RE: Red Star Ascending Axis (BrianG) VS Soviet (HLYA) All Welcome

RE: Red Star Ascending Axis (BrianG) VS Soviet (HLYA) All Welcome (Full Version)

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

Message

HardLuckYetAgain -> RE: Red Star Ascending Axis (BrianG) VS Soviet (HLYA) All Welcome (3/13/2019 11:11:26 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: M60A3TTS If you are trying to conserve IL-2s by leaving the panzers with their AA compliment to the U-2s, my question is why? The IL2M3 alone will have a total production run of something like thirty thousand. You can't run out of them unless you lose the factories early on. The only thing that you really save are trucks. You noted you want like 140-160 IL-2 regiments. You can in fact go higher than that, but again, it will eat more trucks than a U-2VS. That is the only advantage I can see. And as another option you could use level bombers which don't take as many losses against panzers. It is a numbers game at the moment. That is all there is to it. I have a crazy amount of U-2s and decided to use them. Which hasn't been too bad. Once I have sufficient reserves of Il-2s and the current Il-2's are trained the U-2's will go away. Which will be soon. I am currently running 122 squadrons of Bombers but that will dwindle down over the next few months as more Il-2 squadrons come online. But yes 160 was my goal for 42 but will be way more than that. My Il-2s factories are finally almost full production.

56ajax -> RE: Red Star Ascending Axis (BrianG) VS Soviet (HLYA) All Welcome (3/14/2019 1:42:54 AM)
Hyla, I enjoy reading your AARs very much. I think it was you that mentioned a work around for the Soviets slow experience gain, which would be detailed in and AAR??? Please?

Dinglir -> RE: Red Star Ascending Axis (BrianG) VS Soviet (HLYA) All Welcome (3/14/2019 6:59:30 AM)
I have made the decision to not post much on your AAR, as I have been giving out a few thoughts on BrianG's version. I don't want to come across as an armchair general who reads one AAR in order to move to the other to give some "insights", and then return to the first one. That being said, I have had much the same thoughts on stopping to write my AAR's. I began writing AAR's in the hope that they could spark some discussions on the game, and that I could actually learn something from this. Instead it seems I often post four AAR's or more in a row with no meaningfull feedback. There are no questions forcing me to look at my strategy from another perspective, there are no comments presenting me with a perspective other than my own and there is generally no comments at all. All in all, I probably spend an hour or two on every AAR and learn absolutely nothing in return. IT is a very valid question to ask if it is simply not just a waste of time to write them. quote: ORIGINAL: HardLuckYetAgain 1st, actually it is ALL hexes are stacked 3 high in Leningrad. With all the hexes in and around Leningrad filled with units any attack by the Germans would route the Soviet unit to the east instead of into Leningrad proper. Thus freeing them from the pot if you will. Any unit hungry German would not want to attack to lose a "juicy" morsel ;-) Since I had the front line stacked with large defense values and after Brians first attack sending the first set of 3 units far to the east it looks like he made the decision to cut off Leningrad proper. He wanted to force surrender all the units I guess. If he pursued a direct frontal assault all of those Guard units and units in general would 100% route to the east. So I set it up to go either way. With few towns in the north those units route way to the East on to a rail hex normally. Once they rally they are ready to go south Not sure I like this approach. Retreat casualties are increased for routing over long distances, and losing 50% of two divisions is pretty much the same as losing one whole division in my view. What sort of rout losses do you take in the north? Yes, I relaize that the remains will fill up faster and train back to combat level quicker when the unit is retained, but you do have two units to retrain rather than one, so the total amount of time lost might not be very different. quote: ORIGINAL: HardLuckYetAgain 2nd, Many of those units in the rear were brigades set at 70% and division set at 20% TOE along with some AT Brigades set at 20%. If Brian wanted to cut off the ports these units can do one of two things. They can be ported out quickly being under 300 capacity OR they can be used to bring a front line division back up to full strength. Matter fact all units that are killed I use as replacement brigades/Divisions to my other Divisions on the map. It is a nifty replacement system once set up correctly. Many of these 20% TOE replacement divisions are nearing 40 experience so not much of an experience hit either :) This replacement system is an excellent way to keep an offense going. You really only have to worry about the fatigue since you replace back to full every turn. I now have division at 20%, 30%, and 40% TOE in key areas of attacks. I do the same thing for my Armor Corps. Every Turn they are full strength. Not to mention this is how you can get your Armor Corps high in Experience pretty quickly. Yes, when you convert 3 armor brigades into an Armor Corps your experience goes through the floor. Now if you take the corps and add in your top experienced armor brigades you start to quickly bring that experience up. I guess I should stop giving out too much information :( Smart. I haven't thought of that. It does seem rather "gamey" however. Merging formations like this should certainly spend all MP on the merged divisions and require that no MP was spent prior to the merging. The Germans were able to form Kampfgruppen at a moments notice, but not the Soviets. As for giving out information, you and I seem to look at this game from two different perspectives. If all you want t do is to win, by all means hoard your tips and tricks and use them over and over again. If you want to improve your own gameplay, share your insights and seek out the challenge of having to continously improve to stayy on top. quote: ORIGINAL: HardLuckYetAgain 3rd, There was an opportunity to use the 6 Cav Corps to try and do an offense towards Finland. Finlands border with Leningrad was only guarded by Regiments. Instead I decided to use them just to cause loses to the Germans. I have pretty much shunned attacking any other nationality besides the Germans until turn 53. (I should have tried Finland, that would have been interesting to say the least. But kind of defeated my purpose of inflicting loses on Germans) Bear in mind that once Leningrad falls the Finns will be out of the POW camp and back in the game. If nothing else, they can replace German units on the northernmost stretch of the front and thus help strengthening the Wehrmacht. With the risk of losing Leningrad, I believe you have to reevaluate the strategic importance of the Finns. Same thing with the other Axis Minors. I tend not to seperate them to much from the Germans, as they can raplace German units on the frontline. The better shape they are in, the better a job they can do. Incidentally, what are your current success criteria for this game?

HardLuckYetAgain -> RE: Red Star Ascending Axis (BrianG) VS Soviet (HLYA) All Welcome (3/14/2019 11:41:08 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Dinglir As for giving out information, you and I seem to look at this game from two different perspectives. If all you want t do is to win, by all means hoard your tips and tricks and use them over and over again. If you want to improve your own gameplay, share your insights and seek out the challenge of having to continously improve to stayy on top. Before I head out to work I wanted to touch base on just this little snippet. I believe we are on the same page. I know that I have given to this community more information or tricks or just brought to the forefront many items. 1. The air campaign is important part of the game. Up to the time I started posting the wisdom was that Air was not necessary to win the game 2. Super Lvov pocket mainstreamed. I did not invent it, but I perfected it. 3. Being able to take Moscow consistently (and Leningrad by default) Before the conventional wisdom was Moscow could be defended. I was ridiculed by Pelton and Michael T as a pipe dream move) 4. Retreat priorities 5. The effects of fatigue 6. AA is not static and is a movable object 7. Opening defense Strat towards Leningrad for the Soviets 8. Destruction of the German Air arm as a strat By all means this is not an exhaustive list, I am just out of time to post and need to drive to work. What I am trying to say is that I have helped more than you have realized. Just too many tips at once is a bad thing. If I wanted to keep them to my self I would have never posted any at all.

EwaldvonKleist -> RE: Red Star Ascending Axis (BrianG) VS Soviet (HLYA) All Welcome (3/14/2019 12:44:14 PM)
I believe some of the points can be challenged. Note I do not want to imply ill will on your side as there are very many war in the East posts on the internet. I have read many old WitE posts (more than I am proud of) so I think I will chime in. quote: Before I head out to work I wanted to touch base on just this little snippet. I believe we are on the same page. I know that I have given to this community more information or tricks or just brought to the forefront many items. 1. The air campaign is important part of the game. Up to the time I started posting the wisdom was that Air was not necessary to win the game 2. Super Lvov pocket mainstreamed. I did not invent it, but I perfected it. 3. Being able to take Moscow consistently (and Leningrad by default) Before the conventional wisdom was Moscow could be defended. I was ridiculed by Pelton and Michael T as a pipe dream move) 4. Retreat priorities 5. The effects of fatigue 6. AA is not static and is a movable object 7. Opening defense Strat towards Leningrad for the Soviets 8. Destruction of the German Air arm as a strat By all means this is not an exhaustive list, I am just out of time to post and need to drive to work. What I am trying to say is that I have helped more than you have realized. Just too many tips at once is a bad thing. If I wanted to keep them to my self I would have never posted any at all. 1. When was this considered to be the case? Just one example of many: http://www.matrixgames.com/forums/fb.asp?m=4138183 or even older in chaos45 AAR: http://www.matrixgames.com/forums/tm.asp?m=3871507&mpage=4&key= 2. You were the first Super Lvov player to draw entire 2nd PG South. Makes super Lvov less messy, but you need to sacrify some results in the centre. Not a reply to you as it was not your point but still interesting, I earliest super Lvov I know is from MichaelT, although I think there was not yet the movement penalty to regiments in June 1941: http://www.matrixgames.com/forums/tm.asp?m=3075748 3. I am surprised MichaelT said this as in the AARs one can see both use of PG 4 for the T3-5 offensive in the center and more weigh on Moscow than for example in Peltons AARs. Of course I do not know every post, though "ridiculed" is a pretty strong word. 4. True I think, but only if you exclude German wargamer forums, but of course it is a bit unfair to count them as only a small minority speaks German. 5. Agree, important thing I learned from your posts. 6. How do you mean this? When you mean that AA can and should be moved around according to needs and used consistently, I think it is/was standard procedure for people who like to use their support units actively. 7. I disagree on the strategy part. Runaway defence and hard defence of Leningrad early on I recall was also something Flavius tried out. Your original content of course is the tactical deployment as described in your AAR. 8. Definitely not. For example, this post: http://www.matrixgames.com/forums/fb.asp?m=3487196 A thing you did not list is drowning the Axis fighters in ground support escort missions and using the magical training effect of ground support escort/fight for the fighter experience, which I learned from you. Edit: And the rail plan, double teaming is old but you squeezed out a bit more than people before. That should not distract from the fact that I have huge respect for your WitE skills, only the list is not correct in the form. It is unfortunate you never faced MichaelT, I would love to see the AAR and am not sure how to place my bets. But it was not to be :-( Regarding keeping secrets or not, I think there is nothing wrong with not posting your findings regarding the game machine unless they are outright exploits which should be posted/emailed for morvael to fix, although it is not my way, but I find both ok.

HardLuckYetAgain -> RE: Red Star Ascending Axis (BrianG) VS Soviet (HLYA) All Welcome (3/14/2019 2:01:26 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: EwaldvonKleist I believe some of the points can be challenged. Note I do not want to imply ill will on your side as there are very many war in the East posts on the internet. I have read many old WitE posts (more than I am proud of) so I think I will chime in. quote: Before I head out to work I wanted to touch base on just this little snippet. I believe we are on the same page. I know that I have given to this community more information or tricks or just brought to the forefront many items. 1. The air campaign is important part of the game. Up to the time I started posting the wisdom was that Air was not necessary to win the game 2. Super Lvov pocket mainstreamed. I did not invent it, but I perfected it. 3. Being able to take Moscow consistently (and Leningrad by default) Before the conventional wisdom was Moscow could be defended. I was ridiculed by Pelton and Michael T as a pipe dream move) 4. Retreat priorities 5. The effects of fatigue 6. AA is not static and is a movable object 7. Opening defense Strat towards Leningrad for the Soviets 8. Destruction of the German Air arm as a strat By all means this is not an exhaustive list, I am just out of time to post and need to drive to work. What I am trying to say is that I have helped more than you have realized. Just too many tips at once is a bad thing. If I wanted to keep them to my self I would have never posted any at all. 1. When was this considered to be the case? Just one example of many: http://www.matrixgames.com/forums/fb.asp?m=4138183 or even older in chaos45 AAR: http://www.matrixgames.com/forums/tm.asp?m=3871507&mpage=4&key= 2. You were the first Super Lvov player to draw entire 2nd PG South. Makes super Lvov less messy, but you need to sacrify some results in the centre. Not a reply to you as it was not your point but still interesting, I earliest super Lvov I know is from MichaelT, although I think there was not yet the movement penalty to regiments in June 1941: http://www.matrixgames.com/forums/tm.asp?m=3075748 3. I am surprised MichaelT said this as in the AARs one can see both use of PG 4 for the T3-5 offensive in the center and more weigh on Moscow than for example in Peltons AARs. Of course I do not know every post, though "ridiculed" is a pretty strong word. 4. True I think, but only if you exclude German wargamer forums, but of course it is a bit unfair to count them as only a small minority speaks German. 5. Agree, important thing I learned from your posts. 6. How do you mean this? When you mean that AA can and should be moved around according to needs and used consistently, I think it is/was standard procedure for people who like to use their support units actively. 7. I disagree on the strategy part. Runaway defence and hard defence of Leningrad early on I recall was also something Flavius tried out. Your original content of course is the tactical deployment as described in your AAR. 8. Definitely not. For example, this post: http://www.matrixgames.com/forums/fb.asp?m=3487196 A thing you did not list is drowning the Axis fighters in ground support escort missions and using the magical training effect of ground support escort/fight for the fighter experience, which I learned from you. Edit: And the rail plan, double teaming is old but you squeezed out a bit more than people before. That should not distract from the fact that I have huge respect for your WitE skills, only the list is not correct in the form. It is unfortunate you never faced MichaelT, I would love to see the AAR and am not sure how to place my bets. But it was not to be :-( Regarding keeping secrets or not, I think there is nothing wrong with not posting your findings regarding the game machine unless they are outright exploits which should be posted/emailed for morvael to fix, although it is not my way, but I find both ok. quote: I know that I have given to this community more information or tricks or just brought to the forefront many items I iterate my sentence again which is, "I know that I have given to this community more information or tricks or just brought to the forefront many items". I emphasis the bolded items and whoever came up with them has the credit. I have "never" claimed ownership of anything since everything on this forum is an exchange of ideas. Which is my whole point to Dinglir that I have given freely my take on either items I have come up with or further exhortation of existing thought. 1. The main stream promotor back then was Pelton on how to handle the German airforce is what I was referencing. But wasn't descriptive enough on what I meant. I know I on more than a few occasions said to not follow that advice for the German Air force. Giving Soviets free victories is not the thing to do. 2. Yes Michael is an excellent player and innovative. Too bad I didn't start posting back then. (what most don't know, I am guessing here they don't, is that on turn 2 the frozen PZ/Moto that were frozen turn one in the South moved to the center. Which gives it almost a wash in units. So not as much sacrifice in my opinion) 3. Maybe you are correct that ridicule is a harsh word. I should say "dismissive" instead. Thank you 6. Meaning that AA had a range not just the hex that it was in for fire effects of aircraft flying over. I brought this out in one of my AAR's and later Telemecus and M60 delved a great deal deeper into this giving the forum great information. 7. Good to disagree. Again I have never claim ownership of anything. Flavius, I believe mentioned it in one AAR but never tried it(I could be wrong but that is my recall) I put it into practice. (Sort of what you did with "Do you want total War?" AAR :-) 8. Again, I am not claiming ownership. Although I don't see full details in this game of an Air strat :( Granted it has been awhile since I read this post and only skimmed it now. But I should have said German Fighter Arm which I realized my mistake after getting in the car but not going to text and drive at the same time to put "fighter" in. If I had that would get your next sentence after number 8 to be semi correct in my number 8 ;-P (if that makes sense) Now having said this I think a GREAT promoter of ideas(either original or rehash of old ideas) has been "Telemecus". We may not see "eye-to-eye" on everything and we have our disagreements but I applaud him for that.

Telemecus -> RE: Red Star Ascending Axis (BrianG) VS Soviet (HLYA) All Welcome (3/14/2019 3:13:20 PM)
Being British I am of course as adamant that Isaac Newton was THE inventor of calculus as my German friends are adamant that Gottfried Leibniz was. Wikipedia says they both invented it independently - but who would want to trust that ramshackle site! I think the reality though is nobody really can claim to have invented it. The time was ripe that it would have been invented then by somebody. It has so many intermediate baby steps, that so many people can claim to have invented, that there could not really be one person claiming to have invented it whole. And what was in the minds of Newton and Leibniz had been formed by the journals and academic letter writing of the time. Truly no one individual can claim to be an inventor - it was the result of society (Yes Maggie!) My experience with WitE is pretty much the same - questions about which individual can claim credit for inventing something are not even wrong or right, they are just meaningless. There are clear trends in thinking that have gone with this game that I have seen ebb and flow, both in this site, in a wargaming club I am a member of and from what others say in other places too. Whether it is the air war, or logistics, or other areas, you can see clear examples of groups thinking together - as well as the developers reacting to it and changing the game as a result. However I think individuals can claim credit for providing the energy to the intellectual endeavour. Whether it is just asking the right questions, creating the hypotheses or testing them, bringing to the attention hitherto unnoticed curiosities or accumulating data. Even if it is just provoking others to innovate that is just as valuable a contribution. And in that total sense of intellectual labour and inspiration HardLuckYetAgain has been one of the foremost contributors to this game in recent times which is why it would be a travesty for their contributions to end. As a less experienced player I was certainly hungry for the tips and tricks you can find in AARs such as HardLuckYetAgain's. I know new players now are even hungrier for that still. In recent times my only interest has been the intellectual curiosity of the game. I think disagreements is the wrong word for that, it is a debate that should be celebrated and promoted.

Dinglir -> RE: Red Star Ascending Axis (BrianG) VS Soviet (HLYA) All Welcome (3/14/2019 5:22:51 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: HardLuckYetAgain Before I head out to work I wanted to touch base on just this little snippet. I believe we are on the same page. I know that I have given to this community more information or tricks or just brought to the forefront many items. Fair enough. I stand corrected. I must have misread your comment and put a meaning into it htat simply was not intended.

EwaldvonKleist -> RE: Red Star Ascending Axis (BrianG) VS Soviet (HLYA) All Welcome (3/14/2019 5:50:42 PM)
With the highlighting its fair enough :D And it was of course Leibniz.

M60A3TTS -> RE: Red Star Ascending Axis (BrianG) VS Soviet (HLYA) All Welcome (3/14/2019 6:59:28 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: HardLuckYetAgain quote: ORIGINAL: M60A3TTS quote: ORIGINAL: EwaldvonKleist Glad you have joined the U2VS fan club. [image]https://cdn.discordapp.com/attachments/368039257824034816/489010763315281920/unknown.png[/image] Regards EvK You may consider yourself under arrest, Comrade General Armii. You were going to a position in the Far East, but now it's a show trial and twenty years hard labor at a rehabilitation camp. I know I know, I am guilty. Take me away please. I was actually referring to EvK.

MattFL -> RE: Red Star Ascending Axis (BrianG) VS Soviet (HLYA) All Welcome (3/14/2019 8:16:57 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: HardLuckYetAgain 3. Being able to take Moscow consistently (and Leningrad by default) Before the conventional wisdom was Moscow could be defended. I was ridiculed by Pelton and Michael T as a pipe dream move) I'm not sure I agree with this or, rather, that it needs to be put in correct context. I can't say which version you were playing or when you had this conversation, but during the time I was playing around 2014/2015 (around the same time that I know Pelton for one had this view) with versions 1.07 and before, what Pelton and Michael T were saying was absolutely 100% true. Given a competent SHC play, it was nearly impossible for the Germans to take both Lenningrad and Moscow. Rather, the Soviets could pretty much decide between the North (Len) Center, and South that they weren't going to let the Germans drive there and they could stop them. So if the Russians decided they wanted to hold Lenningrad or Moscow, they could, but often at the expense of the other. From what I've been reading under more current versions of the game, taking both happens far more than it should or did previously.

HardLuckYetAgain -> RE: Red Star Ascending Axis (BrianG) VS Soviet (HLYA) All Welcome (3/19/2019 9:49:21 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Dinglir I have made the decision to not post much on your AAR, as I have been giving out a few thoughts on BrianG's version. I don't want to come across as an armchair general who reads one AAR in order to move to the other to give some "insights", and then return to the first one. That being said, I have had much the same thoughts on stopping to write my AAR's. I can understand that. But BrianG can read this AAR too so no problem either way if you like to comment or not. Always appreciated your comments especially the deep analysis you do . Our debate on U-2s have me using them until 42 at the moment (even though now I am converting over to FB instead of U-2's, yes I am changing again with my thinking) quote: ORIGINAL: Dinglir I began writing AAR's in the hope that they could spark some discussions on the game, and that I could actually learn something from this. Instead it seems I often post four AAR's or more in a row with no meaningfull feedback. There are no questions forcing me to look at my strategy from another perspective, there are no comments presenting me with a perspective other than my own and there is generally no comments at all. All in all, I probably spend an hour or two on every AAR and learn absolutely nothing in return. IT is a very valid question to ask if it is simply not just a waste of time to write them. I know your AAR's are very detailed and very good and we are on the same page about interaction on the AAR's. quote: ORIGINAL: Dinglir quote: ORIGINAL: HardLuckYetAgain 1st, actually it is ALL hexes are stacked 3 high in Leningrad. With all the hexes in and around Leningrad filled with units any attack by the Germans would route the Soviet unit to the east instead of into Leningrad proper. Thus freeing them from the pot if you will. Any unit hungry German would not want to attack to lose a "juicy" morsel ;-) Since I had the front line stacked with large defense values and after Brians first attack sending the first set of 3 units far to the east it looks like he made the decision to cut off Leningrad proper. He wanted to force surrender all the units I guess. If he pursued a direct frontal assault all of those Guard units and units in general would 100% route to the east. So I set it up to go either way. With few towns in the north those units route way to the East on to a rail hex normally. Once they rally they are ready to go south Not sure I like this approach. Retreat casualties are increased for routing over long distances, and losing 50% of two divisions is pretty much the same as losing one whole division in my view. What sort of rout losses do you take in the north? Yes, I relaize that the remains will fill up faster and train back to combat level quicker when the unit is retained, but you do have two units to retrain rather than one, so the total amount of time lost might not be very different. It was just a way to not have the unit "surrender" if BrianG went directly for Leningrad. The loses to me at this point in the War I don't pay much attention to Soviet loses since I am just looking for "time". quote: ORIGINAL: Dinglir quote: ORIGINAL: HardLuckYetAgain 2nd, Many of those units in the rear were brigades set at 70% and division set at 20% TOE along with some AT Brigades set at 20%. If Brian wanted to cut off the ports these units can do one of two things. They can be ported out quickly being under 300 capacity OR they can be used to bring a front line division back up to full strength. Matter fact all units that are killed I use as replacement brigades/Divisions to my other Divisions on the map. It is a nifty replacement system once set up correctly. Many of these 20% TOE replacement divisions are nearing 40 experience so not much of an experience hit either :) This replacement system is an excellent way to keep an offense going. You really only have to worry about the fatigue since you replace back to full every turn. I now have division at 20%, 30%, and 40% TOE in key areas of attacks. I do the same thing for my Armor Corps. Every Turn they are full strength. Not to mention this is how you can get your Armor Corps high in Experience pretty quickly. Yes, when you convert 3 armor brigades into an Armor Corps your experience goes through the floor. Now if you take the corps and add in your top experienced armor brigades you start to quickly bring that experience up. I guess I should stop giving out too much information :( Smart. I haven't thought of that. It does seem rather "gamey" however. Merging formations like this should certainly spend all MP on the merged divisions and require that no MP was spent prior to the merging. The Germans were able to form Kampfgruppen at a moments notice, but not the Soviets. Some would consider it "gamey" for sure. Personally just looking to try and get ahead of the powerful German Army any way I can. It has always been in the game for the Soviets(and Germans if they want to) do this. Just the recent patch gave the unit back as a reinforcement where before it did not. quote: ORIGINAL: Dinglir quote: ORIGINAL: HardLuckYetAgain 3rd, There was an opportunity to use the 6 Cav Corps to try and do an offense towards Finland. Finlands border with Leningrad was only guarded by Regiments. Instead I decided to use them just to cause loses to the Germans. I have pretty much shunned attacking any other nationality besides the Germans until turn 53. (I should have tried Finland, that would have been interesting to say the least. But kind of defeated my purpose of inflicting loses on Germans) Bear in mind that once Leningrad falls the Finns will be out of the POW camp and back in the game. If nothing else, they can replace German units on the northernmost stretch of the front and thus help strengthening the Wehrmacht. With the risk of losing Leningrad, I believe you have to reevaluate the strategic importance of the Finns. Same thing with the other Axis Minors. I tend not to seperate them to much from the Germans, as they can raplace German units on the frontline. The better shape they are in, the better a job they can do. Incidentally, what are your current success criteria for this game? I have no intention of staying close to the Finns for very long. Yes, I am suggesting what you may be thinking already. There is no need for me to take extra losses to the Finns when I can stay away from them. All this changes a bit if German PZ's stay up in this area but as of the 1st week of July German PZ's are still here. My current success criteria for this game in 1942 is to constantly make the Germans react to my thrusts instead of me, as the Soviet, reacting to German thrust. If I can control this game of "cat and mouse" like this until the end of 42 I should easily be pushing hard in mid 43 onwards. Currently the PZ's in the south there are a few in the 6-8 CV range after reacting to my recent thrust there. yes the Germans surrounded units in the south but I was able to cut the rail line on multiple hexes & stop the German offensive towards Stalingrad, our Supreme leaders City!!!! A city the Germans WILL NOT get close to. Or some heads are going to roll ;-P (The surrounded units were only mostly junk CAV units)

HardLuckYetAgain -> RE: Red Star Ascending Axis (BrianG) VS Soviet (HLYA) All Welcome (3/19/2019 9:50:42 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: 56ajax Hyla, I enjoy reading your AARs very much. I think it was you that mentioned a work around for the Soviets slow experience gain, which would be detailed in and AAR??? Please? I semi outlined a bit of this already. Granted it does not work to well in the early stages of the war but pays dividends going into 42 for sure :)

HardLuckYetAgain -> RE: Red Star Ascending Axis (BrianG) VS Soviet (HLYA) All Welcome (3/19/2019 9:51:23 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: M60A3TTS quote: ORIGINAL: HardLuckYetAgain quote: ORIGINAL: M60A3TTS quote: ORIGINAL: EwaldvonKleist Glad you have joined the U2VS fan club. [image]https://cdn.discordapp.com/attachments/368039257824034816/489010763315281920/unknown.png[/image] Regards EvK You may consider yourself under arrest, Comrade General Armii. You were going to a position in the Far East, but now it's a show trial and twenty years hard labor at a rehabilitation camp. I know I know, I am guilty. Take me away please. I was actually referring to EvK. GAWD, I sux at reading and writing comprehension :-(�..

HardLuckYetAgain -> RE: Red Star Ascending Axis (BrianG) VS Soviet (HLYA) All Welcome (3/19/2019 10:05:14 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: MattFL quote: ORIGINAL: HardLuckYetAgain 3. Being able to take Moscow consistently (and Leningrad by default) Before the conventional wisdom was Moscow could be defended. I was ridiculed by Pelton and Michael T as a pipe dream move) I'm not sure I agree with this or, rather, that it needs to be put in correct context. I can't say which version you were playing or when you had this conversation, but during the time I was playing around 2014/2015 (around the same time that I know Pelton for one had this view) with versions 1.07 and before, what Pelton and Michael T were saying was absolutely 100% true. Given a competent SHC play, it was nearly impossible for the Germans to take both Lenningrad and Moscow. Rather, the Soviets could pretty much decide between the North (Len) Center, and South that they weren't going to let the Germans drive there and they could stop them. So if the Russians decided they wanted to hold Lenningrad or Moscow, they could, but often at the expense of the other. From what I've been reading under more current versions of the game, taking both happens far more than it should or did previously. It is good to disagree :) I have been playing since WITE released(Fire in the East & Scorched Earth board games before that). Granted I never posted on the forums even under my old alias's. But I can say emphatically that both cities could be taken even in most patches before 1.08 where the workings were even more Pro German with the supply system and the air drops. The only rule inhibiting this was the +1 Soviet attack which would require just a bit of different play style to accomplish. There is nothing wrong with their view(Pelton/MT). I just never catered to it since much of what Pelton was stressing back then was Souths industry. It is a good strategy, just not mine. To me it has always been about "manpower". Without men there is no one to man the items the factories make.

MattFL -> RE: Red Star Ascending Axis (BrianG) VS Soviet (HLYA) All Welcome (3/20/2019 2:24:45 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: HardLuckYetAgain I have been playing since WITE released(Fire in the East & Scorched Earth board games before that). Granted I never posted on the forums even under my old alias's. But I can say emphatically that both cities could be taken even in most patches before 1.08 where the workings were even more Pro German with the supply system and the air drops. The only rule inhibiting this was the +1 Soviet attack which would require just a bit of different play style to accomplish. There is nothing wrong with their view(Pelton/MT). I just never catered to it since much of what Pelton was stressing back then was Souths industry. It is a good strategy, just not mine. To me it has always been about "manpower". Without men there is no one to man the items the factories make. Ahh, Scorched Earth. You truly are a masochist. For my east front boardgames, I tended to stick with lighter fare such as AH's Russian Front and before that The Russian Campaign. Would be interesting to try playing those on Vassal now so the cat can't destroy 2 months playing...... I miss boardgames. Now the only ones I play (and I haven't for a few years now) are Advanced Squad Leader and for a break the Line of Battle Series of ACW games on vassal. ASL is my first love, but I get too addicted to it at the expense of just about everything and need to quit every several years for a few years.

HardLuckYetAgain -> RE: Red Star Ascending Axis (BrianG) VS Soviet (HLYA) All Welcome (3/20/2019 2:53:45 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: MattFL quote: ORIGINAL: HardLuckYetAgain I have been playing since WITE released(Fire in the East & Scorched Earth board games before that). Granted I never posted on the forums even under my old alias's. But I can say emphatically that both cities could be taken even in most patches before 1.08 where the workings were even more Pro German with the supply system and the air drops. The only rule inhibiting this was the +1 Soviet attack which would require just a bit of different play style to accomplish. There is nothing wrong with their view(Pelton/MT). I just never catered to it since much of what Pelton was stressing back then was Souths industry. It is a good strategy, just not mine. To me it has always been about "manpower". Without men there is no one to man the items the factories make. Ahh, Scorched Earth. You truly are a masochist. For my east front boardgames, I tended to stick with lighter fare such as AH's Russian Front and before that The Russian Campaign. Would be interesting to try playing those on Vassal now so the cat can't destroy 2 months playing...... I miss boardgames. Now the only ones I play (and I haven't for a few years now) are Advanced Squad Leader and for a break the Line of Battle Series of ACW games on vassal. ASL is my first love, but I get too addicted to it at the expense of just about everything and need to quit every several years for a few years. Loved AH games too. Wore the counters out on my �The Russian Campaign� game. In the end I had 3 copies with two of those copies with badly worn out counters ;-) (now where did I put my 3rd Stuka counter!!!!!). Absolutely loved Squad leader (original) and made the transition to Advanced Squad leader with its encyclopidea size rule book ;-P. Had many many many fun hours playing people those games in the US Marine Corps. Ok lets Prep fire, advancing fire, defensive fire.... gawd the memories. But still my two favorite has been AH Longest Day and Fire In the East/Scorched Earth. Something about monster games makes me all excited ;-). But I am with you I miss the board games but not looking for counters or setting up the game ;-). Thank you for the memory lane rememberance.

MattFL -> RE: Red Star Ascending Axis (BrianG) VS Soviet (HLYA) All Welcome (3/20/2019 3:31:50 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: HardLuckYetAgain Loved AH games too. Wore the counters out on my �The Russian Campaign� game. In the end I had 3 copies with two of those copies with badly worn out counters ;-) (now where did I put my 3rd Stuka counter!!!!!). Absolutely loved Squad leader (original) and made the transition to Advanced Squad leader with its encyclopidea size rule book ;-P. Had many many many fun hours playing people those games in the US Marine Corps. Ok lets Prep fire, advancing fire, defensive fire.... gawd the memories. But still my two favorite has been AH Longest Day and Fire In the East/Scorched Earth. Something about monster games makes me all excited ;-). So funny, I was so close to saying in my original post "I bet you liked The Longest Day too." [:D] Nuts man, too many counters and too small a dining room table (though I did play Wellington's Victory quite a bit). I failed to mention in my first post that I don't actually play the paper and counter boardgames for years now, I only play them on Vassal (www.vassalengine.org). If you haven't seen it, you should check it out. Best of both worlds - you get to have the total experience of playing those games (including Longest Day/Fire in the East), but all the setups are 100% done already, all of the counters neatly organized, and you can find opponents all over the world without leaving your desk. The experiences with these games are of course what draws folks like us to WiTE and what allows, at least me, to be relatively competitive despite not knowing so much about what goes on under the hood or maximizing other nuances. You have the gaming experience and a far greater understanding of the WiTE engine/nuances which makes you dangerous indeed...........

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

Forum Software © ASPPlayground.NET Advanced Edition 2.4.5 ANSI

1.218018