Matrix Games Forums

The Age of Shadows on Distant Worlds starts now!Paypal System UpdateDistant Worlds: Shadows Final Teaser!Distant Worlds: Legends gets Updated!Recruiting Testers for Commander: the Great War on Mac!Armageddon invasion starts in 2014Command Rommels Panzers in Battle Academy!Servers UpdateThe Deal goes Fourth!Command Ops gets a Massive Update!		 Forums  Register  Login  Photo Gallery  Member List  Search  Calendars  FAQ 

My Profile  Inbox  Address Book  My Subscription  My Forums  Log Out

RE: March Madness '42

 
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: March Madness '42 Page: <<   < prev  4 5 6 [7] 8   next >   >>
Login
Message << Older Topic   Newer Topic >>
RE: March Madness '42 - 12/19/2011 8:01:29 PM   
ComradeP

 

Posts: 6966
Joined: 9/17/2009
Status: online 		After the initial months, you'll generally have a comfortable surplus. You'll need that surplus for reactivations of static units, but you will generally have enough with good management. When you don't put units on static/don't need to reactivate anything, you're sitting on a pool of 500 AP's for most of the game with little to spend it on, keeping in mind that you get 50 per turn, possibly more if a new army HQ arrives.

< Message edited by ComradeP -- 12/19/2011 8:03:47 PM >

_____________________________

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

(in reply to cavalry)
Post #: 181
RE: March Madness '42 - 12/19/2011 8:09:52 PM   
Tarhunnas


Posts: 2945
Joined: 1/27/2011
From: Hex X37, Y15
Status: offline 		I just went to 0 AP in september 1944 after having had the aforementioned surplus of 400 AP or so for several years. I have spent the APs to a large extent on FZs and partly on reassigning units as it is not always possible to move them where you want them to keep the corps structure intact.

(in reply to ComradeP)
Post #: 182
RE: March Madness '42 - 12/19/2011 9:56:32 PM   
carlkay58

 

Posts: 534
Joined: 7/25/2010
Status: offline 		Helio - the dance of divisions that you describe is what the Soviets historically did. So why should they not be able to do that?

If you study the Stalingrad counter attack preparations, you will note that Zhukov was transferred to the Front command and the Army commands were replaced with better leadership too. All of this comes out to about 100 AP in WITE terms.

But that is what the Soviets did. The German command flexibility that everyone seems to point to is the creation of Kampfgruppes and ad hoc units. ALL of these commands took place in Corps commands - I personally cannot recall any that took place across Corps lines, although I have no doubt that someone will come up with a few as examples. Perhaps the argument should be directed on lowering the penalties for using units from different commands for the Germans vs the Soviets. That would be more in line with your command flexibility for Axis.

I have helped trace OOBs in WWII for several projects. There are very few instances of divisions being moved around in normal circumstances in any army in WWII except for the Soviets. Many of the transfers were strictly local and temporary (so lowering the penalty for different commands would help with that). Only when strategic troop moves were being done did you really see divisions and corps being moved around.

(in reply to Tarhunnas)
Post #: 183
RE: March Madness '42 - 12/19/2011 10:13:53 PM   
Toidi

 

Posts: 144
Joined: 8/31/2011
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: ComradeP

Toidi: keep in mind that the Soviets already have a serious advantage as whereas army HQ's were more often than not more like corps level commands in terms of units attached, there is no penalty for attaching 12 divisions to them, making them equal to an Axis army. That's a serious advantage, because it means you have to use fewer army HQ's and can concentrate your mediocre to good leaders in that limited number of army HQ's.

It will be changed at some point (that is: presumably there will either be penalties when more than X units are attached or the command capacity will be lowered), but only if some of the ahistorical Axis advantages are removed first according to Pavel, something I agree with.



Well, I kind of agree with that - you can attach 12 divisions to an army. But you need to bear in mind that until you have corps, those 12 divisions have a CV more or less equal to 2 division of German infantry. As such, the combat power of the Soviet army is half combat power of German Corps... not to mention the possibility of force concentration ;) As such, I do not see that much of an advantage there. There is some late in game - when you have corps and the command capacity go up. Army with 9 Corps attached is quite a bit stronger than German equivalent. But until '43, I really do not see it as much of an advantage; The solution later is relatively simple, one can make Corps weight more than 3 points so fewer corps can be attached to an army without the penalties. On the other hand, I thought that the very powerful late Soviet armies were introduced intentionally... just to let the German be in the same situation in terms of forces attacking as Soviets before (it is more or less equal, the CV of 9 corps army is more or less the same as CV of two German Corps).

(in reply to ComradeP)
Post #: 184
RE: March Madness '42 - 12/19/2011 11:03:20 PM   
ComradeP

 

Posts: 6966
Joined: 9/17/2009
Status: online 		When comparing combat effectiveness, keep in mind that during 1941 and most of 1942 you should historically be defending, and after late 1942/early 1943 you should be preparing for a summer 1943 offensive. Up to that point, you mostly rely on the defensive strength of your army, which means that a 2-3 CV 12 Rifle division army still requires the Germans to commit a corps or two to remove them from their positions each turn, especially with forts as the attacker needs 2:1 CV.

_____________________________

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

(in reply to Toidi)
Post #: 185
RE: March Madness '42 - 12/19/2011 11:29:17 PM   
Toidi

 

Posts: 144
Joined: 8/31/2011
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: ComradeP

When comparing combat effectiveness, keep in mind that during 1941 and most of 1942 you should historically be defending, and after late 1942/early 1943 you should be preparing for a summer 1943 offensive. Up to that point, you mostly rely on the defensive strength of your army, which means that a 2-3 CV 12 Rifle division army still requires the Germans to commit a corps or two to remove them from their positions each turn, especially with forts as the attacker needs 2:1 CV.


I do keep in mind all that...

However, remember:
1. In '41 you do not have much forts... Not enough time to make them. I agree, Soviets have some around Leningrad, and yes, there you have to commit corps for attacking. But in the south? You can have some in '42, but very difficult to make them and keep them. Especially because:

2. Forts are very weak now - some pioneers attacking and there is no fort.
[actually it does not really work the other way round - I recently attacked with 4 sapper regiments in blizzard and the engineering value was 0. Sure, they were not very experienced and not full TOE (yet above 50%), but I was rather disappointed].

3. Finally, average CV of Soviet division is not 3. It is 1-1.5... I have a 90% TOE division in blizzard (so strength is multiplied by 2, and they have CV of 1 - so real CV is somewhere between 0 and 0.9). Division of 3 is a rare thing, now even more with the lower national morale. To have CV of 3, you need to have it rested, and first attack (successful or not) will move it down to 2 or 1.5. Actually, I'm afraid I do not have a single army of all divisions at CV 2-3 at the front. It may be the case for a Shock army or guards units, especially freshly railed, but that's it. If they are at front line, attrition & fatigue usually will move CV from 3 to 2 in a turn or two. Also refitting them an army to such high CV takes at least a month.

Anyway, your argument may be understood that you need to keep the things as they are later on. If you say that the difference of CV of German corps and Soviet army in '41 is almost not enough, than corps armies in '43-'44 are perfectly legal and necessary - as now you need 2:1 CV to win, and Germans have much better forts than Soviets in '41. So even a fully beefed corps army is not stronger in CV than the well preserved German corps in level 3 forts, especially taking into account the new 2:1 odds and better quality of German leadership ;)


(in reply to ComradeP)
Post #: 186
RE: March Madness '42 - 12/19/2011 11:32:40 PM   
Flaviusx


Posts: 5751
Joined: 9/9/2009
Status: online 		Tarhunnas, I think the systemic problems in your game are neither caused by APs, nor would be cured by giving you more of them. Or even infinite APs. Your current shortage is a symptom of those other problems, not a cause of them. If I dumped 500 APs on you right now...I think you might still be screwed. The way the German army falls apart late in the game is remarkable and excessive. Armaments production is probably still too low for them. The handling of replacements is problematic, as is the automatic entry of units from the deadpile.

But I'd like to see more (or, indeed, any) fresh 1.05 games in this late war period. Yours has been patched over so many times it's hard to form firm conclusions from it. But I'm not happy with the way it has developed. To my mind, you have, or should have won it.



_____________________________

WitE Alpha Tester

(in reply to ComradeP)
Post #: 187
RE: March Madness '42 - 12/20/2011 1:58:10 PM   
ComradeP

 

Posts: 6966
Joined: 9/17/2009
Status: online
quote:

as now you need 2:1 CV to win, and Germans have much better forts than Soviets in '41. So even a fully beefed corps army is not stronger in CV than the well preserved German corps in level 3 forts, especially taking into account the new 2:1 odds and better quality of German leadership ;)


But that's not the current reality in the game. The reality is that Rifle corps cause excessive amounts of casualties due to how the game favours high ROF elements, that every Rifle corps can have 3 sapper regiments in them and that the Soviets have serious force multipliers in the shape of the VVS and artillery divisions, not to mention that late war national morale is now so high that your Guards Rifle corps will more or less per default have a very impressive CV by 1944. Due to the current casualties, and counterattacking being rather suicidal for the Germans, there will be few "well preserved corps" by the time the majority of your army consists of Rifle corps.

_____________________________

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

(in reply to Flaviusx)
Post #: 188
RE: March Madness '42 - 12/21/2011 7:12:37 AM   
delatbabel


Posts: 1140
Joined: 7/30/2006
From: Sydney, Australia
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: Flaviusx

But I'd like to see more (or, indeed, any) fresh 1.05 games in this late war period.



I have played a few, but not PBEM, only FTF. I can say it's a much tougher drive to Berlin in 1944/45 than it used to be in earlier editions, either that or my German opponent is getting much better at defence. In 1.03 I could comfortably start pushing into Germany by early 1944, now it ends up as pretty much a stalemate from mid 1943 onwards, and I'm lucky to get a toe-hold in Poland much before March 1945.

Unfortunately the faster turnaround of FTF means I'm not taking too many screen shots or writing up AARs.

The *huge* change is if you're not playing the 1941 GC. The 1942 GC is now an easy win for the Germans -- I played this in 1.03 and managed to slog my way to victory, but in the current 1942 GC in 1.05 it's now a fast drive to the Urals by the Germans, basically picking how much of the Soviet army they'd like to isolate and destroy along the way. Just as a metric, my late 1942 army is around 7.5 million men if I start the 1941 GC, by the end of 1942 if I start the 1942 GC it's down to 5.5 million and I consider losing < 300K troops in a turn to be pretty good. By early 1944 it's around 3.6 million, and by the time the Germans raise the AV flag I'm lucky to have 2.2 million troops.

I know others have said that they wouldn't touch the 1942 GC with a barge pole, but I like having a campaign starting point that stops the arguments about the Germans being too strong in 1941, or the Soviets being too strong in the 41/42 blizzard. I would expect to be able to draw back to a line at the Don river in 1942 and be able to roughly hold that, perhaps at the expense of a blow-out into the Caucasus, but in reality what happens is that the blow-out tends to be through Stalingrad, over the top of
quote:

ORIGINAL: ComradeP
But that's not the current reality in the game. The reality is that Rifle corps cause excessive amounts of casualties due to how the game favours high ROF elements, that every Rifle corps can have 3 sapper regiments in them and that the Soviets have serious force multipliers in the shape of the VVS and artillery divisions, not to mention that late war national morale is now so high that your Guards Rifle corps will more or less per default have a very impressive CV by 1944. Due to the current casualties, and counterattacking being rather suicidal for the Germans, there will be few "well preserved corps" by the time the majority of your army consists of Rifle corps.


Is that what you're seeing? Because I haven't spotted that. I'm seeing pretty good results on counter-attacking by the Germans, and as a result my rifle corps (mostly what I use to hold ground) get mostly fairly well chewed up. Even in 1945, if I put a tank corps anywhere in the front line it's a reasonable certainty that it will be attacked and routed, with massive casualties. It's possible to hold some ground with mech corps, but it's expensive in terms of men and morale. Even when a mass of combined corps dig out a German unit, I'm still seeing the casualties heavily favour the Germans (about 3:1), and when the Germans attack a stack of Soviet units the casualties are about 10:1 in favour of the Germans.


_____________________________

--
Del

(in reply to Flaviusx)
Post #: 189
RE: March Madness '42 - 12/21/2011 8:56:39 AM   
Flaviusx


Posts: 5751
Joined: 9/9/2009
Status: online 		Stay the hell away from the 42 GC. It is quite broken, imo, due to changes in static rules. That alone makes it unplayable. The ideal number of static units for the Soviet Union is approximately zero. It is a mode that simply does not work for them on any level. They cannot afford to immobilize themselves this way, nor does it help their attrition. It is quite useless...worse than useless, it's actively harmful.



_____________________________

WitE Alpha Tester

(in reply to delatbabel)
Post #: 190
RE: March Madness '42 - 12/21/2011 10:06:56 AM   
janh

 

Posts: 1140
Joined: 6/12/2007
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: Flaviusx
Stay the hell away from the 42 GC. It is quite broken, imo, due to changes in static rules. That alone makes it unplayable. The ideal number of static units for the Soviet Union is approximately zero. It is a mode that simply does not work for them on any level. They cannot afford to immobilize themselves this way, nor does it help their attrition. It is quite useless...worse than useless, it's actively harmful.


However, if you want to assess the effects of the patches, and see whether the current modeling of the game-engine reflect reality in some sense, would it in fact be the best thing to have a couple of 41 AARs, a couple of 42 GCs, and 43 or 44 starts as well?

42 GC that doesn't play out anywhere near history in a wider sense, would be a bad sign? However, a 41 GC would after playing a year or two worth of turns already deviated so much from the historical course, that it is a worse (though not necessarily bad) comparison to the 42 summer offensive, or the 43 stalemate. Better choose a starting point that is closer to the correct prerequisites?

(in reply to Flaviusx)
Post #: 191
RE: March Madness '42 - 12/21/2011 10:45:16 AM   
cavalry

 

Posts: 1727
Joined: 9/2/2003
From: Blackboys East Sussex UK
Status: online 		In the Case Blue scn under 1.4 and the newest patch I have played as axis the Russians are on the offensive by Aug and in my current game the same old thing happens the Russians bag anything in the don bend in early September.

There are simply too many Russians and they are so damn strong. The Germans lose so many units to witdrawl there is not enoght to cover the front. I do not mind being over extended into the Urals / Stalingrad but this is silly.

Please someone post a victory in case Blue scn or show me a screen to give me some confidence its me and not the game.
I am planning to start the 43 campaign but after 3 scn when i should feel confident on attack nevermind defence I am still nervous as this game plays out like no other wargame on eastern front I have known.

Cav


(in reply to janh)
Post #: 192
RE: March Madness '42 - 12/21/2011 11:12:07 AM   
Callistrid

 

Posts: 201
Joined: 8/11/2011
Status: offline 		Some words about the "March Madness".
I feel there is no problem with the current system.

It's true the soviet could be hardly beaten, but just if he/she attack with his full forces during the winter turns, and the german don't use his pz/mot troops.
If the soviet player build fortified zones, and deep defense line, the axis can't hit really hard on march. The attack cost it's just 3/15 MP, but moving penalty slow the chance to break the soviet lines.

So, I just want to tell, there is no "March Madness", just some players handled the situation poorly.

And about the AP: the german OOB structure won't really change during the war. Most of the original german corps remain with the original army HQ, just like the divisions. And the OKH could be used as transfer HQ, because it's always cheap to attach unit's to the OKH (around 1-3 AP).

(in reply to cavalry)
Post #: 193
RE: March Madness '42 - 12/21/2011 2:17:57 PM   
ComradeP

 

Posts: 6966
Joined: 9/17/2009
Status: online
quote:

Is that what you're seeing? Because I haven't spotted that. I'm seeing pretty good results on counter-attacking by the Germans, and as a result my rifle corps (mostly what I use to hold ground) get mostly fairly well chewed up. Even in 1945, if I put a tank corps anywhere in the front line it's a reasonable certainty that it will be attacked and routed, with massive casualties. It's possible to hold some ground with mech corps, but it's expensive in terms of men and morale. Even when a mass of combined corps dig out a German unit, I'm still seeing the casualties heavily favour the Germans (about 3:1), and when the Germans attack a stack of Soviet units the casualties are about 10:1 in favour of the Germans.


It depends on the stack being attacked, but a reasonably experienced Rifle corps will cause the kind of losses to a German attacker that makes such attacks unsustainable.

Attacking Tank corps is always fairly easy because they have minimal infantry and high ROF elements. Mechanized corps are a different story.

Later in the war, the number of casualties and not just the ratio is also important. A few 2000:6000 attacks each turn are sustainable for the Soviets, but suicide for German mobile units.

_____________________________

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

(in reply to Callistrid)
Post #: 194
RE: March Madness '42 - 12/21/2011 7:31:47 PM   
Joel Billings


Posts: 18458
Joined: 9/20/2000
From: Santa Rosa, CA
Status: online
quote:

ORIGINAL: cavalry

In the Case Blue scn under 1.4 and the newest patch I have played as axis the Russians are on the offensive by Aug and in my current game the same old thing happens the Russians bag anything in the don bend in early September.

There are simply too many Russians and they are so damn strong. The Germans lose so many units to witdrawl there is not enoght to cover the front. I do not mind being over extended into the Urals / Stalingrad but this is silly.

Please someone post a victory in case Blue scn or show me a screen to give me some confidence its me and not the game.
I am planning to start the 43 campaign but after 3 scn when i should feel confident on attack nevermind defence I am still nervous as this game plays out like no other wargame on eastern front I have known.

Cav





In a related matter, two days ago we found that we had built some of the German units in Campaign 42 and Case Blue with very low support numbers, so the German OB total is about 250k lower than it is now that we have rebuilt the units correctly (in Campaign 42, not sure about the difference in Case Blue). Although this is just support troops, the shortage was probably diverting replacements to refill these weak units. We are working on fixing this. We've also internally been discussing just what the manpower total for the Germans should be in game terms in June 1942. We're up to 2.95 million, but I've seen some numbers that go as high as 3.1 million. It's very hard to get a good number on all the units that are included in the game.

_____________________________

All understanding comes after the fact.
-- Soren Kierkegaard

(in reply to cavalry)
Post #: 195
RE: March Madness '42 - 12/21/2011 8:29:37 PM   
cavalry

 

Posts: 1727
Joined: 9/2/2003
From: Blackboys East Sussex UK
Status: online 		Joel,

Thanks for this reply.

I think I did notice by turn 8 or so all my infantry were toward half strength ( as were some of the panzers) . I also noticed units on rail hexes in refit were or seemed to be very slow taking replacements.

Thanks for your ongoing support.

Cav


(in reply to Joel Billings)
Post #: 196
RE: March Madness '42 - 12/23/2011 7:11:25 AM   
delatbabel


Posts: 1140
Joined: 7/30/2006
From: Sydney, Australia
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: Flaviusx

Stay the hell away from the 42 GC. It is quite broken, imo, due to changes in static rules. That alone makes it unplayable. The ideal number of static units for the Soviet Union is approximately zero. It is a mode that simply does not work for them on any level. They cannot afford to immobilize themselves this way, nor does it help their attrition. It is quite useless...worse than useless, it's actively harmful.




Yes, I've heard that multiple times. In 1.03, the 1942 GC was quite playable, a very good match I found. I keep a copy of 1.03 installed just to play that GC. Some time in 1.04 the attrition levels went way up and it's no longer possible to hold any ground as the Soviets in that campaign, and your front line is pretty much doomed to destruction.


_____________________________

--
Del

(in reply to Flaviusx)
Post #: 197
RE: March Madness '42 - 12/23/2011 4:20:52 PM   
Pelton


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

ORIGINAL: Flaviusx

Tarhunnas, I think the systemic problems in your game are neither caused by APs, nor would be cured by giving you more of them. Or even infinite APs. Your current shortage is a symptom of those other problems, not a cause of them. If I dumped 500 APs on you right now...I think you might still be screwed. The way the German army falls apart late in the game is remarkable and excessive. Armaments production is probably still too low for them. The handling of replacements is problematic, as is the automatic entry of units from the deadpile.

But I'd like to see more (or, indeed, any) fresh 1.05 games in this late war period. Yours has been patched over so many times it's hard to form firm conclusions from it. But I'm not happy with the way it has developed. To my mind, you have, or should have won it.




Russian losses during 42 to early 44 do not reflex historical at all. Not even close to the historical ratio.
During 42 its 2 to 1 unless you can pocket Russian units.

The engine itself is off as far as loss ratio goes. None of the games I have played todate pre or post 1.05 are anything close to 6 to1 during 42. Best I have done and that was vs Larry was 4 to 1. As you know the combat ratio was lower during 1.05 which is a joke and it can be seen in the game now in 42.

The ratio during 43 is 2 to 1 not even close to 4 or 5 to 1 as per historical.

Historical losses on Eastern front, only includes KIA,MIA,WIA

——————German——————-Russian————Ratio

1941
3rd—————551,000——————2,795,000———-5 to 1
4th—————280,000——————1,598,000———-5.7to 1
1942
1st—————280,000——————1,686,000———-6 to 1
2nd—————220,000——————1,395,000———-6.3 to 1
3rd—————383,000——————2,371,000———-6 to 1
4th—————177,000——————1,281,000———-7.2 to 1
1943
1st—————498,000——————1,908,000———3.8 to 1
2nd—————110,000——————444,000———-4 to 1
3rd—————533,000——————2,633,000———-5 to 1
4th—————381,000——————1,939,000———-5 to 1
1944
1st—————423,000——————1,859,000———-4.4 to 1
2nd—————352,000——————1,021,000———-3 to 1
3rd—————879,000——————1,771,000———-2 to 1
4th—————297,000——————1,086,000———-3.6 to 1

Right now the game is rewarding horrible Russian game play.

Because the combat ratio's are so far from historical its a joke.

As of 1.05 what is historical during 1944 is what the combat ratio is during 42 and 43. The basic combat ratio is way to hell of during 42 and 43.

Come late 43 or early 44 as you know Flaviusx the German army can EASLY be broken in 30 turns. At which point the German player has a bunch of 1 cv units vs stacks of 30 attack CV units.

We all know what the out comes of 1.05 games will be. I have stated it as soon as 1.05 came out.

1. Combat ratio's for 42/43 are way way off.
2. Russian late war infantry is uber over rated or German infantry uber under-rated. Nothing close to historical.
3. German moral is lost way way to easly, blizzard rules are a joke as far as moral goes. losses seem historical in most games unless Russian is using cav exploit. (blizzard loses)
4. German army can still easly be broken in 30 turns late to early 44.

I don't see a single game that was started 1.05( all things being equal or even with bad not horrible russian game play) that will not be won by Russian player no matter how good or bad they played that will not be won months before May 45.

Late war the game is a disaster and you alrdy know this and so does 2 by 3.

Pelton


< Message edited by Pelton -- 12/23/2011 4:24:45 PM >

_____________________________

GHC
15 - 3 - 7

10 games ended in 41 (10-0-0)
4 games ended in 42 (4-0-2)
3 games ended in 43 (1-2-3)
1 game ended in 44 (0-1-2)

(in reply to Flaviusx)
Post #: 198
RE: March Madness '42 - 12/23/2011 4:28:20 PM   
Pelton


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

ORIGINAL: Joel Billings


quote:

ORIGINAL: cavalry

In the Case Blue scn under 1.4 and the newest patch I have played as axis the Russians are on the offensive by Aug and in my current game the same old thing happens the Russians bag anything in the don bend in early September.

There are simply too many Russians and they are so damn strong. The Germans lose so many units to witdrawl there is not enoght to cover the front. I do not mind being over extended into the Urals / Stalingrad but this is silly.

Please someone post a victory in case Blue scn or show me a screen to give me some confidence its me and not the game.
I am planning to start the 43 campaign but after 3 scn when i should feel confident on attack nevermind defence I am still nervous as this game plays out like no other wargame on eastern front I have known.

Cav





In a related matter, two days ago we found that we had built some of the German units in Campaign 42 and Case Blue with very low support numbers, so the German OB total is about 250k lower than it is now that we have rebuilt the units correctly (in Campaign 42, not sure about the difference in Case Blue). Although this is just support troops, the shortage was probably diverting replacements to refill these weak units. We are working on fixing this. We've also internally been discussing just what the manpower total for the Germans should be in game terms in June 1942. We're up to 2.95 million, but I've seen some numbers that go as high as 3.1 million. It's very hard to get a good number on all the units that are included in the game.


The problem is not the total numbers it the combat ratio for 42 to 43 is way to hell of historical.

1942
1st—————280,000——————1,686,000———-6 to 1
2nd—————220,000——————1,395,000———-6.3 to 1
3rd—————383,000——————2,371,000———-6 to 1
4th—————177,000——————1,281,000———-7.2 to 1
1943
1st—————498,000——————1,908,000———3.8 to 1
2nd—————110,000——————444,000———-4 to 1
3rd—————533,000——————2,633,000———-5 to 1
4th—————381,000——————1,939,000———-5 to 1

None of the 1.05 games are getting anything close to these numbers.

The German army is still falling apart late 43 or 44 early.
1. Combat ratio is way off.
2. German units lose moral way to fast.
3. German lose way to much artillary when retreating.

The German army had no problem retreating unlike russian army.

Fix is huge problem of combat ratio and the game will be playable late 43 to 45.

_____________________________

GHC
15 - 3 - 7

10 games ended in 41 (10-0-0)
4 games ended in 42 (4-0-2)
3 games ended in 43 (1-2-3)
1 game ended in 44 (0-1-2)

(in reply to Joel Billings)
Post #: 199
RE: March Madness '42 - 12/23/2011 4:33:55 PM   
Pelton


Posts: 4355
Joined: 4/9/2006
Status: offline 		You guys can fart around with little sht forever, but until you fix the way out of wack loses ratio's during 42 and 43 the game is 100% not historical or worth $10.

If I knew how screwed up things were 42 to 44 with ratio I never would have bought game in first plase.

The engine is a joke at this point.

The dam thing with SMG's getting sht tons of kills has been known for over a dam yr and you guys are to dam lazy to fix it?

Come on fix the stupid engine so the combat ratios are something close to historical and German moral should not fall apart late 43 to early 44.

Pelton


< Message edited by Pelton -- 12/23/2011 4:37:35 PM >

_____________________________

GHC
15 - 3 - 7

10 games ended in 41 (10-0-0)
4 games ended in 42 (4-0-2)
3 games ended in 43 (1-2-3)
1 game ended in 44 (0-1-2)

(in reply to Pelton)
Post #: 200
RE: March Madness '42 - 12/23/2011 4:44:04 PM   
Flaviusx


Posts: 5751
Joined: 9/9/2009
Status: online 		Pelton, I sure wish you'd get as worked up about all the goofy things that happen in 41 (starting on turn 1 no less,) but these are of course in your favor.



_____________________________

WitE Alpha Tester

(in reply to Pelton)
Post #: 201
RE: March Madness '42 - 12/23/2011 4:47:19 PM   
Pelton


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

ORIGINAL: Toidi


quote:

ORIGINAL: ComradeP

Toidi: keep in mind that the Soviets already have a serious advantage as whereas army HQ's were more often than not more like corps level commands in terms of units attached, there is no penalty for attaching 12 divisions to them, making them equal to an Axis army. That's a serious advantage, because it means you have to use fewer army HQ's and can concentrate your mediocre to good leaders in that limited number of army HQ's.

It will be changed at some point (that is: presumably there will either be penalties when more than X units are attached or the command capacity will be lowered), but only if some of the ahistorical Axis advantages are removed first according to Pavel, something I agree with.



Well, I kind of agree with that - you can attach 12 divisions to an army. But you need to bear in mind that until you have corps, those 12 divisions have a CV more or less equal to 2 division of German infantry. As such, the combat power of the Soviet army is half combat power of German Corps... not to mention the possibility of force concentration ;) As such, I do not see that much of an advantage there. There is some late in game - when you have corps and the command capacity go up. Army with 9 Corps attached is quite a bit stronger than German equivalent. But until '43, I really do not see it as much of an advantage; The solution later is relatively simple, one can make Corps weight more than 3 points so fewer corps can be attached to an army without the penalties. On the other hand, I thought that the very powerful late Soviet armies were introduced intentionally... just to let the German be in the same situation in terms of forces attacking as Soviets before (it is more or less equal, the CV of 9 corps army is more or less the same as CV of two German Corps).



The historical combat ratio was 1 dead german for 5 russians until mid 44.

The CV's can be whatever, but the basic game engine is not reflecting history.

It 100% not equal at all, the german army is out numbered 2.5 to 1 43 on and russian output in men is 5 to 1.
The basic combat ratio from 42 to end of war is 2 to 1.
So the russian player simply attacks along the front for 30 turns come late 43 and the german army is under 2.3 million and moral is in the tank.

Its simply 1+1=2 do the math Toidi.

IF the combat ratio was historical the German army would brake 3rd or 4th quarter of 44 and not 1st or 2nd quarter.

Until the game engine is a reflextion of history game will end many months before may 45 no matter how horrible the Russian game play was.

Its a FACT once the german army brakes the Russian army can pocket 5 to 10 units per turn easly and advance 4 to 6 hexes to berlin.

I been bitching about how unhistorical the combat ratio is for months.

1+1=2

2 by 3 has to fix this issue or the game remains unplayable after 42.

Pelton

_____________________________

GHC
15 - 3 - 7

10 games ended in 41 (10-0-0)
4 games ended in 42 (4-0-2)
3 games ended in 43 (1-2-3)
1 game ended in 44 (0-1-2)

(in reply to Toidi)
Post #: 202
RE: March Madness '42 - 12/23/2011 4:51:27 PM   
Pelton


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

ORIGINAL: Flaviusx

Pelton, I sure wish you'd get as worked up about all the goofy things that happen in 41 (starting on turn 1 no less,) but these are of course in your favor.




Your 100% right about that, I do not disagree at all and 100% agree.

The game is screwed up for sure.

if they fix the unhistorical ratio's

I have 100% no problem with a fix for Lvov pocket.

The game right now is not historical at all. lets just put it on table and get that over with.

The game engine is in need of some TLC.


_____________________________

GHC
15 - 3 - 7

10 games ended in 41 (10-0-0)
4 games ended in 42 (4-0-2)
3 games ended in 43 (1-2-3)
1 game ended in 44 (0-1-2)

(in reply to Flaviusx)
Post #: 203
RE: March Madness '42 - 12/23/2011 4:58:06 PM   
Pelton


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

ORIGINAL: Flaviusx

Pelton, I sure wish you'd get as worked up about all the goofy things that happen in 41 (starting on turn 1 no less,) but these are of course in your favor.




Also WTH is goofy other then your stupid responce.

As is the case most times you can't refute what I have stated: the combat ratio is a disaster 42 to early 44.

You got to come back with the childish personal responces.

1. The combat ratio is not historical.
2. Russians way way over powered late war.

You know this as fact and have stated that the russian army is over powered late war.

Its over powered late war because the basic combat ratio is of during 1942, 1943 and early 1944.

You already know this and so does 2 by 3.

Why keep wasting poeple time?

Why the stupid, ( We would like to see some more games play out)

You guys alrdy know the dam answer to the question and yet string the general playing public along like lab rats.

Pelton

< Message edited by Pelton -- 12/23/2011 5:02:28 PM >

_____________________________

GHC
15 - 3 - 7

10 games ended in 41 (10-0-0)
4 games ended in 42 (4-0-2)
3 games ended in 43 (1-2-3)
1 game ended in 44 (0-1-2)

(in reply to Flaviusx)
Post #: 204
RE: March Madness '42 - 12/23/2011 6:07:50 PM   
cavalry

 

Posts: 1727
Joined: 9/2/2003
From: Blackboys East Sussex UK
Status: online 		Pelton,

You are keen to get things changed - I advocate patience and one step at a time.

I am inclined to agree with you but these guys are trying to fix things and I agree its good to see how games arrive in 44 or so.

I am not against what you say. There must be something wrong as I do not hear Soviet players raising issues. The Soviets seem to be too effective. You have a lot of games running, you are an experienced player and your AAR are valuable and speak loudest.

Cav

(in reply to Pelton)
Post #: 205
RE: March Madness '42 - 12/23/2011 6:16:38 PM   
Flaviusx


Posts: 5751
Joined: 9/9/2009
Status: online 		Er, this entire topic came about as a result of Soviet complaints. (It has since gone offtopic.) The jury is still out on 1942, and this really shouldn't be swept under the rug by skipping over to 1944 where a different set of issues is apparent.

For that matter, we're ignoring 1941 issues.


< Message edited by Flaviusx -- 12/23/2011 6:19:14 PM >

_____________________________

WitE Alpha Tester

(in reply to cavalry)
Post #: 206
RE: March Madness '42 - 12/23/2011 6:43:07 PM   
cavalry

 

Posts: 1727
Joined: 9/2/2003
From: Blackboys East Sussex UK
Status: online 		OK noted...

(in reply to Flaviusx)
Post #: 207
RE: March Madness '42 - 12/23/2011 7:24:06 PM   
terje439


Posts: 5331
Joined: 3/28/2004
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: Pelton
3. German lose way to much artillary when retreating.

The German army had no problem retreating unlike russian army.


I am not at all an experienced player in this game, nor am I an expert in anything, and by no means do I mean to either put gasoline on the bonfire, nor to be disrespectful.

However this statement seems to me that you confuse retreats and retreats.
Falling back gradually, or merely redeploying to avoid being cut off or attacked is not the same as being pushed back due to a combat result.
When the Germans had to fall back due to overwhelming pressure, they very often lost artillery pieces, espesially AT guns and mortars (atleast that is what one of the members of the SS Wiking told me before he passed away), but if they knew they were being attacked and were well organized, these losses could be avoided.

I think that maybe losses should be less IF they are made on level 2+ fortified units, but remain as they are if the unit is less fortified??
It might be that I think of the fortification values in a way that is nowhere near what the designers intended, but for me
0 fort = just arrived
1 fort = some trenches
2 fort = trenches, barbed wire, layered defence
3 fort = now bunkers start to appear (wooden pillboxes)
4-5 fort = well designed fortification works with everything in place (mines, barbed wire, etc etc)


Terje

_____________________________

Incompetent Allied commander in witp:AE
Trying for Lebensraum in WitE
Emperor in CoG:EE
Sultan in CoG:EE

(in reply to Pelton)
Post #: 208
RE: March Madness '42 - 12/23/2011 7:49:11 PM   
Callistrid

 

Posts: 201
Joined: 8/11/2011
Status: offline 		Pelton, it's hard to simulate the soviet mistakes, like:
1. hold the line at all cost
2. attack the german at all cost
3. never retreat
4. Kiev, Smolensk, Vyazma and other minor pocket...

In the WITE the soviet player try to minimalize his looses, and retreat if he/she need to do that. In the WW2 it was not so.

< Message edited by Callistrid -- 12/23/2011 7:52:54 PM >

(in reply to terje439)
Post #: 209
RE: March Madness '42 - 12/23/2011 10:38:26 PM   
Baelfiin

 

Posts: 1252
Joined: 6/7/2006
Status: offline 		I think pelton may be off his meds today 8)

_____________________________

"We are going to attack all night, and attack tomorrow morning..... If we are not victorious, let no one come back alive!" -- Patton
WITE-Beta
WITW-Alpha

(in reply to Callistrid)
Post #: 210
Page:   <<   < prev  4 5 6 [7] 8   next >   >>
All Forums >> [New Releases from Matrix Games] >> Gary Grigsby's War in the East Series >> RE: March Madness '42 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

0.313