Matrix Games Forums

War in the West gets its first update!Flashpoint Campaigns: Red Storm version 2.08 is now available!Command gets huge update!Order of Battle: Pacific Featured on Weekly Streaming SessionA new fight for Battle Academy!Buzz Aldrin's Space Program Manager is out for Mac!The definitive wargame of the Western Front is out now! War in the West gets teaser trailer and Twitch Stream!New Preview AAR for War in the West!War in the West Manual preview
Forums  Register  Login  Photo Gallery  Member List  Search  Calendars  FAQ 

My Profile  Inbox  Address Book  My Subscription  My Forums  Log Out

RE: 1.05.59 rule changes?

 
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: 1.05.59 rule changes? Page: <<   < prev  1 2 [3] 4 5   next >   >>
Login
Message << Older Topic   Newer Topic >>
RE: 1.05.59 rule changes? - 2/3/2012 4:35:08 PM   
Pelton

 

Posts: 6398
Joined: 4/9/2006
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: paullus99

Pelton - and you've tested this? I'm not going to get into a pissing contest with you, it isn't worth my time. I'm going to dive back into the game and see some results with my own eyes - something that you're not even bothering to do.


Was I right about 1v1=2v1 months before it was nerfed? Yes I was.
same for airfield spamming.
HQ spamming
fort decay ect.

Like you said you can be part of the problem or part of the solution.

I will be part of the solution. I want a better game and a larger player base.

Forsing the game back to a static 1942 is only going to drive more poeple off as pre 1.05 did.


_____________________________

GHC WitE 24 - 4 - 8
GHC WitW 0 - 0 - 0

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8DiSQ36zfWk

(in reply to paullus99)
Post #: 61
RE: 1.05.59 rule changes? - 2/3/2012 4:43:47 PM   
Pelton

 

Posts: 6398
Joined: 4/9/2006
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: BigAnorak

quote:

The Red Horde will have an extra 1.5 million men at the front, allot more Rifle corp. and 4 months worth of forts.


You conveniently ignore the fact that the axis have more men and more divisions in 1944/45 due to avoiding Stalingrad-like losses. (Look at the axis OOB in the Oloren/terje AAR -3.2m Germans in April 1945 and 7k AFVs)

There is zero evidence that having 1.5m more men in the OOB is getting the soviets into Berlin before 1st May 1945. The Axis are capturing Moscow far more often.

I do agree that 1943 can become a WW1 slugfest, but this is due to neither side being able to create conditions for successful mobile warfare - the Axis know that a Citadel re-dux is doomed, and the Red Army isn't quite able to tip the front into mobile attack/defence. I am really not sure this is due to the game structure/mechanics, but rather axis hindsight, and Soviet inexperience of building the right army and using it in a more focused manner. There are signs of some Soviet players "turning the corner", and we may start seeing unstoppable Soviet juggernauts being created in 1943, rather than 1944 onwards, which is all we have seen in AARs to date.

As the game has evolved, several hurdles have been met and needed to be overcome: Firstly the Blizzard which was fixed in 1.04, then the 1942 Wall of level 4 forts, which was fixed with 1.05, but with the by-product of "March Madness".

The changes in 1.05.59 still give the Axis the best chance of creating a winning position in 1941, and a non-losing position in 1942, until such time as we see Soviet players learning better survival techniques for 1941/42 and learning how to build a war-winning Army in 1943, in the same way the Axis learned to survive and do well in 1941 prior to 1.04, when the cards were definitely stacked against them.




I do not and have debated this in leagth before. Troop numbers means nothing it is all 100% about morale from 43 on as far as german side goes. The russian out number the Germans by 2 to 1 most of the time, but get kicked around because of morale 41 -42. The game is hard wired to a morale time line not in game result. I have 3.3 million men vs Kamil in June 44, but my morale blows so he can stream roll and pocket units NP.

There is zero evidence that having 1.5m more men in the OOB is getting the soviets into Berlin before 1st May 1945. The Axis are capturing Moscow far more often.

Read a few AAR's thats just not true and you know it, your sounding like Speedy now.

we see stream rollers in 42 alot of them, the German player bail.

your responce is counter to allot of AAR's Katza vs 76mm July 43 76 mm is stream rolling alrdy.
Pelton vs Kamil
Pelton vs Hoooper
Q-ball vs Tarhunass

ect ect ect ect

Most German players quit in early 42, because they are alrdy getting stream rolled by late 42, thats why you only see ONE game in 1944 that the German player is losing Kamil vs Pelton

I personally know what I am talking about unlike yourself.

Stick to the facts and not fiction.

_____________________________

GHC WitE 24 - 4 - 8
GHC WitW 0 - 0 - 0

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8DiSQ36zfWk

(in reply to BigAnorak)
Post #: 62
RE: 1.05.59 rule changes? - 2/3/2012 4:45:24 PM   
Pelton

 

Posts: 6398
Joined: 4/9/2006
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Baelfiin

I played it out vs Hoooper till the end. That end was in 1944 however


See Big A a another stream roller ends in 1944, but yet 1.06 is a German nerf beat down?

Sorry that I did not know your game got to the end. Did you guys do an AAR?

Pelton

_____________________________

GHC WitE 24 - 4 - 8
GHC WitW 0 - 0 - 0

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8DiSQ36zfWk

(in reply to Baelfiin)
Post #: 63
RE: 1.05.59 rule changes? - 2/3/2012 4:47:41 PM   
Q-Ball


Posts: 5589
Joined: 6/25/2002
From: Chicago, Illinois
Status: offline
It should be noted that my game vs. Tarhunnas was a 1.04 game. Huge difference in 1942 in the Soviet's favor.

Also, the Soviets, with the latest patch, are losing about 1 mil manpower in 1943/44. Additionally, they will need approx. 50% more Army HQs, or approx. 15-20, tying up an additional 200,000 men for no combat gain. Doesn't that put a dent in Soviet Manpower?

(in reply to Pelton)
Post #: 64
RE: 1.05.59 rule changes? - 2/3/2012 4:55:30 PM   
Pelton

 

Posts: 6398
Joined: 4/9/2006
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Flaviusx


quote:

ORIGINAL: Pelton


quote:

ORIGINAL: Commanderski

The rule changers look impressive and it's obvious that Matrix and 2X3 put a lot of effort and thought into this.

I think that maybe we should wait until it's released and we actually use it before we make any criticisms.


The Red Horde will have an extra 1.5 million men at the front, allot more Rifle corp. and 4 months worth of forts.

yes or no?


No.

Rifle corps can't be built before June. They are mostly not worth making in 1942 anyways. Forts get built as slow as molasses during mud and snow. Level 3s are nearly impossible to build in mud, as a matter of fact, even with generous engineering support.

The Red Army will also be grappling with a severe command crisis which you ought to be able to take advantage of.

You will no longer have an ahistorical and deeply silly Axis March 1942 offensive. This is completely intended.








1v1=2v1 was intended completely by design and was a disaster, driving away 100's.

Flaviusx how is it forts get built by the 100's under 1.05 and no maicly will not get built?

Lol come on no one beleives that look at the current 1.05 AAR's andone can see thats just not true. they get built by 100's, but the German player had a chance to get past them pre 1.06.

No there is no chance, so there will be 4 months of fort belts. There is no getting around this, read current AAR's

Ok so rifle corps get formed shortly after 42 and they are a pain in the ass I see them in my current games now.

To build rifle corps requires didvisions of which the Russian player can build 4 months worth before late June 42 now.

I PM you and asked about cost exctra. I know how it works.

Sure we will not have a 100% total historical possibly March German offensive we will be stuck with a staic WWI game as before.

Here again we get to the real TRUTH of the matter THE GERMAN PLAYER MUST BE PUT IN A HISTORICAL BOX!

Its ok that the Russian player can do whatever they like non historical, but if the German player plans ahead and puts together a snow offensive a little better then Historical then the German side is hit with the NERF bat.

Thank you for admitting the truth of why this was done.

The German players is put behind bars while the russian player can do whatever they like that non historical.

_____________________________

GHC WitE 24 - 4 - 8
GHC WitW 0 - 0 - 0

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8DiSQ36zfWk

(in reply to Flaviusx)
Post #: 65
RE: 1.05.59 rule changes? - 2/3/2012 5:06:27 PM   
Pelton

 

Posts: 6398
Joined: 4/9/2006
Status: offline
The patch is clearly a german nerf. Again the German player that plans for a snow offensive is punished. Its 100% historically possible, but will not be part of a game that nerfs all German "what if". 2by3 is interested in only russian what if it would seem.

The snow nerf has been put in because the german side is forsed to play in a historical box. Anything that is done out side that is nerfed time and again.

March madness is nothing that could not have happened historically, just as russian players ruuning for the hills in 1941 and 1942.

2by3 lets the Russian side play around with what "if", but the German side is beat down with nerf after nerf if they do anything out side the historical. Its not unhistorically possible that the Germans could have a good offensive during snow 42.

Again this pet peave of putting the German side in a box patch after patch is simply driving more and more poeple away.

Flaviusx is happy another what if has been taken from the german side as long as he can keep all his what ifs.

_____________________________

GHC WitE 24 - 4 - 8
GHC WitW 0 - 0 - 0

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8DiSQ36zfWk

(in reply to Pelton)
Post #: 66
RE: 1.05.59 rule changes? - 2/3/2012 5:07:45 PM   
Flaviusx


Posts: 6415
Joined: 9/9/2009
From: Southern California
Status: online
Funny, I'm building tank corps in April, not rifle divisions. And rifle divisions come at the low low price of 20 APs in March. There's better places to spend your APs until that drops.

In an ideal world the number of rifle divisions that a Soviet player wants to build is approximately zero. The ones he gets for free are sufficient and then some. It's only when you start losing lots of them that you need to replace them; my rough and ready rule to keep around 400 rifle division equivalents on map.

If you build too many rifle divisions and then flip them over to corps, your replacement situation won't keep up with the numbers. 150 such corps is pushing the limits of your replacement capacity. See Terje's AAR for an example of the problems of overbuilding.

Finally...rifle corps just kinda suck in 1942. They are overpriced and underpowered until 1943. You are in effect spending 20 APs to exchange 30,000 men for 20,000 men. That's not a bargain. (Only with the 42c October corps does the exchange rate become even.)

Rifle corps are primarily an offensive tool, and in 1942 you won't be on the offensive, nor can they accomplish much by themselves without lavish fire support from artillery divisions. You really need to stick to divisions until at least October. A handful of guards rifle corps in summer of 1942 can help defend some key targets, but the numbers ought to be strictly limited.

_____________________________

WitE Alpha Tester

(in reply to Pelton)
Post #: 67
RE: 1.05.59 rule changes? - 2/3/2012 5:13:22 PM   
Pelton

 

Posts: 6398
Joined: 4/9/2006
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Q-Ball

It should be noted that my game vs. Tarhunnas was a 1.04 game. Huge difference in 1942 in the Soviet's favor.

Also, the Soviets, with the latest patch, are losing about 1 mil manpower in 1943/44. Additionally, they will need approx. 50% more Army HQs, or approx. 15-20, tying up an additional 200,000 men for no combat gain. Doesn't that put a dent in Soviet Manpower?



That manpower lost is replased by the static front of 1942. That was the trade off for no combat during the snow turns of 42. A little bait and switch, just like removing 1v1=2v1, but upping the combat ratio after 41.

The C&C is a none issue again because of the extra troops and forts that will be built during the 4 months of early 1942.

The HQ issue will not be a factor in a game all things being equal.

Again the 200,000 troops sitting around will be gaining morale for doing nothing, unlike the German troops who gain nothing by sitting around.

The troops will be training, the russian side have more troops then they know what to do with by 43 anyways.

_____________________________

GHC WitE 24 - 4 - 8
GHC WitW 0 - 0 - 0

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8DiSQ36zfWk

(in reply to Q-Ball)
Post #: 68
RE: 1.05.59 rule changes? - 2/3/2012 5:19:55 PM   
ComradeP

 

Posts: 7185
Joined: 9/17/2009
Status: offline
Pelton, you can't really use your own Axis games as an indication for the average because whereas you're an OK attacker as long as the way you use HQ buildup works, you're a poor defender.

Little to no forts, or an enormous amounts of fortified zones that provide little to no benefit, and not much in the shape of other preparations. You're also pulling out of vast areas at certain times, you're giving your opponent territory for free without any fight at all.

Someone like Ketza knows how to defend as the Axis, you still have to learn it before you can call your own experience representative of what the Axis can do.

_____________________________

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

(in reply to Pelton)
Post #: 69
RE: 1.05.59 rule changes? - 2/3/2012 5:22:03 PM   
Pelton

 

Posts: 6398
Joined: 4/9/2006
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Flaviusx

Funny, I'm building tank corps in April, not rifle divisions. And rifle divisions come at the low low price of 20 APs in March. There's better places to spend your APs until that drops.

In an ideal world the number of rifle divisions that a Soviet player wants to build is approximately zero. The ones he gets for free are sufficient and then some. It's only when you start losing lots of them that you need to replace them; my rough and ready rule to keep around 400 rifle division equivalents on map.

If you build too many rifle divisions and then flip them over to corps, your replacement situation won't keep up with the numbers. 150 such corps is pushing the limits of your replacement capacity. See Terje's AAR for an example of the problems of overbuilding.

Finally...rifle corps just kinda suck in 1942. They are overpriced and underpowered until 1943. You are in effect spending 20 APs to exchange 30,000 men for 20,000 men. That's not a bargain. (Only with the 42c October corps does the exchange rate become even.)

Rifle corps are primarily an offensive tool, and in 1942 you won't be on the offensive, nor can they accomplish much by themselves without lavish fire support from artillery divisions. You really need to stick to divisions until at least October. A handful of guards rifle corps in summer of 1942 can help defend some key targets, but the numbers ought to be strictly limited.


So you dont have an AP crunch now. As the historically possible march offensive put on the russian side.

Now you have 4 months to stock pile AP pts, which means when the time is right you built what you want when you want.

So no more armament crunch and no more AP crunch. it must be nice be part of the "team" to makes sure your side gets every advantage.

nice job on the German nerf beat down patch, which will drive more poeple away and keep driving sales of witw down.

We can only expect that witw will be more of the standard by design boxed in german side and worlds of options for the allied side.

By design the German player is put in a box and the russian side is not.



_____________________________

GHC WitE 24 - 4 - 8
GHC WitW 0 - 0 - 0

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8DiSQ36zfWk

(in reply to Flaviusx)
Post #: 70
RE: 1.05.59 rule changes? - 2/3/2012 5:29:46 PM   
Flaviusx


Posts: 6415
Joined: 9/9/2009
From: Southern California
Status: online
Pelton, no. Just...no.

Look. The time to stockpile APs is during the blizzard. (I'm continually surprised at how many Soviet players don't do this, but I digress.)

Come spring of 42, the bank gets drawn down. There will be no further stockpiling for quite some time. You won't be stockpiling anything from April on, you'll be living hand to mouth until Voronezh front arrives. And then you somehow have to scrape up enough APs for artillery divisions and mech corps by years end.

The mass rifle corps conversion comes in 1943 when the cost drops to 10 APs per.

You don't really understand the evolution of the Red Army, the costs involved, or the schedule, so I'd advise you to avoid making these reckless and uninformed statements about Soviets stockpiling APs in spring of 42. That's nonsense.



_____________________________

WitE Alpha Tester

(in reply to Pelton)
Post #: 71
RE: 1.05.59 rule changes? - 2/3/2012 5:33:31 PM   
Pelton

 

Posts: 6398
Joined: 4/9/2006
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: ComradeP

Pelton, you can't really use your own Axis games as an indication for the average because whereas you're an OK attacker as long as the way you use HQ buildup works, you're a poor defender.

Little to no forts, or an enormous amounts of fortified zones that provide little to no benefit, and not much in the shape of other preparations. You're also pulling out of vast areas at certain times, you're giving your opponent territory for free without any fight at all.

Someone like Ketza knows how to defend as the Axis, you still have to learn it before you can call your own experience representative of what the Axis can do.


katza is in 43 I am in 44.

He is alrdy in trouble and 76 mm army is 7.5 million strong and not over 9 million as Kamils was. I held the front until 44. You cant defend terrain, because as Katza alrdy has stated and Tarhunnas has also the game is 100% based on a morlae time line, nt and in game results time line. Once your morale tanks its over.

I had 100's of forts, read the hole AAR not the end.

The forts as Katza nd Tarhunnas have stated are usless during 44 and almost usless during 43. Forts during 42 and 43 just keep the Russian player from attriting you do death over the hole front.

You cant defend terrain with out forts after late 42.

You got know idea what your talking about clearly. defending is easy to a point. Once the morale timeline is reached and IF the russian player built the right units your in trouble and your helpless.

Kamil is clearly better then Gids at building the Red machine. 76mm is still building his, but also better then Gids. Probably because they both started latter and had more intel on what to build.

In most 1.05 game Moscow is never taken. Most games have the german player only pocket 20 units yet this is far to much for Flaviusx ad the Red crew at 2by3?

I dont see then need for this uber nerf bat patch.

_____________________________

GHC WitE 24 - 4 - 8
GHC WitW 0 - 0 - 0

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8DiSQ36zfWk

(in reply to ComradeP)
Post #: 72
RE: 1.05.59 rule changes? - 2/3/2012 5:35:32 PM   
Speedy

 

Posts: 14382
Joined: 9/11/2001
From: Reading, England
Status: offline
I am always struggling for AP's as the Soviet whether it be ironing out C&C (even more important now due to historical Soviet C&C limitations), replacing leaders, building units or combining to form Corps. I don't think I've ever had more than a few dozen AP's spare as the Soviet until late war

_____________________________

WitE Tester
BTR/BoB Tester

(in reply to Flaviusx)
Post #: 73
RE: 1.05.59 rule changes? - 2/3/2012 5:45:21 PM   
Pelton

 

Posts: 6398
Joined: 4/9/2006
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: Flaviusx

Pelton, no. Just...no.

Look. The time to stockpile APs is during the blizzard. (I'm continually surprised at how many Soviet players don't do this, but I digress.)

Come spring of 42, the bank gets drawn down. There will be no further stockpiling for quite some time. You won't be stockpiling anything from April on, you'll be living hand to mouth until Voronezh front arrives. And then you somehow have to scrape up enough APs for artillery divisions and mech corps by years end.

The mass rifle corps conversion comes in 1943 when the cost drops to 10 APs per.

You don't really understand the evolution of the Red Army, the costs involved, or the schedule, so I'd advise you to avoid making these reckless and uninformed statements about Soviets stockpiling APs in spring of 42. That's nonsense.




Flaviusx you and me know thats the time, but now good russian players are going to have huge amounts of AP's to spend.

The front will be static for 4 months, 4 months thats HUGE and you know it. We have seen the results of this pre 1.05.

Tarhunnas and Katza games started before the HQ nerf bat hit.

My game vs Kamil started after.


This is a distater of a patch. Its bask to WWI again.

Ok I emailed you about this.

During march most germans pocket 20 to 30 units on average. which is 325ish AP points. Thats your math not mine.

This will require the Russian player to spend the next 6ish turn buying back units. But before then its clear weather and I can pocket 10 to 15 more again keeping the size of the russian machine in check and the ap's low as per your email

Plus the german player can push past the forts.

now we have your nerf bat patch 1.06

None of this is possible now.

So the Red machine can add 120k men per turn and not waste 60 ap per turn rebuilting and army, but building a new army.

DO not tell me I dont know what I am talking about when your the one that told me how it works, in your own words.

1. The Russian army on average will be 1.4 million men stronger.
2. Have 4 months to build forts.
3. be building a new Red army and not rebuilding loses during a 100% historically possible snow offensive.

This patch by design makes 1942 WWI on the eastern front.

Its amost like I knew what was coming. I knew because of you just how the AP thing works.

I am sure not everyone on the "team" is happy with this patch.

< Message edited by Pelton -- 2/3/2012 5:46:42 PM >


_____________________________

GHC WitE 24 - 4 - 8
GHC WitW 0 - 0 - 0

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8DiSQ36zfWk

(in reply to Flaviusx)
Post #: 74
RE: 1.05.59 rule changes? - 2/3/2012 5:49:45 PM   
Pelton

 

Posts: 6398
Joined: 4/9/2006
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: Speedy

I am always struggling for AP's as the Soviet whether it be ironing out C&C (even more important now due to historical Soviet C&C limitations), replacing leaders, building units or combining to form Corps. I don't think I've ever had more than a few dozen AP's spare as the Soviet until late war


thats true to a point speedy

The war is desided in 42 all things being equal.

The patch makes sure that you have more then enough ap's when it counts 1942. after that you have allot of wiggle room.

_____________________________

GHC WitE 24 - 4 - 8
GHC WitW 0 - 0 - 0

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8DiSQ36zfWk

(in reply to Speedy)
Post #: 75
RE: 1.05.59 rule changes? - 2/3/2012 5:58:14 PM   
TulliusDetritus


Posts: 4452
Joined: 4/1/2004
From: Back to Reality :(
Status: offline
Pelton, you really should play as the Soviet player. A problem with the APs: those with more hindsight (aka testers) do know how to spend the APs. Those of us with no hindsight (few games in our belt), er, it's a trial error thing, sorry. Had I known the things I now know I would have NOT bought/created many support units. In fact, just a strict, Spartan minimum.

Still, you really should try the Red side... you would see you will run out of APs pretty pretty soon

Cheers

Just for the record, Tank Armies CP = 15 is about right. The Soviets went with 2 x Tank Corps + 1 x Mechanized Corps per army.

_____________________________

Russian Kung Fu Masters. Hurraaaa!!!

(in reply to Pelton)
Post #: 76
RE: 1.05.59 rule changes? - 2/3/2012 6:00:21 PM   
Flaviusx


Posts: 6415
Joined: 9/9/2009
From: Southern California
Status: online
Pelton, you asked me some narrow and specific questions. I gave you narrow and specific answers. You don't have all the facts on hand. I'm trying to fill in the blanks here, but you're simply ignoring my points.

Nor is any Soviet player getting 120k men/turn in 42 now. They're lucky to crack 110k.

You've convinced yourself that we are back to 1.04. Now you need to convince everybody else. The only way to do this is by playing the bloody game.



_____________________________

WitE Alpha Tester

(in reply to Pelton)
Post #: 77
RE: 1.05.59 rule changes? - 2/3/2012 6:04:06 PM   
Flaviusx


Posts: 6415
Joined: 9/9/2009
From: Southern California
Status: online
Tullius, I agree with the command limits on the tank armies. 3 corps per was standard.

I'm just not in love with the new mech bonus. Am seriously doubting it's as good as the admin bonus. Unfortunately, that bonus was given (rather bizarrely imo) to guards and shock armies, who really don't need it if they are commanding rifle units.

I'm planning to make those into cav/mech groups (3 cav corps + 1 tank corps per) myself solely on account of the bonus. Then I might build a few tank armies once I run out of cav to scoop up the rest of the mobile units. We'll see if this mech bonus is all that it's cracked up to be.



_____________________________

WitE Alpha Tester

(in reply to Flaviusx)
Post #: 78
RE: 1.05.59 rule changes? - 2/3/2012 6:05:25 PM   
Aurelian

 

Posts: 2323
Joined: 2/26/2007
Status: offline
Changes look balanced to me.

Even though the drop in Soviet army span doesn't look good at first blush, it's in the right direction. (I think. If not, one will get used to it.)

And wild, I had nothing to do with all this either...........

< Message edited by Aurelian -- 2/3/2012 6:06:26 PM >

(in reply to Flaviusx)
Post #: 79
RE: 1.05.59 rule changes? - 2/3/2012 6:06:06 PM   
colberki

 

Posts: 153
Joined: 6/16/2007
Status: offline
I just hope WITE does not end up like many games especially those from Russian or Eastern European developers where the Germans (in the game) are destined to lose. It maybe not politically correct for the Germans to win but this is a game. But this new rule reducing German CV during the winter of 1941-42 is feeling like the last straw for me. And I have been enjoying playing both German and Soviet sides - seems GG is giving in the the ever vocal minority on the forum.


(in reply to Pelton)
Post #: 80
RE: 1.05.59 rule changes? - 2/3/2012 6:08:20 PM   
ComradeP

 

Posts: 7185
Joined: 9/17/2009
Status: offline
quote:

katza is in 43 I am in 44.

He is alrdy in trouble and 76 mm army is 7.5 million strong and not over 9 million as Kamils was. I held the front until 44. You cant defend terrain, because as Katza alrdy has stated and Tarhunnas has also the game is 100% based on a morlae time line, nt and in game results time line. Once your morale tanks its over.

I had 100's of forts, read the hole AAR not the end.

The forts as Katza nd Tarhunnas have stated are usless during 44 and almost usless during 43. Forts during 42 and 43 just keep the Russian player from attriting you do death over the hole front.

You cant defend terrain with out forts after late 42.

You got know idea what your talking about clearly. defending is easy to a point. Once the morale timeline is reached and IF the russian player built the right units your in trouble and your helpless.



Your opponent, at least in Kamil's case, had very significant trouble with getting anywhere until 1944 due to the massive carpet of fortified zones initially and you turtling (as well as, probably, some mistakes with building the army until 1944), but you're convinced that the Soviets will be in Berlin way before their historical timeframe, even though in one of the games you use as evidence to support your theories, that is quite unlikely to happen.

The game is also not based on a morale timeline. You continue to confuse morale with national morale, or rather: insist they're more or less the same thing per definition. That's more true for the Soviets than for the Germans most of the time.

You also complain when the Soviets withdraw a significant distance or turtle, but you use those strategies yourself and accept them for the Axis it seems.

Your points about the Axis being doomed in the sense that they will lose by default doesn't correspond with even some of your own experiences. I'd agree that the Axis face a very difficult time later in the war, but that doesn't mean they're doomed per default.

Whenever even the slightest change is made to the Axis, it's an "uber nerf bat patch" aimed at ruining the game for the Axis in some way.

_____________________________

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

(in reply to Flaviusx)
Post #: 81
RE: 1.05.59 rule changes? - 2/3/2012 6:12:09 PM   
Encircled


Posts: 1044
Joined: 12/30/2010
From: Northern England
Status: offline
Looks fair to be honest, though that will obviously depend on your standpoint.

I have three games on the go at the moment

April '42 as Soviet (got creamed by March Madness)
T6 joint game
T92 as axis (slow game that I took over that has been going since 1.04)

Realistically, they all need to restart, don't they?

(in reply to ComradeP)
Post #: 82
RE: 1.05.59 rule changes? - 2/3/2012 6:21:00 PM   
Offworlder

 

Posts: 869
Joined: 8/27/2008
Status: offline
But am I correct to think that the reduction of German CV is only on the attack and not for defensive purposes? That would at least allow the Germans to stabilise their fronts rather than counterattacking in March.

(in reply to colberki)
Post #: 83
RE: 1.05.59 rule changes? - 2/3/2012 6:21:42 PM   
Flaviusx


Posts: 6415
Joined: 9/9/2009
From: Southern California
Status: online
Offworlder, that is correct.

_____________________________

WitE Alpha Tester

(in reply to Offworlder)
Post #: 84
RE: 1.05.59 rule changes? - 2/3/2012 6:21:52 PM   
JAMiAM

 

Posts: 6149
Joined: 2/8/2004
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Offworlder

But am I correct to think that the reduction of German CV is only on the attack and not for defensive purposes? That would at least allow the Germans to stabilise their fronts rather than counterattacking in March.


That's correct.

(in reply to Offworlder)
Post #: 85
RE: 1.05.59 rule changes? - 2/3/2012 6:22:34 PM   
Baelfiin


Posts: 1476
Joined: 6/7/2006
Status: online
Yeah its offensive CV only Offworlder.

_____________________________

"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 Offworlder)
Post #: 86
RE: 1.05.59 rule changes? - 2/3/2012 6:22:41 PM   
JAMiAM

 

Posts: 6149
Joined: 2/8/2004
Status: offline
Damn...Flavio thread ninja'd me by 10 seconds...

(in reply to JAMiAM)
Post #: 87
RE: 1.05.59 rule changes? - 2/3/2012 6:23:55 PM   
Baelfiin


Posts: 1476
Joined: 6/7/2006
Status: online
heheh


_____________________________

"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 JAMiAM)
Post #: 88
RE: 1.05.59 rule changes? - 2/3/2012 6:27:57 PM   
JAMiAM

 

Posts: 6149
Joined: 2/8/2004
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Baelfiin

heheh


Et tu, Scotti?

Like Maxwell Smart would say..."Missed it by...*that*...much!"

(in reply to Baelfiin)
Post #: 89
RE: 1.05.59 rule changes? - 2/3/2012 6:35:07 PM   
Offworlder

 

Posts: 869
Joined: 8/27/2008
Status: offline
Gee that was quick......................

So that means that basically if a German player has some reserves, he can easily substitute burned out units at the front with reserves and still stop the Red Army cold, setting them up for a counterattack once the mud turns run out. Interesting........

In a way makes the capture of Leningrad in '41 more important in order to create a pool of reserve infantry divisions.

(in reply to JAMiAM)
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: 1.05.59 rule changes? 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

0.125