Matrix Games Forums

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! Deal of the Week: Combat Command 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

RE: A warning to Russians in the 1.05 GC about what to expect in 1942

 
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 >> RE: A warning to Russians in the 1.05 GC about what to expect in 1942 Page: <<   < prev  1 2 [3]
Login
Message << Older Topic   Newer Topic >>
RE: A warning to Russians in the 1.05 GC about what to ... - 12/3/2011 5:38:39 PM   
Bletchley_Geek


Posts: 3052
Joined: 11/26/2009
From: Living in the fair city of Melbourne, Australia
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: leehunt27@bloomberg.net
But if the German player has kept the Wehrmacht intact and in great fighting shape, why can't 1942-1945 offensives be powerful?


Well, I don't personally a reason why that can't (or shouldn't) be the case. On the contrary, it should be the case.

The concern, and the thing we're trying to brainstorm here is:

* How can the Soviet player, within the constraints posed by game mechanics, avoid the kind of massive encirclements the Soviets historically avoided in 1942 and at the same time, inflict important damage on the Wehrmacht?

There's also the concern that changes to NM have made the above impossible or too hard. But on that respect, I'm kind of sitting on the fence. My opinion is that the Soviet gameplay needs to change, however, I don't know exactly how.

_____________________________

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 leehunt27@bloomberg.net)
Post #: 61
RE: A warning to Russians in the 1.05 GC about what to ... - 12/4/2011 4:58:20 AM   
von Beanie


Posts: 245
Joined: 6/3/2002
From: Oak Hills, S. California
Status: offline
My purpose in starting this thread was simply to warn Russian players not to try to hold the line in 1942. Now that I'm giving up four hexes or so each turn I've essentially neutered the German massed panzer offensive (similar to what can be done in 1941).

One of the design weaknesses of this game is that geography doesn't really matter after the factories are removed. So the obvious strategy is for Russians to be willing to cede substantial territory in 1942 to preserve their army. If I would have known that going into the summer campaign I wouldn't have lost at least 15 corps and a lot of other important stuff in a giant pocket that was caused by me trying to hold the line and rescue a series of smaller pockets. Based on the number of replies to this thread it seems other Russian players have discovered the same thing. If only someone would have put out a warning like this before I learned the hard way what the Germans are now capable of in 1942...





(in reply to Bletchley_Geek)
Post #: 62
RE: A warning to Russians in the 1.05 GC about what to ... - 12/4/2011 6:12:34 AM   
Pelton

 

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

quote:

ORIGINAL: von Beanie

My purpose in starting this thread was simply to warn Russian players not to try to hold the line in 1942. Now that I'm giving up four hexes or so each turn I've essentially neutered the German massed panzer offensive (similar to what can be done in 1941).

One of the design weaknesses of this game is that geography doesn't really matter after the factories are removed. So the obvious strategy is for Russians to be willing to cede substantial territory in 1942 to preserve their army. If I would have known that going into the summer campaign I wouldn't have lost at least 15 corps and a lot of other important stuff in a giant pocket that was caused by me trying to hold the line and rescue a series of smaller pockets. Based on the number of replies to this thread it seems other Russian players have discovered the same thing. If only someone would have put out a warning like this before I learned the hard way what the Germans are now capable of in 1942...







They have always been able to have a big offensive during 42.

Even vs Red armys with 7 million men.

http://www.matrixgames.com/forums/tm.asp?m=2831410&mpage=4&key=

http://www.matrixgames.com/forums/tm.asp?m=2789069&mpage=12

Several other games pre 1.05 I did not have AAR's, but you guys get picture.

Withdrawing 4 hexes a turn means you withdraw 45 hexes during 42 summer which means you will give back a huge number of manpower pts and land. You will still be easy pickings for upping German morale also.

German player if hes smart will easly have 4 million men by mid 43 with good morale and you will have allot of land to win back which will be lined with a ton of forts. If he holds the river line until after 43/44 winter hes won, which should be easy if your running that much.

Running is an option, but a bad one.

Its doen't pay off during 41 and will not during 42.

Losing 40 to 50 units during 42 summer for Russian is nothing, lol losing 100ish is not going to hurt the red machine at all.

43 is basicly a static yr for both sides and as we all know the Red Machine can very very easly make up for loses during 42.

You have to fight during 42, but smarter is all. You have tons of options and toys unlike 41.

Running will simply had the game over to the German during 42.

Pelton

(in reply to von Beanie)
Post #: 63
RE: A warning to Russians in the 1.05 GC about what to ... - 12/4/2011 6:14:00 AM   
delatbabel


Posts: 1242
Joined: 7/30/2006
From: Sydney, Australia
Status: offline
Are you seeing the same thing happening into 1943 and later, in the 1941 GC?

I haven't played the 1941 GC for some time and I'm about to launch into a new one with the latest 1.05 patch. In the early 1.05s starting with the 1942 GC I was finding that much the same thing could be expected well into 1944. The last 1942 GC I started I was hoping for a turnaround by late 1943 and being able to actually advance, but even through 1944 I was retreating hex after hex, back to the Volga -- my army had shrunk to about 3.8 million men and was still shrinking. Then again I suspect it was the 1942 GC that was b0rked, not the actual game (although attrition that was killing me, I see they've since toned that down).


_____________________________

--
Del

(in reply to von Beanie)
Post #: 64
RE: A warning to Russians in the 1.05 GC about what to ... - 12/4/2011 7:36:51 AM   
Flaviusx


Posts: 6296
Joined: 9/9/2009
From: Southern California
Status: online
I wouldn't touch the 42 campaign with a ten foot pole. The amount of units set to static in that game is lethal for the Soviet, especially now. Tons of stuff will get pocketed in the various salients the game starts with, the Sovs haven't got the APs to move units out of them.





_____________________________

WitE Alpha Tester

(in reply to delatbabel)
Post #: 65
RE: A warning to Russians in the 1.05 GC about what to ... - 12/4/2011 2:11:10 PM   
Marquo


Posts: 1336
Joined: 9/26/2000
Status: offline
Personally I enjoy watching Soviet units simply shatter and vaporize in '42; if the Soviet pushes too hard during the blizzard then at the end of the blizzard he is exhausted and very fragile. Further, the 2:1 --> 1:1 means that it is not so easy to counterattck to relieve pockets anymore :-)

As for retreating after 41', well each hex east is a hex that must be regained in 44 - 45, and Berlin is a long way off from Tambor.

Marquo

(in reply to Flaviusx)
Post #: 66
RE: A warning to Russians in the 1.05 GC about what to ... - 12/4/2011 3:14:55 PM   
Klydon


Posts: 2156
Joined: 11/28/2010
Status: offline
This thread is sort of meandering all over the place, but it is all good.

Flav, where do you think the "cut" line should be for static vs non static in 42? I don't see resources being committed to "fixing" scenarios at this point, but the other issue with scenarios is that the community does not seem to support any player made scenarios. They do support "official" scenarios.

My own feeling is perhaps you look at north of Lake Ilmen as the static line. South of Lake Ilmen, I would probably put some German units in static. Both sides probably should have some frozen units so one side or the other doesn't get a massive advantage on the first cycle of turns.

(in reply to Marquo)
Post #: 67
RE: A warning to Russians in the 1.05 GC about what to ... - 12/4/2011 3:26:24 PM   
Flaviusx


Posts: 6296
Joined: 9/9/2009
From: Southern California
Status: online
Klydon, my own view is that all units in all campaign scenarios on both sides should revert to normal mode. (Or, alternately, frozen mode.) We found in testing that leaving substantial numbers of units set to static mode with little or no APs in the kitty is a disaster for the defending side. True for the Germans in 44, also will be true for the Sovs in 42. If a player wants to set units to static once the game starts, let him go ahead and do so, but right now the AP costs of flipping these over is prohibitive and the per turn AP budget will not keep up with it.



_____________________________

WitE Alpha Tester

(in reply to Klydon)
Post #: 68
RE: A warning to Russians in the 1.05 GC about what to ... - 12/4/2011 5:41:50 PM   
Pelton

 

Posts: 5720
Joined: 4/9/2006
Status: offline
AS German I build up 400 ap's. It cost about 6 pts per division to reactivate.

So I only put in what I know I can release in a single turn. About 50 divisions. I know some guys do allot more, but I dont want to get nailed without enough pts to release all my units.

50 German units will save allot of men per turn 10k ish I do it where ever the front is inactive.

(in reply to Flaviusx)
Post #: 69
RE: A warning to Russians in the 1.05 GC about what to ... - 12/4/2011 10:50:05 PM   
Klydon


Posts: 2156
Joined: 11/28/2010
Status: offline
One dynamic that has changed if I remember rightly, you don't get AP's for going static anymore? One issue I would potentially be concerned with especially for the Russians is a large amount of units going into static mode. Having those tank corps start in static doesn't make much sense to me either. May as well not have them for the scenario to be honest. 

(in reply to Pelton)
Post #: 70
RE: A warning to Russians in the 1.05 GC about what to ... - 12/5/2011 4:42:41 PM   
Q-Ball


Posts: 5537
Joined: 6/25/2002
From: Chicago, Illinois
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Klydon

One dynamic that has changed if I remember rightly, you don't get AP's for going static anymore? One issue I would potentially be concerned with especially for the Russians is a large amount of units going into static mode. Having those tank corps start in static doesn't make much sense to me either. May as well not have them for the scenario to be honest. 


You still get APs for putting units in STATIC, but not as many as it takes to re-animate. About 1/2, in my experience, but that's an estimate.

I think it's worth it myself as Germans, though you need to be careful; as Pelton says, don't do it unless you have enough in the kitty to wake everyone up in the event of emergency. Ketza is at almost 100% static, so he is probably pushing that notion a bit.


(in reply to Klydon)
Post #: 71
RE: A warning to Russians in the 1.05 GC about what to ... - 12/5/2011 5:09:04 PM   
Flaviusx


Posts: 6296
Joined: 9/9/2009
From: Southern California
Status: online
After some further testing in 42, I'm not finding that static mode helps the Soviet reduce attrition losses much, btw. As a matter of fact, the formations tend to wither away over time and you have to reactivate them and put them on refit before they waste away. This winds up being a net AP loss. So...screw it.

The safest and most effective way for the Sovs to limit their attrition losses is simply to not stack to the gills on the front line.

For whatever reason, static mode is just much more effective for the Germans.

_____________________________

WitE Alpha Tester

(in reply to Q-Ball)
Post #: 72
RE: A warning to Russians in the 1.05 GC about what to ... - 12/5/2011 5:11:41 PM   
ComradeP

 

Posts: 7166
Joined: 9/17/2009
Status: offline
Yes, considering that attrition was reduced recently, I was surprised to see that some of my Soviet Rifle divisions in static mode on the frontline near Finland were at ~50-60% TOE after the blizzard, whilst they started the blizzard season almost full strength.

_____________________________

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

(in reply to Flaviusx)
Post #: 73
RE: A warning to Russians in the 1.05 GC about what to ... - 12/5/2011 5:17:25 PM   
Flaviusx


Posts: 6296
Joined: 9/9/2009
From: Southern California
Status: online
It's just as bad further south, Pieter. I had units set to static from Leningrad all the way down to the Valdai. Within a half dozen turns a lot of this stuff was going unready. Cost me a fortune to reactivate them. The Soviets are stuck with the shuffle, I'm afraid, and will have to keep everything active and rotate units in and out of the frontline to keep attrition losses down to a dull roar. Very tedious busywork, for quiet sectors of the front that ought to be ignorable. You have to micromanage everything.

_____________________________

WitE Alpha Tester

(in reply to ComradeP)
Post #: 74
RE: A warning to Russians in the 1.05 GC about what to ... - 12/5/2011 5:21:34 PM   
Mike13z50


Posts: 343
Joined: 1/29/2007
From: New Orleans
Status: offline
That is what I discovered. I'm in Sept43 in 41GC vs German AI.

1942 was a sitzkrieg, I ended up with most of the army in static mode, big mistake. Everyone was withering away. Since I'm playing vs the AI on custom level (him 120/me 100) I cranked my ap from 100 to 400=240 AP per turn, and reactivated the entire army, then turned it back down.


I only have the guys on the Finish Border in static now. I held the 3 hex far north choke point and kept the Karelian peninsula. Level 4 forts, heavy woods, static mode. I have 7 divisions up there, six in line in static and one on refit. When a unit drops below 70% toe I rotate the refit division in and pull the low guy back to refit.

Not sure it was worth it.

Oddly, the 4 Naval brigades on the no attack line border north of Leningrad are in static and they stay above 90%.

In my last German campaign I had the whole line north of Moscow in static and they didn't really drop.

The difference is probably (like everything else) based on morale. I think I remember that low morale units loose more do to attrition.

(in reply to Flaviusx)
Post #: 75
RE: A warning to Russians in the 1.05 GC about what to ... - 12/5/2011 5:34:42 PM   
Flaviusx


Posts: 6296
Joined: 9/9/2009
From: Southern California
Status: online
The morale requirements must be pretty high, because I have my army trained up to the high 40s on average in this game, and they still dropped strength fairly quickly. If the only way to make static work is to put what in Soviet terms are elite units on static mode, it's just not worth the bother.



_____________________________

WitE Alpha Tester

(in reply to Mike13z50)
Post #: 76
RE: A warning to Russians in the 1.05 GC about what to ... - 12/5/2011 7:41:18 PM   
Mike13z50


Posts: 343
Joined: 1/29/2007
From: New Orleans
Status: offline
Per rule book:

9. Morale, Elite Units, Experience, Fatigue, Attrition, and Reliability
There are many interrelationships between morale, experience fatigue and attrition. Morale figures into most of these and is the single most important unit attribute. Morale determines experience level and fatigue gain. Attrition is based on morale and experience.

Since the base experience/morale of bad German units is 70/70 and Soviets are 40/40...well there you go.

Maybe they should adjust that, but as it stands now I will hesitate to go static with Russians.

(in reply to Flaviusx)
Post #: 77
RE: A warning to Russians in the 1.05 GC about what to ... - 12/5/2011 7:43:22 PM   
Mike13z50


Posts: 343
Joined: 1/29/2007
From: New Orleans
Status: offline
double post

< Message edited by Mike13z50 -- 12/5/2011 7:44:07 PM >

(in reply to Flaviusx)
Post #: 78
RE: A warning to Russians in the 1.05 GC about what to ... - 12/6/2011 10:13:11 AM   
delatbabel


Posts: 1242
Joined: 7/30/2006
From: Sydney, Australia
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Flaviusx

Klydon, my own view is that all units in all campaign scenarios on both sides should revert to normal mode. (Or, alternately, frozen mode.) We found in testing that leaving substantial numbers of units set to static mode with little or no APs in the kitty is a disaster for the defending side. True for the Germans in 44, also will be true for the Sovs in 42. If a player wants to set units to static once the game starts, let him go ahead and do so, but right now the AP costs of flipping these over is prohibitive and the per turn AP budget will not keep up with it.




This is stupid, stupider, and stupidest, and something the developers should be ashamed of.

Eliminating the ability of units to go into static mode in 1941 is not the solution to the problem of not having enough APs to activate static mode units, or the problem of players farming APs from putting units into static mode. It should simply be a much smaller activation cost for static mode, and a must smaller (or zero) AP gain for units to go into static mode from reserve or normal mode.

Why do you lose so much more paperwork points for giving a unit some trucks than you do for building a unit in the first place (it takes about 50 APs to activate a static mode mech corps, but only about 25 to build it from scratch)? Why do you gain paperwork points for taking the trucks away from a unit? There is no reason or justification for this, it's been pointed out to the developers multiple times, and they just bury their heads in the sand and cover their backsides and ignore the problem.

Stupid, just plain stupid.


_____________________________

--
Del

(in reply to Flaviusx)
Post #: 79
Page:   <<   < prev  1 2 [3]
All Forums >> [New Releases from Matrix Games] >> Gary Grigsby's War in the East Series >> The War Room >> RE: A warning to Russians in the 1.05 GC about what to expect in 1942 Page: <<   < prev  1 2 [3]
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

0.090