RE: Timmyab (Sov) vs 821Bobo (Axis) (Full Version)

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



Message

SigUp -> RE: Timmyab (Sov) vs 821Bobo (Axis) (2/26/2016 8:13:02 AM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: timmyab

I'm not convinced of the all conquering power of +1. It's certainly a threat to players that overextend their spearheads, but that's as it should be. If it was an option I would turn it off for the first 24 turns and 75% of my attacks in this game would still have succeeded. Most of the 25% of +1 offenders in this game were not critical attacks anyway, e.g the two pz corps retreats in the North. Those attacks were not critical, just a bonus for me. Same with the attack against the 17th army bridgehead across the Dniper. Not critical, just helpful. Maybe two critical attacks in this game relied on +1 and would not have been tried without it.
+1 is not a game winning rule. The real offensive power of the Soviet armies (and the Axis too) comes from attacker CV inflation. You can almost guarantee x2 or x3. Defenders usually stay at x1 or a little over.

The attacker CV inflation mostly stems from the fact that the engine is biased to the side with more elements and since the attacker usually brings more elements to bear (especially the Soviets) it leads to those gigantic CV rises. The +1 rule adds to that problem. By my experience you can win the majority of your attacks as the Soviets in a +1 setting at 50% of the German defensive CV. When you face a Soviet player who is aware of this and ready to make the most out of it, it becomes a threat to all German players, not only those that overextend. With the +1 rule all clear terrain hexes are hazardous to German players, forcing you to stack your units two or three divisions high - and even then they are not completely safe.



timmyab -> RE: Timmyab (Sov) vs 821Bobo (Axis) (2/26/2016 1:36:05 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: RKhan

Any turn updates? Please.

Game's over mate, Bobo surrendered. I did mention it in post no.60, but perhaps should have made it clearer.

quote:

ORIGINAL: SigUp
The attacker CV inflation mostly stems from the fact that the engine is biased to the side with more elements and since the attacker usually brings more elements to bear (especially the Soviets) it leads to those gigantic CV rises. The +1 rule adds to that problem. By my experience you can win the majority of your attacks as the Soviets in a +1 setting at 50% of the German defensive CV.


Whatever the cause of the inflation I don't like it. When attacking I try to get 1:1 starting odds and assume x2 attacker CV inflation. With the +1 rule this gave me 100% victories, without +1 it would have been more like 75%.
Initial odds often look lower in the screenies than they did from a CV count. I'm not sure why that is, but from just counting up CVs all my attacks here were very close to 1:1 starting odds or above.
Actually when you look at the turn 14 front line verses history Bobo is doing no worse than the Wehrmacht did. Yes the +1 rule is tough on the Germans but so was the real war, they bit off more than they could chew and got their asses handed to them.
If there had been more infantry supporting 1st PG, instead of 17th army bashing against the lower Dnepr, I think this might have been a different game, with the Donbas industry overrun and everything to play for in 1942.



SigUp -> RE: Timmyab (Sov) vs 821Bobo (Axis) (2/26/2016 2:11:40 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: timmyab

When attacking I try to get 1:1 starting odds and assume x2 attacker CV inflation. With the +1 rule this gave me 100% victories, without +1 it would have been more like 75%.

Herein lies the issue. With the +1 rule you can get like 75% victories at 0.5:1 starting odds. For example any German division in clear terrain, you can move it with - depending on strength - three to six rifle divisions. And in the past some players used this fact to launch mass attacks on German divisions every turn that kept German morale low leading to a snowball effect down the road. It would be one thing if the +1 rule only hurt German players that overextend themselves. However, that's not the case. You can't stack them all two or three high.



timmyab -> RE: Timmyab (Sov) vs 821Bobo (Axis) (2/26/2016 2:38:35 PM)

To be honest I think that mass attacks in 1941 would be a tactical error against a good opponent. Counterattacks should be purposeful and efficient. MPs should mainly be used for retreating or digging. Losing attacks are a particular danger and even 25% would be too many for me.
As I've said here already I'd be happy to forgo +1 in 1941, but that makes the mild blizzard too easy for the Axis and the standard blizzard without +1 is too hard on them, so there's the problem.
My solution would be to make the first winter roughly half way between the two current options and scrap +1 altogether.



RKhan -> RE: Timmyab (Sov) vs 821Bobo (Axis) (2/26/2016 10:58:37 PM)

Thanks timmyab, my bad. I was only reading the turns, not so much the commentary. Surrender seemed a bit premature, but no one should put this much time into a game they are not enjoying.



Page: <<   < prev  1 2 3 [4]

Valid CSS!




Forum Software © ASPPlayground.NET Advanced Edition 2.4.5 ANSI
0.671875