Matrix Games Forums

Battle Academy 2 is out now on iPad!A closer look at rockets in Space Program ManagerDeal of the Week - Pride of NationsA new update for Piercing Fortress EuropaNew screenshots for War in the West!Pike & Shot is now available!Server Maintenance Battle Academy 2 gets updated!Deal of the Week: Advanced Tactics Gold Ask Buzz Aldrin!
Forums  Register  Login  Photo Gallery  Member List  Search  Calendars  FAQ 

My Profile  Inbox  Address Book  My Subscription  My Forums  Log Out

Chaining nerfed?

 
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 >> Chaining nerfed? Page: [1] 2   next >   >>
Login
Message << Older Topic   Newer Topic >>
Chaining nerfed? - 12/4/2012 8:15:17 PM   
Jimbo123

 

Posts: 245
Joined: 10/11/2011
Status: offline
Rule Change (Section 20.6) – Several changes have been made to the HQ Build up rules as follows:

The amount of supplies and fuel delivered to a HQ conducting HQ Buildup is now equal to the total needs of all of the on map units attached to the HQ (supplies/fuel already on hand do not alter this calculation). This replaces the old method of basing supplies/fuel delivered on the AP cost of the buildup. These will then be distributed to bring the units up to 100% of their need with the unused remainder remaining in the HQ.

For each 2 tons of supplies or fuel sent to the HQ, 1 vehicle will be damaged and 1 vehicle will be sent to the HQ. The number of vehicles destroyed remains unchanged



Did this rule nerf chainiing? Updated and started a new game and after several trys I could not get an empty HQ to fill up with supplies
Post #: 1
RE: Chaining nerfed? - 12/4/2012 8:27:09 PM   
carlkay58

 

Posts: 2252
Joined: 7/25/2010
Status: offline
Yes it did nerf it. If you have an empty HQ and do HQ BU, then the total amount of supplies and fuel delivered to the HQ is merely to supply the HQ itself (since there are no longer any units attached for the calculation to use).

(in reply to Jimbo123)
Post #: 2
RE: Chaining nerfed? - 12/4/2012 8:56:40 PM   
Jimbo123

 

Posts: 245
Joined: 10/11/2011
Status: offline
Well isn't that just great. I guess I have played my last game. The German side is hopeless but now a German player has NO chance! They will never be able to get deep enough into russia and inflict enough damage to even make a game of it. I guess the russian players get to win all the time, as if that's fun.

I guess I will just move on!

Del I will finish our game then I'm done.

Good luck to all!

See you in a decade when WITE II comes out


(in reply to carlkay58)
Post #: 3
RE: Chaining nerfed? - 12/4/2012 8:57:54 PM   
Jimbo123

 

Posts: 245
Joined: 10/11/2011
Status: offline
If I'm still alive!

(in reply to Jimbo123)
Post #: 4
RE: Chaining nerfed? - 12/4/2012 10:22:51 PM   
carlkay58

 

Posts: 2252
Joined: 7/25/2010
Status: offline
Before you go, check out some of the AARs with Saper as the Axis (vs Harrybannana?) and you can see that reaching impossible depths is still very much in the Axis abilities if done properly.

(in reply to Jimbo123)
Post #: 5
RE: Chaining nerfed? - 12/4/2012 11:46:00 PM   
Pelton

 

Posts: 6042
Joined: 4/9/2006
Status: offline
Thats going to be nerfed also next patch.

_____________________________

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 carlkay58)
Post #: 6
RE: Chaining nerfed? - 12/5/2012 9:23:03 AM   
Jimbo123

 

Posts: 245
Joined: 10/11/2011
Status: offline
I checked out the AAR and he was most likely chaining ( not muling ) in the South or the Russian had some very poor play. Against solid Russian play the logistics prevent any chance of getting to Kharkov Salino etc. There is a chance that my poor play prevents me from getting those penetrations but after 100's of manhours on this game to me its just math. When the rail repair got nerfed you just can't get enough supply across the Depner until late in the summer.

This has ruined the game for me. I spent so much time trying to replicate some of the massive gains made by the top players ( Pelton, Michael T ) to finally discover and master ( well learn how to use ) chaining. I have read all the auguments about non-historical crap . There are, I have to win, type players. I personally love wargames and while winning is nice it's a game to me. How can it be fun to sit down to invest time into WITE with no hope of getting to 1944. What kind of experience is it for a Russian to not get tested in 41/42.

This is like being 16, having a car given to you and then taken away after 1 day because it was fun to drive!

OK done whining! ( really really disapointed though )

Jimbo


(in reply to Jimbo123)
Post #: 7
RE: Chaining nerfed? - 12/5/2012 3:02:40 PM   
hfarrish


Posts: 743
Joined: 1/3/2011
Status: offline

I don't think anyone is saying that chaining itself is going to be nerfed - I thought the Saper approach was chaining plus some air resupply tricks (I don't mean that perjoritavely) and the air resupply was what was going to be nerfed. Maybe I missed something though.

(in reply to Jimbo123)
Post #: 8
RE: Chaining nerfed? - 12/5/2012 5:28:03 PM   
Jimbo123

 

Posts: 245
Joined: 10/11/2011
Status: offline
No the patch killed chaining. I don't its effects on air supply. My response was based on his game being used as an example of German success while not chaining.

(in reply to hfarrish)
Post #: 9
RE: Chaining nerfed? - 12/5/2012 10:29:40 PM   
Harrybanana

 

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

ORIGINAL: Jimbo123

I checked out the AAR and he was most likely chaining ( not muling ) in the South or the Russian had some very poor play. Against solid Russian play the logistics prevent any chance of getting to Kharkov Salino etc. There is a chance that my poor play prevents me from getting those penetrations but after 100's of manhours on this game to me its just math. When the rail repair got nerfed you just can't get enough supply across the Depner until late in the summer.



As Saper's opponent I can tell you that he was not chaining or muling in the South or anywhere else for that matter. Indeed we started the game after the HQBU nerf you are complaining about. If you ask him he'll probably tell you (and I believe him) that not only did he not chain or mule he probably has not even done a single HQBU.

As for poor play on my part as the Russians, I don't think that is the case. I consider myself a pretty good Russian player. I had not lost a game as the Russians prior to this game, and even this game isn't over yet. What Saper is accomplishing against me he also accomplished against Kamil, Speedy and M60A, 3 pretty good players I think. Though with Kamil I don't think Saper really perfected his system until part way through the game. In fact I am doing better than Speedy or M60A, but probably only because I knew going into my game how Saper was doing it so I was better prepared. Not saying I haven't made mistakes, I have, but I believe I am still giving Saper a pretty good test.

As for how Saper is doing it. Firstly he is a very good player. Take a look at his extended Lvov opening in the South as just one example. Secondly, he has discovered (and I don't believe he is alone in this discovery) that since motorized units require less fuel than panzers he can keep several of them at or near full MPs every turn using airsupply. If you read my AAR in full you will see that I have attempted to explain this in detail, showing on most turns where his motorized have been airsupplied and how much fuel they have. I'm not saying Saper can keep all of his motorized fully gassed every turn, but he can keep enough of them gassed to make incredible advances far from his railheads.

< Message edited by Harrybanana -- 12/5/2012 10:40:31 PM >

(in reply to Jimbo123)
Post #: 10
RE: Chaining nerfed? - 12/5/2012 10:37:50 PM   
Harrybanana

 

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

quote:

ORIGINAL: Jimbo123

No the patch killed chaining. I don't its effects on air supply. My response was based on his game being used as an example of German success while not chaining.


The Saper vs Harrybanana game is exactly that, an example of German success while not chaining. In my AAR I show every turn (as best I can) where Saper's Panzer/motorized units are located and what their fuel state is. Please give me an example of a turn and a location where you believe Saper was chaining, or, for that matter, even performing a HQBU.

(in reply to Jimbo123)
Post #: 11
RE: Chaining nerfed? - 12/6/2012 9:25:53 AM   
delatbabel


Posts: 1244
Joined: 7/30/2006
From: Sydney, Australia
Status: offline
I think the fundamental problem is the victory conditions and to achieve them the Germans have to destroy the Soviet army and production in 1941 to have any chance of "winning" the game.

Historically the Germans didn't take Moscow or Leningrad in 1941. They got close, got pushed back to Berlin by April 1945 and doing exactly that as the Germans should be a draw. If the Germans have control over Berlin in May 1945 that should be a German victory. Realistically, the Germans didn't have any chance of winning the war and aren't going to win it, but if a player can do better than the Germans historically did then that should be a win.

I'd probably even say that the Germans, historically, did a lot better than they should have on paper. So perhaps the victory line should be somewhere in 1944 to make the game more competitive.



_____________________________

--
Del

(in reply to Harrybanana)
Post #: 12
RE: Chaining nerfed? - 12/6/2012 9:48:49 AM   
Jimbo123

 

Posts: 245
Joined: 10/11/2011
Status: offline
Harrybanana I am sorry and had zero intent on insulting your play! My comment was from the frame of reference of "how could this happen if he wasn't chaining". Since you started your game after chaining was nerfed then he isn't chaining. Your word is enough as well.

Style and speed of retreat could also be factors in your game.

I've played several games into 1943 only to have the russian steamroller turn my army into a speed bump. While I am by no means a great player my perspective has been formed from the very common tactic of running and putting up a stone wall just outside the logistical capibilities of the GHC in the South. I have also played some very good russian players. I have no delusions of winning but mearly to put up a great fight and be a quality opponent.

When a game becomes unfun people stop playing it.

How long til you all run out of GHC players?


(in reply to Harrybanana)
Post #: 13
RE: Chaining nerfed? - 12/6/2012 1:21:58 PM   
Gunnulf

 

Posts: 89
Joined: 10/31/2012
Status: offline
My 2p worth as a latecomer who just picked up the game about 5 weeks ago (but have been playing it almost non-stop since...) then from the AI games and 4 MP games I have on the go (all now end of 41 or well into 42) then it all seems fairly well balanced IMHO. From those 2 MP games as Soviet I have 1) held Moscow/lost Leningrad 2) held both in the other (Leningrad by skin of teeth!). From 2 Axis games I have 1) captured both 2) captured Leningrad/ stopped at gates of moscow but taken Rostov.
All in latest patch. Decent players against me I think and has been a solid fight & I have enjoyed playing both sides. I can't see how this old chaining exploit could be seen as anything other than gamey and certainly not in the spirit of the model. Perhaps against seasoned players who have been playing this game inside and out since 2010 then I would not fair so well. However my main point is as a relatively new player then the above results are the sign of a relatively healthy and well balanced game. Well done the devs for closing down exploits.

(in reply to Jimbo123)
Post #: 14
RE: Chaining nerfed? - 12/6/2012 1:38:31 PM   
rrbill

 

Posts: 615
Joined: 10/5/2009
Status: offline
Satisfaction in conducting a good defense or great offense is its own reward. Forcing the game to mimic history goes against learning to play well. Every time a change to the underlying algorithms is experienced it is frustrating; when does it happen and when does it end? "Forcing" means a change to algorithms that's not anticipated from an inspection of the manual.

(in reply to Jimbo123)
Post #: 15
RE: Chaining nerfed? - 12/6/2012 8:48:12 PM   
heliodorus04


Posts: 1404
Joined: 11/1/2008
From: Denver Colorado
Status: offline
One of the key problems for the betterment of game balance is that the German side can only be played to the point of dramatic tension by the very best players who play dozens of games and have more hours in WitE than most of us have to spend on our cumulative free time excursions. Nerfs to the German side were done because of what the very best players could do, making ordinary skill German players play Sisyphus: try to get a good enough 1941, fail, resign, rinse repeat.

(in reply to rrbill)
Post #: 16
RE: Chaining nerfed? - 12/7/2012 12:06:14 AM   
Schmart

 

Posts: 652
Joined: 9/13/2010
From: Canada
Status: offline
The fundamental problem with the game, are the human players. The game system generally falls apart if the Russian player runs away. If the Russian doesn't run away, there's an actual game to be played, and at that point it's far from impossible for the German player to win. Another aspect is the "If I can't get my panzers to Stalingrad in 1941 then the game is a wash" attitude by some. That's an exaggeration, but I'd hazard a guess that a large percentage of Axis players will give up if they haven't won outright in 1941, because a hard/smart defensive fight for 43-45 isn't as glorious as pushing your panzers around at will. I think that the game community generally lacks in regards to Axis defensive skills, hence the "game is over if I don't get Leningrad, Moscow, and Rostov in 41" viewpoint. There are quite a number of good Axis defensive AARs around, that show the ability to slow late war Russian advances, to the point of Axis victory.

Solutions? Hard code a trip line (or something or other), that if crossed by the Germans before a certain date, the Russians are deemed to have run away and trigger a "you're not a fun opponent" loss screen for the Russian player. This will help to force more Russian players to stand and fight. Standing and fighting usually results in the Russians getting torn to shreds in the current system, so the Axis side will probably have to be toned down a bit (ie: no HQBU, reduced logistics, etc).

(in reply to heliodorus04)
Post #: 17
RE: Chaining nerfed? - 12/7/2012 9:52:18 AM   
janh

 

Posts: 1226
Joined: 6/12/2007
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: Schmart
The fundamental problem with the game, are the human players. The game system generally falls apart if the Russian player runs away. If the Russian doesn't run away, there's an actual game to be played, and at that point it's far from impossible for the German player to win. Another aspect is the "If I can't get my panzers to Stalingrad in 1941 then the game is a wash" attitude by some. That's an exaggeration, but I'd hazard a guess that a large percentage of Axis players will give up if they haven't won outright in 1941, because a hard/smart defensive fight for 43-45 isn't as glorious as pushing your panzers around at will. I think that the game community generally lacks in regards to Axis defensive skills, hence the "game is over if I don't get Leningrad, Moscow, and Rostov in 41" viewpoint. There are quite a number of good Axis defensive AARs around, that show the ability to slow late war Russian advances, to the point of Axis victory.

Solutions? Hard code a trip line (or something or other), that if crossed by the Germans before a certain date, the Russians are deemed to have run away and trigger a "you're not a fun opponent" loss screen for the Russian player. This will help to force more Russian players to stand and fight. Standing and fighting usually results in the Russians getting torn to shreds in the current system, so the Axis side will probably have to be toned down a bit (ie: no HQBU, reduced logistics, etc).


Nice way to sum it up.

I'd go a step further than that, aka if the Russian is given better means to fight forward (either tuning down German side of things, or bettering Russian exp, or tuning their manpower and reinforcements to more historical numbers, maybe even dependent on arriving only if certain key cities fall sooner than usual and indicate need) and attrit the Germans in 41 and 42, then you'll automatically see less of Mr. Sir Robin. Same would probably be true for the Germans during blizzard, if the relative combat capacities would be tuned to more even, realistic scenarios in which Germans don't simply lose all offensive and much defensive power by a lighting stroke (and in fact, please link it to the weather, aka random weather blizzard turns in November...).

I don't find it surprising that the defending play part of an I-Go-U-Go game is much less attractive than we-go. After all you've literally no choice except to put our units at the best places you can guess-timate, stack reserves and already plan the next rearward line. You can't even select yourself when your reserves get into action. Nor is the reserves mode what would be needed to mimick all the things a reacting side can really do within the time frame of one week. I hope that part of the game will get much attention for WitW. Not that it is not interesting to watch someone like IdahoNYer execute his skillful defenses -- in fact the tension is great, but from playing I'd say I enjoy the offensive phases a lot more as there is more (interesting things) to do.

(in reply to Schmart)
Post #: 18
RE: Chaining nerfed? - 12/7/2012 9:59:44 AM   
janh

 

Posts: 1226
Joined: 6/12/2007
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: heliodorus04
One of the key problems for the betterment of game balance is that the German side can only be played to the point of dramatic tension by the very best players who play dozens of games and have more hours in WitE than most of us have to spend on our cumulative free time excursions. Nerfs to the German side were done because of what the very best players could do, making ordinary skill German players play Sisyphus: try to get a good enough 1941, fail, resign, rinse repeat.


I don't think so. G&G have been very carefully tuning this thing, and really only addressed loop-holes that are plainly not designed to be there in first place, and plainly just unrealistic. Simply put the logistics system should put a break on the Axis advance even if the Russians were just brainless speed-bumps (i.e. even against AI), or not even there.
Other than that, G&G touched very little, and much of it like the Russian national morale and manpower factors got tuned down in favor of Axis.

Naturally the asymmetry in this conflict means and should mean that playing the German side will allow for fewer errors, and will be more challenging. So more practicing. Just like in the case of Japan in WitP. It was not a contest between even enemies, why should the basic, historically-based GC in this game be? There are alternatives meanwhile in the Mod-Section, that analogous to Andy Mac's AE Scenario 2 or the RA scenarios improve the Axis starting point for more evenly matched PBEM games...

< Message edited by janh -- 12/7/2012 10:00:12 AM >

(in reply to heliodorus04)
Post #: 19
RE: Chaining nerfed? - 12/7/2012 10:19:21 AM   
Jimbo123

 

Posts: 245
Joined: 10/11/2011
Status: offline
@helio and schmart AMEN!

@gunnulf

I felt like you did a month ago until I switched to the "dark side". I was totally against muling and tried everything to avoid the decision to chain. While you are entilted to your opinion I think it might have a bit more relevence after you have experenced 1943. I was permitted to resign by my last russian opponent in late 43 and in conversing with him post game I decided to learn the basics of chaining and then go back to human play. I started a thread announcing my reasons for the switch and my opponent had no trouble accepting my challenge. If he wants to weigh in he can, but I think he has had to work much harder thus enjoying the game more. I also would be suprised if he doesn't feel he will win. I actually play the Germans because I enjoy defending. To be able to do that 41/42 had to get better.

@harrybanana

I guess since sapper is not chaining I would love him to post a screen shot showing the progress of his southern railheads and his begining MP's of his PZ's. ( probably too late ) Post turn russian screen shots really don't help us get better or understand what is going on. I went back and studied AAR's to figure out how to chain and it became my answer to my problem. If there is another way then back to the drawing board. I don't want to clutter your AAR with off topic remarks.

(in reply to Schmart)
Post #: 20
RE: Chaining nerfed? - 12/7/2012 10:40:34 AM   
Jimbo123

 

Posts: 245
Joined: 10/11/2011
Status: offline
@ jahn

I agree with everything you have said. Maybe the best way to say this is at my skill level against my opponents my army turns to mush in late 43. My answer was to chain as it gave me a way of getting to Kharkov-Stalino which I was able to do this game. I have always caprured Lenningrad and scared Moscow without chaining. I'm not there yet as we are about to enter the 41 blizzard, but I feel from my side that I have givin RHC some things to think about and therefore a better gaming exp. I think all of us would like to know how few games even get to 43.

I am also sad and frustrated as this will be my one and only chance to see what happens using this tactic.

Also any thoughts as to how Sapper is doing it in the Harrybanana vs Sapper AAR? It was used in this tread of no chaining German success.

Inquiring minds want to know!

Jimbo

(in reply to Jimbo123)
Post #: 21
RE: Chaining nerfed? - 12/7/2012 11:28:59 PM   
Harrybanana

 

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

quote:

ORIGINAL: delatbabel

I think the fundamental problem is the victory conditions and to achieve them the Germans have to destroy the Soviet army and production in 1941 to have any chance of "winning" the game.

Historically the Germans didn't take Moscow or Leningrad in 1941. They got close, got pushed back to Berlin by April 1945 and doing exactly that as the Germans should be a draw. If the Germans have control over Berlin in May 1945 that should be a German victory. Realistically, the Germans didn't have any chance of winning the war and aren't going to win it, but if a player can do better than the Germans historically did then that should be a win.

I'd probably even say that the Germans, historically, did a lot better than they should have on paper. So perhaps the victory line should be somewhere in 1944 to make the game more competitive.



+1 Could not have said it better myself (although I have tried on several occaisons).

(in reply to delatbabel)
Post #: 22
RE: Chaining nerfed? - 12/7/2012 11:39:11 PM   
mevstedt

 

Posts: 51
Joined: 9/12/2012
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: delatbabel
I'd probably even say that the Germans, historically, did a lot better than they should have on paper. So perhaps the victory line should be somewhere in 1944 to make the game more competitive.


I very much also agree on this point. When you then consider that a GHC player needs to outperform the historical result in -41 in order to even get a draw you could say that something isn't quite right but we all know that much, unfortunately there is no easy solution.




(in reply to delatbabel)
Post #: 23
RE: Chaining nerfed? - 12/8/2012 12:28:35 AM   
Harrybanana

 

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

ORIGINAL: Jimbo123

Harrybanana I am sorry and had zero intent on insulting your play! My comment was from the frame of reference of "how could this happen if he wasn't chaining". Since you started your game after chaining was nerfed then he isn't chaining. Your word is enough as well.


No offense taken.

quote:

Style and speed of retreat could also be factors in your game.


You may be right; but I would say that Saper's style of play forced my speedy retreat.


quote:

I've played several games into 1943 only to have the russian steamroller turn my army into a speed bump. While I am by no means a great player my perspective has been formed from the very common tactic of running and putting up a stone wall just outside the logistical capibilities of the GHC in the South. I have also played some very good russian players. I have no delusions of winning but mearly to put up a great fight and be a quality opponent.

When a game becomes unfun people stop playing it.

How long til you all run out of GHC players?




You make a good point Jimbo, just not sure we agree on the solution. As you say the problem with play balance is that the smart Russian players do run, at least when necessary, especially in the South. Though, imho, Saper is showing a way for the Germans to counter this. But if I understand you your solution to this is to allow chaining so the Germans stand an equal chance. I guess my response is that chaining as it was being used was not historically possible. You might as well give the Germans phasers and plasma rifles to create play balance as to allow chaining.

Others have suggested different rules that require the Russians to stand and fight in order that the Germans can destroy large parts of the Russian army as was historical. My problem with this is why would I, or anyone, want to play as the Russians when I no longer have freedom of choice as to how to run the War. Isn't the entire purpose of these games to allow us as the players the chance to do things differently. Then later on in the War will we add rules to force the Germans to make the same mistakes they did historically? If I or my opponent are forced to make the same mistakes as our historical counterparts made where is the fun in that. If the game is unbalanced then my solution would be to cahnge the victory conditions.


< Message edited by Harrybanana -- 12/8/2012 12:30:04 AM >

(in reply to Jimbo123)
Post #: 24
RE: Chaining nerfed? - 12/8/2012 12:57:42 AM   
sath

 

Posts: 434
Joined: 2/21/2010
Status: offline
I lost interest and stopped playing this game a good while ago since I knew all this was coming. But what the heck they all ready got my hard earned dollars so what do they care. Well I'll be smart enough to never buy anything else from them again.

(in reply to Harrybanana)
Post #: 25
RE: Chaining nerfed? - 12/8/2012 1:06:24 AM   
Harrybanana

 

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

quote:

ORIGINAL: Jimbo123

@harrybanana

I guess since sapper is not chaining I would love him to post a screen shot showing the progress of his southern railheads and his begining MP's of his PZ's. ( probably too late ) Post turn russian screen shots really don't help us get better or understand what is going on. I went back and studied AAR's to figure out how to chain and it became my answer to my problem. If there is another way then back to the drawing board. I don't want to clutter your AAR with off topic remarks.


Obviously I haven't read Saper's AAR. MY understanding is that he was doing the AAR to show people how he was doing what he was doing as there had been suggestions that he was cheating. If this is not what he is doing in his AAR then I don't know what to say except that he does struggle with English. However the simple answer is that he is using massive amounts of airsupply every turn to provide fuel to some of his motorized units. Motorized units require less fuel than panzers so by doing this he has been able to keep 4 to 6 motorized units per turn in good fuel supply. Since, unlike HQBUs, this does not cost APs and he can perform the supply runs to the same units turn after turn, it has some advantages over HQBUs.

As for the MPs these units have, you can get a pretty good idea by reading my AAR. I generally circle each turn the German units that have good fuel supply. If the unit has light green fuel showing on my turn (I always have the fuel soft factor turned on) then it means it has 86% to 100% of it's required fuel. This means it will proably have around 45 MPs on it's next turn. If dark green it will have 71% to 85% fuel = 38 MPs; Yellow = 55% to 70% = 30MPs, etc. Of course, this is just a rough guide I use.

(in reply to Jimbo123)
Post #: 26
RE: Chaining nerfed? - 12/8/2012 10:02:42 AM   
janh

 

Posts: 1226
Joined: 6/12/2007
Status: offline
Saper is quite surely not cheating in any way, at least not within my definitions of cheating. He's merely acting really smart. If German production were open like the Japanese in AE, I am sure he would optimize/rationalize it as well and cut away all the expensive toys and focus on bang-for-the-buck like late Pz IV. Maybe he'd even cut the Pz V series. It is hindsight he is using.

A WW2 PzIII or IV eats some 300 liters of fuel per 100 km, i.e. if I remember correctly, and a Pz II not much less. Take 100-200 of those plus all the trucks, motorbikes, prime mowers etc. and you have a real fuel hog. Ok, a fuel hog with a punch on the offensive and disadvantages as defensive element, but with the Soviet unit quality as stands now, for most of the purposes you don't need that extra bang, or you'll usually wait for the infantry to catch up and do the fighting anyway.

As a pure exploit element, to penetrate deep, feel out and occupy like recon units usually do -- exactly as Saper appears to be using them -- the Mot. Infantry seems to be just good enough. The still pack a good punch to brush aside single, unintrenched Russians. A WW2 truck still eats >30 liters for 100 km range, but overall you get many more miles out of them per ton fuel delivered by the Luftwaffe than directing that fuel to Panzers. Sounds merely smart to me, surely not like cheating.

You could now ask why the Germans didn't realize so themselves, and do so? Perhaps they had better services for the Luftwaffe than to act as supply train for 4 months? Was that just a prestige thing, aka pilots objecting to that and rather wanting to fight? Or does it mean Luftwaffe ground attack effects are underestimated in this game (play a 43 scenario, there LW support becomes much more important...)? Or does it mean that Wehrmacht units per se are so much stronger, or Russian units so weak in 41 (== i.e. combat engine interpreting experiences to calculate losses), that unlike in the real conflict Luftwaffe is not really required for the Axis player to bomb except in cases of heavy Russian opposition or river crossings like LG? Is it because supply of airfields in this game is easier than was in real life, partly because of the logistics engine, partly because of the generic nature of fuel and supplies in games?

Can, in this game, Mot. Infantry used with less risk-less than in real life? Wasn't it just infantry on trucks, escorted by recon elements with trikes and motorbikes, some amored scout cars, perhaps a battalion of assault guns and plenty of towed AT and artillery, that generally was a little vulnerable on advancing through unsecured enemy terrain, so often was preceded by tanks, or moved not exactly a maximum speed to allow its forward deployed elements to clear the route? Might it be that the lack of the defender to be able to generate meeting engagements (i.e. simulating attacking a moving Mot. Inf. column, like move simultaneously with the attacker into an adjacent hex) or even truly ambush units (attacker moving into "apparently empty" hex with severe combat penalties) might eliminate some of the real life dangers Mot. infantry faced and therefore can be used much better in this game to exploit depths? Maybe the Germans generally moved about more cautiously as they believed the Russians to falter before Christmas anyway, so why taking risks? Maybe they didn't move as "almost reckless" as most Axis players as they didn't have the benefit of hindsight and wouldn't know what to expect or face -- maybe it is players habits coupled with our knowledge on this conflict, that brings things like this about?

Answer yourselves. The Germans exploited much with small columns, often recon elements, and as this game doesn't account for ad-hoc combat groups or small units like recon platoon etc., Saper's use of the Mot Inf seems to mimic that as good as this game allows. Whether he can do so with less risk than should be because of I-Go-U-Go limits, or force disbalance, or whether it be so -- answer yourself...

< Message edited by janh -- 12/8/2012 10:06:01 AM >

(in reply to Harrybanana)
Post #: 27
RE: Chaining nerfed? - 12/8/2012 11:44:09 AM   
Jimbo123

 

Posts: 245
Joined: 10/11/2011
Status: offline
@harryBanana

After the rail repair was toned down which I believe was the first attempt to rein some of the massive advances during the muling days, at a rate of 3.5 repaired hexs per turn ( more then generous ) it takes 13.1 turns to get a rail head to cherkassey and you still are not across the dnepr. That leaves little time for any sort of supplied offensive thus the poor performance. It is also much harder to even get there and force the river as well without help. This has been "my" experence. The Russian army is able to stay out of reach and hold their southern Pop centers and turf the GHC needs to give back to survive the blizzard.

At the risk of stating the obvious to you all :-)

Chaining is a 3 step process. Empty a HQ and make sure it is in HQBU range. Next turn fill it with supplies. Next turn move it to the front and assign units. Next turn attack with fully loaded units. With proper planning you can cut out the first step until the dnepr is crossed or use a forth HQ. For me anyway this process simulated the planning required to build up supplies. You also have to have at least 3 HQ out of the command system to consistently keep the supplies moving East ( thus the name chaining). Now for all of those who want to scream exploit. Isn't all of those supplies coming down a single rail line mean that the supply system in WITE somewhat abstract anyway.

Again for me it was the best solution to our shared problem with balance.

1. You have to plan!
2. It really only helps in 41 and goes away after that
3. At my skill level,in my one and only game to do this I was able to achieve the historical advance rate of the GHC. However, since it was my first time using it I do feel I would have gotten better at it. It does require skill believe it or not!

What if the Devs had a download let's say 206.19 which meant that the game was exactly the same execept the chaining exploit was left in. Would Russian players accept a challenge. They would know what they were signing on for which from my seat would be a more entertaining "game". It would be interesting to see which they would choose.

Think of the extra glory for whipping those weak whimpy GHC exploiters (laughing)!!!!!!!

@ Jahn

I agree with your whole post.

I just want to know how he is doing it! His whole army seems to be at a highesh ( is that a word? ) level of supply. The math doesn't work for me based on my current understanding of the rules. I have started a test game to see if I can recreate the effects.

I also very much want to thank everyone for the thoughtful and civil discussion on this emotional and controversial topic!!!



(in reply to janh)
Post #: 28
RE: Chaining nerfed? - 12/12/2012 10:44:32 AM   
delatbabel


Posts: 1244
Joined: 7/30/2006
From: Sydney, Australia
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Jimbo123

I felt like you did a month ago until I switched to the "dark side". I was totally against muling and tried everything to avoid the decision to chain. While you are entilted to your opinion I think it might have a bit more relevence after you have experenced 1943. I was permitted to resign by my last russian opponent in late 43 and in conversing with him post game I decided to learn the basics of chaining and then go back to human play. I started a thread announcing my reasons for the switch and my opponent had no trouble accepting my challenge. If he wants to weigh in he can, but I think he has had to work much harder thus enjoying the game more. I also would be suprised if he doesn't feel he will win. I actually play the Germans because I enjoy defending. To be able to do that 41/42 had to get better.


OK then, I will. :)

I stand by pretty much everything I said to you after the last game. Other Axis players have kept me off guard and kept me retreating much further than you managed to achieve. It's a pity that unrealistic strategies like chaining and muling are required to achieve that, but in retrospect your offense in 1941 should have been good enough to get close to a draw (your limited offense in '42 wasn't good enough, but then again I have practiced my 42 defense quite a lot compared to some players), and your defensive strategy from late 1942 was very good so you should have come away with a marginal loss at worst. Your blizzard defense probably let you down a bit, you put too much armour up front and let me chew away at it, and that weakened your 42 offensive.

In this game you've pushed me back much further, you took Leningrad and I thought you'd take Moscow. I threw everything I could at the defense of Leningrad but with the current game system it's just indefensible, however I probably delayed enough of your units up there to save Moscow.

Yes, this game has been more enjoyable.

I still stand by points I've made previously in this and other threads, which are:

* The Soviet army in the summer of 1941 is unrealistically weak and can't put up even a delaying defense anywhere. People who have tried (witness the recent "no retreat" strategy against MT) have been caned. So the Soviets have no option other than to pull back. Players advocating for rules to make it harder or impossible for the Soviets to retreat are just asking for a game that the Germans will win every time. I would love to put up a solid 1941 defense, but it simply can't be done.

* Even attempting to defend "hero cities" will just lead to more units surrendering and a huge AP drain -- cut off units can't survive a turn of enemy attacks, even if heavily fortified in urban areas. This is probably the last game where, as the Soviets, I will attempt more than a token defense of Leningrad. Realistically it should be possible to defend Leningrad, in the game it is not, and the consequences of trying are 100+ AP of units destroyed. 2 engineers with a dynamite-laden dog can reduce a level 4 urban fort to rubble every single time and take no losses doing so, and an entire supplied Soviet army cut off from the magical supply route to Baku or Chelyabinsk for a week is reduced to zero defense strength anyway, even if fortified and air supplied.

* The blizzard effects on the German army are too severe, especially against a less experienced player who hasn't siphoned his best units off to sit in cities in Poland.

* The Soviet army builds up too fast in 1942 and 1943 even if they aren't hurt badly in 1941. Realistically, the Soviets only had so many men and provided the army with the reinforcements that they needed. It probably wouldn't have been Stavka strategy to throw in an extra 3 million men to an army already sitting over 7 million in size (considering that those men needed to be pulled away from farms and factories).

* The overall effect is that the game is an easy "win" for the Soviets, unless they get severely caned in 1941. No amount of defensive strategy by the Germans will stop a 10+ million man Soviet army. That is also unrealistic. A good German player should be able to reach the gates of Moscow and Leningrad in late 1941 or 1942, set up a mobile defense through 1943 and a good strong static defense in 1944 and win the game. That's not possible.

You are correct, I will win this campaign because the victory conditions are b0rked. I offer you the following alternative victory conditions:

* Soviets occupy Berlin before Jan 1944: Soviet decisive victory.
* Soviets occupy Berlin between Jan and June 1944: Soviet major victory.
* Soviets occupy Berlin between July and September 1944: Soviet minor victory.
* Soviets occupy Berlin between Oct 1944 and Dec 1944: Draw.
* Soviets occupy Berlin between Jan and March 1945: German minor victory.
* Soviets occupy Berlin between April and May 1945: German major victory.
* Soviets occupy Berlin after May 1945: German decisive victory.


_____________________________

--
Del

(in reply to Jimbo123)
Post #: 29
RE: Chaining nerfed? - 12/12/2012 11:42:40 AM   
SigUp

 

Posts: 692
Joined: 11/29/2012
Status: offline
I agree pretty much with every point you made (though mostly through observation of AARs, my own experience is rather limited).

In 1941 practically nobody (human and AI alike) counterattacks on a bigger scale (like in reality the Yelnya offensive) simply because the Red Army is too weak. Thus the German player has far fewer critical moments like the real German forces faced in 41, which is also reflected in the rather low losses prior to the blizzard. The question is now how to fix (for a possible sequel), perhaps either through giving the Soviet player the possibility to mass more units, or giving higher combat strength to them (while restricting mobility or something like that, to avoid the Wehrmacht getting stalled at Dniepr-Dvina every time).

If the 41 summer is fixed, I think the blizzard problem will be fixed as well. The current need for the blizzard from hell is due to the Germans being too strong in the summer.

(in reply to delatbabel)
Post #: 30
Page:   [1] 2   next >   >>
All Forums >> [New Releases from Matrix Games] >> Gary Grigsby's War in the East Series >> Chaining nerfed? Page: [1] 2   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

0.114