RE: T6 north (Full Version)

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



Message

BrianG -> RE: T6 north (1/1/2014 12:52:16 PM)

I may be late to the loop, but why are so many Russian attacks doubling! At a minimum the alteration should be some variable between 1 and 2, not always 2.

Russians should not feel confident their one to one attacks will work. Especially in 41'.!!!



Peltonx -> RE: T6 north (1/1/2014 1:13:56 PM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: BrianG

I may be late to the loop, but why are so many Russian attacks doubling! At a minimum the alteration should be some variable between 1 and 2, not always 2.

Russians should not feel confident their one to one attacks will work. Especially in 41'.!!!


ALLOT of things were broken/not WAD, before morveal started looking at the code-before .11.
It was a mess, simply go back and look at all the messed up stuff he found and fixed.

Because of the 1v1=2v1 and the game is finally WAD a SHC can simply match the displayed German CV, do one bombing run with less then 20 planes, have an ok leader and they win 100% of the time.
Germans must have atleast 2x list SHC CV to win 85% time.

This is summer 1941 this is completely non-historical and a MASSIVE exploit that only true blue Red fanboys will defend.

.14 will fix about everything finally, so I would hold back at starting any new games before that.

Finally games based more on player skills and less on who can exploit the sht out of WAD



Tom Hunter -> RE: T6 north (1/1/2014 2:26:59 PM)

One of the things I find interesting about this is the Axis casualty rate is somewhere near historical, maybe a bit higher. I see several sources saying the Axis lost 800,000 men in Russia in 1941.



timmyab -> RE: T6 north (1/1/2014 2:47:29 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: BrianG

I may be late to the loop, but why are so many Russian attacks doubling! At a minimum the alteration should be some variable between 1 and 2, not always 2.

Russians should not feel confident their one to one attacks will work. Especially in 41'.!!!

It's been going on for ages. As long as the Soviet player is set up right doubled to quadrupled CVs are normal. And yes it's mental! According to this game the Soviet leadership was a model of perfection in the first year of the war.



SigUp -> RE: T6 north (1/1/2014 2:57:08 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: Tom Hunter

One of the things I find interesting about this is the Axis casualty rate is somewhere near historical, maybe a bit higher. I see several sources saying the Axis lost 800,000 men in Russia in 1941.

These are the German losses. Counting Romanian losses you'll probably get a higher number. From 22nd June to 31st December 1941 the German Heer (ground forces) in the East suffered 802.452 so-called bloody losses (killed, wounded, missing). Counting sick people leaving the immediate combat zone the Wehrmacht lost 1.094.251 men in 1941 with arrivals amounting to 509.000 for a net drain of 585.251 men



Michael T -> RE: T6 north (1/1/2014 7:45:27 PM)

That last attack that the soviets made shows WITE right now is broken. 6 Soviet ID v 3 German Divisions should be an absolute slaughter of Russian troops. I can't think of any other game I have ever played that would yield a win for the Russians in this case. In FITE ( Europa boardgame) the attack would be something like a 1:2 -1 DRM. A suicide attack that only a truly desperate player would make.

This whole X3 or X4 of attacking CV due to leader rolls is completely borked.



carlkay58 -> RE: T6 north (1/1/2014 9:22:05 PM)

The interesting part is that the Axis side can also get their CV to be x3 or x4, but never quite seem to anymore. I have not played WitE since my 'Blitz is On' AAR but it seems that I am not seeing people's combat reports including Axis multipliers like that. Of course most people are only posting the close combats or the ones the Soviets are winning lately.



Disgruntled Veteran -> RE: T6 north (1/1/2014 9:38:36 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: carlkay58

The interesting part is that the Axis side can also get their CV to be x3 or x4, but never quite seem to anymore. I have not played WitE since my 'Blitz is On' AAR but it seems that I am not seeing people's combat reports including Axis multipliers like that. Of course most people are only posting the close combats or the ones the Soviets are winning lately.



I am seeing these numbers in my attacks...not a lot but I do occasionally get them.



Tom Hunter -> RE: T6 north (1/1/2014 10:53:39 PM)

I'm seeing a lot of 2x(ish) and some 1.5x from Saper222, and 3x when he hits something you would expect to be brittle, in recent cases when a pnz division broke through and hit a reserve tank brigade, or the third attack in a row on an isolated cavalry corps.

Here are the usual attacks:

[image]local://upfiles/14870/096C98D5717D4B7994F597CAD65876B4.jpg[/image]

I'm also starting to wonder about the delta between the casualties caused by unsuccessful attacks in game vs unsuccessful attacks in the war. Is the 1:1 = 2:1 causing a historical casualty and advance rate to be more likely or less likely?

I agree with a recent post by Michael T pointing out that 6 1941 Soviet infantry divisions would be very unlikely to beat 3 German infantry divisions. I am starting to wonder if the "winning" result is really that important. In most of my attacks that "win" the Red Army takes more casualties and suffers more disruption than the Germans, which sounds right for 1941. However they do put Saper222 a bit off schedule, which also seems right.

Now it would be better if failed attacks and failed defenses causes something like historical casualty rates. Sadly they don't.



Michael T -> RE: T6 north (1/2/2014 12:31:24 AM)

I have very serious concerns about how the whole combat system is working. You can take any game at any level and 6 41 Soviet ID just don't beat back 3 German Divisions. For example take HPS Panzer Campaigns, totally different scale but if you set up 3 German Divisions and attacked with 6 Soviet ID in the Smolensk 41 game they would get flogged for very little loss on the German side. The WITE combat system is failing badly. Simple odds based step loss systems do a much better job.

I see some major flaws that include these ludicrous CV multipliers because of successful leadership rolls, losses mainly due to retreats and 2:1 odds guaranteeing a retreat. Its all getting whacky IMO.




Tom Hunter -> RE: T6 north (1/2/2014 12:52:56 AM)

@Michael T

I'll suggest that concerns with the combat system should focus on questions like historical loss rates and advance rates on the strategic level fist, and then look at particular results like the one you discuss.

The combat system as is seems to fail on the grand strategic level and on the divisional level as well. However fixing the problem at the divisional level might not do a thing for the strategic problem, and might make the strategic problem worse not better.

I understand why some players are upset about the 1:1 = 2:1 but its pretty clear that those players would happily propose a solution that would result in no casualties for the Germans at all. Not out of malice, but simply out of lack of forethought. That is a very common problem in wargames, and in other parts of life, people focus on a simple mechanic while disregarding the system as a whole.



mktours -> RE: T6 north (1/2/2014 1:54:12 AM)

Pelton
Thank you for your kind words!

quote:

ORIGINAL: Pelton

Good job MK, you appear to be a very skilled SHC player even vs one of the top 5 GHC players.

I look forward to your AAR.



mktours -> RE: T6 north (1/2/2014 2:03:34 AM)

Michael, I checked the battle you mentioned, but the soviet CV only went from 189 to 440, that is not a X3 attack. So you might need a better calculator to do the math.
I think both Saper and me are enjoying this game, I fight forward as it is fun and also by doing so, I am going to keep both Leningrad and Moscow in 1941. On the other hand, Saper got opportunity to pocket my troops, so he is happy too. The process is quite like history, the SHC suffer very heavy casualty, but keep both Leningrad and Moscow. And don’t forget I am defending a extend Lvov opening.
If the combat system is in favor of the soviet side, then it only shows how good Saper is as a GHC, because he never complain about it, instead, he adjust his tactics and strategy pretty well and earn my respect. He said he is enjoying the challenge; that is indeed what a great player should do and Saper deserves the respect.
By the way, I don’t think I am doing a desperate attack in this case, under a good leader, 19 attacking CV against 35 defensive CV on a clear hex is what I intentionally aimed for, you could see I didn’t occupied the clear hexes in all the maps I posted. I think that should be a normal result by a good SHC player if he knows how to assign leaders and SU. You surprised me that you seem to don’t know how vulnerable troops could be on clear hexes. If so, then it seems that my previous impression that you are a good player in this game could be wrong.

quote:

ORIGINAL: Michael T

That last attack that the soviets made shows WITE right now is broken. 6 Soviet ID v 3 German Divisions should be an absolute slaughter of Russian troops. I can't think of any other game I have ever played that would yield a win for the Russians in this case. In FITE ( Europa boardgame) the attack would be something like a 1:2 -1 DRM. A suicide attack that only a truly desperate player would make.

This whole X3 or X4 of attacking CV due to leader rolls is completely borked.




Michael T -> RE: T6 north (1/2/2014 2:20:01 AM)

I think you simply need to understand English a little better.

I am not being critical of you or Sapper. I am being critical of the current state of WITE. I did not say that the particular attack I cited was X3 or X4. I was being critical of the fact that it does happen, which is ludicrous IMO.

You obviously enjoy the game, which is fine. I did too. But right now I wouldn't waste my time with it. If it gets back to a state where I consider it a nice balanced game again I will be very happy to play it again. Which is my aim and the reason for my criticism of it.



Flaviusx -> RE: T6 north (1/2/2014 2:40:18 AM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: carlkay58

The interesting part is that the Axis side can also get their CV to be x3 or x4, but never quite seem to anymore. I have not played WitE since my 'Blitz is On' AAR but it seems that I am not seeing people's combat reports including Axis multipliers like that. Of course most people are only posting the close combats or the ones the Soviets are winning lately.



The Axis gets them, and very frequently, on hasty attacks made by mobile units. But very rarely on deliberate attacks.




rmonical -> RE: T6 north (1/2/2014 3:19:49 AM)

quote:

This whole X3 or X4 of attacking CV due to leader rolls is completely borked.


Has this been toned down in WITW. I completely agree that the wild variation of combat results are not realistic and not fun. OTOH, some lack of predictability is good.

Another thing that bugs me is the defender casualties between a 1.9:1 result and a 2:0 result are too different. I know the idea is that the casualties are the result of a retreat. But in a week long term and 10 mile hexes, a lot of territory changes hands in those 1.9:1 results that is not represented at the game scale.



Walloc -> RE: T6 north (1/2/2014 3:32:49 AM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: Flaviusx


quote:

ORIGINAL: carlkay58

The interesting part is that the Axis side can also get their CV to be x3 or x4, but never quite seem to anymore. I have not played WitE since my 'Blitz is On' AAR but it seems that I am not seeing people's combat reports including Axis multipliers like that. Of course most people are only posting the close combats or the ones the Soviets are winning lately.



The Axis gets them, and very frequently, on hasty attacks made by mobile units. But very rarely on deliberate attacks.




If u go back just one page u can see 2 german attacks doing x3+. Just as a note of reference.
342->1085
153->484
both x3+

One of those even vs urban hex where the modified stug CV should be modifed down, tho a small part of the combined CV.
Yeah u see it lots on russian side as soon as they get to attack but u can get the same if u know how to optimize leader rolls when attacking as german.

Kind regards,

Rasmus



Michael T -> RE: T6 north (1/2/2014 4:30:31 AM)

I am pretty sure you can shift leaders around from HQ to HQ during a turn. So you can use say Model in several parts of the front in the same turn benefiting from his Leadership so long as you have the AP to cover the cost. Same on the Russian side. IMO once a Leader has been used for an attack he should be locked down for the turn. In my last game Kamil and I had a HR to prevent this exploit. I am sure it adds to the overall problem of X3 or X4 CV results. I can live with X2, but more than that is Over The Top IMO.



Wheat -> RE: T6 north (1/2/2014 4:33:27 AM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: Michael T

That last attack that the soviets made shows WITE right now is broken. 6 Soviet ID v 3 German Divisions should be an absolute slaughter of Russian troops. I can't think of any other game I have ever played that would yield a win for the Russians in this case. In FITE ( Europa boardgame) the attack would be something like a 1:2 -1 DRM. A suicide attack that only a truly desperate player would make.

This whole X3 or X4 of attacking CV due to leader rolls is completely borked.


I couldn't agree more Michael T. Up to now, I was fondly saying you have to get a "feel" for what works, as the displayed CV is only approximate. But this just defies all logic. In 1941 NINE Soviet infantry divisions wouldn't have pushed back 3 German divisions, much less 6. I have no problem with successful attacks against lone over extended units, but now, as a GHC player, I feel like without a level 5 fort, I have NO confidence of anything.




Flaviusx -> RE: T6 north (1/2/2014 4:38:59 AM)

Rasmus, I've tested this recently myself and Axis deliberate attacks only rarely exceed 3x initial CV, and do so less frequently than the Soviets. This is across literally hundreds of combats. At the same time Axis hasty attacks do hit 3x relatively often.

This is without teleporting leaders, to be sure.

I'm not sure why this works out the way it does, but there it is.



hfarrish -> RE: T6 north (1/2/2014 5:40:55 AM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: Michael T

I am pretty sure you can shift leaders around from HQ to HQ during a turn. So you can use say Model in several parts of the front in the same turn benefiting from his Leadership so long as you have the AP to cover the cost. Same on the Russian side. IMO once a Leader has been used for an attack he should be locked down for the turn. In my last game Kamil and I had a HR to prevent this exploit. I am sure it adds to the overall problem of X3 or X4 CV results. I can live with X2, but more than that is Over The Top IMO.


If that is actually happening/possible it should be killed immediately. Definition of "exploit."



SigUp -> RE: T6 north (1/2/2014 6:57:43 AM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: Flaviusx

Rasmus, I've tested this recently myself and Axis deliberate attacks only rarely exceed 3x initial CV, and do so less frequently than the Soviets. This is across literally hundreds of combats. At the same time Axis hasty attacks do hit 3x relatively often.

This is without teleporting leaders, to be sure.

I'm not sure why this works out the way it does, but there it is.

Perhaps this has something to do with the Soviets having it easier to bring more elements to bear? Morvael already explained that the combat engine is biased towards the side with more infantry (?) elements.



Gabriel B. -> RE: T6 north (1/2/2014 8:18:02 AM)

Without beaming of commanders you can get some 25 soviet army leaders with infantry combat ratings the same as german corps commanders 6-7 , that is esentially half the force in 1941 .





mktours -> RE: T6 north (1/2/2014 10:45:21 AM)

Michael, I was feeling offended by your comment : “A suicide attack that only a truly desperate player would make.” So I felt I need to defend myself as that is not the case.
Now it seems your comment was that in other games this attack could only be suicide. Maybe my English is very poor, but if the comment is “In FITE ( Europa boardgame) the attack would be something like a 1:2 -1 DRM; a suicide attack that only a truly desperate player would make.” Then I might not misunderstand.
I apologize to you for misunderstood your message.


quote:

ORIGINAL: Michael T

I think you simply need to understand English a little better.

I am not being critical of you or Sapper. I am being critical of the current state of WITE. I did not say that the particular attack I cited was X3 or X4. I was being critical of the fact that it does happen, which is ludicrous IMO.

You obviously enjoy the game, which is fine. I did too. But right now I wouldn't waste my time with it. If it gets back to a state where I consider it a nice balanced game again I will be very happy to play it again. Which is my aim and the reason for my criticism of it.




mktours -> RE: T6 north (1/2/2014 10:54:39 AM)

I share this AAR from good will, now I am feeling a bit disappointing that it becomes a battle field for different opinions which I don't have the time and energy to attend to.
I am wondering what is the purpose of AAR? It seems it could not be as simple as someone sharing his game experience?



Walloc -> RE: T6 north (1/2/2014 11:01:33 AM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: Flaviusx

Rasmus, I've tested this recently myself and Axis deliberate attacks only rarely exceed 3x initial CV, and do so less frequently than the Soviets. This is across literally hundreds of combats. At the same time Axis hasty attacks do hit 3x relatively often.

This is without teleporting leaders, to be sure.

I'm not sure why this works out the way it does, but there it is.


Ok Flav,

Its been a while since i tested any thing in WiTE. I just noted in several of AARs as of lately as this has been mentioned and there in AAR that are stil examples of this happning on the german side.
I have no grounds to quantifying it to when i did my testing of the combat system. Can i ask what terrain u made ur tesrts in i found it to have an effect in my tests years back. Also how many german units do attack with vs russians defending. Number as talkign about below have a lets say wierd effect on mod CV as i found it.

Btw when i talk about optimize i in no way talk about moving leaders around between HQs in turn. I talk about optimizing distances of HQs to optimize teh chances of leader rolls.


Since i been critial and still am of later varations of the combat engine well it cant really come as a supprise that I would welcome change.

About devices yes more deviced is better and inheritly the russians has some advantages espcailly when u get formation that is larger and generaly speaking have more unit to pile on where as german rely on pure CV early on.
That said u can use and is used tho not to the same extend, in cases as german. The inherit problem in the combat engine is its usual to attack from 2 or 3 hexes cuz of the hexagon sytem. Not that u cant see 1 hex attack or more than 3.
The norm is 2 or 3 hexes u can attack from. That inheritly gives u an device advantage if u attacking from 2 or 3 hexes where u u can pile up 9 divs vs 3 divs not counting reserves. That an Automatic advantage in devices that then has to be made up by reserves or other modifiers. once u get to use corps with more devices in well it ofc get all the worse.
As if we look apart from the later corp there isnt a whole lot of difference in the number of devices in a unit, the, u inheritly can have many more devices attacking than u can defending.
One of the cases where u see german using this is attacking urban hexes, across major rivers, the backdoor hex of Leningrad has alwasy been judged to be undefendble if u know how to attack if even if u have top forts and the terrain modifier.

We have seen multiple cases of german side attacking Leningrad/Moscow with head on attack using exactly these mechanismn this to boot out well entrechend troops in Urban hexes for with litteraly a cost in a few 1000s.
Not exactly many cases in game we see of the thinking behind the decision not to attack Leningrad but try and starve it out. Hitler fear and if u look to later examle Stalingrad as the most premier one its actually hard to disagree with him that an aassult on Leningrad would have turned into Stalingrad type slaught fest. As german dont win on attrition or at leased shouldnt there is sense in that decision.
Since u can head on assault urban hexes be it Moscow or Berlin using this with out really losing more than a few 1000s men well that decision making progress is devoid in game.

So ill stipulate the mehcanism is the same they are more rarely used by the german side as they have fewer units, therefor natually few battles of "pilling up unit", on teh other hand when it comes to "critical" battles like taking major urban hexes its the same mechanism used to have near auto succes in those cases.

Kind regards,

Rasmus




gingerbread -> RE: T6 north (1/2/2014 11:09:21 AM)

Since the Soviets are displayed with a lower fraction of potential, they have a higher possible multiplier, with multiplier defined as final divided by initial value.

100 Rifle Squads, be they German or Soviet, have the same potential.



Flaviusx -> RE: T6 north (1/2/2014 11:18:06 AM)

All terrain types. I did not optimize anything. I simply fired up the 42 GC, set the AI to Axis, left the settings at 100/100, and then examined the combat results.

If you try this in the 41 GC, the surprise turn messes up results -- you actually can get a lot of 3x CV deliberate attacks on the first turn. But under ordinary conditions, nope. Whereas the 3x hasty attacks are common enough regardless.

This is perhaps not an entirely fair comparison since I'm taking AI generated Axis combat results and lining those up with what I can do as the Soviet, but even so. There is a clear trend. Maybe an Axis player can find ways to optimize away from that trend, as with multiple reassignments of good leaders.

You don't need to abuse the leadership system at all as the Soviet -- and APs are tighter for the Sovs in the first place. You'll still get a fair number of these high final CV combat given enough bites at the apple and at least mediocre generalship. I'm wondering if putting Zhukov in STAVKA (which I always do) is the secret sauce here.



Walloc -> RE: T6 north (1/2/2014 11:28:58 AM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: Flaviusx

This is perhaps not an entirely fair comparison since I'm taking AI generated Axis combat results and lining those up with what I can do as the Soviet, but even so. There is a clear trend. Maybe an Axis player can find ways to optimize away from that trend, as with multiple reassignments of good leaders.


U can optimize on both sides, but i did find when u optimze on german side it generally wasnt to hard to get to 3-1 modifers. Some rolls ofc alwasy fails. It might be more of a given on the soviet side tho. See Gingers post above.

quote:

ORIGINAL: Flaviusx
You don't need to abuse the leadership system at all as the Soviet -- and APs are tighter for the Sovs in the first place. You'll still get a fair number of these high final CV combat given enough bites at the apple and at least mediocre generalship. I'm wondering if putting Zhukov in STAVKA (which I always do) is the secret sauce here.


Well, u could go where u dont come, wink wink, and look at Morveals leader ratings impacts vs modified CV tests. Might give u part of the answer. U will hafta scroll back a few months to get to em.

Btw i used the 42 scn too as my base for the tests.

Rasmus



Flaviusx -> RE: T6 north (1/2/2014 11:38:02 AM)

I'm going to fire up 44 GC later today and see what the Soviet AI can do without any optimization, as this is the easiest way to generate lots of Soviet combats where they are attacking.



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

Valid CSS!




Forum Software © ASPPlayground.NET Advanced Edition 2.4.5 ANSI
0.84375