SigUp
Posts: 1062
Joined: 11/29/2012
Status: offline
|
Yes, about that manpower. I was also wondering how the heck my Wehrmacht is 3.7 million men strong, despite losing 800.000 men in 1941. Granted, my blizzard losses were somewhat lower due to lack of AI aggressiveness, but still, it's nearly 1 million men more than historically in 1942. But I take no offence to it, as the AI is also running with an army that's 1 million men stronger (due to its ability to keep a certain division number under arms no matter how many you destroy) and with loads of corps.
quote:
ORIGINAL: janh
I imagine the flying fuel cans spotted here would be quickly on that list as well as the Lvov opening (at the least the bigger ones) in face that the opponent wouldn't have a free turn for countering it. The logistics setting for both sides would probably be reduced for the whole war to address the overall high pace. The next consensus would probably be about the artificially inflated blizzard conditions (for those here disagreeing with these rules, perhaps adjusting morale to 70 for the soviets in December, 80 for January, 90 for February would do? That's what I do against AI, then it only gets aggressive in December if it wasn't badly manhandled in first place).
That's the great thing with play against the AI, you can adjust the settings to get historically plausible balance. Though I am not quite happy with the blizzard. Because below 110 the AI lacks aggressiveness, but if you set it to 110, the blizzard offensive is way overpowered. In my game I set it at 60 in December, then corrected it to 80. But the AI just refused to conduct any kind of major offensive in the Moscow sector, despite having so many units, that it filled 5 hex rows. Curiously, however, it attacked ferociously from Stary Oskol to Izyum, and successfully pushed me back, but lacked the units to inflict serious damage. The blizzard itself is indeed too powerful. Aside from the morale loss, that's probably 4 morale points too harsh, the combination of lower German CV, higher Soviet CV and the plus 1 of the Soviet attack doctrine is too much.
Now, as for the reduction of German advances due to logistics, I liked the pace of my advance in my game against the AI with logistics at 60 and avoidance of things like bomber fuel cans and chaining. After the first week of July, my advance was only possible in spurts. Like 2 turns advance, followed by 1 turn of rest (sometimes even longer rest, if I wanted to conduct a major advance). One possible complaint by German players I see is the effect of running and blizzard. Some Soviet players perhaps could come up with a tactic to retreat just so much, that German logistics can't supply a major encirclement, thus limiting Soviet losses. Then come December, use the bigger Red Army to hit the Germans hard. So in WITE2, the Soviet player needs to get an incentive to stay forward and defend. Either through the VP system, or perhaps by tying parts of the blizzard penalties to the strength of the Wehrmacht. So, if the German army remains above a certain strength (for example rifle squads), a significant chunk of the blizzard penalties won't kick in (or bonus for Soviets), leading to a very minor blizzard offensive. This would pose an interesting dilemma for the Soviet player. Does he retreat, keep his army intact, and then struggle with the blizzard offensive, or does he keep defending forward, but risk a weak army going into the blizzard? Of course, such an idea is not without problems, like the balancing of where exactly the threshould should be. And, naturally, the combat system. In the current system, the German losses are way too low, unless the Soviet morale is so high, so that they won't rout. But still, I think it is an idea worth discussing.
|
Printable Version
Realism discussion - 
New Messages
No New Messages
Hot Topic w/ New Messages
Hot Topic w/o New Messages
Locked w/ New Messages
Locked w/o New Messages
Post New Thread