Matrix Games Forums

To End All Wars: Mountain InfantryPandora: Eclipse of Nashira Announced! Deal of the Week: Command Ops goes half price!New Fronts are opening up for Commander: The Great WarCharacters of World War 1Sign of for the Pike and Shot Beta!More Games are Coming to Steam! Return to the Moon on October 31st! Commander: The Great War iPad Wallpapers Generals of the Great War
Forums  Register  Login  Photo Gallery  Member List  Search  Calendars  FAQ 

My Profile  Inbox  Address Book  My Subscription  My Forums  Log Out

RE: Lvov Pocket exploit - Q for developers

 
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 >> RE: Lvov Pocket exploit - Q for developers Page: <<   < prev  1 2 [3] 4 5   next >   >>
Login
Message << Older Topic   Newer Topic >>
RE: Lvov Pocket exploit - Q for developers - 9/21/2011 6:46:33 PM   
redmarkus4


Posts: 4084
Joined: 12/1/2007
From: 0.00
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: sveint

What is really needed is a scenario with a free setup turn for each side.


+1 to that

_____________________________

Cyberpower tower PC
Intel Core i7-3930k CPU, 3.20GHz processor
32 GB RAM
2TB HD
2xNVIDIA GeForce GTX 680 graphics cards, each with 4095 MB
Realtek sound card
Dell 3007WFP (running at 2560x1600) 32 bit monitor
Windows 7 Professional 64-bit O

(in reply to sveint)
Post #: 61
RE: Lvov Pocket exploit - Q for developers - 9/21/2011 7:23:53 PM   
kirkgregerson

 

Posts: 506
Joined: 4/9/2008
Status: offline
This issue with the Lvov pocket opening being some sort of issue is silly, as other have already mention.  Do people know what they are really asking for here?  Where does it end?  Maybe the game should control each turn to make sure a historical path is followed by both side.  My goodness, can we please not dilute the developers time with this utter nonsense.  There's several more pressing issues that need to be looked at.

< Message edited by kirkgregerson -- 9/21/2011 7:24:38 PM >

(in reply to redmarkus4)
Post #: 62
RE: Lvov Pocket exploit - Q for developers - 9/21/2011 7:44:11 PM   
heliodorus04


Posts: 1402
Joined: 11/1/2008
From: Denver Colorado
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: kirkgregerson

This issue with the Lvov pocket opening being some sort of issue is silly, as other have already mention.  Do people know what they are really asking for here?  Where does it end?  Maybe the game should control each turn to make sure a historical path is followed by both side.  My goodness, can we please not dilute the developers time with this utter nonsense.  There's several more pressing issues that need to be looked at.


+1
Germany's invasion was a surprise. You're going to have a lot of pretty toys broken by their invasion, but you'll get 20x more to replace them.

(in reply to kirkgregerson)
Post #: 63
RE: Lvov Pocket exploit - Q for developers - 9/21/2011 7:48:07 PM   
asdicus

 

Posts: 251
Joined: 5/16/2002
From: Surrey,UK
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: redmarkus4

3. WiTP AE has two start options, IIRC, one of which allows you to start on December 08, after Pearl Harbor. Maybe WITE needs an option to start the Grand Campaign in week 2, with the historical successes of the first week of operations already played out and the surprise factor removed?


I think this would be an excellent option for starting the 1941 campaign in week 2 with all the historical gains implemented etc. It would avoid all the problems with the russian forces in the south being forced to stand still while the germans just drive around and encircle them. witp ae has exactly the same problems if you allow a free for all on the dec 7 turn. The japanese can land next to singapore at rabaul etc knowing full well the weakness of the allied starting garrisons - the whole game start can just move into 'fantasy mode' if you are not careful.

If the week 2 start is impractical ( lot of work to create a new scenario) would it be possible to alter some of the russian starting dispositions on south west front to make the russian defense stronger in this sector ?

(in reply to redmarkus4)
Post #: 64
RE: Lvov Pocket exploit - Q for developers - 9/21/2011 7:57:16 PM   
heliodorus04


Posts: 1402
Joined: 11/1/2008
From: Denver Colorado
Status: offline
I'm calling slight shenanigans on the idea of a Turn 2 start:

You will STILL have the problem that the German will always know exactly what force is facing him, where it is located, and how best to min/max the Soviet/German capabilities of the 'new turn 1'.  It might not be a Lvov pocket, but maybe it would be a Zhitomir pocket, or some such.  Regardless, in the IGOUGO system, the guy who goes first gets an incomparable advantage. The point I'd ask you to take note of is that they only get that incomparable advantage once per game.



(in reply to asdicus)
Post #: 65
RE: Lvov Pocket exploit - Q for developers - 9/21/2011 8:02:08 PM   
Flaviusx


Posts: 6299
Joined: 9/9/2009
From: Southern California
Status: online
An option for a turn 2 start is interesting, but I wonder how many players would really use it. A lot of folks, myself included, would prefer to bake their own cake as it were.

_____________________________

WitE Alpha Tester

(in reply to heliodorus04)
Post #: 66
RE: Lvov Pocket exploit - Q for developers - 9/21/2011 8:08:55 PM   
Cannonfodder


Posts: 1863
Joined: 10/22/2008
From: the Netherlands
Status: offline
It will be used as often as the turn 2 option in WITP:AE...

_____________________________


"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


(in reply to Flaviusx)
Post #: 67
RE: Lvov Pocket exploit - Q for developers - 9/21/2011 8:11:42 PM   
Baelfiin

 

Posts: 1250
Joined: 6/7/2006
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: heliodorus04

I'm calling slight shenanigans on the idea of a Turn 2 start:

You will STILL have the problem that the German will always know exactly what force is facing him, where it is located, and how best to min/max the Soviet/German capabilities of the 'new turn 1'.  It might not be a Lvov pocket, but maybe it would be a Zhitomir pocket, or some such.  Regardless, in the IGOUGO system, the guy who goes first gets an incomparable advantage. The point I'd ask you to take note of is that they only get that incomparable advantage once per game.




For sure. Anyway you slice it the guy moving first is going to have an advantage in any fixed deployment scheme. As I said before somewhere, a double blind deployment phase prior to game start is the best bet on giving total control to both sides on how they want to start the game.



(in reply to heliodorus04)
Post #: 68
RE: Lvov Pocket exploit - Q for developers - 9/21/2011 8:11:59 PM   
Flaviusx


Posts: 6299
Joined: 9/9/2009
From: Southern California
Status: online
I'll pass the idea along to Trey...as if he didn't have enough on his plate right now.

_____________________________

WitE Alpha Tester

(in reply to Cannonfodder)
Post #: 69
RE: Lvov Pocket exploit - Q for developers - 9/21/2011 8:32:19 PM   
Flaviusx


Posts: 6299
Joined: 9/9/2009
From: Southern California
Status: online
Y'know, we could actually do this in a rough and ready way right now.

The scripted AI for turn 1 has the historical German moves, more or less. Run that, maybe with some settings tweaks, save it, and presto. Won't be exact, but if you want a quick fix...



_____________________________

WitE Alpha Tester

(in reply to Flaviusx)
Post #: 70
RE: Lvov Pocket exploit - Q for developers - 9/21/2011 8:32:43 PM   
jzardos


Posts: 293
Joined: 3/15/2011
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: kirkgregerson

This issue with the Lvov pocket opening being some sort of issue is silly, as other have already mention.  Do people know what they are really asking for here?  Where does it end?  Maybe the game should control each turn to make sure a historical path is followed by both side.  My goodness, can we please not dilute the developers time with this utter nonsense.  There's several more pressing issues that need to be looked at.



+1

I'm also very tired of this discussion about some sort of issue with the Lvov pocket. I've yet to heard one objective argument as to why this is a problem in the game. I've heard a lot of 'subjective' crying by some players about it. If the game mechanics work, the parameters for the eastern conflict are in place, then let the players play.

Will there be some openings that are better than others...sure. Should they all be nerfed? Ummm, you have to be out of your mind to even consider this option. There's no guarantee each pocket will be completely successful.

Of course this discussion goes away if we let players have some freedom of setting up units. But does that mean a player could put all his Pz Grps in the south? Without some limits in a 'free-setup', a new 'can of worms' will be opened and many more people complaining. Of course just make it an optional setting like the random weather, then players can choose historical or free setup.

< Message edited by jzardos -- 9/21/2011 8:33:50 PM >

(in reply to kirkgregerson)
Post #: 71
RE: Lvov Pocket exploit - Q for developers - 9/21/2011 10:07:36 PM   
sath

 

Posts: 434
Joined: 2/21/2010
Status: offline
I'm shocked this issue is even being talked about. Yes plenty of things will happen in this game that are not historic. The main concern should be balance. Does the Lvov pocket on turn 1 unbalance the game and make it harderd on the Russian player than it was historically. The answer is certainly no way. Have some people play out the first 17 turns and look at the results if the German plays it historically and does not do the Lvov pocket. As difficult of a time that they are having think what it will be like otherwise.

(in reply to jzardos)
Post #: 72
RE: Lvov Pocket exploit - Q for developers - 9/21/2011 10:10:31 PM   
el hefe


Posts: 3106
Joined: 10/28/2002
Status: offline
LOL. Not interested. 40+ hours of work for one week of advancement from the stock 1941 campaign? No thanks. I'd rather work on something new :)

Trey


quote:

ORIGINAL: Flaviusx

I'll pass the idea along to Trey...as if he didn't have enough on his plate right now.



_____________________________

"You want mercy!? I'm chaotic neutral!"

WiTE Scenario Designer
WitW Scenario/Data Team Lead
Sabre 21's perpetual arch-nemisis

(in reply to Flaviusx)
Post #: 73
RE: Lvov Pocket exploit - Q for developers - 9/21/2011 10:16:16 PM   
Flaviusx


Posts: 6299
Joined: 9/9/2009
From: Southern California
Status: online
I figured as much, Trey.

_____________________________

WitE Alpha Tester

(in reply to el hefe)
Post #: 74
RE: Lvov Pocket exploit - Q for developers - 9/22/2011 1:09:09 AM   
Empire101


Posts: 1957
Joined: 5/20/2008
From: Coruscant
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: kirkgregerson

This issue with the Lvov pocket opening being some sort of issue is silly, as other have already mention.  Do people know what they are really asking for here?  Where does it end?  Maybe the game should control each turn to make sure a historical path is followed by both side.  My goodness, can we please not dilute the developers time with this utter nonsense.  There's several more pressing issues that need to be looked at.


+1

_____________________________

Our lives may be more boring than those who lived in apocalyptic times,
but being bored is greatly preferable to being prematurely dead because of some ideological fantasy.
- Michael Burleigh


(in reply to kirkgregerson)
Post #: 75
RE: Lvov Pocket exploit - Q for developers - 9/22/2011 3:07:42 AM   
Wild


Posts: 307
Joined: 12/10/2007
Status: offline
+1 No problems here. Time to move on.

(in reply to Empire101)
Post #: 76
RE: Lvov Pocket exploit - Q for developers - 9/22/2011 3:57:51 AM   
Ketza


Posts: 2204
Joined: 1/14/2007
From: Columbia, Maryland
Status: offline
In the boardgame FITE there was a variable set up option. It was great until people figured out the optimal Soviet defense which eventually led to the optimal Axis attack.

(in reply to Wild)
Post #: 77
RE: Lvov Pocket exploit - Q for developers - 9/22/2011 10:28:42 AM   
Jakerson

 

Posts: 508
Joined: 8/15/2006
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: redmarkus4
3. WiTP AE has two start options, IIRC, one of which allows you to start on December 08, after Pearl Harbor. Maybe WITE needs an option to start the Grand Campaign in week 2, with the historical successes of the first week of operations already played out and the surprise factor removed?


This is kind of good idea but it wont stop German players making new type of totally optimized opening move for week 2 and forming new pockets from week 2 setup.

This optimized start up moves is bit of problem for every turn based game.

(in reply to redmarkus4)
Post #: 78
RE: Lvov Pocket exploit - Q for developers - 9/22/2011 12:27:05 PM   
Bletchley_Geek


Posts: 3056
Joined: 11/26/2009
From: Living in the fair city of Melbourne, Australia
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Jakerson

quote:

ORIGINAL: redmarkus4
3. WiTP AE has two start options, IIRC, one of which allows you to start on December 08, after Pearl Harbor. Maybe WITE needs an option to start the Grand Campaign in week 2, with the historical successes of the first week of operations already played out and the surprise factor removed?


This is kind of good idea but it wont stop German players making new type of totally optimized opening move for week 2 and forming new pockets from week 2 setup.

This optimized start up moves is bit of problem for every turn based game.


Only on those IGOUGO where the opponent hasn't the ability to react (automatically or manually) to enemy movements. I made elsewhere the suggestion that a nice refinement for WitE rules would be to have some sort of automatic "operational level" reaction/interception (think of TOAW Local Reserves but tying it to specific areas rather than battles).

_____________________________

Nullius in Verba since February 2013 - http://panthergames.com
-----
Life in the Internets: http://steamcommunity.com/id/mvorkosigan
----
I'm a real person as well: http://au.linkedin.com/in/miguelramirezjavega

(in reply to Jakerson)
Post #: 79
RE: Lvov Pocket exploit - Q for developers - 9/22/2011 3:08:52 PM   
Flaviusx


Posts: 6299
Joined: 9/9/2009
From: Southern California
Status: online
quote:

ORIGINAL: Jakerson

quote:

ORIGINAL: redmarkus4
3. WiTP AE has two start options, IIRC, one of which allows you to start on December 08, after Pearl Harbor. Maybe WITE needs an option to start the Grand Campaign in week 2, with the historical successes of the first week of operations already played out and the surprise factor removed?


This is kind of good idea but it wont stop German players making new type of totally optimized opening move for week 2 and forming new pockets from week 2 setup.

This optimized start up moves is bit of problem for every turn based game.


It's a question of leverage. Surprise turn effects can be leveraged in a way that ordinary turns cannot. You can optimize future turns, sure, but the pay off won't be anywhere near as big or have as huge strategic consequences.

I'm pretty well convinced at this point that the Lvov opening is greatly accelerating the pace of operations in AGS, by a good month or so. It's having a non trivial impact on the game. SW front is just getting wrecked way too easily. Wonder why Soviets are running away so much? Well...because after turn 1 they haven't got a whole lot left to defend with. In real life 2 of the 3 front were demolished from the getgo. The Lvov gambit turns it into 3.

< Message edited by Flaviusx -- 9/22/2011 3:09:03 PM >


_____________________________

WitE Alpha Tester

(in reply to Jakerson)
Post #: 80
RE: Lvov Pocket exploit - Q for developers - 9/22/2011 4:04:09 PM   
Rafo

 

Posts: 56
Joined: 2/22/2011
Status: offline
quote:

In real life 2 of the 3 front were demolished from the getgo. The Lvov gambit turns it into 3.


Yep, and the 2 out of 3 fronts were hopelessly outnumbered and unprepared. This wasn't the case for the 3rd one since the south axis is where the Soviet expected the main blow and where they concentrated most of their forces. Only the magic of first player first turn IGO YGO make it different.

It's a little strange to see people saying nothing should change because we don't want to script the German 1st turn whereas there are a ton of special rules in place on this turn to allow the Germans to do as good or better as historically.

(in reply to Flaviusx)
Post #: 81
RE: Lvov Pocket exploit - Q for developers - 9/22/2011 4:55:50 PM   
janh

 

Posts: 1221
Joined: 6/12/2007
Status: offline
I think Flavius managed to formulate nicely on the mark why there is good reason to discuss the 1st turn issue with the Lvov pocket. To me it seemed so far only to change the dynamics in the south (i.e. a big pocket immediately, and only small ones later). But he is right that this must consequently influence the op-tempo in the south.
At least if the goal is to reach a close-to-realistic(~history) experience with the engine, thinking about this openly should be independent of which side you prefer. After all, who wants to win, no matter what side or whether due to a 2:1 rule or anything else, just knowing that it was only due to smart (mis-)use of game mechanics?

I would support Bletchley_Geek suggestions for putting on the wishlist -- I think a reaction option would be neat to counter the static nature of the long I-Go-U-Go turns and would enable something like meeting engagements and block moves. Whether feasible, or whether there are more pressing issues, is developer decision, but finding a concept and putting it on the wishlist won't do damage.

quote:

ORIGINAL: Rafo
It's a little strange to see people saying nothing should change because we don't want to script the German 1st turn whereas there are a ton of special rules in place on this turn to allow the Germans to do as good or better as historically.


Ah, presently, with a static behavior of one side during the turn of the other, you can easily script the 1st turn -- Flavius pointed this out for a "historic" first turn above. You could think of a set of different scripts, say one with an extra Pz.-Korps for AGS, one with historic staging, etc. And implement the ideal moves for each of them. Then the first turn of a GC for the Germans could be just selecting the one of choice, and watching it being performed by the book -- every time. Acknowledgments should go the original author who optimized it, and the player for successfully copying it. And the real challenge starts after the 1st Russian turn.

< Message edited by janh -- 9/22/2011 5:01:28 PM >

(in reply to Rafo)
Post #: 82
RE: Lvov Pocket exploit - Q for developers - 9/22/2011 6:13:45 PM   
heliodorus04


Posts: 1402
Joined: 11/1/2008
From: Denver Colorado
Status: offline
What about the fact that Kiev's 600,000 prisoners is never going to happen?
How, exactly, does that impact the delay of operations in the South, Flavius?
Might I remind everyone that the Germans took Rostov in 1941...

I thought it was you who yesterday was arguing that there is a tradeoff for the Germans in that parts of 6th and 17th Armies can end up 4 turns behind their historical advance as they try to destroy this Lvov pocket.

I can show you a screenshot of a game of mine on Turn 8 where I have 2 corps of 17th Army, 1 of which is a little west of Krivoi Rog and the other is barely east of the Romanian NE frontier, because I had to chase SEC brigades around the Hungarian mountains at 1 hex a turn.

Two more points:
1) Half of the Soviet AARs I see still advocate taking the strong units from SW front and railing them north towards Leningrad on Turn 1. If you guys end up stealing more advantage from the Axis via this unctuous whining about the Soviet not moving first on Turn 1, I want all rail prohibited of Soviet units west of the Dnepr for the first 3 turns. You f@ckers can stand and fight all along the front like Stalin expected.

2) We all know that no matter what changes you make to TUrn 1, Soviets are going to run to Kiev and D-town as fast as they damn-well can, no matter how many pop centers there are there, and the Germans will be denied what they accomplished in the first 8 weeks of the war. So start planning how you're going to take something away from the Soviets while you're busy trying to ensure the Germans can't actually you know, challenge you.




< Message edited by heliodorus04 -- 9/22/2011 6:20:10 PM >

(in reply to janh)
Post #: 83
RE: Lvov Pocket exploit - Q for developers - 9/22/2011 6:20:05 PM   
Flaviusx


Posts: 6299
Joined: 9/9/2009
From: Southern California
Status: online
I made no such argument. You've got me confused with somebody else.





_____________________________

WitE Alpha Tester

(in reply to heliodorus04)
Post #: 84
RE: Lvov Pocket exploit - Q for developers - 9/22/2011 7:21:26 PM   
PeeDeeAitch


Posts: 1281
Joined: 1/1/2007
From: Laramie, Wyoming
Status: offline
heliodorus, you make a lot of assumptions couched as facts that are not born out all the time. Players have made huge Kiev pockets, not all players run to the Dnepr bend, nor do all do such things as send a front to Leningrad. I understand, this is called "overplaying your hand" but it does make it a bit less insightful.

While we have seen a lot of players cut and run as the Soviets, the more experienced know this is not the best play. While it is in the interest of the Soviet players to avoid large encirclements, it is not always possible (and given the deteriorating nature of their army after turns 8-10 perhaps even likely) to avoid.

_____________________________

"The torment of precautions often exceeds the dangers to be avoided. It is sometimes better to abandon one's self to destiny."

- Call me PDH

- WitE noob tester

(in reply to Flaviusx)
Post #: 85
RE: Lvov Pocket exploit - Q for developers - 9/22/2011 11:35:57 PM   
heliodorus04


Posts: 1402
Joined: 11/1/2008
From: Denver Colorado
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: PeeDeeAitch

heliodorus, you make a lot of assumptions couched as facts that are not born out all the time. Players have made huge Kiev pockets, not all players run to the Dnepr bend, nor do all do such things as send a front to Leningrad. I understand, this is called "overplaying your hand" but it does make it a bit less insightful.

While we have seen a lot of players cut and run as the Soviets, the more experienced know this is not the best play. While it is in the interest of the Soviet players to avoid large encirclements, it is not always possible (and given the deteriorating nature of their army after turns 8-10 perhaps even likely) to avoid.


I make assertions, not assumptions. My assertions have the weight of multiple AARs to back them up, and I could cite them if necessary.

In 1.04, bagging all that crap in the Lvov pocket had no noticeable effect on Soviet players' ability to bash the hell out of the German army as soon as 1942. So I would like to assert that the Soviet players are doing nothing more than whining. Even losing all those "elite, best of the best" Soviet force, Soviets were crushing Germans far faster than history.

If people want to discuss the Lvov pocket's effect on 1.05, let's wait for at least 10 AARs to get to 1942, and then we'll parse the data.

This is a non-problem problem, or at least it was under 1.04. Complaining about it makes Soviet players look foolish, IMO. I don't know why it would be a bigger problem under 1.05, but I'm willing to listen.

(in reply to PeeDeeAitch)
Post #: 86
RE: Lvov Pocket exploit - Q for developers - 9/23/2011 12:52:02 AM   
PeeDeeAitch


Posts: 1281
Joined: 1/1/2007
From: Laramie, Wyoming
Status: offline


quote:

ORIGINAL: heliodorus04


quote:

ORIGINAL: PeeDeeAitch

heliodorus, you make a lot of assumptions couched as facts that are not born out all the time. Players have made huge Kiev pockets, not all players run to the Dnepr bend, nor do all do such things as send a front to Leningrad. I understand, this is called "overplaying your hand" but it does make it a bit less insightful.

While we have seen a lot of players cut and run as the Soviets, the more experienced know this is not the best play. While it is in the interest of the Soviet players to avoid large encirclements, it is not always possible (and given the deteriorating nature of their army after turns 8-10 perhaps even likely) to avoid.


I make assertions, not assumptions. My assertions have the weight of multiple AARs to back them up, and I could cite them if necessary.

In 1.04, bagging all that crap in the Lvov pocket had no noticeable effect on Soviet players' ability to bash the hell out of the German army as soon as 1942. So I would like to assert that the Soviet players are doing nothing more than whining. Even losing all those "elite, best of the best" Soviet force, Soviets were crushing Germans far faster than history.

If people want to discuss the Lvov pocket's effect on 1.05, let's wait for at least 10 AARs to get to 1942, and then we'll parse the data.

This is a non-problem problem, or at least it was under 1.04. Complaining about it makes Soviet players look foolish, IMO. I don't know why it would be a bigger problem under 1.05, but I'm willing to listen.


quote:

What about the fact that Kiev's 600,000 prisoners is never going to happen?


Assumption - I can give you off the top of my head 3 1.04 AARs/Games that had Kiev Pockets. Pelton had perhaps the largest, what looked to be 100+ divisions in his entire marshes across to Bryansk Pocket. I pocketed 50+ divisions against Pawlock, Tarhunnas had similar large pockets. You assert a totality that does not exist, it is an assumption. I expect the counter to be "those were against poor players," but yet I bagged 30+ in my AAR against JAMIAM around Kiev. It is possible, with good play against good players.

quote:

1) Half of the Soviet AARs I see still advocate taking the strong units from SW front and railing them north towards Leningrad on Turn 1. If you guys end up stealing more advantage from the Axis via this unctuous whining about the Soviet not moving first on Turn 1, I want all rail prohibited of Soviet units west of the Dnepr for the first 3 turns. You f@ckers can stand and fight all along the front like Stalin expected.


And oddly enough those AARs show poor play and losing by the Soviets. It is when they tighten up, slow down the Axis, and actually defend that they are not sliced up. You make the mistake of assuming that numbers is the deciding factor, when in reality it is the results. Against a new Axis player, running is wonderful as they do not know how to handle their army. But even a relatively new Axis player with a few games under their belt can bust this.

quote:

2) We all know that no matter what changes you make to TUrn 1, Soviets are going to run to Kiev and D-town as fast as they damn-well can, no matter how many pop centers there are there, and the Germans will be denied what they accomplished in the first 8 weeks of the war. So start planning how you're going to take something away from the Soviets while you're busy trying to ensure the Germans can't actually you know, challenge you.


Again, they lose. See my AAR against JAMIAM (yes, the one where I did make a Kiev Pocket) to see how a determined defense in the Ukraine will bleed the panzers white, and make any "last 6 turns" of the season dash impossible.

.
.
.
In short, you make assumptions based on a totality that is rather bellicosely stated, one which uses combative language to assert the authority of your argument. However, there are examples that show you to not be always correct, and therefore you are left with misstated positions and that combative language, a far weaker place from which to argue.

While raising issues and concerns does good work, claiming things as absolutes does not. I understand the nature of the internet is to do such, and the language follows: combative, over-assertive, and at times mean spirited. This does little good in actually figuring out the problems and the solutions unless one is to believe they have all the answers and just need the idiots reading the posts to understand.

There is no ill will in this post. There is a call for a reasoned, calm, and thought out process in which to discuss such things. Many times, upon reflection, there are better ways to hash out a point. Even on the internet.


_____________________________

"The torment of precautions often exceeds the dangers to be avoided. It is sometimes better to abandon one's self to destiny."

- Call me PDH

- WitE noob tester

(in reply to heliodorus04)
Post #: 87
RE: Lvov Pocket exploit - Q for developers - 9/23/2011 1:03:58 AM   
heliodorus04


Posts: 1402
Joined: 11/1/2008
From: Denver Colorado
Status: offline
What you describe as bellicose is passion, and as you refuse to state directly: a sometimes penchant for being right.


There are opinions.  Ours differ. I'm not one of your students, professor. You don't get to mark me down because you dislike my tone.


< Message edited by heliodorus04 -- 9/23/2011 1:04:34 AM >

(in reply to PeeDeeAitch)
Post #: 88
RE: Lvov Pocket exploit - Q for developers - 9/23/2011 3:36:07 AM   
LiquidSky


Posts: 874
Joined: 6/24/2008
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: heliodorus04

What you describe as bellicose is passion, and as you refuse to state directly: a sometimes penchant for being right.


There are opinions.  Ours differ. I'm not one of your students, professor. You don't get to mark me down because you dislike my tone.




Well from what I can see is that there is a problem in the opening south moves, and that by pointing at other problems you are just trying to misdirect. Do you think that it is perfectly okay for the Russian southern army to be carved up like it was the North in a week or two? That there is no problem at all?

The trouble is, the closer you are to the start of a game, the easier it is to detect ahistorical anomalies. The longer a game goes on, the farther you drift from the 'center-line' of history. So looking at the Kiev pocket of September is disengenious at best, as games will have evolved by then.

So how about you come back to the topic and discuss why you think the Russian Southern Front would collapse quickly if only the Germans used a couple more panzer divisions?

To use your tag line at the end...is it historically plausable?

_____________________________

What's the sense of sending $2 million missiles to hit a $10 tent that's empty?

— President George W. Bush, Oval Office meeting, 13 September 2001.

(in reply to heliodorus04)
Post #: 89
RE: Lvov Pocket exploit - Q for developers - 9/23/2011 3:48:45 AM   
Wild


Posts: 307
Joined: 12/10/2007
Status: offline
I know your comment was not directed at me, but i think that if the Germans used an extra Panzer Corps and headed to the Rumanian border the destruction in the south would be PLAUSIBLE. Whether it would have happened that way we will never know.

(in reply to LiquidSky)
Post #: 90
Page:   <<   < prev  1 2 [3] 4 5   next >   >>
All Forums >> [New Releases from Matrix Games] >> Gary Grigsby's War in the East Series >> RE: Lvov Pocket exploit - Q for developers Page: <<   < prev  1 2 [3] 4 5   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

0.109