RE: Crimea? We don't need no schtinkin' Crimea! (Full Version)

All Forums >> [New Releases from Matrix Games] >> Gary Grigsby's War in the East Series



Message

KenchiSulla -> RE: Crimea? We don't need no schtinkin' Crimea! (1/9/2011 8:21:52 PM)

So you wouldnt mind dedicating a sizeable force to lock russian forces on the peninsula? A breakout from that area, even only by raiding forces, would surely be bad for your supply situation? Or am I overestimating the potential here...?



pompack -> RE: Crimea? We don't need no schtinkin' Crimea! (1/9/2011 9:27:31 PM)


T, you were right again. You would think that I would learn my lesson, but I'm afraid that I don't. I keep trying to be polite and help people but I am totally unable to recognize a troll. I should have green-buttoned the good brother bwheatley and gone on with my life. So I will just put another little check mark in my "Terminus was right again" column.



bwheatley -> RE: Crimea? We don't need no schtinkin' Crimea! (1/9/2011 10:11:11 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: pompack


T, you were right again. You would think that I would learn my lesson, but I'm afraid that I don't. I keep trying to be polite and help people but I am totally unable to recognize a troll. I should have green-buttoned the good brother bwheatley and gone on with my life. So I will just put another little check mark in my "Terminus was right again" column.


Yea i'm totally a troll. If you bother to look at who talked about air being boned first it was comrade. So lets get off our high horse ok? Trolls don't bother posting 1800 times over 6 years. Disagreeing with someone doesn't make them a troll. I'd actually wager personal attacks is more troll like. But to each their own. :)



bwheatley -> RE: Crimea? We don't need no schtinkin' Crimea! (1/9/2011 10:12:18 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: Terminus

You know what "bwheatley", you can quit your highjacking of my thread. Start your own whine-athon somewhere else.


Like i said if you look back comrade brought up air. So please don't say i hijacked it. While i might have answered valid posts it's really not that big a deal. Being a public forum and all. I wasn't going off on anything not related to the game. Thicker skin and less personal attacks would be appreciate. But snark +1 again lol.



kirkgregerson -> RE: Crimea? We don't need no schtinkin' Crimea! (1/9/2011 10:32:04 PM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: pompack


T, you were right again. You would think that I would learn my lesson, but I'm afraid that I don't. I keep trying to be polite and help people but I am totally unable to recognize a troll. I should have green-buttoned the good brother bwheatley and gone on with my life. So I will just put another little check mark in my "Terminus was right again" column.



NO.. No don't even go there again Mr Pompack.

I have to step in and say that from what I have seen so far, Terminus is just an antagonistic angry person with emotional issues. All he does is try and find some obtuse angle to make a personal attack on somebody's comments even if it means twisting what people are trying to convey. I've seen him do this with abulbulian posts and now bwheatley.

I don't like being brought down to this level, but Terminus and not Pompack's posts are really diluting this forum into some sort of silly circus. Is it that fricken hard to make a conscious effort to try and avoid confrontation posts? Stick to what is trying to be accomplished. If you don't agree with somebody's post do it in a manner that is respectful and document your position.

Yes, my post was a bit based on emotion, but I had to step up as these guys are making me ill.

I too remember some sort of posts about more work needed in the air war for WitE. But I'm very glad they released the game when they did and I've SEEN more work to correct what they need to in a very short amount of time.

Keep in mind that Joel and Gary have been working hard and probably had less of a holiday break than any of us.



Klydon -> RE: Crimea? We don't need no schtinkin' Crimea! (1/9/2011 11:34:43 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: Cannonfodder

So you wouldnt mind dedicating a sizeable force to lock russian forces on the peninsula? A breakout from that area, even only by raiding forces, would surely be bad for your supply situation? Or am I overestimating the potential here...?


I think you are perhaps over estimating the potential. The Soviets won't be using rail supply and port supply is the end point I believe (so they start counting from a port for their overland and since the ports are on the south coast, they have a ways to go to get to the troops at the "front"). I think 1 good German Corps and some Rumanians can keep them from going anyplace, which is a lot less force than using an entire army trying to clean them out. (Probably 2 stacks of 2 German divisions with some Rumanians to help with digging, etc).

I also think the Axis run their supply lines a bit north to start with there, so the Soviets would have to go quite a distance before the Axis rails would be threaten.



Mynok -> RE: Crimea? We don't need no schtinkin' Crimea! (1/9/2011 11:47:53 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: kirkgregerson
I have to step in and say that from what I have seen so far, Terminus is just an antagonistic angry person with emotional issues. All he does is try and find some obtuse angle to make a personal attack on somebody's comments even if it means twisting what people are trying to convey. I've seen him do this with abulbulian posts and now bwheatley.

I don't like being brought down to this level, but Terminus and not Pompack's posts are really diluting this forum into some sort of silly circus. Is it that fricken hard to make a conscious effort to try and avoid confrontation posts? Stick to what is trying to be accomplished. If you don't agree with somebody's post do it in a manner that is respectful and document your position.

Yes, my post was a bit based on emotion, but I had to step up as these guys are making me ill.

I too remember some sort of posts about more work needed in the air war for WitE. But I'm very glad they released the game when they did and I've SEEN more work to correct what they need to in a very short amount of time.

Keep in mind that Joel and Gary have been working hard and probably had less of a holiday break than any of us.


Terminus is the one supporting Joel and Gary, not the fracking weasels whining about the tiniest glitches...incessantly...when they already know they are being worked on.

You are grossly deluded.



ComradeP -> RE: Crimea? We don't need no schtinkin' Crimea! (1/10/2011 12:06:28 AM)

quote:

So you wouldnt mind dedicating a sizeable force to lock russian forces on the peninsula? A breakout from that area, even only by raiding forces, would surely be bad for your supply situation? Or am I overestimating the potential here...?


The main problem would probably be a large scale Soviet amphibious operation being possible, with a maximum of 500x~50 amphibious points being accumulated. They can launch an operation with around 15 divisions or 5 to 7 corps and an HQ depending on what they're invading with. Their supply state would probably be fairly awful when they're some distance from their beachhead, but it should be possible, especially if they capture a port. Of course, the Axis can quickly rail forces to the area, but it could prove problematic if it happens at the wrong moment.

It could be interesting to watch, especially as the Soviets can land in Romania (although that would probably be a bad idea as it would soon unfreeze most minor Axis forces). If planned right and in coordination with other attacks, it could be quite a success. An amphibious invasion alone, even in the blizzard, would be a suicide mission.

The possibility of a couple of corps suddenly appearing way behind the front is a lot more threatening than some non-escorted level bombers trying to bomb Ploesti.



abulbulian -> RE: Crimea? We don't need no schtinkin' Crimea! (1/10/2011 12:27:03 AM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: Mynok


quote:

ORIGINAL: kirkgregerson
I have to step in and say that from what I have seen so far, Terminus is just an antagonistic angry person with emotional issues. All he does is try and find some obtuse angle to make a personal attack on somebody's comments even if it means twisting what people are trying to convey. I've seen him do this with abulbulian posts and now bwheatley.

I don't like being brought down to this level, but Terminus and not Pompack's posts are really diluting this forum into some sort of silly circus. Is it that fricken hard to make a conscious effort to try and avoid confrontation posts? Stick to what is trying to be accomplished. If you don't agree with somebody's post do it in a manner that is respectful and document your position.

Yes, my post was a bit based on emotion, but I had to step up as these guys are making me ill.

I too remember some sort of posts about more work needed in the air war for WitE. But I'm very glad they released the game when they did and I've SEEN more work to correct what they need to in a very short amount of time.

Keep in mind that Joel and Gary have been working hard and probably had less of a holiday break than any of us.


Terminus is the one supporting Joel and Gary, not the fracking weasels whining about the tiniest glitches...incessantly...when they already know they are being worked on.

You are grossly deluded.


quote:

Terminus is the one supporting Joel and Gary, not the fracking weasels whining about the tiniest glitches...incessantly...when they already know they are being worked on.

You are grossly deluded.


Mynok, I don't think it's correct or appropriate to make comments about people by calling them 'weasels' and 'whinners'. Why do you feel like you have to put down somebody in order to support somebody's else personal attack comments?

I think Gary and Joel can stand up for themselves, they don't need people making these rude attacks to 'support' them? I'd hardly call that support. What Gary and Joel would like is useful comments and concerns about the game so the can look into it with their testers and take the appropriate steps to correct anything in a timely fashion.

I think bwheatley was a bit concerned about the air war and he wants to make sure it's being looked into. No reason to attack him. He's a friend and a class act, he knows how hard all the testers and developers are working to make WitE an incredible experience for us all. Best money I spent in five years in terms of fun factor. Yes, still things to do to make it better. I think we all want that and may not exactly always agree as to the best way to get there.

I agree with Kirk in that I feel some people are looking (call it trolling if you like) through the forum to find something just to attack and figure they're doing it to support WitE. I got news for them, we're all here trying to support WitE!

So please chill on the hating..... [;)]



kirkgregerson -> RE: Crimea? We don't need no schtinkin' Crimea! (1/10/2011 1:36:25 AM)

Well from what I've seen on this thread and others, Mynok just has no control over his posting of insults.

Not sure if his thinks he's being cute, funny, or what. But it's becoming very annoying when I try and read through posts and see comments like his.

Can't change a person like that's behavior and I don't want to even attempt it. Better just to ban them if that can't contribute and be respectful to other's comments without bashing them personally.




Farfarer61 -> RE: Crimea? We don't need no schtinkin' Crimea! (1/10/2011 1:55:37 AM)

I attacked and took it all, sent most my Pz Corps there by rail for the winter, poised to re-rail to the front in Spring, (the Crimea being the Russian Riviera and all..) only to find that it is in a Blizzard as well, and first turn winter rules ( hex X, hex Y). Yes, a very gamey move, but there aren't death blizzards in the Crimea.



Erik Rutins -> RE: Crimea? We don't need no schtinkin' Crimea! (1/10/2011 2:51:22 AM)

Ok, that's enough everyone. Please keep things civil. No personal attacks.

Regards,

- Erik



jjdenver -> RE: Crimea? We don't need no schtinkin' Crimea! (1/10/2011 3:29:28 AM)

Abulbulian and Bwheatley I know from way back on AT forums. Those guys are not trolls and as far as I remember they keep it generally civil and intelligent. So +1 to those guys from prior experience. And can we avoid personal attacks and abusive/super-critical language and have fun w/ this game? Thanks! :)

And if it helps to bring anyone's blood pressure down - the patches that are released can be applied to ongoing PBEM games. AFAIK no PBEM games have made it into Dec 41 yet so I doubt any are irreparably harmed by not being able to strategic bomb out of the Crimea. There is apparently a Soviet air tactic that can be used to wear out the Luftwaffe in 41 but hopefully all of our PBEM'ers playing Sovs aren't taking advantage of that since it would ruin a fun PBEM game. I would guess air is due for some major patching over the next couple of patches.

Cheers



Montbrun -> RE: Crimea? We don't need no schtinkin' Crimea! (1/10/2011 3:56:16 AM)

Guys,

1) Nothing is BROKEN. The person that made that statement is wrong.

2) Everything has been tested.

Do all of the mechanisms and routines work perfectly? No. Tweaks and patches will obviously continue for some time to correct the issues that come up. Testing doesn't always reveal all issues that may come up.

Brad



vinnie71 -> RE: Crimea? We don't need no schtinkin' Crimea! (1/10/2011 9:20:57 AM)

Against the AI, it is important to at least damage the forces in the Crimea, since somehow it can manage to send substantial reinforcements in the area. I normally employ only one German Corps with heavy artillery and pioneers plus the Romanian 3 Army, which includes the Romanian Mountain Corps. The point is that if one doesn't take Sevastapol early, the Romanian Mountain troops will provide a sufficient powerful rearguard.

For my newest game, I sent the late coming Panzer Corps there in order to provide added mobility and destroy the soviet forces outside Sevastapol. If I'm lucky the German Corps will winter in Sevastapol and the Romanian mountain corps will hold the Kerch strait. The rest will be railed northwards.



alfonso -> RE: Crimea? We don't need no schtinkin' Crimea! (1/10/2011 1:37:10 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: bwheatley

Ok let me replace the word knowingly broken with "wasn't ideal". :)


Do you really think that they are the same thing?. I thought not, but, of course, English is not my native language. Or is that your way of saying: "sorry, I was rude with my words"



BletchleyGeek -> RE: Crimea? We don't need no schtinkin' Crimea! (1/10/2011 1:50:53 PM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: ComradeP
As pompack already implied, "new and exciting" bugs were discovered within days. With around or so dozen or so guys+a lady, you can't cover everything.


You need to put more ladies into that counter mix [:)]



barkman44 -> RE: Crimea? We don't need no schtinkin' Crimea! (1/10/2011 2:13:58 PM)

just my 2 cents.they just patched toaw3 how long has it been out?steel panthers has been constantly updated again how long since its release?
as having limited exp with this game some of the {broken}features of this game only became evident from reading this forum.
but perhaps now that there are 100+[given the # of games sold] new testers the problems will be overcome given time.
"impatiance is a fools virtue"was something my grandfather told me.we pushed for the release of this product so we've gotten it.
i am enjoying it immensely having wanted somthing like this since i played board games since i could'nt find an opponent only one game fit the bill(i believe the name of the game was guderian which was as close to a solitaire game
as you could get,all the soviet units were preplaced upside down so you did'nt know what you where attacking till engaged}
sorry if i'm rambling been iced in and reading the manual again!



morganbj -> RE: Crimea? We don't need no schtinkin' Crimea! (1/10/2011 2:18:52 PM)

I bypassed it, and as soon as I broke out south of Rostov heading into towards the mountains, the Russkies mostly evacuated it and I got it for free. I was beginning to take the Black sea ports, so I guess the AI felt that it was being "surrounded."



ComradeP -> RE: Crimea? We don't need no schtinkin' Crimea! (1/10/2011 2:48:37 PM)

quote:

Against the AI, it is important to at least damage the forces in the Crimea, since somehow it can manage to send substantial reinforcements in the area. I normally employ only one German Corps with heavy artillery and pioneers plus the Romanian 3 Army, which includes the Romanian Mountain Corps. The point is that if one doesn't take Sevastapol early, the Romanian Mountain troops will provide a sufficient powerful rearguard.


A problem when committing forces to taking the Crimea is that you can't really quit at the halfway point, as that doesn't really provide much of a benefit. You either take Sevastopol and Kerch, or the operation's essentially a failure that's tying down your forces. The Soviet player can then launch a minimal amphibious invasion of the Crimea that will tie down even more forces.



vinnie71 -> RE: Crimea? We don't need no schtinkin' Crimea! (1/10/2011 3:49:50 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: ComradeP

quote:

Against the AI, it is important to at least damage the forces in the Crimea, since somehow it can manage to send substantial reinforcements in the area. I normally employ only one German Corps with heavy artillery and pioneers plus the Romanian 3 Army, which includes the Romanian Mountain Corps. The point is that if one doesn't take Sevastapol early, the Romanian Mountain troops will provide a sufficient powerful rearguard.


A problem when committing forces to taking the Crimea is that you can't really quit at the halfway point, as that doesn't really provide much of a benefit. You either take Sevastopol and Kerch, or the operation's essentially a failure that's tying down your forces. The Soviet player can then launch a minimal amphibious invasion of the Crimea that will tie down even more forces.


Actually for me, the land in the Crimea tends to become secondary in '41. What I'm most intersted in is destroying the units that tend to accumulate in the area. When these plus other forces that the AI dispatches in the area, attack in winter, they can become a real pain in the neck (almost lirerally) since they threaten the supply lines to Stalino etc.. Sevastapol is a target, but not the main one plus the bulk of the units used (Romanian 3 Army except fot the mountain corps) are basically useless in '41 at the front (too slow to reach the frontline and too weak to really effect the outcome).



hgilmer3 -> RE: Crimea? We don't need no schtinkin' Crimea! (1/10/2011 3:58:43 PM)

In the same vein as the humorous first post....

quote:

Ha ha, Crimea.  Do you know what Crimea is?  It's a sitting
duck.  A road apple.  Crimea is weak.  It's feeble.  I think it's
time to put the hurt on Crimea.



ComradeP -> RE: Crimea? We don't need no schtinkin' Crimea! (1/10/2011 4:04:04 PM)

quote:

Actually for me, the land in the Crimea tends to become secondary in '41. What I'm most intersted in is destroying the units that tend to accumulate in the area. When these plus other forces that the AI dispatches in the area, attack in winter, they can become a real pain in the neck (almost lirerally) since they threaten the supply lines to Stalino etc.. Sevastapol is a target, but not the main one plus the bulk of the units used (Romanian 3 Army except fot the mountain corps) are basically useless in '41 at the front (too slow to reach the frontline and too weak to really effect the outcome).


What I meant was: if you don't commit to taking it, you have to hold 3 hexes to prevent the Soviets from getting out. If you do commit to taking the Crimea and fail to take it, your frontline will be much longer than 3 hexes and will thus require more troops. Good troops, so not primarily the Romanians, who with their combined strength would still have serious difficulties with invading my backyard.



Q-Ball -> RE: Crimea? We don't need no schtinkin' Crimea! (1/10/2011 5:42:21 PM)

Excellent point, what do you gain by holding 5 hexes inside the Crimea, at the gates of Kerch/Sevastapol, vs. 3 at the top? Nothing, just more empty space.

...and two of the exit hexes are very tough, swamps with only 1 hex adjacent, over a major river. Romanians are enough to hold those two. Give them a German Division or two, and a 3-corps Romanian Army should be able to keep it permanently stoppered.

There is a risk the Russkies come out in the Winter. But it seems to me that even if that happens, you can probably stop them on the Dnepr line, and to the East they would be super-dangerously exposed to being cut-off and destroyed.

In Summer of 1942, you can bust-in vs. the AI. Against a human I suspect that will be much tougher, but if I am a SU player, no way I attempt a breakout in 1942; I would be very content to sit there.



vinnie71 -> RE: Crimea? We don't need no schtinkin' Crimea! (1/10/2011 6:02:02 PM)

Oops! Sorry didn't explain myself well. My fault.

If Sevastapol doesn't fall, I pul back my forces behind the Romanian Mountain Corps, which is an excellent rearguard in the blizzard, out of the Crimea. They also will man the three hexes that lead to the Crimea as well.



FredSanford3 -> RE: Crimea? We don't need no schtinkin' Crimea! (1/10/2011 7:11:22 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: ComradeP

The main problem would probably be a large scale Soviet amphibious operation being possible, with a maximum of 500x~50 amphibious points being accumulated. They can launch an operation with around 15 divisions or 5 to 7 corps and an HQ depending on what they're invading with.


The Soviets had the (theoretical) capability to launch a 15 division amphibious operation? I don't think that's even close to historically plausible. That would dwarf Neptune/Overlord.



ComradeP -> RE: Crimea? We don't need no schtinkin' Crimea! (1/10/2011 11:27:53 PM)

That's unless I'm completely misinterpreting transport costs (which is doubtful as according to the manual the transport costs are the same for all strategic transportation modes), yes. It takes them 20 turns to get to their maximum amphibious allowance. I'm also not sure how it would dwarf Overlord: the turns are weekly. Provided there were no naval requirements for Italy or Dragoon, or even with the ships available, the Western Allies would've been able to drop 15 divisions in France in a week. They would just be impossible to supply, and I expect the Soviets will face the same problem if they try to do so. The units would also have no MP's after landing.



jomni -> RE: Crimea? We don't need no schtinkin' Crimea! (1/11/2011 1:28:56 AM)

Can't the Soviets just ship the units to port?



mmarquo -> RE: Crimea? We don't need no schtinkin' Crimea! (1/11/2011 1:59:43 AM)

Are attacks allowed across the Straits of Kerch? What are the "penalties?"



bwheatley -> RE: Crimea? We don't need no schtinkin' Crimea! (1/11/2011 2:01:11 AM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: alfonso


quote:

ORIGINAL: bwheatley

Ok let me replace the word knowingly broken with "wasn't ideal". :)


Do you really think that they are the same thing?. I thought not, but, of course, English is not my native language. Or is that your way of saying: "sorry, I was rude with my words"



Term i apologise if you feel like i jacked your thread. I just followed where it went. And i meant no disrespect. You're a fellow witp'er and to me that means something.

It was my way of saying my point was it was known the air war wasn't ideal. I release less then ideal software all the time it's the nature of the beast. It wasn't a dig on 2by3 or any of the testers. I changed my verbiage in case someone was super literal when they read what i posted after comrade pointed that out. If i apologise for something i come out and say i'm sorry and i apologise. I take responsibility for any mistakes if i make them. That is how you grow as a person.

Now there is no place for someone to read into it that i was criticising anyone. I've helped test 2by3 games in the past as well as other matrix games. I don't throw it on my signature because i keep things like that close to my chest.

The game is amazing and i'm super glad they released it instead of waiting longer to make things perfect. Because in the software world perfect doesn't come. I don't think i was at all rude maybe a poor choice of words. But i know a some of the testers and they all bust their ass. if anyone took anything i said as an attack on their work i apologise for that. I've done the tester thing before you start from the outset and think it's fun and games but you really have to keep a spreadsheet of bugs and how to trigger them etc. It's a lot of work. I respect that.

Now all i did was point out my frustration when comrade mentioned strat air.

I love most everyone on matrix games forums. They have some of the classiest people i've ever had the pleasure to work/game with. People get heated and that's fine but for someone to call a person a troll i find it one of the most disrespectful things that someone can do.

There now lets hug it out and get back to the business of hand of talking about the best eastern war strategy game out there.







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

Valid CSS!




Forum Software © ASPPlayground.NET Advanced Edition 2.4.5 ANSI
2.453125