: 204

RE: The Great Patriotic AAR II - 6/8/2012 11:44:32 AM

juret

Posts: 198
Joined: 10/17/2011
Status: offline

hats off to MT for exellent axis play

Tarhunnas - ty for good AAR
- would u play MT with other house rules ? u think u would have bigger chance with different rules?

(in reply to TulliusDetritus)

Post #: 205

RE: The Great Patriotic AAR II - 6/8/2012 12:03:48 PM

Tarhunnas

Posts: 3152
Joined: 1/27/2011
From: Hex X37, Y15
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: RCH

I think this challenge is only half done. I hope Tarhunnas accepts the offer to change sides and play again with the same rules. As I see it, this is unfinished.

Before conclusions are set in stone, I'd like to see what damage Tarhunnas can do as the Axis. I'd like to see what Michael can do with the Soviets.

This experiment needs to be seen to its completion.

I don't think it is so easy as to just switch sides and that would sort of prove anything. Even though I have played Axis in two GC to 1942 and 1945 respctively, that was some time ago and several versions ago. My goal currently is to play a GC to conclusion as the Soviets. I have not practiced Axis openings or moves for several months, almost a year, while Michael T has played ten GCs as the Axis. I could never come close to matching his results, not without extensive practicing for several weeks, which I don't have the time or inclination for right now, and probably not even then. So while I appreciate his offer, I will take a rain check on that for now.

(in reply to RCHarmon)

Post #: 206

RE: The Great Patriotic AAR II - 6/8/2012 1:53:48 PM

RCHarmon

Posts: 322
Joined: 1/19/2011
Status: offline

Tarhunnas' reasons are valid. I have enjoyed the thread, thanks.

A lot has been made of the house rules, but how much did they come in to play? A Soviet player should have the option to fight forward. Historically, the Soviets caused the Axis many casualties. Casualties that you will not see if the Soviet runs.

I think I know the answer, but I must ask.......If there was no Lvov pocket and you had those troops, could a better fighting defense been possible? Would it had been a mere delay or could it have changed the game?

(in reply to Tarhunnas)

Post #: 207

RE: The Great Patriotic AAR II - 6/8/2012 2:04:58 PM

Tarhunnas

Posts: 3152
Joined: 1/27/2011
From: Hex X37, Y15
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: RCH
A lot has been made of the house rules, but how much did they come in to play? A Soviet player should have the option to fight forward. Historically, the Soviets caused the Axis many casualties. Casualties that you will not see if the Soviet runs.

As I said above, I would have fought much the same even without house rules. Not now, with hindsight though.

quote:

ORIGINAL: RCH
I think I know the answer, but I must ask.......If there was no Lvov pocket and you had those troops, could a better fighting defense been possible? Would it had been a mere delay or could it have changed the game?

Without a Lvov pocket, a forward defense is much more feasible, but a player with the abilities of Michael T might very well have made short work of a forward defense regardless.

(in reply to RCHarmon)

Post #: 208

RE: The Great Patriotic AAR II - 6/8/2012 3:46:38 PM

RCHarmon

Posts: 322
Joined: 1/19/2011
Status: offline

A key point, but not the main point may be found in Michael Ts own words.

"I think Tarhunnas forward strategy may well work with some tweaking. More than a few of my advances were almost stopped. With a breakthrough coming only with the last throw of the dice. A 2.2 : 1 win or some such. The thing the German must have is momentum. As soon as it stops, trouble." Quote from Michael T.

This momentum is a key and a reason for the Axis players success. Momentum would have been tempered by supply constraints historically, not in this game.

There is a lot of info to digest from this game, it is not all cut and dry.

< Message edited by RCH -- 6/8/2012 4:17:49 PM >

(in reply to Tarhunnas)

Post #: 209

RE: The Great Patriotic AAR II - 6/8/2012 3:56:15 PM

Tarhunnas

Posts: 3152
Joined: 1/27/2011
From: Hex X37, Y15
Status: offline

I think Michael T is too flattering on my defense. Quite frankly, I have never been so completely outmatched in this game before! It did not feel like a close thing from my side! I was simply completely crushed and powerless to resist by turn 8!

< Message edited by Tarhunnas -- 6/8/2012 6:17:14 PM >

(in reply to RCHarmon)

Post #: 210