Anybody win with the Russian ? (Full Version)

All Forums >> [Current Games From Matrix.] >> [World War II] >> Across the Dnepr - Second Edition



Message

mariovalleemtl -> Anybody win with the Russian ? (4/28/2010 1:59:41 PM)

Anybody win with the Russian ?

I have play 5 games so far and the German run the show galore.
The Russian surrender all the time because most the there army evaporated.
Russian try to stand there ground and be eliminated.
Russian try to retreat a loose objectives city.
Smolenks always fall around turn 14 (at max).

I find it's depressing to play the Russian again a good German player.
Even if you could win with the victory points, you will spend more the 25 hours
of frustrating gaming time retreating all the time.
The game look balance in term of victory but, for me, not balance in term of fun.
I am not a masochist. I don't like to play desperate situation.

Now if anybody could show me how to win with the Russian, I will be very please. [:)]



ComradeP -> RE: Anybody win with the Russian ? (4/28/2010 4:39:08 PM)

As said in my AAR, a lot depends on dice rolls and what the Germans do with their armour.

In the official AAR, Smolensk held out until turn 17, but that was mostly because German armoured and motorised strength was spread all over the map and thus not concentrated as well as that the siege was left to infantry formations with no Tank shock which they can use to remove weak defenders from city hexes.

In a very short trial game (we only played the first 3 turns) with Noakesy, I noticed that if the Germans concentrate 5 Panzer/motorised divisions at one location, they're unstoppable no matter what the Soviets try. Sure, a wall of men will delay them for a turn, but after that turn there'll be a huge gap in the Soviet line because all the men have died.

Not to mention that the Germans basically have no AO's and can thus ignore important objectives should they desire to do so. Introducing AO's for the Germans would be a good start, as now it feels like the original DB series system with the increased lethality of the new DB Eastern Front series system. The Soviet AO's are in many cases very restrictive and don't follow natural lines of defense. The triggers are located at odd locations (villages hexes away from the nearest road) sometimes too. A variant where the Soviet AO's are like the German AO's, or a variant where the Germans have to capture certain locations to expand their AO's will be a LOT more difficult for the Germans.

If the German player mostly rolls no loss rolls and/or even gets double dice no loss rolls, which my opponent did get in several turns, there's nothing you can do as the Soviet player as due to the very generous tactical shift system for the Germans, a few Pionier battalions can kill an entire division with ease. It's certainly a frustrating experience.

Of course, the terrain helps a bit, but woods don't really do anything and only forests or marshes matter and German motorised leg units simply zip through wooded areas as if they're driving on a highway.

The low OP's for tanks and the fact that, for most units, their lack of a tank shock when below 4 steps makes them useless as tanks means you can only counterattack a few times. Counterattacks which the German player can destroy with relative ease.

I'm confident the Soviet player can win this, but as it stands the scenario might indeed be too easy for a good German player and I am of the opinion that a historical result isn't possible. Losses for both sides quickly become higher than they were in real life, but as the Soviets are mostly the ones taking the beating and the vast majority of their Rifle Divisions are gone forever, that hurts them a lot more than the Germans, as most German units come back and they can quickly be refitted back into shape.

Halfway through my game with Squatter, most of my army's dead and it's questionable what I can achieve with the rest, but my army didn't die in vain as he is quite a distance removed from major objectives.

I do have several new ideas for a Soviet defense which I'll probably document in a new AAR soon, presumably the game against Talos.

I also have several changes in mind for an unofficial variant.

As an aside: the problem with German unit strength also applies to Husky, the Germans can simply blow most Allied units away with relative ease.



mariovalleemtl -> RE: Anybody win with the Russian ? (4/28/2010 8:36:10 PM)

I totally agree with you Pieter. Like you said , I concentrated my panzer and that is unstoppable.  Sometime, I attack the same city hex 6 or 7 time in the same turn. Objectives city fall like dominos. Maybe more restrictive German AO could help but is it historical ? [:(] [&:] [8|] [:-]



hank -> RE: Anybody win with the Russian ? (4/28/2010 8:40:00 PM)

I have no reassuring news since I've not played with Russians yet but I started one a couple of days ago and plan on getting it on for at least a couple of turns tonight.   I've been watching this topic (here and at Run5) and look forward to seeing how bad it is.  After watching the Axis AI's first turn I was amazed at how aggresive it is.

I'm a better defender than attacker so I hope to be able to slow down the onslaught enough to get a draw. I'm using all the advice so far handed out by the accomplished players.

I'll try to track what happens.  I'm playing with Axis level recommended, Axis historical AO's ... BUT, I turn off my AO's.  I don't like playing with AOs because I feel with the HQs features and supply issues you have enough restrictions.  However, I do believe the AOs have really improved the performance of the AI plus the other improvements they've implemented has really made the AI a strong opponent.



jjdenver -> RE: Anybody win with the Russian ? (4/29/2010 5:11:59 AM)

Well playing against Talos might not be the best debut for your new Soviet strategy. Talos is pretty good I think.



squatter -> RE: Anybody win with the Russian ? (4/29/2010 11:14:14 AM)

I just won in my first game as the Russians against an experienced German opponent.

There are one or two areas of imbalance, but this is winnable either side.

Did any of you play the first AtD? Strategy is the same - this is a fighting withdrawal for the Russians. The first 15 turns are about delaying, holding a line here or there for a turn or two, counterattacking here and there to slow him down. The last 5 turns are about standing your ground with the army you've conserved in the first 15.

My advice to anyone struggling would be:

1. Where possible screen your line with a line of attachments.
2. Where you can't hold the opponent, don't feed him your units piecemeal - get out of there. Blow bridges and drop detachments, live to fight another day.
3. Keep a flak carpet behind your lines to minimise interdiction.
4. When you need to hold a line, make it a double line.
5. Preserve a core of armour, motorized infantry, cavalry alive for the end game. Especially T34 units, elite tank regiments, and elite cavalry. These will come in handy. As will full strength T-26 (I thnk) regiments which have a +2 tank shock value when full strength.
6. Defend key marsh areas - leave suicide units in them to slow the advance.
7. A tip for a counterattack: if you won't be able to return most if not all of your counterattacking forces to friendly terrain where they can be dug back in, don't go for the counterattack. There are exceptions, but this is a good general rule.
8. Russian cavalry are superhuman, capable of immense (and imo unrealistic) penetration of enemy front, and recon. Don't throw them away. Use them in concert with armour to mount serious counterattacks.
9. Never blame the dice. If you've put yourself in a situation where the dice determine whether you win or lose, you're strategy was a failure.




oldspec4 -> RE: Anybody win with the Russian ? (4/29/2010 12:37:39 PM)

Thanks for the tips...I only play the AI and still need beaucoup help.



ComradeP -> RE: Anybody win with the Russian ? (4/29/2010 2:11:57 PM)

quote:

Sometime, I attack the same city hex 6 or 7 time in the same turn.


Squatter attacked Demidov about 5 or so times this turn. Guess what: it fell.

quote:

Well playing against Talos might not be the best debut for your new Soviet strategy. Talos is pretty good I think.


Talos is one of the best players out there, which is one of the reasons why I want to try my new strategy against him. I might ask him to play an edited version of the scenario though, as I'm already kind of tired of some of the minor or more significant shortcomings of the stock version.

I also want to play against him because of how silly our tournament game for Kharkov was. Seeing almost the entire group Bobkin, Soviet 6th Army and the Tank Corps sit outside a hedgehogged stack in Lannaya (held by something like 2 regiments and 2 battalions), failing to take it because my artillery failed or my rolls and artillery failed, was one of the worst moments in my gaming history I've ever experienced and it left me with a bitter feeling towards how dice rolls can utterly screw up a game.

quote:

Did any of you play the first AtD? Strategy is the same - this is a fighting withdrawal for the Russians. The first 15 turns are about delaying, holding a line here or there for a turn or two, counterattacking here and there to slow him down. The last 5 turns are about standing your ground with the army you've conserved in the first 15.


I feel I'm going to be disagreeing with you a lot.

It isn't remotely the same as the original ATD, mostly because the AO's give the Soviets severe problems and because good rolls by the Axis (such as by you in our game) can blow every Soviet defence away in a single turn. In the original ATD, the Germans should be happy with a *-D2 roll, here that's basically the minimum.

The Germans had 36 infantry divisions, 6 motorised infantry divisions, 9 Panzer divisions, 1 cavalry division, 20 artillery units and 25 independent combat units in the original

In this version they have the same amount of divisions, but 121 artillery units (all of which can fire independently) and 33 independent combat units. Most of the German units come back, which essentially doubles their combat units and gives the Germans 100+ divisions. The German units tend to be more powerful than the units in the original version too, and they have more bullets which is also very important.

Due to the generous tactical shifts the Germans get, a 1 step unit isn't necessarily weaker than a 4 step unit in an attack.

quote:

1. Where possible screen your line with a line of attachments.


True, but those don't help against tank shock and the Germans will still at least be able to get 5-1 odds.

quote:

2. Where you can't hold the opponent, don't feed him your units piecemeal - get out of there. Blow bridges and drop detachments, live to fight another day.


With 18 OP's (and much less for artillery) and the AO's "getting out of there" often isn't an option.

quote:

3. Keep a flak carpet behind your lines to minimise interdiction.


There are not enough AA units for that and keeping them behind the lines means giving the German artillery target practice. They need to be at the frontline to make sure the Germans need to roll at least a 4 on air strikes. I'd also say that, due to the new interdiction system where they don't interdict roads but everything, interdiction will be mostly used at the frontline. I don't recall a single instance in our game thus far where you placed significant interdiction in my rear echelons, at least not an instance where that actually slowed me down.

quote:

4. When you need to hold a line, make it a double line.


That's usually not possible and it doesn't help if the Germans concentrate at one point. It's a good strategy if the Germans spread out, like Roger did in the official AAR and you're doing in our game, but if the Germans concentrate, everything in the area will die.

quote:

5. Preserve a core of armour, motorized infantry, cavalry alive for the end game. Especially T34 units, elite tank regiments, and elite cavalry. These will come in handy. As will full strength T-26 (I thnk) regiments which have a +2 tank shock value when full strength.


That's a good idea, although the cavalry could at first be used to disrupt supply or capture unprotected objectives. Their death doesn't matter much: they come back and when they come back, you also have a unit you can sacrifice if a unit needs to die, as the second time the Germans won't get any points.

quote:

6. Defend key marsh areas - leave suicide units in them to slow the advance.


There are only two marsh areas the Germans can't really go around: in the North between Velizh and Rzhev and Southeast of Smolensk, the rest of the marsh areas are not strategically significant on the long term.

If units are about to be pocketed, you should try to place them in marsh areas so the Germans have to root them out the hard way, but aside from that there are few significant marsh areas.

quote:

7. A tip for a counterattack: if you won't be able to return most if not all of your counterattacking forces to friendly terrain where they can be dug back in, don't go for the counterattack. There are exceptions, but this is a good general rule.


That really depends on what you can kill and if a counterattack would stop the momentum in a certain area. A single German regiment is worth more than an entire Soviet division, so if you can kill several German units for the loss of 10 or so units, that might be a good trade. It does depend on how many units you have left.

quote:

8. Russian cavalry are superhuman, capable of immense (and imo unrealistic) penetration of enemy front, and recon. Don't throw them away. Use them in concert with armour to mount serious counterattacks.


50 OP's isn't unrealistic, that's 200 kilometres a day at most, which is possible in a trot or lope with relative ease. I'm more worried about German infantry being able to walk 80+ kilometres each day than cavalry moving at 200 kilometres a day at most.

Soviet armour has 30 OP's, so they can't really be used in concert with cavalry in deep penetrations. If the Soviet armour would have more realistic OP's, especially the BT series, it would certainly be a valid strategy, but currently it's difficult to pull off.

quote:

9. Never blame the dice. If you've put yourself in a situation where the dice determine whether you win or lose, you're strategy was a failure.


This is the part where we'll disagree most. In our game, you get a consistent rate of double dice odds with overruns and often no losses rolls. In the last turn, when you retook Mogilev, you had 50% chance to overrun my forces and 50% chance to force a retreat. You got both and after that you succeeded at a retreat roll where you needed a 6. The way you got into Orsha was similar and the fight over Demidov was the first instance where being in a city hex actually helped a bit.

Sorry, but there's absolutely nothing I can do against such rolls or against your series of *-D2 or *-D3 rolls which often instantly kill a Rifle Division. Luck/good dice rolls are just as important as strategy.

We could take a bet and start an unsecure game where you'll try a turn over long enough until you don't get any overrun rolls or good retreat rolls and see whether you can manage to get to your current point of advance. I guarantee you that you won't. I prefer skill over luck, but luck is always a factor.

Some of the turns you send me back leave me in something of a state of shock for a while. You're really getting good rolls on many attacks, often no-loss rolls which make the game easier for you and far more difficult for me. Heck, when you get double dice odds, 8/10 times one of your rolls guarantees you get an overrun. On the other hand, my combat average is 3.23 after a few attacks on turn 11.

Due to how most combat mechanics work in favour of the Germans in this scenario (tank shock, tactical shifts, artillery, air strikes) good rolls can make any defensive line crumble.



squatter -> RE: Anybody win with the Russian ? (4/29/2010 3:33:57 PM)

All I can do is transmit my own thus far succesful strategy for the Russian player. If you disagree with some of my suggestions, all I can say is that you haven't applied the tactics in the same manner as I have.

ComradP, to address some of your points:

"There are not enough AA units for that and keeping them behind the lines means giving the German artillery target practice. They need to be at the frontline to make sure the Germans need to roll at least a 4 on air strikes. I'd also say that, due to the new interdiction system where they don't interdict roads but everything, interdiction will be mostly used at the frontline. I don't recall a single instance in our game thus far where you placed significant interdiction in my rear echelons, at least not an instance where that actually slowed me down.

When I say behind the lines, I'm talking one or two hexes, sometimes forming a key coridor along important lines of retreat. In our last game, the pockets formed around Orsha and the swamp west of Smolensk were greatly assisted by my interdiction. If you are keeping your flak in your front lines, I'd suggest you are vulnerable to pocketing. Given I was able to create two large pockets against you, that seems to be born out. Unless of course you are suggesting that my interdiction wasnt important in creating the pockets?

Regarding double lines - where the German player concentrates is exactly where you need a double line. Or to retreat. Never to offer a weak line which will just evaporate. I'd go as far as to say that if the German player concentrates heavily in one area, this is a good thing for the Russian player, as he can either force the German into a tough assault on a tough double line, or he can just scoot altogether, meaning the German has wasted his concentration. It also allows for more adventurous counter attacks on other, weaker sections of the German line. The Russian can force the German to concentrate in one area by deploying a double line, only to dissappear the following turn when the German has concentrated sufficiently to assault it.

Regarding cavalry vs infantry movement - I generally agree with you. The solution may lie in raising penalties for cavalry movement into enemy terrain, and reducing german infantry foot movement overall.

Regarding dice in general, I have some sympathy as the Russian player because the sheer amount of damage you are receiving makes it look like the dice are against you. But in the 10 turns we have played in our game so far, I as the Germans have rolled over 300 dice in direct assault results alone. The more dice you roll, the closer your average result will be to 3.50 (I believe- I'm no statistician). The game records my outcome as 3.46, which is slightly lower than I would hope for.

But it's easy to fixate on the rolls that seem to go against you, and not remember all the rolls your opponent misses- the heavy artillery rolls that miss on a 1, the assaults that dont get overruns, the times when the defender rolls an extra three defensive fire hits etc.

I agree if a game is decided by just a few hundred points then certain key dice rolls can be blamed for the overall result. But in a scenario as massive as AtD, these rolls will even themselves out.

"This is the part where we'll disagree most. In our game, you get a consistent rate of double dice odds with overruns and often no losses rolls. In the last turn, when you retook Mogilev, you had 50% chance to overrun my forces and 50% chance to force a retreat. You got both and after that you succeeded at a retreat roll where you needed a 6. The way you got into Orsha was similar and the fight over Demidov was the first instance where being in a city hex actually helped a bit."

In this instance, where I needed either an overun or a retreat, and these were both 50/50 dice rolls, the percentage chance of me getting on or other is 75%. You are describing an outcome that would occur in 3 out of 4 instances as a lucky outcome.

"We could take a bet and start an unsecure game where you'll try a turn over long enough until you don't get any overrun rolls or good retreat rolls and see whether you can manage to get to your current point of advance. I guarantee you that you won't. I prefer skill over luck, but luck is always a factor."

Sorry, I dont understand what you mean by this.  The German turn would be over as soon as he misses an overrun or retreat roll?

Some of the turns you send me back leave me in something of a state of shock for a while. You're really getting good rolls on many attacks, often no-loss rolls which make the game easier for you and far more difficult for me. Heck, when you get double dice odds, 8/10 times one of your rolls guarantees you get an overrun. On the other hand, my combat average is 3.23 after a few attacks on turn 11.

Again you are ignoring the massive losses I was taking reducing your pockets, for example, as well as every other bad roll I made. As I said earlier, the more dice you roll, the closer your average will be to 3.50. As the German player rolls many more dice, in our instance my average was closer to 3.50 than yours, which makes sense.

While we are referring to our last game (looking forward to seeing it from your perspective in the AAR, btw), I would suggest that the overriding reason for your difficulties was your defensive/offfensive posture in the opening three turns or so. You essentially adopted a front-wide offensive posture, rather than a fighting withdrawal. Instead of "counterattacking", you were "attacking"! While you were able to kill an impressive amount of German units in the opening turns, it meant that at the beginning of every turn I was presented with a bewildering choice of soviet units left unentrenched to destroy. You were even crossing the Dniepr in the south to make attacks on me rather than the other way round! As I say, you got some impressive kills, but your losses were huge, and many came from artillery hits to units deployed in open terrain. I'd suggest that such an offensive posture from the Sovs in the opening turns is a recipe for disaster.



Ron -> RE: Anybody win with the Russian ? (4/29/2010 4:26:54 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: squatter

"This is the part where we'll disagree most. In our game, you get a consistent rate of double dice odds with overruns and often no losses rolls. In the last turn, when you retook Mogilev, you had 50% chance to overrun my forces and 50% chance to force a retreat. You got both and after that you succeeded at a retreat roll where you needed a 6. The way you got into Orsha was similar and the fight over Demidov was the first instance where being in a city hex actually helped a bit."

In this instance, where I needed either an overun or a retreat, and these were both 50/50 dice rolls, the percentage chance of me getting on or other is 75%. You are describing an outcome that would occur in 3 out of 4 instances as a lucky outcome.




I don't know but your math seems wrong. A 50% chance to overrun and a 50% chance to force a retreat is 25% odds overall. Now to do that twice as suggested (in Mogilev and Orsha), even without taking into account the additional retreat roll of 6, would be 6.25%, a rare event.

Anyways this brings up a related question, how secure is secure? I recall some question of that from BiN and BiI.



jjdenver -> RE: Anybody win with the Russian ? (4/29/2010 4:37:24 PM)

I think the 75% was the chance of one or the other occuring, not both.

As for secure - I believe secure is secure completely now. I think some guy figured out a way to hack it awhile ago but it was patched to close that hole. Really if you are playing someone who spends their time hacking the game it's just goofy. I'll take the loss and he can take his bad karma and his waste of time. I don't even spend brainpower thinking about that. :)



ComradeP -> RE: Anybody win with the Russian ? (4/29/2010 4:47:49 PM)

quote:

If you disagree with some of my suggestions, all I can say is that you haven't applied the tactics in the same manner as I have.


That's probably true, which is also why I'm commenting from my own experience.

quote:

When I say behind the lines, I'm talking one or two hexes


In that case they won't help out with air strike rolls on the frontline and they won't necessarily have a significant effect on stopping interdiction, with an AA range of only 1 hex. I prefer to keep them at the front and with the mechanised/armoured reserve in the rear.

quote:

In our last game, the pockets formed around Orsha and the swamp west of Smolensk were greatly assisted by my interdiction. If you are keeping your flak in your front lines, I'd suggest you are vulnerable to pocketing. Given I was able to create two large pockets against you, that seems to be born out. Unless of course you are suggesting that my interdiction wasnt important in creating the pockets?


Actually, your interdiction was indeed not the critical element for the creation of both pockets. In the Orsha pocket, I didn't have the men to secure my flank so I created a pocket voluntarily. The main problem was that you captured Orsha earlier than anticipated. I had also expected you to have more difficulty with the NKVD unit stack, but it died quickly to a medium strength attack.

In the case of the situation Northwest of Smolensk, my withdrawal had to be slow to make sure my artillery and HQ's had at least a chance. You were also placing pressure on me from three sides. You cutting my retreat with combat units did more to create the pocket than interdiction. Interdiction by itself often isn't good enough. Even though the partisan interdiction penalty is impressive, it wasn't impressive enough to stop your troops from converging on Mogilev from the North.

quote:

Regarding double lines - where the German player concentrates is exactly where you need a double line. Or to retreat.


What will happen is that the German player will use one or two divisions to crack the weak to medium strength stack on the first line and, if the result wasn't an overrun, lets the follow up divisions handle the second line. As said: even with detachments in place, the Germans can still get 5-1 odds with relative ease. The placing of detachments will also mean that some units won't be entrenched.

A line might simply not be the best idea for the Soviets in this scenario, as it is doomed due to how powerful the Germans are. It might actually be better to leave single road block units which will at least give an OP penalty than to try to defend a line.

quote:

Never to offer a weak line which will just evaporate.


Due the disparity in unit strength in terms of steps, basically every Soviet line will be weak. Creating a DB series style line isn't really possible.

quote:

But in the 10 turns we have played in our game so far, I as the Germans have rolled over 300 dice in direct assault results alone. The more dice you roll, the closer your average result will be to 3.50 (I believe- I'm no statistician). The game records my outcome as 3.46, which is slightly lower than I would hope for.


The problem is that those dice also include double dice odds, and you only need to make 1 overrun roll to get the overrun, not 2, so if you roll a 6 and 1 when you can overrun on a 6, the result is still an overrun. That's the main problem for me. Whenever you get 50% chance at double dice odds and 50% chance of getting an overrun, you tend to get double dice and overruns at crucial rolls.

quote:

But it's easy to fixate on the rolls that seem to go against you, and not remember all the rolls your opponent misses- the heavy artillery rolls that miss on a 1, the assaults that dont get overruns, the times when the defender rolls an extra three defensive fire hits etc.


That's true, but not all rolls are crucial to an advance or defense.

quote:

In this instance, where I needed either an overun or a retreat, and these were both 50/50 dice rolls, the percentage chance of me getting on or other is 75%. You are describing an outcome that would occur in 3 out of 4 instances as a lucky outcome.


The chance of you getting both is 25%. The chance of you getting both that roll and a 6 on a retreat roll in the other city hex is minimal, but you made it, and that dice roll is significant because the chance of all my cavalry units being killed was minimal, but they died. It's rolls like that which can unhinge a strategy. I had hoped to hold Mogilev for 1 turn or at the least preserve most of the cavalry units.

quote:

Sorry, I dont understand what you mean by this. The German turn would be over as soon as he misses an overrun or retreat roll?


No, you would simply complete the turn as normal, but without the good overrun rolls and retreats, as according to you that would not impact your advance all that much, whilst I'm saying that it would.

quote:

Again you are ignoring the massive losses I was taking reducing your pockets, for example, as well as every other bad roll I made.


You are reducing the pockets with relatively few units compared to how many are in the pocket, so naturally losses are higher for individual units. Your losses are mostly high for the swamp pocket due to the CRT and due to a few good Direct Defense rolls, they were not high for the Orsha pocket.

quote:

I would suggest that the overriding reason for your difficulties was your defensive/offfensive posture in the opening three turns or so. You essentially adopted a front-wide offensive posture, rather than a fighting withdrawal. Instead of "counterattacking", you were "attacking"! While you were able to kill an impressive amount of German units in the opening turns, it meant that at the beginning of every turn I was presented with a bewildering choice of soviet units left unentrenched to destroy. You were even crossing the Dniepr in the south to make attacks on me rather than the other way round! As I say, you got some impressive kills, but your losses were huge, and many came from artillery hits to units deployed in open terrain. I'd suggest that such an offensive posture from the Sovs in the opening turns is a recipe for disaster.


I got a comfortable lead in points and my losses only started to mount after the first counterattacks, I still think counterattacking is a good strategy. Your units were low on bullets through all the overrunning and your advance in the North was basically completely messed up. You had elements of 4 Panzer and 4 motorised divisions chasing 9 Rifle Regiments.

Only the attack I made North of Orsha was perhaps too much, the rest was justifiable.

quote:

Now to do that twice as suggested (in Mogilev and Orsha)


Orsha fell after a series of attacks, not after a single attack, but generally the results were pretty close to a 25% for it to fall.



squatter -> RE: Anybody win with the Russian ? (4/29/2010 5:15:01 PM)

Hilarious that after ONE game your name becomes associated with the suggestion of hacking!!! Hilarious. Comrade P, I know this is not your doing, but all your talk of 'good dice' has led to this!! Another reason never to blame the dice.

Don't worry, I'm taking it in good humour. A complement even.

But for those looking at the Mogilev example in question, I said: "the chance of me getting either an overrun OR (that's OR not AND) was 75%". And indeed, my 75% chance came in. I either needed the retreat, after which I could occupy the hex, OR an overrun, which would allow me to finish off the survivors and then occupy the hex.

So, my name gets connected with hacking for succeeding in a 75% favourable chance outcome. Hilarious. People ought to pay more attention to WORDS when READING.

ComP: actually, I see what you mean about the double dice roll attacks - actually only one of these rolls should count towards overrun. This must be considered an error in the engine which actually punishes a player for defending one hex with more troops than another.




ComradeP -> RE: Anybody win with the Russian ? (4/29/2010 5:23:08 PM)

quote:

Hilarious that after ONE game your name becomes associated with the suggestion of hacking!!! Hilarious. Comrade P, I know this is not your doing, but all your talk of 'good dice' has led to this!! Another reason never to blame the dice.

&

So, my name gets connected with hacking for succeeding in a 75% favourable chance outcome. Hilarious. People ought to pay more attention to WORDS when READING.


I'm not quite following you, who's saying that you're hacking? All I see is someone asking how "Secure" secure is and that there was a problem once in BiI/BiN.

quote:

ComP: actually, I see what you mean about the double dice roll attacks - actually only one of these rolls should count towards overrun. This must be considered an error in the engine which actually punishes a player for defending one hex with more troops than another.


Yup, and in this case, that's what's causing most of the damage to my forces.

quote:

I have to say, all this talk of dice, good rolls, bad rolls, in a game where, may I say it, you've been hammered - absolutely hammered - without once even a mention of a modicum of ability in the opposition player is extremely ungenerous.


We're debating some rolls, not the entire game, and I don't have a tendency of commenting on the total game before it is over. You don't hear me say that you've only been lucky, what I'm saying is that several of your good rolls changed the way the scenario played out.

We're 9 turns from the end, we can debate about the full game and how I've been "hammered" when it's over and you get a convincing overwhelming victory, otherwise I haven't really been "hammered".



jjdenver -> RE: Anybody win with the Russian ? (4/29/2010 5:27:50 PM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: squatter
So, my name gets connected with hacking for succeeding in a 75% favourable chance outcome. Hilarious. People ought to pay more attention to WORDS when READING.


Just to be clear my reading of this thread does not include any hint of hacking on the part of anyone at all. I think the one fellow who posted about hacking was just asking an unrelated question - not inferring that anyone playing the game now is trying to hack it.

First I don't even think hacking is very possible, and second I really really don't think anyone playing the game today is hacking it. I think the hacking point should be forgotten and we can move on w/ more interesting game discussions without spending our energy on that dead topic.


As an aside - I hope that this thread will not degenerate into a flame-ish thread. It feels like emotions are rising and I'd like to ask everyone to just take it easy. It's a game, a fun game. That's it.



Ron -> RE: Anybody win with the Russian ? (4/29/2010 5:33:39 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: squatter

Hilarious that after ONE game your name becomes associated with the suggestion of hacking!!! Hilarious. Comrade P, I know this is not your doing, but all your talk of 'good dice' has led to this!! Another reason never to blame the dice.

Don't worry, I'm taking it in good humour. A complement even.

But for those looking at the Mogilev example in question, I said: "the chance of me getting either an overrun OR (that's OR not AND) was 75%". And indeed, my 75% chance came in. I either needed the retreat, after which I could occupy the hex, OR an overrun, which would allow me to finish off the survivors and then occupy the hex.

So, my name gets connected with hacking for succeeding in a 75% favourable chance outcome. Hilarious. People ought to pay more attention to WORDS when READING.

ComP: actually, I see what you mean about the double dice roll attacks - actually only one of these rolls should count towards overrun. This must be considered an error in the engine which actually punishes a player for defending one hex with more troops than another.

I have to say, all this talk of dice, good rolls, bad rolls, in a game where, may I say it, you've been hammered - absolutely hammered - without once even a mention of a modicum of ability in the opposition player is extremely ungenerous.





No offense, but how can you chastise people with a straight face to pay more attention to WORDS when READING and then go off about your name being associated with hacking??


Anyways I questioned the 75% because of this: "In the last turn, when you retook Mogilev, you had 50% chance to overrun my forces and 50% chance to force a retreat. You got both ...." To get both is an AND not an OR. Chill man.




squatter -> RE: Anybody win with the Russian ? (4/29/2010 6:06:59 PM)

Yes, I wouldnt want tempers to rise, and as I said I'm taking this all in good humour because it is slightly hilarious.

However Ron, I would ask you to re-read what I wrote about the 75% chance and confirm again whether you read what I wrote correctly or not.

And I would suggest that to bring up the question of hacking in a thread where one player's supposedly improbable dice rolls are being targetted as the main cause of his victory will inescapably lead to an association between the player concerned and the possibility of hacking. That's what association is.

No hard feelings to anyone involved from my end.  



jjdenver -> RE: Anybody win with the Russian ? (4/29/2010 7:16:18 PM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: squatter
brutally honest assessment is that I am hammering you


Whether this is true or not it's not very polite to say this sort of thing in a discussion. First that's your impression. Second it sounds quite boastful and is an indirect putdown of your opponent as well. Third I think that we are all thankful to have an AAR at all and we want to encourage further AAR's. Boasting in a "brutally honest" way that you are "hammering" an opponent won't encourage further AAR's, nor will it likely lead to enjoyable further discussion of the game in question or the scenario.

Your explanation of how dice even out etc was I think pretty convincing so I guess it's ok to leave it at that. You're right that complaining about dice isn't very fruitful.



Carl Myers -> RE: Anybody win with the Russian ? (4/29/2010 8:05:42 PM)

ComradeP
quote:

In the last turn, when you retook Mogilev, you had 50% chance to overrun my forces and 50% chance to force a retreat. You got both and after that you succeeded at a retreat roll where you needed a 6.


Interesting observation that on two die rolls that your opponent got what had a 25% chance of happening. But the rest of the story would be interesting, the die rolls between the close combat die roll and the retreat die roll, what were the outcomes of Direct Attack die rolls and Direct Defense die roll?



henri51 -> RE: Anybody win with the Russian ? (4/29/2010 10:36:19 PM)

To learn how to win against the AI, just look at the German AI in an AI vs AI game. In a number of tries (described in another thread), the Russians won overwhelming victories even when the Germans were given a significant advantage. So if you play the same way, you should get the same result...

These results also show that the AI is not biased in favor of the Gemans as some have claimed, although it says not much about playing against humans.

Henri[:D]



NavalNewZ -> RE: Anybody win with the Russian ? (4/30/2010 3:43:03 AM)

.



squatter -> RE: Anybody win with the Russian ? (4/30/2010 10:59:34 AM)

Okay, don't want to be to blame for putting people off from posting AARs. Apologies for rudeness/boastfulness/put downs. Have removed offending material from earlier posts.

I really think people should be clear about the odds in question though.

I needed to retake Mogilev from a long-range sneak attack by soviet cavalry. Two regiments sat unentrenched on the hex. For my first effort I lined up odds that meant I needed EITHER an overrrun (with a 3,4, or 5) OR a retreat (for which I needed a 3, 4, or 5 on another dice.) So I had two seperate 50-50 chances of taking the hex. The overall probability of success for me making one or other was thus 75%. I made the roll and retook the hex. In fact, in the end, I made both rolls, which was unneccessary, but welcome. In the follow up attack on the retreat hex, I lucked out with a six to force another retreat, and ultimate death of the cavalry and their support units. This was also welcome, but unneccessary as the cavalry had been sent on a suicide mission deep into enemy territory, were instantly surrounded, and their HQ destroyed, meaning that they would not be able to go anywhere even had they survived. The whole cavalry attack was a desperate lunge to steal some points for sitting on Mogilev for a turn, doomed to failure 75% of the time (and this doesnt even factor in my follow-on forces that would have attacked the mogilev hex once again had the first attack failed).

In this instance, the player who lost the cavalry should be looking at how he has used and deployed his units as the reason for their loss, not the dice. Blaming the dice is both a dig at how well the game is built, and at the prowess of your opponent. I want to stick up for both.

I doubt if anyone's even bothered to read through this latest bout of self-justifying drivel from me, but if you have, thank you.

And in the spirit of not wanting to lessen the amount of AARs around, I may even do one myself.



Carl Myers -> RE: Anybody win with the Russian ? (4/30/2010 11:51:50 AM)

But the rest of the story would be interesting, the die rolls between the close combat die roll and the retreat die roll, what were the outcomes of Direct Attack die roll and Direct Defense die roll?



ComradeP -> RE: Anybody win with the Russian ? (4/30/2010 11:55:26 AM)

quote:

Interesting observation that on two die rolls that your opponent got what had a 25% chance of happening. But the rest of the story would be interesting, the die rolls between the close combat die roll and the retreat die roll, what were the outcomes of Direct Attack die rolls and Direct Defense die roll?


I can't run the replay now as I haven't completed the turn, I'll get back to you on that. From memory, I believe mostly my units in the marshes Northwest of Smolensk made their Direct Defence roll and the other units didn't.

quote:

In this instance, the player who lost the cavalry should be looking at how he has used and deployed his units as the reason for their loss, not the dice. Blaming the dice is both a dig at how well the game is built, and at the prowess of your opponent. I want to stick up for both.


In a direct sense, I of course blame the dice for their loss, as it was what caused it, but I naturally didn't expect my cavalry to survive.

It was, by no means, a desperate lunge. Having a feeling that there would be no combat unit in Mogilev, I thought that maybe I could capture it for a turn, which would give me 200 points and lose you 5. The cavalry units are only worth 3 VP's each, so for a maximum loss of 26 VP's if the HQ and the cavalry all died, I could gain 205 points (points withheld from the enemy also count) and that's for no casualties on the German side. I killed an HQ and a security battalion, which gave me 105 points. The incursion also diverted the strength of an infantry division and assorted support units from the front. I also cut off one, possibly two, supply sources and one OMA. An OMA where, according to the arrival schedule, units were supposed to arrive.

Thus far, the incursion has cost me 20 VP's and I've gained 105. Given the minimal chance that all my cavalry would die (and the 2 regiments that didn't go to Mogilev are still alive), it was certainly worth the risk and the loss of units that come back.



squatter -> RE: Anybody win with the Russian ? (4/30/2010 12:19:06 PM)

Fair enough, I take back the 'desperate lung' comment.

When you beat me by 100 points you can refer me back to my pompous comments on your tactics!




hank -> RE: Anybody win with the Russian ? (5/1/2010 5:59:56 PM)

Now that I've reached turn 7 against the Axis AI (historical AOs and recommended strength level) I can see the frustration playing as Ruskies.  The Axis is ahead by ~850 but projected the Russians should win by nearly 9000.  Now that's going to be a challenge.

At turn 7 they still have a long way to go before taking Damidov, Mstlovl(?), and Smolensk.  But I have found a couple of things I don't like.
The russians only get one artillery strike on a hex.  The Axis gets three.  Why is this?  That really handicaps the Russians.

Also, I've had several units get caught by overruns and they suddenly lose the ability to move.  These are foot soldiers, they still have bullets and jerry cans but can't move a single hex.  I would think as long as they have supply they could at least move a hex or two.  Sure they're cut off from further supply but for the turn after they get isolated they should be able to move a little. (are they just frozen in terror)

Other than that ... its a real slaughter goin' on.  Hope I can hang on to enough units to finish the game.

regards



ComradeP -> RE: Anybody win with the Russian ? (5/1/2010 6:21:27 PM)

quote:

The russians only get one artillery strike on a hex. The Axis gets three. Why is this? That really handicaps the Russians.


Poor Soviet artillery doctrine is probably the main culprit, although I'm not sure why the Soviets get 2 artillery strikes/hex on turn 11. It might be because of the historical counterattack, but that started earlier.

The Germans also have several heavy artillery units split up into battalions, which is one of the reasons why they have so many artillery units.

quote:

I would think as long as they have supply they could at least move a hex or two.


That's probably due to OP penalties from adjacent enemy units, mixed with interdiction and/or artillery residue. Rifle Regiments only have 18 OP's, so they can quickly get stuck somewhere.



hank -> RE: Anybody win with the Russian ? (5/1/2010 10:12:44 PM)

two more turns and the score is still holding ... but I really am starting to wonder if I will have any units left to defend Smolensk with in another 10 turns.

I can live with the foot soldiers losing their movement capability after overrun but I think doctrine for Soviet artillery can be modelled differently.  Instead of simply restricting them to only one shot at a hex per turn make the die rolls higher to mimic their lack of effectiveness (if that's what its suppose to be doing).

If I want to roll the dice time after time to get a 5 or 6, at least I have that option.   ... just my 2 pennies FWIW



TheWombat_matrixforum -> RE: Anybody win with the Russian ? (5/5/2010 11:38:54 PM)

I finished my first game (against the AI) as the Russians. I won handily, without even a moment's doubt about the outcome. Which is odd for me, as I generally suck pretty badly. The key seemed to be the failure of the Germans to take the front line cities expeditiously. Whether do to luck or whatever, they took a long time to take the cities, particularly Mogilev and Orsha, so that I was able to rack up the big points after turns four and five. They only took Mstislavl on the last turn, and I retook it with a counterattack; they never got close to taking Smolensk or Yartsevo.

This was probably a combination of bad die rolls, the difficulty of the AI handling a long attack plan, and maybe some good luck on my part with some of my local counterattacks, but I did find a boatload of German arty units waaaaay back at the western edge of the map when I examined the map after the game ended. A lot of smaller units scattered between the front lines and the map edge, seemingly doing--nothing. But as the AI routinely kicks my butt when I'm playing the Germans, I'm loathe to criticize it. And I'll have to try another go as the Russians (where I'll probably die horribly).

I think though that even when winning as the Russians it can require a certain mindset to avoid becoming demoralized. Some of your units are not quite ready for prime time, and really melt away. But infantry + AT/armor + engineers + NKVD in a city hex are damn hard to winkle out.



ComradeP -> RE: Anybody win with the Russian ? (5/6/2010 12:24:43 PM)

The German AI often attacks Soviet units with 1 or 2 units, which can in some cases kill the attacker. I'm surprised the Soviet AI seems to be better than the german AI, especially as the armies in reserve need to be moved to the front, which would seem to be a more complex operation than moving from West to East. I guess the lack of AO's really hinders the AI, because it will just crawl all over the map like in the DB series.



Page: [1] 2   next >   >>

Valid CSS!




Forum Software © ASPPlayground.NET Advanced Edition 2.4.5 ANSI
5.511719