RE: Rhine or Ruin

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: Rhine or Ruin

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: Rhine or Ruin

Page: << < prev 3 4 5 [6] 7 next > >>

Message

<< Older Topic Newer Topic >>

RE: Rhine or Ruin - 7/19/2012 12:40:56 PM

Flaviusx

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

Michael, your defense in the south is extravagant and uneconomical. You could easily strip it. OTOH, there's no need to do this yet, as the German hasn't shown his hand.

You do not need to evacuate each and every armament point. (There may indeed be long term problems with this.) It's ok to leave some of it behind and allow some rail for troop transfers. If you write off everything west of the Dnepr from the getgo, you can evacuate the entire south by turn 10. That gives you options and frees up stuff for duty elsewhere. I'm guessing you are still working on getting the Donbas stuff out, as a result of trying to save everything other thank Minsk. If your opponent was a bit more aggressive about threatening factories he could really put the squeeze on you here by, say, getting in your face by Tula. I prefer to write off some of the industry early on and never allow for this kind of thing in the late summer.

Your game metatheory is good enough to get you into 1942, nothing more. The game isn't won in 1941 merely by surviving with your industry and a reasonably strong Red Army. These are necessary but not sufficient conditions. If you give up too much territory you can fall behind the curve, and underestimating the importance of Moscow is a mistake, although I agree that losing it temporarily isn't fatal so long as it can be taken back during the winter.

I think you have an chance of holding Leningrad now. Crossing the Neva without panzers isn't quite as easy as that, especially with some luck from reserves. He pulled them out a bit prematurely imo. He could still isolate it, and the garrison will be hard to maintain if that happens, fair warning. Stuff in there will tend to wither away at an alarming rate.

_____________________________

WitE Alpha Tester

(in reply to Peltonx)

Post #: 151

RE: Rhine or Ruin - 7/19/2012 1:54:39 PM

Walloc

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

I would totally agree with Flav. I understand ur overalll goal and why u think it will work. There are absolutly merits in it, but and i've critisized this earlier too in the thread. Some times there is no need for rapid fall backs.
While u might dodge a few bullits here in the way that ur opponents way of attacking and one should ofc take that into account.

1. Having a huge army especially for blizzard is in it self a good thing.

Problems.
2. Have u evaced the HI to actually sustain a large army(yes i think Glvaca could have done a better job at recogniese ur strategy and pressured ur evacing more than he has. Presumably forcing u to leave more HI or at leased had to make choices more so than now)

3. Pulling back to far. Things are a bit up in the air and there are still things to be seen. Do Leningrad survive(u might have dogde a bullit here), Do Moscow?
Fact is if u lose both tho counting on taking back Moscow in blizzard who says u can hold it in the summer. Plus the fact manpower have the possibilty of getting destroyed when ever a city hex falls. No way of getting that back. Damaged doesnt necesarrily produce dependiing on damage, for a while. Having russian cities fall many times over, while securing some part of the manpower in evac's overall this will hurt russian long time.

IF one lose both and other cities combined with the general withdraw strategy, while much is still up in the air how much u will capture back in teh blizzard and how much ur opponent will take back in 42. U can have a manpower replacement rate on combined axis vs russian which lead to a situasion where u in 42 get down to only between 2-1 to 3-1 depending on land loss.
Doesnt sound very east front'isk, but and i dont have the time to show the math now but is non the less a reality. Ok, what does that matter if u have a large army. Again alot have to do with how much ur opponent recogniese this facts and if he starts to attack with this in mind and use this to his advantage. The way that attrition works it will hurt russian side more so than axis side. Among other things this means losses arent equal. Taken together with how the german manpower situasion is the first year especially if compared to the historic one this gives a german player that have a blizzard strategy, in preserving his army to a greatest extend reasonble, while losing as little territory possible. That will have a '42 where u have a situasion where attrition simply work too slow in ur favor. Hurting long term.

Ofc this all matters nada of u able to make lighting advances, but just see this as a cautious word of warning. I have much faith in ur tactical and operational ability and i dont think Glvaca moves in a way that seems to regcogniese he manpower facts. If those 2 things hadnt been true I would see real dangers to how ur strategy would work out. Especially since u can save ur army and pull back slower. Its a skill too.

Kind regards,

Rasmus

(in reply to Flaviusx)

Post #: 152

RE: Rhine or Ruin - 7/19/2012 9:37:48 PM

Peltonx

Posts: 7250
Joined: 4/9/2006
Status: offline

I have to agree with Flaviusx and Walloc based on my game with M60 and many others.

He lost Moscow during November and gained it back in December.

I findly read M60's thread yesterday, as he played a mirror game of what you are tring to do.

1. Save the Red army. M60 only lost 3 million men as of turn 25.
1A. Save industry, M60 saved about everything other then the plane factorys in Moscow.
2. Moscow fell turn 22 Manpower production fell to 93k.
3. M60 quickly regained the city in just 6 turns.
4. Manpower out put as of turn 48 only 85,000, thats after having it back for 20 turns. 68% of per war levels.
5. Turn 30 Russian army was 6 million strong and German army under 3 million.
6. On turn 48 M60 had 920,000 armament pts saved up.
7. by June of 42 GHC had 3.6 million men and only 2300 tanks heheh normal for me and SHC 6.76 million
8. SHC loses were only 4.5 million and German 1.6.

Why did I win?

Going after arm means zip now as GHC as of 1.05 and we are on 1.06 peeps. Saving every single arm is just plain stupid if you take the time and simply read a few ARR's that get into 42. SHc can easly easly lose 35 and probably more like 50-60 and it will mean nothing zip zero. 70 is what I beleive tipping point is. Flaviusx's strategy is 100% dead on right. You should be railing around units more to save the one thing that matters now, manpower pts!!!

The fact is during the summer of 1942 with the Red army only getting 85,000 replasements I can easly out grind the red army not even counting pockets.

So save your army and arm pts, but you will have no troops to give all them new guns to.

M60's only mistake was building Corps during 42 and not more divisions.

M60 is 100% right HI does matter. You dont need to save allot. I am guessing 10ish, but it does matter.

From what I see your tring something that someone esle has alrdy done and it did not work.

Moscow is huge huge huge.

Once I ground down his army and pocketed a few units he was helpess and I could push east another 20 to 30 hexes over running yet more manpower centers.

Then the problem for M60 was I could grind with him in 1943! Not totally I figured my manpower would drop only 200,000 over a yr, but clearly more then enough to hold the line east of moscow NP.

I personally target manpower centers.

Lets do the math.

So from 120,000 to 85,000. But SHC always losses some manpower. Based on past AAR's most game if Moscow is held the number is 100k ish.

So 15k x 52 = 780,000 men That doesn't sound right?

Its is vs 8421 I did not take moscow and his army was at 7.5 million by June 42. There are other AAR's with same numbers and they add up to basicly same #'s.

So when you lose Moscow he just killed 780,000 men over the next 12 months.

Chances are if you lose it he will retake it in summer of 42 and you take another hit heheh

You cann't rail around manpower centers, but you can rail around your units with amazing speed to the right spots to try to save them.

< Message edited by Pelton -- 7/19/2012 9:46:32 PM >

_____________________________

Beta Tester WitW & WitE

(in reply to Walloc)

Post #: 153

RE: Rhine or Ruin - 7/19/2012 9:46:39 PM

Peltonx

Posts: 7250
Joined: 4/9/2006
Status: offline

Wait 10 mins after I post something so I can reread it and correct all my errors hehe

If as GHC player you take X manpower centers and the SHC railed out everything+kitchen sink and only lost 3 million.

You still have the clear upper hand and its 100% your game to lose.

< Message edited by Pelton -- 7/19/2012 9:52:05 PM >

_____________________________

Beta Tester WitW & WitE

(in reply to Peltonx)

Post #: 154

RE: Rhine or Ruin - 7/19/2012 10:03:20 PM

Peltonx

Posts: 7250
Joined: 4/9/2006
Status: offline

More #'s.

The poeple that hold Moscow on average lose about 3.4 to 3.6 million men, but have on average about 400,000 more men come June 42.

So sure fighting forward costs more, but its like a good investment. You invest a few 100,000 men and get back 2x what you lost and then more if you hold it during 42.

There is a fine balance of which few SHC players have found.

Flaviusx knows what he is talking about when it comes to the SHC.

_____________________________

Beta Tester WitW & WitE

(in reply to Peltonx)

Post #: 155

RE: Rhine or Ruin - 7/19/2012 10:29:31 PM

Michael T

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

I don't think I am going to strike any problems using this strategy. I have been claiming it�s a no lose risk free victory for the SU if done correctly for a long time now. I see no reason *yet* that will change my view. The proof is in the pudding. If I go down then I will be the first to admit I was wrong. And quite honestly if my strategy fails it would be a good thing as far as the WITE engine goes. But I firmly believe this run and preserve strategy will win me the game. I have confidence in my tactical skill to out manoeuvre any German in 42 as long as I have enough well armed troops. This point of having enough troops seems to be the debatable issue. Lets assume Moscow is worth ~5000 men a turn. But if I lose 500,000 men holding it (or maybe even still lose it) that�s equivalent to two years worth of its manpower production, not to mention the loss of ARM points in equipment. For me it�s a no brainer, I would much rather keep my 500,000 men to use in the blizzard and beyond. Until they make cities more lucrative to hold or capture I think my idea is valid.

His dilemma will surface soon enough. I can't give too much away because I can't control what will get passed back to him from these posts, so my cards are always held close to my chest. But I do listen to your comments/ideas. But after 17 wins straight I am sticking with what works for me.

_____________________________

(in reply to Peltonx)

Post #: 156

RE: Rhine or Ruin - 7/19/2012 10:33:43 PM

Peltonx

Posts: 7250
Joined: 4/9/2006
Status: offline

Flaviusx has not lost and doesn't lose Moscow.

I have yet to see you in a 42 game as a German or Russian so I am thinking based on what I do know you don't have any exp in 42.

Problem is the guy you are fighting has zero also heheeh

_____________________________

Beta Tester WitW & WitE

(in reply to Michael T)

Post #: 157

RE: Rhine or Ruin - 7/19/2012 10:43:50 PM

Flaviusx

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

I think Moscow is worth more like a full rifle division a turn although the exact numbers will vary depending on the manpower multiplier. It's important for reasons besides that, though. Losing the HI from there may be enough to create supply problems in 42 if you are cutting it close. (I've never had these supply problems, but I've also never lost Moscow, and am wondering if this is the tipping point, especially if the Red Army gets too big in 1942.) Moscow is a major rail nexus, and your rail cap will take a big hit if it goes. And Moscow is an excellent anchor for your line. Putting all of that together, it is well worth trying to hold.

BTW, I think you could even consider stealing units from the Leningrad area now, or at a minimum not reinforcing it any further. What you have up there is more than enough to stop a purely infantry advance past the Volkhov, although the city itself may yet fall (or not, this is going to be close.) I doubt the Axis will even try to do anything up there beyond taking the city as a matter of fact.

_____________________________

WitE Alpha Tester

(in reply to Peltonx)

Post #: 158

RE: Rhine or Ruin - 7/19/2012 11:13:22 PM

Michael T

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

Nothing has gone to Leningrad for 2 or 3 turns now. Don't get me wrong. I intend to try and hold Moscow. But I will not sacrifice an entire front or two in that process. Who knows what will ensue, maybe I will hold one or the other, or lose both. What if I end up holding more manpower and rail in the south? All I know is I am quite happy at this point in time. But next turn I might find half my army cut off, so one can't count the chickens yet.

This business of not playing in to 42 before is wrong. I have actually played 2 games as Soviet in to early 42 and one as German in to early 42. But aside from that my general east front gaming counts for mid/late war experience. Pelton when my game with Glenn is over I will be happy to take you on with my hordes of Russians. But that might be some time away yet. I don't have anymore time right now to do more than one game at a time. I only get about 3 hours a night plus some extra time on the weekend if I'm lucky.

_____________________________

(in reply to Flaviusx)

Post #: 159

RE: Rhine or Ruin - 7/19/2012 11:54:12 PM

Peltonx

Posts: 7250
Joined: 4/9/2006
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Michael T

Nothing has gone to Leningrad for 2 or 3 turns now. Don't get me wrong. I intend to try and hold Moscow. But I will not sacrifice an entire front or two in that process. Who knows what will ensue, maybe I will hold one or the other, or lose both. What if I end up holding more manpower and rail in the south? All I know is I am quite happy at this point in time. But next turn I might find half my army cut off, so one can't count the chickens yet.

This business of not playing in to 42 before is wrong. I have actually played 2 games as Soviet in to early 42 and one as German in to early 42. But aside from that my general east front gaming counts for mid/late war experience. Pelton when my game with Glenn is over I will be happy to take you on with my hordes of Russians. But that might be some time away yet. I don't have anymore time right now to do more than one game at a time. I only get about 3 hours a night plus some extra time on the weekend if I'm lucky.

Be an interesting game, but I have 3 as German on going and had a russian on going that had to be stopped because of RL issues. I might start another Russian one, but not until September now because of time issues. I really want to try out the cav build up thing in blizzaard heheh.

Mybe this winter.

Again you are doing very good as I stated a few posts back.

Just supportting Flaviusx pt on manpower,HI (M60) and how important it is a GHC to take Moscow.

I dont beleive I have seen an AAR where Moscow has fallen and the GHC not won.

Wow been what 18 months and we still really dont kow what the tipping pts are for sure or what combo of what.

Game was worth allot more then 80$

2by3

_____________________________

Beta Tester WitW & WitE

(in reply to Michael T)

Post #: 160

RE: Rhine or Ruin - 7/20/2012 12:10:11 AM

Michael T

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

quote:

I dont beleive I have seen an AAR where Moscow has fallen and the GHC not won.

Well I lost 2/3 of Moscow against Bobo821 and still won. Plus Leningrad and Rostov. And even if I had of lost the last hex of Moscow it would have made no difference. Time will tell. I even have a perverse thought to leave Moscow as an open city to prove the point but I couldn't bring myself to do it :)

_____________________________

(in reply to Peltonx)

Post #: 161

RE: Rhine or Ruin - 7/20/2012 12:19:34 AM

gingerbread

Posts: 2994
Joined: 1/4/2007
From: Sweden
Status: offline

I'm quite interested in how you intend to defend in '42, but time will tell.

Also noticed the air bases in the front lines here and there and thought it strange that you'd provide free Pz. fuel, but I now realize that they are empty and are for transport purposes only.

(in reply to Michael T)

Post #: 162

RE: Rhine or Ruin - 7/20/2012 2:56:56 AM

Michael T

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

Just a word on the validity of the Lake Janis stop line for the Finns, not the gamey or not argument. I don't mind a discussion on the validity aspect here at all.

I did a quick comparison of manpower lost versus saved by holding the Finns at the northern edge.

If we assume the normal Svir line until the fall of Leningrad and then the collapse of the Svir line and the loss of most towns and cities in the area Volkov/Svir/Cherepovets/Vishy compared to the loss of Leningrad but the line holding at Lake Janis and the Volkov we get a difference in manpower of around 40 points.

That�s about 80K men in 42. You could argue that I am wasting 80K of troops holding the line with 9 div's but I would argue that you will lose more than 9 div's in the ensuing collapse of the Volkov and Svir lines once Leningrad falls. Plus I get even more manpower back from this area in 43. It's a no brainer for me. This line at Lake Janis is a big plus IMO *if* you can afford the initial investment of troops for the line before the Finns come at you.

_____________________________

(in reply to gingerbread)

Post #: 163

RE: Rhine or Ruin - 7/20/2012 3:09:45 AM

Flaviusx

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

A line held east of the Svir will be longer and take about as many units to hold. Moreover, said line isn't secure and can invite all sorts of shenanigans, as shown by Farfarer most recently. And it's that much more real estate that needs to be won back down the line. With all this room to fall back on, Leningrad may never be taken back and Finland will last the entire war, giving the Axis a nice VP cushion. (Assuming the game even lasts that long.)

It really is a no brainer. What amazes me is so many Soviet players even now insist that it's best to let the Finns run wild. I just don't get this.

_____________________________

WitE Alpha Tester

(in reply to Michael T)

Post #: 164

RE: Rhine or Ruin - 7/20/2012 3:10:03 AM

hfarrish

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

Not to mention the retention of APs you certainly would have used to build forts along the Svir river line, or the reduction of opportunity cost that occurs when the Svir river line is staffed with actual units...

I think the Lake Janis line is a no brainer...

(in reply to Michael T)

Post #: 165

RE: Rhine or Ruin - 7/20/2012 11:47:26 AM

janh

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

quote:

ORIGINAL: Michael T
I don't think I am going to strike any problems using this strategy. I have been claiming it�s a no lose risk free victory for the SU if done correctly for a long time now. I see no reason *yet* that will change my view. The proof is in the pudding. If I go down then I will be the first to admit I was wrong. And quite honestly if my strategy fails it would be a good thing as far as the WITE engine goes. But I firmly believe this run and preserve strategy will win me the game. I have confidence in my tactical skill to out manoeuvre any German in 42 as long as I have enough well armed troops. This point of having enough troops seems to be the debatable issue. Lets assume Moscow is worth ~5000 men a turn. But if I lose 500,000 men holding it (or maybe even still lose it) that�s equivalent to two years worth of its manpower production, not to mention the loss of ARM points in equipment.

You are definitely going to "prove" one thing, or another. There are still plenty of bad pitfalls for you as Soviet player, one of them the AP deficit and the problem of building an army that can fight back powerfully. We have seen many AARs where the Russian player had to learn that being allowed to build almost freely doesn't mean he'd end up with something useful. And we have not yet seen one AAR where the Soviet player has built anything as large as the historical Red Army, or anything that could push anywhere near the German paces of 41 and 42. One problem with the size is surely that commonly more manpower centers and cities are lost against an average German in this game.
I am curious to see how you will maneuver that maze.

Just assuming you can built an Army that can advance against the quality German units and their entrenchments at 1/2 of the pace of 41, you will need at least 1 year to make up for the terrain lost in 41, plus more for that lost in 42. Counting the German reserves and reinforcements, I bet a lot more, but you maybe have a different solution to this problem.
A lot will now also depend on the blizzard. If the Germans retire before your thrusts, and don't loose many men, I bet you will be in trouble with your strategy -- the clock is ticking. If you nonetheless manage to show that this is a foolproof strategy for the Soviets -- then VP limits ought to be adjusted to prevent a Soviet Sir Robin, and perhaps a German blizzard withdrawal. But if you fail with what seems to be the hope for a Soviets player... well, that would be "good" in some sense for the WitE engine, but very discouraging for one side as well.

quote:

ORIGINAL: Michael T
For me it�s a no brainer, I would much rather keep my 500,000 men to use in the blizzard and beyond. Until they make cities more lucrative to hold or capture I think my idea is valid.

I think Stalin would have agreed very much with you here. I bet up to the point where he would have sacrificed Moscow in winter 41 to save a few precious divisions, even at the risk of having to send more political troops to discourage or bloodily disperse civilian unrests. Well, Stalin was famous for many bad things, that would just have fit him.
But he certainly knew it was his Army he needed, and since time didn't matter that much (as it does with the deadline in game), he could trade ground to a large degree.

In an analogous fashion the German Generals did see the need for preserving forces and a flexible defense more than clinging to every foot conquered. Both during blizzard 41 and the whole later course the often advocated retreats/withdrawals or "corrections of the MBTL", as long as this did not lead to risks like cut off slower units, or other chaos. In that sense I am sure that hindsight would best require both sides to retreat during dire times.

< Message edited by janh -- 7/20/2012 11:49:24 AM >

(in reply to Michael T)

Post #: 166

RE: Rhine or Ruin - 7/22/2012 3:46:57 AM

Peltonx

Posts: 7250
Joined: 4/9/2006
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Michael T

Pelton when my game with Glenn is over I will be happy to take you on with my hordes of Russians.

I think I am ready, figured a way around the latest supply nerf http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Db40S82sqic&feature=related ( whats this number 4?) and how to grind atleast as good as Jamian.

I will have time in September for a 4th game.

When ever you have the time I am game.

_____________________________

Beta Tester WitW & WitE

(in reply to Michael T)

Post #: 167

RE: Rhine or Ruin - 7/26/2012 10:01:08 PM

Michael T

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

I haven't heard from glvaca for over a week now. Not sure what the problem is. I hope the game will go on but I am getting worried.

_____________________________

(in reply to Peltonx)

Post #: 168

RE: Rhine or Ruin - 7/26/2012 11:09:16 PM

Peltonx

Posts: 7250
Joined: 4/9/2006
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Michael T

I haven't heard from glvaca for over a week now. Not sure what the problem is. I hope the game will go on but I am getting worried.

It is summer. I have one 4 day and one 10 day vacation next month.

I get totally off the grid when i go.

Mybee hes just chilling.

Bobo was gone for 4 or 5 days last week, but he did tell me.

_____________________________

Beta Tester WitW & WitE

(in reply to Michael T)

Post #: 169

RE: Rhine or Ruin - 7/26/2012 11:19:40 PM

Michael T

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

I hope its something as simple as that.

Meanwhile I haven't been idle. I am a GIS analyst. I have managed to get the map and a bunch of data in to a GIS format and it has revealed some interesting things

_____________________________

(in reply to Peltonx)

Post #: 170

RE: Rhine or Ruin - 7/27/2012 9:11:07 AM

Michael T

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

Example

Attachment (1)

< Message edited by Michael T -- 7/27/2012 9:16:51 AM >

_____________________________

(in reply to Michael T)

Post #: 171

RE: Rhine or Ruin - 7/27/2012 12:57:27 PM

Peltonx

Posts: 7250
Joined: 4/9/2006
Status: offline

Nice, lol I have it writen on a piece of note paper about 14 months old heheh

I have a finish line I try to reach in 41 and then 42

_____________________________

Beta Tester WitW & WitE

(in reply to Michael T)

Post #: 172

RE: Rhine or Ruin - 7/28/2012 2:52:05 AM

Michael T

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

This is not just a map Pelton. I have compiled a database that is spatially referenced to the map. So I can do any kind of analysis I see fit. Its very enlightening. It also debunks some debatable theories on certain areas of the map. But I think I will keep my 'debunking' thoughts to myself in future :)

_____________________________

(in reply to Peltonx)

Post #: 173

RE: Rhine or Ruin - 7/28/2012 3:03:31 AM

Peltonx

Posts: 7250
Joined: 4/9/2006
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Michael T

This is not just a map Pelton. I have compiled a database that is spatially referenced to the map. So I can do any kind of analysis I see fit. Its very enlightening. It also debunks some debatable theories on certain areas of the map. But I think I will keep my 'debunking' thoughts to myself in future :)

You are smarter then me, I do it the old way trial and error.

I have figured out a few things about grinding. I saw Jamian doing it and Flaviusx worried about it. I had a nice trail run vs M60 storming Moscow in 42 head on.

Refining it now in my 3 current games so far working better then even I expected. The most amazing thing is my Infantry TOE stays high. In my game vs Bobo out of 103 infantry divisions only 12 are below 90% TOE on turn 14 dispite very hvy fighting.

Still an amazing amount of milk in the cow known as wite.

Bobo is having a good amount of reserve reactions, but I have not lost a single combat in the Moscow area where I am grinding. The only "loses" are the planned ones. Whats that saying everything happens for a reason.

< Message edited by Pelton -- 7/28/2012 3:07:02 AM >

_____________________________

Beta Tester WitW & WitE

(in reply to Michael T)

Post #: 174

RE: Rhine or Ruin - 7/29/2012 9:08:50 PM

Michael T

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

I have heard from from Glenn. He has been very busy. This game will resume soon :)

_____________________________

(in reply to Peltonx)

Post #: 175

RE: Rhine or Ruin - 7/29/2012 9:34:31 PM

Peltonx

Posts: 7250
Joined: 4/9/2006
Status: offline

Cool. Good to hear everything is ok

_____________________________

Beta Tester WitW & WitE

(in reply to Michael T)

Post #: 176

RE: Rhine or Ruin - 7/30/2012 4:34:54 AM

delatbabel

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

quote:

ORIGINAL: Flaviusx

It really is a no brainer. What amazes me is so many Soviet players even now insist that it's best to let the Finns run wild. I just don't get this.

My first preference is to stop the Finns at Lake Janis, my second preference is the Svir, but it is impossible to hold Leningrad in this game and they will eventually break out.

Against inexperienced players I have let the Finns run wild to some advantage -- there aren't that many of them (men or units) and if they get spread out they can be mopped up quickly using a couple of armies stacked full of rifle brigades, tank brigades, and cav divisions. You just carpet them, surround them and destroy them where they stand, and from there you have an easy walk across the top and into Helsinki. Against an experienced player that won't work so well.

_____________________________

--
Del

(in reply to Flaviusx)

Post #: 177

RE: Rhine or Ruin - 7/30/2012 10:45:06 PM

Michael T

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

quote:

but it is impossible to hold Leningrad in this game and they will eventually break out.

Maybe the game needs some counters like the NKVD Political troops in FITE/SE. Thats is any unit stacked with them won't retreat unless the units become depleted or some such. A half dozen or so of these units that could be attached to division sized units would make it possible to have Stalingrad like battles evolve when the Soviets decide to fight for a city, eg Leningrad.

_____________________________

(in reply to delatbabel)

Post #: 178

RE: Rhine or Ruin - 7/30/2012 10:46:52 PM

Michael T

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

Should add they would only use this 'no retreat' ability in cities or urban hexes.

_____________________________

(in reply to Michael T)

Post #: 179

RE: Rhine or Ruin - 7/30/2012 11:11:26 PM

Walloc

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

quote:

ORIGINAL: Michael T

quote:

but it is impossible to hold Leningrad in this game and they will eventually break out.

Maybe the game needs some counters like the NKVD Political troops in FITE/SE. Thats is any unit stacked with them won't retreat unless the units become depleted or some such. A half dozen or so of these units that could be attached to division sized units would make it possible to have Stalingrad like battles evolve when the Soviets decide to fight for a city, eg Leningrad.

I kinda like ur idea Michael T. I know it from FiTE too. Personally i'd prefere if the combat system was look at tho. This is more of a stop gap meassure IMO. Not that that cant work at times. While its absolutly a problem for russian side in 41/42/urban settings mostly, the same goes infavor of russian side later on. I mean how often do we see offensives falter in game?
Give me a little leeway in the make up of forces for for example Mars, corps making, putting eng in right places and the such. That offensive cant fail then in game with same forces involved. If u know what ur doing. Same with summer 43 offensive vs AGC, yes i said 43 not 44. It wasnt exactly a stunning succes either.

Look at some of the current AARs, germans making 41 type offensives in 43. As strong as u can be in attacking the germans as weak u can be repulsing counter offensives as russian. I mean how many times did u see german saying ok i want that piece of the front and getting it post 42. Not the same as when russian side cant get overextended, stretched out and running to far from supply lines. Under those cuircumstances they can their front pierced and get surrounded. Or attacks repsulsed with great russian losses, but thats not teh same as they could say now i want to own this realestate surrounding X. With out russian can do much about it. Ill give it doesnt happen much but there are game showing this and i think in many cases its a mental thing. If u now mentally on the defence u dont think in such. So u dont set up the options of doing such. There are games where it wouldnt be possible periode tho but i see possibilities in AARs that isnt "used".

Kind regards,

Rasmus

< Message edited by Walloc -- 7/31/2012 12:00:23 AM >

(in reply to Michael T)

Post #: 180