Winter too weak now? (Full Version)

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



Message

PeeDeeAitch -> Winter too weak now? (5/7/2011 2:00:27 AM)

So I am playing a GC, started under 1.03 and now in 1.04.15...and it seems that winter effects are far lighter. December was rough, as it should be, but January came and now the units are springing back. It seems as if the changes have made January like February before, February should be better still.

My question is that it seems too easy in some places. I have stopped the Soviets (or at least reduced them to a crawl) in places. My "big empty" middle is always a problem, and of course here it is too, but even Panzers coming out of the cities are not hit as bad.

The feeling of a "near run thing" seems gone. I will survive this winter and come out strong. This is not a whine, and maybe I just kind of figured out winter before, but now I feel I have til the end of January to survive then I can feel far safer. I had at least 5 successful counter assaults on January 8th...imagine what I can do in a month with lower attrition?



Farfarer61 -> RE: Winter too weak now? (5/7/2011 2:31:33 AM)

Give the rest of us mortals a chance to screw it up - I am in my first human v human game :)



bdtj1815 -> RE: Winter too weak now? (5/7/2011 3:11:39 AM)

Sounds almost right!



76mm -> RE: Winter too weak now? (5/7/2011 5:59:45 AM)

I mentioned when the patch was announced that to me the changes to the effects on combat sounded right, but that the reduction in attrition sounded like too much. Too early to say of course, but it sounds like at least PDH's experience bears this out...



Skanvak -> RE: Winter too weak now? (5/7/2011 1:35:01 PM)

Let's remind that the German survive the first winter. So it seem fair to me.



jjdenver -> RE: Winter too weak now? (5/7/2011 10:54:53 PM)

I think things got a little easier for Germany as the winter of 41-42 wore on right? They managed to stop the Sovs and even make some counterattacks after that first initial shock when they didn't know at all how to deal with winter. I am not 100% sure this is true but is the impression I get from reading books like Raus' memoir.



pompack -> RE: Winter too weak now? (5/8/2011 1:45:15 AM)

Well, I usually add about 1.1 million to the disabled pool during the winter ending at around 1.22 million. In a GC begun under 1.04 I ended at about 1.1 million but I also had an exceptionally good summer inflicting over five million casualties resulting in a MUCH reduced Russian winter offensive. My attrition was less but I think that it was mostly because I was not being pushed out of towns and forts by the Russian steamroller.



pat.casey -> RE: Winter too weak now? (5/8/2011 3:54:04 AM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: jjdenver

I think things got a little easier for Germany as the winter of 41-42 wore on right? They managed to stop the Sovs and even make some counterattacks after that first initial shock when they didn't know at all how to deal with winter. I am not 100% sure this is true but is the impression I get from reading books like Raus' memoir.


They did definitely do better as winter progressed. Part of that was experience I'm sure, but part of it was actually falling back on their railheads and digging in.

When the blizzard counterattack started in '41, the germans were strung out in open ground in offensive deployments and the soviets hit them hard, took ground, and caused casualties. Once the germans established defensive lines though, the soviets didn't make much progress in the latter phases of the winter.

In game terms I think we're getting closer to modeling this properly. A fort 0 german unit in poor supply in the blizzard should get spanked. A Fort 4 unit in good supply should hold with minimal casualties.



saygame -> RE: Winter too weak now? (5/8/2011 4:52:09 AM)

I don't envy you designer/developer guys in sorting all this out. Between the obvious prejudices that creeps in from playing a preferred player's side and then rendering advice, and the need to keep it a game (meaning some sort of balance at least in allowing a victory) and the need to keep us historical authenticates at bay, you have alot of competing interests to sway your call. Not to mention, players rendering advice who are playing head to head and not evenly matched in their play.

In addition, just the other nite after fully digesting the fact that most AARs report Leningrad falling in '41, it came to me that in real life, the German High Command, buoyed by overwhelming Barbarossa successes may have very well contented themselves in Sept-Oct '41 to starve Leningrad out rather than endure the rather enormous casualties expected of a direct assault. Especially when they could see from the heights right into the city from the heights of Schlisselburg. Given that the Germans at that point had rather convincing campaign evidence thus far to be exuberant and confident of taking whatever they intended. So it could be that Leningrad was indeed historically fairly certain to fall and quite vulnerable to a concerted offense that most players now practice. if assaulted earlier and aggressively. Only after Tikhvin (which we players and historicals get the Monday Morning Quarterback advantage from) did the shock emerge that maybe Leningrad COULD hold as it ultimately did.

So, getting this one right, (the winter balance, I mean) is going to come down to someone's arbitrary best historical guess after alot of reports roll in. My experience of PDH, from reading his posts here, is that his opinion will probably represent a most unbiased, even handed and best first guess. Yet time will tell. Good luck Joel, Pavel and company! With all the time, effort and energy you all have put in to craft the most accurate historical conjecture, I have great advance faith in whatever your calls are on this.




Panama -> RE: Winter too weak now? (5/8/2011 1:22:04 PM)

Winter too weak now?

[:D] I'm sure most saw this coming. [:D]



Sabre21 -> RE: Winter too weak now? (5/8/2011 6:08:46 PM)

It is a tough balancing act, especially trying to make changes after the game has been released. Most testers move on and the few that remain are hard pressed. When testing 1.04, there were several ai vs ai tests run and only 1 game made it thru the blizzard. It was from these that some final adjustments were made which included increasing armament production by 50%. A few more tests were ran once 1.04.10 was released that indicated the armament increase was too much. That's why I asked some of you guys that started new games with 1.04 if you could post the production page showing the manpower and armament pools as part of your aar's. Based on the tests and many of your aar's, armament points have been taken down a notch to 250 per factory rather than 300 and I am currently testing that.



PeeDeeAitch -> RE: Winter too weak now? (5/8/2011 6:28:19 PM)

Just for the record, I am not attacking nor blaming. I realize that it is a tough high-wire act to get it right. I just noted that things got far easier for me once January hit, and that had not been the case before.



Panama -> RE: Winter too weak now? (5/8/2011 10:27:06 PM)

Since no two people are alike you will never find a balance that would be considered good. Maybe close is the best you could get. However, if some elements could be made adjustable those playing the game could put settings where they like and find their own best balance.



Slarty -> RE: Winter too weak now? (5/8/2011 11:17:59 PM)

Is release 1.04 available for general download? If not does anyone have an idea when it might?



carnifex -> RE: Winter too weak now? (5/9/2011 2:35:44 PM)

Instead of all this balancing and shmalancing why not just put in a slider in the options menu - Severe Winter, Hard Winter, Regular Winter, Mild Winter and let the players adjust their winter effect preference. Otherwise you'll be getting these winter is unbalanced again threads all to the end of time.



Q-Ball -> RE: Winter too weak now? (5/9/2011 3:40:32 PM)

I tend to believe it's about right now. And I would prefer to play the Soviets.

Historically, the Soviets DID run out of gas in the Winter, starting in January. So what you are experiencing PDH is about right.

Historically, where the Germans did have a crisis, and did experience big problems, was in AGC sector. The reason for this was partly Blizzard, but it had as much to do, IMO, with the fact that AGC was dangerously overextended and very depleted heading into the Blizzard.

I would bet anything, PDH, that you were NOT overextended and overdepleted heading into the Blizzard. The fact that you didn't experience those issues is a reward for prudence. Stick your neck out, and you can expect greater problems. This is similar to the fact that the Soviets usually enter the Winter with more guys than historical. Why? Because they don't allow millions to get surrounded in stupid pockets, and ALSO reap the rewards of good play (and hindsight).

It could be argued that the Germans have too easy a time in Summer '41 now. That is a separate debate. This is a considerable work in progress, and Blizzard was just one lever. There are several other schools out there who are thinking that:

1. Germans are too powerful in Summer '41
2. 1942 isn't fluid enough; too many trenches. A "Case Blue"-type breakout is just about impossible for the Germans
3. In 43/44, Soviets have too easy a time smashing german formations, until the Wehrmacht collapses

I don't 100% agree with all of these, but I think they have some merit, and we need further play to parse all of these out.



PeeDeeAitch -> RE: Winter too weak now? (5/9/2011 3:46:33 PM)

Heh, you know me. I was way overextended. I had no real fortifications, and I paid for that in December. Those places where I had depth, I am Ok (still losing ground but no shattering fronts) in January. The combination of units recovering, wooded terrain, and level 1 forts (at least) make the "2-4 hexes being opened up and exploited" not so easy now.

Of course, I have a too long stretch that was too lightly held in the south, but I sort of deserve to be hurting there!



BletchleyGeek -> RE: Winter too weak now? (5/9/2011 4:24:27 PM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: Q-Ball

I tend to believe it's about right now. And I would prefer to play the Soviets.

Historically, the Soviets DID run out of gas in the Winter, starting in January. So what you are experiencing PDH is about right.

Historically, where the Germans did have a crisis, and did experience big problems, was in AGC sector. The reason for this was partly Blizzard, but it had as much to do, IMO, with the fact that AGC was dangerously overextended and very depleted heading into the Blizzard.

I would bet anything, PDH, that you were NOT overextended and overdepleted heading into the Blizzard. The fact that you didn't experience those issues is a reward for prudence. Stick your neck out, and you can expect greater problems. This is similar to the fact that the Soviets usually enter the Winter with more guys than historical. Why? Because they don't allow millions to get surrounded in stupid pockets, and ALSO reap the rewards of good play (and hindsight).

It could be argued that the Germans have too easy a time in Summer '41 now. That is a separate debate. This is a considerable work in progress, and Blizzard was just one lever. There are several other schools out there who are thinking that:

1. Germans are too powerful in Summer '41
2. 1942 isn't fluid enough; too many trenches. A "Case Blue"-type breakout is just about impossible for the Germans
3. In 43/44, Soviets have too easy a time smashing german formations, until the Wehrmacht collapses

I don't 100% agree with all of these, but I think they have some merit, and we need further play to parse all of these out.


Nice post Q-Ball [:)] I tend to agree with you about First Winter. Perhaps I will de-rail the thread but the points you brought out here merit some comment:

1. Germans are too powerful in Summer '41

I think they're OK, especially after the buff the Soviet player received with the Armaments stockpile. That really helps getting the masses formed into combat units. Soviet players that are able to defend in depth and are able to foresee German spearheads penetrations will get to Winter '41 OK (i.e. fighting for their lives at the gates of Moscow and on the banks of the Donets). I can't say much yet about the "Leningrad question". I'm currently on two GC's against human german players and I have managed to entertain them enough on the Pskov - Ostrov region to avoid the kind of rough rides one can see on fiva55 game and elsewhere. Again, defense in depth and not underestimating the amount of ground german motorized units can cover in one turn is key.

2. 1942 isn't fluid enough; too many trenches. A "Case Blue"-type breakout is just about impossible for the Germans

I just don't agree with this. The breakout into the Caucasus and Stalingrad is possible, but most players will find it's not a wise course of action. Demjansk can become an early little Stalingrad. The situation of 9. Armee and 3. PzArmee on the Rzhev salient is less rosy than it seems, a massive assault on this salient from east and west can be successful if the German player commits to heavily to the south.

The mystery of the 42-45 GC is to obtain strategic surprise against your opponent as the German player. No surprise and then the campaign will degenerate into a horrible meat-grinder with only one possible victor.

3. In 43/44, Soviets have too easy a time smashing german formations, until the Wehrmacht collapses

Can't say much about #3, I haven't played it much myself. But if in '42 the Wehrmacht is in a very delicate position - it's just not obvious at first sight - in '43 the situation is much worse. Once the german infantry is dislodged from its level 3/4 forts the name of the game is to run to a prepared defense line further west.

I think that our perceptions of 1942 and 1943 campaigns would be very different if the starting dates were other (say April 1942 and April 1943). Players wouldn't be constrained by several painful -- and very historical -- dilemmas...



Panama -> RE: Winter too weak now? (5/9/2011 4:45:00 PM)

1) You want an historical Axis advance.
2) You want an historical Axis advance.
3) You want an historical Soviet advance.

[&:]

Why not just read the book? Any game is better served by the ability to make things different. The slider thing is the best idea for any of it.



Q-Ball -> RE: Winter too weak now? (5/9/2011 5:18:02 PM)

Bletcheley Geek: I am actually referring not to the 42/43/44 scenarios, but rather GCs that continue into those years.

We haven't seen any GC make it past mid-1942; the ones that have made it to 1942 see more trench warfare than breakouts at the moment. (see Idaho v Scar as an example; Idaho played very well in 1941, but is basically halting offensive ops in 1942). Small sample size, but a trend that bears watching IMO.

What happens in 1943/44 is even more speculative. Certainly, we can expect that good Soviet players will form Artillery Divisions, and kill 1000s of Germans. I personally think the Wehrmacht will collapse in 1944 in most GCs, because the Soviets can inflict way more casualties than the Germans can replace once Artillery Divisions are in play, but I don't know for sure. It's a guess at this point, but also bears watching.

PANAMA: It is a game, so not looking for historical outcomes. I am looking for historical possibilities. Right now, it is very possible for the Soviets to build the kind of fortified belts that didn't exist in 1942. That is an a-historical capability. That might be OK, but it's not as much fun as a more fluid environment.



Scarz -> RE: Winter too weak now? (5/9/2011 5:52:34 PM)

I think you nailed the main issues right on the nose Q-Ball.

1. Germans are too powerful in Summer '41

The Germans are too powerful and the Soviets are too weak. The Soviets are not able to launch even the most limited counter attacks which is ahistorical. Also the supply system needs to be reworked, as the Germans can do just too much in 41, and they can do it everywhere.

2. 1942 isn't fluid enough; too many trenches. A "Case Blue"-type breakout is just about impossible for the Germans

As my game with IdahoNY is proving, 42 has become vintage trench warfare. Again, the Germans will need to feel the effects of blizzard with reduced manpower (more importantly, the supply for the Germans should not allow another broad front advance like in 41), and the Soviets need to be a bit better, then the entrenchments can be made much harder to achieve. That would give us a more fluid 42.

3. In 43/44, Soviets have too easy a time smashing german formations, until the Wehrmacht collapses

Can't speak to this, as I have not been that far in a game.

4. Air

The one you missed is the air portion of the game. It seems broken. I could list lots of examples here, but it just doesnt seem right. Most obvious, the Soviets in our game are mid-42 right now, they have decent fighters, with average crews, and they get results of 60+ fighters shot down by the Germans for no losses by the Germans in a 30 on 150 fight. There are other examples like interdiction, Soviets commonly lose 1500 men in an interdiction attack. And then there are air base attacks issues....etc etc



heliodorus04 -> RE: Winter too weak now? (5/9/2011 6:06:12 PM)

I am interested in playing an Axis player who wants to see how the game plays when the Soviet (me) has a -10 hit to fortification.  I can't start for a couple of days.  but the plan would be to play as long a game as we could using this setup.  I've got some experience in 1.03 doing this as the Soviet. Message me if interested.



Scarz -> RE: Winter too weak now? (5/9/2011 6:15:08 PM)

Hey Heliodorus:
I would think that you would be at a severe disadvantage. I have only played one game as Axis against human and it ended early, but from the Soviet side, the entrenchments is all you have in 41, and to take a hit there seems like it can't end well.
Scar23



heliodorus04 -> RE: Winter too weak now? (5/9/2011 7:03:09 PM)

Oh, I'm not doing well in the 1.03 version, by any means, except casualty figures.  I have an AAR going on it over in the AAR section if you're interested (moves slow, and only on Turn 12).

I think if you manage the Soviet army itself properly and avoid useless casualties, you can lose Moscow and Leningrad and still make the historical May 1945 'night-night Der Fuehrer' end date.  And that's really what I'm trying to play out.  I think if the Soviet army in 1942 is restricted by the handicap from building Kursk-salient style rings of fortifications, then the German player has a higher degree of mobility advantage and then you can have a "fun" (don't ask me about historical) 1942 campaign that has some see-saw to it as Soviet corps come online.  And I would expect by 1943, the weight of soviet corps and production will see the German go completely to the defensive.  Once the German is completely on the defensive, the handicap doesn't matter all that much, but it still enables some German 'fire-brigade' style counter-attacks.  That's my theory, at least, which is why I'm looking for opponents.

I think the changes to date have a nice overall effect on the tradeoffs of 1941 EXCEPT Soviet omniscience leading to delightfully crisp and cohesive command and control (thus, fewer stupid casualties than historic).  Combine that competence with the relatively large effect of even level 2 forts, and I see the cause of the 1942 sitz-krieg that some people are now experiencing.  I personally would rather have a game that sees the whole German army more mobile in 1942 than it was historically.  But that's part of what I consider a fun game to play, and I know I differ from some folks in the degree of historical plausibility I need.  I'm a heretic that wishes I could rename XXXXVIII Panzer Corps to '48 Panzer'...

I think that the player community now needs to start seeing how current situations ripple in campaigns that run from at least June 41 to September 43. 



Sabre21 -> RE: Winter too weak now? (5/9/2011 9:08:58 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: Panama

Since no two people are alike you will never find a balance that would be considered good. Maybe close is the best you could get. However, if some elements could be made adjustable those playing the game could put settings where they like and find their own best balance.


You can do that already on the game options page. You can adjust values to handicap one side or another or both sides.



Panama -> RE: Winter too weak now? (5/10/2011 1:11:00 AM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: Q-Ball

PANAMA: It is a game, so not looking for historical outcomes. I am looking for historical possibilities. Right now, it is very possible for the Soviets to build the kind of fortified belts that didn't exist in 1942. That is an a-historical capability. That might be OK, but it's not as much fun as a more fluid environment.


Agreed. I've never been a big fan of WWI.



Panama -> RE: Winter too weak now? (5/10/2011 1:18:47 AM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: Sabre21


quote:

ORIGINAL: Panama

Since no two people are alike you will never find a balance that would be considered good. Maybe close is the best you could get. However, if some elements could be made adjustable those playing the game could put settings where they like and find their own best balance.


You can do that already on the game options page. You can adjust values to handicap one side or another or both sides.


Thank you for pointing that out. Because it seemed as though no one has bothered to look at the Game Options. I don't think I've seen them mentioned as a way to balance the game. Now if only they could be adjusted in the midst of a pbem scenario. [;)]



WarHunter -> RE: Winter too weak now? (5/12/2011 9:47:27 PM)

I like this quote.

quote:

ORIGINAL: Q-Ball
PANAMA: It is a game, so not looking for historical outcomes. I am looking for historical possibilities. Right now, it is very possible for the Soviets to build the kind of fortified belts that didn't exist in 1942. That is an a-historical capability. That might be OK, but it's not as much fun as a more fluid environment.


To add a little more "historical possibilities".

I would like to see in some future update.
The ability to use Admin Points to cancel Historical Withdrawal dates. Make it an option. Those that want to play historical Reinforcement/Withdrawals, should not be forced to use this option.



Wild -> RE: Winter too weak now? (5/13/2011 2:41:58 AM)




I would like to see in some future update.
The ability to use Admin Points to cancel Historical Withdrawal dates. Make it an option. Those that want to play historical Reinforcement/Withdrawals, should not be forced to use this option.

[/quote]

I think this might be a decent idea. It could add a little variety and fun to the Germans and those who like to play historically would not have to use it.
I don't know how Soviet players would feel about it though.




Mynok -> RE: Winter too weak now? (5/13/2011 3:21:03 AM)


Hmmm...an interesting thought, but APs don't seem to really represent 'political points' in the same sense as a Witp:AE. They seem to be more like general staff action points which wouldn't really apply to strategic decisions. In other words, they don't seem like 'Hitler points' or 'Stalin points'.



Page: [1] 2   next >   >>

Valid CSS!




Forum Software © ASPPlayground.NET Advanced Edition 2.4.5 ANSI
0.71875