RE: Gamey Tactics which Drive Me Wild (Full Version)

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



Message

gradenko2k -> RE: Gamey Tactics which Drive Me Wild (7/7/2011 3:23:56 PM)

quote:

If we were to consider the 'ahistorical gambits' used by axis players as opposed to 'ahistorical play' by soviet players I know which is by far the more deviant.

The key difference here is that if we put both of them side-by-side in the context of having no political, only physical and temporal limits to what the armed forces of each side can do, then the Soviets making an orderly withdrawal is plausible (as is the Lvov gambit), whereas it remains just as unlikely for the Germans to have been able to use Riga as a major port of debarkation even if Hitler did not exist.



kvolk -> RE: Gamey Tactics which Drive Me Wild (7/7/2011 4:49:32 PM)

If a tactic is "gamey" I would think that some one would have developed an equally "gamey" response to combat it if it is really impacting game play to a significant level. It is odd how much people which to change the game and not adopt different tactics and strategdy. JMHO

in addition just wondering, if you know exactly what a first turn move is for your opponent doesn't that make your planning more focused and possibly more impactful?



sanderz -> RE: Gamey Tactics which Drive Me Wild (7/7/2011 6:06:20 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: ComradeP

quote:

when you say you get them back for free do you mean that if you didn't lose them you wouldn't get the extra units? or that you get the free units anyway


If you don't lose them, you would of course not get units of the same name appearing as reinforcements. The mountain divisions and possibly the cavalry divisions, as well as brigade and regiment sized units won't reappear, but the Rifle divisions will, as will the Motorized and Tank divisions (as Rifle divisions and Tank brigades).


Sorry, but just to be clear i think you are saying that you get the extra units no matter how high or low actual casualties are. So it is worthwhile pocketing units and destroying them - cos if not that would seem a little lame, not to say disheartening for the German player.

thanks



Speedysteve -> RE: Gamey Tactics which Drive Me Wild (7/7/2011 6:12:54 PM)

No you wouldn't get the additional units. The reinforcements you'll get are those units that entered service in the historical 'x' date and those (as Soviets) destroyed by end of September 41 (except units caveated by comradep before) will come back as shells.



Klydon -> RE: Gamey Tactics which Drive Me Wild (7/7/2011 6:29:48 PM)

I think the first turn is incredibly important for the Germans, but perhaps not in a way of what most people think of. In any campaign, there are decision points that go a long way to determining who wins and who loses the war. Sometimes the decision tree is "make the right move" and you get to continue to play in a situation where the outcome is in doubt while a wrong decision results in your eventual loss (or goes a long way to dooming you to a loss). In my thinking, the Germans absolutely need a good turn 1 to get the offensive rolling. Failure to do so means they will either face a stronger Russian army than necessary and/or they do not get to the territorial objectives they need to get to in order to set up potential success in the following turns.

This is not to say that if the Germans have a bad turn 1, the Russians will be in Berlin in 1942. It is to say that with a lot of AARs, Germans having a "bad" turn 1 usually don't last long.



Zort -> RE: Gamey Tactics which Drive Me Wild (7/7/2011 9:05:59 PM)

Since the game begins with the same starting positions for everyone I don't see it as gamey for the german first move.  Once the entire WW2 game comes out then both sides will have the opportunity to modify their starting positions.  But since this will be an "issue" what I would like to see is:

1.  Soviets have the opportunity to move units around but within limits, ie, A front has X units and Y of these units have to be deployed within certain boundary limits with Z number on the border. 
2.  Germans then modify their starting positions.

The 'gamey' tactic that bugs me is the ability for the russians to run away and save their armies with no penalty for them doing this.  I would advocate a change to russian morale, as more land/cities/towns they give up the lower their morale gets.  Now I have had a hard time killing/capturing more then 3.5 million soviets before blizzard and the soviet army gets huge in 42.  I do think it is a viable tactic for the soviets to withdraw since we don't have any Stalin idiot rules but having some sort of penalty to do this should be applied.  This topic has been vigorously discussed before.



entwood -> RE: Gamey Tactics which Drive Me Wild (7/7/2011 9:40:07 PM)

if some of Guderian's forces move into AGS domain wouldn't that really mean those forces should be attached to a AGS Panzer Korps or 1st Panzer Army?  The Command and Control (realistically) would be sort of interesting if this really happened.  Guderian down south is additional pressure on gaminess and exploitation of the game at the beginning...and where do we stand between game and simulation?  There is so much detail in the game with leaders and attachments and the like, that I'm leaning more towards simulation as the way to go...if we go anywhere.    Such as move would also increase supply requirements in the AGS area.



lastdingo -> RE: Gamey Tactics which Drive Me Wild (7/7/2011 9:48:21 PM)

Open cockpits in winter:
The Hs 123 was the last German plane to still fly in worst winter weather, and it was open.

Soviet amphibious operations:
Did happen during Crimean campaign.



mmarquo -> RE: Gamey Tactics which Drive Me Wild (7/7/2011 10:29:14 PM)

>Soviet amphibious operations:
>Did happen during Crimean campaign

But not into the Roumania or the Ukraine...

Marquo



Michael T -> RE: Gamey Tactics which Drive Me Wild (7/7/2011 11:04:34 PM)

In the end I am happy if a move or strategy is within the realm of possibility. No matter how remote. A big part of the fun of the game for me is trying out new ideas. I have worked out a new ploy that I beleive is better than the Lvov pocket on turn one. I am itching to try it in my next game as axis.

I would suggest if you are a 'historical' only type player then let potential opponents know before hand and impose some rigid guidelines. But thats not for me. I am generally ok with anything that is allowable within the rules as written. The only thing I would object to is a bug that allows an abuse of a well intended rule.



entwood -> RE: Gamey Tactics which Drive Me Wild (7/7/2011 11:59:51 PM)

I guess it is essentially a gray area.  From the manual, which is not to hold to anything exactly;  


2.2. THE GAME
Gary Grigsby’s War in the East is a turn based simulation of the Eastern Front in World War
Two from June 1941 to September 1945. As the Axis or Soviet player, you take the role of
the military High Command to use the forces available to you to execute the conflict at the
strategic and operational levels of war. The game is an “Alternate History Creator” that focuses
on simulating the logistic and command and control problems that the historical commanders
on the Eastern Front had to deal with. It will allow players to explore many of the strategic and
operational “What ifs” that have been discussed by historians and armchair strategists for
many years. As such, economic and research based “what ifs” are not the focus.

I guess I am just feeling a little depressed about it.   I, for one, would like to play in just a bit tighter frame-work of historical parameters of
leaders, chain-of-command, supply, doctrine, and other factors, and not get gamed on either side.   I would love to see some RISK in the gambits and that
they could fail and have consequences, things like that, with increased historical FOW. 

It is a wonderful game and I do support it fully.

I think there are still a lot of other general fixes we will get over the months to come anyway.



Empire101 -> RE: Gamey Tactics which Drive Me Wild (7/8/2011 12:14:16 AM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: Michael T

In the end I am happy if a move or strategy is within the realm of possibility. No matter how remote. A big part of the fun of the game for me is trying out new ideas. I have worked out a new ploy that I beleive is better than the Lvov pocket on turn one. I am itching to try it in my next game as axis.

I would suggest if you are a 'historical' only type player then let potential opponents know before hand and impose some rigid guidelines. But thats not for me. I am generally ok with anything that is allowable within the rules as written. The only thing I would object to is a bug that allows an abuse of a well intended rule.



I totally agree[8D]



Panama -> RE: Gamey Tactics which Drive Me Wild (7/8/2011 2:20:53 AM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: entwood

2.2. THE GAME
The game is an “Alternate History Creator” .


I would have to wonder about that particular statement. If it's alternate history shouldn't you be able to do some things that were not historical and so not suffer the historical consequences of a historical action that you DID NOT take? Perhaps too many historical events are hard coded.



neuromancer -> RE: Gamey Tactics which Drive Me Wild (7/9/2011 12:50:43 AM)

Didn't I run a topic almost exactly like this a few weeks back? Boring Turn 1 Moves?

In the end I decided that the game needs a lot of work on the supply model, and some other meaningful potential objectives for the Germans in the early part of the game (right now its "take cities, kill Russians, and then after the summer of 1942, try to keep the Russians out of Berlin").

Oh, and the Industrial Evacuation is too easy for the Russians.

I find the complaints about pockets amusing because historically there were a whole bunch of pockets which accounted for a LOT of captured Russians (but also accounted for German casualties as they didn't just surrender as soon as they were surrounded). In this game, you get the Lvov pocket, and a number of smaller pockets, but you will never see the likes of the Minsk and Kiev pockets after the initial Lvov pocket. And as has been pointed out, the Lvov pocket doesn't exactly cost the Russians the game, it simply prevents them from crushing the Germans too quickly.



PeeDeeAitch -> RE: Gamey Tactics which Drive Me Wild (7/9/2011 2:18:52 AM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: neuromancer
I find the complaints about pockets amusing because historically there were a whole bunch of pockets which accounted for a LOT of captured Russians (but also accounted for German casualties as they didn't just surrender as soon as they were surrounded). In this game, you get the Lvov pocket, and a number of smaller pockets, but you will never see the likes of the Minsk and Kiev pockets after the initial Lvov pocket. And as has been pointed out, the Lvov pocket doesn't exactly cost the Russians the game, it simply prevents them from crushing the Germans too quickly.


Ahem.

I have made the Kiev Pocket in several games, once netting about 500k prisoners. I have also made the Stalino Pocket, the Kaluga Pocket, the Corner Pocket, and the "Wooded area between Vyazma and Moscow" Pocket.

They can be done...



pompack -> RE: Gamey Tactics which Drive Me Wild (7/9/2011 3:37:50 AM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: PeeDeeAitch


quote:

ORIGINAL: neuromancer
I find the complaints about pockets amusing because historically there were a whole bunch of pockets which accounted for a LOT of captured Russians (but also accounted for German casualties as they didn't just surrender as soon as they were surrounded). In this game, you get the Lvov pocket, and a number of smaller pockets, but you will never see the likes of the Minsk and Kiev pockets after the initial Lvov pocket. And as has been pointed out, the Lvov pocket doesn't exactly cost the Russians the game, it simply prevents them from crushing the Germans too quickly.


Ahem.

I have made the Kiev Pocket in several games, once netting about 500k prisoners. I have also made the Stalino Pocket, the Kaluga Pocket, the Corner Pocket, and the "Wooded area between Vyazma and Moscow" Pocket.

They can be done...



Not to mention the Leningrad Pocket, the Volkhov Pocket, and for devotees of the extreme Right Hook, the Svir Pocket



WarHunter -> RE: Gamey Tactics which Drive Me Wild (7/9/2011 3:51:46 AM)

Don't forget the Moscow Pocket. Also the "Hot Pocket". A source of food, for those inside looking out. [sm=00000117.gif]



PeeDeeAitch -> RE: Gamey Tactics which Drive Me Wild (7/9/2011 4:08:53 AM)

If I can't pocket the Soviets, I surround the Romanians.



Panama -> RE: Gamey Tactics which Drive Me Wild (7/9/2011 1:06:11 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: WarHunter

Don't forget the Moscow Pocket. Also the "Hot Pocket". A source of food, for those inside looking out. [sm=00000117.gif]



[:D][:D][:D]



nedcorleone1 -> RE: Gamey Tactics which Drive Me Wild (7/20/2011 4:28:33 PM)

How about taking a "Fortress Europa" type approach to the game? Allow a scenario type that allows for a variable setup from each of the players. You could limit this to select army groups or what have you in given 'regions'. Allow the Soviets to place their units first followed by an Axis placement. If you play with FOW then this could make for some very interesting positioning. In order to prevent repetition and predictability, the game could randomize the select units that can be custom placed. Just an idea.

EDIT: Yeah just realized this idea has been pitched before. *doh!* I should have known...



Jakerson -> RE: Gamey Tactics which Drive Me Wild (7/21/2011 1:07:08 PM)

What drives me mad is that axis can encircle and destroy whole soviet armies of 200 000 men just with 20 000 men (one infantry div and one panzer div). Axis just paints area around Soviet army so wide that Soviet army is isolated and cannot restore supply with slow moving rifle armies that can only move 1 or 2 hexes deep axis controlled territory. One axis panzer div could easily paint 5-6 hexes deep aroun the soviet army. Then just kills whole army with infantry div.

I just find it unrealistic that soviets cannot get any supply trough when there is hundreds of kilometers wide empty space all around them that is just painted to axis control during axis turn with their 50 movemen point panzer div.

Becose of this soviet virtually have to deploy their troops in checker board formation to minimize losses.



timmyab -> RE: Gamey Tactics which Drive Me Wild (7/21/2011 1:30:59 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: Jakerson
I just find it unrealistic that soviets cannot get any supply trough when there is hundreds of kilometers wide empty space all around them that is just painted to axis control during axis turn with their 50 movemen point panzer div.

In real life these empty spaces would have company and battalion sized formations deployed at important road junctions.A game of this scale can't model this without turning into micro management hell so it uses an abstraction.I think it's done pretty well myself.



Tarhunnas -> RE: Gamey Tactics which Drive Me Wild (7/21/2011 2:39:45 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: timmyab


quote:

ORIGINAL: Jakerson
I just find it unrealistic that soviets cannot get any supply trough when there is hundreds of kilometers wide empty space all around them that is just painted to axis control during axis turn with their 50 movemen point panzer div.


In real life these empty spaces would have company and battalion sized formations deployed at important road junctions.A game of this scale can't model this without turning into micro management hell so it uses an abstraction.I think it's done pretty well myself.



I agree with timmy, I think it's a very realistic way to recreate the encirclement battles of 1941. It will only work against low morale troops and no reserves.



Panama -> RE: Gamey Tactics which Drive Me Wild (7/21/2011 2:44:34 PM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: timmyab


In real life these empty spaces would have company and battalion sized formations deployed at important road junctions.A game of this scale can't model this without turning into micro management hell so it uses an abstraction.I think it's done pretty well myself.



Any division, grunt or mobile, can only cover so much ground. The Germans were constantly frustrated because their 'pockets' leaked like a sieve. While the heavy equipment might not get out the men did.

And if these 'pockets' are sealed as you claim, one division breaking up to cover a 100 kilometer paper thin line, then the division counter should be removed. It is, afterall, blocking all of those important road junctions.

History in this regard was not as represented in the game. But then, we throw out time and space completely in this one so what the heck, eh?



timmyab -> RE: Gamey Tactics which Drive Me Wild (7/21/2011 3:31:10 PM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: Panama
Any division, grunt or mobile, can only cover so much ground. The Germans were constantly frustrated because their 'pockets' leaked like a sieve. While the heavy equipment might not get out the men did.

This could be easily simulated in the game if it was deemed necessary.For instance a proportion of the encircled manpower could escape back to the pool if the pocket perimeter was not completely covered by enemy unit ZOC.It's probably more bother than it's worth though.



herwin -> RE: Gamey Tactics which Drive Me Wild (7/21/2011 4:40:49 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: Tarhunnas


quote:

ORIGINAL: timmyab


quote:

ORIGINAL: Jakerson
I just find it unrealistic that soviets cannot get any supply trough when there is hundreds of kilometers wide empty space all around them that is just painted to axis control during axis turn with their 50 movemen point panzer div.


In real life these empty spaces would have company and battalion sized formations deployed at important road junctions.A game of this scale can't model this without turning into micro management hell so it uses an abstraction.I think it's done pretty well myself.



I agree with timmy, I think it's a very realistic way to recreate the encirclement battles of 1941. It will only work against low morale troops and no reserves.


The German Army had serious problems keeping those pockets closed in 1941.



Jakerson -> RE: Gamey Tactics which Drive Me Wild (7/21/2011 6:44:54 PM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: Panama
This could be easily simulated in the game if it was deemed necessary.For instance a proportion of the encircled manpower could escape back to the pool if the pocket perimeter was not completely covered by enemy unit ZOC.It's probably more bother than it's worth though.


Isolated Soviet troops in should be allowed rout if pocket is not sealed with enemy ZOC. Routing kills large partition of heavy equipment but let’s manpower slip to safety. I just see it ridiculous that 200 000men sized Soviet Armies surrender to 10 000 Germans in one panzer div that painted hexes behind them When there is only 1 panzer div behind them holding whole area that is painted to axis control.

That is more than 20 prisoners per German soldier it is no way that can even guard that much prisoners.

Well this is just game but still.

This German painting can be countered keeping Mobile soviet formations possible tank brigades in checker board formation all across the line so they can counter paint when this painting happen sometimes even this don’t help because soviet tank brigades seem to be able to move only 1/3 of hexes in empty axis controlled hexes what German panzer div can so experience German can paint so deep in one turn that Soviet have no way to repaint it back in one turn.

This that Soviet tank brigades can advance only 1/3 of German painted hexes than Germans travel Soviet painted hexes in one turn is another thing I see lame. Soviet tanks had better mechanical design in their tracks than German helping them to move faster in Soviet terrain. Soviets also knew their own home country better than Germans so they could choose faster routes and did not get lost so much than Germans. German mobile formations being so much faster is just not Historical.



Mynok -> RE: Gamey Tactics which Drive Me Wild (7/21/2011 10:23:03 PM)


Track efficiency has little do with a unit getting from one place to another successfully in war. Command and control is the critical piece to the puzzle and the Germans were light years better than the Soviets in that area.



Empire101 -> RE: Gamey Tactics which Drive Me Wild (7/21/2011 11:11:42 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: Mynok


Track efficiency has little do with a unit getting from one place to another successfully in war. Command and control is the critical piece to the puzzle and the Germans were light years better than the Soviets in that area.



You've hit the nail right on the head. Engine/track/mechanical reliability is already built into the game anyway.
Command and control IS the decisive factor here. In 1941, only the commanders tank in a Soviet squadron had a radio anyway.
Communication in the beginining for the Soviets, was flags, and how dangerous would that be to poke your upper torso out of the turret and start waving a couple of flags about, in the middle of a battle, with a fully trained Pz III 300 yards away?



Tarhunnas -> RE: Gamey Tactics which Drive Me Wild (7/21/2011 11:37:11 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: Jakerson

This that Soviet tank brigades can advance only 1/3 of German painted hexes than Germans travel Soviet painted hexes in one turn is another thing I see lame. Soviet tanks had better mechanical design in their tracks than German helping them to move faster in Soviet terrain. Soviets also knew their own home country better than Germans so they could choose faster routes and did not get lost so much than Germans. German mobile formations being so much faster is just not Historical.



No tank runs faster than its commander can think! As Mynok says, command and control and intelligence is the limiting factor, not mechanics. And why would a tanker from Voronezh know the countryside around Minsk better than a tanker from Stuttgart?

German formations could run rings around the Soviets in the summer of 1941. That they are faster in the game strikes me as highly historical.

The Germans have a hard time inflicting the historical casualties anyway in the game without needing this kind of limits. Though it is refreshing with someone saying the game is unrealistic because the Soviet are disadvantaged by rule X, usually it is the other way around. [;)]



Page: <<   < prev  1 2 [3] 4 5   next >   >>

Valid CSS!




Forum Software © ASPPlayground.NET Advanced Edition 2.4.5 ANSI
1.796875