Not Taking Moscow post 1.06.11

Share your gameplay tips, secret tactics and fabulous strategies with fellow gamers here.

Moderators: Joel Billings, Sabre21

User avatar
HITMAN202
Posts: 714
Joined: Thu Nov 10, 2011 3:10 pm

Not Taking Moscow post 1.06.11

Post by HITMAN202 »

What changes in the game after the 1.06.11 up-date make it easier for the Soviets to hold Moscow ???
WITE is a good addiction with no cure.
User avatar
Michael T
Posts: 4445
Joined: Sat Oct 21, 2006 9:35 pm
Location: Queensland, Australia.

RE: Not Taking Moscow post 1.06.11

Post by Michael T »

I think it was when the devs restricted the amount of fuel that HQ's accumulated from a HQ BU.
carlkay58
Posts: 8770
Joined: Sat Jul 24, 2010 10:30 pm

RE: Not Taking Moscow post 1.06.11

Post by carlkay58 »

That and some Soviet adaptability that also saw most of the AARs seeing less reinforcements going to Leningrad and more being funneled into the Smolensk - Vyazma - Moscow axis.
User avatar
Wally Wilson
Posts: 98
Joined: Wed Jun 22, 2011 2:42 am
Location: The Republic of Texas

RE: Not Taking Moscow post 1.06.11

Post by Wally Wilson »

I'm playing an AI game as the Soviets, normal difficulty, and there is no way the Germans are going to take Moscow in my game. Its about 50-50 for taking Leningrad, and I'm not even strongly defending the city. This is my first game since playing a couple of games just after release.
janh
Posts: 1215
Joined: Tue Jun 12, 2007 12:06 pm

RE: Not Taking Moscow post 1.06.11

Post by janh »

You might want to try a game with Axis AI benefits bumped up to 110-118%, especially morale benefits. That helps AI markedly, and you'll find yourself struggling to hold off the permanent frontal grinding AI does.

AI on the offensive is weaker than the defensive, though for this game I remain impressed with the AI. It even manages some occasional small pockets. Holding Moscow and LG against it is not a big surprise with fairer difficulty settings, and still manageable at 118% (though if you restrict yourself a bit, it gets a chance...).

Unlike a human playing the Wehrmacht side as you can take from the PBEM AARs. Especially when looking at more-skilled players like Pelton, Michael, or IdahoNYer (though he restricts his game by houserules to more realism), the holding part is far from a given. Nevertheless 1.06.11 has apparently restricted Axis HQ-build-ups and fuel sufficiently to increase the chance to hold at least Moscow. Not sure 50:50 is what it is now, but Soviet players that dump everything into delaying at LG, and then holding Moscow, while Wehrmacht focuses on both in the usual manner, seem to get a shot at seeing Wehrmacht pincers getting stuck in the last two turns just in front of Moscow, particularly if the weather gods do their part. Unfortunately it means forgoing to fight bitterly and hold in the south, but at least it allows some chance.
User avatar
Wally Wilson
Posts: 98
Joined: Wed Jun 22, 2011 2:42 am
Location: The Republic of Texas

RE: Not Taking Moscow post 1.06.11

Post by Wally Wilson »

Thank you for the suggestion. I'm on turn 20 and have been very fortunate with weather. In fact, I have a blizzard this turn, but wasn't anticipating it so early and am not prepared to exploit it.

I'll bump the German settings on my next game.
User avatar
bairdlander2
Posts: 2288
Joined: Sat Mar 28, 2009 9:25 am
Location: Toronto Ontario but living in Edmonton,Alberta

RE: Not Taking Moscow post 1.06.11

Post by bairdlander2 »

ORIGINAL: Wally Wilson

I'm playing an AI game as the Soviets, normal difficulty, and there is no way the Germans are going to take Moscow in my game. Its about 50-50 for taking Leningrad, and I'm not even strongly defending the city. This is my first game since playing a couple of games just after release.
Im playing the ai as Axis and I have taken Moscow on turn 4.I came here to ask if the ai has been "dumbed down" since latest patch and found this thread.
User avatar
cpt flam
Posts: 2353
Joined: Sun Jan 16, 2011 4:34 am
Location: caen - France

RE: Not Taking Moscow post 1.06.11

Post by cpt flam »

Hi wally
i must tell you that blizzard before december will have slow axis but will not favor you
swkuh
Posts: 1034
Joined: Sun Oct 04, 2009 9:10 pm

RE: Not Taking Moscow post 1.06.11

Post by swkuh »

Congrats bairdlander.

As I play the game as you do, would appreciate knowing how you do Moscow in 4 turns. I'm bear of little brain and haven't imagined the possibility.
carlkay58
Posts: 8770
Joined: Sat Jul 24, 2010 10:30 pm

RE: Not Taking Moscow post 1.06.11

Post by carlkay58 »

Wow - Moscow on Turn 4! Very good. I am not sure I could even get there without all those pesky speed bumps (Soviet Units) in the way!

The AI has improved greatly since the release of the game. There are still a few glitches. The first thing to look at is the settings you are playing at as they have a MAJOR influence on the AI. If you wish a mildly challenging game, you should have all of the AI settings set to 105 or above while your settings remain at 100. I find that the AI set to 110 or 115 vs my 100 does it about right for me.
User avatar
Peltonx
Posts: 5814
Joined: Sun Apr 09, 2006 2:24 am
Contact:

RE: Not Taking Moscow post 1.06.11

Post by Peltonx »

ORIGINAL: HITMAN202

What changes in the game after the 1.06.11 up-date make it easier for the Soviets to hold Moscow ???

I explained this when .11 was released.

1. Tula south SHC checker boards and turns refit off.
2. 20-30 SHC units are railed out of south to Tula north.
3. All new units go to Tula north.
4. SHC only takes 2.75 or less KIA. I did it my first SHC game.
5. By Dec 1st 5+ million SHC army.
6. GHC recieves an ass kicking during the Middle Earth Blizzard ruleset.
7. SHC has 6.7 + million men by June. Close to 8 million if they do not attack during blizzard.
8. GHC cannot conduct offensive operations for more then a few months if at all during summer of 42.
9. Impossible to take Moscow in 42 or Leningrad.
10. Berlin falls in 44.

2by3 has made wite very predictable and boring at this point.

Very few AAR's are showing anything different.

They all track the same way when playing an above average SHC player.

There are no options for GHC because as I stated when game was a few months old. GHC can only take what it is given.

So basicly the game is unhistorical because of the crappy combat engine.

SHC should have 150+ more infantry divisions and GHC CV should be atleast 2x what it is now.

Once you add in the new logistic system from witw GHC will be lucky to get to the landbridge by October. So expect allot less SHC kia when 2.0 comes out.

If 2by3 keeps going down this road expect witw to be a total flop. Sure the ammount of troops ect will be historical, but the combat will be a flop because of the POS combat engine.
Beta Tester WitW & WitE
User avatar
morvael
Posts: 11763
Joined: Fri Sep 08, 2006 9:19 am
Location: Poland

RE: Not Taking Moscow post 1.06.11

Post by morvael »

ORIGINAL: Pelton
9. Impossible to take Moscow in 42 or Leningrad.
10. Berlin falls in 44.

So point 9 is historically correct, only in point 10. there is a year of difference. So the German offensive power in 41-43 shouldn't be boosted, but rather defensive power in 43-45.
User avatar
Peltonx
Posts: 5814
Joined: Sun Apr 09, 2006 2:24 am
Contact:

RE: Not Taking Moscow post 1.06.11

Post by Peltonx »

ORIGINAL: morvael
ORIGINAL: Pelton
9. Impossible to take Moscow in 42 or Leningrad.
10. Berlin falls in 44.

So point 9 is historically correct, only in point 10. there is a year of difference. So the German offensive power in 41-43 shouldn't be boosted, but rather defensive power in 43-45.

No historically 50% toe german divisions could hold off 3 Russian Corps easly. The russians had to attack with 3 Corp, then another 3 fresh Corp then another 3 fresh Corp before getting the German division to retreat a hex.

The Combat engine simply does not reflex modern warfare. Which is 100% about firepower, range and not how many rifle squads a division has. The current combat engine should be for WW1 and not WW2.

German CV is way way way way to low and SHC CV is way way to high. Mainly because the core damage is done by rifle squads (machine gun squads for SHC) and not artillary,tanks and anti tank units. A Company of 88's canshould and did hold off divisions on the open plains. But in the current combat engine they fire a few times do little if any damage and infantry squads running across 20 miles of open terrain suffer next to nothing in losses. Thats simply silly.

The combat engine sucks because there should be another 150 SHC infantry divisions, but this would have the SHC attacking in 1941 and not 43ish.

SHC should have way more units of lower CV and GHC units should have higher CV.
Beta Tester WitW & WitE
User avatar
morvael
Posts: 11763
Joined: Fri Sep 08, 2006 9:19 am
Location: Poland

RE: Not Taking Moscow post 1.06.11

Post by morvael »

It could have been balanced to give the same effect as it is now... so would't change the overall result while forcing the SHC player to deal with even more counters (that is painful already).

I think the WW2 was unwinnable for the Axis once all major players were in (past December '41?), therefore I wouldn't think the game as being in any way historically accurate, if the Germans would win (auto-win) in more than 1-2% of the games. I always thought it's about the final result - was it earlier and later than IRL and at what casualties for both sides. Then, by switching sides and playing a mirror game the best player could be determined.
User avatar
Peltonx
Posts: 5814
Joined: Sun Apr 09, 2006 2:24 am
Contact:

RE: Not Taking Moscow post 1.06.11

Post by Peltonx »

2by3 is improving the logistics system and air war for witw, but is ignoring the core problem with the game.

The combat engine is a disaster and its becoming more and more clear that it is.

If the combat engine does not get a total over haul to make it more about fire power, range and less about rifle squads witw will be a predictable disaster as wite has become predictable and unhistorical.

Its hard to balance a game when the problem is the central controling factor of the game itself.

The reason why wite is never balanced is because they never tried to fix the main problem with the game.

a 50% toe german infantry division should have same cv value as a russian Corp, thats simply historical and you can read account after account of this in about any history book.

The reason why they don't is combat engine is centered around rifle squads and not fire power.



Beta Tester WitW & WitE
User avatar
morvael
Posts: 11763
Joined: Fri Sep 08, 2006 9:19 am
Location: Poland

RE: Not Taking Moscow post 1.06.11

Post by morvael »

Thanks my browser for jumping somewhere and eating my post :(

I think it's good to see the two sub-systems improved, who knows what will be then improved for WitE2?

As for combat system, I wrote I'm not a fan of WitE way of "thousands of elements making thousands of random rolls" - I like systems designed from top to bottom, not the other way round, as it is proper for boardgames (and I consider WitE a boardgame).

edit: does this 50% div vs 100%corps having equal CV is for German defense or offense? I'd like to see bigger difference in attack/defend combat values. Attacking requires skill, bravery, experience, coordination, reconaissance etc. while a cornered rat will always fight to the death - it'd doesn't require as much skill, supplies, guidance from officers etc - once the berserker mode is on, even militia will achieve great results (this I would like to see most in urban & surrounded combat, except when there is no ammo left).
User avatar
Peltonx
Posts: 5814
Joined: Sun Apr 09, 2006 2:24 am
Contact:

RE: Not Taking Moscow post 1.06.11

Post by Peltonx »

ORIGINAL: morvael

Thanks my browser for jumping somewhere and eating my post :(

I think it's good to see the two sub-systems improved, who knows what will be then improved for WitE2?

As for combat system, I wrote I'm not a fan of WitE way of "thousands of elements making thousands of random rolls" - I like systems designed from top to bottom, not the other way round, as it is proper for boardgames (and I consider WitE a boardgame).

edit: does this 50% div vs 100%corps having equal CV is for German defense or offense? I'd like to see bigger difference in attack/defend combat values. Attacking requires skill, bravery, experience, coordination, reconaissance etc. while a cornered rat will always fight to the death - it'd doesn't require as much skill, supplies, guidance from officers etc - once the berserker mode is on, even militia will achieve great results (this I would like to see most in urban & surrounded combat, except when there is no ammo left).

defensive CV should be much higher for GHC units.

They had great fire control, wiping out one gruops of men or tanks at a time in a quick orderly fashion.

Offenive CV's are probaly about right, but defensive is way way off.
Beta Tester WitW & WitE
User avatar
morvael
Posts: 11763
Joined: Fri Sep 08, 2006 9:19 am
Location: Poland

RE: Not Taking Moscow post 1.06.11

Post by morvael »

One could always argue that this is represented as the Soviet "doctrine" which causes them greater losses, 1:1-3:1 in victorious combat and 3:1-10:1 in lost combat. Many things can hide under this special rule, like lack of experienced officers and NCOs leading to those poorly planned attacks. On the other hand as I was pointing in other thread, artillery isn't reflected in overall CV or doesn't have it's own Artillery Value representative factor, therefore numbers on Soviet counters doesn't change, even a bit, as their artillery doubles. There could be no end of special rules added, since Soviet units should have less degradation of CV when low on supplies, units fighting on their own home territory should have increased strength and reduced chance for retreat, comparing to fighting on foreign land, especially in big cities. That's why I'm for simpler systems that can be controlled by their author. As always the Twilight in the East boardgame comes to mind... Not too simple (over 40 000 possible results) but still clean and elegant is the system there, factoring in things like offensive and defensive strength modified by current combat effectiveness level (fatigue and disruption) as well as power of artillery (used in an equivalent of planned attacks, but only when ammo is on hand, which for overextended supply lines is in short supply), fortifications, weather, leaders, reserves, German edge in combat with results ranging from increased fatigue to casualties that mount very high on retreat and when the unit routs. The system also requires proper rotation and resting of units, which is rare in boardgames. Of course on the boardgame scale it's close to a monster game, but for the computer it would be very simple and could be extended to % results instead of 6-12 discrete ones.
User avatar
bairdlander2
Posts: 2288
Joined: Sat Mar 28, 2009 9:25 am
Location: Toronto Ontario but living in Edmonton,Alberta

RE: Not Taking Moscow post 1.06.11

Post by bairdlander2 »

ORIGINAL: rrbill

Congrats bairdlander.

As I play the game as you do, would appreciate knowing how you do Moscow in 4 turns. I'm bear of little brain and haven't imagined the possibility.
The thing is I cant see holding it.Is this because of "dumbed down" ai?I never did this well,playing on normal difficulty.

Image
Attachments
shot1.jpg
shot1.jpg (551.34 KiB) Viewed 479 times
User avatar
Wally Wilson
Posts: 98
Joined: Wed Jun 22, 2011 2:42 am
Location: The Republic of Texas

RE: Not Taking Moscow post 1.06.11

Post by Wally Wilson »

ORIGINAL: cpt flam

Hi wally
i must tell you that blizzard before december will have slow axis but will not favor you

Thx, cpt flam. The Germans only had one turn of clear between mud and the blizzard and now is snowing and still November - no operation Typhoon. It seems to have slowed them down quite a bit. In fact, they are further away from my reserves that I planned for the winter counterattack :( On turn 22, Nov 13, they have only reached Rzhev, Vyazma, Bryansk on the Moscow drive. If there is a clear turn, I'll move up the reserves. Such is war.

Looks like I will lose LG early in December unless I want to rail reserves up there.
Post Reply

Return to “The War Room”