RE: Tackling the Russian bear (No Tarhunnas pls)

Matrix Games Forums

Join the Matrix Team at Historicon!

Recruiting Privates for Germany at War: Barbarossa 1941!

Ageod takes you back to the Civil War

Battle Academy iPad and PC 50 per cent off!

Close Combat Last Stand Arnhem v5.60.53 update

Allied Corps Walkthrough playlist and AAR

Conflict of Heroes: Ghost Divisions Released!

Pandora Beta Playthrough Videos

Germany at War: Barbarossa 1941 Announced!

Great Battles Medieval coming to your tablet with a 50 per cent off launch sale!

Forums Register Login Photo Gallery Member List Search Calendars FAQ

My Profile Inbox Address Book My Subscription My Forums Log Out

RE: Tackling the Russian bear (No Tarhunnas pls)

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 >> After Action Reports >> RE: Tackling the Russian bear (No Tarhunnas pls)

Page: << < prev 5 6 7 8 [9]

Message

<< Older Topic Newer Topic >>

RE: Tackling the Russian bear (No Tarhunnas pls) - 10/17/2012 12:45:22 AM

timmyab

Posts: 625
Joined: 12/14/2010
From: Bristol, UK
Status: offline

Yes I agree.I think his chance of holding you short of the 260 mark disappeared with the Kursk pocket.He's a tremendous fighter though, and you'll probably have to prise the very last VP out of his grasp.

(in reply to Pelton)

Post #: 241

RE: Tackling the Russian bear (No Tarhunnas pls) - 10/17/2012 1:22:16 AM

randallw

Posts: 1931
Joined: 9/2/2010
Status: offline

I'd like to know how often units in reserve mode were encountered ( on defense ) in the attacks to create the pocket.

(in reply to timmyab)

Post #: 242

RE: Tackling the Russian bear (No Tarhunnas pls) - 10/17/2012 7:38:22 AM

glvaca

Posts: 1109
Joined: 6/13/2006
Status: offline

@ Pelton, I already have Moscow...
Seriously, check the map, count the points.
I'm not saying it's impossible or that my possition isn't very good.
But it certainly is a looong road to get the final points. And there are several potential "Stalingrads" along the way.

(in reply to Pelton)

Post #: 243

RE: Tackling the Russian bear (No Tarhunnas pls) - 10/17/2012 7:44:04 AM

glvaca

Posts: 1109
Joined: 6/13/2006
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: randallw

I'd like to know how often units in reserve mode were encountered ( on defense ) in the attacks to create the pocket.

From memory (server game), I'd say approx. 1 in 10 combats reserves activated but they only influenced the result once or twice. I think his units were just were too weak and the attacking units to strong to really make a difference.

< Message edited by glvaca -- 10/17/2012 7:55:07 AM >

(in reply to randallw)

Post #: 244

RE: Tackling the Russian bear (No Tarhunnas pls) - 10/17/2012 8:33:49 AM

randallw

Posts: 1931
Joined: 9/2/2010
Status: offline

10% isn't good at all; there were a few months of turns available to organize the forces properly to get the layers of HQ in some order.

(in reply to glvaca)

Post #: 245

RE: Tackling the Russian bear (No Tarhunnas pls) - 10/17/2012 10:29:36 AM

janh

Posts: 1150
Joined: 6/12/2007
Status: offline

Tarhunnas is probably a tremendous fighter, and he may outgrow his own expectations in this situation, but without resources even a RE Lee is bound to fail. Pelton is probably right, he stands no real chance here. He may be lucky, dice can make a big difference, though. Or bad mistakes. Yet with 3M and very poor morale, or what he may make out of that if you leave him really alone for 10 turns, you face a situation that is as good or better now than the GC41 start.

quote:

ORIGINAL: randallw
I'd like to know how often units in reserve mode were encountered ( on defense ) in the attacks to create the pocket.

I wondered about that too. But probably the better question would need to be directed to him: How many did he really set on reserve with enough MP and good leaders, how many never committed because of poor C&C or poor unit experience, hence too low MP? Me thinks that doesn't come down to the key problem he faced. He probably underestimated how powerful a very seasoned Axis player can be, and should not have attempted to fight him so hard in 41. I think in fighting forward he had lost by turn 17.

< Message edited by janh -- 10/17/2012 10:30:31 AM >

(in reply to randallw)

Post #: 246

RE: Tackling the Russian bear (No Tarhunnas pls) - 10/17/2012 1:09:56 PM

Flaviusx

Posts: 5761
Joined: 9/9/2009
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: glvaca

@ Pelton, I already have Moscow...
Seriously, check the map, count the points.
I'm not saying it's impossible or that my possition isn't very good.
But it certainly is a looong road to get the final points. And there are several potential "Stalingrads" along the way.

You will destroy his army in a few turns of clear weather and then it's just mop up. This game is over, has been for some time. You crippled the Red Army in 41 beyond hope of recovery. At 100k manpower/turn or so it cannot ever get out of the hole it is in. All of this is a mathematical certainty. You do not have to play brilliantly to make it happen. (The brilliant play necessary was already done in 41.) No brilliant play on the Soviet part can prevent it.

The Wehrmacht, by itself, practically is equal size. Throw in minors, and you considerably outnumber him. Red Army is just too small, full stop. I would have resigned this thing a long time ago.

I don't know why you are pretending there is any question about the end result here.

_____________________________

WitE Alpha Tester

(in reply to glvaca)

Post #: 247

RE: Tackling the Russian bear (No Tarhunnas pls) - 10/17/2012 4:59:57 PM

glvaca

Posts: 1109
Joined: 6/13/2006
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Flaviusx

quote:

ORIGINAL: glvaca

@ Pelton, I already have Moscow...
Seriously, check the map, count the points.
I'm not saying it's impossible or that my possition isn't very good.
But it certainly is a looong road to get the final points. And there are several potential "Stalingrads" along the way.

You will destroy his army in a few turns of clear weather and then it's just mop up. This game is over, has been for some time. You crippled the Red Army in 41 beyond hope of recovery. At 100k manpower/turn or so it cannot ever get out of the hole it is in. All of this is a mathematical certainty. You do not have to play brilliantly to make it happen. (The brilliant play necessary was already done in 41.) No brilliant play on the Soviet part can prevent it.

The Wehrmacht, by itself, practically is equal size. Throw in minors, and you considerably outnumber him. Red Army is just too small, full stop. I would have resigned this thing a long time ago.

I don't know why you are pretending there is any question about the end result here.

Its clear you would have resigned a while ago, you've been saying that for like 20 turns or so. But, I also think you'd be missing out on part of the fun. I certainly wouldn't give up as the Soviet now. You never know. And things need to be played to be certain.

Anyway, we agreed to a game with no surrender, exactly to avoid the scenario where either side would quit. For both of us that is part of the apeal of playing.

I'm not pretending anything. The distances involved to capture the remaining 15VP are vast. Pockets are not certain. Terrain, rivers, forts, dice can be great equalizers. It has to be played but I certainly like my chances.

we'll just have to wait and see.

(in reply to Flaviusx)

Post #: 248

RE: Tackling the Russian bear (No Tarhunnas pls) - 10/17/2012 5:04:42 PM

glvaca

Posts: 1109
Joined: 6/13/2006
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: janh

Tarhunnas is probably a tremendous fighter, and he may outgrow his own expectations in this situation, but without resources even a RE Lee is bound to fail. Pelton is probably right, he stands no real chance here. He may be lucky, dice can make a big difference, though. Or bad mistakes. Yet with 3M and very poor morale, or what he may make out of that if you leave him really alone for 10 turns, you face a situation that is as good or better now than the GC41 start.

quote:

ORIGINAL: randallw
I'd like to know how often units in reserve mode were encountered ( on defense ) in the attacks to create the pocket.

I wondered about that too. But probably the better question would need to be directed to him: How many did he really set on reserve with enough MP and good leaders, how many never committed because of poor C&C or poor unit experience, hence too low MP? Me thinks that doesn't come down to the key problem he faced. He probably underestimated how powerful a very seasoned Axis player can be, and should not have attempted to fight him so hard in 41. I think in fighting forward he had lost by turn 17.

Two things. It's 4M not 3M. So he'll most likely be able to get back to 5M without counting potential losses.
Two, who says he'll be fighting forward this time around? Really, do the math on what I need to capture to gain 15VP's. I guarantee you'll be surprised.
3VP's for a light urban, 1VP per city.

< Message edited by glvaca -- 10/17/2012 5:21:30 PM >

(in reply to janh)

Post #: 249

RE: Tackling the Russian bear (No Tarhunnas pls) - 10/17/2012 5:24:06 PM

Flaviusx

Posts: 5761
Joined: 9/9/2009
Status: offline

Glvaca, it's as certain as anything can be. The only way this could turn around is if you went comatose. I do not expect this to happen. Given even average play on your part, stick a fork in it, it's done.

If you and Tarhunnas are playing for fun, fine, but you're kidding yourself (and selling yourself short) thinking that the outcome here is in question. It is not. His army isn't going to grow once clear weather arrives. It will shrink remorselessly from an already small base. He's well past the danger point and deep down you know this fully well. So forgive me if I'm a little impatient at what seems to me either disingenuousness or self delusion on your part.

_____________________________

WitE Alpha Tester

(in reply to glvaca)

Post #: 250

RE: Tackling the Russian bear (No Tarhunnas pls) - 10/17/2012 9:47:01 PM

glvaca

Posts: 1109
Joined: 6/13/2006
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Flaviusx

Glvaca, it's as certain as anything can be. The only way this could turn around is if you went comatose. I do not expect this to happen. Given even average play on your part, stick a fork in it, it's done.

If you and Tarhunnas are playing for fun, fine, but you're kidding yourself (and selling yourself short) thinking that the outcome here is in question. It is not. His army isn't going to grow once clear weather arrives. It will shrink remorselessly from an already small base. He's well past the danger point and deep down you know this fully well. So forgive me if I'm a little impatient at what seems to me either disingenuousness or self delusion on your part.

How about modesty and caution? The caution that one learns after having bumped ones head against the wall once to often to realize you cannot always be right.

I'm sure you are familiar with both emotions. What I'm more interested in is hearing your opinion on the Soviet replacement problem for which I floated an idea, and no-one has reacted to it. That certainly must be more productive then "this", not?

(in reply to Flaviusx)

Post #: 251

RE: Tackling the Russian bear (No Tarhunnas pls) - 10/17/2012 10:34:18 PM

Flaviusx

Posts: 5761
Joined: 9/9/2009
Status: offline

The replacement situation cannot be addressed in a vacuum and probably will require changes in the political/VP system. Otherwise, everybody will just run, collect their goodies, and wind up with a huge army. But that isn't the way it worked, exactly. Soviets definitely got way more replacements than the game allows, but it also represented a surge capacity (especially in 1941) tapping into manpower pools when a crisis occurred. For example, after the disastrous stretch between September and October 1.2 million+ were lost in Kiev and Typhoon. Sovs raised almost 2 million fresh men in response to that by year's end. (About double what the game would generate in two months.) But these bodies wouldn't necessarily show up in game terms absent such a disaster on the front. They competed directly, for example, with the labor force. It's not an easy issue.

So a completely static replacement system is going to cause problems. (Either on the upside or downside.) Like so many other problems in the game, it will have to be addressed as part of a package deal and not in any patch. It's a WitE 2.0 project.

What you call modesty seems like disingenuousness to me. Mileage definitely varies. I think that any honest assessment of this game has to put you virtually on a lock to win. Either by VPs or at the very worst by the clock. Denying this rather obvious truth simply strikes a false note to me.

_____________________________

WitE Alpha Tester

(in reply to glvaca)

Post #: 252

RE: Tackling the Russian bear (No Tarhunnas pls) - 10/17/2012 10:50:53 PM

glvaca

Posts: 1109
Joined: 6/13/2006
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Flaviusx

The replacement situation cannot be addressed in a vacuum and probably will require changes in the political/VP system. Otherwise, everybody will just run, collect their goodies, and wind up with a huge army. But that isn't the way it worked, exactly. Soviets definitely got way more replacements than the game allows, but it also represented a surge capacity (especially in 1941) tapping into manpower pools when a crisis occurred. For example, after the disastrous stretch between September and October 1.2 million+ were lost in Kiev and Typhoon. Sovs raised almost 2 million fresh men in response to that by year's end. (About double what the game would generate in two months.) But these bodies wouldn't necessarily show up in game terms absent such a disaster on the front. They competed directly, for example, with the labor force. It's not an easy issue.

So a completely static replacement system is going to cause problems. (Either on the upside or downside.) Like so many other problems in the game, it will have to be addressed as part of a package deal and not in any patch. It's a WitE 2.0 project.

I'm not sure you read the idea. IT deals exactly with these issues as well. Again, it certainly can be improved upon. I'm curious to how you would modify it to deal what you think needs to be done.

quote:

What you call modesty seems like disingenuousness to me. Mileage definitely varies. I think that any honest assessment of this game has to put you virtually on a lock to win. Either by VPs or at the very worst by the clock. Denying this rather obvious truth simply strikes a false note to me.

Yes, well I'd rather strike a false note being modest than being obviously biased to one side or another.

I leave it in the middle if that could be termed disingenuous...

(in reply to Flaviusx)

Post #: 253

RE: Tackling the Russian bear (No Tarhunnas pls) - 10/17/2012 11:01:32 PM

Michael T

Posts: 1575
Joined: 10/22/2006
From: Queensland, Australia.
Status: online

Clearly the result of this game is not in doubt. But if both players are having fun good for them :)

_____________________________

'Deus le Volt!'
------------------

(in reply to glvaca)

Post #: 254

RE: Tackling the Russian bear (No Tarhunnas pls) - 10/18/2012 9:48:44 AM

janh

Posts: 1150
Joined: 6/12/2007
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: glvaca
What I'm more interested in is hearing your opinion on the Soviet replacement problem for which I floated an idea, and no-one has reacted to it. That certainly must be more productive then "this", not?

Nothing is a given as long as dice are involved, you are certainly right with that. I though I saw 3M on one of your status screens, though. Anyway, Tarhunnas faces a major challenge, about as if the GC41 would start all over.

My first idea would be turning towards Kazan and beyond, towards the industry centers at the Urals. Taking Rostov, Voronesh, Voroshilovgrad, Stalingrad, Tula, Gorki etc. on the way. The distances are initially large, but once closing, there are a number of sites to capture. Towards Baku the distances are equally large, but there is less to capture, but the evident advantage of a clean up there first would be anchoring your right flank at Astrachan by autumn. If a 1943 sizable offensive would still be needed, you could still turn towards Kazan then, yet with a safe rear.

I saw your suggestion for the Soviet replacements, and yes, logically it makes sense. Would be nice if a player had some more control over drafting from cities or with less micromanagement from provinces. They could also introduce a weighing function that automatically increases drafts from cities within 10 or 15 hex of the enemy, and lowers it a bit say beyond 30 hexes. Good thought you had, though. Might just be for "WitE 2- Generals edition", should that ever come true.

(in reply to glvaca)

Post #: 255

RE: Tackling the Russian bear (No Tarhunnas pls) - 10/18/2012 11:36:51 AM

timmyab

Posts: 625
Joined: 12/14/2010
From: Bristol, UK
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: janh
My first idea would be turning towards Kazan and beyond, towards the industry centers at the Urals. Taking Rostov, Voronesh, Voroshilovgrad, Stalingrad, Tula, Gorki etc. on the way.

They're playing the 260 version.He wont need to go nearly as far.

(in reply to janh)

Post #: 256

Page: << < prev 5 6 7 8 [9]

All Forums >> [New Releases from Matrix Games] >> Gary Grigsby's War in the East Series >> After Action Reports >> RE: Tackling the Russian bear (No Tarhunnas pls)

Page: << < prev 5 6 7 8 [9]

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

0.179