RE: Do you want total war? An AAR-Guide f or Axis players (Full Version)

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



Message

HardLuckYetAgain -> RE: Do you want total war? An AAR-Guide f or Axis players (3/20/2019 5:05:19 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: EwaldvonKleist

@HLYA: We do not need to discuss if it is nice to have the unit in the blue circle encircled on T1 and the one in the red box hugged tightly. No debate necessary and I would gladly take this if it is for free. But it is not and the question always comes down to if it is worth the cost to the Centre/Northern Centre.






This is a "GUIDE" per your title. I have an opposing view to what you did in the South and I provided it here in your "Guide" for the south. Those that are using this guide should understand this.

As for going down the "Rabbit hole" on the different units has gotten a bit out of hand. You took what I came up for the Super Lvov pocket (along with other people having similar thoughts)on the super Lvov pocket and posted an updated addendum of your take. That is GREAT! You did an excellent job. That is what this game is about helping others. But now I am getting the impression you are making this into a battle You (Evk) versus Me (HLYA) way of doing something. It should not be. Let people decide what they want to do. Hell, I would rather players come up with their own addendum to this and beat both of our ways. I personally am not defending my ways as the "right" or "only" way. I implore people to experiment and do better than me and anyone else that is out there. I am pretty sure I said this many times in my AAR's. Again there is no wrong or right way & with a few adjustments in the North and Center I can pretty much do what you did in the North and Center and still do what I did in the South locking down units.

BTW, you first said "Center" for unit difference between our games ;-) But as for your numbers of 8 blue units, one orange unit, one light blue unit, and 4 green units is "not correct" at all as the difference between our games. We can debate this all day and night but this is detracting from what people should be getting from the guide. I will leave that lie and let people come up with their own better ways since this IS NOT about "You" versus "ME" but about others bettering themselves in WITE from our experiences given in Guides and AAR's :)




EwaldvonKleist -> RE: Do you want total war? An AAR-Guide f or Axis players (3/20/2019 5:27:05 PM)

quote:

This is a "GUIDE" per your title. I have an opposing view to what you did in the South and I provided it here in your "Guide" for the south. Those that are using this guide should understand this.

As for going down the "Rabbit hole" on the different units has gotten a bit out of hand. You took what I came up for the Super Lvov pocket (along with other people having similar thoughts)on the super Lvov pocket and posted an updated addendum of your take. That is GREAT! You did an excellent job. That is what this game is about helping others. But now I am getting the impression you are making this into a battle You (Evk) versus Me (HLYA) way of doing something. It should not be. Let people decide what they want to do. Hell, I would rather players come up with their own addendum to this and beat both of our ways. I personally am not defending my ways as the "right" or "only" way. I implore people to experiment and do better than me and anyone else that is out there. I am pretty sure I said this many times in my AAR's. Again there is no wrong or right way & with a few adjustments in the North and Center I can pretty much do what you did in the North and Center and still do what I did in the South locking down units.

BTW, you first said "Center" for unit difference between our games ;-) But as for your numbers of 8 blue units, one orange unit, one light blue unit, and 4 green units is "not correct" at all as the difference between our games. We can debate this all day and night but this is detracting from what people should be getting from the guide. I will leave that lie and let people come up with their own better ways since this IS NOT about "You" versus "ME" but about others bettering themselves in WITE from our experiences given in Guides and AAR's :)


All I do is opening and game analysis. It is something completely natural to do, it happens for chess and other games too. It includes saying things like player XYZ's approach has advantages here and ZYX's approach there.
You criticised certain aspects of my opening and I replied with a detailed post to that to outline pro and cons of the two approaches. The post contains praise and criticism of aspects of both openings. The forum is full of such back and forth discussions and I personally have learned much from those discourses. Sometimes they are even more useful than textbook style treatises.

The names for both openings (opening HLYA, opening EvK) are completely arbitrary, I chose some which easily indicate which one is is meant. Replace them with plan Red and plan Blue if necessary.
If you think certain formulations are aggressive or offensive I am grateful for hints to avoid that in the future, I am not overly experienced in English.

It has always been my intention to help people and learn from their feedback with the AAR-Guide. The last line in my reply explicitly asks people to share their ideas for improvements. I never claimed to have invented a final or perfect opening.



HardLuckYetAgain -> RE: Do you want total war? An AAR-Guide f or Axis players (3/20/2019 5:34:40 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: EwaldvonKleist

quote:

This is a "GUIDE" per your title. I have an opposing view to what you did in the South and I provided it here in your "Guide" for the south. Those that are using this guide should understand this.

As for going down the "Rabbit hole" on the different units has gotten a bit out of hand. You took what I came up for the Super Lvov pocket (along with other people having similar thoughts)on the super Lvov pocket and posted an updated addendum of your take. That is GREAT! You did an excellent job. That is what this game is about helping others. But now I am getting the impression you are making this into a battle You (Evk) versus Me (HLYA) way of doing something. It should not be. Let people decide what they want to do. Hell, I would rather players come up with their own addendum to this and beat both of our ways. I personally am not defending my ways as the "right" or "only" way. I implore people to experiment and do better than me and anyone else that is out there. I am pretty sure I said this many times in my AAR's. Again there is no wrong or right way & with a few adjustments in the North and Center I can pretty much do what you did in the North and Center and still do what I did in the South locking down units.

BTW, you first said "Center" for unit difference between our games ;-) But as for your numbers of 8 blue units, one orange unit, one light blue unit, and 4 green units is "not correct" at all as the difference between our games. We can debate this all day and night but this is detracting from what people should be getting from the guide. I will leave that lie and let people come up with their own better ways since this IS NOT about "You" versus "ME" but about others bettering themselves in WITE from our experiences given in Guides and AAR's :)


All I do is opening and game analysis. It is something completely natural to do, it happens for chess and other games too. It includes saying things like player XYZ's approach has advantages here and ZYX's approach there.
You criticised certain aspects of my opening and I replied with a detailed post to that to outline pro and cons of the two approaches. The post contains praise and criticism of aspects of both openings. The forum is full of such back and forth discussions and I personally have learned much from those discourses. Sometimes they are even more useful than textbook style treatises.

The names for both openings (opening HLYA, opening EvK) are completely arbitrary, I chose ones so everyone knows which one is meant. Replace them with plan Red and plan Blue if necessary.
If you think certain formulations are aggressive or offensive I am grateful for hints to avoid that in the future, I am not overly experienced in English.

It has always been my intention to help people and learn from their feedback with the AAR. The last line in my reply explicitly asks people to share their ideas for improvements. I never claimed to have invented a final or perfect opening.


Oh! I am not criticizing your play at all!!! Far from it. I think what you have provided here is great & makes people do better. I have said numerous times in my post on this thread you did Great! I love it when people do this. Plus makes me look at what I did and try to squeeze out more. So please don't think I am criticizing you, I am not.



EwaldvonKleist -> RE: Do you want total war? An AAR-Guide f or Axis players (3/20/2019 5:41:56 PM)

@HLYA: I have no problem with critique. It is necessary and good if focused on the topic and structured and I appreciate it and criticise other people myself. Maybe there is a problem between languages, what I mean with critique/criticism is the process of challenging argumentation or concepts.

If I decide to fortify Berlin in June 1941 and someone argues "That is a waste of resources, because 1)..., 2)... and 3)..., that is what I understand under criticism and I apply that to other people's play as I do to mine.



HardLuckYetAgain -> RE: Do you want total war? An AAR-Guide f or Axis players (3/20/2019 5:49:52 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: EwaldvonKleist

@HLYA: I have no problem with critique. It is necessary and good if focused on the topic and structured and I appreciate it and criticise other people myself. Maybe there is a problem between languages, what I mean with critique/criticism is the process of challenging argumentations or concepts.

If I decide to fortify Berlin in June 1941 and someone argues "That is a waste of resources, because 1)..., 2)... and 3)..., that is what I understand under criticism and I express that kind of critisim to other people's play as I do to mine.



Understood.

Again, I like your take on this opening and your moves you have done. You have invested a great deal of time and effort into this guide and you should be applauded for doing so.



joelmar -> RE: Do you want total war? An AAR-Guide f or Axis players (3/22/2019 8:03:20 PM)

This discussion puts emphasis on what fascinates me the most about that game: The depth of the mechanics, the endless possibilities and thus the importance of the Commander in Chief, namely, the player.

I realise that every player has exactly the same ratings as the Leaders in the game. Some are good in pushing units and choosing paths of attack or defense, so high Mec or Inf rating, others are good at logistics, so high Admin, or timely attribution of support to attacking spearheads, which also uses initiative ratings etc... Others have steely nerves and will play more aggressively or make gambit, won't despair in face of difficult odds, showing high morale... So many things to think about and master that it must be really rare to have a player with all those ratings above 7 or 8, a Model, Manstein, Weiss or a Rendulic ;-)

This is exactly in line with the thinking of Clausewitz on the mechanics of war and the importance of the leader and morale. And it's quite a great achievement in a game design I think.

So I think that to have a complete and thorough analysis of openings and deciding which is best might not be possible. In this case, both openings will make for very different following turns, with different opportunities, and those are entirely up to the talent and vision of the player as to how they will develop. And also to a great degree to the reactions of his opponent, also depending on his talent and vision. So past experiences in games with a specific opening might not be full proof as maybe the Soviet best tactics or strategies against it has never been fully implemented, even if that game was against an experienced and talented soviet player.

Correct me if I'm wrong, and this is only a green player with not much experience in game play, and also no experience at all in MP games... but it might also be that against some players with the right ratings, a standard historical Axis attack on the first turn might still be the best option, even if less devastating at first.

At least, I hope it is the case else a lot of those forces of depth and complexity are lost.

I was reading in your AAR HLYA that some nerfs of the last patches were for twarting elite players and that they made the lives of average players really tough... I can understand why. Balance in this game is probably an impossible razor edge to find for the programers and game designers. And even with house rules, if you accept some to give a edge to a player that is not as good as you are or experimented, and suddenly the guy understands things and becomes better while playing, then you suddenly are in trouble! lol!

Best attitude is maybe not to play for winning, but for the sheer enjoyement of analysing tasks and problems and finding the best solutions possible.



Michael T -> RE: Do you want total war? An AAR-Guide f or Axis players (3/25/2019 5:10:15 AM)

There's always more than one way to skin a cat.



Crackaces -> RE: Do you want total war? An AAR-Guide f or Axis players (3/25/2019 3:31:48 PM)

“Best attitude is maybe not to play for winning, but for the sheer enjoyement of analysing tasks and problems and finding the best solutions possible. “

+1



joelmar -> RE: Do you want total war? An AAR-Guide f or Axis players (3/26/2019 4:12:43 PM)

Michael T: Or for the cat to skin you if it turns out to be a tiger!

Crackaces: thanks. I think it's a bit of a shame when a player abandons after 3-4 turns because of a bad start, thus missing great learning opportunities. And possibilities of taking advantage of mistakes by the oppononent to amend a bad situation, mistakes which I think are bound to happen due to the complexity, the lenght and the changing nature of the game. But I understand that continuing a game one is almost certain or certain to lose might be tough on morale if your focus is only on winning and proving yourself to the universe ;-) I also understand there might come a point when you know for sure nothing can be done, but I doubt this moment comes after 4 turns. I mean, I'm at the 12th turn of a campaign against the AI, and even though it plays quite stupidly most of the time and I did hit hard and it is in the ropes, that thing still has ressources to throw at me. I can only guess how much more efficient and ressourceful a human will be, even an average opponent should be able to do much better.

In the end, Stalin and Zhukov didn't abandon even though the Russians had a really bad start. And most German generals already knew in late 1941 that they wouldn't win the war. Yet they fought on.



EwaldvonKleist -> RE: Do you want total war? An AAR-Guide f or Axis players (3/26/2019 4:19:55 PM)

quote:

Best attitude is maybe not to play for winning, but for the sheer enjoyement of analysing tasks and problems and finding the best solutions possible.

Thank you for your sacrify my Pixeltruppen, I have learnt a great deal about operational warfare and it was a really interesting to find the best solution to win the war with just 2 million of you dead. Is that what you are going to tell your troops in the end?

I for my part fight for final victory&Lebensraum or to liberate europe from capitalist pigs respectively.

You mentioned Clausewitz, I really enjoyed reading "On war", I think it has quite a number of useful concepts for wargamers, highly recommended. The art of war of Jomini has something too but is less abstracted and as such not so useful as On war for other time periods/theatres.






Telemecus -> RE: Do you want total war? An AAR-Guide f or Axis players (3/26/2019 4:44:57 PM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: EwaldvonKleist
quote:

Best attitude is maybe not to play for winning, but for the sheer enjoyement of analysing tasks and problems and finding the best solutions possible.

Thank you for your sacrify my Pixeltruppen, I have learnt a great deal about operational warfare and it was a really interesting to find the best solution to win the war with just 2 million of you dead. Is that what you are going to tell your troops in the end?
I for my part fight for final victory&Lebensraum or to liberate europe from capitalist pigs respectively.


Although the Axis may have appreciated a replay or make it the best of three?



joelmar -> RE: Do you want total war? An AAR-Guide f or Axis players (3/26/2019 5:17:18 PM)

quote:

Thank you for your sacrify my Pixeltruppen, I have learnt a great deal about operational warfare and it was a really interesting to find the best solution to win the war with just 2 million of you dead. Is that what you are going to tell your troops in the end?


lol! You have a high level of virtual compassion for you Pixeltruppen! A pity neither Hitler or Stalin had any of that for the real humans under their command.

I understand you, I am a fighter, I have a strong sense of pride, and I love to win. To be honest, I used to play only to win, whatever the game. But I'm getting old I guess... ;-) Anyway, I feel there is too much time investment to put in this game to stake the fate of my pleasure only on victory with a big "V". And I hope to find opponents who won't give up after 4 turns, like I was some kind of invicible and infaillible war lord when in fact there are plenty of chances of mistakes and twists of fate, which I know I'll be making... ;-)

And I intend to keep on fighting as long as I can even if I'm getting creamed. At least until one of the opponents means of action are almost wiped out and nothing can be done to redress that. But like I said, I don't think that can happen in the early stages of the game and certainly not on turns 3-4.

For Clausewitz, I'm a big fan. I read the book twice over a 20 years period, finding very different insights both times. Jomini I didn't read, because of Clausewitz who as you know didn't like him much for exactly the reasons you mention. Maybe I should come round to him, there must be interesting things for sure and I know he influenced many.




wkuh -> RE: Do you want total war? An AAR-Guide f or Axis players (8/3/2019 2:14:36 PM)

Thanks for this guide...

+++Ewald von Kleist and all that contributed.



EwaldvonKleist -> RE: Do you want total war? An AAR-Guide f or Axis players (8/3/2019 3:36:05 PM)

You are welcome, if you have any questions or remarks which you think should be included make sure to notify me!



Gamer64 -> RE: Do you want total war? An AAR-Guide f or Axis players (3/8/2020 4:14:36 PM)



quote:

The retreat path taken by a unit in WitE is deterministic, meaning that the same conditions will always lead to the same behaviour. The manual is vague on the details of the mechanism. From experience and testing, the program works down a list of priorities until at last only one hexagon remains as candidate for retreat.
1. Avoid retreat over more than one hexagon
2. Chose the retreat hexagon with the least hexagons with an enemy unit adjacent.
3. Chose the retreat hexagon with the least enemy controlled hexagons adjacent. Pending hexagons controlled by the enemy are counted as hexagons controlled by the enemy.
4. Chose a hexagon with an undamaged rail. The rail does not necessarily have to be connected to a national supply source.
5. Chose the hexagon with the least friendly units in it.
6. Retreat East (Soviet side) or West (Axis side).
7. Minimize the retreat path MP cost
8. Retreat to a hexagon with fortifications in it and in the direction of the unit’s HQ


Do these rules still hold? I have units that retreat adjacent to my unit even though there is an open hex with no enemy adjacent. Perhaps this is what is being fixed in the patch?

Excellent resource btw thanks.

Gamer



joelmar -> RE: Do you want total war? An AAR-Guide f or Axis players (3/8/2020 5:12:57 PM)

Those rules were true in 1.11.03.

Now in 1.12.03, the retreat paths have been changed. They are way more random.

If you want to know the details of the new rules, they are in the patch release notes, point #45 and #46 in the change log

https://www.matrixgames.com/forums/tm.asp?m=4690852



EwaldvonKleist -> RE: Do you want total war? An AAR-Guide f or Axis players (3/8/2020 7:05:49 PM)

@Gamer64: The rules were updated as Joelmar was so kind to explain. I have added the changes in the guide.
Thanks, glad you like it!
Regards
EvK



Gamer64 -> RE: Do you want total war? An AAR-Guide f or Axis players (3/9/2020 8:58:07 AM)

Thank you for the responses guys. It is so frustrating when they retreat adjacent to my units instead of into hexes with no enemy adjacent. Violates 30 years of war gaming experience [:)]

Gamer



joelmar -> RE: Do you want total war? An AAR-Guide f or Axis players (3/14/2020 2:23:03 PM)

yes annoying, but maybe more realist? One thing certain, very true that it makes some of our (well at least mine) instinct of how to attack obsolete.



HardLuckYetAgain -> RE: Do you want total war? An AAR-Guide f or Axis players (3/16/2020 9:51:16 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: joelmar

yes annoying, but maybe more realist? One thing certain, very true that it makes some of our (well at least mine) instinct of how to attack obsolete.

quote:

https://www.matrixgames.com/forums/tm.asp?m=4690852


I have played two games in 1.12.03 and have found the new retreat priorities not a problem at all. If you are really trying to alleviate knowing where a unit will retreat just make it random 100% of the time.



joelmar -> RE: Do you want total war? An AAR-Guide f or Axis players (3/16/2020 10:10:34 PM)

@HardLuckYetAgain

I haven't played a game yet on 1.12.03, but I made some trials of the opening, and I didn't find it was a problem either.

I don't think it should be random though. Retreat has some logic to it even in RL and retreat paths should have some measure of predictability.



HardLuckYetAgain -> RE: Do you want total war? An AAR-Guide f or Axis players (3/16/2020 10:14:32 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: joelmar

@HardLuckYetAgain

I haven't played a game yet on 1.12.03, but I made some trials of the opening, and I didn't find it was a problem either.

I don't think it should be random though. Retreat has some logic to it even in RL and retreat paths should have some measure of predictability.


I agree with you :-)



rebelkevin12 -> RE: Do you want total war? An AAR-Guide for Axis player (7/20/2020 3:55:12 PM)

This has been a very helpful resource, thank you for taking the time to develop this thread. One question I had on strategy was during turn 1 I often bomb the hell out of Soviet Air bases racking up thousands of kills on the ground. It appears you are suggest a more tempered approach by conserving the Luftwaffe for ground support. I thought that damaging the Soviet air force severely in the start would be better. Can you advise on this further as to why one should not?
Thanks again for your help.
Rebel



joelmar -> RE: Do you want total war? An AAR-Guide for Axis player (7/20/2020 5:21:13 PM)

@rebelkevin12 I'll give you my view on this, and EvK might add his own latter on.

First, this guide was written for 1.11.03, so quite a few things have changed in the 1.12.xx patch. But most of the principles described by EvK are still relevant, though at different degrees of importance in the new paradigm.

Killing on the ground as many airgroups as possible is of course a very good way to go. But in my most recent Axis turn 1 experience, I managed to kill 5200 soviet planes, including the more modern ones like Migs, Yaks, Il-2s AND recon (which are the most important to get), while keeping a part of the LW completly fresh or with low miles traveled, including fighters. My aim was to use them for heavy interdiction, and it worked to a certain degree. I almost didn't use GS during the turn. And I kept fighter escorts to a minimal, which is something between 60-75% on turn one to effectively protect your bombers and kill enemy fighters in the air. Some may have different opinion on this one way or another, but that recipe worked well for me, I had low fighter losses on turn 1, complete dominance of the skies for a few turns, and what little VVS flew against me was easy pray, thereby augmenting my kill tally every turn.

That said, I know eskuche did a 6000+ turn 1 kills on airbases in 1.12.xx, which is probably a near perfect turn 1 in that respect. see here: https://www.matrixgames.com/forums/tm.asp?m=4793058#5

But... others do less kills and still manage a very good air war. All that just to say that I don't think there is really a "better way to go".



EwaldvonKleist -> RE: Do you want total war? An AAR-Guide for Axis player (7/20/2020 5:25:23 PM)

Hi, I am happy it has been helpful to you.

quote:

One question I had on strategy was during turn 1 I often bomb the hell out of Soviet Air bases racking up thousands of kills on the ground. It appears you are suggest a more tempered approach by conserving the Luftwaffe for ground support. I thought that damaging the Soviet air force severely in the start would be better. Can you advise on this further as to why one should not?


Please point me towards the particular quote you are refering too. I suppose you mean this:
quote:

The primary mission for T1 is to reduce the enemy ground unit and manpower count, making support of the ground forces the primary occupation of the air force.
At the same time, I go for maximal morale reduction of Soviet air groups to delay the moment when they will re-appear on the sky while using the special T1 situation to train the air force. By delaying the air-field bombing until the later parts of the turn, the fighter gets the chance to engage Soviet aircraft and gain experience and morale quickly. It is important to spare fighter air groups for escort missions on for later airfield and ground bombing as well as for base defence during the Soviet turn, therefore the training missions are flown by the air groups with lowest experience.


The idea is that the primary objective for me on T1 is to encircle or lock down as many units and manpower as possible. To do this you have to win some crucial attack with advanced mobile formations, e.g. Riga or against some big tank division in the South. Winning them can make the difference between having an enemy army properly encircled or allowing them to escape. So for some crucial attacks, fly ground bombing and/or support or provide fighter cover against Soviet ground support. The number of these battles is limited as I am not talking about your ordinary infantry assault here. So even when giving support to some close, key battles, there will be enough left to damage the Soviet airforce significantly. If you look at the main map in this post: http://www.matrixgames.com/forums/fb.asp?m=4601276 you see that the air kill count was 6553 aircraft and another game saw slightly less than 6000 with this approach, both very good numbers (not sure if 1.12.05 will allow the same high kill count as I did not monitor the changes).
So it is not an "either or" but a "both" approach, although with somewhat more weight on ground combat support than (probably) usual.

IMO the kill count isn' even that important: Except for a few niches (recon, daytime tactical bombers) the Soviets aren't likely to run out of aircraft not matter the T1 losses unless you make the VVS your focus during summer 1941 at the cost of ground support. What matters more to me is to hit air group morale and experience to make the airgroups useless for a few turns. Although losses and morale loss are somewhat correlated, there are diminishing returns.

All this is based on 1.11.03 and older, but I believe the principal ideas are still valid.


@joelmar: Thank you for chiming in! I am not following the forum lately due to RL reasons but have the guide/library threads subscribed so there are Email notifications.



joelmar -> RE: Do you want total war? An AAR-Guide for Axis player (7/20/2020 6:04:38 PM)

@Evk: my pleasure :-)

For the forum following sentence, that's why I changed my first comment because I then guessed that you would probably see it anyway. It was no reproach by the way, I've been a bit out of the Wite forums myself lately, for RL reasons too.



eskuche -> RE: Do you want total war? An AAR-Guide for Axis player (7/20/2020 7:55:09 PM)

I will say my opener is hardly nearing perfect but there are some things to be gleaned. As EvK said, there are actually fewer bottlenecks in the VVS than people expect. For me, they appear to be recon, IL-4, and (relatively) irreplaceable tactical bombers such as the out of production I153BS and 12 per turn Su-2 (some around Rzhev I recall). While yes bombing turn 1 for morale is useful, the experience is relatively untouched and it will return after some cycling, while the experience actually remains. To that point, does morale even affect combat stats for planes or only experience and airframe?

Another point is what the Soviet player will do. If they are going to counterbomb in turns 1-2 with 40 plane regiments, it is imperative to 1. Keep this in mind with airbase placement, especially turn one, 2. Specifically target level bombers (long range > SB-2 > Pe-2) to prevent damage, a lot of these BAK air corps bases being fairly far in the back, such as by Zaporozhye and Novgorod 3. Keep fighter fatigue in check (I generally only escort the first bombing per airbase if at all turn one, as most of your fighters arrive fatigued from other theatres), and 4. At least attempt to cut down any regiments above 20 planes, I.e., prefer to take three regiments from 40 to 20 rather than destroy two full regiments. This cuts down on the airframe VOLUME available to counterbomb on turn 2-3 until soviet regiments downgrade to 20 planes.

A final, and much more controversial view is to leave most old soviet planes untouched. An example: I lost 1000 planes turn 3, only to get 20 regiments back as modern fighter bombers. If one mostly ignores the non-prioritized planes as above, VVS will be stuck with biplanes unless they splurge AP to do it manually. Biplanes contribute basically nothing (except fatiguing Axis fighters) to air combat or support, so this strategem may be defensible but has yet to be tested.



Hanny -> RE: Do you want total war? An AAR-Guide for Axis player (7/26/2020 1:08:18 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: eskuche

A final, and much more controversial view is to leave most old soviet planes untouched. An example: I lost 1000 planes turn 3, only to get 20 regiments back as modern fighter bombers. If one mostly ignores the non-prioritized planes as above, VVS will be stuck with biplanes unless they splurge AP to do it manually. Biplanes contribute basically nothing (except fatiguing Axis fighters) to air combat or support, so this strategem may be defensible but has yet to be tested.


Interesting insight, even after all this time, people still have interesting new ideas to consider stealing.....



rebelkevin12 -> RE: Do you want total war? An AAR-Guide for Axis player (7/27/2020 3:30:13 PM)

Thank you all for the comments. Your experience and wisdom is appreciated. The links by EVK have served me well.



Page: <<   < prev  1 2 [3]

Valid CSS!




Forum Software © ASPPlayground.NET Advanced Edition 2.4.5 ANSI
0.96875