(Full Version)

All Forums >> [Current Games From Matrix.] >> [World War II] >> Steel Panthers World At War & Mega Campaigns



Message

Drake -> (11/15/2000 7:12:00 AM)

quote:

Originally posted by Mogami: Hi, I practice what I preach I am axis 44 and never use Tigers/Panthers/Wurfherman/air and I have not lost a battle yet. I use VG infantry small calibur arty. I like the flavour of being out numbered and having to use my limited resources wisely. If you are just interested in victory then keep it the way it is but if you want to know what it was like to be a german soldier in 1944 then forget about equality and get used to being shelled/strafed every turn and having much larger enemy forces to deal with. Anyone can win battles driving around in herds of Tigers and Panthers against a equal sized enemy but show me where it happened after 1942. Even during the Bulge in 44 after 48 hours the germans were right back to being outnumbered. There are a lot of genius's running around the halls of SPWaW thinking they are good because they never risk battle unless they are sure of having all the good toys. These 15 turn equal force meeting engagements are pure fantasy.
I agree with you their Mogami but most people like playing with the nice toys [img]http://www.matrixgames.com/ubb/smile.gif[/img] Often when I play campaigns I will do the same as you and buy units and formations that are more historic. Im sure if you want to play online like this you could set it up with someone so you would be limited in what you could buy [img]http://www.matrixgames.com/ubb/smile.gif[/img]



mogami -> (11/15/2000 7:44:00 AM)

Hi, I have no problem with players wanting to have 20 Tigers and 3 Companies of SS and Wurfherman ect. What I find painfull is them then wanting to face a force of 20 Shermans. There were Elite well equipped units in the German army in 1944. But they suffered the same problem the rest of the army faced. Overwhelming (else they would have won) numbers. Now no one wants to spend many hours fighting hopeless battles so there has to be a means of giving "Game victorys" to the german. This is the source of this thread since all the players of all the different armies are measured by the same yardstick. A desisive victory for the german in 1944 is not the same as one in 1939. The Germans did not win DV's in 1944 even Market Garden can only be called marginal at best since it did not turn the tide in any way. So I would give the allies more points and cheaper units but make them score more points while the german can win "Game" by just staying alive and holding the ground he is ordered to defend. In cases where german has assault or advance mission he is going to have a harder time winning but this is as it should be, it is still possible for a good player to win battles in 1944. ------------------ I'm not retreating, I'm attacking in a differant direction! [This message has been edited by Mogami (edited November 14, 2000).]



Kharan -> (11/15/2000 10:15:00 AM)

If someone really would buy 20 Tigers and 3 SS rifle companies, in year '44 he would have to face at least 40 T-34 M42's and 10 Soviet rifle companies. Would he win? Depends most on the terrain, but he'd be hard pressed to stop those red hordes. If you invest 190 points in a Tiger, you damn better make some use of it. Unit cost has nothing to do with historical availability. [This message has been edited by Kharan (edited November 14, 2000).]



Charles22 -> (11/15/2000 8:30:00 PM)

Mogami: You seriously believe the Russians built more T34s than the Germans built halftracks? I wish you could provide evidence for such claims (this is beside the fact that this game isn't attempting to echo production figures). Anyway, with your viewpoint, they would need to produce more than two times the T34s to halftracks. Also, to use your logic, since the Germans probably "produced" more trucks than the Russians (the Russians didn't produce many, they got them on loan from the US), the Russian trucks and supply sections should be very expensive therefore or German ones 1 point or so (assuming the entire point structure is based solely on the war in Russia, which it isn't). It may interest you to know that you seem hooked on this myth that the T34s were produced at a 8-to-1 (or greater) ratio to every piece of German equipment. You see, the problem is that not only are you believing exaggerated Russian claims but you are also taking your beliefs simply from concentrated battles, not the total composition of both forces. I'm currently reading "Russia at War 1941-1945" which this evidence should make you at least wonder. Page 953 from the Soviet History these figures are for the great attack launched which the Germans weren't expecting in such force (1/14/45 after the Germans had lost so much already), while the Germans had concentrated more in Hungary, so it's not indicative of the entire front, just on a concentrated attack. If the general entire front were an 8-to-1 Soviet advantage, then certainly the great attacks given from the Soviet figures themselves (almost always grossly exaggerated), would shown concentrations of 16-to-1 or better, and yet the following doesn't show that..
quote:

The First Belorussian and the First Ukrainian Fronts had 163 divisions, 32,143 guns and mortars, 6,460 tanks and mobile guns and 4,772 aircraft. The total effectives were 2,200,000 men. Thus we had in the Warsaw-Berlin direction [at the beginning of the offensive] 5.5 times more men than the enemy, 7.8 times more guns, 5.7 times more tanks, 17.6 times more planes.
I must point out that the book lists the 5.7 figure on tanks, with the point being not on the bottom of the figure, as I type it, but higher up, so that, perhaps, the point means not a point, but an estimate, so as to say "5-7 times", but I doubt that, for when this applied to the aircraft figure it would say "17-6 times" and that makes no sense, since the lower figure always goes first (In other words it would read "6.17 times" instead). If you want to compare a tank produced to the entire war to one that wasn't produced till late 1944 (King Tiger), sure you might find an 8-to-1 advantage or larger, but even so, you aren't taking the reality a "tank class" into consideration. You're comparing a medium tank to a very heavy. Try comparing Russian production of the KV series to the Tiger and see there isn't that big of a difference. Even so, the KV was produced at least twice as long as the Tiger (if we include the regular Tigers) was produced. The only relatively fair comparison that can be made between Russian/Soviet tank classes, would have to be over the same periods of the war. For example, one could compare the T34 to the PZIV series to some extent since they were both produced throughout the war. Also, you have to figure that a lot of the Soviet total equipment was lost without a fight in 41-42 in Russia and Finland both. So how do you emulate the early effects of a Russia which was quite different from the late Russia in tanks? You can't just take concentrated battles and paint that as a Russian production advantage throughout the war for tanks, and even more absurdly for just the T34 class in particular. Weren't there only allegedly like 35,000 T34s produced the whole war? Seems I've seen that figure. If that's so, we know the German figures to be reliable. If you just account for the Panthers and Tigers you come between 4,000-6,000 tanks don't you? The 4,000 figure would "barely" make the 8-to-1 ratio you claim for T34s, and that's not even making the somewhat fair comparison of T34 vs PZIV, even if you can believe the Russian figures. (Through www.achtungpanzer.com, they put the production of Panthers at 5,796, while the Tiger is 1,844. The show the PZIV at 8,544. If you compare T34 to Panther/Tiger for the 2+ years they were produced you have a rough 4-to-1 T34 advantage, while the T34 vs. PZIV is roughly the same.) [This message has been edited by Charles22 (edited November 15, 2000).]



panda124c -> (11/15/2000 10:56:00 PM)

quote:

Originally posted by Mogami: Hi, I practice what I preach I am axis 44 and never use Tigers/Panthers/Wurfherman/air and I have not lost a battle yet. I use VG infantry small calibur arty. I like the flavour of being out numbered and having to use my limited resources wisely. If you are just interested in victory then keep it the way it is but if you want to know what it was like to be a german soldier in 1944 then forget about equality and get used to being shelled/strafed every turn and having much larger enemy forces to deal with. Anyone can win battles driving around in herds of Tigers and Panthers against a equal sized enemy but show me where it happened after 1942. Even during the Bulge in 44 after 48 hours the germans were right back to being outnumbered. There are a lot of genius's running around the halls of SPWaW thinking they are good because they never risk battle unless they are sure of having all the good toys. These 15 turn equal force meeting engagements are pure fantasy.
I hear that, I love playing with a core of ONE Inf Co (foot) a section of AT's and a section of 81's. And a section of mules to move em around. Russian front is a B***h. But lots of fun.



Charles22 -> (11/16/2000 12:12:00 AM)

Campaigners don't play 15 turn meeting engagements, anymore, anyway, it's usually 30+ and from the way it usually works out, the battle is pretty much over before the 10th turn is reached, whether on the offensive or defensive (the battles could of course be longer, except the AI so often charges, and, frankly, if the objectives are in the middle and timed, the battle ought to be very quick unless gunnery isn't being utilised to it's most proficient). In fact, when I played the Motherland campaign of Wild Bill's, I had a couple of attacks that ended up getting the last objective hex only on the last turn, and in one instance I only had one unit due to enemy units in and about the hex, that could reach that hex. The tank reached it, a T34, but the tank got destroyed and only the crew remained on that very last turn. Strangely enough though there was also an SGIIIB in the hex, the control of the hex went over to the crew, though the SGIIIB hadn't been damaged. When you are used to a more leisurely pace of the campaign games, always being leary of mines, it isn't easy to start throwing tanks out there haphazard to blow past opponents to try and capture a last hex or two.



Charles22 -> (11/16/2000 12:28:00 AM)

From my comments on the myth of the T34 8-to-1 superiority over any german tank line, I would like to add that it makes it a little bit more difficult to figure out, when you take into consideration that not all of the german equipment was on the Eastern Front, but then again, even though they aren't considered to have more than one front, not all of the russian stuff produced was fighting on that front either. Who knows? Maybe the Germans only had 60% of their equipment, total, in the East, so that it would've been a lot easier for the Russians to achieve, in the field, the occassional 8-to-1 or better advantage in tanks, but when we compare production figures it simply doesn't add up to 8-to-1 for any one type over it's most direct competitors (T34 vs. PZIV for example).



mogami -> (11/16/2000 2:29:00 AM)

Hi, Well we are Grognards after all so I will be precise KV production all types 4749 T-34/75 have not found total yet (but over 10,000 had been produced prior to June 22, 1941 including those lost in Winter War and deployed in East) T-34/76 35,120 T-34/85 18,480 using your production numbers a T-34/85 should be 10 times more common then a Tiger and a T-34/76 7 times more common then a Panther if we assume all of these were on Eastern front which we know is not the case. Assigning point value by production numbers is a valid means of showing relative value since a T-34/85 is ten times more likely to be on a battlefield then a Tiger it should cost 1/10th of whatever value you give the Tiger. I am sorry if this means the Soviets will outnumber the German but in fact this was the reality of the war. And this will not stop me from playing the german side late in the war just make it more "fun" ------------------ I'm not retreating, I'm attacking in a differant direction! [This message has been edited by Mogami (edited November 15, 2000).]



Drake -> (11/16/2000 3:03:00 AM)

quote:

Originally posted by Mogami: Hi, Well we are Grognards after all so I will be precise KV production all types 4749 T-34/75 have not found total yet (but over 10,000 had been produced prior to June 22, 1941 including those lost in Winter War and deployed in East) T-34/76 35,120 T-34/85 18,480 using your production numbers a T-34/85 should be 10 times more common then a Tiger and a T-34/76 7 times more common then a Panther if we assume all of these were on Eastern front which we know is not the case. Assigning point value by production numbers is a valid means of showing relative value since a T-34/85 is ten times more likely to be on a battlefield then a Tiger it should cost 1/10th of whatever value you give the Tiger. I am sorry if this means the Soviets will outnumber the German but in fact this was the reality of the war. And this will not stop me from playing the german side late in the war just make it more "fun"
Thier are many factors your not taken into account do Mogami. Like one is that the soviets were loseing tanks faster then the Germans were so at any one time they did not out number the Germans by that much. What was happing was that the tanks were being sent to the front and destroyed and then replaced. Take 1944 for example. German Tank losses (The German losses are for both fronts) 1941: 2,758 1942: 2,648 1943: 6,362 1944: 6,434 1945: 7,382 Soviet Tank Losses 1941: 20,500 1942: 15,000 1943: 22,400 1944: 16,900 1945: 8,700 I think as it is the Soviets get way to many tank Kills. If the Germans had lost tanks as fast as even me playing Human opponants they would have lost the war in 43 or before.



mogami -> (11/16/2000 3:28:00 AM)

Hi, I guess I will have to post total Soviet Tank production The Tank lossess you listed were all types of tanks not T-34/KV of which more were lost to mechanical failure then to the germans. The T-34 was designed to withstand a 76mm at 1000 meters and a 37mm at all ranges this was the motivating reason for the german's design of Tiger and Panther however most of these tanks saw service in the west because Adolph decided to try and break the alliance by inflicting heavy lossess on the Western allies. After Kursk (july 43)the bulk of german heavy tank production went to west front formations so you could argue they would be more common in the West Front 44. Also since we are in a 43 league many of the production numbers given for german hvy tanks have in fact not yet been built but the T-34/75 and 76 have finished their production runs. The Soviet Union had in excess of 30,000 AFV on June 22, 1941 They recieved over 4000 tanks from Great Britian in 41-42 (all of Canada's production went to Soviets) the Valentine should be more common then the Tiger/Panther on Eastern Front!!! But really this is missing the point, why do players insist on equality in a historical game where that equality did not exist? If you want to be a german go for the whole hog and fight those desperate battles against the odds like your heros did. If you want to ride at the head of an overwhelming mass of Germans stay in Poland. France 1940 saw outnumbered germans in inferior machines win a great victory. Russia 1941 the germans again outnumbered pushed nearly to victory. Do not forget it is not the armour/gun rating of the tank that matters as much as the exp/morale of the crew and of the leader that wins or lose's the battle. The fact of the matter it does not matter how many Russian tanks were lost they in fact were there to be lost and in the battles we fight they are not. If the Soviets lost that many tanks in 1943 they did while destroying a German Army Group and advancing. And your posting a 4 to 1 kill ratio for germans in 43 only highlights the need for the Soviets to have at least 4 times as many tanks. ------------------ I'm not retreating, I'm attacking in a differant direction! [This message has been edited by Mogami (edited November 15, 2000).]



Charles22 -> (11/16/2000 3:32:00 AM)

Mogami: I don't know where you get your T34 production figures but this is a quote from www.achtungpanzer.com which doesn't mention '45 production, but surely it didn't top another 5,000 in 4 mere months.
quote:

T-34 was produced in six main variants, all operated by four men crew and armed with 76.2mm gun and 2 or 3 machine guns designated as T-34/76. T-34/76 was produced in following variants: A (model 1940), B (model 1941), C (model 1942), D (model 1943), E (model 1943) and F (model 1943). From 1940 to 1944, some 35119 T-34/76 tanks were produced. In order to respond to T-34/76 in 1942, Germans developed their own Panzerkampfwagen V Panther, which incorporated many features of the Soviet T-34/76 and eventually proved to be a superb tank.
It would seem I'm mistaken there in how I analysed the data at achtung, for I didn't read the entire article. It later stated that the T34/85 was produced to the tune of 29,430, so that the quote I showed above wasn't total T34 production as I thought, but only the T34/76 till '45. As with Drake's comment later I agree that the Soviets for whatever reasons, didn't do very well in outnumbering as the production numbers would indicate, plus, and this is a major plus, is that not only was a lot of Soviet stuff destroyed early on, but some were captured (although perhaps more German stuff was lost overall). Not only that, but perhaps the Soviets had to churn out more, because they may had been less apt to repair broken ones. Naturally, the large quantitive advantage in tanks that the Soviets had early on was erased by the strategic situation in losing so many to surrender and retreat, so that if you made a game with total Soviet production numbers vs. total German numbers, the Germans would scarcely move them an inch, '41 or otherwise. If we lump the KV figure (though I would think it higher) you came up with, with the T34/76 and T34/85, we end up with like 60,000 medium/heavy (not including JS tanks apparently) Soviet tanks, to like 9.000 PZIVs along with about 7,500 panthers/Tigers, for around 16,500 total. This makes the Soviets around the 4-to-1 advantage again (Certainly the KV series produced more than the figure you qouted).



Tombstone -> (11/16/2000 3:33:00 AM)

Point values are based on effectiveness, not production values. There isn't much logic in that. This is a game, and points are a construct of the game maker's devising to tell us what a unit's relative effectiveness. They aren't dollars, they aren't historical accuracy units, they tell us what matches up against what (in general) within the context of the game. If you play with true troop cost on then you get relatively cheap T-34's. You can really get a good numerical superiority against german armored forces, but not so much that it's dumb. It works as close to a balanced system as we can expect considering the complexity of the task. Tomo



mogami -> (11/16/2000 3:50:00 AM)

Hi, Well being a Grognard I just go to Yahoo type in T-34 Production and start visting sites you can pick any of them they all are within a few k of each other as far as numbers go I have not listed JS series since they are not around in 43 which is year league placed in. KV production numbers were a suprise to me but the soviets moved on and used the turrent from KV-85 on T-34/85 and only built 130 of the KV's and they did not lose the KV's so units with them did not require many new tanks. I can see my time is wasted here since I am unable to verbalize my point well enough for you to understand the Germans were outnumbered from the day they invaded till the day they surrendered and the odds only grew longer as time passed. I do not mind facing this reality as a german in fact I realish it I want it I need it. And another issue the germans when using Tigers always assigned a number of "Escort" tanks (MK-III and Mk-IV) as I said before Tigers should be a ratio not the total point value. I have had to face 20 Tiger and Panther's in 5k point battle since T-34 is only 40 points cheaper it is not possible to achive the numbers required to have an even match add the fact all these Tiger formations always come with those Wurfherman you get unreal force compostions. If you look you will notice ver 4.4 does not include Russian Guard infantry, T-34/85 KV-1(E) 85mm AA gun and this really makes for what I consider an unfair axis advantage for the East Front league which is what my whole point is about ------------------ I'm not retreating, I'm attacking in a differant direction!



Kharan -> (11/16/2000 4:03:00 AM)

quote:

Originally posted by Mogami: And another issue the germans when using Tigers always assigned a number of "Escort" tanks (MK-III and Mk-IV) as I said before Tigers should be a ratio not the total point value. I have had to face 20 Tiger and Panther's in 5k point battle since T-34 is only 40 points cheaper it is not possible to achive the numbers required to have an even match add the fact all these Tiger formations always come with those Wurfherman you get unreal force compostions. If you look you will notice ver 4.4 does not include Russian Guard infantry, T-34/85 KV-1(E) 85mm AA gun and this really makes for what I consider an unfair axis advantage for the East Front league which is what my whole point is about
Odd then that Axis side has only 8 wins while Allies have 22. On the West Front league the figures are 4 versus 15. [This message has been edited by Kharan (edited November 15, 2000).]



mogami -> (11/16/2000 4:08:00 AM)

The win/loss ratio for eastern front to a large degree happen before ver 4.4 also they are not scoring many points for all these wins. I refuse to use 12 turn 2k meeting engagements as a yardstick. Most of the allied wins are the same player but he does not seem to score many points in each victory 70k in 14 battles (about 5k per battle)and yes I wonder how he does it(envy)since you need 3-1 for a victory axis player scoring less then 1k per fight? His opponents seem to be better germans and I want to play against them also. you don't mention the number of draws. ------------------ I'm not retreating, I'm attacking in a differant direction! [This message has been edited by Mogami (edited November 15, 2000).]



Kharan -> (11/16/2000 5:13:00 AM)

So what would you use as a yardstick? How do you know how long the games have lasted? Victory requires a 2-1 ratio in human vs human battles. [This message has been edited by Kharan (edited November 15, 2000).]



mogami -> (11/16/2000 5:38:00 AM)

I am online in gameroom everynight. If they are PBEM games they are very fast ones. I don't know why I bother with this take 3k axis 43 against 3k soviet 43 and explain to me how soviet getting 2-1. I never lose as axis in these type battles and feel good if I draw as soviet perhaps I am rotten commander. But I can count in last battle my opponent had more Tigers and Panthers then I had Total AFV's he had no Infantry and this cost him a draw. His Wurfhermen kept my infantry from closing with his tanks but I had enough to capture some of the objectives. ------------------ I'm not retreating, I'm attacking in a differant direction!



Kharan -> (11/16/2000 6:22:00 AM)

So don't play '43 Ger vs Sov battles if you think they're unfair. I personally find Germans harder to play. Like you said, if the German player buys lots of his expensive tanks (182 points for a Tiger compared to 95 points for a T-34 M42 in '43), he's going to have a hard time coping with the red infantry hordes.



Charles22 -> (11/16/2000 7:45:00 AM)

Mogami: Oh don't go away, this is just getting fun, it would seem the 8-to-1 theory doesn't have a lot of legs, but I'll give you that "in the field", the East Front that is, they may often have had a 8-to-1 tank advantage, but overall production numbers don't reflect that, but then not all the Gerry forces went to that front. Talking about what the Russians faced in numbers and what the Germans produced are two different things. Funny, though, if the Germans were so inferior on the East Front, as you say and I know, that it got worse as the war dragged on, you would think that one of the main offensives of the war (the drive to Warsaw-Berlin), would've notched a much higher tank advantage than 5.7-to-1 (A Russian figure), especially if their general tank advantage "in the field" were a much higher figure of say 8-to-1. On the other hand this is a difficult issue, because at least early in the war, the Russians routinely listed the German forces as much larger than they really were, or rather I should say, that they listed the German losses often higher than the entire size of the entire German forces on that front, with the flawed thinking that such exaggerated claims for German losses would boost morale. So, from the psychological standpoint, the book I'm reading points out the standard Russian practice of wildly exaggerating German losses in the first two years, but I don't recall it making mention if that same tactic was employed later on. Perhaps they assumed that of the didn't report the Russian loss reports, later, the reader would assume that the practice continued throughout the war. I have seen individual accounts of small battles in various books about later in the war, and it seems as though the country, at least early on, exaggerating German losses, passed on to the average Russian commander as well. It was probably a way, also, from getting themselves sent off to Siberia.



Charles22 -> (11/16/2000 7:56:00 AM)

Mogami: One last thing tonight. You mentioned several units the Russians don't have in V4.4. That's total baloney. I've, personally, used the KV1E, and guards infantry in the Motherland campaign, and I have seen KV1Es available in WWII campaign, though I haven't campaigned deep enough as Russian to see if "everything" listed in the OOBs comes to fruition when it;s supposed to. BTW, Wild Bill had one or two German units become available two or three monthes ahead of what the OOBs say were their available dates, but I did quite well with them. The Russian armor ratings in the early years make up for an awful lot of deficiencies. Have a Russian tank get a kill or two for each battle, over the course of three or more battles, and they get pretty deadly. BTW, my B1 unit was upgraded to a KV1E and I registered like 33 kills with it during the course of the 6 or so battles that it was.



mogami -> (11/16/2000 9:58:00 AM)

I would be happy if T-34 only cost 95 points its 130. 4.4 not online battle if scenario designer put in KV-1(E)it will show up but you can not buy them in online battles. If you had them in campaign and upgraded to 4.4 they are still there. Soviet Guards Infantry in buy menu is just MG and mortor no infantry sqds KV-1 and KV-1s but no E. I have 7 Heros posted at Tankhead's site all with over 60 kills but league is not 1941-42 it is 43. I am not asking for 8-1 odds but I am always outnumbered by German heavy tanks in my particular battles. These guys buy Tigers/Panthers/Wurfherman and little infantry (maybe some SS or engineer) This is not the wailing wall it is an attempt to recreate reality in the game. As it stands now it is unreal. Iwant the hordes of Russians\western allies when I am the axis. I am AXIS in 44 league and never worry about suffering a loss I give 3 to 1 to allies don't use the heavy tanks and still hold my ground. So I do not want to hear fairy tales about allies who win against even forces when they are comprised of Tigers ect. The even point battles I have tried as axis using them last less then 10 turns before I destroy the soviets. I want the e-mail address of these germans who are losing so I can get in on some of the fun too. Keep believing the Germans where not outnumbered the Russians must of been better fighters then SPWaW gives them credit for. I would settle for the raise in exp/morale level they must have had. During the period covered in the league. The Germans lost the battle of Kursk Tigers/Panthers/Elefant not withstanding and Army Group Center was crushed by the follow up Soviet attack from 1943 on the germans might have had local success (this game type battle) but they were pushed back and defeated so the Soviets must have won more local success (this type battle) and you maintain they did it with equal force. Do you not enjoy having the mass of soviet's to fight? Meet me online I will be axis you soviet show me the tactic to replace the advantage you want to take away from the Soviet's but keep the axis advantage without suffering their weakness. Meeting engagement 3k Axis moves first. This is an open invitation to anyone but no PBEM online only sorry if you can't find the time. and make sure you purchase all those balony units. ------------------ I'm not retreating, I'm attacking in a differant direction! [This message has been edited by Mogami (edited November 15, 2000).]



Drake -> (11/16/2000 10:09:00 AM)

Gess im going to have to take you up on that this weekend Mogami, becouse I think as it is the Russains have the advantage in both 43 and 44.



Kharan -> (11/16/2000 6:12:00 PM)

So when other people report that they find Germans harder to play and the league results show that too quite clearly (a couple missing German and Soviet units in v4.4 don't make any difference) it is fairy tales, but when you say something it is the absolute truth? Hmm [img]http://www.matrixgames.com/ubb/wink.gif[/img]. By the way, try looking at the actual unit costs (which are affected by True troop cost setting) in buy screen instead of encyclopedia numbers. A T-34 M42 in June '43 costs 95 points. A regular T-34 M43 in October '43 costs 106 points. When you buy a Tiger in June '43, you could have bought 7 rifle squads with the same points. When you buy a Tiger in June '43, your Soviet opponent gets to buy 9 rifle squads. Are you telling me one Tiger will consistently beat 9 rifle squads? Well maybe so if it's on a tall hill with clear fields of fire and the Soviets who come at it don't use forests and smoke for cover. Not a chance otherwise. [This message has been edited by Kharan (edited November 16, 2000).]



JTV -> (11/16/2000 7:19:00 PM)

quote:

Originally posted by Mogami: T-34/75 have not found total yet (but over 10,000 had been produced prior to June 22, 1941 including those lost in Winter War and deployed in East)
You will be having hard time finding production info about those T-34 tanks that Soviets lost in Winter War as there were *none*. Simple reason for this: Winter War ended 13th of March 1940 and Soviets didn't use any T-34 tanks in it as production of T-34 had not started yet. Soviets battle- tested prototype of KV-1 in Winter War at Lähde sector and tested T-34/76 m 1940 tanks aganst obstacles of Mannerheim line at Karelian Isthmus at *summer of 1940* but no T-34 was used in Winter War.



Charles22 -> (11/16/2000 7:22:00 PM)

Mogami: I don't know anything about these '43 battles to which you speak, but if they don't have the KV1E available, a tank that became available I believe it was 7/41, that's definitely lame. So why does the campaigns allow it's use and not this tournament or whatever it is that you speak of? I also wonder what's so great about '43, that such a time period is chosen. If what you say about Russian missing units is true, and the battles are in '43, it sounds like an open-and-shut case of the situation being manipulated for people who can't play the strong Germans very well. I always thought '44 was better, because there was more heavy and different stuff available for all sides. I always knew that just about the time that the Panther became available, that such a time is the crest of German advantage in quality over their opponents, although the Germans did come up with better stuff later, the later stuff was negated somewhat by their opponents being on the ball and getting a lot better stuff too. I can understand a Gerry player wanting to play when he thinks they have the best advantage, but what good is that advantage if you "eliminate" some of the best units for the opponent? They might as well be playing AOE. I suppose eliminating the opponents best units is supposed to keep them from buying them ridiculously en masse, but if that's the objective, there's a far better way I would think, in that you could make rules for say a 2K game, where each side picks one or two units they think their opponents should not be able to use en masse and make a gentleman's agreement that those units will not exceed the number chosen, or they forfeit the game. For example the Soviet player might limit the German one to no more than 5 Panthers, while the German might limit the Soviet to five 85mm AAs.



Kharan -> (11/16/2000 7:43:00 PM)

There are some units that aren't buyable because some formations in the OOBs are messed up, like German JPz's and Soviet Guards Plt, but the reason you can't buy a KV-1(E) in '43 is that in SPWAW it's available from October '41 to '42.



Pack Rat -> (11/16/2000 7:45:00 PM)

Please visit the gamers forum where Greywolf has come up with a point scoring system. ------------------ "Sex, it's natures way of loving you" Pack Rat



mogami -> (11/16/2000 10:37:00 PM)

Hi I do not think the league results show anything quite clearly except that the 2 top allies are really good players or there are some really rotton german players. They have 19 of the 23 allied wins leaving the other 14 posted allies with 4 wins 9 losses and 21 draws. And as I said before it is not hard to draw the battles since the germans I have face don't buy infantry. In my last battle a 10k meeting engagement the german had 2 platoons of FJ and about 20 MG to ride on his 10 Tigers and 12 Panthers with 2 MK-IVh. An ammo dump with 4 Wurfhermen piled on it and 6 Brumbars and 8x88mm Flak guns and 26btry of OB. Not hard to draw at all since he is not going to advance past the objectives he runs to on first turn. I had high hopes when I got 9 sappers next to his ammo dump but then he lost his connection. It was raining with visibiltiy of 25 so it would have taken a while for my 6 rifle companies to advance to the objectives but there was plenty of time. OB arty only has 1 round of smoke and Soviet rifle squads each carry one and each company had a platoon of engineers attached to provide more. The molotov's will kill any axis tank if you can get next to it. Oh well another lost connection in a good situation why am I the only player who saves game? Restart no good now that he knows the sappers are there. This tactical situation is a "Fairey tale" to me maybe not to you I had more tanks 18 T-34, 12-KV-1(s)6 SU-152 giving me 36 to 24 and I felt good about my chances but not in a gun duel it was my infantry I was banking on at 25 hexes germans kill pretty regular soviet's do not. I know people will say "but that is realistic" ok we will choose what parts of reality we will use and ignore what we don't like. Jocaim Piper an SS panzer general once fought in Russia to hold a position. The first day the soviet's attacked with 200 tanks lost 120, the next day 200 more lost over 100, the next day 200 more and Piper had to retreat who won the battle? Also if you do look at league standings you will see I am #2 axis 44 and I still think it is too easy to aquire "super" KG's that an allied player with the same amount of points can not match. I am testing my belief in 2 online league games in 1 I gave 3-1 points in other 2-1 allied arty might be deciding factor in first. In 2nd issue still in doubt my Mk-III's and IV's suffering higher lossess but the infantry is holding the postions pretty well. ------------------ I'm not retreating, I'm attacking in a differant direction! [This message has been edited by Mogami (edited November 16, 2000).]



BA Evans -> (11/17/2000 12:14:00 AM)

quote:

Originally posted by Mogami: Assigning point value by production numbers is a valid means of showing relative value since.....
You are confusing value with availability. Production - Losses is a good method for assigning availability. Availability = how many units you can field. Gun + armor + speed + etc. is a good method for assigning combat value. Value = how good the unit performs on the battlefield. Most players want BOTH sides to have an equal chance of winning before the battle begins. Value performs this job admirably. Availability does not. I postulate that a better method for you to assign availability would be to calculate the ratio between forces in actual battle, not production numbers. Don't you want to know what units were actually used in battle, instead of which units were still being transported to the front, in the maintenance yards, etc? * This would be a true system for battlefield availability. * German armies were much more mobile than their Russian counter parts. In most battles, Germany was able to reach localized parity with their Russian enemies because German armies could much more easily move their mobile forces from hot spot to hot spot. BA Evans P.S. Your system makes Finland vs. Russia unplayable since Russia out-produced Finland by massive quantities. How many German companies do I get for each Belgium squad (what about Rumania, Lechtinstin, etc)? Any battle between a big nation and a small nation is not playable under your system. Under the current system, we do not have this problem.



Charles22 -> (11/17/2000 1:02:00 AM)

Oh, the KV1E is only available till '42. Well, there's a KV85 or some such to take it's place in '43, isn't there? I'm not sure, but through prior experience, it seemed to me too that I might've preferred the KV1E's superior armor, to it's successor. Some of you guys play 10k battles (10k each side I suppose)? My hat's off to you, y'all must be more manly than I am. I haven't played anything over 5k to my knowledge, unless of course the original 3.2k core starting off in 9/39 ends up with enough expensive units to reach 10k. You must have to play with the extended map widths in order not to go insane and have 10k on each side. If that's true, I can't see anyone having less than 50 total tanks, and yet that seems to be what I'm hearing. The fact that tournament doesn't have guards infantry, also makes me wonder whether they give the Germans the new ski infantry. Mogami: Perhaps one day, like me, you'll resign yourself to playing the AI, as I've found the sort of thing you've described in opponents all too common. I don't need that hassle, though my opponent, in the form of the AI, may be much easier. I find some way to be challenged nonetheless (maybe my losing more than 5 tanks in a battle is something of a loss, for example). When I played Wild Bill's Motherland campaign, I did as well as I've done with generally any six or so battles as the Germans (Motherland is a battle as the Ruskies), although it was slightly tainted, in my view, because I probably played with heavier stuff than I normally would, but what's a guy to do when he isn't sure of the heft of what Wild Bill would throw? I mean he did throw out a couple of vehicles three monthes early, though the overall composition was generally lighter than I expected. I'm so used to playing as Germany against the AI, that I know it won't bulldoze me with nothing but KVs, so I can afford to have a healthy mix of units. As to how the AI a lot of times uses artillery, that's another matter entirely (as far as field dominance goes). I'm currently playing as Gerry in 6/41 Russia and the AI forces are far too light for the battle, though I've seen three T34s. Damaged one with a PZIIIH, resulting in the crew abandoning and their subsequent being gunned down, while the other T34 got a lot of bouncing fire and retreated, and that leaves only one more for the time being. On my side of the card, I've lost either two or three PZ38ts from Russian BA7Ms etc. It's been a pretty sporting meeting engagement, but it's one of few times when the AI seems to have picked way too light. I suppose I'll run into another time when half the army is T34 or KVs. Hopefully I'll have changed those PZ38ts to something else by then (though I do tend to generally hide the weak units anyway, it's just that those BA7Ms were too juicy an easy target, not to let the 38ts open up).



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

Valid CSS!




Forum Software © ASPPlayground.NET Advanced Edition 2.4.5 ANSI
2.96875