RE: Smokindave vs. Sapper222 (No Sapper)

Matrix Games Forums

Forums Register Login Photo Gallery Member List Search Calendars FAQ

My Profile Inbox Address Book My Subscription My Forums Log Out

RE: Smokindave vs. Sapper222 (No Sapper)

View related threads: (in this forum | in all forums)

Logged in as: Guest

Users viewing this topic: none

Printable Version

All Forums >> [New Releases from Matrix Games] >> Gary Grigsby's War in the East Series >> After Action Reports >> RE: Smokindave vs. Sapper222 (No Sapper)

Page: << < prev 4 5 [6] 7 8 next > >>

Message

<< Older Topic Newer Topic >>

RE: Smokindave vs. Sapper222 (No Sapper) - 7/1/2013 2:09:10 AM

Michael T

Posts: 4443
Joined: 10/22/2006
From: Queensland, Australia.
Status: offline

Problem is other ill informed or just plain biased people are disagreeing on the post I started about Soviet morale and are just muddying the waters. So 2by3 will get a warped sense of the problem and won't react.
But I agree, Dave is showing some true grit. Good luck, you are going to need it.

Another thing that annoys me is the SD CG only helps one side without a summer 41 check. It favours the Reds by not preventing them running in 41 but stops the Germans running. But the way the game is going these days I see no reason for the Reds to run anymore anyhows.

_____________________________

(in reply to timmyab)

Post #: 151

RE: Smokindave vs. Sapper222 (No Sapper) - 7/1/2013 4:49:15 AM

Flaviusx

Posts: 7750
Joined: 9/9/2009
From: Southern California
Status: offline

MT, if you do a SD check in summer of 41 the Soviet will lose every time solely on account of the Lvov opening and the south generally. Kiev never holds until September. Not even in this game.

There are lots of problem with 1941. But you and others insist on seeing only this one, because it is new, and have taken the old problems to be a state of normality. It isn't.

_____________________________

WitE Alpha Tester

(in reply to Michael T)

Post #: 152

RE: Smokindave vs. Sapper222 (No Sapper) - 7/1/2013 5:31:48 AM

Michael T

Posts: 4443
Joined: 10/22/2006
From: Queensland, Australia.
Status: offline

The SD I will use in 1941 for the Reds will be a end T10 check (mid August). Being 200 VP, an example line of the required territory is the line:

Novogorod, Rzhev, Vyzama, Bryansk, Kursk, Belgorod, Kharkov, Z-Town

It takes in to account the Lvov opening. And here are my HR set at this point assuming no change from the 2by3 guys.

With morale adjustment I will be dropping my Reserve Limits.

-----------------------------------

Alt 41CG Sudden Death Scenario
Server game
Locked HQ Support Axis/ Unlocked Soviet
Full FOW
Non Random Weather

House Rules

No Para drops to break pockets at anytime in the game. No Para missions at all by the Soviets until the first
Blizzard.

No bombing of air bases more than 3 times a turn (after turn 1).

No bombing of HQ's unless stacked with a ground unit

No extra German units can be moved in to Rumania until they activate.

Morale adjustments:

German +5
Soviet -3

Additional Auto VC (in place to prevent ludicrous runaways) If the Axis player has 200 VP
at the beginning of the Axis T11, he wins a Sudden Death Victory.

Example Line: Novogorod, Rzhev, Vyzama, Bryansk, Kursk, Belgorod, Kharkov, Z-Town.

----------------------------------------------------------

< Message edited by Michael T -- 7/1/2013 5:32:43 AM >

_____________________________

(in reply to Flaviusx)

Post #: 153

RE: Smokindave vs. Sapper222 (No Sapper) - 7/1/2013 5:41:58 AM

Michael T

Posts: 4443
Joined: 10/22/2006
From: Queensland, Australia.
Status: offline

I might add that in my game with Kamil by turn 10 I had Tula, was at the gates of Rostov and had Tambov. All of which were gained simply because they were given up. As much fun as the game with Kamil is I prefer games with less running. Hence the August check in future. I might also add I will be looking to play as Russian with the above rules as well. I like a challenge, not a one-sided cake walk.

I agree Flavius the game has problems. But I still believe a contest is attainable with some HR and morale adjustments.

_____________________________

(in reply to Michael T)

Post #: 154

RE: Smokindave vs. Sapper222 (No Sapper) - 7/1/2013 6:13:34 AM

Flaviusx

Posts: 7750
Joined: 9/9/2009
From: Southern California
Status: offline

Bah. I want to fix Lvov, and then set the VPs around that, this is just a bandaid measure that assumes Lvov to have happened. Make it possible for the Soviet to hold Kiev until late...and make him pay if he doesn't. Basically get the south to behave as it should but never does.

That said I admit that it's vanishingly unlikely that Lvov will get a true fix until WITE2. So you are probably stuck with bandaids until then.

_____________________________

WitE Alpha Tester

(in reply to Michael T)

Post #: 155

RE: Smokindave vs. Sapper222 (No Sapper) - 7/1/2013 7:11:55 AM

Michael T

Posts: 4443
Joined: 10/22/2006
From: Queensland, Australia.
Status: offline

There is only so much we have the power to do as players. I agree WITE 2.0 is the real hope but till then WITE is still the best around on the subject. So I persist. Better than just moaning for 2 or 3 years. I want to play.

_____________________________

(in reply to Flaviusx)

Post #: 156

RE: Smokindave vs. Sapper222 (No Sapper) - 7/7/2013 2:01:44 AM

smokindave34

Posts: 877
Joined: 1/15/2008
Status: offline

Turn 15:

I continue to try and make the best of a bad situation. I have tried to pocket a handful of units each turn to try and minimize the beating I'm going to take during the blizzard. On average I've probably pocketed 4-5 units per turn. Here are the numbers at turn 15:

These numbers are comparable to my last game versus "The Pro's" however I'm a LOT further west than I was in that game. One advantage I have in this game is that I've captured about 300K more Soviets so that should help a little (I'm trying to be optimistic!).

I've also focused on getting my morale up prior to the blizzrad and I have all but 3 of my armor/motorized units at "elite" level and the remaining three units are at 85 morale so I'll get them across the threshold before the blizzard. Sapper has been helping me in that regard by parking tank brigades next to all of my motorized units and they have given me some easy wins.

Although my morale is in pretty good shape and my army is strong this summer offensive has been pathetic. I probably won't even capture Smolensk - very dissapointing. I'll be starting the blizzard at about the same spot I normally end the blizzard. The new morale rule has certainly helped Sapper thus far and I'm hoping that I can take advantage of it to restore my infantry morale after the blizzard. If I can prevent Sapper from capturing many of my units I'll be able to shuffle units in and out of the line and get my morale/CV restored.

My Luftwaffe numbers are very low and Sapper has been bombing my airfields 10+ time per turn (each airbase). This turn I've asked him for a house rule to limit that to 3 per turn. Seems like overkill and I should have asked for this house rule from the start. Hopefully he will agree.

Attachment (1)

< Message edited by smokindave34 -- 7/7/2013 2:12:09 AM >

(in reply to Michael T)

Post #: 157

RE: Smokindave vs. Sapper222 (No Sapper) - 7/7/2013 2:02:56 AM

smokindave34

Posts: 877
Joined: 1/15/2008
Status: offline

Turn 15 Losses

Attachment (1)

(in reply to smokindave34)

Post #: 158

RE: Smokindave vs. Sapper222 (No Sapper) - 7/7/2013 2:03:50 AM

smokindave34

Posts: 877
Joined: 1/15/2008
Status: offline

Turn 15 AGN

I'm using XXXX panzer corps to push Sapper back to gain some breathing room north of Lake Peipus. I want to be able to hold that choke point as long as I can during the blizzard. If he breaks through there I may be in trouble.

Attachment (1)

< Message edited by smokindave34 -- 7/7/2013 2:04:37 AM >

(in reply to smokindave34)

Post #: 159

RE: Smokindave vs. Sapper222 (No Sapper) - 7/7/2013 2:06:24 AM

smokindave34

Posts: 877
Joined: 1/15/2008
Status: offline

Turn 15 AGC

A few attacks here but nothing substantial. I'm averaging a winning percentage of about 90% over the last 3 turns to gain morale.

Attachment (1)

(in reply to smokindave34)

Post #: 160

RE: Smokindave vs. Sapper222 (No Sapper) - 7/7/2013 2:07:05 AM

smokindave34

Posts: 877
Joined: 1/15/2008
Status: offline

Turn 15 - AGC

Attachment (1)

(in reply to smokindave34)

Post #: 161

RE: Smokindave vs. Sapper222 (No Sapper) - 7/7/2013 2:08:21 AM

smokindave34

Posts: 877
Joined: 1/15/2008
Status: offline

Turn 15 AGS

I moved III panzer corps south to try and force a decision at D/Z town.

Attachment (1)

< Message edited by smokindave34 -- 7/7/2013 2:09:09 AM >

(in reply to smokindave34)

Post #: 162

RE: Smokindave vs. Sapper222 (No Sapper) - 7/7/2013 2:10:04 AM

smokindave34

Posts: 877
Joined: 1/15/2008
Status: offline

Turn 15 - Crimea

I was able to cross the river here and clear out a few level 2 forts with cavalry unit by using hasty attacks.

Attachment (1)

(in reply to smokindave34)

Post #: 163

RE: Smokindave vs. Sapper222 (No Sapper) - 7/7/2013 2:15:23 AM

Peltonx

Posts: 7250
Joined: 4/9/2006
Status: offline

5.1 million you would think its a disaster, but vs Hugh he had same numbers and I was able to do a 1 hex withdrawal in areas and 2 hex in south. Then pounded him in 42, then dispite ammo/refit/replacement/morale bugs I was holding out 3.5 vs 9.5 in March 44. Draw was more then likely.

I do not thk most guys have got the October 42 - July 45 part of the game down as far as GHC goes.

It should be easyer then ever now to get draws as GHC after the last round of patchs.

_____________________________

Beta Tester WitW & WitE

(in reply to smokindave34)

Post #: 164

RE: Smokindave vs. Sapper222 (No Sapper) - 7/7/2013 8:05:44 AM

sillyflower

Posts: 3509
Joined: 8/4/2010
From: Back in Blighty
Status: offline

It's not just about the army numbers but the geography and the economy. Sapper will have an intact economy, without any manpower of arms point problems. By the end of the blizzard Smoking will be a long way back and Sapper's army will be in very good condition to meet any German summer O. I don't expect that O to get anywhere at all and is more likely to wear down the Wehrmacht than the red army

Come winter '42 Smokin' will be going backwards but without any spare running room.

_____________________________

web exchange

Post: I am always fearful that when I put this game down on the table and people see the box-art they will think I am some kind of neo-Nazi

Reply: They already know you're a gamer. What other shame can possibly compare?

(in reply to Peltonx)

Post #: 165

RE: Smokindave vs. Sapper222 (No Sapper) - 7/7/2013 8:07:00 AM

sillyflower

Posts: 3509
Joined: 8/4/2010
From: Back in Blighty
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: timmyab

I must say that I admire your grit and determination, it's a great quality to have.I think I might have thrown all my toys out of the pram a while ago and be on to the sulking stage by now.

Smokin' is the most tenacious opponent I have ever met. Not content with The Pro's getting an auto win in '44 by taking Magdeburg, he wanted to make us take Berlin. We went back a turn(an advantage of PBEM)and played on keeping cleat of M town until Berlin fell in '45.

< Message edited by sillyflower -- 7/7/2013 8:10:24 AM >

_____________________________

(in reply to timmyab)

Post #: 166

RE: Smokindave vs. Sapper222 (No Sapper) - 7/7/2013 9:51:22 AM

janh

Posts: 1216
Joined: 6/12/2007
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Michael T
I might add that in my game with Kamil by turn 10 I had Tula, was at the gates of Rostov and had Tambov. All of which were gained simply because they were given up. As much fun as the game with Kamil is I prefer games with less running. Hence the August check in future. I might also add I will be looking to play as Russian with the above rules as well. I like a challenge, not a one-sided cake walk.

I agree Flavius the game has problems. But I still believe a contest is attainable with some HR and morale adjustments.

I think Flavius statement is right in so many ways. Your idea of an "anti-running" HR by T10 is probably doable. However, Kamil wasn't exactly voluntarily giving up that much territory. At least from what he said in his AAR and what his maps showed, after the initial T1-T3 disasters in the south, he was caught completely flat-footed and unable to set up something orderly for quite a while -- well, as you yourself surely noticed. It must have been around T9-T11 when he first regained some balance and started to punish your extremely exposed Motorized Divisions...

It is another example where the game went outside the "average balanced path" , and began an accelerating spiral into his demise. Not sure he could have done so much else except placed more small groups of forces in your way to just would have gotten additional victims for a minor speed bump...?

Not even the fixed morale mechanics helped that. Probably when Sov players get used to it, and get used to the new Lvov-Rumania opening, the game may see more forward fighting. As such the problem isn't the newly gained CV. I think Flav also hit the nail right on, it is the routing function with its additional casualties that becomes an issue now if the units get stouter.
Plus: it is the Lvov type opening coupled with (i) the militarily relatively unimportant cities and poorly defensible terrain in the south and contrasted by a combination of (ii) hindsight on how important LG is for the fate of Moscow (and the war), with (iii) the previous in-game experience that Sov units in the north and center are unable without sizable additions from the south to delay or contest the Axis in a fashion that would enable feats like stopping AGN short of LG, or for several >=4 turns at Smolensk.

I think it is from a game sense logical to move pretty much all surviving units north to where the really matter rather keeping them face AGS while most of their chance to really stop it have just evaporated. This looks like a vacuum, however, and looks to me like a serious cause of the issues that develop for some Axis players with AGC or AGN. Not sure you'd remove that with a T10 SD check. With the new morale fix, I think you need to give Sov's more reason to fight and let units stay in the south, by whatever means. Perhaps a SD rule of the opposite type, that if by T8 or T10 Proskurov, Kiev and Odessa are still held, some penalty applies to Axis. That may be more motivating that just having opposite checks.

Other than that I think Axis players give up way to early when suddenly facing stiffening Sov resistance, like in front of LG. The thing that affects Axis the most, and feels most arbitrary with little logical to do against except sending a whole Army group on home leave remains this blizzard. I think with the morale now fixed, Sovs should be able to go better into that phase, and the Axis penalties should be given the highest priority to be looked at still...

(in reply to Michael T)

Post #: 167

RE: Smokindave vs. Sapper222 (No Sapper) - 7/7/2013 12:42:20 PM

Peltonx

Posts: 7250
Joined: 4/9/2006
Status: offline

Its still far to easy to win as SHC.

Look at the AAR's post 1.07 and you will see only 2 people with wins or draws. All the rest of the games SHC is winning easly. Basicly on the offensive in mid to late 1942.

Completely unhistorical and people want to give SHC a bigger advantage?

< Message edited by Pelton -- 7/7/2013 12:43:19 PM >

_____________________________

Beta Tester WitW & WitE

(in reply to janh)

Post #: 168

RE: Smokindave vs. Sapper222 (No Sapper) - 7/7/2013 12:57:49 PM

smokindave34

Posts: 877
Joined: 1/15/2008
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: sillyflower

It's not just about the army numbers but the geography and the economy. Sapper will have an intact economy, without any manpower of arms point problems. By the end of the blizzard Smoking will be a long way back and Sapper's army will be in very good condition to meet any German summer O. I don't expect that O to get anywhere at all and is more likely to wear down the Wehrmacht than the red army

Come winter '42 Smokin' will be going backwards but without any spare running room.

I think Sillyflower is right on the mark here. I intend to survive the blizzard and hopefully have my army in good shape but I don't believe I've captured any armament points and certainly have not captured any major manpower centers. Sapper will be building a monster in '42/43. Hopefully the new morale rules and fix to the '43 rifle squad will help me but I wouldn't bet on it.

(in reply to sillyflower)

Post #: 169

RE: Smokindave vs. Sapper222 (No Sapper) - 7/7/2013 12:59:44 PM

smokindave34

Posts: 877
Joined: 1/15/2008
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: sillyflower

quote:

ORIGINAL: timmyab

I must say that I admire your grit and determination, it's a great quality to have.I think I might have thrown all my toys out of the pram a while ago and be on to the sulking stage by now.

Smokin' is the most tenacious opponent I have ever met. Not content with The Pro's getting an auto win in '44 by taking Magdeburg, he wanted to make us take Berlin. We went back a turn(an advantage of PBEM)and played on keeping cleat of M town until Berlin fell in '45.

What one person may call tenacious others may call stubborn!

(in reply to sillyflower)

Post #: 170

RE: Smokindave vs. Sapper222 (No Sapper) - 7/7/2013 11:52:59 PM

smokindave34

Posts: 877
Joined: 1/15/2008
Status: offline

Turn 17 - End of the '41 Summer offensive.

AGN

I corps and XXXX panzer push back the NW sector of Sappers line some more. I continue to build forts in the choke point north of Lake Peipus.

Attachment (1)

(in reply to smokindave34)

Post #: 171

RE: Smokindave vs. Sapper222 (No Sapper) - 7/7/2013 11:54:33 PM

smokindave34

Posts: 877
Joined: 1/15/2008
Status: offline

Velikie Luki - Sapper sticks a cavalry unit out to far and I cut if off - should be one less cavalry division to deal with during the blizzard.

Attachment (1)

< Message edited by smokindave34 -- 7/7/2013 11:55:03 PM >

(in reply to smokindave34)

Post #: 172

RE: Smokindave vs. Sapper222 (No Sapper) - 7/7/2013 11:56:19 PM

smokindave34

Posts: 877
Joined: 1/15/2008
Status: offline

Turn 17 AGC

I use my panzers to push Sapper back in the area of Smolensk - this was the furthest his line extended west so I will concentrate on this area during the snow turns as well. After the attacks I pull my panzers back to refit and dig.

Attachment (1)

(in reply to smokindave34)

Post #: 173

RE: Smokindave vs. Sapper222 (No Sapper) - 7/7/2013 11:58:06 PM

smokindave34

Posts: 877
Joined: 1/15/2008
Status: offline

Turn 17 AGS:

I make 3 direct attacks on Soviet cities and capture all of them. Not exactly a crushing blow to the Soviet manpower reserves but I'll take it.

Attachment (1)

(in reply to smokindave34)

Post #: 174

RE: Smokindave vs. Sapper222 (No Sapper) - 7/7/2013 11:59:33 PM

smokindave34

Posts: 877
Joined: 1/15/2008
Status: offline

Turn 17 - Crimea.

I continue to farm morale for 1st Panzer against Sapper cavalry divisions. The Rumanians and Italians continue digging the "smokindave line". I've been refitting my minor allies and have a lot of them over 50 morale - they will be decent in '41 but still useless during the blizzard (expect the mountain brigades).

Attachment (1)

< Message edited by smokindave34 -- 7/8/2013 12:01:05 AM >

(in reply to smokindave34)

Post #: 175

RE: Smokindave vs. Sapper222 (No Sapper) - 7/8/2013 11:59:36 AM

Cfant

Posts: 473
Joined: 12/12/2010
Status: offline

Beeing a noob, I'm just playing my first GC against the KI. I read, that the GHC should get 4 Mio. Russians in '41. I get it in my game, but I can't imagine to nearly achieve that against a human player. We see it here: It will be 2 Mio., not more.
The reason is: There are no consequences for running away. The Sowjets were not loved in the Ukraine (and many other regions), maybe it was not only underestimating the enemy, but also political reasons, what made them fighting forward.
WitE is about the military, it is about economy, but it fades out policy. The Russians should get penaltys for running away. Kiev falls before turn 10? -10 Moral. Smolensk before turn 8? Event "Russians doubt, that victory is possible - productivity falls by 10 percent". Just thinking :)
Would prevent, that SHC runs like Forrest Gump. :)

(in reply to smokindave34)

Post #: 176

RE: Smokindave vs. Sapper222 (No Sapper) - 7/8/2013 12:38:23 PM

Flaviusx

Posts: 7750
Joined: 9/9/2009
From: Southern California
Status: offline

Ultimately there needs to be some kind of penalty for running away. I don't really buy into the sudden death thing. But I'm not sure what the right mechanic here would be. I suppose you could hit the person who runs with some severe penalty in VPs, or a bonus to the other side, such that in the end it would actually change the level of victory. This is sort of what the scenarios do.

So, hypotheticaly, a Soviet major win in 45 that came after a lot of running early on could be knocked down a notch or two, and turn into a draw or worse. This avoids the gimmicky SD stuff but makes you pay a real price for giving up too much ground too quickly. Same penalties could apply for the Axis, but the blizzard needs to be fixed up to be less severe. Generally speaking, I don't believe changes in this area can be done in a vacuum, other game systems need to be fixed as well. Too many things are interlocked here to pick and choose stuff a la carte and call it a day. We need to address all these issues together.

Of course, the running away stuff can't really be addressed without the Lvov opener. Again, it's all a package deal.

< Message edited by Flaviusx -- 7/8/2013 12:40:51 PM >

_____________________________

WitE Alpha Tester

(in reply to Cfant)

Post #: 177

RE: Smokindave vs. Sapper222 (No Sapper) - 7/8/2013 1:12:41 PM

SigUp

Posts: 1062
Joined: 11/29/2012
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Flaviusx

Ultimately there needs to be some kind of penalty for running away. I don't really buy into the sudden death thing. But I'm not sure what the right mechanic here would be. I suppose you could hit the person who runs with some severe penalty in VPs, or a bonus to the other side, such that in the end it would actually change the level of victory. This is sort of what the scenarios do.

So, hypotheticaly, a Soviet major win in 45 that came after a lot of running early on could be knocked down a notch or two, and turn into a draw or worse. This avoids the gimmicky SD stuff but makes you pay a real price for giving up too much ground too quickly. Same penalties could apply for the Axis, but the blizzard needs to be fixed up to be less severe. Generally speaking, I don't believe changes in this area can be done in a vacuum, other game systems need to be fixed as well. Too many things are interlocked here to pick and choose stuff a la carte and call it a day. We need to address all these issues together.

Of course, the running away stuff can't really be addressed without the Lvov opener. Again, it's all a package deal.

I have thought about something similar. Perhaps something like splitting up the war for VP calculation purposes in different phases (e.g. June 41 - Dec 41, Dec 41 - May 42, May 42 - Dec 42 etc.). Players get awarded VPs for their performance in each phase. After the game's end in 1945 these points then get added to see who won. So ideally, even if a Soviet arrives in Berlin in March 45, but has ran away too much doesn't win. On the other hand, if a German player has a disastrous 41, he can still hold out for a draw by limiting Soviet success in the subsequent phases, even if he loses Berlin by March 45.

But I agree, the issues of 41 are all interlocked and can't be really resolved until WITE2. Most important in my opinion is the combat system. Soviet blizzard success for example should result more due to German exhaustion and force concentration, rathar than some magical winter bonus that turns Soviet divisions that were trashed just a week prior into monsters, while German divisions get reduced into crap. Then logistics should get straightened out, like single-double track issues, limited cargo amount on a single rail line etc. This not only can limit German advance in 41, but also Soviet advances in the winter, or in 43-44. As for the Lvov opener, I agree that this should be removed, although I don't quite know how, yet.

(in reply to Flaviusx)

Post #: 178

RE: Smokindave vs. Sapper222 (No Sapper) - 7/12/2013 12:57:45 AM

smokindave34

Posts: 877
Joined: 1/15/2008
Status: offline

As I prepare for the blizzard (I just finished the last mud turn) I'm considering sending my artillery support units back to OKH in Poland to ride out the blizzard. I've never done this before but think that some players have done this to minimize losses to the armament hogs. Does anyone have experience with this?

(in reply to SigUp)

Post #: 179

RE: Smokindave vs. Sapper222 (No Sapper) - 7/12/2013 7:36:41 AM

SigUp

Posts: 1062
Joined: 11/29/2012
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: smokindave34

As I prepare for the blizzard (I just finished the last mud turn) I'm considering sending my artillery support units back to OKH in Poland to ride out the blizzard. I've never done this before but think that some players have done this to minimize losses to the armament hogs. Does anyone have experience with this?

I think Hitman and Pelton have done something like this.

(in reply to smokindave34)

Post #: 180

Page: << < prev 4 5 [6] 7 8 next > >>

All Forums >> [New Releases from Matrix Games] >> Gary Grigsby's War in the East Series >> After Action Reports >> RE: Smokindave vs. Sapper222 (No Sapper)