Matrix Games Forums

Forums  Register  Login  Photo Gallery  Member List  Search  Calendars  FAQ 

My Profile  Inbox  Address Book  My Subscription  My Forums  Log Out

Anyone played the ’42 GC vs. Challenging AI lately?

 
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 >> Anyone played the ’42 GC vs. Challenging AI lately? Page: [1]
Login
Message << Older Topic   Newer Topic >>
Anyone played the ’42 GC vs. Challenging AI lately? - 3/22/2012 12:13:02 PM   
coolts


Posts: 282
Joined: 2/1/2011
From: Auf Wiedersehen, Pet
Status: offline
I’m getting nowhere fast.

I’ve completed two ’41 GC at normal level and read lots of AAR’s and read PyleDrivers ’42 AAR and thought I would give it a go, but……

….the Wehrmacht is a complete mess. My Divs are at CV’s of 2 and 3, the Pz Divs are 4-6 CV. It’s taken me 4 weeks to get Rostov and the AGS A-B split to start sorting the mess out but AP’s are scarce.

I like the more aggressive AI on challenging but the increased attrition and reduced logistics and admin rolls are really hurting.

Manpower is so low I’ve disbanded the RHG commands and set all inf divs to TOE 70% and still got nothing in the manpower pool. Decreasing arty & const TOE’s has had no effect on manpower. I’m going to 65% next turn to see if that hits the sweet spot.

At this rate there will be no ’42 offensive worth talking about ;(

In Johns AAR he was storming all over the place ;) that was way way back though and not on challenging level.

Has anyone persevered with this scenario at this level and if so can you give me any advice? I’m trying to pocket near the Donnets bend as sovs are hell bent on retaking Stalino so I’m thinking of a trap and am not even contemplating the Fall Blau farce.

Maybe I’m just used to soft beds and home cooking but ’42 under 1.06.04 is not a nice place to be!


_____________________________

"Gauls! We have nothing to fear; except perhaps that the sky may fall on our heads tomorrow. But as we all know, tomorrow never comes!!" - Chief Vitalstatistix
Post #: 1
RE: Anyone played the ’42 GC vs. Challenging AI lately? - 3/22/2012 1:55:55 PM   
karonagames


Posts: 4679
Joined: 7/10/2006
From: The Duchy of Cornwall, nr England
Status: offline
I have 1942 sandbox campaign for testing stuff, and I found that for the first six months 95/105 offered the right level of challenge, in the winter I went to 95/110 and for 1943 onwards I was at 95/115, as this seems to be the level at which the AI can put in enough attacks to keep the attritional pressure on. Personally I don't like reducing the axis numbers, as I want to keep them close to what I would want to see in a Pbem game.

On these settings, I got Rostov on T1, Voronezh T4 and Stalingrad and Grozny around T20,I got kicked back to Rostov during the winter and was back to the Dneiper by December 1944.

(in reply to coolts)
Post #: 2
RE: Anyone played the ’42 GC vs. Challenging AI lately? - 3/22/2012 2:24:57 PM   
GBS

 

Posts: 903
Joined: 7/3/2002
From: Southeastern USA
Status: offline
May I ask....do the 95/105 stand for your adjustments to logistics and Administrative?

(in reply to coolts)
Post #: 3
RE: Anyone played the ’42 GC vs. Challenging AI lately? - 3/22/2012 2:53:19 PM   
karonagames


Posts: 4679
Joined: 7/10/2006
From: The Duchy of Cornwall, nr England
Status: offline
All the settings - morale is the one that has most impact on CVs and relative combat performance.

(in reply to GBS)
Post #: 4
RE: Anyone played the ’42 GC vs. Challenging AI lately? - 3/22/2012 4:18:11 PM   
coolts


Posts: 282
Joined: 2/1/2011
From: Auf Wiedersehen, Pet
Status: offline
Daft question. Does the "challenging" setting affect the AI or am i imagining a more agressive opponent?

_____________________________

"Gauls! We have nothing to fear; except perhaps that the sky may fall on our heads tomorrow. But as we all know, tomorrow never comes!!" - Chief Vitalstatistix

(in reply to karonagames)
Post #: 5
RE: Anyone played the ’42 GC vs. Challenging AI lately? - 3/22/2012 4:24:15 PM   
karonagames


Posts: 4679
Joined: 7/10/2006
From: The Duchy of Cornwall, nr England
Status: offline
The settings change the relative strengths, so the AI sees more attack opportunities, hence the appearance of higher aggression, but no other routines are amped up.

(in reply to coolts)
Post #: 6
RE: Anyone played the ’42 GC vs. Challenging AI lately? - 3/23/2012 9:21:52 AM   
Tazak

 

Posts: 1054
Joined: 9/3/2011
Status: offline
The 1942 CG does start the germans in a fairly bad manpower state, it takes me up to early 1943 to get it back to a decent state but try the following

const, AA and sec units to 50% TOE
Arty (all types) & AT to 65%
Inf to 75% on quiet sectors, 85-90% on your active sectors
Disband the airfields attached to Army HQ's (recon aircraft can be located at LF airfields, I move 1 airfield directly behind the front lines which the recon then use as a staging airfield)
Dont disband all your RHQ's, use one to attach all security units too and attach this RHQ directly to OKH, this avoids the sec units from counting againsts command limits of your fighting HQ's
work out which RR units you wont use and disband 1 or 2 of them (20k manpower each), this should leave you with 3 which is enough to maintain at least 2 axis of advance
try to have 1 corp of at least 3 Inf div as reserve per army group, you can then set these to refit, once they get to strength use them to cycle through your front line to give all units a chance to refit over time

Dont expect this adjustments to make any difference overnight (overweek?), it takes 3-4 weeks before you see any effects filtering through

(in reply to karonagames)
Post #: 7
RE: Anyone played the ’42 GC vs. Challenging AI lately? - 3/23/2012 12:18:59 PM   
coolts


Posts: 282
Joined: 2/1/2011
From: Auf Wiedersehen, Pet
Status: offline
Tarzak

I have "relaxed" the % a little as per BigA suggestiions and am continuing my streamlining. The extra attrition hit is massive under challenging level. An extra 5K or more per turn.

I parent sec units to OKH once the RHG commands are gone. So far i've kept my army airbases as the LW airbases can't be spread too thinly tor they fall out of the 5 hex support range, (does this even matter for AB's as they dont need parent formation SU commitment)

EDIT - there is no AG-Antonesque in this scenario. Thats why the armys are so overloaded as they are all babysitting a homesick Rumanian Corps!! Bugger off and start digging! Oh, not enough AP's ;)

< Message edited by coolts -- 3/23/2012 12:36:52 PM >


_____________________________

"Gauls! We have nothing to fear; except perhaps that the sky may fall on our heads tomorrow. But as we all know, tomorrow never comes!!" - Chief Vitalstatistix

(in reply to Tazak)
Post #: 8
RE: Anyone played the ’42 GC vs. Challenging AI lately? - 3/24/2012 7:50:08 AM   
fcam1387

 

Posts: 384
Joined: 5/17/2006
Status: offline
Yeah, I'm playing 42' as the Axis on challenging. It's not pretty. My "summer offensive" resulting in the capture of Voronezh and Rostov and Krasnodar, but I only made it about 14 hexes east of Stalingrad.

Manpower has been a serious problem and I'm struggling to keep most of my infantry division north of 65 TOE. Romania's manpower is exhausted (is this a bug?) with only around 1500 replacements per turn and I reckon I'll have to cannibalise units if I want to bring front line troops up to 100% TOE, likewise for Hungary. The Red Army has been nuding the Finns north of Leningrad (the seige was broken in January and the 18th Army was sent reeling) but I think I can hold there.

I am fairly determined to launch a summer 43' offensive. This could be a really bad idea but with the right force-displacement I might be able to do it. I'm debating having a reinforced Army Group North make a massive assuault to capture Leningrad. Or either use Army Group B to push into the Caucasus oilfields with a massive concentration of mechanised units - I don't think I have the manpower to push towards at the same time.... should be interesting...

(in reply to coolts)
Post #: 9
RE: Anyone played the ’42 GC vs. Challenging AI lately? - 3/29/2012 10:28:35 AM   
coolts


Posts: 282
Joined: 2/1/2011
From: Auf Wiedersehen, Pet
Status: offline
I have managed a big pocket near Rostov as the sovs pushed to cut it off and attack Stalino. They pulled back from all the bulges north of Moscow after that which stymied my plans a little. The AI aint like it was back on release ;) I plan to attack Leningrad as there are only two hexes I need to isolate it. The Defences are however MASSIVE and 4th panzer army bounced off an attack near Pushkin.

As the army is such a shambles, I’ve set everything to 50% TOE and pulled 18th army off the line, set to 85% TOE and refit to build-up. I am manually moving Pioneers to the army (never manually managed SU's before so this is another learning experience for me). Hopefully in 2-3 weeks I can start pounding. I will move loads or airbases near and pound the hex first before each 6-9 div attack. That should wear him down. Rebuilding "proper" panzer armies but AP's too low for much large scale reorganising.

I am torn between large 'proper' panzer armies (3 x mech corps, 1 inf corps), or just moving mech corps around the whole front wherever needed. The problem with the latter strategy, is although it allows for more small pockets, you always seem to fall into the "if only I had ONE MORE PANZER DIVISION" trap of attempting large pockets). hmmmm.

If the Leningrad gambit works I will use it as a template for a winter offensive to take Moscow. It’s all about hitting his manpower centres I reckon as the AI has moved all juicy Armaments to the mountains. Got to keep his OOB static if possible or abandon the offensive and do a "pelton wall" over the winter.

Failing that, rage quit ;)



< Message edited by coolts -- 3/30/2012 10:46:31 AM >


_____________________________

"Gauls! We have nothing to fear; except perhaps that the sky may fall on our heads tomorrow. But as we all know, tomorrow never comes!!" - Chief Vitalstatistix

(in reply to fcam1387)
Post #: 10
RE: Anyone played the ’42 GC vs. Challenging AI lately? - 3/29/2012 9:18:29 PM   
Kronolog

 

Posts: 110
Joined: 3/23/2011
From: Sweden
Status: offline
I've been playing the 42 campaign some, as the Germans at settings of 95/110, and for the most part it's OK, though some aspects of the combat model irks me; I seem to lose infantry elements at an alarming rate. Even if I'm simply pushing soviet brigades out of unfortified clear hexes, I still seem to lose a lot of riflemen. This is especially apparent for the panzer divs and after a couple turns of constant action the leading units are down to nothing but a couple of companies worth of rifle and pioneer sections, at which point the become useless for anything but exploitation despite fielding in excess of 100 tanks. This is a problem for the infantry too, to some extent, because the front-line divs will become unfit after about a month, and then need to be sent to the rear. Though perhaps this isn't a fault as much as it is the natural effect of the AI receiving more bonuses.

(in reply to coolts)
Post #: 11
RE: Anyone played the ’42 GC vs. Challenging AI lately? - 3/30/2012 10:52:33 AM   
coolts


Posts: 282
Joined: 2/1/2011
From: Auf Wiedersehen, Pet
Status: offline
Glad its not just me ;)  It forces you to make stark choices as to where your limited replacmemnts go and to plan ahead as it takes several weeks for % TOE shuffling to bring priority armies up to strength, and even then, offensives must be short and decisive.  Its agonising!

I have had to place everything at 50% TOE just to release a trickle of manpower for my offensive corps and the attrition is killing me everywhere else.  I have loads of trucks although this is a bad sign as it means i have not been advancing!  Areas with large static forces split into regiments are therefore way over CP limits and cannot attack because of leader roll penalties for being over CP.  you need them on static though to reduce attrition. Catch 22.

_____________________________

"Gauls! We have nothing to fear; except perhaps that the sky may fall on our heads tomorrow. But as we all know, tomorrow never comes!!" - Chief Vitalstatistix

(in reply to Kronolog)
Post #: 12
Page:   [1]
All Forums >> [New Releases from Matrix Games] >> Gary Grigsby's War in the East Series >> Anyone played the ’42 GC vs. Challenging AI lately? Page: [1]
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

0.145