Matrix Games Forums

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 WarDeal of the Week Panzer CorpsNew Strategy Titles Join the Family
Forums  Register  Login  Photo Gallery  Member List  Search  Calendars  FAQ 

My Profile  Inbox  Address Book  My Subscription  My Forums  Log Out

Why was German ratio gimped from 2.5 to 1 , to 1.25 to 1 42-45?

 
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 >> The War Room >> Why was German ratio gimped from 2.5 to 1 , to 1.25 to 1 42-45? Page: [1] 2 3 4 5   next >   >>
Login
Message << Older Topic   Newer Topic >>
Why was German ratio gimped from 2.5 to 1 , to 1.25 to ... - 11/3/2011 2:32:02 AM   
Pelton

 

Posts: 5720
Joined: 4/9/2006
Status: offline
I lost more then the retreating routed Russian units? What are you guys tring to do? Make 100% sure the Germans can't attack during 42? I tried the first turn of summer attacking and won every time but I lost about the same as the defender.

The real kicker is that when the Russians attack and win with about same odds the German loses more then the Russian.

Am I missing something?

Is 2by 3 tring to screw the game? Who came up with the new losses ratio?

Germam attack and results.

Historical or are the Pigs flying again?

We take out 1v1=2v1, but we make attacking impossible after 41?




Attachment (1)

< Message edited by Pelton -- 11/21/2011 11:07:12 AM >
Post #: 1
RE: Why was Germa attacks uber gimped during 42? - 11/3/2011 2:35:13 AM   
Pelton

 

Posts: 5720
Joined: 4/9/2006
Status: offline
More examples here

http://www.matrixgames.com/forums/tm.asp?m=2851126&mpage=6






Attachment (1)

(in reply to Pelton)
Post #: 2
RE: Why was Germa attacks uber gimped during 42? - 11/3/2011 2:38:18 AM   
stone10


Posts: 240
Joined: 9/20/2008
Status: offline
Because you're a bad Axis player.

This is how my Axis opponent kick my ass.




Attachment (1)

(in reply to Pelton)
Post #: 3
RE: Why was Germa attacks uber gimped during 42? - 11/3/2011 2:40:30 AM   
Pelton

 

Posts: 5720
Joined: 4/9/2006
Status: offline
Thats 41 dum ass, read what poeple post not what fairytale your dreaming about.

42 not 41 dummy.

What you posted supports what I said, lol.



< Message edited by Pelton -- 11/3/2011 2:41:20 AM >

(in reply to stone10)
Post #: 4
RE: Why was Germa attacks uber gimped during 42? - 11/3/2011 3:18:05 AM   
Marquo


Posts: 1337
Joined: 9/26/2000
Status: offline
Pelton,

How can you expect an attacker not to loss more than the defender every once in a while? Look at the final adjusted CV ratios and the losses rise/fall accordingly - the Axis attack was ~ 4:1 while the first Soviet attack ~ 6:1 and the second one ~ 2:1.

Marquo

(in reply to Pelton)
Post #: 5
RE: Why was Germa attacks uber gimped during 42? - 11/3/2011 3:42:26 AM   
Toidi

 

Posts: 198
Joined: 8/31/2011
Status: offline
@Pelton

Posting like that, I'm afraid you are loosing your credibility...

In post from 11/3/2011 2:32:02 AM , you actually attacked during blizzard, not summer as stated in the post, and in town (I somehow find that clear+town is different to clear, but maybe that is superstition). Anyway, Germans are not that great attacking in blizzard (though I agree that the results is not that great). However, you attacked guards rifle corps - those guys have higher morale thus you inflicted lower losses. I found that losses depends on morale a lot. I don't know your morale - if it was not that great, that would explain everything...

In post 11/3/2011 2:35:13 AM , you shown examples of SU attacking and complain, about Germans who lost more than Russians. Actually, Russians attacked in snow, not blizzard. The SU also have huge advantage in guns and used guards corps in the mix which have high morale, so lower losses. Finally, in the second example, Russian player lost more than 1/5 of all the tanks put into attack (tanks were not guards, mind you). If that would happen to you in your blizzard attack, you would lose 170 tanks, not 56 [and in blizzard should be much more breakdowns]. Quite a difference eh? Also, the odds for the SU are much better than those for Germans in blizzard - 1:4.2 is actually much different to 1:5.7.

Finally, the amount of losses is depending on many more factors than just the combat odds, and you know it well; the morale of troops is most important. Thus the funnily low losses of the NKVD border regiments in 1.4.xx

Anyway, it appears to me that your arguments are not strong enough and not well substantiated. Even though I agree with you on many issues you point out (though I am a SU player, ironically), it seems to me that recently you started to stretch the truth too much. As such, I'm afraid, I will start soon ignoring your posts without real evaluation of merit, as many others do already... Trust me, by stretching the truth your arguments do not support anything and your voice will be ignored. Even worse, once you find a real issue nobody will listen. Actually, it already happens as I cannot say whether the issue you state above is real or not - I can only tell that the data you provided is not credible. But by providing not credible data, you make the whole issue to appear as at best unlikely.

(in reply to Pelton)
Post #: 6
RE: Why was Germa attacks uber gimped during 42? - 11/3/2011 6:04:48 AM   
darbymcd

 

Posts: 288
Joined: 12/6/2005
Status: offline
Pelton, are you kidding? the first one, you attack in blizzard. you know what, it is bad to attack in blizzard. is that simple enough for you?
your soviet attack examples show how tough the germans really are. look at the force ratios. c. 5:1 arty for the sovs in the second, 15:1 in the first!!! my god, your guys are super tough to get near parity in losses. really pelton, i think you don't actually know much about military operations, you just read some of the early war histories (based on german accounts) of the east front and you like to find game exploits.
STOP WHINING!!!!!

(in reply to Toidi)
Post #: 7
RE: Why was Germa attacks uber gimped during 42? - 11/3/2011 10:31:30 AM   
Pelton

 

Posts: 5720
Joined: 4/9/2006
Status: offline
As far as I know there are no mods during blizzards after 41/42.

During 41 there are different ratio for losses then during 42 to end of war.

Its about math and numbers politics.

1v1=2v1 was a joke and was nerfed.
old HQ buildup was a joke and was nerfed.
Air field bbombing was a joke and was nerfed

ect ect.

Being nice or being up front about issues has nothing to do with them being historical or non-historical. Its about math and simply is the ratio a reflection of historical losses or not. If someone posts something childish like Stone he should expect to get nuked.

I have heard all the ignore stuff the last three times and guess what, 1v1=2v1 was nerfed, HQ was nerfed and air spamming was nerfed.

Pelton

< Message edited by Pelton -- 11/3/2011 10:33:16 AM >

(in reply to darbymcd)
Post #: 8
RE: Why was Germa attacks uber gimped during 42? - 11/3/2011 11:42:34 AM   
Cannonfodder


Posts: 1852
Joined: 10/22/2008
From: the Netherlands
Status: offline
Pelton, these are not raw recruits you are attacking. You are attacking a slightly entrenched GUARDS RIFLE CORPS with supporting tanks, probably led by a decent commander (assumption). You have only small numerical superiority...

I think you should be happy with that ratio...

_____________________________


"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 Pelton)
Post #: 9
RE: Why was Germa attacks uber gimped during 42? - 11/3/2011 12:38:01 PM   
BigAnorak


Posts: 4673
Joined: 7/10/2006
From: The Duchy of Cornwall, nr England
Status: offline
I have similar "ranting" posts in the development forums, when I got fixated about some of the combat results that were occurring in testing. In my case this did lead to the discovery of a major bug.

The lesson I learned was to never get upset about results in isolation - your result is one out of thousands. If this kind of result was happening thousands of times in a game then you may have a right to be concerned. In isolation, this kind of result is well within the kind of variance Gary likes to see in his games.

I did indeed stop playing for a while because I could not come to terms with the variance.

(in reply to Cannonfodder)
Post #: 10
RE: Why was Germa attacks uber gimped during 42? - 11/3/2011 1:07:49 PM   
Marquo


Posts: 1337
Joined: 9/26/2000
Status: offline
Are you at peace now? :-)

(in reply to BigAnorak)
Post #: 11
RE: Why was Germa attacks uber gimped during 42? - 11/3/2011 1:37:36 PM   
BigAnorak


Posts: 4673
Joined: 7/10/2006
From: The Duchy of Cornwall, nr England
Status: offline
Nearly! . I have started a 1941 GC PBEM(currently of Turn10), and although some of the combat results seem just as crazy as when I was testing, I am not losing sleep over them!

< Message edited by BigAnorak -- 11/3/2011 1:38:30 PM >

(in reply to Marquo)
Post #: 12
RE: Why was Germa attacks uber gimped during 42? - 11/3/2011 2:07:02 PM   
Klydon


Posts: 2156
Joined: 11/28/2010
Status: offline
Good to see you again Big A, you have been missed.

Pelton, I can't offer an explanation about why those fights went the way they did, but especially for the blizzard one, I wonder how many elements were damaged that then became destroyed, upping the losses. Attacking with units that have a lot of damaged elements would increase attacker casualties I would think.

(in reply to BigAnorak)
Post #: 13
RE: Why was Germa attacks uber gimped during 42? - 11/3/2011 2:40:47 PM   
ComradeP

 

Posts: 7166
Joined: 9/17/2009
Status: offline
Here we're completely on the same page, for a change, Pelton.

I've been reporting/complaining about high losses post-1941 for almost a year now, and the problem is in most cases high ROF elements causing silly amounts of losses (that goes for both sides, you don't want to know how much damage 4 FlaK Vierlings can do currently) partially due to engagement ranges almost always dropping to 50 meters for most elements (even SPAA).

It's the primary flaw of the combat system from my perspective, now that routing seems to be a bit more costly to the defender (but I'd still like some sort of chase/pursuit phase for AFV's) and Axis retreat losses for high morale units have been decreased.

As corps are loaded with mortars and SMG squads, they can inflict serious losses. There's not really any counter, aside from letting the Soviets attack you instead of you attacking them, or not attacking more than 3 Rifle divisions/1 Rifle corps.

As such, attacking can be suicidal for the Axis on the long term, even though the addition of Hiwi's has made things a bit easier.

Please don't quote me out of context on this, as I'm not saying that the combat system is broken post-1941, I'm saying that high ROF elements and rapidly decreasing engagement ranges cause issues with the combat system.

There's no easy way to fix this, as prolonging combat would require that the supply system is completely overhauled (not a bad thing per se), and that takes time.

Certain elements are, and have always been, performing much better than their historical counterparts whilst others, particularly machineguns and AFV's often perform poorly. Due to the rapidly decreasing engagement ranges during combat, MG's don't get to fire often and AFV's mostly soak up hits (still a good thing, though), they tend to cause only a small percentage of the casualties, regardless of how many are involved.

You can see both of these things for yourself when you watch a battle in high detail.

Battles tend to go something like:

-Air support arrives and can in some cases cause significant disruption.
-Artillery fires only a few shells, another problem.
-Medium ranged elements fire, mortars fire for the first time.
-Mortars fire again, short-medium ranged elements fire.
Attacker casualties are still fairly low at this stage, but rapidly mounting due to the mortars.
-Enemy infantry elements fire, Rifle squads have an extremely variable performance, but SMG squads nearly always go on a killing spree.
-Your infantry elements fire, provided they have decent morale/experience they will cause a fair amount of casualties. Your own high ROF elements cause high losses.
-Defenders retreat/rout or hold.

< Message edited by ComradeP -- 11/3/2011 2:45:14 PM >


_____________________________

SSG tester
WitE Alpha tester
Panzer Corps Beta tester
Unity of Command scenario designer

(in reply to Klydon)
Post #: 14
RE: Why was Germa attacks uber gimped during 42? - 11/5/2011 1:14:45 PM   
Pelton

 

Posts: 5720
Joined: 4/9/2006
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Cannonfodder

Pelton, these are not raw recruits you are attacking. You are attacking a slightly entrenched GUARDS RIFLE CORPS with supporting tanks, probably led by a decent commander (assumption). You have only small numerical superiority...

I think you should be happy with that ratio...


Thats a good point, but Kamil has posted info also.

The ratio is not the same as with my game vs Hoooper or other poeple for that matter(42). Generally speaking when attacking with good armored formations before I would get a 2.5 to 1 ratio when attacking forts with high cv's.

The ratio now is close to 1.5 to 1. I was not attacking guards during summer to straighten lines an ratio was about 1.5 to 1.

This also speaks to Big A's point, this is not a 1 time thing. This is the trend, atleast in this game.

I am hoping that my game vs M60 will get to 42.

I thk TDV has dropped out of our game. 1 turn in 2 weeks. Hes lost 74 armament points and thats a huge hit now.

I have started another one but it be a while before or I should say IF we get to 42.

I have yet to get any feed back from any higher ups about the change or nno change to ratio.

(in reply to Cannonfodder)
Post #: 15
RE: Why was Germa attacks uber gimped during 42? - 11/5/2011 1:17:37 PM   
Pelton

 

Posts: 5720
Joined: 4/9/2006
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: ComradeP

Here we're completely on the same page, for a change, Pelton.

I've been reporting/complaining about high losses post-1941 for almost a year now, and the problem is in most cases high ROF elements causing silly amounts of losses (that goes for both sides, you don't want to know how much damage 4 FlaK Vierlings can do currently) partially due to engagement ranges almost always dropping to 50 meters for most elements (even SPAA).

It's the primary flaw of the combat system from my perspective, now that routing seems to be a bit more costly to the defender (but I'd still like some sort of chase/pursuit phase for AFV's) and Axis retreat losses for high morale units have been decreased.

As corps are loaded with mortars and SMG squads, they can inflict serious losses. There's not really any counter, aside from letting the Soviets attack you instead of you attacking them, or not attacking more than 3 Rifle divisions/1 Rifle corps.

As such, attacking can be suicidal for the Axis on the long term, even though the addition of Hiwi's has made things a bit easier.

Please don't quote me out of context on this, as I'm not saying that the combat system is broken post-1941, I'm saying that high ROF elements and rapidly decreasing engagement ranges cause issues with the combat system.

There's no easy way to fix this, as prolonging combat would require that the supply system is completely overhauled (not a bad thing per se), and that takes time.

Certain elements are, and have always been, performing much better than their historical counterparts whilst others, particularly machineguns and AFV's often perform poorly. Due to the rapidly decreasing engagement ranges during combat, MG's don't get to fire often and AFV's mostly soak up hits (still a good thing, though), they tend to cause only a small percentage of the casualties, regardless of how many are involved.

You can see both of these things for yourself when you watch a battle in high detail.

Battles tend to go something like:

-Air support arrives and can in some cases cause significant disruption.
-Artillery fires only a few shells, another problem.
-Medium ranged elements fire, mortars fire for the first time.
-Mortars fire again, short-medium ranged elements fire.
Attacker casualties are still fairly low at this stage, but rapidly mounting due to the mortars.
-Enemy infantry elements fire, Rifle squads have an extremely variable performance, but SMG squads nearly always go on a killing spree.
-Your infantry elements fire, provided they have decent morale/experience they will cause a fair amount of casualties. Your own high ROF elements cause high losses.
-Defenders retreat/rout or hold.


Atleast the info is here now and hopefully some of you other guys will get to the summer of 42. then note can be compared and see if its an issue or not.

(in reply to ComradeP)
Post #: 16
RE: Why was Germa attacks uber gimped during 42? - 11/5/2011 2:56:50 PM   
Bletchley_Geek


Posts: 3055
Joined: 11/26/2009
From: Living in the fair city of Melbourne, Australia
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: ComradeP
There's no easy way to fix this, as prolonging combat would require that the supply system is completely overhauled (not a bad thing per se), and that takes time.


Thanks for the post, I found it to be extremely informative and interesting.

I wonder if there wouldn't be a workaround to having to overhaul the supply system. If you guys want to "decompress" time a bit during tactical combat, why don't just decrease the ROF in a way proportional to the time decompression factor. I mean, if battles have twice as many phases, decrease ROF by half. I'm assuming that the side effect on the supply system is due to the increased ammo expenditure because of the combat taking longer.

_____________________________

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 ComradeP)
Post #: 17
RE: Why was Germa attacks uber gimped during 42? - 11/5/2011 4:16:35 PM   
Scook_99

 

Posts: 268
Joined: 6/20/2007
Status: offline
This is where a battle export feature would be great. Every result in a spreadsheet format, to look for trends easily, not just having occasional screenshots, which can be subjective.

(in reply to Bletchley_Geek)
Post #: 18
RE: Why was Germa attacks uber gimped during 42? - 11/5/2011 4:17:00 PM   
ComradeP

 

Posts: 7166
Joined: 9/17/2009
Status: offline
quote:

I mean, if battles have twice as many phases, decrease ROF by half.


That would still mean the relative advantage of high ROF elements would be the same as it is now.

_____________________________

SSG tester
WitE Alpha tester
Panzer Corps Beta tester
Unity of Command scenario designer

(in reply to Bletchley_Geek)
Post #: 19
RE: Why was Germa attacks uber gimped during 42? - 11/5/2011 5:44:47 PM   
Bletchley_Geek


Posts: 3055
Joined: 11/26/2009
From: Living in the fair city of Melbourne, Australia
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: ComradeP

quote:

I mean, if battles have twice as many phases, decrease ROF by half.


That would still mean the relative advantage of high ROF elements would be the same as it is now.


Indeed, this was more about having low ROF ground elements more "chances" to fire while not requiring to tweak the supply system. As far as I understand, there are quite a few checks involved (experience, morale?, leader stats), so I find surprising that there are ground elements with such a high ROF as to become a problem. Or it is a problem with the Ground element "inherent" parameters?

_____________________________

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 ComradeP)
Post #: 20
RE: Why was Germa attacks uber gimped during 42? - 11/5/2011 6:09:18 PM   
Pelton

 

Posts: 5720
Joined: 4/9/2006
Status: offline
quote:

Enemy infantry elements fire, Rifle squads have an extremely variable performance, but SMG squads nearly always go on a killing spree.


Note to self. When I play witw as german build ALLOT of SMG squads! heheh

Pelton

(in reply to Bletchley_Geek)
Post #: 21
RE: Why was Germa attacks uber gimped during 42? - 11/6/2011 8:41:04 AM   
ComradeP

 

Posts: 7166
Joined: 9/17/2009
Status: offline
Bletchley Geek: it's more a problem of them having significantly higher chances to fire even with poor to mediocre experience and leaders. It's also why casualties go up again as soon as the Soviets get 41c Rifle divisions: 41b Rifle divisions have a minimal amount of support weapons, but 41c Rifle divisions have plenty of mortars and also some SMG squads.

It's also caused by combat almost always ending with close quarter fights and, particularly, by virtually all elements closing in on eachother.

Normally, the SMG squads would probably just be picked off one by one by regular rifle squads in clear terrain, as there would be no reason for the riflemen to close in to a range where they're at a serious disadvantage. Currently, your infantry happily runs into a disadvantageous situation and pays the price. The SMG squads now always perform like you might expect them to perform in urban terrain, as virtually without exception, elements close in to about 50 meters.

< Message edited by ComradeP -- 11/6/2011 8:54:18 AM >


_____________________________

SSG tester
WitE Alpha tester
Panzer Corps Beta tester
Unity of Command scenario designer

(in reply to Pelton)
Post #: 22
RE: Why was Germa attacks uber gimped during 42? - 11/6/2011 8:03:28 AM   
76mm


Posts: 2088
Joined: 5/2/2004
From: Moscow
Status: offline
Pelton,

You seem to be drawing wide-ranging conclusions from a couple of combat results--do you have a bigger data set in table format?

Plus, I don't think you are necessarily correct that any combat results mechanisms have changed in 1.05; ComradeP says a similar issue has existed since the beginning, and your results against Hoooper could be different for any number of reasons. In my game against Ketza, his losses in most attacks are unfavorable to him, even when he is attacking tank brigades, etc.

If there is an issue, I think it is just that you are seeing it for the first time, not that it has just arisen in 1.05. The combat system is a complete black box to me, which I don't like much.

(in reply to ComradeP)
Post #: 23
RE: Why was Germa attacks uber gimped during 42? - 11/6/2011 12:42:14 PM   
Pelton

 

Posts: 5720
Joined: 4/9/2006
Status: offline
Kamil has over 20 attacks now and all are about 1.5 to 1 odds, its a clear trend ad intended by devs.

1.04 losses were at 2.5ish to 1.

Counter attacking is also down about same.

Trade off for removing 1v1=2v1 I am guessing. Which was a piss poor idea and is wasting everyones time.

vs Kamil if the odd ratio was the same as before it would have been worth attacking during 42. There is no point if after 3 to 4 turns my army is a weak and will take forever to replase. The Red army can recover faster then before in the new games because so little production has been lost.

If they did that then nothing was balanced to get games to 44. As long as Reds evac and run they will never lose more then 40 arm pts unless they screw up and hand germans a gift. German moral is lower because of a lack of units to attack, russian moral is higher because they did not get beat up during summer ect ect

Also its very hard vs an even red to get to 3 million killed now which is lower then past games. 3.5 was normal.

So I am not so sure this patch is going to get games much more into the war.

The Hiwis did help, but its just a bunch of bodys.

One thing that could fix things is fixing Russian production like the German side. That way the russians cant exploit the best units and guns they need for 43+.

I am not really seeing any long term fixs other then size of German army. Its easyer then ever to have 5 million good russians for first blizzard turn and 7 million+ by June. Plus with all the extra armament pts floating around the russian army is stronger then before by summer.



Pelton

< Message edited by Pelton -- 11/6/2011 12:51:31 PM >

(in reply to 76mm)
Post #: 24
RE: Why was Germa attacks uber gimped during 42? - 11/6/2011 12:56:40 PM   
Pelton

 

Posts: 5720
Joined: 4/9/2006
Status: offline
The deck is still very much stacked against the German. Which is why so many poeple are getting tired of hanging around an moving on.

Unbalanced moral recovery rules
combat ratios that are so unhistorical from 42 on its a joke.
Over rated rail system
Cav units that are over powered during blizzard.
The hole evac and chicken little thing during 41 is stupid.
Letting the Russian player build the perfect army is also stupid, because during the war the red army had no idea what would work so they had to try everything first. Under current system the red player know just what they need to build during each yr of war. This is a huge screw up also.
VP system uber joke also.


< Message edited by Pelton -- 11/6/2011 12:57:39 PM >

(in reply to Pelton)
Post #: 25
RE: Why was Germa attacks uber gimped during 42? - 11/6/2011 12:56:45 PM   
Kamil

 

Posts: 1860
Joined: 2/5/2011
Status: offline
quote:

Pelton


Kamil has over 20 attacks now and all are about 1.5 to 1 odds, its a clear trend ad intended by devs.

1.04 losses were at 2.5ish to 1.

Counter attacking is also down about same.

Trade off for removing 1v1=2v1 I am guessing. Which was a piss poor idea and is wasting everyones time.



You are referring to initial odds, that are created by extensive German fortification. Check out my eng value (rarely under 10) and amount of guns. Your forts are wiped out before battle - they go 1 level down what changes odds drastically. (Practically every corps got sapper regiment and each army has few sapper units too)

It works both direction - check out Your attacks during summer.


< Message edited by Kamil -- 11/6/2011 12:59:40 PM >

(in reply to Pelton)
Post #: 26
RE: Why was Germa attacks uber gimped during 42? - 11/6/2011 12:59:42 PM   
Pelton

 

Posts: 5720
Joined: 4/9/2006
Status: offline
I know Kamil, but this is not my first game to get this far.

I can stack eng the same way and get even of lose more men then you do. Not even close to pre 1.05 odds.

Again is is not my first game into 43.

(in reply to Kamil)
Post #: 27
RE: Why was Germa attacks uber gimped during 42? - 11/6/2011 1:06:38 PM   
Pelton

 

Posts: 5720
Joined: 4/9/2006
Status: offline
Its should be a HUGE red flag that this games been out for close to a yr and of the 1000's of games started none have gotten to 45, none to 44 and only a handfull even into 43.

The deck is stacked agianst the German to even make it to Jan 44.

I am not sure why they can't see this clear fact.

This issue will effect sales of witw.

Pelton

(in reply to Pelton)
Post #: 28
RE: Why was Germa attacks uber gimped during 42? - 11/6/2011 1:16:22 PM   
Pelton

 

Posts: 5720
Joined: 4/9/2006
Status: offline
We need to wait for others to put in another few months to see if 1.05 did anything other then add a few 100,000 men to German army which is not going to make the game any more fun in 42 or do more then buy a few months for the German side.

(in reply to Pelton)
Post #: 29
RE: Why was Germa attacks uber gimped during 42? - 11/6/2011 1:50:48 PM   
Kamil

 

Posts: 1860
Joined: 2/5/2011
Status: offline
quote:

Pelton

I know Kamil, but this is not my first game to get this far.

I can stack eng the same way and get even of lose more men then you do. Not even close to pre 1.05 odds.

Again is is not my first game into 43.



I played some games too, and in my opinion problem is strength of Soviet army not change in battle algorithm. Strength that is consequence of year '41. Interested things pointed out by ComradeP doesn't apply here - it is not about how battle algorithm works but about changes between 1.04 and 1.05. And biggest change is common knowledge about efficient Soviet strategy for year '41, strategy that makes them so strong in '42.


Plus I think (with whole respect for You) You are not defending as good as attacking. Sorry for saying it here on forum, but a little bit of self criticism is sometimes necessary.

< Message edited by Kamil -- 11/6/2011 2:06:37 PM >

(in reply to Pelton)
Post #: 30
Page:   [1] 2 3 4 5   next >   >>
All Forums >> [New Releases from Matrix Games] >> Gary Grigsby's War in the East Series >> The War Room >> Why was German ratio gimped from 2.5 to 1 , to 1.25 to 1 42-45? Page: [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

0.119