RE: T09

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: T09

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 2 >> After Action Reports >> RE: T09

Page: << < prev 1 2 [3]

Message

<< Older Topic Newer Topic >>

RE: T09 - 10/4/2021 5:07:35 PM

Joel Billings

Posts: 32265
Joined: 9/20/2000
From: Santa Rosa, CA
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: tyronec
Axis are on 632 VPs at the start of T13. They would need to take 5 out of 6 of Kalinin, Rzhev, Ryzam, Tambov, Voronezh and Rostov by T16 and that is not going to happen.

If not for the Kerch straights bug, you might have gotten across and taken Krasnodar and Maikop. That might have been a stretch unless you had a lot of armor down there, but maybe it was possible. Then you would have only needed 5 of 8, which you were darn close to. Not saying you would have made it, but I wish as soon as you had the Kerch bug you would have stopped as Pavel's already reported that fixed now. It just took time and a save to figure out what was causing it, and just got lucky to realize it was movement FOW. As for the air issues, well I can't say there's a bug, or if it's WAD but just too hard to intercept GA. Same with AS issue and recent GS issue. All of these will require saves and concentrated time because I don't think we are likely to find a smoking gun bug so much as systems that provide these results. If the systems need to change, they will take time to adjust and balance, so I don't see anything coming anytime soon. The last issue (GS not getting escorts) may be one that could be fixed faster if we have a save and it shows that a recent change had an unintended impact. Since an auto-victory should be very hard to get in 41, it would have been really good to see how this game played out over the winter, but appreciate the AAR nonetheless.

_____________________________

All understanding comes after the fact.
-- Soren Kierkegaard

(in reply to tyronec)

Post #: 61

RE: T12 - 10/4/2021 5:11:13 PM

HardLuckYetAgain

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

quote:

ORIGINAL: Seminole

quote:

ORIGINAL: gundam1985

The Soviet had cut off two infantry regiments and move forward near Pskov in T12. It seems that no enemy behind the defensive line.

Definitely playing with fire regarding reserves left in AGN. I guess the mech went to help AGC?

This would have drawn forces away from other fronts and I would almost bet the rail head is not close to the front here for railing in units. It just isn't worth it to take chances on a non-active front the German aren't pushing with gaps in the defense :( You take the chance you could get caught by a crafty Soviet player.

< Message edited by HardLuckYetAgain -- 10/4/2021 5:25:45 PM >

(in reply to Seminole)

Post #: 62

RE: T12 - 10/4/2021 5:25:21 PM

HardLuckYetAgain

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

quote:

ORIGINAL: Seminole

quote:

ORIGINAL: gundam1985

The Soviet also cut off the many Panzer/Motorized divisions in center, it's a disaster to Axis.

Nice pocket, although the forces are there to fix things immediately, I'd look upon that as nuisance, not a disaster.

More intriguing to me is that the German FBD is about two weeks from connecting the double track line to Tula. I wonder if Tyrone sees the same 'Road to Moscow' that I do...

Germans are there but that supply is key for continuation on the German offense. Those units will be a turn behind. Plus the Germans are overstreched in my eyes across the map. To me in WITE2 mass rushing forward is not worth it like it was in WITE1. Solid Offense with solid defense and the Soviets aren't going to be able to do breakthroughs in the line. But that is just me and maybe Tyronec is correct & going to try for the Auto victory. But this game turn 16 I don't see it happening with resources pull to put out fires in the backfield.

I personally prefer "No Early End" scenario myself, makes it interesting long term.

< Message edited by HardLuckYetAgain -- 10/4/2021 5:28:39 PM >

(in reply to Seminole)

Post #: 63

RE: T12 - 10/4/2021 11:37:01 PM

gundam1985

Posts: 62
Joined: 12/19/2017
Status: offline

It was clear that the Germans were not strong enough to maintain a continuous front, it's T12 now and had been pocked some troops,they should save them in T13. You can check that there are many tank division and mechanization Division in his flank. The next battle is likely to evolve into a tug of war.

(in reply to Seminole)

Post #: 64

RE: T12 - 10/4/2021 11:43:44 PM

gundam1985

Posts: 62
Joined: 12/19/2017
Status: offline

I think the Soviet tank/mechanization divisions in the north should go fast and deep toward Pskov, force the Axis move back from the east. If they don't, the Soviet can break any kind of defense and end the war before 1942.

(in reply to gundam1985)

Post #: 65

RE: T12 - 10/5/2021 1:23:30 AM

HardLuckYetAgain

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

quote:

ORIGINAL: gundam1985

I think the Soviet tank/mechanization divisions in the north should go fast and deep toward Pskov, force the Axis move back from the east. If they don't, the Soviet can break any kind of defense and end the war before 1942.

You are getting "way" ahead of yourself here. You will get some gains in the north from what I can see on the snapshots. But you by all means are not going to end the war before the end of 1942 "if this game went on". If you still think that then you need to send all the forum the stuff you are smoking :-)

(in reply to gundam1985)

Post #: 66

RE: T12 - 10/5/2021 1:46:02 AM

Seminole

Posts: 2105
Joined: 7/28/2011
Status: offline

What should a player do about an air command that gets stuck behind the lines such as in this picture?

(in reply to HardLuckYetAgain)

Post #: 67

RE: T12 - 10/5/2021 3:46:11 AM

gundam1985

Posts: 62
Joined: 12/19/2017
Status: offline

There are two plans in the North, 1.if the German fall back, I will end the northern offensives in T14 and back to the old line, then make some offensive in Tula or some other line; 2.if he ignore this, I'll assemble all the reserve forces and try to attack Minsk. He has no reserve at all(TB were locked) except two Panzer divisions. From west to East,the German front defense line is like a long snake array, which has violated the great taboo of the strategists. I can't say how will going on but it must be bound to be a mess for Axis. I am confident that the battle will end in 1941 when the German offensive end and force send their troops back for defending. I will continue to attack all the front line and push them back. In most cases at that time, the players will choose to give up the game.

< Message edited by gundam1985 -- 10/5/2021 4:34:05 AM >

(in reply to HardLuckYetAgain)

Post #: 68

RE: T12 - 10/5/2021 4:15:35 AM

gundam1985

Posts: 62
Joined: 12/19/2017
Status: offline

The two infantry regiments in the north seems no hope there, another two infantry divisions are dangerous. They can't hold the line except send more reinforcements and I bet tyronec will send them to the north. If there are nothing happen in T13, at least two more infantry divisions will be eliminated in T14. The right way to fix the gap is let the two reinforced Panzer divisions(arrive to the map in T12 and had already sended to the east by tyronec) turn around and go to Pskov. Also attach 3 more infantry divisions is better. Keep the front line steady is the only way to end my offensive.
On the other hand, one motorized regiment are surrounded in the big pocket, no fuel in the nearby motorized troops, he should temporary motorize at least two infantry divisions which behind Tula to save it. Then I wish to do some counterattacks on that open ground.

(in reply to gundam1985)

Post #: 69

RE: T12 - 10/5/2021 5:45:20 AM

tyronec

Posts: 4940
Joined: 8/7/2015
From: Portaferry, N. Ireland
Status: offline

I feel I am repeating myself, but just respond to all who have been generous enough to post on this AAR.
Gundam won, there is no question about that. I don't know what turn he was going to win on but he was definitely going to win. It doesn't make a lot of sense to discuss when I would have lost if the game had continued because if I had been playing to survive as many turns as possible I would have played differently.
On T09 when the Soviets renewed GA this became a 16 turn game, some people may feel that Axis can play against massed GA without fighter cover but I don't. It seems that there may be a way to fly AS as jubjub has posted but I was not aware of that at the time and have not tested it. I think Gundam has a challenge posted so there is the opportunity to take him on and hopefully fighter intercept is being improved.
If I had got across the Kerch straights it would have given me something of a chance but really that is neither here nor there. Maybe Axis could have got a win that way but I am not sorry that didn't happen because if it had it would have been a result down to a misunderstanding of one rule by Gundam.

< Message edited by tyronec -- 10/5/2021 7:44:41 AM >

(in reply to gundam1985)

Post #: 70

RE: T12 - 10/5/2021 7:35:16 AM

gundam1985

Posts: 62
Joined: 12/19/2017
Status: offline

I had 60k man in Kerch waiting for you. But before you talk about the bug in post, I don't really know you can't go though it. You clean Crimea in T11, houw do your panzers can capure the last vp citys though swamp and rough terrain without railway supply in only 5 turns? It's too dificul to complete.

(in reply to tyronec)

Post #: 71

RE: T12 - 10/5/2021 7:55:32 AM

tyronec

Posts: 4940
Joined: 8/7/2015
From: Portaferry, N. Ireland
Status: offline

quote:

I had 60k man in Kerch waiting for you. But before you talk about the bug in post, I don't really know you can't go though it. You clean Crimea in T11, houw do your panzers can capure the last vp citys though swamp and rough terrain without railway supply in only 5 turns? It's too dificul to complete.

Actually no, there were no men defending Kerch on the turn I attempted to cross.
We don't know if I could have taken Krasnodar & Maikop, who can tell. I hear what you are saying, you think it is too difficult.

(in reply to gundam1985)

Post #: 72

RE: T12 - 10/5/2021 8:43:10 AM

gundam1985

Posts: 62
Joined: 12/19/2017
Status: offline

My troops were defending in swamp hex(253,201)/(254,201)/(255,200)

(in reply to tyronec)

Post #: 73

RE: T12 - 10/5/2021 9:06:10 AM

loki100

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

quote:

ORIGINAL: tyronec

I feel I am repeating myself, but just respond to all who have been generous enough to post on this AAR.
Gundam won, there is no question about that. I don't know what turn he was going to win on but he was definitely going to win. It doesn't make a lot of sense to discuss when I would have lost if the game had continued because if I had been playing to survive as many turns as possible I would have played differently....

I'll add my voice to those who think its a pity this is ending. As ever you have done exceptionally well - which is reassuring about overall game balance.

We have very few HtH games going into 1942 in a decent state (& you are), never mind past the initiative change.

You have asserted several times that the Axis can't defend after this shift. Now at the moment that is an evidence free interpretation (StB is useful but very unlikely to be the situation of a 1941 start come late 42).

I realise that many axis players play for an auto-win in 1941 and have little interest in winning any other way. Pity in many ways as it reduces the fun for the Soviet side and means we never get to see if the intended end-1944 victory test has any validity. I know it does vs the Soviet AI but as ever AI and HtH games are sufficiently different to make comparisons something to be cautious over.

_____________________________

(in reply to tyronec)

Post #: 74

RE: T12 - 10/5/2021 12:09:37 PM

HardLuckYetAgain

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

Grand Campaign 41 normal version is now only a 16 turn scenario in my eyes. You can pretty much look at it that way as an auto-victory grab by the Germans. As a Soviet player I would demand the "No early End" Grand Campaign 41 Scenario.

(in reply to loki100)

Post #: 75

RE: T12 - 10/5/2021 12:21:39 PM

Joel Billings

Posts: 32265
Joined: 9/20/2000
From: Santa Rosa, CA
Status: offline

The downside of that is there is less pressure on the soviets to defend forward.

_____________________________

All understanding comes after the fact.
-- Soren Kierkegaard

(in reply to HardLuckYetAgain)

Post #: 76

RE: T12 - 10/5/2021 12:39:49 PM

HardLuckYetAgain

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

quote:

ORIGINAL: Joel Billings

The downside of that is there is less pressure on the soviets to defend forward.

The Germans have to set the bar for the HWM for the Soviets to achieve in 44. Thus, the Soviets can run as far as they want in 41 in my eyes because the Soviets will make it easier in 42 to grab even more as the Germans. Not to mention there are certain parts of the maps, North and Center that the Soviets just can't run. So it is arguable, at least in my eyes, that the Soviets really have to play for the long haul 41 & 42 to not have the Germans set too high of a HWM in the "No Early End" GC41 scenario. I also feel it gives a much better overall experience of the War in Russia than a German mad dashing for VP's.

(in reply to Joel Billings)

Post #: 77

RE: T12 - 10/5/2021 12:59:45 PM

loki100

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

quote:

ORIGINAL: HardLuckYetAgain

Grand Campaign 41 normal version is now only a 16 turn scenario in my eyes. You can pretty much look at it that way as an auto-victory grab by the Germans. As a Soviet player I would demand the "No early End" Grand Campaign 41 Scenario.

I don't think the no early end system really solves this.

Like you I remember that WiTE1 constantly had assumptions as to what meant game over in 1941. Clearly this metric changed (& certainly carried on changing after I stopped playing) but it drove behaviour. Too many Axis players bailed from good positions because they hadn't won at that stage, equally Soviet players would fold on a slightly less than optimal set up.

Fwiw, I think that WiTE2 is designed for 2 main victory points - the possibility of a German player matching the auto-win situation in late 1942 or of converting a strong HWM into a December 44 win. The other resolution points are really to put a mismatch out of its misery or provide a backstop for a more nuanced late game (ie Berlin or bust).

In effect, the 'I haven't won on T16' is attitudinal. So run the game with no view to the long term and if it goes wrong, the Soviet player doesn't get the chance to explore how to operate as the player with the strategic initiative.

I have no solution for this, different people clearly want very different things and thats as valid as any other take.

edit - clearly this interpretation relies on the Axis player getting their fun with the initiative in 1941-2 so if that is missing then the wider game balance issues are less relevant

< Message edited by loki100 -- 10/5/2021 1:02:47 PM >

_____________________________

(in reply to HardLuckYetAgain)

Post #: 78

RE: T12 - 10/5/2021 1:14:51 PM

HardLuckYetAgain

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

quote:

ORIGINAL: loki100

quote:

ORIGINAL: HardLuckYetAgain

Grand Campaign 41 normal version is now only a 16 turn scenario in my eyes. You can pretty much look at it that way as an auto-victory grab by the Germans. As a Soviet player I would demand the "No early End" Grand Campaign 41 Scenario.

I don't think the no early end system really solves this.

Like you I remember that WiTE1 constantly had assumptions as to what meant game over in 1941. Clearly this metric changed (& certainly carried on changing after I stopped playing) but it drove behaviour. Too many Axis players bailed from good positions because they hadn't won at that stage, equally Soviet players would fold on a slightly less than optimal set up.

Fwiw, I think that WiTE2 is designed for 2 main victory points - the possibility of a German player matching the auto-win situation in late 1942 or of converting a strong HWM into a December 44 win. The other resolution points are really to put a mismatch out of its misery or provide a backstop for a more nuanced late game (ie Berlin or bust).

In effect, the 'I haven't won on T16' is attitudinal. So run the game with no view to the long term and if it goes wrong, the Soviet player doesn't get the chance to explore how to operate as the player with the strategic initiative.

I have no solution for this, different people clearly want very different things and thats as valid as any other take.

edit - clearly this interpretation relies on the Axis player getting their fun with the initiative in 1941-2 so if that is missing then the wider game balance issues are less relevant

Excellent points as always. Thank you for sharing :)

The "No Early End" may not solve it. But, it does give a "better" alternative, at least in my eyes, for a long term game.

(in reply to loki100)

Post #: 79

RE: T12 - 10/6/2021 5:18:36 AM

tyronec

Posts: 4940
Joined: 8/7/2015
From: Portaferry, N. Ireland
Status: offline

quote:

I'll add my voice to those who think its a pity this is ending. As ever you have done exceptionally well - which is reassuring about overall game balance.

We have very few HtH games going into 1942 in a decent state (& you are), never mind past the initiative change.

I concur with your sentiments, it would be good to see more games play through to '42 and later. That was certainly my expectation when this game started, a '41 sudden death for Axis is a long shot.
However with the air war bugs, even if the game had continued then the result would not be that meaningful against how the game is going to play out once those bugs have been fixed. Also I don't have the enthusiasm to play a game for 100 turns more or less when for me the result is clear. I do respect your willingness to play through games and adjust the rules as you go along to keep the game balance working but for me once the result is clear I lose some of my enthusiasm.

Specifically I mean the AS intercept, auto-intercept and GS escorts bugs. I would like to see massed GA nerfed but the game works with that as it is. There was an issue during testing with massed GA being a super weapon because Axis were unable get supplied fighters forwards to protect their advanced units. That has been resolved but now we have a similar effect that Axis can get their fighters forwards but they are not intercepting as they should.

It was interesting to see that AA SUs are not that effective against massed GA. If the Soviets spread out their attacks then the AA can take a heavy toll, but if they concentrate say 3000 sorties against one unit then the first round of attacks will take out much of the AA and subsequent attacks go in with less opposition.

(in reply to HardLuckYetAgain)

Post #: 80

RE: T12 - 10/6/2021 5:38:28 AM

tyronec

Posts: 4940
Joined: 8/7/2015
From: Portaferry, N. Ireland
Status: offline

quote:

I'll add my voice to those who think its a pity this is ending. As ever you have done exceptionally well - which is reassuring about overall game balance.

We have very few HtH games going into 1942 in a decent state (& you are), never mind past the initiative change.

I concur with your sentiments, it would be good to see more games play through to '42 and later. That was certainly my expectation when this game started, a '41 sudden death for Axis is a long shot.
However with the air war bugs, even if the game had continued then the result would not be that meaningful against how the game is going to play out once those bugs have been fixed. Also I don't have the enthusiasm to play a game for 100 turns more or less when for me the result is clear. I do respect your willingness to play through games and adjust the rules as you go along to keep the game balance working but for me once the result is clear I lose some of my enthusiasm.

Specifically I mean the AS intercept, auto-intercept and GS escorts - they are on the bug list now and will be resolved in due course. I would like to see massed GA nerfed but the game works with that as it is. There was an issue during testing with massed GA being a super weapon because Axis were unable get supplied fighters forwards to protect their advanced units. That has been resolved but now we have a similar effect that Axis can get their fighters forwards but they are not intercepting as they should.

It was interesting to see that AA SUs are not that effective against massed GA. If the Soviets spread out their attacks then the AA can take a heavy toll, but if they concentrate say 3000 sorties against one unit then the first round of attacks will take out much of the AA and subsequent attacks go in with less opposition.

(in reply to HardLuckYetAgain)

Post #: 81

RE: T12 - 10/6/2021 5:23:59 PM

EwaldvonKleist

Posts: 2038
Joined: 4/14/2016
From: Berlin, Germany
Status: offline

During testing as Soviet vs human Axis player GA proved very effective in 1941 already, especially the tactical bombers. Most of the losses inflicted during the Soviet turn were a result of bombing. In addition to the losses, concentrating the entire airforce on 3-4 units is like using a small tactical nuke, helpful for breaking pockets etc.

Maybe there should be diminishing returns for attacking the same unit over and over, e.g. increasingly lower inflicted losses as the target is prepared/scatters/hides?

(Granted, that was in 2018, but loss formulas shouldn't have changed that much).

< Message edited by EwaldvonKleist -- 10/6/2021 6:53:29 PM >

_____________________________

The Library of Gary Grigsby's War in the East resources.
Do you want total war? Guide for WitE players

(in reply to tyronec)

Post #: 82

RE: T12 - 10/6/2021 10:07:33 PM

HardLuckYetAgain

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

quote:

ORIGINAL: EwaldvonKleist

During testing as Soviet vs human Axis player GA proved very effective in 1941 already, especially the tactical bombers. Most of the losses inflicted during the Soviet turn were a result of bombing. In addition to the losses, concentrating the entire airforce on 3-4 units is like using a small tactical nuke, helpful for breaking pockets etc.

Maybe there should be diminishing returns for attacking the same unit over and over, e.g. increasingly lower inflicted losses as the target is prepared/scatters/hides?

(Granted, that was in 2018, but loss formulas shouldn't have changed that much).

Soviet GA is a pain in the arse. But Tyronec was correct that interception isn't working properly & just noticed it after a quick look at my Turn 12 in Jubjub game :(

(in reply to EwaldvonKleist)

Post #: 83