RE: The Soviet Union has no playability now (Full Version)

All Forums >> [New Releases from Matrix Games] >> Gary Grigsby's War in the East 2



Message

ShaggyHiK -> RE: The Soviet Union has no playability now (12/6/2021 2:58:09 AM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: Erik Rutins
The question I would as is the following: Is the battle you showed entirely historically plausible for August 1941? Yes, I'd say it is, though every battle result should not be the same as that. The WITE2 system has always been designed to show the entire breadth of possible results, so picking one battle and showing it is not really useful unless you start seeing that for all battles. Watching many battles over the course of a campaign and seeing how that compares to history (and to the types of results seen in WITE) is much more helpful.

Every change to the game requires a ton of supporting data to help guide it and a ton more to test it, to make sure that the end result both at the micro and macro level is realistic. It's a very complex system designed by people who do know military history and have decades of experience trying to bring the Eastern Front to life in a wargame. We'll keep listening and tweaking as needed, but we're looking at much more than just individual battles in order to do that.

Regards,

- Erik



This is really not an isolated case. German players all too easily obtain the necessary conditions for an overwhelming victory in battle.
In cases of an attack on the move, all heavy weapons of the Soviet troops more than 85mm do not participate in the battle, while the German troops use the overwhelming firepower of their army to suppress any number of elements and inflict huge damage, in cases of a well-prepared attack due to a lot of experience, points training and enormous initiative of the generals does not pose a problem to suppress any number of artillery of the Soviet Union if you add artillery to the headquarters.
Now the Soviet Union is not in a position to attack in the summer of 41, but it shows itself even worse on the defensive in the 41.
There is absolutely no way to hold any position other than urban. A high level of fortifications will not help if the German player uses his sapper units.
In theory, the German player should be depleted as he moves further and further east. Take casualties by losing your offensive capabilities, but if the German player controls the attacks, no attrition occurs. The level of losses in any battles does not exceed a few units of soldiers. The forces used by the Soviet Union are absolutely irrelevant. It can be 30k people and 600 guns, they will all be suppressed before they can even fire if the German player uses forces adequate to the task.

Prior to fixing the night raids, the German offensive could have been thwarted by the defeated railyard. That at least somehow reduced the effectiveness of the German offensive, but moreover could lead to a complete collapse and a halt of the German troops.
After the fix, the German war machine does not suffer losses, it cannot be not only stopped, but even weakened



DeletedUser44 -> RE: The Soviet Union has no playability now (12/6/2021 4:05:12 AM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: ShaggyHiK


There is absolutely no way to hold any position other than urban. A high level of fortifications will not help if the German player uses his sapper units.
In theory, the German player should be depleted as he moves further and further east. Take casualties by losing your offensive capabilities, but if the German player controls the attacks, no attrition occurs. The level of losses in any battles does not exceed a few units of soldiers. The forces used by the Soviet Union are absolutely irrelevant. It can be 30k people and 600 guns, they will all be suppressed before they can even fire if the German player uses forces adequate to the task.


After the fix, the German war machine does not suffer losses, it cannot be not only stopped, but even weakened


Sorry Shaggy, but it is statements like these that make my eyes bleed.

Pioneers?
---------
I get the impression, you have never played Germany. Because if you had, you would know that Germany only has 55 pioneer battalions, to cover the entire Eastern Front. That is barely enough to have 1 pioneer per corps.

Unlike the Soviets, Germany does not get to build any more pioneers. Germany cannot poop out pioneers whenever or wherever.

In order to have enough to deal with significant fortifications means Germany has stripped the other sectors bare.

No Attrition?
-------------
The attrition losses in my logistics report must be imaginary.

No Losses?
----------
Just on turn 9, current patch, I have Pz Divs at 65%. Avg Inf Div at 75%. And these guys were all 100% 9 turns ago.

----------

The latest patch has been out, less than a week? How have you played enough to support these outlandish claims?




ShaggyHiK -> RE: The Soviet Union has no playability now (12/6/2021 4:27:09 AM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: Sauron_II
Pioneers?
---------
I get the impression, you have never played Germany. Because if you had, you would know that Germany only has 55 pioneer battalions, to cover the entire Eastern Front. That is barely enough to have 1 pioneer per corps.

You don't need to have pioneers in every corps, you need to have them where you need them.
Soviet troops are not able to dig in the entire Soviet-German front at least 1 level, 2 and 3 fortifications are a fairly local defense.

The attrition losses in my logistics report must be imaginary.

Speaking of losses, I mean combat losses directly or after combat losses, they are very low in Germany, while the “logistic” losses allegedly from local small battles in Germany are relatively high.

Are you using discord?
The forum is not a very convenient place to share a lot of screenshots from the game.



ShaggyHiK -> RE: The Soviet Union has no playability now (12/6/2021 5:21:19 AM)

If you start checking the battles fought you will see a general trend as in the screenshot.
Honestly, no matter what patch, the combat system has not undergone a really qualitative change and has not changed fundamentally yet. Specifically, these battles were held on 1.02.06

[image]local://upfiles/82063/FC8FD957095042B793FC1D12F1677A60.jpg[/image]
You can notice that the German troops use most of their ToE in battle effectively, from the Soviet side in battle, although there are 3 regiments of artillery, in fact, they not only do not shoot, they do not participate directly in the battle. The presence in the battle of the AT-Brigade, which was sharpened by the Soviet command as a countermeasure to the tank forces of the Wehrmacht (historically), does not cause any damage to German tanks.

Should the Germans win this battle? I think it's more likely yes than no. Are their losses adequate? No, their losses should be several orders of magnitude higher, and maybe 10 times higher than they suffered in a specific example.



ShaggyHiK -> RE: The Soviet Union has no playability now (12/6/2021 5:43:39 AM)

If someone thinks that this is an accident than a rule. He can check it himself in his games. Here's another example:

[image]local://upfiles/82063/91A83EC75C4047B2AC02292AEB1E2D3D.jpg[/image]


In battle, although there is heavy arming of the Soviet troops, in fact it does not participate in the battle. I think it's time to introduce home rules of the game - no pre-intentional attacks. Only prepared.



ShaggyHiK -> RE: The Soviet Union has no playability now (12/6/2021 5:52:02 AM)

Here's another example:
Of all the ToE of the Soviet division, and this is not a beaten division, but a fresh one. Full strength under a strong Soviet commander, only 76mm and 45mm cannons participate in the battle

[image]local://upfiles/82063/C2D0BCCC37BB4625872B7F87DF316570.jpg[/image]



loki100 -> RE: The Soviet Union has no playability now (12/6/2021 8:48:42 AM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: ShaggyHiK

..., only 76mm and 45mm cannons participate in the battle

...


not correct actually, the default view for this screen is it shows only the elements that hit something and got at least a disruption, so misses or hit/no damage not shown

tick 'show all' and you'll get a better idea what actually participated - see 37.13 of the manual



DesertedFox -> RE: The Soviet Union has no playability now (12/6/2021 9:19:00 AM)

Shaggy you lost me here. I know you know these are from beta .06 but as we have moved onto beta .08 shouldn't we be just looking at .08 as

.06 is gone and done?



IDGBIA -> RE: The Soviet Union has no playability now (12/6/2021 9:29:40 AM)

The base cvs on some of these battles start pretty low, and since its only turn 3 I'd assume those units are not 50 morale and xp, the battle I showed was 50 morale and 49 xp so you'd expect it to perform well and the base cvs were fairly high, These are not just one off battles though these are almost every attack regardless of any terrain advantage or base cv advantage if the soviets dont have enough men to absorb the artillery disruption they will lose and lose badly. One way to see what this kind of thing looks like is to load up the operation typhoon scenario and Deliberate attack every tile with infantry. I'm not saying germany should lose these battles and be totally unable to push but it should not be this easy, and they should not take close to 0 losses and only a minor ammount of damage (damage was around 10-20 elements in most of these battles)

The only battle that soviets held was one which German Artillery support didn't join. some of these soviets are on clear terrain with bad morale yes but many are on supposedly good defensive terrain, over rivers with lv1 forts and they struggle to kill more than 50 germans and then then rout taking huge losses

This is turn 1 of the scenario with 0 pockets and only using the infantry to deliberate the frontline without even touching the tanks or motorized. A majority of casualties are captures from routing units taking huge losses. Germany doesn't need to form pockets when 2 infantry deliberating will often capture a whole division where it stands.


maybe typhoon is a bad example a lot of these soviet divisions are pretty bad but I think it gives you a sort of idea about how terrain doesn't do much with artillery disruption
[image]local://upfiles/82525/80D94985EFEC40B6A05AC11435A0FBA4.gif[/image]



Gam3r -> RE: The Soviet Union has no playability now (12/6/2021 9:47:30 AM)


quote:

operation typhoon scenario and Deliberate attack every tile with infantry.



I wonder why i can't reach 60% casualties to german units in '45 while losing 0 men...




[image]local://upfiles/78197/5EF13F5D0D604CAABD675CAA2FE37A03.jpg[/image]



DesertedFox -> RE: The Soviet Union has no playability now (12/6/2021 9:58:47 AM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: Gam3r

quote:

operation typhoon scenario and Deliberate attack every tile with infantry.



I wonder why i can't reach 60% casualties to german units in '45 while losing 0 men...



Good question. Although I am reasonably confident there is a good answer to this, I just don't know what it is.



IDGBIA -> RE: The Soviet Union has no playability now (12/6/2021 10:16:47 AM)

I'd assume 80k soviets is enough to absorb the disruption. also no artillery support joined that bottom battle, you see the (0) means it didnt participate properly I think. also In what I've tested lv3 forts actually do seem to disruption, you can test this out in stalingrad to berlin fairly easy since theres some axis units on lv2 forts and some on lv3 forts close by so you can attack with similar soviet units and see the difference

I cant tell if you're being sarcastic or not but if you think arty is reasonable and totally fine maybe post a battle that actually shows that instead of "look see when no artillery joins and soviets have a 15-1 advantage they win!!! this proves 41-42 German artillery disruption is very reasonable and terrain matters" I'm not sure what im even complaining about at that point I guess to distill my whole whining I think heavy forest and light forest should provide a bit of cover from artillery and disrupted units should perhaps fire back a tiny bit. but who knows maybe wood splinters are very dangerous like on ships of the line



DesertedFox -> RE: The Soviet Union has no playability now (12/6/2021 10:32:49 AM)

Not being sarcastic.

It is a good question.

I don't know the answer.

Am reasonably confident there is a good answer.

If there isn't a good answer I am 100% confident the devs will look at it.



loki100 -> RE: The Soviet Union has no playability now (12/6/2021 10:50:01 AM)

Some answers.

In post 70, I'd say all the combat elements collapsed - would help to see a fuller battle report. Once that happens notionally strong (in manpower) units can rout/shatter. You'll see this with German Pzr divisions if they are pushed too hard, too far in 1941.

Second battle, not sure what the point being made is. Its an attack with overwhelming force and I'd suspect the Germans bailed out quickly. Looks perfectly fine to me but I maybe missing what I'm meant to see

but if this means what I think it is claimed:

quote:

also no artillery support joined that bottom battle, you see the (0) means it didnt participate properly I thin


then the interpretation is simply wrong. The 0 is the fortification level after the battle, since the hex was lost its set to zero simply due to that so tells you nothing about how artillery affected the fortification in the battle. It most definitely does not say that 'no artillery support joined the battle'.

quote:

disrupted units should perhaps fire back a tiny bit


Just doesn't happen, thats the game engine, disrupted elements take no part in the battle after they are disrupted



Gam3r -> RE: The Soviet Union has no playability now (12/6/2021 11:10:37 AM)


quote:



In post 70, I'd say all the combat elements collapsed -

Second battle, not sure what the point being made is. Its an attack with overwhelming force and I'd suspect the Germans bailed out quickly.



Yes. one side is collapsed. And other - bail out quickly.

'45 is basically '41 reversed. but for some reason we dont get similar results.

[image]local://upfiles/78197/777746958F5B4FBC8394A65E0644A233.jpg[/image]



IDGBIA -> RE: The Soviet Union has no playability now (12/6/2021 11:16:51 AM)

The (0) im talking about is this one in the report about what support elements joined and while I think disrupted units on the offense taking no part in battle makes sense as their advance stops, on defense it seems silly that a shell lands near them and they duck and cover all the way until there's a German soldier standing behind them to march them off to


if you want to see similar results I suggest you do the same thing with a German unit not on a lv3 fort even a lv2 fort on decent terrain and I think you'll notice the disruption to be much higher and ofc soviet artillery never reaches close to the level of 41 German artillery but in terms of HPE so you wont see the same effect and again you're not showing a case were soviet base cvs are equal too or exceed Germans turning into routs because of how much is disrupted which I think is the issue, if 3 German divisions deliberate attack soviets on clear Then that result shown is actually fairly sensible in my opinion. I'll boot up the editor and make a few examples in a bit to try show what I mean

and ultimately if this is what's needed for soviets to take historical casualties without historical pockets like Kiev and Minsk then Its a reasonable way to do it I suppose and at least axis has some teeth now but maybe a little too sharp in my opinion

[image]local://upfiles/82525/7C8AFD0AC09E44D3878EB68E53224B78.gif[/image]



Gam3r -> RE: The Soviet Union has no playability now (12/6/2021 11:53:16 AM)

quote:



if you want to see similar results I suggest you do the same thing with a German unit not on a lv3 fort even a lv2 fort on decent terrain and I think you'll notice the disruption to be much higher


OK

Tank Army, deliberate attack on a previously retreated regiments. lvl 0 fort. only 80% destroyed.




[image]local://upfiles/78197/E5361E8B58B24DBB8B10D1A23BB4F7C8.jpg[/image]



DesertedFox -> RE: The Soviet Union has no playability now (12/6/2021 12:41:01 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: IDGBIA

I'll boot up the editor and make a few examples in a bit to try show what I mean

and ultimately if this is what's needed for soviets to take historical casualties without historical pockets like Kiev and Minsk then Its a reasonable way to do it I suppose and at least axis has some teeth now but maybe a little too sharp in my opinion




Firstly, the eastern front is extremely hard to get a fair balance in games. A little much either way is usually a foregone conclusion come 42 for the "lucky" side.

Something I have noticed though is the difficulty in reproducing near historical losses for either side and maintaining that balance.

So at the end of Sept 41 German (not axis) losses are at 500,000 and according to Glantz as of November 1st-41 680,000, which he equates to 20% of total German staring forces plus their reinforcements.

I have never seen these types of numbers for the Germans or anywhere close to them in wite2. If I did see them, from my experience it's game over for the Germans.

Conversely, Russian losses to the end of Sept 42 were at 2.8 million and add another 2 million to that come November 1st -41 or thereabouts. There is even some conjecture that the extra 2 million is too low a figure.

Having under beta .06 (at end of August) my losses predicted to the end of Sept would have been 3 million. I was on the ropes at this stage at the end of August with no major pockets after the initial start of Barbarossa. 3 million losses come the end of Sept was going to be a huge feat to overcome and add 2 more million for October and there is no way I was going to survive.

To put this into context in the same game, the total axis losses at the end of August was 215,000, and the chances of that reaching like 500,000 {historically german casualties only, not total axis) in one month, zero. To get to 680,000 German alone losses by November 1st, again impossible.

My thoughts are the historical losses cannot be achieved by either side without unduly favoring the other side. Thus in a sense, the balance of the 41 start GC needs to not try and achieve these numbers but rather achieve realist historical goals for both sides taking into account logistics, combat etc and not try to tweak the engine to achieve historical losses because I just don't think it's possible between two competent opponents.

In summary, should the axis or Russians suffer anything close to their historical losses in 41, it will come at a huge boost for the other side because they can only be realistically achieved in this manner and by one side only in each game.









loki100 -> RE: The Soviet Union has no playability now (12/6/2021 1:26:08 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: IDGBIA

The (0) im talking about is this one in the report about what support elements joined and while I think disrupted units on the offense taking no part in battle makes sense as their advance stops, on defense it seems silly that a shell lands near them and they duck and cover all the way until there's a German soldier standing behind them to march them off to
....


well you are wrong - which is worrying given the wider claims you are making

the (x) value is the cv added, heavily rounded down (/100), artillery elements have very low cv by design so low/100 shows as 0. They take part just they don't do their damage in the same way as shorter range weapon systems



IDGBIA -> RE: The Soviet Union has no playability now (12/6/2021 2:50:59 PM)

Here's an example, The heavy cannons have the 0 and by looking at the combat report you see they are present but didn't fire implying they attempted to join the battle but did not fire aka did nothing, I've looked around as many battles in this save as I can and any time an artillery unit is listed as (0) it is because it did not fire at all for whatever reason (heavy cannon battalion is the sk18 gun), in any battle where I can see they fired they have a (1) this is even happening with the same unit on the same turn as can be seen with the heavy cannon battalion

You say I'm wrong but offer no evidence, can you show an example of a unit being listed (0) but still firing and contributing and that not being a direct indicator that it didn't do anything

Infact ill load the editor right now and make the weakest artiellery support unit possible, a single gun and run some battles to see as you if its CV is so low it should round down or if it will only display as (0) if it failed to participate



jubjub -> RE: The Soviet Union has no playability now (12/6/2021 3:27:04 PM)

Artillery and heavy artillery doesn't shoot in hasty attacks. Idk if it's a bug or not.

The low CV for artillery battalions is WAD. Since you are comparing hasty to deliberate attacks, the CV for the artillery will be halved in a hasty attack (when it doesn't fire). Maybe this is causing the engine to round down to 0.



IDGBIA -> RE: The Soviet Union has no playability now (12/6/2021 4:22:19 PM)

I loaded up the editor and you were right and I was wrong correct if a support unit is small enough it can be listed as a (0) while also firing and scoring a hit unlike what I said. I had to bump the number of guns up to 4 to even get it to score a hit since otherwise it doesn't prove anything one way or the other but I also made a comically large werfer battalion to be used at the same time as a comically large artillery battalion (edited 500 guns in the toe of each)

edited artillery elements containing 500 guns each not firing, the SFH and Nebewerfers but their corresponding units are not displaying as (0) Like I claimed so while its an extreme example it still shows I'm wrong on both counts in a technical sense

Also Beethoven has just informed me that Loki wrote the manual So I suppose I do now seem rather foolish running my mouth but I stand by the spirit of the initial claim that (0) indicates the arty provided very little or no impact on the battle shown with the only exception I can produce being from editing massive amounts of guns in but I am technically wrong

Generally the (0) seems to happen because the unit didn't fire but you can also achieve a (0) with units that did fire and achieve non (0) with units that don't fire this is somewhat besides the original point of weather or not German artillery is too powerful in 41 though

[image]local://upfiles/82525/70DF0D358B3140A7BEE3D0A293D5D489.gif[/image]



GibsonPete -> RE: The Soviet Union has no playability now (12/6/2021 7:55:05 PM)

IDGBIA;
A little passion mixed with a little foolishness is not a bad thing. There is a lot to discuss when it comes to this game. Sometimes the gamer is right and sometimes the developers are. That is what makes this game so good. When I examine events, I tend to not take at face value the reason given for an outcome. In some of the examples presented I do not know the status of happened previously, how many times has the attacker attacked, the defender defended, what is the fatigue of either side from movement or a previous retreat, actual supply status and leader ability checks passed or not, SU assigned verses participated and their status, the CPP of each side or Morale level of the attacker verse defender. These factors and others make a difference in the outcome. I do not know how many times I have been frustrated and foiled by a stubborn Soviet unit that should have been a pushover and gave me finger and giggled while I counted my dead. It is a humbling experience. It is a learning experience.



IDGBIA -> RE: The Soviet Union has no playability now (12/6/2021 11:34:48 PM)

Behold The Artillery Megazord, by attaching 5 units involved in an attack to a different hq each, Their combined powers of artillery and the Friendship of 6 possible support units per HQ even 3 guards corps turn to jellly before this mighty power of German organization. I don't think this is seriously applicable in a real game but I think you could certainly do 2 overlapping commands in each combat to try get 12 possible arty elements joining, and I am curious if for example on plains during summer soviet formations that are not 100% fresh (these corp are actually over 100% toe because of the 43 toe change)this can be used to cause so much disruption in a stack of 3 soviet corps that 90% of the corps routs directly into a POW camp

Just to be clear I have not edited TOE of anything here this is StB ran for a few turns to set this up

[image]local://upfiles/82525/B4B2ECB6C5E144CDA01C397A21580C58.gif[/image]



loki100 -> RE: The Soviet Union has no playability now (12/7/2021 7:41:47 AM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: IDGBIA

Behold The Artillery Megazord, by attaching 5 units involved in an attack to a different hq each, Their combined powers of artillery and the Friendship of 6 possible support units per HQ even 3 guards corps turn to jellly before this mighty power of German organization. ...



again, what does this show of any real interest. Its near impossible in a real game for the Germans to get that sort of concentration, unless they really plan and prepare for it. If they are prepared to strip most of a sector to heavily use artillery in a narrow area, then yes there is a huge benefit ... and they are paying a price everywhere else?

The Soviets can readily (from late 42) get 1000+ gun barrages, for the Axis this is a massive localised commitment



xhoel -> RE: The Soviet Union has no playability now (12/7/2021 8:34:19 AM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: Gam3r

I wonder why i can't reach 60% casualties to german units in '45 while losing 0 men...



Because even in 1945 German units will usually have morale at around 55-65 and similar experience. Moreover motorized German units will have morale of around 65-76 depending on unit type. Add to that good commanders that had all war to hone their craft and a LW that still can pack a punch.

Why you are comparing them to the Soviet forces at the start of Barbarossa is beyond me. The Soviets had nothing comparable neither in terms of morale or commanders at this point.


quote:

ORIGINAL: Gam3r

'45 is basically '41 reversed. but for some reason we dont get similar results.



It isnt.

In 1941 as the Soviets, a unit that gets beat up can be sent to the rear to recover and will do so. In 1945 as the Germans a beat up unit is pretty much gone. You are either forced to disband them, merge them or simply send them to the rear where they will need to sit for many turns until they can reach at least 40-50% TOE so that they gain ready status. This is not the same at all, so you comparing these two situations as if it is the same is simply disingenuous.

And the Germans take plenty of losses as it is. The Germans in 1945 dont have the same luxury that the Soviets have: infinite space to retreat and neither do they have the luxury of non stop reinforcements, very high manpower production or unit creation.

Here you have a few examples from 1945:


[img]https://i.imgur.com/OiAEs71.jpg[/img]

The unit lost only 60% of their men you will say and this is a bad thing or unfair to the Soviets according to you. Well this is what the units looks like after the battle:

[img]https://i.imgur.com/qlJu2TL.jpg[/img]

1 ready Sturm Squad (-) left and 27 support squads. 0 ready TOE.

[img]https://i.imgur.com/cblHc3E.jpg[/img]

[img]https://i.imgur.com/6XA6dkm.jpg[/img]

[img]https://i.imgur.com/3XhEitf.jpg[/img]

[img]https://i.imgur.com/oUWA6X3.jpg[/img]

[img]https://i.imgur.com/4s5rWii.jpg[/img]

[img]https://i.imgur.com/gxBWB7Q.jpg[/img]

Unit directly after battle:

[img]https://i.imgur.com/kF3tqi3.jpg[/img]

1 MG squad and 8 Support Squads. 0 TOE.



ShaggyHiK -> RE: The Soviet Union has no playability now (12/7/2021 9:36:52 AM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: xhoel

Let's be honest. German players won't make it to this stage if the game started in 1941. The German player is either winning a situation in 41-42 years, or admits defeat at the first major failure.

The comment about experienced German generals is simply ludicrous. The Soviets were probably just participating in another war, with some other Germans?
Probably, the German genius of the generals was so large that 6 years of war for them were twisted like space and time, but in fact, their experience turned out to be 4 times more than the Soviet one ... What can we say about the French. old men in the ranks of generals. Those in general should have immediately collapsed into a black hole.

You are disingenuous when you say that the Soviets have endless retreat space. The seizure of Moscow and the cutting of its railway tracks leads in fact to the collapse of the entire transport system of the game for the USSR. If it really so happens that after that the Germans will be able to cut off or take Baku, then the Soviet Union will not be capable of long resistance at all.

You cite the example of the catastrophe of individual regiments or initially beaten divisions. I gave examples of divisions that are considered very strong for the USSR for 41 years. TOE is close to 90% of the requirement, almost without damaged elements. Their fall from this state to a state of inoperability later occurs in 1-2 battles. After that, you either replenish them for a long time and stubbornly, taking them to the rear, or send them to the reserve.

Moreover, the point is not even that they cannot win, but that these seemingly strong divisions do not even damage the German troops. The losses of Germany with the actual lack of forces in the offensive are about 50-100 people and a couple of guns. In battle 16k Germans for 31k people of the USSR.



xhoel -> RE: The Soviet Union has no playability now (12/7/2021 10:00:44 AM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: ShaggyHiK


Let's be honest. German players won't make it to this stage if the game started in 1941. The German player is either winning a situation in 41-42 years, or admits defeat at the first major failure.



You do understand that players also play other campaigns right? StB and VtB come to mind. So this isnt an argument. And not all players will "admit defeat at the first major failure". Try to have a discussion in good faith.

quote:

ORIGINAL: ShaggyHiK

The comment about experienced German generals is simply ludicrous. The Soviets were probably just participating in another war, with some other Germans?
Probably, the German genius of the generals was so large that 6 years of war for them were twisted like space and time, but in fact, their experience turned out to be 4 times more than the Soviet one ... What can we say about the French. old men in the ranks of generals. Those in general should have immediately collapsed into a black hole.



Are you being daft on purpose? Even the most hard core Soviet player will admit that German generals have better ratings than the Soviet ones and that is especially the case in 1941. What even is the point you are trying to make with these weird ramblings about French generals???

quote:

ORIGINAL: ShaggyHiK

You are disingenuous when you say that the Soviets have endless retreat space. The seizure of Moscow and the cutting of its railway tracks leads in fact to the collapse of the entire transport system of the game for the USSR.



In how many games where the players are evenly matched has Moscow fallen? I cant say I have seen any but maybe that is just me. And they do have plenty of space to retreat too, which the Germans dont have. Once the war reaches Poland and with the Western Forces pressing on the other fronts, the Germans simply do not have the luxury of constant retreats.

Moreover, weather and good roads are very important in the Soviet Union and you can hold off a German push by blocking certain sectors. Cant really do the same in Germany, since the good road system means it will be a lot easier for you to move around as the Soviets and that weather plays less of a role.

quote:

ORIGINAL: ShaggyHiK

You cite the example of the catastrophe of individual regiments or initially beaten divisions. I gave examples of divisions that are considered very strong for the USSR for 41 years. TOE is close to 90% of the requirement, almost without damaged elements. Their fall from this state to a state of inoperability later occurs in 1-2 battles. After that, you either replenish them for a long time and stubbornly, taking them to the rear, or send them to the reserve.



The poster I replied to said that you cannot find these results for the Germans. I just showed you that you can. German full TOE divisions in 1945 can get mauled just as easily. TOE is not everything. Morale, experience, supplies, leadership, terrain, fort levels all play a role.

Moreover, I am not showing you "catastrophes of individual regiments". I am showing you normal battle results you get in 1945 with the Germans when playing a human player. I do not have divisions at 90% TOE, the Germans dont have that luxury and I cannot even commit full divisions to combat most of the time since I dont have the unit density for it.

The point is that the Soviets have the manpower to replenish their forces and even if they dont, they receive enough reinforcments that they can simply add fresh formations to the front without needing to refit said mauled divisions.

quote:

ORIGINAL: ShaggyHiK
Moreover, the point is not even that they cannot win, but that these seemingly strong divisions do not even damage the German troops. The losses of Germany with the actual lack of forces in the offensive are about 50-100 people and a couple of guns. In battle 16k Germans for 31k people of the USSR.


Like I showed above, the same goes for the Soviets in the late war too, they inflict massive casualties on the Germans while only losing a dozen men. This swings both ways. And those losses slowly add up and the Germans get a lot of attrition from all the battles they get into. Death by a thousand cuts as the saying goes. By the time winter arrives you wont be seeing full strength German divisions anymore.

I can understand that you are frustrated that the Soviets do not play the way you want them to. If you want to discuss simple combat results we can do so, but the general claim you are making is simply not true. Plenty of players play the Soviets and do really well with the Soviet Army.



ShaggyHiK -> RE: The Soviet Union has no playability now (12/7/2021 10:22:53 AM)

We cannot talk about good Soviet generals through the prism of German generals.

In the USSR, there is not a single general with Model indicators.
In fact, if you give Vatutin or Rokossovsky to the German headquarters leading the assault on Moscow, you will very quickly want to change them to someone better.
But notice the reasoning about experienced generals you give on the basis that during the war the German generals received experience in military operations, since you admit such an argument, I conclude that you do not take into account the receipt of a similar experience in the USSR. And only German generals learned how to conduct hostilities in that war. The rest, as they started the war, did not get any further experience.

Moreover, note that you are arguing with two different people in your argumentation. I criticize your screenshots in relation to mine. If you give an example where the German division 90% TOE with support in the form of artillery regiments and / or AT regiments or similar support units does not inflict damage on the Soviet one. It will be very interesting for everyone to see this.



loki100 -> RE: The Soviet Union has no playability now (12/7/2021 10:24:32 AM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: xhoel


quote:

ORIGINAL: ShaggyHiK


Let's be honest. German players won't make it to this stage if the game started in 1941. The German player is either winning a situation in 41-42 years, or admits defeat at the first major failure.



You do understand that players also play other campaigns right? StB and VtB come to mind. So this isnt an argument. And not all players will "admit defeat at the first major failure". Try to have a discussion in good faith.



I agree with Xhoel here - there are a number of AARs from 1941 starts now into 1942 or 1943 with examples of the Axis player sticking with a game that is objectively lost. Partly because the Soviet player deserves the chance to set the operational tempo and partly because you learn a lot.

Now it is, depressingly, true that the bulk bail out around T15 if they can't get an early win but that is a separate problem

quote:

ORIGINAL: ShaggyHiK

The comment about experienced German generals is simply ludicrous. The Soviets were probably just participating in another war, with some other Germans?
Probably, the German genius of the generals was so large that 6 years of war for them were twisted like space and time, but in fact, their experience turned out to be 4 times more than the Soviet one ... What can we say about the French. old men in the ranks of generals. Those in general should have immediately collapsed into a black hole.


quote:

ORIGINAL: xhoel

Are you being daft on purpose? Even the most hard core Soviet player will admit that German generals have better ratings than the Soviet ones and that is especially the case in 1941. What even is the point you are trying to make with these weird ramblings about French generals???

....



but why use the phrase 'being daft'? or 'hard core'. Most of the community play the game, many from both sides (a mode highly recommended), really doesn't progress the debate?



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

Valid CSS!




Forum Software © ASPPlayground.NET Advanced Edition 2.4.5 ANSI
1.03125