Matrix Games Forums

Command Ops gets a Massive Update!Lost Battles AAR: Smolensk 41War in the East: Lost Battles is here!Conflict of Heroes: Awakening the Bear! Let's Play videoLost Battles Scenario Manual excerpts available!A sneak peek from Allied Corps!Harpoon 3 ANWs Free Ultimate Update!All good Deals always come in threesDistant Worlds: Shadows Approaches!Lost Battles AAR: Moscow 41		 Forums  Register  Login  Photo Gallery  Member List  Search  Calendars  FAQ 

My Profile  Inbox  Address Book  My Subscription  My Forums  Log Out

RE: Pelton vs Kamil

 
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: Pelton vs Kamil Page: <<   < prev  4 5 [6] 7 8   next >   >>
Login
Message << Older Topic   Newer Topic >>
RE: Pelton vs Kamil - 10/30/2011 8:11:38 AM   
76mm


Posts: 1703
Joined: 5/2/2004
Status: offline 		The rarely-seen German carpet defense makes an appearance!

(in reply to Pelton)
Post #: 151
RE: Pelton vs Kamil - 10/30/2011 1:49:38 PM   
Kamil

 

Posts: 1510
Joined: 2/5/2011
Status: online 		These are casualties from turns 52nd an 70th.


Why German losses are dropping?


losses:

Ger -40k
Sov +155k




Attachment (1)

< Message edited by Kamil -- 10/30/2011 1:51:05 PM >

(in reply to 76mm)
Post #: 152
RE: Pelton vs Kamil - 10/30/2011 2:53:22 PM   
Pelton


Posts: 4355
Joined: 4/9/2006
Status: offline 		Your 100% right.

After looking at my turn 59 losses and turn 70 losses I gained men. My numbers are different then yours, but number are close.

I put it in tech support area.

http://www.matrixgames.com/forums/tm.asp?m=2940037&mpage=1&key=�

Pelton

< Message edited by Pelton -- 10/30/2011 3:18:48 PM >

(in reply to Pelton)
Post #: 153
RE: Pelton vs Kamil - 10/30/2011 3:38:52 PM   
Marquo


Posts: 1095
Joined: 9/26/2000
Status: offline 		The number of killed and captured have increased but the disabled dropped; I think the disabled are recycled through the transit pool.

Marquo

(in reply to Pelton)
Post #: 154
RE: Pelton vs Kamil - 10/30/2011 4:30:23 PM   
Kamil

 

Posts: 1510
Joined: 2/5/2011
Status: online
quote:

Marquo

The number of killed and captured have increased but the disabled dropped; I think the disabled are recycled through the transit pool.



Problem is my all figures increased - so Pelton's attrition was much much lower than my. (maybe it is kind of bug?)

(in reply to Marquo)
Post #: 155
RE: Pelton vs Kamil - 10/30/2011 4:40:13 PM   
Pelton


Posts: 4355
Joined: 4/9/2006
Status: offline 		With 1.05 German units can go into static mode, which dropps loses to about 8 to 10k per turn if all front line units are in static mode. So army can grow 18,000 k per turn instead of the old 8,000 per turn.

Which make sents if there is no fighting going on. Once we start fighting I have to take units out of static mode and attrition will jump back up into the old 16,000 to 20,000k per turn.

No bug new rule set.

(in reply to 76mm)
Post #: 156
RE: Pelton vs Kamil - 10/30/2011 4:45:44 PM   
Marquo


Posts: 1095
Joined: 9/26/2000
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: Kamil

quote:

Marquo

The number of killed and captured have increased but the disabled dropped; I think the disabled are recycled through the transit pool.



Problem is my all figures increased - so Pelton's attrition was much much lower than my. (maybe it is kind of bug?)



Thay may mean that you are accruing disabled losses at at a rate which exceeds the recycle rate.

(in reply to Kamil)
Post #: 157
RE: Pelton vs Kamil - 10/30/2011 4:49:39 PM   
Kamil

 

Posts: 1510
Joined: 2/5/2011
Status: online
quote:

Pelton


With 1.05 German units can go into static mode, which dropps loses to about 8 to 10k per turn if all front line units are in static mode. So army can grow 18,000 k per turn instead of the old 8,000 per turn.

Which make sents if there is no fighting going on. Once we start fighting I have to take units out of static mode and attrition will jump back up into the old 16,000 to 20,000k per turn.

No bug new rule set.



Good stuff.

(in reply to Marquo)
Post #: 158
RE: Pelton vs Kamil - 10/30/2011 4:54:57 PM   
Marquo


Posts: 1095
Joined: 9/26/2000
Status: offline 		Did you put them into static mode?

Marquo

(in reply to Kamil)
Post #: 159
RE: Pelton vs Kamil - 10/30/2011 4:58:22 PM   
Pelton


Posts: 4355
Joined: 4/9/2006
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: Marquo


quote:

ORIGINAL: Kamil

quote:

Marquo

The number of killed and captured have increased but the disabled dropped; I think the disabled are recycled through the transit pool.



Problem is my all figures increased - so Pelton's attrition was much much lower than my. (maybe it is kind of bug?)



Thay may mean that you are accruing disabled losses at at a rate which exceeds the recycle rate.


Kamil is short 89 armament pts so thats not going to be easy to over come the rest of the War

(in reply to Marquo)
Post #: 160
RE: Pelton vs Kamil - 11/1/2011 1:22:02 AM   
Kamil

 

Posts: 1510
Joined: 2/5/2011
Status: online 		T74 (12 Nov 42, first turn of snow)


I dared to make 3 attacks. My boys did well, but overall situation is not as good as it might seem - I won't be able to make enough successful attacks to be able to bleed Pelton's forces. Not to mention fact that attacking makes me very vulnerable.




Attachment (1)

< Message edited by Kamil -- 11/1/2011 1:29:51 AM >

(in reply to 76mm)
Post #: 161
RE: Pelton vs Kamil - 11/1/2011 3:54:19 AM   
Pelton


Posts: 4355
Joined: 4/9/2006
Status: offline 		High loss ratio for me 2 to 1 when throw out the fort guys, but that was probably best possible units you could muster. 200 afvs and 80 guns.

Hate to see what a hold result would look like.

Now we have 3 hexes of no mans land with a ton of units on both sides waiting on easy pickings heheh I guess someone can claim them during mud.

Pelton

(in reply to Kamil)
Post #: 162
RE: Pelton vs Kamil - 11/1/2011 4:33:32 AM   
Kamil

 

Posts: 1510
Joined: 2/5/2011
Status: online
quote:

Pelton

Hate to see what a hold result would look like.



T75





Attachment (1)

< Message edited by Kamil -- 11/1/2011 4:44:41 AM >

(in reply to Pelton)
Post #: 163
RE: Pelton vs Kamil - 11/1/2011 9:48:41 AM   
Pelton


Posts: 4355
Joined: 4/9/2006
Status: offline 		Ouch!

With 5 wins 1 loss (83%)the ratio jumped over 2.7 to 1, which is a draw ratio if you were doing 20+ attacks a turn. Wow almost 400 afvs in 6 attacks.

Looking back on Hooopers old game he was winning about 85% of attacks with 20% to 25% being from 1v1=2v1. He was averaging 30 attacks per turn. So with out he be doing 60% to 65%. Loss ratio was 3 to 1.

So with out 1v1=2v1 he would have been wining about 63% or 2/3 of his attacks. Your doing better then average, because your being smart and picking soft spots.

Thats allot of losses doing 10 attacks per turn 85% ratio, it be more if you were doing 66% ratio.


< Message edited by Pelton -- 11/1/2011 10:53:16 AM >

(in reply to Kamil)
Post #: 164
RE: Pelton vs Kamil - 11/2/2011 2:45:04 PM   
olivier34

 

Posts: 998
Joined: 5/10/2010
From: montpellier
Status: offline 		is this GC still fun to play ? Great and interesting analyse of the production and the manpower but it will be a little boring to follow your game if you play it until 45 (or 46 maybe) ! It's a death carpet match !
it remembers me my first wargame experience, the game was "La Marne" and it was very static.
We should ask Larry F. to do one of his great animation to be abble to see the moves of the front during the next two years...we should see a wave maybe...

(in reply to Pelton)
Post #: 165
RE: Pelton vs Kamil - 11/2/2011 5:14:29 PM   
Kamil

 

Posts: 1510
Joined: 2/5/2011
Status: online
quote:

olivier34

is this GC still fun to play ?



It is not as thrilling as '41 and winter of '42, but I think it is still fun, especially for Soviet who can arrange their armies accordingly to situation and decide how game develops.

(in reply to olivier34)
Post #: 166
RE: Pelton vs Kamil - 11/2/2011 7:45:27 PM   
Pelton


Posts: 4355
Joined: 4/9/2006
Status: offline 		WiTE is mostly Germans get to push for first 17 turns then sit and take it for another 233. If you lucky you get to attack again during 42 for 17 turns.

So about 85% of the time your on the defensive.

I am hoping it goes on until 44 atleast.

It will just depend on when Kamil can get the steam roller going.

(in reply to Kamil)
Post #: 167
RE: Pelton vs Kamil - 11/2/2011 9:01:30 PM   
Q-Ball


Posts: 5261
Joined: 6/25/2002
From: Chicago, Illinois
Status: offline 		Keep it going, we need some games to get past 1942 here, between two good opponents

(in reply to Pelton)
Post #: 168
RE: Pelton vs Kamil - 11/3/2011 2:24:44 AM   
Pelton


Posts: 4355
Joined: 4/9/2006
Status: offline 		The ratio is allot different then before 1.05.

I am attacking at 4 to 1 and winnng and losing more troops then him. I route 2 of the 3 units. He was in open terrain also.

When I lose a battle now I lose more then him. I know they changed the combat ratio but it seems very screwed up.

In the past when I won a battle with 2 to 1 odds an just a retreat I get 2 to 1 odds in my favor.
Now when the Germans win your lucky to get 1 to 1 odds.

So look to see all games go static in 42 with these retarded ratios. There is very little point now to even counter attack.

The changing of the ratio simply gimped the hole patch. The nerfing forts helped a little, but gimping German attacks really is retarded.

Again WW I on the Russian front in 42.




Attachment (1)

(in reply to Q-Ball)
Post #: 169
RE: Pelton vs Kamil - 11/3/2011 2:35:20 AM   
Ketza


Posts: 2016
Joined: 1/14/2007
From: Columbia, Maryland
Status: offline 		Attacking Soviet infantry corps is deadly unless they are worn down. Its just how it is.

(in reply to Pelton)
Post #: 170
RE: Pelton vs Kamil - 11/3/2011 2:44:02 AM   
Pelton


Posts: 4355
Joined: 4/9/2006
Status: offline 		I do know that, but its never been this sick.

I battled Hoooper all though 42 and 43. It was never this bad.

Mybee its his best troops, but they are in open no forts vs allot of tanks and same number of guns.

Thats not even close to historical. In the past when you rout units you get 3 to 4 to 1 ratio, now its 1 to 1.5.

This is nothing like before 1.05

< Message edited by Pelton -- 11/3/2011 2:48:25 AM >

(in reply to Ketza)
Post #: 171
RE: Pelton vs Kamil - 11/3/2011 3:06:02 AM   
Q-Ball


Posts: 5261
Joined: 6/25/2002
From: Chicago, Illinois
Status: offline 		What changes happened in 1.05 though that would make it tougher than 1.04?

Russian National Morale is lower, and Armament production less.

How is the morale of your units?

(in reply to Pelton)
Post #: 172
RE: Pelton vs Kamil - 11/3/2011 3:26:09 AM   
Marquo


Posts: 1095
Joined: 9/26/2000
Status: offline 		What does Fort 1 --> 0 mean on the battle report....

(in reply to Q-Ball)
Post #: 173
RE: Pelton vs Kamil - 11/3/2011 4:33:08 AM   
Q-Ball


Posts: 5261
Joined: 6/25/2002
From: Chicago, Illinois
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: Marquo

What does Fort 1 --> 0 mean on the battle report....


Started at Lvl 1, was reduced to Zero during combat

(in reply to Marquo)
Post #: 174
RE: Pelton vs Kamil - 11/3/2011 5:25:21 AM   
JAMiAM

 

Posts: 6146
Joined: 2/8/2004
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: Ketza

Attacking Soviet infantry corps is deadly unless they are worn down. Its just how it is.

QFT

(in reply to Ketza)
Post #: 175
RE: Pelton vs Kamil - 11/3/2011 10:38:20 AM   
Pelton


Posts: 4355
Joined: 4/9/2006
Status: offline 		Nation moral, which seems as pointless as hvy industry unless I am missing something?

During 41 Blizzard all german troops lose 2 pts of moral per turn ( as per 22.3.3 ) or 32 pts of moral which means after blizzard most German infantry are at less then 65 moral.

When I fight a battle the combat is based on the moral of units and not national moral right?

So what point does national moral play in the game at all?

German units never gain back moral sitting, Russians do as I understand it so national moral only helps the russian side and not the German.

Am I right about this?



< Message edited by Pelton -- 11/3/2011 10:42:38 AM >

(in reply to JAMiAM)
Post #: 176
RE: Pelton vs Kamil - 11/3/2011 10:45:30 AM   
Pelton


Posts: 4355
Joined: 4/9/2006
Status: offline 		Its 42 the front is a carpet of infantry corps. Thats why WW I on the russian front. The thing 2/3 is tring to nerf and make fun or a mobile warfare for atleast 42.

I am sure most German players would like vs an even enemy to do something other then attack for 17 turns then be a punching bag for 233. With this ratio there just is about no point in attacking or counter attacking during 42-45

< Message edited by Pelton -- 11/3/2011 10:46:29 AM >

(in reply to JAMiAM)
Post #: 177
RE: Pelton vs Kamil - 11/3/2011 6:05:17 PM   
olivier34

 

Posts: 998
Joined: 5/10/2010
From: montpellier
Status: offline 		yes Pelton, I agree. You should be abble to do a large breakthrough in one sector by concentrating your best forces but it seems impossible...I am not an expert of the east front but I think that in 42 the germans had this power...even in 43 (Kursk saliant...)
I feel that the way we use APs should be change. Both players should have to make choices. For exemple, If the german want to do a push in the south in 42, he needs to get enough APs, so he needs to put other part of the front in static.
If the soviet wants to concentrate some armys to be abble to counter attack (Stalingrad), it must be costly for him. In the same time, He should not be abble to build fortification all along the front (three rows !). A fortified sector three rows deep should be costly, so we should see only part of a front like that. They could become saliants and the skill of the players will be to find the good spots to build such saliants or how to turn those by preparing an offensive which would ask a few weeks.




< Message edited by olivier34 -- 11/3/2011 6:14:37 PM >

(in reply to Pelton)
Post #: 178
RE: Pelton vs Kamil - 11/4/2011 2:03:45 AM   
Marquo


Posts: 1095
Joined: 9/26/2000
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: Q-Ball


quote:

ORIGINAL: Marquo

What does Fort 1 --> 0 mean on the battle report....


Started at Lvl 1, was reduced to Zero during combat


Thanks, that is what I thought and I think that Pelton forgot this in his calculus.

Marquo

(in reply to Q-Ball)
Post #: 179
RE: Pelton vs Kamil - 11/4/2011 6:50:38 AM   
76mm


Posts: 1703
Joined: 5/2/2004
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: Pelton
The changing of the ratio simply gimped the hole patch. The nerfing forts helped a little, but gimping German attacks really is retarded.


What exactly what gimping took place? I don't recall reading anything about that in the patch notes. In fact, even after getting rid of 1:1, the Sovs continue to take horrendous 10x losses if an attack fails, so as far as I can tell nothing has changed in combat resolution.

It looks like you won a marginal victory and took some losses. The routed units were probably a result of units retreating into overstacked hexes so should not be viewed as you crushing his units in combat.

If you're attacking rifle corps, it is going to hurt. Do you have a more representative sample of combat results, or is this it?

I've been saying from day one that this patch could result in total stalemate in 1942, but the main problem seems to be not combat resolution but the fact that the Sov army is too big in 1942 because they are not being pocketed in 1941 because they have no reason to defend...

(in reply to Pelton)
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: Pelton vs Kamil Page: <<   < prev  4 5 [6] 7 8   next >   >>
Jump to:





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
 Reply to Message
 Post New Poll
 Submit Vote
 Delete My Own Post
 Delete My Own Thread
 Rate Posts


Forum Software © ASPPlayground.NET Advanced Edition 2.4.5 ANSI

0.293