Russia much tougher in 1.60?

Share your best strategies and tips with other players here.
User avatar
willgamer
Posts: 900
Joined: Sat Jun 01, 2002 11:35 pm
Location: Huntsville, Alabama

Russia much tougher in 1.60?

Post by willgamer »

Is it just me or is Russia a much tougher nut to crack under 1.60?

Attacking in '41, on the first May turn when the map was not 100% mud, there are new forts, lots of L2 Inf. Corps, and even many L2 Arm. Corps.

The effects of invasion shock seem nerfed in some way and Brest-on-the-Bug is indeed vigorously defended.

Much more challenging so far. [:)]
Rex Lex or Lex Rex?
Anraz
Posts: 678
Joined: Fri Jul 25, 2008 4:59 am

RE: Russia much tougher in 1.60?

Post by Anraz »

In fact we tried to enhance Soviet and German AI performance especially in long campaigns. I even afraid that now German AI is overpowered and still have second thoughts regrading Soviet AI. I hope more such reports will help us to find even better balance.
User avatar
cpdeyoung
Posts: 5378
Joined: Tue Jul 17, 2007 3:26 pm
Location: South Carolina, USA

RE: Russia much tougher in 1.60?

Post by cpdeyoung »

I have been commenting in my current AAR about how much better the AI is playing. At the tactical level they are impressive, perhaps less so at higher levels. Still you guys have done a fine job as I see it, and the AI is much more fun to play against.

Chuck
herra
Posts: 9
Joined: Fri Sep 05, 2008 8:29 am

RE: Russia much tougher in 1.60?

Post by herra »

Hi,
Well i'm having alot of shocks from the AI in 1.60, normal difficulty I'm playing germany with the rest set to AI. I'm not playing with total concentration and careful planning, but I went into Russian around may 1941, I was totally confident with about 2500 PP unspent in the bank. Well the AI is punishing all my mistakes and over confidence, it's very encouraging signs from the AI in attack and defence. Great to see any lone unit attacked and cut off, and even large pincer movements that sprang from nowwhere on a completely static front, was great to see!
Frozen units on cities with 2 strength make it very easy to take cities even when larger strength units sit by, which a human player would put on the city?

My only real gripe is the naval game, maybe bring the sea zones onto the main map?. Please reduce the number of clicks with the mouse when bombing, perhaps put a bomb icon over all the units in range?
Also I would like to see strategic movement impossible for cut off units if possible?

I must say a BIG thankyou to wastelands for a great gesture for this free upgrade from RTV, Good Job!

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

RE: Russia much tougher in 1.60?

Post by Flaviusx »

German AI is fine. I just finished a 1.6 playtest Grand Campaign as a solo Soviet and knocked out Germany in mid 1944. No cheats on my part.
 
The AI is much better now, however, and builds a much more balanced military.
 
The German AI kind of threw away the game from the getgo by attacking me during the mud turns in 1941, thus wasting a lot of the disorganization period. So I actually think it needs a little buffing in a grand campaign context to avoid that sort of thing.
 
I'm going to do a solo Barbarossa playtest as the Russian next and see how that goes. That should be more challenging as the Soviet than the grand campaign, given the abysmal set up the Sovs have in the scenario and an active Finland.
WitE Alpha Tester
User avatar
doomtrader
Posts: 5319
Joined: Tue Jul 22, 2008 5:21 am
Location: Poland
Contact:

RE: Russia much tougher in 1.60?

Post by doomtrader »

Those kind of feedbacks about AI behaviour are very important for us.

Thank you.
oldspec4
Posts: 748
Joined: Mon Nov 01, 2004 2:34 pm

RE: Russia much tougher in 1.60?

Post by oldspec4 »

ORIGINAL: Flaviusx

German AI is fine. I just finished a 1.6 playtest Grand Campaign as a solo Soviet and knocked out Germany in mid 1944. No cheats on my part.

The AI is much better now, however, and builds a much more balanced military.

The German AI kind of threw away the game from the getgo by attacking me during the mud turns in 1941, thus wasting a lot of the disorganization period. So I actually think it needs a little buffing in a grand campaign context to avoid that sort of thing.

I'm going to do a solo Barbarossa playtest as the Russian next and see how that goes. That should be more challenging as the Soviet than the grand campaign, given the abysmal set up the Sovs have in the scenario and an active Finland.

You may want to wait until the official 1.60 patch. I played Russians in the Grand Campaign w/ the beta and came across a nasty bug that deletes text/dialog boxes (approx. turn 45).

As stated in tech support, a new exe file should fix the issue w/ the final 1.60.
Radar8717
Posts: 38
Joined: Fri Aug 03, 2007 1:26 pm
Location: Minnesota

RE: Russia much tougher in 1.60?

Post by Radar8717 »

Yes, overall the Soviet AI is much improved, but it still doesn't defend Leningrad or Moscow very well. Twice the Soviet AI has lost control of Leningrad during the Finnish Winter War and couldn't retake it in two different grand campaign games. Also usually I can take Lviv, Kishinev undefended during the first turn of Barbarossa. All these examples were played in the 1939 Grand Campaign with normal difficulty settings.
User avatar
willgamer
Posts: 900
Joined: Sat Jun 01, 2002 11:35 pm
Location: Huntsville, Alabama

RE: Russia much tougher in 1.60?

Post by willgamer »

Update 2 months later 1-July-1941 (normal difficulty)...

Russia gone wild! From the numbers, I think I must have stumbled into China! [:D]

Here's the side by side comparison of the forces just 2 months after the invasion:

Unit type/#German/#Russian
Inf. Div. 34/146
Inf. Cor. 39/90
Mch. Div. 0/25
Mch. Cor. 20/7
Arm. Div. 0/51
Arm. Cor. 12/3
Fighter 10/10
Tac. B. 12/10
Srt. B 0/2

Total Unit Strength: 621/931 [X(]

Production: 441/444, Upkeep: 185/45 (~+140 Russian edge in net production)

Russian war economy: 167% [X(][X(][X(] (Are you kidding me.... result of war with Finland?)

Land/air unit research: level 3/level 2

Add to this 20% (higher to the north, lower to the south) cloud cover in July (=mud).

The Russian lines are 3 deep around cities.

Given that it often takes multiple attacks at 6 or 7-1 to actually kill a unit, the Germans can't even eliminate what Russia can produce each turn.

I'm definitely not one of the experts here, but something doesn't feel right! [&:]
Rex Lex or Lex Rex?
User avatar
Flaviusx
Posts: 7732
Joined: Wed Sep 09, 2009 3:55 pm
Location: Southern California

RE: Russia much tougher in 1.60?

Post by Flaviusx »

Interesting. Sounds like Soviet AI is doing something I've always done: throw ants at the Germans until the disorganization period is over.

A swarm of cheap infantry divisions eats up German AP at little cost to yourself. I don't start defending for real until they reach my main line of resistance. (Pskov/Smolensk/Kiev/Odessa.) Once there do I actually use full corps based behind rivers and/or fort lines. Hopefully by the time the Germans get to these places in strength, I'm defending the spots with level 2 infantry corps without the disorganization penalty.

This is the reason the Barbarossa scenario is much tougher than the Grand Campaign as the Soviets. From my standpoint, the scenario set up is awful (but historically so.) And it throws away all that lovely armor...

WitE Alpha Tester
Anraz
Posts: 678
Joined: Fri Jul 25, 2008 4:59 am

RE: Russia much tougher in 1.60?

Post by Anraz »

Germans can't even eliminate what Russia can produce each turn

Welcome to the East front [8D]


User avatar
Michael the Pole
Posts: 680
Joined: Sat Oct 30, 2004 2:13 am
Location: Houston, Texas

RE: Russia much tougher in 1.60?

Post by Michael the Pole »

ORIGINAL: willgamer

Update 2 months later 1-July-1941 (normal difficulty)...

Russia gone wild! From the numbers, I think I must have stumbled into China! [:D]

Here's the side by side comparison of the forces just 2 months after the invasion:

Unit type/#German/#Russian
Inf. Div. 34/146
Inf. Cor. 39/90
Mch. Div. 0/25
Mch. Cor. 20/7
Arm. Div. 0/51
Arm. Cor. 12/3
Fighter 10/10
Tac. B. 12/10
Srt. B 0/2

Total Unit Strength: 621/931 [X(]

Production: 441/444, Upkeep: 185/45 (~+140 Russian edge in net production)

Russian war economy: 167% [X(][X(][X(] (Are you kidding me.... result of war with Finland?)

Land/air unit research: level 3/level 2

Add to this 20% (higher to the north, lower to the south) cloud cover in July (=mud).

The Russian lines are 3 deep around cities.

Given that it often takes multiple attacks at 6 or 7-1 to actually kill a unit, the Germans can't even eliminate what Russia can produce each turn.

I'm definitely not one of the experts here, but something doesn't feel right! [&:]
Interesting analysis
I have said repeatedly that the soviet production curve is initially much too steep. The Sovs were only able to go on the offensive accross the entire front in '43-44. Until then (ie Stalingrad in 42) they were only able to mount a limited offensive on part of the front while holding on by their teeth in other areas.
We see the same thing in the AARs where the Soviets attack Germany in 1940 or 1941 without provocation. Couldn't possibly have happened. (Provocation = abrogation of M-R Pact, or inadiquate garrison of Eastern borders.)
The end result is currently ok, with the Germans being steam rolled by masses of Red Army units. The curve of red production is too abrupt-- it shouldnt take off until 1943. But the only chance the Germans had historicaly was to fight an error free campaign and destroy the Soviet Army by the end of the summer of 1942.
I think that the solution is to slow down the growth of Soviet war production. This is essentially a tweak and must be discovered by experimentation. All of you track toads out there! What you should be looking for is a real cliff hanger in 1941 and again in 1942--1943 is Kursk and the destruction of Army Group South.
"One scoundrel is a disgrace, two is a law-firm, and three or more is a Congress." B. Franklin

Mike

A tribute to my heroes: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8fRU2tlE5m8
User avatar
Severian
Posts: 111
Joined: Sun Jul 27, 2008 2:16 pm
Location: Poland
Contact:

RE: Russia much tougher in 1.60?

Post by Severian »

Have you any idea what is "soviet limited counteroffensive"? It's bigger than any Patton's 3rd Army offensive.

In winter 1941/42 there were plenty of big counteroffensives:

- Tikhvin Operation
- Rostov Operation
- Moscov Operation
- Kerch-Feodosiya amphibiuos assault
- Luban Operation
- Rzhev-Vyazma Operation
- Diemansk Operation
- Barwienkowo-Lozow Operation

In those operations only Zhukov lost 1.500.000 dead soldiers in 3 months, Konev in his army lost 341.000 soldiers of 346.000 at beginning. Each operation involved min. 3 armies (20-30 divisions and 5-10 armored brigades).

I must say that 1941 and 1942 were years when SU had millions of soldiers and lost millions. In 1943 situation wasn't better - in fact Red Army had mobilization crisis because over 70 millions of Soviet citizens were under German occupation. Red Army lost so many potential soldiers that even prisoners from Siberia had been taken to front in Strafbats (penalty battalions) and you say that in 1943 was the year of Soviet mobilization breakthrough?
War, war never changes... but are you sure? Bitter Glory

Put an apple in your mouth, we'll play Wilhelm Tell - "Hawkeye" Pierce to Frank Burns
User avatar
Flaviusx
Posts: 7732
Joined: Wed Sep 09, 2009 3:55 pm
Location: Southern California

RE: Russia much tougher in 1.60?

Post by Flaviusx »

As Severian says, Sovs launched front wide counteroffensives as early as winter 1941-2. (And indeed launched counteroffensives as early as late June/early July 1941 across most of the front, in accordance to their defense plan. These didn't work out so good, though.)

The game has actually much improved the Soviet economy, by drastically limiting it in the pre war period. It ramps up fast during wartime, but it's really hard now to build a humungous army with thousands of PP left in the kitty prior to that. So the German player has a chance and a short window to overwhelm the Sovs before the Big Red Mobilization Machine gets into gear. This seems about right to me.

You have to take maximum advantage of the disorginization period. (And the German AI needs to learn to not declare war on April 1941 and get stuck in mud...)

Edit: also, it is true that Soviet production was crippled in 1941, but this shouldn't be confused with mobilization. They were pumping out hundreds, and I literally mean hundreds, of rifle divisions in the first 6 months of the war. The numbers are fairly staggering. That's why they were able to bounce back from disasters in Kiev, Smolensk, and Orel/Vyazma. They could lose entire Fronts and have the losses replaced in weeks. That happened most spectacularly in front of Moscow during the Oct-Dec period.

WitE Alpha Tester
Anraz
Posts: 678
Joined: Fri Jul 25, 2008 4:59 am

RE: Russia much tougher in 1.60?

Post by Anraz »

I have said repeatedly that the soviet production curve is initially much too steep.
 
[..]

 
The curve of red production is too abrupt-- it shouldnt take off until 1943. But the only chance the Germans had historicaly was to fight an error free campaign and destroy the Soviet Army by the end of the summer of 1942.
 

Mike here you are Soviet GDP during ww2 [ counted in billion international dollars and 1990 prices http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Military_production_during_World_War_II ]
 
1938 - 359, % of 1938 production: 100
1939 - 366, % of 1938 production: 102
1940 - 417, % of 1938 production: 116
1941 - 359, % of 1938 production: 100
1942 - 274, % of 1938 production: 76
1943 - 305, % of 1938 production: 85
1944 - 362, % of 1938 production: 101
1945 - 343, % of 1938 production: 95
User avatar
willgamer
Posts: 900
Joined: Sat Jun 01, 2002 11:35 pm
Location: Huntsville, Alabama

RE: Russia much tougher in 1.60?

Post by willgamer »

ORIGINAL: Anraz
Germans can't even eliminate what Russia can produce each turn

Welcome to the East front [8D]

Oh please! The condescension is not helpful. [:-]

I don't question the experts here who cite Russian hordes. I would question whether the game combat system allows for historical loss rates. However, the more serious problem IMHO is-

In the Barbarossa scenario, the USSR starts with a war economy of 65% and total unit strength of 465. In the same month and year (abeit 2 months after invasion), the war economy is 167%, the strength is 931.


Either the grand campaign or the scenario is broken. [:@]

I asked if the war in Finland might be the root cause of the problem. Are we saying that the critical strategy for the USSR is to go to war with Finland asap to maximize the war economy. [X(][X(][X(]

I should also mention the USSR SMP had been built up to 38. That's the ability to transport 38 inf. div./turn.

Is anyone seriously defending the German advances in the USSR being reduced to 1 hex to the East just 2 months after the invasion? [&:]


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

RE: Russia much tougher in 1.60?

Post by Flaviusx »

An extended war with Finland could be a problem here, yeah. Perhaps the game engine should be modified to treat wars against minors differently than a war against a major power or coalition, and limit economic gains from limited wars.
 
That said, a Soviet players willing to abuse the Bolshevik Industrialization event could actually pump up his production handsomely even without going to war. But his national morale will be incredibly fragile if he does this.
 
One way to overcome the ant problem for the Germans: build your own ants and lots of them. You can actually get high odds attacks against scratch Soviet divisions with German divisions, and you'll have more APs to play with. Using big bad panzer corps for ant stopping is uneconomical. So, instead of running around with 12 motorized corps, reduce that number and give yourself some motorized divisions.
WitE Alpha Tester
Anraz
Posts: 678
Joined: Fri Jul 25, 2008 4:59 am

RE: Russia much tougher in 1.60?

Post by Anraz »

One way to overcome the ant problem for the Germans: build your own ants and lots of them. You can actually get high odds attacks against scratch Soviet divisions with German divisions, and you'll have more APs to play with. Using big bad panzer corps for ant stopping is uneconomical. So, instead of running around with 12 motorized corps, reduce that number and give yourself some motorized divisions.

And this the very good tactic. Shield your wings with weak infantry units and push forward in chosen places, aim at key cities and/or try to make large pocket with enemy divisions inside. No more "ant" will bother you. Also do not hesitate and allow Soviet player to perform smaller counteroffensives while having impotent objects on the horizon.
User avatar
willgamer
Posts: 900
Joined: Sat Jun 01, 2002 11:35 pm
Location: Huntsville, Alabama

RE: Russia much tougher in 1.60?

Post by willgamer »

ORIGINAL: Anraz
One way to overcome the ant problem for the Germans: build your own ants and lots of them. You can actually get high odds attacks against scratch Soviet divisions with German divisions, and you'll have more APs to play with. Using big bad panzer corps for ant stopping is uneconomical. So, instead of running around with 12 motorized corps, reduce that number and give yourself some motorized divisions.

And this the very good tactic. Shield your wings with weak infantry units and push forward in chosen places, aim at key cities and/or try to make large pocket with enemy divisions inside. No more "ant" will bother you. Also do not hesitate and allow Soviet player to perform smaller counteroffensives while having impotent objects on the horizon.

I'm utterly gobsmacked! [:D]

Are you saying that the official response to a USSR at 167% war effort and about twice the strength of the Axis in June '41 in the grand campaign, vastly different to the Barbarossa scenario, is: WAD![X(][X(][X(][X(]

Just WOW![8|]

(WAD=Working As Designed)
Rex Lex or Lex Rex?
User avatar
Tomokatu
Posts: 488
Joined: Mon Feb 27, 2006 7:55 am

RE: Russia much tougher in 1.60?

Post by Tomokatu »

while having impotent objects on the horizon
While I realise that it's an accidental confusion in a second language for the author and I really am not wanting to appear in any way critical or condemnatory, as a sometime creator of erotic art - I ABSOLUTELY LOVE THIS IMAGERY!![:D]
That's going to spark off a series of cartoons, that is.
 
Thank you, Anraz [&o]- you've made my weekend.
For every action, there is an equal and opposite malfunction
Post Reply

Return to “The War Room”