RE: Game favors Axis and is unbalanced

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: Game favors Axis and is unbalanced

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] >> Strategic Command Series >> Strategic Command WWII: World at War >> RE: Game favors Axis and is unbalanced

Page: << < prev 1 2 [3] 4 next > >>

Message

<< Older Topic Newer Topic >>

RE: Game favors Axis and is unbalanced - 8/6/2019 5:30:30 PM

nnason

Posts: 502
Joined: 3/4/2016
From: Washington DC Metro Area
Status: offline

All,
I hope the developers focus on game balance for human players.
This is a game where both sides should have a balanced chance of winning. This will mean there will be some historical inaccuraciesHopefully not many.)
The AI is a training device to prepare players for each other. Developer time is precious and in my opinion should be spent forst on "bigs" and second on Balance.

Remember WiE has had 18 months of hard work by Bill and Hubert and the community is still wrangling over balance versus historical accuracy.

4 of us are in a 4-way game using hotseat. We would really like the "bug" that doesn't allow turn start decisions to be fixed.

_____________________________

Live Long and Prosper,
Noah Nason
LTC Field Artillery
US Army Retired

(in reply to Hartmann)

Post #: 61

RE: Game favors Axis and is unbalanced - 8/6/2019 5:53:40 PM

Hartmann

Posts: 888
Joined: 11/28/2000
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: nnason

All,
I hope the developers focus on game balance for human players.
This is a game where both sides should have a balanced chance of winning. This will mean there will be some historical inaccuraciesHopefully not many.)
The AI is a training device to prepare players for each other. Developer time is precious and in my opinion should be spent forst on "bigs" and second on Balance.

I knew that something like this would be coming. I disagree about the AI being just a training device. If that be the case we actually wouldn't need an AI at all, like in "World in flames". Some people need the AI because they can't make the commitment to reliably deliver turns to a human opponent on a schedule. Some people also like to play within a "world" where they can watch AI players duking it out (that's part of why I love "Crusader Kings 2" so much).

I'm playing computer wargames since the 1980ies, but today wouldn't buy a game without a strong and competent AI anymore. I also wouldn't buy a game where "hands off" gameplay would not on average give roughly historical results. That's why I quit HOI (even though I used to be a betatester for HOI1/2). But of course it's Hubert's and Bill's decision what to do with their series.

< Message edited by Hartmann -- 8/6/2019 6:23:56 PM >

(in reply to nnason)

Post #: 62

RE: Game favors Axis and is unbalanced - 8/6/2019 7:35:21 PM

BillRunacre

Posts: 4945
Joined: 7/22/2013
Status: offline

Good points Hartmann, this is what we constantly struggle with - balancing the game no matter how it is played.

_____________________________

(in reply to Hartmann)

Post #: 63

RE: Game favors Axis and is unbalanced - 8/7/2019 8:38:31 AM

Wahhim

Posts: 17
Joined: 12/17/2018
From: Poland
Status: offline

I might as well add my 2 cents to this topic.

I'm playing mostly as Allies, but recently as one of my two games was concluded I've accepted an open challenge created by sveint, whom chose to play as Allies. I don't really think that I'm that good of a player, but he's definitely a great one. In early game he hindered my economy by making a really smart call (but it is his to share with publicly) with a potential of dealing even more economic damage later on. He was a little late when it comes to USSR's infantry weapons level 2, but I guess that was the case bacuase he invaded Finland and I did not annex Lithuania, which makes USSR's tech investments somewhat problematic. He's reached it though, before the huge fights happened. But it didn't help at all. My tanks at lvl 3 just cut into him like a knife through a butter. He wasn't really able to counterattack, because of insuffiecient forces. It's now spring of 1942 and I'm on the verge of getting to panzer's at 5th level with all of the tanks, including heavy and minor's tanks coming into action soon and the doors to his capitals lie open. I don't believe he has enough to stop me, but it remains to be seen. In China I believe I was a bit slow, but I don't think he can recover as well. He was really unlucky with his diplo investments though.

On the other hand in my other game, in which I play as Allies against quite good player, pcolin, he decided to invest more into German units, than into tech. As I never invade Finland to keep USSR's income as high as possible, I always have infantry weapons lvl 2 and have or I'm close to having tanks at lvl 2 and armored warfare done, if Axis player decides to annex Lithuania. Pcolin also had his tanks on lvl 2, and as I've decided to heavily defend Dniepropietrovsk, to buy time for my engineers to finish 2 fortifications on the hills near Rostov. He concentrated most of his combat-valuable units in the South as well, which put a lot of pressure on me. When he tried to encircle the city from the North, I had my counterattack forces made of 2 tanks at lvl 2 and 2 mechanized units attached to Zhukov (rating 9 at this point) destroy 2 of his tanks and one mechanized unit, which all had ok supply from Cherkasy (4-6) and still was able to retreat with most of my attacking units to safety. He was able to destroy only 1 tank in his countermove.

With this comparison I wanted to show what kind of difference can tech make. I believe that one of the solutions to improve USSR's situation may be to give it way more MPP's at the start of the game and by doing so force the player to decide what to do with them (invest into tech or buy units) or perhaps give it more initial investments in tech fromt the get-go.

< Message edited by Wahhim -- 8/7/2019 9:22:56 AM >

(in reply to BillRunacre)

Post #: 64

RE: Game favors Axis and is unbalanced - 8/7/2019 9:00:59 AM

zzmzzm

Posts: 116
Joined: 10/24/2010
Status: offline

Tank T-34 is more advanced than any German tanks in 1941, and produced from 1940. But in this game, German tanks are always in the lead.

(in reply to Wahhim)

Post #: 65

RE: Game favors Axis and is unbalanced - 8/10/2019 3:46:20 AM

HamburgerMeat

Posts: 361
Joined: 7/22/2017
Status: offline

The USSR does get heavy tanks earlier than Germany though

(in reply to zzmzzm)

Post #: 66

RE: Game favors Axis and is unbalanced - 8/12/2019 8:41:39 PM

PanzerCro

Posts: 52
Joined: 5/6/2019
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: ThunderLizard2

quote:

ORIGINAL: elxaime

quote:

ORIGINAL: Hubert Cater

quote:

The Japanese are conquering China easily enough

It might be that the supply rule changes are not having enough of an effect on the Japanese, but I would be interested to hear what the situation in China is like a bit later on in when the Japanese have pushed a little further as they'll likely need a bit more careful supply management (when there is typically lower occupational supply for them) to be successful.

I'd guess against a skilled Axis PBEM player the Chinese still have zero chance. The Japanese have two years to concentrate on them with a tech advantage. Due to its early weakness, the US is really no threat until 1943 or so in terms of advancing into the Japanese home areas and the extra economy Japan gains from conquering most of China reduces the MPP gap considerably (not to mention the experienced 12 and 13 strength Japanese armies that can be thrown against India). In the two PBEM so far post patch as Allies, the Japanese more or less are in position to attack the USSR from behind by mid-1942. Usually a good guide to whether a strategy is perceived as a winner is that each opponent adopts it, and the all-in to squash China seems a low-risk high yield approach.

What might be looked at are two aspects.

First, an early all-out Japanese advance into the depths of China would not just have alarmed the Communists in Yenan, but also Stalin and the potent "China Lobby" in the USA, which was an exception to the general pre-war American isolationism. Thought might be given to impacts on their war readiness. Second, it might be worth considering similar "backs to the wall" type events that could trigger, similar to how the UK gets US tanks if Cairo is approached or the USSR can move industry in land. A deep advance and serious threat probably also would have led to the collapse of the Chinese Nationalist government and its replacement by some sort of salvation front. China was no match for the Japanese in WW2 but they were also not the pushovers they often seem to be in the game. The Japanese had more problems with supply and partisans than seem portrayed as well. Whether the Yellow River flood of 1938 has significant impact (aside from civilians) is debated, but it shows the lengths the Chinese were prepared to go. If China wasn't the USSR, they also weren't France 1940.

The idea is not to make an all-China approach impossible, but to make it more of a trade off than currently. Consequences to USSR and USA readiness and some additional triggers may be what is needed.

I've held China in all my MP games. Here's a few ideas:

* Focusing on double investments in infantry weapons, infantry warfare and command and control. Add one level of AA after others
* Pull back two units defending ChangSa on turn 1 even though they are behind fort walls. Otherwise they will be destroyed quickly.
* Put units on both sides of Nanning - an opponent did this in my last game and completely jammed me in the South
* Move an HQ down south ASAP (I just read about fighter trick so will try it next game)
* Move 1-2 corp south to help defend ChungKing and Burma road (varies depending on how aggressive Japan attacks in North)
* Rotate and upgrade units when tech level reached. Double down again on infantry weapons after level 1 is done.
* Use engineer to fortify south of ChungKing

I always lose ChangSa and Nanning by April/May 1940 or so but by late 40/early 41 lines have stabilized after I have level 2 infantry with 1 AA level. By then Japan needs to start focusing on upgrading ships and launching LTAs for eventual entry of US/DEI etc. into the conflict.

What trick is that ? :)

I find chinese front most challenging in this beautiful game :)

(in reply to ThunderLizard11)

Post #: 67

RE: Game favors Axis and is unbalanced - 8/12/2019 9:02:24 PM

PanzerCro

Posts: 52
Joined: 5/6/2019
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Wahhim

On the other hand in my other game, in which I play as Allies against quite good player, pcolin, he decided to invest more into German units, than into tech. As I never invade Finland to keep USSR's income as high as possible,

So if I don't invade Finland (I am playing as Allies against AI) USSR income will be bigger ? Because USSR is really low on the MPP's before they get attacked by the Germans.

(in reply to Wahhim)

Post #: 68

RE: Game favors Axis and is unbalanced - 8/12/2019 9:04:07 PM

taffjones

Posts: 346
Joined: 3/25/2016
Status: offline

Hi Bill/ Hubert

In the 1.03 games I have got going at the moment 3 x PBEM add 1 V the AI.

The supply changes are working, even advancing slowly in Russia the spearhead units are struggling for supply. With a similar situation in China.

Once these games come to a end (will be some time as most are in 42/43). I will try a different approach as the Axis and see what effect that has.

It will be prioritising Logistics tech and building HQ units to try chaining HQ's to see what effect on supply to the spearhead units that has.

(in reply to PanzerCro)

Post #: 69

RE: Game favors Axis and is unbalanced - 8/13/2019 6:16:32 PM

BillRunacre

Posts: 4945
Joined: 7/22/2013
Status: offline

Thanks taffjones, that'll be useful.

_____________________________

(in reply to taffjones)

Post #: 70

RE: Game favors Axis and is unbalanced - 8/15/2019 5:40:06 AM

smckechnie

Posts: 118
Joined: 3/12/2018
Status: offline

Here are a few moves that the Allies can do to stop the axis.

1. Invest in diplomacy to USA before and right after fall of France. If India is in the war, they get 2 chits to put towards US mobilization, the Brits get 5. Get a few diplomacy hits and Axis are screwed. Messes up entire Japanese time line in the Pacific for expansion. Tons of MPPs going to Russia with convoys right at the start of axis DOW of Russia. Have to test this out more, but think it is a decisive allied move. If axis put MPPs to counter USA diplomacy, they weaken their Russia invasion force.

2. Royal Navy defends DEI. Royal Navy sends 2 subs and puts them next to DEI capital before the Japs get there. This halts Japan from taking DEI on first turn unless IJN sends enough forces to scatter subs. Royal Navy carrier force positioned to wipe out overstretched IJN who is engaged at Pearl Harbor. British mobilize Malaysia, put HQ, fort, and naval bomber. This can be countered by the Japanese, but it is costly.

3. Allies prepare landing force to take Norway right after Germany takes it. Oslo Corps is weakened by DE, French Navy helps with endeavor. Strategic bomber with carriers later hit Copenhagen port from Oslo to 0, allied Navy then gets into the Baltic and wipes out Kriegsmarine surface forces, subs not so much.

4. When the BEF goes to France send the BEF to Marseilles, French Corps there goes to defend Paris area. Evacuate BEF to help defend Egypt before France falls (easy to do as Italian Navy is usually in port till France falls). Build engineer in England to send to Egypt after no Sea Lion to fortify El Alamein. Have India build HQ's, tank unit, and Army unit to send to defend Egypt. Build new HQ's unit in England, send the Gort HQ's to Egypt rather than back to England. 2 British HQ's, 1 India HQ's and units that come that pop up there will make it very hard for Axis to take Egypt. The 2 British HQ's there make the place tough to take. Send British Strategic bomber to Egypt to hit supply at Tobruk and axis HQ's as they try to move towards Egypt.

5. A few things on Russia. Swap out the Russian HQ unit around Leningrad to more experienced commander right away. Current unit that starts is only at 4 leadership level, can sack him to a 6 or 7 level leader right away. Critical to get Russian tech to level 2 infantry ASAP. Keep tank research always at 2 chits. Get armored and infantry warfare chits ASAP too. After these you need command to level 2. Invest at least one chit into air defense. Unlike many players I think the Russian Air Force can hold its own if done right. Put one research chit to air warfare and one to fighters (would have 2 chits to fighters) Do not use the Russian Air Force until you get to level 1 or 2 fighters, have air warfare and command them by Zukov. I usually put Zukov in Southern Russia. The Russians get two experienced fighter units, plus them up and they will do more damage to the luftwaffe than the stupid 1 or 2 level air defense that ground units get. Axis are stretched for fighter units across lots of the Russian front. If your Russians are holding their ground pretty good, purchase a strategic bomber and put research at level one. I know this sounds crazy, but most of the captured cities in Russia only provide the axis with 5 supply. A Russian strategic bomber at a level 1 with 2 attacks with fighter escort will be able to level all the axis supply sources in front of Moscow. The Axis advance will grind to a halt. I know this because Hamburger did this to me with US and British bombers. Allies have to keep Murmansk convoy clear.

I think China is lots harder to conquer now with new 1.03 update.

(in reply to BillRunacre)

Post #: 71

RE: Game favors Axis and is unbalanced - 8/15/2019 2:10:37 PM

HamburgerMeat

Posts: 361
Joined: 7/22/2017
Status: offline

Lots of great ideas from smckechnie! I will have to incorporate these into my Allied plans.

Allies have too much going on for me to keep track of all the possibilities. I prefer the simple land-based brutality of the axis

(in reply to smckechnie)

Post #: 72

RE: Game favors Axis and is unbalanced - 8/15/2019 6:51:22 PM

sveint

Posts: 3556
Joined: 1/19/2001
From: Glorious Europe
Status: offline

1. I've done this. It's a gamble, you are betting on the dice gods. If it works out it helps but in reality all you are doing is spending X MPs and forcing Germany and Japan to spend the same X MPs. Not enough to make a difference in Russia.

2. Invade DEI from the south, 2 landing forces is enough. Those subs do not matter.

3. I've done this and if I will encounter this as Germany it is great news. This critically weakens the UK efforts to defend Egypt. It is also a big diplo hit on the US so less/later support from the US for the Allies.

4. This is good advice. The UK must reinforce Egypt and blockade the Italian ports.

5. I'd love to have the MPs to do all that research.

How to win as Germany in three simple steps (makes for a very boring game):
1. Max tank research
2. Build all tank units
3. Overrun the Soviets with your superior tanks
(side note, don't waste MPs on naval etc, focus on things that helps in Russia)

(in reply to HamburgerMeat)

Post #: 73

RE: Game favors Axis and is unbalanced - 8/15/2019 7:08:49 PM

Sugar

Posts: 926
Joined: 3/16/2017
Status: offline

quote:

It is also a big diplo hit on the US so less/later support from the US for the Allies.

Is that the case? In WiE it wasn't afaik.

I`d guess a possible Axis' "counter" would be not to take the DE or to DoW Norway. The benefits are limited anyway, since the only income you'll get is that of the convoy, and that's rarely more than none against most opponents.

Reducing all possible supply sources by strat. bombers is a viable tactic though, I guess the new supply rules need some urgent rebalancing. I really wonder who's idea that was?

(in reply to sveint)

Post #: 74

RE: Game favors Axis and is unbalanced - 8/16/2019 12:51:32 AM

smckechnie

Posts: 118
Joined: 3/12/2018
Status: offline

In reference to sveint's comments.

1. The British in this game are not starved for resources like they are in previous games. You put 4 chits to USA and you will hit something on "dice Gods". Put USA max on industry, which is always a given as US player. If axis do any other invasions that increase mobilization of US. US will be able to build like crazy before war breaks out, 2 carriers, 2 light carriers, 1 maritime bomber. Can ambush Japan at Pearl Harbor, knock out at least 2 jap carriers. Done this on 3 games.

2. Japan doesn't have the forces to attack DEI from the South. 2 British carriers, 1 light carrier, plus surface ships, and Allies will crush the IJN even if they are able to take DEI. Remember the Japanese still have to deal with Pearl Harbor and the rest of the Pacific.

3. It is only a diplomatic hit if allies invade Norway before the Germans! What you do is invade Norway at Oslo right after the April turn where the Germans take Norway. The DE gives the allies the exact time of the invasion of Norway. At the end of the German turn where they take Norway the decision event hits all the garrisons and corps at Oslo strength. The garrisons and Corps get hammered on strength per the DE. Allies then invade and take Oslo. Axis player is then screwed out of the 100 MPPs that they paid for the DE and have to decide if they want to expends resources to attack Norway.

4. First priority for the British is to avert a Sea Lion event, after that defend Egypt.

5. The Russians should have the MPPs if the western allies have cleared the Murmansk convoy route and have done industry chits.

(in reply to Sugar)

Post #: 75

RE: Game favors Axis and is unbalanced - 8/17/2019 10:53:51 AM

zzmzzm

Posts: 116
Joined: 10/24/2010
Status: offline

Yes, smckechnie have some good ideas, but these are only ideas. Allies have not enough mpps to achieve these goals.
In the game between I(axis) and ThunderLizard, Japan alomost conquered china in 1942(taken chongqin and lanzhou, kunming), and invade India with elite japan army. Though India use all mpps to build many troops(india does not invest diplomatic), but it is still cannot hold on. If india put 300 or more mpps in diplomatic, surely it will be conquered soon. And Japan teken Vladivostok and deep-going Soviet in 1941 end。
As in Ger_Su, German taken Caucasus and Stalingrad in the latter half of 1942. German have near 900 mpps a turn now. Japan have more than 400 mpps a turn. There is little chance for ALlies.
It seems Axis is obviously dominant at the end of 1942.

China is still too easy to be conquered for a experienced Axis player. This is the most disadvantage for Allies now.

(in reply to smckechnie)

Post #: 76

RE: Game favors Axis and is unbalanced - 8/20/2019 1:22:15 PM

EarlyDoors

Posts: 548
Joined: 12/16/2018
From: uk
Status: offline

I do think the T34 does not reach its true glory. How about giving it a mobility advantage over axis mech in snow conditions?

(in reply to zzmzzm)

Post #: 77

RE: Game favors Axis and is unbalanced - 8/20/2019 1:59:23 PM

zzmzzm

Posts: 116
Joined: 10/24/2010
Status: offline

My advice is give tech some time restriction， such as in 1941 we can only research less then 3rd level armor tech . Just like in HOI series game .
So you can not have 5th level tank in 1943.

(in reply to EarlyDoors)

Post #: 78

RE: Game favors Axis and is unbalanced - 8/20/2019 5:38:55 PM

Rising-Sun

Posts: 2082
Joined: 11/5/2009
From: Clifton Park, NY
Status: offline

There a lot of things in this game is unbalance. For one should have multi ships in a single hex.

So having a hex, put a multi hexes inside of it, like up to seven hexes per hex on the strategic map. Should have been like that for all engagements.

So having capitol ship in the center and screening around it.

Sorry I didn't like the way things are setup in this game. Look nice though.

_____________________________

(in reply to Judgementday)

Post #: 79

RE: Game favors Axis and is unbalanced - 8/21/2019 8:43:19 AM

Hartmann

Posts: 888
Joined: 11/28/2000
Status: offline

SC always had the "one hex=one unit" basic rule, and that's part of what made it appealing to me (maybe because I was coming from chess to grand strategy). If the series would suddenly introduce stacking of multiple units in one hex (like e.g. "Third Reich" did back then), I would switch to other games.

(in reply to Rising-Sun)

Post #: 80

RE: Game favors Axis and is unbalanced - 8/21/2019 9:34:32 AM

sapper32

Posts: 1197
Joined: 5/7/2007
From: Warminster England
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: zzmzzm

Yes, smckechnie have some good ideas, but these are only ideas. Allies have not enough mpps to achieve these goals.
In the game between I(axis) and ThunderLizard, Japan alomost conquered china in 1942(taken chongqin and lanzhou, kunming), and invade India with elite japan army. Though India use all mpps to build many troops(india does not invest diplomatic), but it is still cannot hold on. If india put 300 or more mpps in diplomatic, surely it will be conquered soon. And Japan teken Vladivostok and deep-going Soviet in 1941 end。
As in Ger_Su, German taken Caucasus and Stalingrad in the latter half of 1942. German have near 900 mpps a turn now. Japan have more than 400 mpps a turn. There is little chance for ALlies.
It seems Axis is obviously dominant at the end of 1942.

China is still too easy to be conquered for a experienced Axis player. This is the most disadvantage for Allies now.

Yes that sounds like one of my current games, My opponent although maybe a little slower but not much is making gains in Caucasus, Outskirts of Lenningrad Moscow and Stalingrad has fallen, I was powerless against his lvl2 Pzr now at lvl3 I won't last much longer, No where near enough MPPs to build upgrade and repair my huge losses per turn no money for research,The only chance USSR have is if your opponent over extends his supply then maybe you can inflict some damage, USSR needs more of something at the start ?

_____________________________

The battle of Medjerda is almost forgotten,but was fought against highly disciplined German troops and blasted a route straight to Tunis it was a perfect infiltration battle and should be remembered as the best fought British battle of the war.

(in reply to zzmzzm)

Post #: 81

RE: Game favors Axis and is unbalanced - 8/21/2019 1:02:11 PM

Mercutio

Posts: 256
Joined: 12/26/2006
Status: offline

Really if you don't max convoy from US to UK and UK to USSR early, you will be in trouble. IMO that should be the default as new people have no idea the default is 1/2 the max

I think a few things could help
An event to transfer troops from Siberia and replace with garrisons (except Vladivotok, which really needs to be an army) They would go into the new units pool next turn for placement
Soviet Armor research should be cheaper as they certainly didn't over engineer it like the Germans and others. Crew comfort? pfft.
Perhaps more units auto-building and/or cheaper units?
Better performance in winter (less penalties for attacking in snow/frozen)

I am not saying all are needed, just spit balling here.

(in reply to sapper32)

Post #: 82

RE: Game favors Axis and is unbalanced - 8/21/2019 2:11:58 PM

sapper32

Posts: 1197
Joined: 5/7/2007
From: Warminster England
Status: offline

Convoys are maxed out from US/UK ,UK/USSR a typical turn USSR gets 580mpps spend 400 keeping Red Army in the game leaves 180 for what? Rebuild an Army all gone hence no research or a build up of forces

_____________________________

(in reply to Mercutio)

Post #: 83

RE: Game favors Axis and is unbalanced - 8/21/2019 2:18:09 PM

zzmzzm

Posts: 116
Joined: 10/24/2010
Status: offline

Yes, Soviet can make heavy tanks early, but it is something only about KV-1.
In now a game , in 1941 july, Axis oppoent have 3rd tach Armor, my soviet has only 1st tech armor. Where is T34?

(in reply to sapper32)

Post #: 84

RE: Game favors Axis and is unbalanced - 8/21/2019 9:11:21 PM

Mercutio

Posts: 256
Joined: 12/26/2006
Status: offline

Which is why I said make USSR armor research cheaper. Perhaps their tanks too.

Also I like the idea of limiting by year, turns, whatever max research so axis can't get so far ahead. However, that would mean the axis will probably fall behind once they stall out. Then they are in trouble.

Really the German/USSR balance is a totally different thing than everything else.

As I said, maybe giving them more units that drop automatically. Say around Leningrad, Stalingrad and Moscow. I am no expert, just coming up with ideas to perhaps help the discussion.

(in reply to zzmzzm)

Post #: 85

RE: Game favors Axis and is unbalanced - 8/22/2019 7:01:30 PM

ThunderLizard11

Posts: 573
Joined: 2/28/2018
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Mercutio

Really if you don't max convoy from US to UK and UK to USSR early, you will be in trouble. IMO that should be the default as new people have no idea the default is 1/2 the max

I think a few things could help
An event to transfer troops from Siberia and replace with garrisons (except Vladivotok, which really needs to be an army) They would go into the new units pool next turn for placement
Soviet Armor research should be cheaper as they certainly didn't over engineer it like the Germans and others. Crew comfort? pfft.
Perhaps more units auto-building and/or cheaper units?
Better performance in winter (less penalties for attacking in snow/frozen)

I am not saying all are needed, just spit balling here.

Agree default should be 100% - I often forget this for a turn or two.

quote:

ORIGINAL: zzmzzm

Yes, Soviet can make heavy tanks early, but it is something only about KV-1.
In now a game , in 1941 july, Axis oppoent have 3rd tach Armor, my soviet has only 1st tech armor. Where is T34?

Agree. When I play as Allies I don't have the MPP for Soviets to build heavies until late '42/'43 at the earliest. They get a few which can be upgraded.

The game doesn't model armor correctly. The 1941 T34 was a better tank the the 1941 Pzkpfw IV. In game, Germany has lvl 3 tanks by '42 and Russia usually still level 2 so Germany armor much better than Russian armor. I'd suggest a change for both balance and historical reasons to have Russian tank research and production costs to be lower than German.

< Message edited by ThunderLizard2 -- 8/22/2019 9:41:37 PM >

(in reply to Mercutio)

Post #: 86

RE: Game favors Axis and is unbalanced - 8/23/2019 12:26:33 PM

sapper32

Posts: 1197
Joined: 5/7/2007
From: Warminster England
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: ThunderLizard2

quote:

ORIGINAL: Mercutio

Really if you don't max convoy from US to UK and UK to USSR early, you will be in trouble. IMO that should be the default as new people have no idea the default is 1/2 the max

I think a few things could help
An event to transfer troops from Siberia and replace with garrisons (except Vladivotok, which really needs to be an army) They would go into the new units pool next turn for placement
Soviet Armor research should be cheaper as they certainly didn't over engineer it like the Germans and others. Crew comfort? pfft.
Perhaps more units auto-building and/or cheaper units?
Better performance in winter (less penalties for attacking in snow/frozen)

I am not saying all are needed, just spit balling here.

Agree default should be 100% - I often forget this for a turn or two.

quote:

ORIGINAL: zzmzzm

Yes, Soviet can make heavy tanks early, but it is something only about KV-1.
In now a game , in 1941 july, Axis oppoent have 3rd tach Armor, my soviet has only 1st tech armor. Where is T34?

Agree. When I play as Allies I don't have the MPP for Soviets to build heavies until late '42/'43 at the earliest. They get a few which can be upgraded.

The game doesn't model armor correctly. The 1941 T34 was a better tank the the 1941 Pzkpfw IV. In game, Germany has lvl 3 tanks by '42 and Russia usually still level 2 so Germany armor much better than Russian armor. I'd suggest a change for both balance and historical reasons to have Russian tank research and production costs to be lower than German.

The Panzers are far too lethal and combined with Axis air by mid too late 42 are unstoppable, I'm losing in the good weather 7 to 10 Red Army units a turn and can build 2 or 3 if I'm lucky, The supply changes have not made any meaningfull difference in the USSR unless your opponent over runs his supply, The Axis can advance across Russia at a reasonably steady pace destroying Red units and get better and better all the time, The USSR needs a chance I've never had an Army in the field and unless you just build GAR and Corps you never will

_____________________________

(in reply to ThunderLizard11)

Post #: 87

RE: Game favors Axis and is unbalanced - 8/23/2019 3:03:17 PM

sapper32

Posts: 1197
Joined: 5/7/2007
From: Warminster England
Status: offline

Why do the USSR get so few HQs, 2 at the start 1 in Siberia when Barbarossa starts and one that is spawned next to the German army so let's forget about that one, How many will the Axis have 8,9 or 10 maybe against 3 for USSR, I can't spare 350 mpps to buy another one never mind the 3 or 4 extra you really need to buy.

_____________________________

(in reply to sapper32)

Post #: 88

RE: Game favors Axis and is unbalanced - 8/23/2019 5:29:05 PM

Judgementday

Posts: 29
Joined: 12/10/2013
Status: offline

OK, Strategic Bombing is totally unrealistic, 1-2 Strats with supporting fighter(s) can disable an entire front in 2-4 weeks? really. And decimate entire armies/armor units, when they where not event used against them. 3-4 will disable 1/2 of USSR, 1-2 will disable 1/2 of China or India.

HamburgerMeat and I are playing a game, Axis are clearly leading or would be, if Strats were not destroying supply and then decimating out of supply armies/armor in a period of weeks. To his credit, Hamburger has found more game flaws and is exploiting them without mercy. I MAY be able to holdout for a win, Maybe not, but our game isn't even fun anymore, due to a strategy that seems to be ridiculous. Strategic bombers where used to hurt economies and make it impossible to fund a war, not to decimate supply and destroy units.

Great game HamburgerMeat, I look forward to a rematch, when some work is done to the game to work out balancing and unrealistic strategies.

NOTES resulting from our games for consideration:

(1) I'm not sure a one turn conquest of Poland should be allowed, and if so, Germany certainly needs be forced to honor the German-Soviet Pact or pay diplomatically if they do not, which is broken if Germany does conquer Poland in one turn. A very likely result.
(2) Both Turkey and Spain appear to be much to easy to conquer, both will fall in 1-2 turns regardless if Axis or Allies attack them. I'm pretty sure they would be harder to conquer than that.
(3) Baring crazy strats, where the Allies throw EVERYTHING at Germany using a broken Strat tactic to stop them from decimating USSR, USSR is to weak.
(4) China is to weak, a good Japanize player will crush them every time. China was VERY shaky, but held. They wont here unless VERY lucky or the Japanize make mistakes.

Great games HamburgerMeat, you are an excellent player.

I hope the game designers will consider these suggestions and work on improvements to this game, it is awesome. I would like to see a WWI and WWIII version. Korea would also be cool.

(in reply to sapper32)

Post #: 89

RE: Game favors Axis and is unbalanced - 8/23/2019 5:53:20 PM

HamburgerMeat

Posts: 361
Joined: 7/22/2017
Status: offline

Agreed with Judgmentday for the most part. Strategic bombers are crazy powerful (if there are soft build limits, not sure if axis can win against a strat bomber fleet). USA too powerful, USSR too weak, China too weak. I'm curious to hear results from zzmzzm

And I'd be happy for a rematch sometime Judgementday. I was admittedly worried by the ferocity of your barbarossa attack.

< Message edited by HamburgerMeat -- 8/23/2019 6:10:32 PM >

(in reply to Judgementday)

Post #: 90

Page: << < prev 1 2 [3] 4 next > >>

All Forums >> [New Releases from Matrix Games] >> Strategic Command Series >> Strategic Command WWII: World at War >> RE: Game favors Axis and is unbalanced