Matrix Games

quote:

ORIGINAL: Ketza

He is hitting you with too much during his soak off attacks. One division at a time would have the same impact but cost a lot less. Eventually you would lose all your reserves and ammo then "bam" here come the corps.

quote:

ORIGINAL: Ketza

Well I am certainly watching this game closely. I like your strategic thinking and approach in this game with MT. Its sort of what I was looking to do against 76mm when I switched to a strategic defense in the late summer of 42.

Not getting beat up in the blizzard, having shorter lines and the Soviets not getting morale boosts from the blizzard wins makes a big difference from a total strategic perspective. If you can prove that a solid Axis defense can stop the Soviets long enough to not push you much past the historical front lines in 1944 you may change the way the game is played going forward.

This will hopefully lead to a change in the way victory is defined and change the dynamic of each side taking turns running.

I still think he is attacking you wrong and way too early but I am sorta pulling for you I love a good defense!

quote:

ORIGINAL: Michael T

But you need to look the whole battle for that hex Pelton. 4 attacks, by the end of it the loss rate is around 3.5 to 1. Acceptable losses. You are focusing on failures only. Add all the results of the attacks and the rate is still around 3 or 4 to 1, some turns are better. Yes this reserve thing has made life better for you. But all your propaganda ain't gonna win the war for you

quote:

ORIGINAL: Disgruntled Veteran

I have to admit that the reserve function in this game is beyond silly. In my current game A-game gets 100% reserve activations every battle that is near even odds. Most of the time its 2 units activated. I seriously think every battle in the last few turns has had reserve activations (like 20 a turn) with only battles where I have monster superiority that are not getting reserved.

Should it be this way? Also, I don't think units use mp's on the return trip from activation. Hopefully future versions have a better setup. End Gripe.

quote:

ORIGINAL: Flaviusx

Michael, here is my problem with what you are doing: it is extravagantly expensive in terms of morale and armament points. It has the potential of delaying your transition over to Red Army 2.0.

It is much much better to pound away with Red Army 2.0 with massive pools backing up any losses at that stage than to throw away those same pools on attacks made by RA 1.5. You are not getting the most bang for your buck here. You are indeed risking a hand to mouth situation down the line rather than replacement pool abundance to press your advantage when you have the toys to do so.

Furthermore, you won't even need soak off attacks by and large once you transition over. You'll start seeing them work in one shot, and that is far more efficient.

A half dozen successful assaults per turn will bleed the Germans to death over a year, while your own morale will go from strength to strength as it won't be getting wrecked. This is a far more sustainable pattern for assaults than these soak off attacks. After September of 1942, your morale norms will go up by 1 every month, so you want to take advantage of that. Soak off attacks make it much harder to do this.

I realize you are concerned that leaving the Axis alone will allow them to build up their pools. But you can burn through that relatively quickly down the line.

You are so close to getting to the point you need to be. It is a matter of 6 months or so. Then, everything will change. If you can just restrain yourself a bit more the payoff is within reach.

quote:

ORIGINAL: Pelton

The reserve commitment is 33% as it has always been. Poeple have changed frontages of armys so they have 9 chances per turn min for 3 turns.

The SHC is still grinding down GHS it just takes 60 turns instead of 20 without it.

quote:

ORIGINAL: Pelton


There is no propaganda the ratio was 15.8 to 1.

Over-all 3.5 to 1 is more then acceptable loses.

Its a stalemate.

quote:

ORIGINAL: Disgruntled Veteran

quote:

ORIGINAL: Pelton

The reserve commitment is 33% as it has always been. Poeple have changed frontages of armys so they have 9 chances per turn min for 3 turns.

The SHC is still grinding down GHS it just takes 60 turns instead of 20 without it.

Is this for GHC only?

The reason I ask is that in my current game the SHC player is getting between 60-80% activations per turn with an average of 20 attacks per turn. The only time reserves don't activate is when I have overwhelming superiority or extreme luck. Does anyone else notice this?

quote:

ORIGINAL: hfarrish


...and the downside of it is that those units set to reserve are not refitting, and if they fail to halt the German attack they are then less effective in defending their own hex. I pretty much stopped bothering with reserves in '42 for these reasons - plus given the scarcity of APs trying to get your command structure to support effective reserve activations is just not worth the cost, imo.

Of course, that statement above is only really with respect to the Soviets in 42 - other situations obviously different.

quote:

ORIGINAL: 821Bobo

I have not spent a single AP in 42 for sorting C&C. This was all done in 41. You have to start from turn 1 and it pays off. Every destroyed unit in 42 is replaced with new formation from Stavka reserves - zero AP costs.

quote:

ORIGINAL: carlkay58

No, what he is talking about is that new divisions (from wherever - either reinforcement or replacement of the destroyed units in 1941) start in the command of STAVKA (or at least if done properly) and can replace the destroyed unit in an army with 0 AP cost for being transferred.

The Soviets actually have a pretty good helping of divisions available in 42 from the free rebuilds in 41. Also there are so many brigades that can either be absorbed into low TOE divisions or combined into a division for minimal AP costs.