Of Course Not, The Entire Game Is An Anti-German Design [8D]

Matrix Games Forums

Forums Register Login Photo Gallery Member List Search Calendars FAQ

My Profile Inbox Address Book My Subscription My Forums Log Out

Of Course Not, The Entire Game Is An Anti-German Design [8D] - Bread (Axis) vs Beethoven (Soviet)

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 2 >> After Action Reports >> Of Course Not, The Entire Game Is An Anti-German Design [8D] - Bread (Axis) vs Beethoven (Soviet)

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

Message

<< Older Topic Newer Topic >>

Of Course Not, The Entire Game Is An Anti-German Design... - 2/4/2022 9:13:51 PM

Beethoven1

Posts: 754
Joined: 3/25/2021
Status: offline

Bread and I are starting a game for the purpose of trying to test if it is possible for the Axis to win, or if, alternatively, the entire game is an anti-german design

.

Accordingly, we are going to be giving some special handicaps to the Soviets in this game, i.e. some special rules...

1) Soviets may not use armies (HQs) or corps (HQs) to organize their troops and to have generals commanding their troops. Soviets may only keep a handful of armies behind the lines, for use solely in rallying routed regiments (since they have to be in range of a HQ to be rallied).

2) Due to not having any armies, Soviets are also unable to use any artillery or other similar support units such as AT regiments, mortar battalions, AA regiments, etc (unless directly attached to a unit).

3) The Soviets may not have an air force. The VVS will be disbanded in its entirety on turn 1, and will remain disbanded for the rest of the game.

4) Soviets may have assault fronts, but these are the only fronts that can be used (and no armies or corps may be used under the front level). All other units must be directly commanded by STAVKA. However, the fronts may not have particularly good leaders. Hopefully Grigory Kulik can be one of the Front leaders.

This will obviously make it harder for Soviets. My guess is most people would probably agree that it ought not to be possible for Soviets to win under those circumstances, unless the Axis player is totally incompetent or something.

So, we are playing with sudden death rules, and the Axis will be trying to get a sudden death win. Soviets will be abandoning the south, other than a very light possible defense of a few screening units, up until Stalino/Kharkov or so.

These rules are subject to possible alteration later when we see how things go.

On the bright side, however, this will make it easier for me to do turns quickly since I will pretty much not have to deal with the air phase or with OOBs etc AT ALL. This means we should be able to get far enough in the game to see the effects of these special rules quickly. I will also try to be quite a bit less careful than I normally would be, to do turns faster.

Post #: 1

RE: Of Course Not, The Entire Game Is An Anti-German De... - 2/4/2022 9:18:22 PM

Beethoven1

Posts: 754
Joined: 3/25/2021
Status: offline

Bread/RedJohn has killed some Soviet generals! Quite a lot of them, too! What a horrible murderer of generals he is!

Fortunately for me, this does not matter, because I will not be using generals or armies in this game.

Bread has also done the Lvov pocket in the south, and pocketed some high morale units from the Southwestern Front, including a 64 morale Mountaineer division:

This is a lot more unfortunate for me than the leader deaths, because I WILL be using high morale units, at least as much as I can.

(in reply to Beethoven1)

Post #: 2

RE: Of Course Not, The Entire Game Is An Anti-German De... - 2/4/2022 9:26:10 PM

Beethoven1

Posts: 754
Joined: 3/25/2021
Status: offline

Bread has advanced in various directions. Namely, in the north, in the center, and in the south.

We have not lost that many planes, but that doesn't really matter, since we are going to disband them all. So in a sense, I guess he has destroyed our entire air force:

250k losses so far:

In addition, 632k men are isolated:

(in reply to Beethoven1)

Post #: 3

RE: Of Course Not, The Entire Game Is An Anti-German De... - 2/4/2022 9:30:28 PM

Beethoven1

Posts: 754
Joined: 3/25/2021
Status: offline

The first step is to disband the Soviet Air Force. We won't be needing the VVS. I hope not, anyway.

This GREATLY simplifies the air phase. I can just click through it, and it is even faster than AI air assist, since I don't have to run any sorties.

POOF, it is gone. Unfortunately a couple of planes are left in the theater boxes and also some on the map which are in pockets or are frozen. Will have to move the pocketed planes out so I can disband them next turn:

(in reply to Beethoven1)

Post #: 4

RE: Of Course Not, The Entire Game Is An Anti-German De... - 2/4/2022 9:32:38 PM

RedJohn

Posts: 517
Joined: 9/20/2019
Status: offline

My opener is the standard Lvov pocket. I am partial to copying Tyronec's approach and going as far east as possible for the followup encirclement, as this also risks killing off Malinovsky turn 2 due to the southern front staying locked.

However this game I wanted to ensure nothing of value escapes Lvov. Chances are the majority of the units in SW front will be sent to reserve, and there's very little I could do to stop that if I went with that long opener. So, Lvov is taken and the area encircled. PZG1 will be split and likely continue to Odessa, taking Crimea ASAP. It is one of the few places Beethoven might defend, and it is a bitch to take if the soviets prepare.

Attachment (1)

(in reply to Beethoven1)

Post #: 5

RE: Of Course Not, The Entire Game Is An Anti-German De... - 2/4/2022 9:34:56 PM

RedJohn

Posts: 517
Joined: 9/20/2019
Status: offline

For supply, I will be trying a different rail route than I usually do. Depots will be spammed as per carlkays AAR which works very well.

Some say logistics is the counter to the southern strategy, so let's really see if that's true! I spend all 19 of my AP on depots. I also put the rail repair SUs on 3 corps, and send the 2 rail repair units from Norway to the map. They will arrive turn 4. I also bring all of the transports back from the various TBs, to maximize the amount of airlifting I can do.

I did forget to set my ports, so I'll do that next turn.

Attachment (1)

< Message edited by RedJohn -- 2/4/2022 9:36:22 PM >

(in reply to RedJohn)

Post #: 6

RE: Of Course Not, The Entire Game Is An Anti-German De... - 2/4/2022 9:35:56 PM

Beethoven1

Posts: 754
Joined: 3/25/2021
Status: offline

Actually, I tried sending planes to reserve also, and was able to get rid of some more that way. Now there is only one air group left on the map that I can neither disband nor transfer to reserve this turn. It is the 11 SAD.

This is very sad, it makes me unhappy.

It is our hope that by not having an air force, we will deny German fighter pilots air to air kills. Accordingly, hopefully they will not get skill bonuses from shooting down our planes. With lower skill, the German pilots are more likely to crash and have operational losses.

I don't know if it works that way, but it is funny to think about. If it does work like that, then this could possibly actually be inadvertently a good strategy.

(in reply to Beethoven1)

Post #: 7

RE: Of Course Not, The Entire Game Is An Anti-German De... - 2/4/2022 9:42:34 PM

Stamb

Posts: 1030
Joined: 10/26/2021
Status: offline

haha, I like that title

, was hoping to see Loki as an Axis player here!

(in reply to Beethoven1)

Post #: 8

RE: Of Course Not, The Entire Game Is An Anti-German De... - 2/4/2022 9:55:32 PM

Beethoven1

Posts: 754
Joined: 3/25/2021
Status: offline

Using the Commander's report, I set all units which have more than 50 morale on refit. Then I picked the map view hat makes refitting units appear highlighted in blue. So now we can see where my high morale units are. Although some of them are only barely above 50 morale, there are a decent # of infantry/mountaineer divisions that are at or close to 60 morale. These are definitely worth paying special attention to.

Notice a good # of them are near Rovno. It might have been a mistake for Bread to not do a Rovno pocket, as there is a 57 and a 60 morale infantry division there that he could have pocketed (and one or two more that might possibly have been on the edge of gettable). The tank/mech units are only barely > 50 morale though.

Next, I set units with less than 40 morale on reserve, so they get highlighted in pink for easier identification:

This doesn't find them all since unready/depleted units can't go on reserve, but at least highlights some of them.

(in reply to Stamb)

Post #: 9

RE: Of Course Not, The Entire Game Is An Anti-German De... - 2/4/2022 10:07:03 PM

Beethoven1

Posts: 754
Joined: 3/25/2021
Status: offline

My next order of business is to deal with some routed and depleted units. These do not have SMP, which means they cannot board trains. So it will be harder for them to escape, and I need to pay special attention to evacuating them first.

For example, here are 2 routed units, a 41 morale rifle division and a 35 morale tank division (with 149 AFVs):

I can move both of these more than 8 hexes away from the nearest enemy unit and on a rail line. So I send the infantry division to the reserve.

I could also send the tank division to reserve (or more likely to the Transcaucasus), but I am just going to disband it so that the AFVs can go into my other tank divisions that have higher morale. Then they will be a strong threat immediately against Bread's Panzers.

So fortunately, the men in both of these units will be able to escape safely from Bread's clutches.

I will do similarly with other units, possibly some in other parts of the map as well such as ones trying to escape from the Bialystok pocket. But the most important place to do this is in the south.

(in reply to Beethoven1)

Post #: 10

RE: Of Course Not, The Entire Game Is An Anti-German De... - 2/4/2022 11:19:18 PM

carlkay58

Posts: 8650
Joined: 7/25/2010
Status: offline

I like your highlighting strategy. Very useful.

(in reply to Beethoven1)

Post #: 11

RE: Of Course Not, The Entire Game Is An Anti-German De... - 2/4/2022 11:58:27 PM

HardLuckYetAgain

Posts: 6987
Joined: 2/5/2016
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Beethoven1

Bread and I are starting a game for the purpose of trying to test if it is possible for the Axis to win, or if, alternatively, the entire game is an anti-german design .

Accordingly, we are going to be giving some special handicaps to the Soviets in this game, i.e. some special rules...

1) Soviets may not use armies (HQs) or corps (HQs) to organize their troops and to have generals commanding their troops. Soviets may only keep a handful of armies behind the lines, for use solely in rallying routed regiments (since they have to be in range of a HQ to be rallied).

2) Due to not having any armies, Soviets are also unable to use any artillery or other similar support units such as AT regiments, mortar battalions, AA regiments, etc (unless directly attached to a unit).

3) The Soviets may not have an air force. The VVS will be disbanded in its entirety on turn 1, and will remain disbanded for the rest of the game.

4) Soviets may have assault fronts, but these are the only fronts that can be used (and no armies or corps may be used under the front level). All other units must be directly commanded by STAVKA. However, the fronts may not have particularly good leaders. Hopefully Grigory Kulik can be one of the Front leaders.

This will obviously make it harder for Soviets. My guess is most people would probably agree that it ought not to be possible for Soviets to win under those circumstances, unless the Axis player is totally incompetent or something.

So, we are playing with sudden death rules, and the Axis will be trying to get a sudden death win. Soviets will be abandoning the south, other than a very light possible defense of a few screening units, up until Stalino/Kharkov or so.

These rules are subject to possible alteration later when we see how things go.

On the bright side, however, this will make it easier for me to do turns quickly since I will pretty much not have to deal with the air phase or with OOBs etc AT ALL. This means we should be able to get far enough in the game to see the effects of these special rules quickly. I will also try to be quite a bit less careful than I normally would be, to do turns faster.

Sorry, I missed the catalyst for this game to be played like this. I read your reason above but I thought I glimpsed something in another thread similar verbiage as the games title. Was that it? Plus this seems to go with Breads(RedJohns) tongue in check AAR. I do admire the enthusiasm on pursuit of the subject matter.

Thank you for your answer.

(in reply to Beethoven1)

Post #: 12

RE: Of Course Not, The Entire Game Is An Anti-German De... - 2/5/2022 1:45:38 AM

AlbertN

Posts: 3693
Joined: 10/5/2010
From: Italy
Status: offline

I believe the game won't last long played that way though - but hey - if the Soviets hold even this way paint me massively surprised.

Front HQs are few, will fail buckets of tests, and the units have a CV of 20% less if I've read well the manual. (And by that I am not sure if they also fight 20% worse too)

(in reply to HardLuckYetAgain)

Post #: 13

RE: Of Course Not, The Entire Game Is An Anti-German De... - 2/5/2022 4:01:39 AM

Lovenought

Posts: 227
Joined: 8/21/2017
Status: offline

Kulik will sort it all out

(in reply to AlbertN)

Post #: 14

RE: Of Course Not, The Entire Game Is An Anti-German De... - 2/5/2022 8:36:38 AM

Stamb

Posts: 1030
Joined: 10/26/2021
Status: offline

You could leave transport planes to supply pockets.

(in reply to Beethoven1)

Post #: 15

RE: Of Course Not, The Entire Game Is An Anti-German De... - 2/5/2022 10:33:35 AM

Beethoven1

Posts: 754
Joined: 3/25/2021
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: HardLuckYetAgain

Sorry, I missed the catalyst for this game to be played like this. I read your reason above but I thought I glimpsed something in another thread similar verbiage as the games title. Was that it? Plus this seems to go with Breads(RedJohns) tongue in check AAR. I do admire the enthusiasm on pursuit of the subject matter.

Thank you for your answer.

It is pretty straightforward. We think that it is pretty much impossible for Soviets to lose, especially if they abandon the south, and this is an attempt to test out that theory. And yes, that is consistent with the other tongue in cheek AAR. A good number of players have argued that the Axis should win a sudden death victory if Soviets abandon the south. Given the large nerfs to Soviets from our special rules (especially the complete lack of Army HQs and generals), if Axis can't win with a sudden death victory (and win fairly easily), that should prove the point to a considerable extent. At least that is the idea. We'll see if it plays out like that or not though.

(in reply to HardLuckYetAgain)

Post #: 16

RE: Of Course Not, The Entire Game Is An Anti-German De... - 2/5/2022 10:37:33 AM

Beethoven1

Posts: 754
Joined: 3/25/2021
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Stamb

You could leave transport planes to supply pockets.

What pockets? You are imagining that I will get pocketed, other than minor unavoidable small pockets?

If I had not disbanded my transport planes, they would also be useful to supply newly deployed units, to get their CVs up quickly. That is where I will really miss the transport planes. But I don't expect to have particular have logistical difficulties in any case after a few turns, because I will put my whole army on supply priority 4. Even with having bad admin rules due to lack of leaders/HQs, I should end up with just fine supply after the initial shock wears off.

(in reply to Stamb)

Post #: 17

RE: Of Course Not, The Entire Game Is An Anti-German De... - 2/5/2022 10:41:13 AM

Stamb

Posts: 1030
Joined: 10/26/2021
Status: offline

Without army HQs I guess that there will be pockets, so transport planes might be very helpful as they do not get shot down easily and you can sustain their losses without a problem.

(in reply to Beethoven1)

Post #: 18

RE: Of Course Not, The Entire Game Is An Anti-German De... - 2/5/2022 10:43:00 AM

Stamb

Posts: 1030
Joined: 10/26/2021
Status: offline

But overall - thanks for doing this test. If Axis can not win this game then... We all know what does it mean.

(in reply to Stamb)

Post #: 19

RE: Of Course Not, The Entire Game Is An Anti-German De... - 2/5/2022 10:43:59 AM

Beethoven1

Posts: 754
Joined: 3/25/2021
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Stamb

Without army HQs I guess that there will be pockets, so transport planes might be very helpful as they do not get shot down easily and you can sustain their losses without a problem.

They would probably get shot down more easily in this game though, considering that I have 0 fighters to escort them because all the fighters are disbanded.

(in reply to Stamb)

Post #: 20

RE: Of Course Not, The Entire Game Is An Anti-German De... - 2/5/2022 2:09:25 PM

Beethoven1

Posts: 754
Joined: 3/25/2021
Status: offline

I started up again, and at this point have disbanded pretty much all the HQs and artillery/support units that I can disband on turn 1. There are some more that I can't disband until turn 2 for various reasons, and in subsequent turns I will keep getting more new artillery etc which I will keep on disbanding.

But anyway, as a result of that, my manpower pool is already up to 800,000 men (normally it is 600,000 or so on the first turn).

In addition, there are another 200,000 men serving air air support staff in airfields. Since we are not going to be using any planes, these 200,000 men will be freed up, and they will become infantrymen instead.

So in total, I have already freed up an additional 400k manpower by going without army/corps HQs, artillery, and an air force. That is more or less enough men for an entire additional Front of ~40 divisions. What's more, the Soviet HQs and artillery etc starts off under-strength, so it would normally be eating up reinforcements in subsequent turns. That won't be happening in this game, for better or worse.

And here is another interesting item. It costs 8 AP to make a new rifle division (or other unit like a naval infantry brigade):

Normally this would be a prohibitively expensive AP cost until the cost goes down in 1942. Normally, most Soviet AP in 1941 will probably end up being spent replacing generals with better commanders...

However... I am opting out of that whole Generals/armies thing. STAVKA will control everything, central planning in action. And that means that I will be saving a lot of AP.

And conveniently, since I am not using artillery/planes/etc, that frees up a lot of manpower, which can either be used to fill my existing divisions with higher TOE, or alternatively to start making new divisions earlier and get more counters on the map more quickly.

I am not using my AP on this QUITE yet, because I have some other priorities first. However, by maybe about turn 3 or so I could probably start doing this if I want.

< Message edited by Beethoven1 -- 2/5/2022 2:11:47 PM >

(in reply to Beethoven1)

Post #: 21

RE: Of Course Not, The Entire Game Is An Anti-German De... - 2/5/2022 3:13:01 PM

K62

Posts: 666
Joined: 6/7/2002
From: DC
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Beethoven1

It is pretty straightforward. We think that it is pretty much impossible for Soviets to lose, especially if they abandon the south, and this is an attempt to test out that theory. And yes, that is consistent with the other tongue in cheek AAR. A good number of players have argued that the Axis should win a sudden death victory if Soviets abandon the south. Given the large nerfs to Soviets from our special rules (especially the complete lack of Army HQs and generals), if Axis can't win with a sudden death victory (and win fairly easily), that should prove the point to a considerable extent. At least that is the idea. We'll see if it plays out like that or not though.

The most you'll prove is that the T16 victory condition needs to be adjusted. Also, it would be a bit more convincing if you did the test against someone who actually disagreed with you.

_____________________________

"Power always thinks it has a great soul and vast views beyond the comprehension of the weak"
John Adams

(in reply to Beethoven1)

Post #: 22

RE: Of Course Not, The Entire Game Is An Anti-German De... - 2/5/2022 4:04:37 PM

Beethoven1

Posts: 754
Joined: 3/25/2021
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: K62

The most you'll prove is that the T16 victory condition needs to be adjusted.

That wouldn't be a contradiction to the point I don't think, it would support it. If e.g. Taganrog (Oct 17 historical capture) and Mariopol (Oct 8 historical capture) were VPs, that would make the case for defending the south a lot stronger. Both of those could potentially be help until or beyond the historical capture dates if Soviets throw enough into the defense of the Donbas, because they are deep enough into the Soviet Union that Axis should have logistical problems advancing by that point.

On the other hand, if the threshold for a sudden death Axis victory were simply lowered without changing anything else, or alternatively if e.g. Kirovgrad and Cherkasy became VPs, then that would make abandoning the south a mandatory strategy. Since there is no way you can hold Kirovgrad/Cherkasy until the historical dates to stop Axis from getting 6 bonus VP, that would make it even more important to make sure you hold cities like Kalinin and Tula to avoid a sudden death loss, and consequently Soviets would have to abandon the south and only try to defend the north/center.

quote:

Also, it would be a bit more convincing if you did the test against someone who actually disagreed with you.

Bread was trying to play against tyronec with this strategy, but MSAG apparently got into contact with tyronec first. Also I think in his other AAR Bread mentioned that he would be willing to try it (as Soviets) against anyone else who has time for another game and who thinks that it is a bad strategy for Soviets. As for me, I don't have enough time for another game, trying to do this one quickly will be the most I can manage.

< Message edited by Beethoven1 -- 2/5/2022 4:06:02 PM >

(in reply to K62)

Post #: 23

RE: Of Course Not, The Entire Game Is An Anti-German De... - 2/5/2022 9:24:31 PM

RedJohn

Posts: 517
Joined: 9/20/2019
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: K62

quote:

ORIGINAL: Beethoven1

It is pretty straightforward. We think that it is pretty much impossible for Soviets to lose, especially if they abandon the south, and this is an attempt to test out that theory. And yes, that is consistent with the other tongue in cheek AAR. A good number of players have argued that the Axis should win a sudden death victory if Soviets abandon the south. Given the large nerfs to Soviets from our special rules (especially the complete lack of Army HQs and generals), if Axis can't win with a sudden death victory (and win fairly easily), that should prove the point to a considerable extent. At least that is the idea. We'll see if it plays out like that or not though.

The most you'll prove is that the T16 victory condition needs to be adjusted. Also, it would be a bit more convincing if you did the test against someone who actually disagreed with you.

Which will be the most the game has changed in terms of adjusting VPs since inception, no?

My belief in the strategy has no bearing on how convincing the game is. I will play to the best of my ability, and utilize everything I know as the axis to try and win sudden death. Some said in my AAR that good logistics is the key to ruining this strategy. I aim to have a strong logistics net to see how true their claim is.

And as Beethoven said, I still have an open offer for anyone to play as the axis against me where I'll utilize this strategy.

(in reply to K62)

Post #: 24

RE: Of Course Not, The Entire Game Is An Anti-German De... - 2/5/2022 10:38:26 PM

tyronec

Posts: 4940
Joined: 8/7/2015
From: Portaferry, N. Ireland
Status: offline

quote:

Bread was trying to play against tyronec with this strategy, but MSAG apparently got into contact with tyronec first. Also I think in his other AAR Bread mentioned that he would be willing to try it (as Soviets) against anyone else who has time for another game and who thinks that it is a bad strategy for Soviets. As for me, I don't have enough time for another game, trying to do this one quickly will be the most I can manage.

Am not sure if this is intended to be humorous or a not but it seems in poor taste to me. Maybe the game is advantage Soviet at present, am not sure. What I am certain of is that the devs. have been continually working to make the game as historically accurate as they can. I can't think of any game I have played where there has been a higher level of support from fixing bugs, making improvements and answering an endless number of queries.

(in reply to RedJohn)

Post #: 25

RE: Of Course Not, The Entire Game Is An Anti-German De... - 2/5/2022 10:39:34 PM

Rosencrantus

Posts: 318
Joined: 1/9/2021
From: Canada
Status: offline

(in reply to tyronec)

Post #: 26

RE: Of Course Not, The Entire Game Is An Anti-German De... - 2/6/2022 1:23:28 AM

Hardradi

Posts: 571
Joined: 2/9/2011
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: RedJohn

My opener is the standard Lvov pocket. I am partial to copying Tyronec's approach and going as far east as possible for the followup encirclement, as this also risks killing off Malinovsky turn 2 due to the southern front staying locked.

However this game I wanted to ensure nothing of value escapes Lvov. Chances are the majority of the units in SW front will be sent to reserve, and there's very little I could do to stop that if I went with that long opener. So, Lvov is taken and the area encircled. PZG1 will be split and likely continue to Odessa, taking Crimea ASAP. It is one of the few places Beethoven might defend, and it is a bitch to take if the soviets prepare.

Would I be right is saying it does not look like you have split part of 2nd Panzer Group for use in the south?

(in reply to RedJohn)

Post #: 27

RE: Of Course Not, The Entire Game Is An Anti-German De... - 2/6/2022 2:20:33 PM

Beethoven1

Posts: 754
Joined: 3/25/2021
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: tyronec

What I am certain of is that the devs. have been continually working to make the game as historically accurate as they can. I can't think of any game I have played where there has been a higher level of support from fixing bugs, making improvements and answering an endless number of queries.

I am a bit surprised by this comment because as far as I don't think I (or Bread as far as I am aware) have said anything to the contrary. Indeed, I have expressed the same sentiments as you previously in various other threads. I think (and have said before) the game keeps gradually improving with successive patches, the devs have said that they are trying to make incremental improvements to avoid the risk of over-correcting and having wild swings in balance, and I think that is the right approach. I made a HOI4 multiplayer mod that was played frequently for a long time and which tried to make HOI4 more realistic/historical and balanced, so I am familiar from that experience with the difficulties of balancing a game like this, which is why I think the devs are generally take the right approach with regards to patches, taking into account feedback, etc.

quote:

Am not sure if this is intended to be humorous or a not but it seems in poor taste to me. Maybe the game is advantage Soviet at present, am not sure.

I am not sure if this is a reference to the thread title or to Bread's attempt to reach out to you to see if you wanted to play against him. With regards to the latter, I said: "Bread was trying to play against tyronec with this strategy, but MSAG apparently got into contact with tyronec first."

What I meant by "this strategy" was simply abandoning the south, and nothing more. To be clear, if Bread had played against you, he would NOT have disbanded all his armies/artillery/air force etc like I am doing. If you were thinking that, then I understand why you would be unhappy and even offended, since that from your perspective would have probably ruined your game for you! That is not what I meant to imply, sorry if that was unclear!

The purpose of disbanding artillery/army HQs etc in this AAR is to serve as a supplement to Bread's other AAR. In that, it is pretty clear he is winning easily as Soviets by abandoning the south. However, a good number of readers seem unconvinced by that, so we are doing this AAR to try to add strength to the argument, by making it tougher for Soviets and seeing if the same sort of thing happens or not (Soviets stopping the Axis advance in the north/center and building up a huge OOB). Another criticism one might make of the other AAR is that the Germany player is not (as far as I know, anyway), the most experienced. So in this AAR we have Bread playing Germany, and Bread is at this point a very experienced Germany player, and moreover he knows the Soviet strategy in advance. So if this ends up at all similarly, it should help remove any doubt that Soviets abandoning the south is too good of a strategy.

Alternatively, if you are making a reference to the thread title, yes, of course it is obviously a joke (just as Loki's original comment was obviously a joke, you can tell by the smiley face emoticons if nothing else). It should go without saying, but nobody seriously thinks the game is an anti-German conspiracy!

(in reply to tyronec)

Post #: 28

RE: Of Course Not, The Entire Game Is An Anti-German De... - 2/6/2022 2:39:11 PM

Beethoven1

Posts: 754
Joined: 3/25/2021
Status: offline

Now, some further discussion and clarification with regards to the actual substantive issue of game balance -

I do think it is basically impossible for Axis to win in 1941 against a Soviet player that knows what they are doing (especially if Soviets abandon the south, but I don't think the issue is so simple as just "Soviets are too strong/Axis is too weak," relative to historical. However, I do think there is a significant balance issue (just talking about 1941 here), and I think it relates specifically to comparative balance in the south as compared to the north/center.

In some respects, Soviets are too weak relative to historical. I can't think of a single game (with an AAR) where Soviets have held on as well as they did historically in the south for the first month or two or three, holding cities like Odessa and Kiev as long as historical. The only way anyone has gotten anything close to that is if either the Axis player is new and doesn't really know what they are doing, or in the K62-tyronec game where Soviets took advantage of running a lot of small naval patrol missions that could not be intercepted (a game flaw) by Axis fighters, and which makes more missions fly than are apparently supposed to. And even in that, he didn't actualy hold for as long as historical, instead tyronec just gave up after he couldn't take it much faster than historical.

Another way that Soviets are often weaker than historical is that often the area around Vyazma falls significantly sooner than historical. Historically, it held as long as it did (into October) to a considerable degree because Guderian's Panzergruppe was... sent south! This is something that will not generally happen in the game, because there is no reason to send them south to encircle Kiev after sending them up to Smolensk. So this too is, indirectly, related to the south.

But meanwhile, despite Vyazma often falling faster than historical, Smolensk often holds longer than historical. Soviets can also stonewall the Axis advance in the north relative to historical. The only way Axis can take the north is pretty much if they catch the Soviet player off guard (and often if they are attacking with more motorized units than historical).

The Road to Leningrad scenario may produce more historical Axis advance in the north (and Axis could even be too strong possibly in it), but the difference between that and a grand campaign is that Soviets can send additional troops more quickly to the north than historical (especially if they abandon the south or have a weak defense in the south). The key in the north is speed. To have any hope of historical advance in the north, the first few turns are absolutely vital for the Axis. If they don't advance a long way in the first few turns, and if the Soviet player simply deploys enouggh units in the north quickly and allows them time to dig in, get supply, and build forts, then the Axis advance will be stymied.

(in reply to Beethoven1)

Post #: 29

RE: Of Course Not, The Entire Game Is An Anti-German De... - 2/6/2022 4:24:02 PM

Sammy5IsAlive

Posts: 514
Joined: 8/4/2014
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Beethoven1

I do think it is basically impossible for Axis to win in 1941 against a Soviet player that knows what they are doing (especially if Soviets abandon the south, but I don't think the issue is so simple as just "Soviets are too strong/Axis is too weak," relative to historical. However, I do think there is a significant balance issue (just talking about 1941 here), and I think it relates specifically to comparative balance in the south as compared to the north/centre.

Isn't this an example of the game being balanced though? Assuming you aren't seeing lots of the opposite outcomes where the Axis player is losing by the late 1941/1942 sudden loss checks? I'd only be expecting to see Axis auto victories in 1941 where there is a big mis-match in experience. If the players are broadly similarly matched I'd be expecting the majority of games to be going into 1944.

That said I think I agree with the general principle of this experiment - that if the Soviet side is able to avoid Sudden Loss despite all the restrictions there may be balance issues that need to be addressed. Will be interested to see how it turns out.

(in reply to Beethoven1)

Post #: 30