RE: Balance discussion

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: Balance discussion

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 >> The War Room >> RE: Balance discussion

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

Message

<< Older Topic Newer Topic >>

RE: Balance discussion - 9/13/2018 6:06:09 AM

HardLuckYetAgain

Posts: 6987
Joined: 2/5/2016
Status: offline

Nada

< Message edited by HardLuckYetAgain -- 12/28/2018 6:16:39 PM >

_____________________________

(in reply to chaos45)

Post #: 121

RE: Balance discussion - 9/13/2018 9:23:20 AM

xhoel

Posts: 3219
Joined: 6/24/2017
From: Germany
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: chaos45

Germans can easily outrun fleeing soviets with their motorized and panzer formations in 41 and 42 both and 43 to be honest as most German motorized units keep very high morale for a long time and enemy controlled hex cost is based on the units morale.

Also Xhoel, I comment in your AAR...but look at a historical map of the 1941 campaign and you will quickly see you are far in advance of historical by 1-2 months across almost the entire front. This is why me and HLYA talk balance issues.

I made a comment in the AAR but won't be pursuing a discussion there.
I am approaching this discussion by talking about the points that have been raised by Soviet players, among others you. I said:

-contrary to what was stated panzers can take losses and gave you an example (you can check the screenshots in my AAR to see for yourself). You said that that is not the problem if I manage my TOEs correctly. I gave you arguments why that is not the case and you didn't address the point again.
-I said I'm for a fix of the Soviet construction bug and experience gain bug.
-I said I'm for limitations to using ports as major supply centers.
-I said I'm pro for the +1 rule to be revised so that it ends in November, making more Axis players open to playing with it.
-I asked about how the HQ swap fuel exploit works and you didn't answer.
-Add extra options at the start of the game for the ''expert'' players to have more choice.

After all the points I raised and things I said you went with the fact that in my AAR I am 1-2 months ahead of the actual German advance, completely ignoring the fact that my opponent has been retreating constantly and has kept his army more or less intact. This is a game, with certain mechanics (which do not replicate all the things that actually happened), open to be played as the player sees fit not a simulation so that point of yours is moot.

MarauderPL stated it before and so has Tele and I'm sure that EvK has done the same: Many Axis players that don't post here do far worse than what you are used to seeing in the AARs. Simply saying that all it takes for the Axis to win is to master the supply system is simplyfing the problem and acting like the Axis have the game handed over to them, they only need to learn how supply works which is not the case.

If you want to have a meaningful discussion please approach the points I made, don't jump around finding other arguments as then this stops having any meaning as a thread.

_____________________________

AAR WITW: Gotterdammerung 43-45
http://www.matrixgames.com/forums/tm.asp?m=4490035
AAR WITE: A Clash of Titans 41-45
http://www.matrixgames.com/forums/tm.asp?m=4488465
WitE 2 Tester and Test Coordinator

(in reply to chaos45)

Post #: 122

RE: Balance discussion - 9/13/2018 2:49:36 PM

mouse707

Posts: 57
Joined: 6/3/2013
Status: offline

I don't want to involve too much in the discussion as I'm not an expert player. But the viewpoint of an intermediate player can provide some insights in the discussion, since the game is not directed only toward expert players.

I've played 15 games so far, always as the soviet. On these games, only 1 has gone toward 1942 (the current one vs bitburger). In all other games except one, the german player resigned because he wasn't able to advance sufficiently. On several occasions, the German player stopped on turn 2 to 5, very early. If he sees that he does not destroy the soviet southfront, he often stops the game (while if we talk about history, south front was very difficult for Germany, and that was only the coming forces from the AGC that helped to advance)
I do play forward defense, and it was very difficult for every beginner to intermediate player to advance toward rising russian troops if they do not destroy many of them early. In the remaining game, it's me that did not respond to the first german turn. It was Bendeer who played it, and before having the possibility to move a single unit, the whole russian army was trapped on turn 1. There was no point to spend hundred of hours moving the soviet units knowing that without troops, you can't play.

So what I can see is that the game is very german oriented for top players, but playing the german is very very difficult for other players. A single look at the "Opponent wanted" section shows that the majority of them request a german opponent. And no russian player can tell that playing the soviet the first summer is particularly exciting.
Then a change in the rules of the game should only change small "exploits" (or gamey things or any name you want), that allows some players to make a super extended Lvov pocket, to optimize supply toward mobile units just by changing the HQ, to concentrate rail repair, to use Ports without restrictions and so on, while at the same time, not rising the difficulty for the 95% of german players remaining.

< Message edited by mouse707 -- 9/13/2018 2:50:25 PM >

(in reply to xhoel)

Post #: 123

RE: Balance discussion - 9/13/2018 3:43:21 PM

Stelteck

Posts: 1376
Joined: 7/20/2004
Status: offline

The problem of the german player is the first turn have to be perfect.

It is a huge burden.

I would really love a scenario that start one week after the opening of the war with the historical positions. (Like in WITP there is a scenario that start the day after the historical pearl harbor).

(in reply to mouse707)

Post #: 124

RE: Balance discussion - 9/13/2018 5:01:24 PM

chaos45

Posts: 1889
Joined: 1/22/2001
Status: offline

- panzer AFV losses are very low.....we are talking AFVs. As well again ToE management will keep them topped off with infantry/guns esp if you cycle them.
-Most the fixes you list as I have said are about what ive asked for in addition to some scenario fixes to limit super lvov
-as to HQ exploits...not being a german expert not sure 100% how it works....but its something like u keep a selection of HQs back at the rail head then move them up when they are full supply and swap out the units from an empty fuel corps so next turn they fill up. As well is some type of HQ thing were German infantry corps HQs keep alot of fuel on hand but the infantry Divs dont need them so you can put 1 Motor div in an infantry HQ and get it more fuel than normal....thats my understanding of how it works.
- the problem with adding more options is some players don't like to use them...thus fewer players to get a good game with.
-A big issue right now in the game is soviet player doesnt matter as much against good German player...fight forward and you just lose massively as you cant slow down super German CV. Retreat and fight for the main objectives- again super German CV wins every time. It really is just a matter of how much MP the German player has on their motorized and panzer divisions on how long and what you can hold due to the CV disparity.

Now some of the suggested fixes go a long way towards balancing things...but the patch team has been relatively quiet on what they are actually changing.

(in reply to Stelteck)

Post #: 125

RE: Balance discussion - 9/13/2018 5:29:41 PM

SparkleyTits

Posts: 898
Joined: 10/7/2016
From: England
Status: offline

I tend to lose a lot of AFV in 41 to the point where I have to consistently hold myself back in a hefty % of my Axis games and limit my options in order to keep a strong supplement of AFV in spring 42

In 41 panzers can be killed just fine and if Axis does not keep an eye on it they won't have a full supplement of AFV come spring 42 (Perhaps I am aggresive with my armour arm so others don't lose so much?)
It's later on once the models get to pz4 and beyond they become a problem so they aren't as big an issue in the very early war I feel

The HQ exploit is a one off deal and not going to rails and switching supplies
If you look at all Axis armies they will have fuel in stores in them on turn 1, you can use AP to put panzers under said armies command (There is enough fuel for about 2 panzers) but bare in mind there are only a couple of armies that are optimal for it ratings wise to get the most out of the deal and that are not overloaded
Once the fuel is used up it's gone and can't be done ever again

< Message edited by SparkleyTits -- 9/13/2018 5:30:27 PM >

(in reply to chaos45)

Post #: 126

RE: Balance discussion - 9/13/2018 5:34:49 PM

Stelteck

Posts: 1376
Joined: 7/20/2004
Status: offline

Remember there is a lots of differents panzers. The axis loose far more easily panzer II and panzer 38 than Panzer 3 or 4.

(in reply to SparkleyTits)

Post #: 127

RE: Balance discussion - 9/13/2018 5:48:52 PM

SparkleyTits

Posts: 898
Joined: 10/7/2016
From: England
Status: offline

If you look back on older AAR's and ideas from years ago I would guess that on average the playerbase is higher in skill than perhaps it was 3 years ago +
This is apparent from an Axis standpoint quite heavily as it is the side that needs less mistakes to play well

Unfortunately this translates into players needing reactionary responses for them to adapt and grow in order to stay above water as high level players

For the Soviets, one place I would definitely say is needed at the moment to continue to advance and stay at a top level is to learn Axis alongside main playing Soviets as it broadens your repitoire
It seems the trend to me nowadays is that players that only play Soviets are having a very hard time staying competetive at the higher skill levels

It teaches a huge amount of nuance for me personally playing both sides alongside eachother

< Message edited by SparkleyTits -- 9/13/2018 5:49:30 PM >

(in reply to Stelteck)

Post #: 128

RE: Balance discussion - 9/13/2018 6:17:05 PM

chaos45

Posts: 1889
Joined: 1/22/2001
Status: offline

ST disagree---soviet nerfs is almost completely to blame for the drastic game changes....as well as German buffs. You can talk to Morvael there were some very big German buffs that happened on accident in I think it was patch .08 that they have since been trying to adjust the game to fix.

As well the patch team became abit overzealous at the same time with Soviet Nerfs. You can look at old matches and see a completely different soviet army on the field and completely different Axis rate of advance. Talk to beender as he seems to be from many the top player right now...I did not play a bad game vs him at all...its simply a matter of German MP and unstoppable CV in the first about 20 turns.

The soviet nerfs have been constant and just finally reached an overwhelming weakness in the soviet army that it can no longer really deal with the Super lvov. The older patch versions of the game had the soviet army just strong enough to still survive after super lvov type moves as new divisions arrived abit earlier and were abit stronger due to more manpower and more experience gain. As well you had a much stronger Soviet engineer corps which allowed them to dig in and get fortified bonuses abit easier.

Just in that one paragraph is a ton of CV reductions to Soviets....while the Germans just got faster and faster due to the supply changes the patch team made.

I highly recommend that players that feel the soviets are the easy side to face a german player than can do Super Lvov type southern opening and you will quickly see its nigh impossible to slow the Germans after.

(in reply to SparkleyTits)

Post #: 129

RE: Balance discussion - 9/13/2018 6:55:41 PM

SparkleyTits

Posts: 898
Joined: 10/7/2016
From: England
Status: offline

Since I started playing the past 2 years Russia has become much more balanced and managable from what I can remember?
So I am not entirely sure what you mean by constant and drastic changes that only buff Axis and debuff Soviets

I'm not saying you aren't correct to a degree as a game like this one will always need more balance of course but I certainly don't think the game is as lobsided as you advocate
I think the team has done brilliant work since I have been playing to making this game better in all regards

(in reply to chaos45)

Post #: 130

RE: Balance discussion - 9/13/2018 7:48:28 PM

STEF78

Posts: 2094
Joined: 2/19/2012
From: Versailles, France
Status: offline

German side is far harder to play than the russian one. It allows less errors on the 10/15 first turn but on the other side there is nothing to do against top notch german players.

I've played 25 GC on both sides and I've been swept in 1941 as russian against 2 players:
- HLYA beat me in 10 turns but I shouldn't have agreed to play with a no +1 / vanilla blizzard setting. Against a high skilled german player there is nothing to do without +1. But I admit that HLYA is a better player than me.
- Bozo beat me in 12 turns... he was just far better than me.
The 2 other games were lost in 1942 at a time when we didn't get automatic return of destroyed units past 02/1942

I think a good house rule is to allow Lvov Pocket but to deny super Lvov.
Other option would be +1/mild blizzard

I will propose such a setting in my next game. From my experience it gives a fun game against most players.

(in reply to SparkleyTits)

Post #: 131

RE: Balance discussion - 9/13/2018 7:49:20 PM

xhoel

Posts: 3219
Joined: 6/24/2017
From: Germany
Status: offline

@chaos45: Here are two example from my AAR: 3rd Panzer Division has 84 AVFs operational, the 14th Panzer Division has 92 AVFs operational. Unless you want to deny facts, German Panzers take losses just fine.
-As to the HQ exploit I would advise you to play a German player that does not take advantage of this till it gets fixed.
-I think more options are better to accomodate a small number of players.
-Massive German CV? I must have missed this one since in my game I'm attacking with 2-3 divisions in deliberate attacks in order to push back strong Soviet defenses. This is one of the major problems I have with the way you present your case.
''super German CV wins every time'' is simply not the case and a complete distortion of reality.
-Supply buff for the Germans? When was that implemented?

From what I have gathered from many players that have expressed their viewpoints here the consensus seems to be that while small tweaks are needed to ensure the game gets even more balanced, the game is already balanced.

_____________________________

(in reply to SparkleyTits)

Post #: 132

RE: Balance discussion - 9/13/2018 8:23:53 PM

chaos45

Posts: 1889
Joined: 1/22/2001
Status: offline

xhoel---a german panzer division can be 20+ CV in 1941...that's one division. Often all you need to do is have infantry break the soviet fortified front line and the that one or at most 2 panzer divisions in a stack can hasty attack most other soviet units out of the way.

Against a Super Lvov opening its very hard to build any depth into soviet defenses in 1941 as you just don't have the forces available. In your current game you did not pull off the super Lvov so the soviets were in abit better shape unit and manpower wise thus offering up better/more realistic resistance...and even then you are doing just fine, you still have some time until mud and then will have a couple turn of frost after mud.

Also a 20 CV German division esp if it is able to get into a town or woods...is virtually invincible to soviet forces in 1941...thus once u break the soviet lines u can park panzer units and the soviet play in effect cannot move them ever. Doesn't even need to be 20 CV...anything over about 10 CV esp if it gets a terrain bonus is very hard for the soviets to move in 1941 without a game bonus.

As to game tweaks it seems most ppl are more or less agreed with my initial suggestions- which is odd as many attacks as I seem to get. I will repeat my suggestions yet again:
-Fix exp gain- is for both sides
-fix soviet digging
-fix the AA guns...they are much to good---kinda an auto include in the fix list lol
-Scenario tweak to limit super lvov move- Im not talking stop it completely my suggestion was to allow the 1 soviet tank grp to not get encircled and to put a garrison in Odessa- so tweaks not massive changes.
-I also do feel soviet manpower generation is alittle weak at the moment, one fix I suggested was just add a slightly bigger starting manpower pool instead of an entire game manpower buff--this seems to be playing out more and more in games where the soviets have more guns then men basically the entire war....which it really shouldnt work out that way. This was a later suggestion while waiting on the patch team to decide what they are doing.

These fixes IMO wont break the current game at all I think would give a more balanced and playable game to both sides.

(in reply to xhoel)

Post #: 133

RE: Balance discussion - 9/13/2018 8:45:32 PM

HardLuckYetAgain

Posts: 6987
Joined: 2/5/2016
Status: offline

Nada

< Message edited by HardLuckYetAgain -- 12/28/2018 6:17:01 PM >

_____________________________

(in reply to Stelteck)

Post #: 134

RE: Balance discussion - 9/13/2018 8:58:09 PM

HardLuckYetAgain

Posts: 6987
Joined: 2/5/2016
Status: offline

Nada

< Message edited by HardLuckYetAgain -- 12/28/2018 6:17:14 PM >

_____________________________

(in reply to STEF78)

Post #: 135

RE: Balance discussion - 9/13/2018 9:03:15 PM

MarauderPL

Posts: 134
Joined: 4/8/2016
Status: offline

Are you talking about the strategy where you avoid activating the Southern Front and then gobble it up in a swift drive a turn or two later? Thats not a secret for a long time. On the other hand, if you are talking about something completely different, then maybe its really better not to tell

(in reply to HardLuckYetAgain)

Post #: 136

RE: Balance discussion - 9/13/2018 9:13:27 PM

HardLuckYetAgain

Posts: 6987
Joined: 2/5/2016
Status: offline

Nada

< Message edited by HardLuckYetAgain -- 12/28/2018 6:17:27 PM >

_____________________________

(in reply to MarauderPL)

Post #: 137

RE: Balance discussion - 9/13/2018 10:18:19 PM

beender

Posts: 184
Joined: 2/23/2017
From: Beijing, China
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: HardLuckYetAgain

I have a German opening now that does not have to be perfect. Matter of fact in the south I dont even need to go that far. Say 5 hexes on anything on hex line with Rovno and below just to make a small advance. Personnelly I think this opening is even more deadly than the extended lvov opening. Maybe I will pick up a lucky person that can defend against it ;-p. Hell, I dont even need to make a pocket on the 1st turn as Germany now. Maybe I will release it with an in depth write up from A to Z to bring German players up to speed quickly. But I have been reluctant.

I happened to have a similar idea recently while playing the Soviet side extensively. In South there are really some very good units (by Soviet standard) and thus the room for German to improve their openings. Indeed there is no need at all to maximize return on T1, as generally about every 3 turns should be considered together, which is the rhythm mobile divisions act at.

(in reply to HardLuckYetAgain)

Post #: 138

RE: Balance discussion - 9/14/2018 8:01:31 PM

D511

Posts: 14
Joined: 1/20/2013
Status: offline

in my current game with Tollwut his Axis Panzer Division just not going in to the battle :) how i can beat such enemy? ))
Strange 12 Panzer Division

(in reply to beender)

Post #: 139

RE: Balance discussion - 9/15/2018 10:37:41 AM

VigaBrand

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

My impression is, with a good axis player, you should play with +1/mild blizzard.

The low SU CV leads to good attack chances for the axis, but chaos is right, this means mostly no chances to move the germans.
If you higher the overall cv from the soviets, than you could move the germans, but this means the well dig in soviets are nearly impossible to move. Thise balancing act is hard to solve. So with actual settings, you need +1 so that the game will work and both sides had fun (could win).

_____________________________

(in reply to D511)

Post #: 140

RE: Balance discussion - 9/15/2018 10:49:45 AM

MarauderPL

Posts: 134
Joined: 4/8/2016
Status: offline

Or we could change the +1 to +0,75

(in reply to VigaBrand)

Post #: 141

RE: Balance discussion - 9/15/2018 11:50:48 AM

xhoel

Posts: 3219
Joined: 6/24/2017
From: Germany
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: chaos45

xhoel---a german panzer division can be 20+ CV in 1941...that's one division. Often all you need to do is have infantry break the soviet fortified front line and the that one or at most 2 panzer divisions in a stack can hasty attack most other soviet units out of the way.

Against a Super Lvov opening its very hard to build any depth into soviet defenses in 1941 as you just don't have the forces available. In your current game you did not pull off the super Lvov so the soviets were in abit better shape unit and manpower wise thus offering up better/more realistic resistance...and even then you are doing just fine, you still have some time until mud and then will have a couple turn of frost after mud.

Also a 20 CV German division esp if it is able to get into a town or woods...is virtually invincible to soviet forces in 1941...thus once u break the soviet lines u can park panzer units and the soviet play in effect cannot move them ever. Doesn't even need to be 20 CV...anything over about 10 CV esp if it gets a terrain bonus is very hard for the soviets to move in 1941 without a game bonus.

As to game tweaks it seems most ppl are more or less agreed with my initial suggestions- which is odd as many attacks as I seem to get. I will repeat my suggestions yet again:
-Fix exp gain- is for both sides
-fix soviet digging
-fix the AA guns...they are much to good---kinda an auto include in the fix list lol
-Scenario tweak to limit super lvov move- Im not talking stop it completely my suggestion was to allow the 1 soviet tank grp to not get encircled and to put a garrison in Odessa- so tweaks not massive changes.
-I also do feel soviet manpower generation is alittle weak at the moment, one fix I suggested was just add a slightly bigger starting manpower pool instead of an entire game manpower buff--this seems to be playing out more and more in games where the soviets have more guns then men basically the entire war....which it really shouldnt work out that way. This was a later suggestion while waiting on the patch team to decide what they are doing.

These fixes IMO wont break the current game at all I think would give a more balanced and playable game to both sides.

Here you again changed your statement from ''German Panzer Divisions take no losses" to: ''It can happen but to only one division" which is not the case. And when I prove that, you will jump to another argument and we will keep going down the rabbit hole something that I have no desire to do.

And no, against a Soviet player that defends in depth using the infantry to break the first line is nowhere close to getting the job done.

I am all for the changes too as long as they mean that the game rules are implemented correctly and no gamey stuff is happening. What people should keep in mind is that the game goes on till 1945 so both sides should prepare for a long fight and should not expect an I Win button. I see little reason as to why Soviet forces should be able to move a strong German Panzer Division defending in a forest or village in 1941. With that being said my opponent has forced German infantry divisions (not cut off) defending in clear terrain to retreat in more than one occasion during our game.

I will disagree on the AA guns, I think that they at least do something right now, as in the past patches you would think they were shooting cotton candy out of their guns and couldn't hit a target if it was 2 meters in front of them.

The Super Lvov move can be forbidden as a house rule and it only affects a very small percentage of players as most Axis players will not be able to pull that off anyways. So its fine with me if it gets tweaked. In either way I personally don't care about it as I see little reason to do it.

If the Soviets get more manpower (I am all for it), then armaments production should be lowered a bit too. Manpower was not a problem till late 44-45 but it seems to me that the fact the Soviets can afford to lose 25% of their ARM points and not have any problems in the late war is a bit of a stretch.

_____________________________

(in reply to chaos45)

Post #: 142

RE: Balance discussion - 9/15/2018 12:19:36 PM

SparkleyTits

Posts: 898
Joined: 10/7/2016
From: England
Status: offline

20CV is often only seen at the early game unless Soviets and Axis are both defensive in their playstyle and there will be options to degrade it's elements without +1 with foresight in clear and light woods

If you do one or two draining attacks to lessen the ammo which can really damage a panzers CV potential and damage some AFV in the process then go in for the win to turn all of those into AFV into losses you'll soon see those panzers turn into 10-15CV packs

Granted this is circumstancial as it's not always possible to throw away your own manpower, supplies and CV willy nilly every turn unless you are in control to a degree but in an even game you can bide your time by keeping an eye on panzers that are starting to fray under sustained fights of their own accord and then hit that panzer for more efficient ratios

(in reply to xhoel)

Post #: 143

RE: Balance discussion - 9/15/2018 1:22:55 PM

Stelteck

Posts: 1376
Joined: 7/20/2004
Status: offline

The CV value of panzer division actually increase during war. Germany have also some completely op support units, like with tigers that you can add to further increase the battle value.

You can have CV 40 in 1943 for some elite units

< Message edited by Stelteck -- 9/15/2018 1:23:29 PM >

(in reply to SparkleyTits)

Post #: 144

RE: Balance discussion - 9/15/2018 1:35:29 PM

SparkleyTits

Posts: 898
Joined: 10/7/2016
From: England
Status: offline

Sorry yes you're definitely right!

By 20CV at the beginning I meant in the context of 41 as that is the danger year for balance we were talking about

I didn't even think to mention later in the years tbh so definitely a hefty chunk of oversight and a lack fo clarify from me there
I have seen some monster panzers in yours and Stef game and I have felt the heavy sting of the monsterous SS panzers myself on my way to Berlin!

Cheers

(in reply to Stelteck)

Post #: 145

RE: Balance discussion - 9/15/2018 1:38:32 PM

SparkleyTits

Posts: 898
Joined: 10/7/2016
From: England
Status: offline

Trying to degrade panzers in 43+ is just not efficiently plausible from when I have tried even if you use weather and damaged elements to your advantage it's just never worth the cost

In 42 you can do it still but it's more down to Axis mistakes over Soviet opportunities

(in reply to SparkleyTits)

Post #: 146

RE: Balance discussion - 9/16/2018 5:02:15 PM

GamesaurusRex

Posts: 505
Joined: 10/13/2013
Status: offline

Current Grand Campaign game playing Russian side versus very experienced German Player...

Initial game setting tweaks:
Russian Attack +1 / Mild Winter
German Morale 102% German AP set 110%
Russian Morale 110% Russian AP set 120%
House Rule denying Lvov Pocket

Turn 27 November, 1941... Germans possess everything west of a line from (Lake Oneida - Kalinin - Moskow - Ryazan - Boguchar - Rostov) including full control of named cities.
People who say the Germans cannot take Leningrad/Moskow/Rostov in 1941 simply do not know what they are talking about. If the German player is experienced, this is a cake walk.

< Message edited by GamesaurusRex -- 9/16/2018 5:03:47 PM >

(in reply to SparkleyTits)

Post #: 147

RE: Balance discussion - 9/16/2018 8:33:17 PM

STEF78

Posts: 2094
Joined: 2/19/2012
From: Versailles, France
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: GamesaurusRex

.../...
German Morale 102% .../...
Russian Morale 110% .../...
Turn 27 November, 1941... Germans possess everything west of a line from (Lake Oneida - Kalinin - Moskow - Ryazan - Boguchar - Rostov) including full control of named cities.
People who say the Germans cannot take Leningrad/Moskow/Rostov in 1941 simply do not know what they are talking about. If the German player is experienced, this is a cake walk.

Some years ago, we had a fierce debate about morale >100%.

The testers (including some german fanboys) concluded it was a huge advantage for the german player.

I would never accept such a setting as russian and would consider it as unfair as german... something like a cakewalk.

(in reply to GamesaurusRex)

Post #: 148

RE: Balance discussion - 9/18/2018 10:57:42 AM

56ajax

Posts: 1950
Joined: 12/3/2007
From: Carnegie, Australia
Status: offline

It is a long time since I have played T1 and whilst having read the forums on how to defend as the Soviet I am pessimistic on my survival. Whether by accident or design a number of my army HQs and the NW Front were pocketed. (I am impressed). Thus I cannot set up an appropriate command structure for the defense of the motherland. Whilst I can use the relocate button this typically moves the unit 1 or 2 hexes into friendly territory, and if my opponent is capable I cannot see why these HQs may not be re pocketed on t2 etc. I could use Northern Front for my defense of Leningrad but it is frozen. And perhaps all this is academic as my opponent has done an excellent Super Lvov pocket and thus I do not have too many units to spare anyway.

Now there are a number of frozen units waiting activation but I suspect they will be pocketed on T2 as the Axis moves so quickly, so there is no point in them being in the game other than historical accuracy.

Now most of the discussion on Balance has centered on Combat, Morale, Experience but perhaps other functions need to be addressed.

The game has gone well past frozen units, and if they must be kept, perhaps they can be unfrozen through the expenditure of Admin Points.

Not sure what to do about my pocketed Front but perhaps its location needs to be changed.

Cheers and Good Night.

_____________________________

Molotov : This we did not deserve.

Foch : This is not peace. This is a 20 year armistice.

C'est la guerre a�rienne

(in reply to STEF78)

Post #: 149

RE: Balance discussion - 9/18/2018 6:32:21 PM

thedoctorking

Posts: 2297
Joined: 4/29/2017
Status: offline

I'm still in favor of a limited free deployment option. I'd be happy to start another game with this option (using the editor) if somebody wants to try it out.

Proposed rules:
No unit can be moved more than 5 hexes from its starting position in the standard setup
Every border hex has to be in a Soviet ZOC
At least half of Soviet divisions that are unlocked on turn 1 must deploy within 5 hexes of the border, and the remainder must be within 10 hexes of the border
Soviet air groups may not be redeployed to different air bases, and bases cannot be more than 5 hexes from their starting positions in the standard setup

Also, for discussion:
No redeployment of units from their original HQ's

(in reply to 56ajax)

Post #: 150