Matrix Games Forums

Space Program Manager unveils its multiplayer modes Another update for Commander: The Great War!Distant Worlds: Universe gets a new updateDeal of the Week: Eagle Day to Bombing the Reich Advanced Tactics Gold is coming to SteamMatrix Games now speaks German!A little bit of history with To End All WarsBattle Academy 2 gets a release date!Reinforcements on the Frontline!New shipping cost for European territories!
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 II (No MT 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 II (No MT pls) Page: <<   < prev  1 [2]
Login
Message << Older Topic   Newer Topic >>
RE: Tackling the Russian bear II (No MT pls) - 7/8/2012 2:04:55 PM   
notenome

 

Posts: 598
Joined: 12/28/2009
Status: offline
Whilst Soviet tanks were a very nasty surprise for the Wehrmacht, Soviet mech corps and divisions were considered an utter failure (so much so that they were aggressively disbanded). As always I'd like to see the Soviet tank units cause more casualties, but they're success rate seems about right to me.

(in reply to timmyab)
Post #: 31
RE: Tackling the Russian bear II (No MT pls) - 7/8/2012 3:37:08 PM   
glvaca

 

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

quote:

ORIGINAL: timmyab

They still caused the Germans problems though.They couldn't penetrate the armor with their standard anti tank weapons.The T34 and KV1 developed a fearsome reputation in 1941 and with good reason.Not to represent this in the game is crazy.


That was actually late in 1941 and those were the brigades.
Are those brigades useful in game? Who can tell? We all just do things we think should work or are the right thing to do based on what we know of history. The combat engine is such a mistery nobody knows for real.

What I do agree with is that tanks are generally underpower in this game.

(in reply to timmyab)
Post #: 32
RE: Tackling the Russian bear II (No MT pls) - 7/28/2012 10:05:26 AM   
Apollo11


Posts: 22575
Joined: 6/7/2001
From: Zagreb, Croatia
Status: online
Hi all,

What is current situation?


Leo "Apollo11"

_____________________________



Prior Preparation & Planning Prevents Pathetically Poor Performance!

A & B: WitW, WitE, WbtS, GGWaW, GGWaW2-AWD, HttR, CotA, BftB, CF
P: UV, WitP, WitP-AE

(in reply to glvaca)
Post #: 33
RE: Tackling the Russian bear II (No MT pls) - 7/28/2012 2:06:26 PM   
Pelton

 

Posts: 5751
Joined: 4/9/2006
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: timmyab


quote:

ORIGINAL: Flaviusx
You don't need to save everything. Indeed, it's in the Soviet advantage to get a lot of stuff killed, including the tank divisions. They are armament and vehicle hogs, and I will cheerfully use them to screen the infantry so it can withdraw.

The weakness of Soviet tanks is a major design flaw of the game in my opinion.Can you imagine Stavka saying "lets get all our tanks killed off as fast as we can".In particular, units with large numbers of T34 and KV1 should be a threat and a worry to the Axis player.Tone up Soviet armor and tone down the cavalry.

quote:

LUFTWAFFE
I actually try something new. In an effort to maximize the efficiency of the Lufwaffe from turn 1, I reorganize the gruppe on the airbases.
As many Stuka gruppe as possible are transfered to fighter bases. All recon and otherwise useless stuff is sent to the reserve. The Army airbases have plenty of recon capability.
This gives me around 3 (or was it 4 airbases?) to distribute bomber gruppe too within support limits.
For each Lufflotte, one base directly attached is used for the Ju52's. This allows me to keep these guys in the rear without having to put other bases out of command range. With this setup, I can push the fighter/Stuka bases pretty close to the action, keeping the bomber bases further back, and finally, the Ju52 bases even further without to much negative effect.


Stavka did throw away 1000's of tanks and 10,000 of men in counter attack after counter attack.

_____________________________

GHC
22 - 4 - 8

15 games ended in 41 (15-0-0)
7 games ended in 42 (5-0-2)
8 games ended in 43 (2-3-3)
4 games ended in 44 (0-1-3)


General Cheesefinder of WitW

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

(in reply to timmyab)
Post #: 34
RE: Tackling the Russian bear II (No MT pls) - 2/2/2013 5:06:14 PM   
glvaca

 

Posts: 1109
Joined: 6/13/2006
Status: offline
This game is going to restart shortly. Currently getting my barings in the current version of the game after a few months without play.
My game with Tarhannus ended in surrender in June '42 after I surrounded several Russian fronts. I'll update the AAR for that game when I have the chance.

(in reply to Pelton)
Post #: 35
RE: Tackling the Russian bear II (No MT pls) - 2/3/2013 6:50:06 PM   
Disgruntled Veteran


Posts: 500
Joined: 2/19/2012
Status: offline
Thats good in a sense.

Personally, I wish Michael wouldn't run. I've read the debates on this forum but it makes for a silly game. When my current game with A-Game ends I'm going to play Soviets for the first time and make an AAR about a Russian who stands and fights...not everywhere,but just running away ruins a game IMO.

(in reply to glvaca)
Post #: 36
RE: Tackling the Russian bear II (No MT pls) - 2/3/2013 7:47:23 PM   
Flaviusx


Posts: 6311
Joined: 9/9/2009
From: Southern California
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: Disgruntled Veteran

Thats good in a sense.

Personally, I wish Michael wouldn't run. I've read the debates on this forum but it makes for a silly game. When my current game with A-Game ends I'm going to play Soviets for the first time and make an AAR about a Russian who stands and fights...not everywhere,but just running away ruins a game IMO.


What's even a sillier game are those where the Soviet stands and gets destroyed and the game ends in 41.

Until and unless a number of things change, running is mostly a good idea. Right now it is more or less impossible to play historically as the Soviet in 41. How about the Axis starts playing historically by not vaporizing SW Front on turn 1? No? Ok, then I'll keep right on running.

Michael goes a bit overboard, but not by much.

< Message edited by Flaviusx -- 2/3/2013 7:51:45 PM >


_____________________________

WitE Alpha Tester

(in reply to Disgruntled Veteran)
Post #: 37
RE: Tackling the Russian bear II (No MT pls) - 2/3/2013 9:30:35 PM   
Disgruntled Veteran


Posts: 500
Joined: 2/19/2012
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Flaviusx

quote:

ORIGINAL: Disgruntled Veteran

Thats good in a sense.

Personally, I wish Michael wouldn't run. I've read the debates on this forum but it makes for a silly game. When my current game with A-Game ends I'm going to play Soviets for the first time and make an AAR about a Russian who stands and fights...not everywhere,but just running away ruins a game IMO.


What's even a sillier game are those where the Soviet stands and gets destroyed and the game ends in 41.

Until and unless a number of things change, running is mostly a good idea. Right now it is more or less impossible to play historically as the Soviet in 41. How about the Axis starts playing historically by not vaporizing SW Front on turn 1? No? Ok, then I'll keep right on running.

Michael goes a bit overboard, but not by much.



No I agree. You can't play historical I understand that much. I withdraw a hex or two per turn in my first December as Axis. But flat out running just takes the fun out imo. You can't tell me its a fun game where each side runs back and forth right? I look forward to playing my first game as Soviets soon enough and seeing what is possible.



(in reply to Flaviusx)
Post #: 38
RE: Tackling the Russian bear II (No MT pls) - 2/3/2013 10:06:53 PM   
Harrybanana

 

Posts: 764
Joined: 11/27/2004
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Disgruntled Veteran

No I agree. You can't play historical I understand that much. I withdraw a hex or two per turn in my first December as Axis. But flat out running just takes the fun out imo. You can't tell me its a fun game where each side runs back and forth right? I look forward to playing my first game as Soviets soon enough and seeing what is possible.


I think you'll find that "what is possible" will depend to a large extent on the skill of your opponent. Against many German opponents "flat out running" is not necessary; but against some (MT, Pelton, Saper, Glcava and a few others) it is suicide not to run in the South. By the way I don't think after turn 2 it is ever wise or necessary to "flat out run" in the North, but certainly tactical retreats are required even there from time to time.

(in reply to Disgruntled Veteran)
Post #: 39
RE: Tackling the Russian bear II (No MT pls) - 2/3/2013 10:24:42 PM   
glvaca

 

Posts: 1109
Joined: 6/13/2006
Status: offline
We're picking the game back up at German turn 11.
I'll update the AAR after I fini!sh, still getting back in the game.

On the retreat question, we agreed he was free to do as he sees fit and I have no problem with him running. The only time when a balance can really be made of what was won or lost by either side is after the blizzard.

(in reply to Harrybanana)
Post #: 40
Page:   <<   < prev  1 [2]
All Forums >> [New Releases from Matrix Games] >> Gary Grigsby's War in the East Series >> After Action Reports >> RE: Tackling the Russian bear II (No MT pls) Page: <<   < prev  1 [2]
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

0.075