The Turkey problem (Full Version)

All Forums >> [New Releases from Matrix Games] >> Gary Grigsby's World at War: A World Divided



Message

Lucky1 -> The Turkey problem (6/23/2008 1:31:43 AM)

As has been noted in some prior threads, the issue of Turkey is problematic -- Germany can invade with very little strategic cost, thereby getting access to the Caucasus and Mediterranean.

Effectively, the cost of invading Turkey does not remotely come close to counterbalancing the benefits and is completely a-historical. While I do not wish to take the option of invading Turkey off the table (after all a-historic results can be fun), I would suggest that such a-historical play should also have equally a-historic consequences. In a PBEM in which he has effectively exploited this loophole, my opponent has suggested that Russia DOW occur no more than two turns after invasion. This might be considered. I would suggest at a very minimum that Soviet troops be un-frozen for strategic movement (or lets say at least all troops other than Kiev and Eastern Poland). While this is a-historic, so is the invasion of Turkey. This would allow the Soviets to re-deploy etc. to meet the new threat and would mitigate some of the gamey-ness of the Turkey exploit.

Any thoughts on the issue?



WanderingHead -> RE: The Turkey problem (6/23/2008 6:14:46 AM)

By any chance have you looked at Global Glory (in the patch)?

It tries to improve this by adding random political events that place additional militia in the Caucasus and give the USSR additional WR points if the Germans invade Turkey. The fact that the event is random (and can occur twice instead of just once) provides more uncertainty as to what will happen. The Russians may get enough WR points in 1 turn, or maybe 2, to take them over the edge, or may not. And the militia is not huge (2 per event, or a max of 4), but enough that the Germans have to devote a little more strength to the south. Also, the uncertainty and ability for 2 events means that the Germans have real motivation to try to exploit it as *fast* as possible.

I found that it provides me (as Germany) a real pause in considering the strategy. Actually, I don't think I've tried the strategy in GG.

If you have feedback on it, let me know. I still have some work to do on the GG scenario for the next patch (which could be 2 weeks away or could be 2 months away, I'm afraid it is out of my hands at the moment and delayed by other 2by3 projects).



Lucky1 -> RE: The Turkey problem (6/23/2008 7:49:05 AM)

Actually, we are playing Global Glory.

In my opinion, I think those measures really do not go far enough. For example, I am playing a game wherein I am subject to the German-Japanese 'squeeze' wherein both focus incredibly quickly on attacking Russia. Effectively, Istanbul was taken with force in fall 1940. Turkey fell in winter and, the Caucasus fell in Spring 41, along with a concerted 20+ units Japanese attack on Russia in the East. While the early attack exposes the axis to some possible long-term liabilities, this is contingent on Russia actually being able to survive - rather unlikely the way things stand (my opponent was quite skillful in his execution). The frustrating thing for me is that I could see this strategy unfold, but do little to position any meaningful troops in the caucasus once Turkey was attacked. In reality, there is no way that Russia would NOT have mobilized her troops significantly in such an eventuality.

As mentioned in my first post, I am not against the possibility of attacking Turkey. However, the strategic importance of Turkey as a bridge to the Med, Caucasus and Crimea is simply not recognized sufficiently. The significant economic damage that can be done by this strategy means that Germany would rarely attack the USSR through Turkey without some force - the few militia really do not do enough. This is why I think the USSR, faced with a significant breach in her sphere of influence and strategic position from Germany, would not keep her armies locked in a holding pattern in Eastern Europe. Allowing strategic redeployment, in my mind, is probably the most balanced way of reacting to a German violation of Turkey.

Any thoughts on the issue from anyone else?



SGT Rice -> RE: The Turkey problem (6/24/2008 4:15:17 AM)

I haven't seen an invasion of Turkey with GG yet, but in principle it sounds like a realistic response to increase Soviet redeployment limits. Completely removing the limits might go to far; perhaps add 2 Soviet redeployments for each Axis occupied territory on the Soviet's southern border (including Istanbul)?



WanderingHead -> RE: The Turkey problem (6/24/2008 7:06:51 AM)

I agree that increasing the Sov strat move limit would be very reasonable. But I am afraid that it is not going to happen. I stopped code changes some time ago.

I have made some changes so that the 2 militia placed in the Caucasus *could* be modified to any unit type (events can now spawn any units). That would be a data file change.

One might be able to change things so that some of the Caucasus regions unfreeze if Turkey is attacked. But that seems extreme and really puts Russia in the driver seat (although it is interesting, because if Russia attacks then they would lose the benefits of militia and the +25 WR bump).

It would be interesting to see how the game in question turns out. If the opponent was "quite skillful in his execution", maybe he will deserve a victory. But also I think that the long term consequences are always what must be considered. I've seen the Russians decimated but the Allies ultimately pull it off



Lucky1 -> RE: The Turkey problem (6/24/2008 8:02:17 AM)

Ahhhh. No further code changes. Fair enough. 'Tis what it is then. Certainly, your political mods are much better than nothing. Indeed, your mod has made some significant improvements over the stock scenarios. I (and many others) appreciate the very significant effort you have put into this game so far.

Turning to the particular game I am playing, who knows what will yet arise. Russia is under severe strain and will collapse without significant WA intervention (and I AM intervening, it is just a matter of whether it will be enough). The key question will be how soon the US is able to get in the war, as Britain is basically only tying up German troops in Turkey and along the Mediterranean coastline (troops are in Syria, with everything south of Turkey secure for the moment. Is actually a rather interesting matchup so far.

As for my opponent's gambit, he basically took every crimean-adjacent territory but Rostov, along with Eastern Poland, Odessa, Balkans and Belorus in his German invasion opener. I would put a screen shot, but I no longer have ther requisite program on my computer. Perhaps Ning is able to do so if he reads this post. I have his navy trapped in the Crimean for the moment (and some in N. Italy ports), but he has moved his airforce southward and I expect the area to be heavily contested. Japan has massed some troops in the Southwest, but I am not sure whether my opponent will seek to allow the US to enter the war at this time (leaving Autumn 41). good fun.



WanderingHead -> RE: The Turkey problem (6/25/2008 6:41:50 AM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: Lucky1
Ahhhh. No further code changes. Fair enough.


This intrigued me enough that I've been thinking of making one very small code change for it (given the delays I'm experiencing getting a build from the code I've provided).

What if the GG political event for German occupation of Turkey/Persia were to include an adjustment to the Russian strat moves?

Looking at it, it should be easy to make it so that all future Russian strat moves are increased by an integer number. The precise integer number would be configurable, but I think I would make it bump up by 2 each time the event fires (remembering that the event can occur twice). The militia spawn would be eliminated.

The Russian could put at least 3 units anywhere he wants, 6 units if the German is slow and gives him two turns.



Lucky1 -> RE: The Turkey problem (6/26/2008 1:12:54 AM)

FYI, my opponent got to 89 VP by summer or autumn 42. Basically, in terms of production capacity, I was reduced to Central and Southern Urals and either Kazan or Gorky (can't remember which). A veru well-executed and coordinated attack. He held WA to a standoff in the Middle-East (he held Turkey and I held everything South), rebuffed an invasion of Northern Italy (which would have put Italy out of the war as I had Sicily and Tripoli etc.), kicked out my fleet in the Med, and was holding a sizeable WA beachead in Denmark in check. Japan had also advanced to India and invaded Australia (basically mostly ignored by WA - doing everything it could to keep Russia in the game). A fun game, all in all.

I think a few strat moves as you have suggested would be appropriate.

I look forward to the suggested tweaks and would again thank you for your considerable work on the game.

Cheers,

Sean



xianing -> RE: The Turkey problem (6/29/2008 5:24:36 PM)

As I see this post today, I would like to add some screen shot for this discussion. This is the winter turn before invasion of Russia. I think Russia DOW would be still 2-3 turns away. We can see there are 6 troops(5Mils+1 Artillery?) in Caucasus result of 2 times of that event, but compare to the German army it is indefendable.
[image]http://img517.imageshack.us/img517/8886/snap370am2.jpg[/image]



xianing -> RE: The Turkey problem (6/29/2008 5:55:19 PM)

And then a overwhelming Barbarossa reduced Russia production and population to a dangerous level. Japan attacked in the same time.
[image]http://img75.imageshack.us/img75/1403/snap380bk9.jpg[/image]
[image]http://img75.imageshack.us/img75/9419/snap382xj6.jpg[/image]



xianing -> RE: The Turkey problem (6/29/2008 6:07:41 PM)

Until spring 42, US is still looking, maybe would DOW in two turns. But Russia is already paralysed (Production point only 6). Japan was well prepared and attacked US then in two turns Axis got an AV.
[image]http://img137.imageshack.us/img137/7162/snap394dl9.jpg[/image]
[image]http://img137.imageshack.us/img137/9357/snap398fp8.jpg[/image]
[image]http://img137.imageshack.us/img137/9198/snap396uh5.jpg[/image]
[image]http://img391.imageshack.us/img391/5760/snap413rx4.jpg[/image]



xianing -> RE: The Turkey problem (6/29/2008 6:15:53 PM)

I have already discussed this strategy before but now I found the Turkey problem make it even more too powerful to change the balance of the game.
http://www.matrixgames.com/forums/tm.asp?m=1615576




Lucky1 -> RE: The Turkey problem (6/30/2008 12:35:40 AM)

Sigh. I had this big message written, but when I hit post, it said that I had timed out... Boo.

Anyhow, thanks to Ning for posting the screenshots. I would have liked to provide the same (e.g., some of the counter-attacks attempted that came very close to isolating a pocket of 20 German troops in Stalingrad) - only my feeble bombers were unable to take out sufficient transports in the Crimea), but I don't have the program to do so anymore.

I did my best with England to force Germany to garrison the coastal areas (and came very close to taking Italy out of the war - the WA limit of three troops early on was just too low for me to launch any powerful amphib assaults, but I almost succeeded). Even then, the very quick and coordinated onslaught against Russia was too much for me.

I would be interested in seeing an AAR where Ning (or anyone else) tried the strategy against a more capable player. Of course, the allies would have a real advantage because they would expect the very early attack etc., but even then I think it would be very difficult to counter. (The strategy is obviously most effective when it is not expected.)

This brings me to a related point. Although it has not happened in this particular game, Japan can often attack Russia prior to Germany. After taking out the garrisoned Soviet troops in the East, the remainder of the Russian frozen territories can be taken by lonely militia marching unopposed across huge swaths of Russian soil. As with Turkey, I find it very implausible that Russia would not have attempted to resist. As such, I would suggest that a limited amount of strategic moves from central and/or western Russia. This is not only politically realistic, but also forces Japan to commit more than two militia to take out all of Siberia. This is especially important for the Global Glory mod because of the higher Russia DOW threshold Japan can inflict signficant damage before Germany attacks Russia (even if this were along historical timelines).

Any thoughts?

Thanks again to WH for his willingness to explore these issues.




WanderingHead -> RE: The Turkey problem (6/30/2008 6:05:16 AM)

To be honest, I'm not sure how much of a balance problem Turkey is. I favor making the strat move change (eliminate the sprouted Russian militia in Caucasus from the event, and replace with strat moves) because instead of being automatic it is a mechanism that gives the Russian player choices (choice is always good in a game [;)]) and feels natural.

Early on, I really came to favor the Turkish route, but with some balancing changes I now do not think it is a no-brainer. A good choice, yes. But not a sure win.

I'll make the little tweak and we'll see.

quote:

ORIGINAL: Lucky1
Japan can often attack Russia prior to Germany. After taking out the garrisoned Soviet troops in the East, the remainder of the Russian frozen territories can be taken by lonely militia marching unopposed across huge swaths of Russian soil.


Huh? If Japan attacks Russia then everything from the Urals eastward will unfreeze, and Russian WR and production will increase. With no Germans to worry about, I find it implausible that the Russians would not be able to shut down the Japanese quite quickly and ultimately win the game.

Unless you were playing the AI, and the Russian AI did very poorly with this unexpected course of events, which I suppose might be possible.



Lucky1 -> RE: The Turkey problem (6/30/2008 6:38:31 AM)

I will have to test it, but when the Japanese only attack occurred, they overran Vladivostok and the adjacent state (the one with the tank), leaving only the one militia in the whole eastern partition. I could be wrong, but I recall not being able to strat move any units from the central/western partition into the eastern partition to fight the japanese. It has been a while since that occurred....

As for the no-brainer dimension, I am hoping to see an AAR against this strategy (even if it will not be entirely representative b/c axis is declaring it as a strategy).



Lucky1 -> RE: The Turkey problem (6/30/2008 6:46:02 AM)

OK. I just tested it. Seems that central partition is activated (with factories) with Japanese attack. Perhaps this has always been this way, perhaps it was changed some time ago (I don't know). As such, that concern should be disregarded (it is not directly related to my inital point, in any event).




Bubble -> RE: The Turkey problem (8/26/2008 6:09:32 PM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: WanderingHead

Huh? If Japan attacks Russia then everything from the Urals eastward will unfreeze, and Russian WR and production will increase. With no Germans to worry about, I find it implausible that the Russians would not be able to shut down the Japanese quite quickly and ultimately win the game.

Unless you were playing the AI, and the Russian AI did very poorly with this unexpected course of events, which I suppose might be possible.


If I play as Axis vs the AI and invade the Soviet Far East with Japan (usually in mid 1940), the AI never sends anything against me -- I just saunter up the Trans-Siberian railway all the way to the Urals without any opposition. I can usually get to the Urals (or one territory short of the Urals) before the Soviets DOW, providing Japan with tonnes of resources. And if I'm careful with how far I go, I can usually keep a minimal garrison at the end of my advance and bring the rest of the troops back to face China. Against the AI, at least, it seems to be a no-lose strategy.

Maybe a rationale is that the Soviets are taking a calculated risk in letting their Far East be captured because they "know" the Germans are coming and can't spare the troops...? They don't seem to need the resources from out there, at least not in the early stages, but it sure helps Japan.

I'm not sure if this is something you might want to address, e.g., in how the AI responds to such an attack, in strat move limits, or in WR responses. Or I can imagine that there are perfectly good reasons that you'd want to leave it as it is. [;)]



WanderingHead -> RE: The Turkey problem (8/27/2008 2:07:15 AM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: Bubble
If I play as Axis vs the AI and invade the Soviet Far East with Japan (usually in mid 1940), the AI never sends anything against me


Since this is a little off topic for this thread, I took the liberty to moving to a new thread on the AI.

http://www.matrixgames.com/forums/tm.asp?m=1899910&mpage=1&key=�



Page: [1]

Valid CSS!




Forum Software © ASPPlayground.NET Advanced Edition 2.4.5 ANSI
2.6875