March Madness '42

Gary Grigsby’s War in the East: The German-Soviet War 1941-1945 is a turn-based World War II strategy game stretching across the entire Eastern Front. Gamers can engage in an epic campaign, including division-sized battles with realistic and historical terrain, weather, orders of battle, logistics and combat results.

The critically and fan-acclaimed Eastern Front mega-game Gary Grigsby’s War in the East just got bigger and better with Gary Grigsby’s War in the East: Don to the Danube! This expansion to the award-winning War in the East comes with a wide array of later war scenarios ranging from short but intense 6 turn bouts like the Battle for Kharkov (1942) to immense 37-turn engagements taking place across multiple nations like Drama on the Danube (Summer 1944 – Spring 1945).

Moderators: Joel Billings, elmo3, Sabre21

User avatar
Flaviusx
Posts: 7732
Joined: Wed Sep 09, 2009 3:55 pm
Location: Southern California

RE: March Madness '42

Post by Flaviusx »

Pelton, I sure wish you'd get as worked up about all the goofy things that happen in 41 (starting on turn 1 no less,) but these are of course in your favor.

WitE Alpha Tester
User avatar
Peltonx
Posts: 5814
Joined: Sun Apr 09, 2006 2:24 am
Contact:

RE: March Madness '42

Post by Peltonx »

ORIGINAL: Toidi

ORIGINAL: ComradeP

Toidi: keep in mind that the Soviets already have a serious advantage as whereas army HQ's were more often than not more like corps level commands in terms of units attached, there is no penalty for attaching 12 divisions to them, making them equal to an Axis army. That's a serious advantage, because it means you have to use fewer army HQ's and can concentrate your mediocre to good leaders in that limited number of army HQ's.

It will be changed at some point (that is: presumably there will either be penalties when more than X units are attached or the command capacity will be lowered), but only if some of the ahistorical Axis advantages are removed first according to Pavel, something I agree with.


Well, I kind of agree with that - you can attach 12 divisions to an army. But you need to bear in mind that until you have corps, those 12 divisions have a CV more or less equal to 2 division of German infantry. As such, the combat power of the Soviet army is half combat power of German Corps... not to mention the possibility of force concentration ;) As such, I do not see that much of an advantage there. There is some late in game - when you have corps and the command capacity go up. Army with 9 Corps attached is quite a bit stronger than German equivalent. But until '43, I really do not see it as much of an advantage; The solution later is relatively simple, one can make Corps weight more than 3 points so fewer corps can be attached to an army without the penalties. On the other hand, I thought that the very powerful late Soviet armies were introduced intentionally... just to let the German be in the same situation in terms of forces attacking as Soviets before (it is more or less equal, the CV of 9 corps army is more or less the same as CV of two German Corps).

The historical combat ratio was 1 dead german for 5 russians until mid 44.

The CV's can be whatever, but the basic game engine is not reflecting history.

It 100% not equal at all, the german army is out numbered 2.5 to 1 43 on and russian output in men is 5 to 1.
The basic combat ratio from 42 to end of war is 2 to 1.
So the russian player simply attacks along the front for 30 turns come late 43 and the german army is under 2.3 million and moral is in the tank.

Its simply 1+1=2 do the math Toidi.

IF the combat ratio was historical the German army would brake 3rd or 4th quarter of 44 and not 1st or 2nd quarter.

Until the game engine is a reflextion of history game will end many months before may 45 no matter how horrible the Russian game play was.

Its a FACT once the german army brakes the Russian army can pocket 5 to 10 units per turn easly and advance 4 to 6 hexes to berlin.

I been bitching about how unhistorical the combat ratio is for months.

1+1=2

2 by 3 has to fix this issue or the game remains unplayable after 42.

Pelton
Beta Tester WitW & WitE
User avatar
Peltonx
Posts: 5814
Joined: Sun Apr 09, 2006 2:24 am
Contact:

RE: March Madness '42

Post by Peltonx »

ORIGINAL: Flaviusx

Pelton, I sure wish you'd get as worked up about all the goofy things that happen in 41 (starting on turn 1 no less,) but these are of course in your favor.


Your 100% right about that, I do not disagree at all and 100% agree.

The game is screwed up for sure.

if they fix the unhistorical ratio's

I have 100% no problem with a fix for Lvov pocket.

The game right now is not historical at all. lets just put it on table and get that over with.

The game engine is in need of some TLC.
Beta Tester WitW & WitE
User avatar
Peltonx
Posts: 5814
Joined: Sun Apr 09, 2006 2:24 am
Contact:

RE: March Madness '42

Post by Peltonx »

ORIGINAL: Flaviusx

Pelton, I sure wish you'd get as worked up about all the goofy things that happen in 41 (starting on turn 1 no less,) but these are of course in your favor.


Also WTH is goofy other then your stupid responce.

As is the case most times you can't refute what I have stated: the combat ratio is a disaster 42 to early 44.

You got to come back with the childish personal responces.

1. The combat ratio is not historical.
2. Russians way way over powered late war.

You know this as fact and have stated that the russian army is over powered late war.

Its over powered late war because the basic combat ratio is of during 1942, 1943 and early 1944.

You already know this and so does 2 by 3.

Why keep wasting poeple time?

Why the stupid, ( We would like to see some more games play out)

You guys alrdy know the dam answer to the question and yet string the general playing public along like lab rats.

Pelton
Beta Tester WitW & WitE
Cavalry Corp
Posts: 3634
Joined: Tue Sep 02, 2003 5:28 pm
Location: Sampford Spiney Devon UK

RE: March Madness '42

Post by Cavalry Corp »

Pelton,

You are keen to get things changed - I advocate patience and one step at a time.

I am inclined to agree with you but these guys are trying to fix things and I agree its good to see how games arrive in 44 or so.

I am not against what you say. There must be something wrong as I do not hear Soviet players raising issues. The Soviets seem to be too effective. You have a lot of games running, you are an experienced player and your AAR are valuable and speak loudest.

Cav
User avatar
Flaviusx
Posts: 7732
Joined: Wed Sep 09, 2009 3:55 pm
Location: Southern California

RE: March Madness '42

Post by Flaviusx »

Er, this entire topic came about as a result of Soviet complaints. (It has since gone offtopic.) The jury is still out on 1942, and this really shouldn't be swept under the rug by skipping over to 1944 where a different set of issues is apparent.

For that matter, we're ignoring 1941 issues.
WitE Alpha Tester
Cavalry Corp
Posts: 3634
Joined: Tue Sep 02, 2003 5:28 pm
Location: Sampford Spiney Devon UK

RE: March Madness '42

Post by Cavalry Corp »

OK noted...
User avatar
terje439
Posts: 6603
Joined: Sun Mar 28, 2004 12:01 pm

RE: March Madness '42

Post by terje439 »

ORIGINAL: Pelton
3. German lose way to much artillary when retreating.

The German army had no problem retreating unlike russian army.

I am not at all an experienced player in this game, nor am I an expert in anything, and by no means do I mean to either put gasoline on the bonfire, nor to be disrespectful.

However this statement seems to me that you confuse retreats and retreats.
Falling back gradually, or merely redeploying to avoid being cut off or attacked is not the same as being pushed back due to a combat result.
When the Germans had to fall back due to overwhelming pressure, they very often lost artillery pieces, espesially AT guns and mortars (atleast that is what one of the members of the SS Wiking told me before he passed away), but if they knew they were being attacked and were well organized, these losses could be avoided.

I think that maybe losses should be less IF they are made on level 2+ fortified units, but remain as they are if the unit is less fortified??
It might be that I think of the fortification values in a way that is nowhere near what the designers intended, but for me
0 fort = just arrived
1 fort = some trenches
2 fort = trenches, barbed wire, layered defence
3 fort = now bunkers start to appear (wooden pillboxes)
4-5 fort = well designed fortification works with everything in place (mines, barbed wire, etc etc)


Terje
"Hun skal torpederes!" - Birger Eriksen

("She is to be torpedoed!")
Callistrid
Posts: 669
Joined: Thu Aug 11, 2011 12:27 pm

RE: March Madness '42

Post by Callistrid »

Pelton, it's hard to simulate the soviet mistakes, like:
1. hold the line at all cost
2. attack the german at all cost
3. never retreat
4. Kiev, Smolensk, Vyazma and other minor pocket...

In the WITE the soviet player try to minimalize his looses, and retreat if he/she need to do that. In the WW2 it was not so.
User avatar
Baelfiin
Posts: 2983
Joined: Tue Jun 06, 2006 9:07 pm

RE: March Madness '42

Post by Baelfiin »

I think pelton may be off his meds today 8)
"We are going to attack all night, and attack tomorrow morning..... If we are not victorious, let no one come back alive!" -- Patton
WITE-Beta
WITW-Alpha
The Logistics Phase is like Black Magic and Voodoo all rolled into one.
User avatar
KenchiSulla
Posts: 2956
Joined: Wed Oct 22, 2008 3:19 pm
Location: the Netherlands

RE: March Madness '42

Post by KenchiSulla »

ORIGINAL: Baelfiin

I think pelton may be off his meds today 8)

Isn't he always?
AKA Cannonfodder

"It happened, therefore it can happen again: this is the core of what we have to say. It can happen, and it can happen everywhere.”
¯ Primo Levi, writer, holocaust survivor
User avatar
delatbabel
Posts: 1252
Joined: Sun Jul 30, 2006 1:37 am
Location: Sydney, Australia
Contact:

RE: March Madness '42

Post by delatbabel »

Can we get back on topic?  I'll start a new thread, this one has died.
--
Del
Post Reply

Return to “Gary Grigsby's War in the East Series”