Matrix Games Forums

Distant Worlds: Shadows Final Teaser!Distant Worlds: Legends gets Updated!Recruiting Testers for Commander: the Great War on Mac!Armageddon invasion starts in 2014Command Rommels Panzers in Battle Academy!Servers UpdateThe Deal goes Fourth!Command Ops gets a Massive Update!Lost Battles AAR: Smolensk 41War in the East: Lost Battles is here!		 Forums  Register  Login  Photo Gallery  Member List  Search  Calendars  FAQ 

My Profile  Inbox  Address Book  My Subscription  My Forums  Log Out

RE: Refuting Pelton's "Axis Should not Attack in 42 Onward" Diatribe

 
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 >> RE: Refuting Pelton's "Axis Should not Attack in 42 Onward" Diatribe Page: <<   < prev  1 [2]
Login
Message << Older Topic   Newer Topic >>
RE: Refuting Pelton's "Axis Should not Attack in 4... - 1/15/2013 2:07:47 PM   
Maximeba

 

Posts: 132
Joined: 8/9/2009
From: Buffalo, NY, USA
Status: offline 		Someday, I will learn how to put things into quotes and actually download screenshots. Sorry, about the mess ups.

Signed,
Mr. Frustration

_____________________________

Wes
Allies Forever

(in reply to Maximeba)
Post #: 31
RE: Refuting Pelton's "Axis Should not Attack in 4... - 1/15/2013 4:43:28 PM   
TulliusDetritus

 

Posts: 3810
Joined: 4/1/2004
From: Back to Reality :(
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: Maximeba

quote:

For the Soviet POV, read TD's AAR: Stalin's Fired I'm in Charge; he seems to be keeping it up more than my AAR "Axis Lambs to the Slaughter."

Marquo

Thanks, for the info. I just took a quick glance at the AAR and I noticed that it doesn't seem to have info on losses,production and mampower. Hopefully I'm just over looking them. I plan on sitting down and reading the entire
AAR today.


I think you should avoid going through the whole thing I am not a numbers man. I hate that by the way I am more interested in the big picture. In any case my approach is: do --more or less-- what was done in the real thing, the game should handle the minutiae, as I want to avoid that like the pest it is.

And yes, I like micromanaging. Suffice to say that my prefered game is WitP AE. Micromanaging forces, logistics, operations, development of bases, ok... but the raw, cold numbers, no thanks.

_____________________________



"Block is very important. If you think block is useless now it's ok. If you don't like block, why don't you take it with your face...?" -- Kung Fu master

(in reply to Maximeba)
Post #: 32
RE: Refuting Pelton's "Axis Should not Attack in 4... - 1/16/2013 12:19:41 AM   
The Guru

 

Posts: 69
Joined: 12/24/2012
Status: offline
quote:

And changing over to a points based system isn't going to change that fact either. The German still ends up with a very long, very detailed defensive game


They certainly do, but I still think points could alter the moment when they decide to go turtle, to make it closer to historical reality and specially to make it more interesting to play. If points were awardedd for holding locations far to the east, maybe beyond the original high water mark (or penalties for loosing them too early) or even for getting as close to Moscow as possible, this could entice the German to be more daring, reflecting their optimistic/aggressive attitude and again, offer a more enjoyable game

(in reply to Maximeba)
Post #: 33
RE: Refuting Pelton's "Axis Should not Attack in 4... - 1/16/2013 1:33:33 AM   
Numdydar

 

Posts: 643
Joined: 2/13/2004
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: turtlefang


So unless the German player very dedicated, he won't stick around in 43-45. And many of them wouldn't be playing the German if they were defensive minded in the first place.




Then you need to explian why there are many people playing Japan in WitP (currently in June '44 btw ) lol. Including me The simple reaon many people play the 'losing' side is simply to see if they can 'beat' the historical record. Regardless of the type of play style they have to use to do so.

So as Japan, if I have not lost by 8/45, then I will feel i have 'won' regardless of what the game (or history ) says. The same would apply as Germany in WitE. To me if you are playing as Germany against another person, I would consider it poor sportmanship to quit in '43 or '44 UNLESS your opponate says it is ok. This is even more true in WitP which is 1,600 turns long versus 144.

While you may not like playing the Germans in '43+, others would have no problem with it.

(in reply to turtlefang)
Post #: 34
RE: Refuting Pelton's "Axis Should not Attack in 4... - 1/16/2013 8:33:00 PM   
Jeffrey H.


Posts: 2502
Joined: 4/13/2007
From: San Diego, Ca.
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: The Guru

Are we really the only ones to think that way?



Nope, but this was a hot topic of discussion a while back, I'm sure a forum search will turn up the original topic. We had a poll sponsored by Joel Billings IIRC, and if I'm not mistaken, there were some changes to the game VC's as a result.

The problem remains however as you can see.

I think the basic underlying theme of the game is that the German will lose, and there isn't anything a German player can do about that.

Ok, from a historical perspective perhaps, but doesn't make for an exciting game. (my opinion of course)




_____________________________

"Games lubricate the body and the mind" Ben Franklin.

(in reply to The Guru)
Post #: 35
RE: Refuting Pelton's "Axis Should not Attack in 4... - 1/16/2013 9:44:13 PM   
Flaviusx


Posts: 5747
Joined: 9/9/2009
Status: online 		Somebody must have forgotten to tell Marquo what that theme was, among many other people who have won playing the Axis.

The game has gotten much much more forgiving to play as the Axis since it first came out. To the point where I for one think 1941 is on the edge being much too easy for the Axis. The game's combat engine and logistical model are incredibly generous for the offensive. If things don't get changed up for WITW, it's going to be a walkover for the Allies, who will be in position to abuse these mechanics even more than the Axis can in WITE.

I for one will no longer play any good Axis player in 1941 without random weather anymore. It's gotten a bit too lopsided.



_____________________________

WitE Alpha Tester

(in reply to Jeffrey H.)
Post #: 36
RE: Refuting Pelton's "Axis Should not Attack in 4... - 1/16/2013 10:46:07 PM   
Marquo


Posts: 1095
Joined: 9/26/2000
Status: offline 		"I think the basic underlying theme of the game is that the German will lose, and there isn't anything a German player can do about that."

Jeffery,

I went into the game with a sense of forboding and doom, having been mislead by a "vocal" cadre of sullen Axis fanboys who have been vociferating that the game is broken and unwinnable for the Axis. Initially it was rough going; random weather with more than a fair share of mud as well my learning curve slowed me down. However, while the Axis pundits were first advising raiding armaments, I felt that bleeding off Soviet manpower was going to be my road to success. So first grinding, second pocketing and most important driving south to maximize deprivation of manpower was the key to success. TDs OOB was held in check, and frankly my strategy was simple: make sure he lost as many or more troops than he could regenerate every turn.

This is why I attacked so aggressively in 1943: his depleted corps whithered under counterattack; and loses of 4 - 7,000 men/attack were not sustainable for him.

I think if played right by both sides, the game should end in a draw. In fact, if TD had played on I think that is how our game would have ended. However, I understand his frustration: it did gel into a morass where I would have retreated 1 or 2 hexes/turn all the way back to the frontier. Once the Axis player figures out how to build fortified hexes in depth, then the deal is done. There was not going to be a glorious deep operational penetration past my interior lines, no Bagration, only turn after turn of controlled retreat.


(in reply to Flaviusx)
Post #: 37
RE: Refuting Pelton's "Axis Should not Attack in 4... - 1/17/2013 1:31:52 AM   
turtlefang

 

Posts: 226
Joined: 7/18/2012
Status: offline 		As a matter of fact, I play my games out to the end unless my opponet wants to call it quits. Doesn't really matter if I'm lossing or not, and I prefer defense to offense so if I'm playing the Germans, I will play it out to the end regardless. If someone going to invest the amount of time that required to play this game, I owe them that much respect.

But WITE isn't WITP (which I have never played). But based on a review of this forum, I find the following:

1) Very few games go past 42. If the German doesn't win, he throws in the towel. We don't have good examples of how well or how long the German can fight it out because we don't have very many examples - or the best strategies for the German in the later game.
2) There are a number of complaints on this forum about German players abandoning games after 42 and just walking away.

So yes, there appears to be a problem. I don't know if the two games draw different people due to subject matter, interest or other factors. Or some other reason such as WITE having a broader appeal. But based on the comments and lack of AARs in 43, this does seem to happen.

(in reply to Numdydar)
Post #: 38
RE: Refuting Pelton's "Axis Should not Attack in 4... - 1/17/2013 2:52:15 AM   
timmyab

 

Posts: 616
Joined: 12/14/2010
From: Bristol, UK
Status: offline 		I think to some extent it's just in the nature of Eastern front games.The drama of 41 and 42 draws people in and the tedious slog from 43 to 45 turns them off.
The game from 43 onwards could certainly do with some work to make it more interesting.I do think there needs to be some way of giving obvious and meaningful value to strategically important locations.I'm not certain exactly how it should be done, but there should be no doubt that certain places are worth fighting for, possibly even at the risk of getting armies cut off.This would make the game more exiting for both players.
quote:

ORIGINAL: Flaviusx
Somebody must have forgotten to tell Marquo what that theme was, among many other people who have won playing the Axis.

Technically it may be a win but the position was probably kind of drawish wasn't it?TD should easily make the 41 start line by the end of the game.
quote:

ORIGINAL: Flaviusx
The game's combat engine and logistical model are incredibly generous for the offensive.

Yes, for both sides.These two aspects definitely need sorting out.

(in reply to turtlefang)
Post #: 39
RE: Refuting Pelton's "Axis Should not Attack in 4... - 1/17/2013 3:17:58 AM   
TulliusDetritus

 

Posts: 3810
Joined: 4/1/2004
From: Back to Reality :(
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: timmyab
Technically it may be a win but the position was probably kind of drawish wasn't it?TD should easily make the 41 start line by the end of the game.


I never cared about what the game has to say (I mean the victory conditions). Either I get to Berlin (or quite close) or it's a lost game. As simple as that. So it's a lost game on MY book (the only that matters to me on this case)

_____________________________



"Block is very important. If you think block is useless now it's ok. If you don't like block, why don't you take it with your face...?" -- Kung Fu master

(in reply to timmyab)
Post #: 40
RE: Refuting Pelton's "Axis Should not Attack in 4... - 1/17/2013 12:46:30 PM   
smokindave34


Posts: 378
Joined: 1/15/2008
Status: offline 		I stopped playing as the Soviets because I had multiple axis opponents drop out even in situations where they still had the upper hand in '42. I currently have 3 games going as the axis; two in late '42 and one into September '44 and I have found that playing as the axis in '44 can be very enjoyable. I'm constantly shuffling my panzer reserves to try and plug holes in my lines while I have reserves digging my next MLR - it's certainly much more exciting than the slow trudge west by the Red army I experienced in '43. You also have to consider your strategy for handling the axis minor allies when they are close to the surrender threshold (should I garrison SS units in Bucharest/Budapest, how many German units should I risk keeping in Rumania etc.).

A few drawbacks with playing as the axis late in the game are:

1) You know you are going to lose and your army will be destroyed. At least when I played as Soviet and was getting pushed around in '41 I knew better times were ahead if I survived
2) I have to hold Berlin until late June to get a victory? That seems like a crazy victory condition - get battered by the Red army for two and a half years and if you hold out a month and a half longer than historical you lose. My personnel victory condition is to hold Berlin longer than historical but the VP system may turn some axis players off.
3) There aren't a lot (if any) AAR's by axis players deep into '44 for help. I'm considering starting one in my game with Pelton since I think that game is still up for grabs. (Although I'm still kicking against Sillyflower in late '42 he has built a 8.5 million man Red monster that is going to carve me up in '43 so I'm not sure an AAR on that game would be beneficial!)

(in reply to TulliusDetritus)
Post #: 41
RE: Refuting Pelton's "Axis Should not Attack in 4... - 1/17/2013 1:22:23 PM   
Marquo


Posts: 1095
Joined: 9/26/2000
Status: offline 		My personal goal in this game was to keep TD out of Berlin, period. BTW, I will never paly the stock scenario again, as it tacks on way too many moves after May, 1945. It is hard enough to keep the Bear at bay, those extra months are too much. And this is my major dissatisfaction with the game: simple possesion of a VP hex such as Berlin should not be absolute, rather relative in respect to the time of possesion. If the games drags on to late 1945, VP conditions should respect the fact that the Axis held onto to Berlin until the penultimate moment of the game.

Marquo

(in reply to smokindave34)
Post #: 42
RE: Refuting Pelton's "Axis Should not Attack in 4... - 1/18/2013 3:01:38 AM   
turtlefang

 

Posts: 226
Joined: 7/18/2012
Status: offline 		I agree with you. If the Soviets can't get to Berlin by May 45, then the Germans should consider it a win. Going pass that date and it is vitually a lock for the Soviet.

(in reply to Marquo)
Post #: 43
Page:   <<   < prev  1 [2]
All Forums >> [New Releases from Matrix Games] >> Gary Grigsby's War in the East Series >> RE: Refuting Pelton's "Axis Should not Attack in 42 Onward" Diatribe 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

0.172