RE: Micheal T (Ger) vs Kamil (Sov)

RE: Micheal T (Ger) vs Kamil (Sov) (Full Version)

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

Message

Peltonx -> RE: Micheal T (Ger) vs Kamil (Sov) (6/16/2013 11:51:11 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Kamil Sorry Pelton, but you are are completely wrong. He has beaten you badly and everyone knows it, but you just can't accept truth and keep moaning about it. he refused not me. Only game to 43 cant refute the facts

mktours -> RE: Micheal T (Ger) vs Kamil (Sov) (6/17/2013 3:47:01 AM)
it seems that michael had pull out a lot of units from the front to his two wings, it might be a waste that you still keep so many unit at the front door of Moscow. don't forget what Zhukov did in 1941, only by drawing units from the front could he stop the Germans from two wings. don't forget Moscow urban area is the best fort in this game, put Zhukov in charge of an army and numerous supply units under his command (there is no limt of supply units could be commited in the urban area) and the city is invincible to any frontal assault. so it might be a choice to withdraw your front line to the city and put them at the back of the urban area and protect the rail line. and you can easily hit them back to vyazma in the winter. quote: ORIGINAL: Kamil T11 Moscow (German) Main line wasn't breached. Soon troops from Leningrad theatre will arrive and I should be safe here at least until panzers from AGN get transferred to central part of front. [image]local://upfiles/37480/629D2CFE633147D6A66EC352386DD1B1.jpg[/image]

mmarquo -> RE: Micheal T (Ger) vs Kamil (Sov) (6/17/2013 1:12:44 PM)
He is going for the rail lines to isolate the city from behind - becareful. Marquo

bigbaba -> RE: Micheal T (Ger) vs Kamil (Sov) (6/17/2013 1:19:41 PM)
indeed. you dont need all the western and kalinin front armies infront of moscow. you can for sure transfer a lot of troops to the north and south. the great defensive terrain there will benefit you and make it easier to stop the flanking attack.

KamilS -> RE: Micheal T (Ger) vs Kamil (Sov) (6/17/2013 11:18:15 PM)
quote: Marquo He is going for the rail lines to isolate the city from behind - becareful. Marquo quote: bigbaba indeed. you dont need all the western and kalinin front armies infront of moscow. you can for sure transfer a lot of troops to the north and south. the great defensive terrain there will benefit you and make it easier to stop the flanking attack. This is situation from few turns ago. Decisions were taken and price was paid. [:)]

sillyflower -> RE: Micheal T (Ger) vs Kamil (Sov) (6/18/2013 12:02:12 AM)
Michael does not use exploits, eg doing things like muling or putting bombers on army airbases, but he does exploit (using the word in a non-perjorative sense) the rules eg that ridiculous new southern opening and using LW as a flying petrol station so as to make it impossible for soviets in 41. Once you lose too many units you can't stop the snowball effect. All legitimate but rather robs the game of much meaning IMHO

SigUp -> RE: Micheal T (Ger) vs Kamil (Sov) (6/18/2013 8:43:13 AM)
That's right, he is working extremely well within the boundaries of what the engine allows. But I am just stunned by this (unrealistic) progress, and as such I am really deterred from playing multiplayer.

Peltonx -> RE: Micheal T (Ger) vs Kamil (Sov) (6/18/2013 9:19:35 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: SigUp That's right, he is working extremely well within the boundaries of what the engine allows. But I am just stunned by this (unrealistic) progress, and as such I am really deterred from playing multiplayer. You can do the same things vs AI GHC or SHC

SigUp -> RE: Micheal T (Ger) vs Kamil (Sov) (6/18/2013 9:29:44 AM)
That is why I play the Soviet AI on 119 or 114 morale and German logistics at 60. I only captured Smolensk around mid-August, Kiev still hasn't fallen on turn 12 now (though I've completed the link-up between Panzer Groups 1 and 2 north of Sumy). It is doubtful whether Leningrad will fall (I just captured Shlisselburg), as the hex next to Pavlovo is guarded by 2-3 Soviet divisions at around 60-70 morale with level 3 forts (and not to mention of the other masses in reserve mode). Granted I am not a great player, but logistics at 60 and the rule of only transports being allowed for fuel transportation (unless the target unit is encircled) really puts a dent on how far the Panzers can advance. And I'm honestly having much fun with this.

Peltonx -> RE: Micheal T (Ger) vs Kamil (Sov) (6/18/2013 11:10:43 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: SigUp That is why I play the Soviet AI on 119 or 114 morale and German logistics at 60. I only captured Smolensk around mid-August, Kiev still hasn't fallen on turn 12 now (though I've completed the link-up between Panzer Groups 1 and 2 north of Sumy). It is doubtful whether Leningrad will fall (I just captured Shlisselburg), as the hex next to Pavlovo is guarded by 2-3 Soviet divisions at around 60-70 morale with level 3 forts (and not to mention of the other masses in reserve mode). Granted I am not a great player, but logistics at 60 and the rule of only transports being allowed for fuel transportation (unless the target unit is encircled) really puts a dent on how far the Panzers can advance. And I'm honestly having much fun with this. The down side to that is late war SHC steam roller, unless your creative as GHC. I have never used bombers to transport fuel and can still take Moscow by turn 12 vs AI on hard. WitE's AI is the best I have ever played agaist, but still no match for human vs human. The logistics at 60 can easly be over come chaining HQB's. I am still tring to figure out MT's fuel tactics. More of a rotation very much like my chaining tactic. Nothing that can be patched out of the game.

SigUp -> RE: Micheal T (Ger) vs Kamil (Sov) (6/18/2013 12:26:24 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Pelton quote: ORIGINAL: SigUp That is why I play the Soviet AI on 119 or 114 morale and German logistics at 60. I only captured Smolensk around mid-August, Kiev still hasn't fallen on turn 12 now (though I've completed the link-up between Panzer Groups 1 and 2 north of Sumy). It is doubtful whether Leningrad will fall (I just captured Shlisselburg), as the hex next to Pavlovo is guarded by 2-3 Soviet divisions at around 60-70 morale with level 3 forts (and not to mention of the other masses in reserve mode). Granted I am not a great player, but logistics at 60 and the rule of only transports being allowed for fuel transportation (unless the target unit is encircled) really puts a dent on how far the Panzers can advance. And I'm honestly having much fun with this. The down side to that is late war SHC steam roller, unless your creative as GHC. I have never used bombers to transport fuel and can still take Moscow by turn 12 vs AI on hard. WitE's AI is the best I have ever played agaist, but still no match for human vs human. The logistics at 60 can easly be over come chaining HQB's. I am still tring to figure out MT's fuel tactics. More of a rotation very much like my chaining tactic. Nothing that can be patched out of the game. That's the beauty of single player, when the tide turns (like blizzard, or from 1943 on) I can just tune back the settings to 100 or so. As for HQB's, I don't chain them. If I'm already imposing such rules like a limit on recon, or a limit on fuel transports, no Lvov opener, in order to achieve realistic operation tempo, then I sure am not going to go for masses of HQB's.

Aurelian -> RE: Micheal T (Ger) vs Kamil (Sov) (6/18/2013 1:45:09 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: sillyflower Michael does not use exploits, eg doing things like muling Only because it's been nerfed

Flaviusx -> RE: Micheal T (Ger) vs Kamil (Sov) (6/18/2013 5:44:31 PM)
Until people insist that Michael expose himself to random weather, we're going to keep seeing games like this. It is the only thing you can do to throw a spanner across his optimized logistical machine. Only the occasional and unexpected mud turn with slow that down and introduce an element of uncertainty into his calculations. Right now he is mostly just playing against himself. So long as he makes no errors, it is a mathematical certainty that he will end his games in or shortly after 1941. The Soviet player is merely a bystander here.

Balou -> RE: Micheal T (Ger) vs Kamil (Sov) (6/18/2013 5:59:01 PM)
Do you have any idea how his fuel warp works ?

OddBall2 -> RE: Micheal T (Ger) vs Kamil (Sov) (6/19/2013 1:28:31 AM)
Feel compelled to jump in here regarding the endless nerfing, for what it worth. The game has definitely become my addiction. Rush home every day after work to see the new posts. Regarding the mulling, chaining, HQBU, etc. The game needs to stay a 50-50 chance to win for either side. This means the Germans need to have a 50/50 chance to win the game in 41 or 42. The endless nerfing because one of the top players like a Pelton, or MT or Sillyflower or Comrade P etc. etc, has figured out a way to tweak out some last bit of fuel or fort building speed or what ever. Does not always need to be nerfed. If MT gave me this game against Kamil after turn 4 or 5. Kamil would still kick my butt because he is so much better then me at the game. The game is so complex that half the fun is trying to figure how to endlessly improve (figure out)your strategy/logistics/TOE etc. But nerfing something because one person has figured something out. Robs all of us newbies of the fun of figuring it out also. I new I was in trouble when early on one of the seniors told someone to "read the code"!!! The vast majority of this game's buyers are not computer programmers or statisticians. We are middle aged guys who played the board games in the late 70's early 80's. It seems to me the top players are the ones who spend the most time and effort on the game (And I Mean A Lot Of Time And Effort). That is what makes them the top players!!! Lets us newbies grow and have fun learning the tricks of the trade also. Saw Pelton can get to Moscow in 12 turns without air fueling or HQBU's? I cannot get there in 12 turns with Air drops and HQBU's. See that's what I am talking about.

Peltonx -> RE: Micheal T (Ger) vs Kamil (Sov) (6/19/2013 1:41:23 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Flaviusx Until people insist that Michael expose himself to random weather, we're going to keep seeing games like this. It is the only thing you can do to throw a spanner across his optimized logistical machine. Only the occasional and unexpected mud turn with slow that down and introduce an element of uncertainty into his calculations. Right now he is mostly just playing against himself. So long as he makes no errors, it is a mathematical certainty that he will end his games in or shortly after 1941. The Soviet player is merely a bystander here. Think I have Mt's fuel tactics figured out finally + Sappers fly over. Don't need to use one or the other as getting a draw is about 100% with my play style. The fact is if Kamil had not screwed up turn 2 he be clearly in the drivers seat. SHC still has an easy win vs anyone without a long term draw strategy. Random weather simply makes a draw a for sure thing as GHC is on the defensive 2/3's of the time.

Peltonx -> RE: Micheal T (Ger) vs Kamil (Sov) (6/19/2013 1:43:51 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: SigUp quote: ORIGINAL: Pelton quote: ORIGINAL: SigUp That is why I play the Soviet AI on 119 or 114 morale and German logistics at 60. I only captured Smolensk around mid-August, Kiev still hasn't fallen on turn 12 now (though I've completed the link-up between Panzer Groups 1 and 2 north of Sumy). It is doubtful whether Leningrad will fall (I just captured Shlisselburg), as the hex next to Pavlovo is guarded by 2-3 Soviet divisions at around 60-70 morale with level 3 forts (and not to mention of the other masses in reserve mode). Granted I am not a great player, but logistics at 60 and the rule of only transports being allowed for fuel transportation (unless the target unit is encircled) really puts a dent on how far the Panzers can advance. And I'm honestly having much fun with this. The down side to that is late war SHC steam roller, unless your creative as GHC. I have never used bombers to transport fuel and can still take Moscow by turn 12 vs AI on hard. WitE's AI is the best I have ever played agaist, but still no match for human vs human. The logistics at 60 can easly be over come chaining HQB's. I am still tring to figure out MT's fuel tactics. More of a rotation very much like my chaining tactic. Nothing that can be patched out of the game. That's the beauty of single player, when the tide turns (like blizzard, or from 1943 on) I can just tune back the settings to 100 or so. As for HQB's, I don't chain them. If I'm already imposing such rules like a limit on recon, or a limit on fuel transports, no Lvov opener, in order to achieve realistic operation tempo, then I sure am not going to go for masses of HQB's. Not much of a challenge when your playing god.

Peltonx -> RE: Micheal T (Ger) vs Kamil (Sov) (6/19/2013 1:49:32 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: OddBall2 Feel compelled to jump in here regarding the endless nerfing, for what it worth. The game has definitely become my addiction. Rush home every day after work to see the new posts. Regarding the mulling, chaining, HQBU, etc. The game needs to stay a 50-50 chance to win for either side. This means the Germans need to have a 50/50 chance to win the game in 41 or 42. The endless nerfing because one of the top players like a Pelton, or MT or Sillyflower or Comrade P etc. etc, has figured out a way to tweak out some last bit of fuel or fort building speed or what ever. Does not always need to be nerfed. If MT gave me this game against Kamil after turn 4 or 5. Kamil would still kick my butt because he is so much better then me at the game. The game is so complex that half the fun is trying to figure how to endlessly improve (figure out)your strategy/logistics/TOE etc. But nerfing something because one person has figured something out. Robs all of us newbies of the fun of figuring it out also. I new I was in trouble when early on one of the seniors told someone to "read the code"!!! The vast majority of this game's buyers are not computer programmers or statisticians. We are middle aged guys who played the board games in the late 70's early 80's. It seems to me the top players are the ones who spend the most time and effort on the game (And I Mean A Lot Of Time And Effort). That is what makes them the top players!!! Lets us newbies grow and have fun learning the tricks of the trade also. Saw Pelton can get to Moscow in 12 turns without air fueling or HQBU's? I cannot get there in 12 turns with Air drops and HQBU's. See that's what I am talking about. The current rule set will not be changing. 2by3 is all in on witw and then wite2. So the current wite is it for about 2 yrs. 2 yrs ago most good GHC never lost, but 2by3 has balanced game out now to the pt that the game is basicly historical. Even MT can be beaten, Kamils turn 2 screw up really cost him. As it is he still has a chance at winning.

SigUp -> RE: Micheal T (Ger) vs Kamil (Sov) (6/19/2013 7:38:23 AM)
I don't think you understand what I mean. Why should the challenge be gone if I reduce Soviet morale and logisitcs during blizzard, but commmitt to a forward defence? Why should the challenge be gone, if I reduce Soviet logistics from the Winter 42-43 onwards, in order to achieve a slower operation tempo? [&:]

bigbaba -> RE: Micheal T (Ger) vs Kamil (Sov) (6/19/2013 2:45:38 PM)
actualy there is no point for the soviet to defend forward. because of the unbrealistic german supply you will get your troops (mostly south and sw front) encirceld and destroyed very soon. dont get me wrong. the game is great and maybe the best large scale game about barbarossa but there are few things which prevent the people from playing a "realistic game". stalin would never allow the red army to give up western ukraine but also the germany had no chance to be at kiev by july. actualy it took them until september to cross the dnjepr in the south in force.

Peltonx -> RE: Micheal T (Ger) vs Kamil (Sov) (6/19/2013 3:15:44 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: bigbaba actualy there is no point for the soviet to defend forward. because of the unbrealistic german supply you will get your troops (mostly south and sw front) encirceld and destroyed very soon. dont get me wrong. the game is great and maybe the best large scale game about barbarossa but there are few things which prevent the people from playing a "realistic game". stalin would never allow the red army to give up western ukraine but also the germany had no chance to be at kiev by july. actualy it took them until september to cross the dnjepr in the south in force. As I have stated 100 times before the what "ifs" work both ways. GHC players get the Lvov because they commit several more Panzer Corp to the south and fewer to center. but there are few things which prevent the people from playing a "realistic game". This statement is so silly, but so many people make it I feel I have to addrees it. What is unrealistic is a game can't go back to 1937 so people can play a what if. The facts are: 1. Stalin killed off the best commanders. 2. Russian units only trained to do offensive tactics. None of the 4 fronts had a single plan to do defensive operations, NONE. All the plans were for offensive operations. 3. All the divisions were in positions to conduct a counter attack or and out right offensive on the western borders with Germany. Stalin would not and shot anyone who disagreed with his strategy. The Lvov pocket is a 100% historical what if. I wish people like Flaviusx would take the time and read why SHC units were in the positions they were in in June 1941. Also the plans that were in the front commanders hands. The GHC opening like Sappers, MT's, mine and others are 100% historical what ifs. The before June 1941 what ifs for SHC are simply not historical what ifs because Stalin was the leader. You have to say Stalin died before 1936? Stalin was a moron and the Lvov pocket is a reflextion of that. The what ifs for SHC start after Germanys first turn. In other words Stalin dies during GHC turn 1.

loki100 -> RE: Micheal T (Ger) vs Kamil (Sov) (6/19/2013 4:29:45 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Pelton The facts are: 1. Stalin killed off the best commanders. 2. Russian units only trained to do offensive tactics. None of the 4 fronts had a single plan to do defensive operations, NONE. All the plans were for offensive operations. 3. All the divisions were in positions to conduct a counter attack or and out right offensive on the western borders with Germany. Stalin would not and shot anyone who disagreed with his strategy. I'm sorry, but you are talking rubbish here. As to the issues of what is realistic. Well there have always been players of wargames who effectively see them as nothing but complex chess. So if its not banned by the rules, its legit. Its a point of view I recognise exists, its not a point of view I agree with.

Aurelian -> RE: Micheal T (Ger) vs Kamil (Sov) (6/19/2013 7:15:06 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: loki100 quote: ORIGINAL: Pelton The facts are: 1. Stalin killed off the best commanders. 2. Russian units only trained to do offensive tactics. None of the 4 fronts had a single plan to do defensive operations, NONE. All the plans were for offensive operations. 3. All the divisions were in positions to conduct a counter attack or and out right offensive on the western borders with Germany. Stalin would not and shot anyone who disagreed with his strategy. I'm sorry, but you are talking rubbish here. As to the issues of what is realistic. Well there have always been players of wargames who effectively see them as nothing but complex chess. So if its not banned by the rules, its legit. Its a point of view I recognise exists, its not a point of view I agree with. I wasn't aware that Rokossovsky, Vatutin, Tolbukhin, Konev, Zhukov, et al were shot.

Peltonx -> RE: Micheal T (Ger) vs Kamil (Sov) (6/19/2013 7:19:51 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: loki100 quote: ORIGINAL: Pelton The facts are: 1. Stalin killed off the best commanders. 2. Russian units only trained to do offensive tactics. None of the 4 fronts had a single plan to do defensive operations, NONE. All the plans were for offensive operations. 3. All the divisions were in positions to conduct a counter attack or and out right offensive on the western borders with Germany. Stalin would not and shot anyone who disagreed with his strategy. I'm sorry, but you are talking rubbish here. As to the issues of what is realistic. Well there have always been players of wargames who effectively see them as nothing but complex chess. So if its not banned by the rules, its legit. Its a point of view I recognise exists, its not a point of view I agree with. 1. Stalin did not kill off 10 - 20 million (includes civilians starved to death) of his own civilians from 1936-38 and 90% of all commanders all the way down to company level?? https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Great_Purge 2. Stalin was in charge of SHC forses, that's why they were deployed in WW1 style. Including the air forse. Simply standard reading in about any historical book. Stalin was all about attack attack. I will again stick to historical facts, others can keep the Stalin dream alive if they wish. The wall is down and the USSR lost the Cold War. No need to defend someone who killed more of his own people then Hitler did.

mmarquo -> RE: Micheal T (Ger) vs Kamil (Sov) (6/19/2013 9:03:17 PM)
"GHC players get the Lvov because they commit several more Panzer Corp to the south and fewer to center" Good players can form the Lvov pocket without any help from the center units.

Aurelian -> RE: Micheal T (Ger) vs Kamil (Sov) (6/19/2013 9:16:27 PM)
And I don't know why it is ignored, maybe because Hitler didn't have them shot, (Then again, Stalin didn't shoot all that many during the war either IIRC.), but German commanders got fired as well for not doing what he wanted.. von Leeb, List, Hoth, Guderian, (sure, he was appointed Inspector General of Armored Troops, but as far as WiTE is concerned, he is out of the game from 12/25/41 to 7/21/44 when he replaces Zietzler, who replaced Hadler.) To name just a few

Peltonx -> RE: Micheal T (Ger) vs Kamil (Sov) (6/19/2013 11:33:30 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Aurelian And I don't know why it is ignored, maybe because Hitler didn't have them shot, (Then again, Stalin didn't shoot all that many during the war either IIRC.), but German commanders got fired as well for not doing what he wanted.. von Leeb, List, Hoth, Guderian, (sure, he was appointed Inspector General of Armored Troops, but as far as WiTE is concerned, he is out of the game from 12/25/41 to 7/21/44 when he replaces Zietzler, who replaced Hadler.) To name just a few We are talking before turn 1. The turn one disaster was 7 years in the making. All the good generals who had the units far behind the border and dug in were shot 3 to 5 yrs before June 1941. Stalin moved up a bunch of WW1 buds to General who then deployed the Russian forces /planes in WW1 fashion. Stalin even favored HE rounds over AP rounds for KV-1's. All countries replace commanders during wars. Stalin had them killed years before. Why the Red Army was a mess for several years.

76mm -> RE: Micheal T (Ger) vs Kamil (Sov) (6/20/2013 12:22:02 AM)
quote: Stalin did not kill off...90% of all commanders all the way down to company level?? https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Great_Purge Do you even read the materials that you cite? Obviously not... You state above that 90% of commanders to company level were killed. This is so fantastically, unbelievably wrong I'm not sure what to say. To quote the source that you cite ('ve helpfully bolded the wording which completely contradict the point you are trying to make): ************* At first it was thought 25-50% of Red Army officers were purged, it is now known to be 3.7-7.7%. Previously, the size of the Red Army officer corps was underestimated, and it was overlooked that most of those purged were merely expelled from the Party. Thirty percent of officers purged in 1937-9 were allowed to return to service. ******************* So to recap: --At most, 7.7% of the Red Army officers were purged. --Most of the purged officers were expelled from the Communist party, not killed. --30% of purged officers were allowed to return to service. quote: I will again stick to historical facts... haha. I wish I could say that I thought you had a good sense of humor, but I think you really believe your drivel...

ChiChester -> RE: Micheal T (Ger) vs Kamil (Sov) (6/20/2013 1:08:26 AM)
sense of humor is pivotal here!

Aurelian -> RE: Micheal T (Ger) vs Kamil (Sov) (6/20/2013 1:37:14 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: 76mm quote: Stalin did not kill off...90% of all commanders all the way down to company level?? https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Great_Purge Do you even read the materials that you cite? Obviously not... You state above that 90% of commanders to company level were killed. This is so fantastically, unbelievably wrong I'm not sure what to say. To quote the source that you cite ('ve helpfully bolded the wording which completely contradict the point you are trying to make): ************* At first it was thought 25-50% of Red Army officers were purged, it is now known to be 3.7-7.7%. Previously, the size of the Red Army officer corps was underestimated, and it was overlooked that most of those purged were merely expelled from the Party. Thirty percent of officers purged in 1937-9 were allowed to return to service. ******************* So to recap: --At most, 7.7% of the Red Army officers were purged. --Most of the purged officers were expelled from the Communist party, not killed. --30% of purged officers were allowed to return to service. quote: I will again stick to historical facts... haha. I wish I could say that I thought you had a good sense of humor, but I think you really believe your drivel... Good catch. I just love it when people use sources that puncture their claims.

Page: << < prev 6 7 [8] 9 10 next > >>

Forum Software © ASPPlayground.NET Advanced Edition 2.4.5 ANSI

0.8242188