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: Ethical Question - help wanted

 
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 >> RE: Ethical Question - help wanted Page: <<   < prev  1 [2]
Login
Message << Older Topic   Newer Topic >>
RE: Ethical Question - help wanted - 2/1/2016 6:03:46 PM   
VigaBrand

 

Posts: 303
Joined: 12/19/2014
From: Germany
Status: offline 		At the end of T16 I close a pocket near Kaluga.
In T17 I killed all units, with the exception of one division in Kaluga (urban) which held at least two attacks from me. So, if I will play for the exploit, why I did clean that pocket?
The answer is, that the pocket in the North stands, because it is very wide and you retreat. The Finns couldn't attack somebody, my tanks from Panzergruppe 2 are out of fuel.
I must stay 9 panzer and mech divisions in the North, where I want them to be free to attack Moscow. It is not intended.
In Leningrad I attack all I could what was not urban. And the Leningrad pocket was close in the same turn as the other one.

Best is to reset the november month with december or january 1942. I would play everything the same if there will be not that rule with the units. Because I couldn't clean it early as I want.




Attachment (1)

_____________________________




(in reply to VigaBrand)
Post #: 31
RE: Ethical Question - help wanted - 2/1/2016 6:15:51 PM   
timmyab

 

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

ORIGINAL: VigaBrand
Best is to reset the november month with december or january 1942.

A very good solution I think. December would be fine. Nobody's going to deliberately leave a pocket until then. Too dangerous.

(in reply to VigaBrand)
Post #: 32
RE: Ethical Question - help wanted - 2/1/2016 8:01:03 PM   
Icier


Posts: 564
Joined: 7/15/2014
From: a sunny beach nsw
Status: offline 		Just to add more confusion to the mix, I was under the impression that if you force those Soviet units to surrender, they are gone,
never to rear their ugly heads again.

(in reply to timmyab)
Post #: 33
RE: Ethical Question - help wanted - 2/1/2016 8:39:04 PM   
loki100


Posts: 10920
Joined: 10/20/2012
From: Utlima Thule
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: Ice

Just to add more confusion to the mix, I was under the impression that if you force those Soviet units to surrender, they are gone,
never to rear their ugly heads again.


if they are destroyed before the end of November they come back as weak shells 10-12 weeks later. Form most of the Soviet reinforcements in late 41 through to spring 42. You pay the cost of new manpower and equipment but not of the admin pts.

that matters as admin pts are a major bottleneck.

anything destroyed post-nov is indeed lost for ever and the Soviet player needs to pay out admin pts to recreate the formation as well as manpower and arms pts to rebuild - which is why the issue of when a unit is destroyed is so important

edit: I like vigabrand's suggestion of say Jan 42. Very few Soviet units will be pocketed in December/Jan and it removes any temptation to take risks?

< Message edited by loki100 -- 2/1/2016 9:41:29 PM >

_____________________________


(in reply to Icier)
Post #: 34
RE: Ethical Question - help wanted - 2/1/2016 9:08:31 PM   
No idea

 

Posts: 495
Joined: 6/24/2011
Status: offline 		My apologies to Vigabrand

< Message edited by No idea -- 2/1/2016 10:09:49 PM >

(in reply to VigaBrand)
Post #: 35
RE: Ethical Question - help wanted - 2/2/2016 5:31:40 AM   
VigaBrand

 

Posts: 303
Joined: 12/19/2014
From: Germany
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: loki100

quote:

ORIGINAL: Ice

Just to add more confusion to the mix, I was under the impression that if you force those Soviet units to surrender, they are gone,
never to rear their ugly heads again.


if they are destroyed before the end of November they come back as weak shells 10-12 weeks later. Form most of the Soviet reinforcements in late 41 through to spring 42. You pay the cost of new manpower and equipment but not of the admin pts.

that matters as admin pts are a major bottleneck.

anything destroyed post-nov is indeed lost for ever and the Soviet player needs to pay out admin pts to recreate the formation as well as manpower and arms pts to rebuild - which is why the issue of when a unit is destroyed is so important

edit: I like vigabrand's suggestion of say Jan 42. Very few Soviet units will be pocketed in December/Jan and it removes any temptation to take risks?


If I had time until the end of November, everything is okay, because I will be finished after that. May not with the heavy urban defenders from Leningrad, but the big pocket should be clean. (I hope).

_____________________________




(in reply to loki100)
Post #: 36
RE: Ethical Question - help wanted - 2/2/2016 7:57:38 PM   
Icier


Posts: 564
Joined: 7/15/2014
From: a sunny beach nsw
Status: offline 		As usual the mechanics of the game differ to what is written in the rules..on surrender its say the unit & is removed from map, with the possibly of some of the sections creating Partisan units..& then further on some of the destroyed units may return as a shell. My experience
is that all the units return, making the Russian army gigantic, & one tough mother to beat in December.

(in reply to VigaBrand)
Post #: 37
RE: Ethical Question - help wanted - 2/2/2016 9:09:38 PM   
sillyflower


Posts: 3509
Joined: 8/4/2010
From: Back in Blighty
Status: offline 		They can both - at least the inf, tank and mot xx can. They all come back and a very few also leave partisans behind

_____________________________

web exchange

Post: I am always fearful that when I put this game down on the table and people see the box-art they will think I am some kind of neo-Nazi

Reply: They already know you're a gamer. What other shame can possibly compare?

(in reply to Icier)
Post #: 38
RE: Ethical Question - help wanted - 2/3/2016 2:39:10 AM   
Belphegor


Posts: 2209
Joined: 5/10/2004
Status: offline 		For me it is about the impact on the game. Will holding on to the pocket be the deciding factor that causes your opponent to lose? Probably not. The German already seeks the discomfort of the Soviet player by removing factories of various sorts. That action makes it more difficult to win but not impossible. The inconvenience of not reducing the pocket is AP only for the Soviet and tied up troops for the German. So the question is whether your value returned is worth the price.

Surrounding Soviet troops in '42 or beyond does not pose an ethical dilemma. Obviously it is sought. So why so critical in '41? Those lost in the last turns prior to them not coming back will not be back in time to do much of anything until summer '42 earliest. For some reason I view this in a similar fashion to turning 18 (or whatever the age of majority in your country). In general, regardless of intelligence, readiness and sometimes preparation on the day of your 18th birthday a whole different set of rules apply.

I think on the balance there will rarely be sufficient Soviet forces pocketed and held until after November to give the German player significant advantage while disadvantaging the Soviet. If it occurs in the small scale I don't find it ethically questionable and in the large scale I suspect it might be impractical.

Ethics are what you do when you won't get caught. Everything else is risk assessment and tolerance.

Are you playing with any sort of historicity in mind (different from replaying exact history). Could the Soviet forces survive in a pocket until November IRL? If so, then no problem. If they couldn't (say you pocketed them in June) then there's an issue if you're playing with history in mind. Hard to say although Stalingrad is a good example of surviving (so to speak) in a large pocket for a long time. I'm not going to debate the effect of air resupply on that pocket.

Are you playing a game as a game? Then it's within the rules.

Others have already identified this.

And finally (also identified) is the only really important opinion is that of your opponent. Ask him directly if he cares.
If others don't like your gameplay they'll limit you with house rules before playing you.

(in reply to sillyflower)
Post #: 39
RE: Ethical Question - help wanted - 2/3/2016 11:13:07 AM   
loki100


Posts: 10920
Joined: 10/20/2012
From: Utlima Thule
Status: offline 		WiTW solves this to some extent (and so will WiTE2). In that if you surround a unit with low morale/experience (say an Italian infantry division on Sicily), next turn its a 1-1 ant and ready for culling. If you surround a FJ Division (or regiment) if can stay powerful for 3+ turns (depending on its access to supplies) - with the allied player cursing its ability to resist attacks.

So that reflects the ability of high morale/well experienced/minimally supplied units to cling on in encirclements for some time but on the other hand a formation with low morale etc will simply fall apart.

_____________________________


(in reply to Belphegor)
Post #: 40
RE: Ethical Question - help wanted - 2/3/2016 7:01:53 PM   
Farfarer61

 

Posts: 713
Joined: 7/21/2004
Status: offline 		Oh hell yeah keep them isolated so they don't come back for free, if you are not paying a steep operational price for so doing. You can mop up with 2nd and 3rd line units much later. Equally important, you want to starve to death all the population centres which you have isolated, so that the people are gone from the game forever and do not relocate to the Urals when you finally move in. For Lvov and Leningrad pockets (well all isolated pop centres I imagine ) this means at least 8 turns of unbroken isolation. Very difficult but just think if you can similarly remove Moscow, Kharkov and Krasnodor etc. from ever contributing effectively for the remainder of the game ! Now if the game let the Axis rebuild or repurpose Russian factory cities or left-behind infrastructure I might have a use for the cities and their virtual denizens...

(in reply to loki100)
Post #: 41
RE: Ethical Question - help wanted - 2/3/2016 8:41:04 PM   
Peltonx


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

ORIGINAL: Farfarer

Oh hell yeah keep them isolated so they don't come back for free, if you are not paying a steep operational price for so doing. You can mop up with 2nd and 3rd line units much later. Equally important, you want to starve to death all the population centres which you have isolated, so that the people are gone from the game forever and do not relocate to the Urals when you finally move in. For Lvov and Leningrad pockets (well all isolated pop centres I imagine ) this means at least 8 turns of unbroken isolation. Very difficult but just think if you can similarly remove Moscow, Kharkov and Krasnodor etc. from ever contributing effectively for the remainder of the game ! Now if the game let the Axis rebuild or repurpose Russian factory cities or left-behind infrastructure I might have a use for the cities and their virtual denizens...


Manpower is an over looked industry by some.

Its funner taking it then giving back during 41/42 winter then rolling over it again 42 summer.

Double dip


< Message edited by Pelton -- 2/3/2016 9:42:22 PM >

_____________________________

Beta Tester WitW & WitE

(in reply to Farfarer61)
Post #: 42
Page:   <<   < prev  1 [2]
All Forums >> [New Releases from Matrix Games] >> Gary Grigsby's War in the East Series >> RE: Ethical Question - help wanted Page: <<   < prev  1 [2]
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

3.000