Matrix Games Forums

Forums  Register  Login  Photo Gallery  Member List  Search  Calendars  FAQ 

My Profile  Inbox  Address Book  My Subscription  My Forums  Log Out

RE: 1:1 odds, counterattack casualties etc

 
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: 1:1 odds, counterattack casualties etc Page: <<   < prev  3 4 [5] 6 7   next >   >>
Login
Message << Older Topic   Newer Topic >>
RE: 1:1 odds, counterattack casualties etc - 2/1/2011 7:27:10 PM   
MengJiao

 

Posts: 232
Joined: 12/18/2010
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: notenome

One could test this in the editor, no? Put one Axis division in clear next to one soviet division and assign Manstein to one side and Rokossovky to the other. Then make a hotseat 'game' and have each side attack 10 times, see how CVs faired.


Perhaps a small scenario, one where we have very good accounts of events as they actually unfolded. For example, 6th Army in Blau I which ran into plenty of Russian tanks and I think Rokossovky turned up with 5th Tank Army just as Blau I phased into Blau II and Bock was relieved.

I'm basing this on Glantz first book in the Stalingrad series.

I'm betting that 90% of the time the Germans will run at high CVs and the Russians will get blown out of the way until Rokossovky shows up and does some damage. Pretty realistic -- if that's what happens.

(in reply to notenome)
Post #: 121
RE: 1:1 odds, counterattack casualties etc - 2/1/2011 7:34:03 PM   
MengJiao

 

Posts: 232
Joined: 12/18/2010
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: abulbulian

quote:

ORIGINAL: redmarkus4


quote:

ORIGINAL: ComradeP

Yes, that is fairly odd. You're not even trying, and the Axis still get stuck.


Well, I am trying - I'm just not very good!

Based on Jackerson's sources and my own reference material (particularly Mawdsley's Thunder in the East) I have come up with the following comparison of in-game losses versus the historical ones in my game against Carnage, in both case to December 41. This is killed plus captured.

As you can see, the figures are amazingly close, almost identical. So, the issue isn't the loss statistics when the game is fought along historical linear defence lines. It is either the level of replacements, reinforcements, unit quality or the impact of the blizzard, maybe all four combined. I would argue that the battle results must be incredibly realistic to produce this output and I'm not sure that's where the focus should be...






Not sure I agree with your figures on soviet loses in 1941. I have sources for soviet loses KIA + wounded + MIA in the ball park of 6 million.

Here's one source: Stalingrad: the infernal cauldron, 1942-1943. Stephen Walsh P26

"Soviet loses in 1941 were horrific. It is estimated that between 22 June 1941 and 31 December 1941, the Red Army suffered upwards of 6 million causalities. Three million POW and tank loses of 21,391."

So I think you value of 3 million is way off. Is that just POW? Where did you get those crazy numbers for loses?

So in reality your actual soviet loses are about 1/2 what they should be. Which supports exactly the time of issues the game has in play balance. Simply put, the axis are lucky to get anything close to historical for soviet loses in 41. I was lucky against my PBEM opponent to just get 4 million in 41. Which we both agreed would not happen again if we played again.

All the extra troops the sov have in spr 42 cause very serious issues in 1942 for the axis. I think the current changes for manpower reduction mods (less 450k in 41 and less 700k in 42) will help, but still will not be enough.

ALSO, just wait until after the 13 turns of blizzard. You will lose about 1 million and more if the sov players makes any attacks, which a decent sov player will in all 13 turns.




Well, if the Russians actually lost around 3 million then the game is doing very well.

(in reply to abulbulian)
Post #: 122
RE: 1:1 odds, counterattack casualties etc - 2/1/2011 7:37:59 PM   
abulbulian


Posts: 893
Joined: 3/31/2005
Status: offline
quote:

I'm betting that 90% of the time the Germans will run at high CVs and the Russians will get blown out of the way until Rokossovky shows up and does some damage. Pretty realistic -- if that's what happens.



lol, I've played in 42 and see this NOT happening. What real examples do you have? My guess is none, because I only know of 3 games of human vs human 41 campaign that have got anywhere near 42.

Yeah, I've read about 10 of Glanz's books, but that doesn't mean it will happen in WitE?

Are you actually saying that if you read it in a book it will be model properly in WitE? Lol, please tell me you joking? I suggest you play more and make conclusions on that rather that your silly bets.



< Message edited by abulbulian -- 2/1/2011 7:38:06 PM >

(in reply to MengJiao)
Post #: 123
RE: 1:1 odds, counterattack casualties etc - 2/1/2011 7:52:08 PM   
MengJiao

 

Posts: 232
Joined: 12/18/2010
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: abulbulian

quote:

I'm betting that 90% of the time the Germans will run at high CVs and the Russians will get blown out of the way until Rokossovky shows up and does some damage. Pretty realistic -- if that's what happens.



lol, I've played in 42 and see this NOT happening. What real examples do you have? My guess is none, because I only know of 3 games of human vs human 41 campaign that have got anywhere near 42.

Yeah, I've read about 10 of Glanz's books, but that doesn't mean it will happen in WitE?

Are you actually saying that if you read it in a book it will be model properly in WitE? Lol, please tell me you joking? I suggest you play more and make conclusions on that rather that your silly bets.




I was suggesting a test. I'll build a small Blau I scenario. Do you really think 6th army will not get to Voronzhe in 2-3 weeks in July 1942? I'm pretty sure the game can handle that even if the Russians have 6-8 tank corps.
Then, if the Germans turn south on schedule, the Russians will do some damage.

Anyway, that's what I'm expecting.

(in reply to abulbulian)
Post #: 124
RE: 1:1 odds, counterattack casualties etc - 2/1/2011 8:03:22 PM   
abulbulian


Posts: 893
Joined: 3/31/2005
Status: offline
Well I played about 10 turns in spr 42-sum 42. Here's what I found:

Sov had:

7 million men
defense lines in depth of 3-4 hexes w/fort 3-4 in most
total of about 60 corps units by turn 55

I was not able to make any real breakthroughs in 42. I could fight a few hexes with my infantry (got best units in a few spots for a push). I could force retreats, but my loses even though usually half the sov still drained my inf. Then my opponent could just counter attack my gains (fort 0) and push me back with high loses on both side. Sov player can afford the loses when he has 7 million men.

So if you're expecting to make gains in 42 as axis anything near what was accomplished in 42 historically.. sorry to disappoint you. If you play against AI or maybe your sister (as sov), you could maybe do something in 42.

Not sure about the scenarios... they might work better. I hope.

I was scratching my head in 42 trying to see where any of the axis advantages were?

(in reply to MengJiao)
Post #: 125
RE: 1:1 odds, counterattack casualties etc - 2/1/2011 8:04:59 PM   
wosung

 

Posts: 683
Joined: 7/18/2005
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: redmarkus4


quote:

ORIGINAL: ComradeP

Yes, that is fairly odd. You're not even trying, and the Axis still get stuck.


Well, I am trying - I'm just not very good!

Based on Jackerson's sources and my own reference material (particularly Mawdsley's Thunder in the East) I have come up with the following comparison of in-game losses versus the historical ones in my game against Carnage, in both case to December 41. This is killed plus captured.

As you can see, the figures are amazingly close, almost identical. So, the issue isn't the loss statistics when the game is fought along historical linear defence lines. It is either the level of replacements, reinforcements, unit quality or the impact of the blizzard, maybe all four combined. I would argue that the battle results must be incredibly realistic to produce this output and I'm not sure that's where the focus should be...






It’s probably easier to find solid data about captured than Red Army soldiers than about those killed. The casualities were a sensitive issue in the Soviet Union. OTH did German authorities some enthusiastic book keeping about their prisoners. Besides, data variance exists, based on the used sources and in the set of used numbers.

For 1941 the following data can be found:
4,03 Mio. killed, 2,99 Mio. missing or captured.
(Glantz, Slaugtherhouse, p. 11, w/o giving sources)

3,8 Mio. POW
(Das Deutsche Reich und der 2. WK, Vol. 4, p 727)

566.852 KIA, 235.339 NCL, 2.33 Mio. MIA/POW (total 3,13 Mio)
1,25 Mio. WIA, 66.169 sick, 13.557 frostbitten (total 1,33 Mio),
(grand total 4.473.820, Red Army and Navy)
(Glantz, Colossus Reborn, p. 624)

Regards


< Message edited by wosung -- 2/1/2011 8:05:15 PM >

(in reply to Redmarkus5)
Post #: 126
RE: 1:1 odds, counterattack casualties etc - 2/1/2011 8:08:26 PM   
MengJiao

 

Posts: 232
Joined: 12/18/2010
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: abulbulian

Well I played about 10 turns in spr 42-sum 42. Here's what I found:

Sov had:

7 million men
defense lines in depth of 3-4 hexes w/fort 3-4 in most
total of about 60 corps units by turn 55

I was not able to make any real breakthroughs in 42. I could fight a few hexes with my infantry (got best units in a few spots for a push). I could force retreats, but my loses even though usually half the sov still drained my inf. Then my opponent could just counter attack my gains (fort 0) and push me back with high loses on both side. Sov player can afford the loses when he has 7 million men.

So if you're expecting to make gains in 42 as axis anything near what was accomplished in 42 historically.. sorry to disappoint you. If you play against AI or maybe your sister (as sov), you could maybe do something in 42.

I was scratching my head in 42 trying to see where any of the axis advantages were?



I've always thougth 1941 would be very hard to simulate. I've also suggested from my very first posts here that Axis players are going to be happy with starting things in 1942. I don't see the problem with starting the campaign in 1942. It guarantees a completely historical 1941 and puts the Axis in a pretty good situation.

Anyway, I'm running my Blau I test using the Blau scenario in the game. I expect the 6th army to get to Voronnezh in about 2-3 weeks and I'll be very surprised if they don't.

Meanwhile, I don't see the point in finding that an ahistorical 1942 results from an ahistorical 1941. If you want a historical 1941, you should start in 1942, which is what I have been doing.

(in reply to abulbulian)
Post #: 127
RE: 1:1 odds, counterattack casualties etc - 2/1/2011 8:16:23 PM   
ComradeP

 

Posts: 7192
Joined: 9/17/2009
Status: offline
quote:

But how fishy is it really? The Pz divisions are already operating much closer to peak efficiency than the Russians formations. To take a really crude way of looking at it:

1) Manstein makes a few good suggestions to a Panzer formation that is already using its 80 tanks very well and adds 20 CV factors
2) Some reasonable Russian makes some very basic suggestions (like get to the front and use your radios!) to say 400 tanks that are mostly
not getting used well at all (say at 1/10 effectiveness), to quadruple he just has to get 160 out of 400 tanks to operate reasonably, unlike Manstein who has to do something miraculous to get 80 tanks to function as well as 160. The Russian could double it all again to a 320-tank level and still be operating at less than half of Manstein's magic level.


The problem is that the modification isn't transparent in any way. All notenome's previous attacks failed, most without any significant modifiers, and then suddenly the Soviets get their 4x initial CV? notenome probably doesn't know what happened, and neither do I.

I can somewhat plan for the odds modifier's effect, although it seems it's still really easy for the Soviets to remove good divisions from their hexes if they want to, but how am I supposed to plan for the instance that, maybe, the Soviets will suddenly get a heavily inflated CV, whilst I don't get much of a boost?

If this were, say, an SSG game, and my opponent would roll 6/6/6, I'd be able to see that and verify what happened. I have absolutely no idea what happened in the two attacks where Soviet CV's were so heavily inflated.

_____________________________

SSG tester
WitE Alpha tester
Panzer Corps Beta tester
Unity of Command scenario designer

(in reply to MengJiao)
Post #: 128
RE: 1:1 odds, counterattack casualties etc - 2/1/2011 8:21:27 PM   
Redmarkus5


Posts: 4417
Joined: 12/1/2007
From: 0.00
Status: offline
Before you start calling people's posts crazy, why don't you read the full text? I clearly stated that "This is killed plus captured". Therefore it does not include wounded, which would bring the numbers up to your 6 million or close enough.

My source for Soviet killed and captured was Mawdsley's Thunder in the East which provides detailed tables operation by operation from June to December '41. The Axis casualty figures are based on a month-by-month list posted by Jackerson. His source was Source: "Deutsche militärische Verluste im Zweiten Weltkrieg" by Rüdiger Overmans



_____________________________


(in reply to abulbulian)
Post #: 129
RE: 1:1 odds, counterattack casualties etc - 2/1/2011 8:22:18 PM   
JAMiAM

 

Posts: 6165
Joined: 2/8/2004
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: ComradeP

JAMiAM: the problem with what you say in my opinion is that you don't know how I got into a specific situation. The screenshots I post for the moment are zoomed out and don't display CV or MP's. That's why I asked you for proof that the problem was not due to, say, routing units being combat ready in the Soviet phase, but due to how I'm attacking/what I'm trying.

You don't know how I'm attacking, as you're only shown zoomed out screenshots from the end of the turn.

You can say "I would've done this" and point out where you would've gone based on a screenshot I posted, but you have no idea whether it would've been possible.

My bolding of Pieter's quote.

As they say, "a picture is worth a thousand words." Even in the zoomed out, cv-less, pictures that you're showing, there is what I feel to be a glaring problem with the way that you're handling your breakthroughs. In short, and without any pictures at the moment to back me up, what you've repeatedly done in your attacks is to force a one hex breach in the enemy lines, and then push through your mobile units. This is where you're failing on several levels. Please indulge me the analysis.

The first, is sacrificing your mobility. By forcing your units through the one hex gap, you are wasting a lot of MPs due to the movement from ezoc-to-ezoc costs. These are MPs that you could be using for concentrated hasty attacks, and deeper, and wider penetrations.

Due to, and in conjunction with, the wasted MPs, you're not making enough attacks against the defending forces to sufficiently disrupt them, to widen the gap for later exploitation, and to penetrate deep enough to cause a breakout into the enemy rear area. After the front line, or two, has been cracked with your infantry assaults, Pz Korps sized stacks should be used to successively make hasty attacks against the second, third, etc., lines to widen and deepen the breach on a frontage of not less than three hexes. This is to allow followup exploitation movement unimpeded by ezoc.

By remaining in contact with the enemy through a one hex wide breakthrough point, you are creating opportunities for the enemy to cut off the schwerpunkt, by making attacks against a *single* hex. In effect, you're putting your eggs all into one basket, and banking on the enemy to fail to succeed on a single key point. That is not distributing your risk among several hexes, where the enemy would have to succeed on multiple hexes to unhinge your plans.

Since you're not disrupting the enemy's reserves enough, they are both in position, and in condition, to execute the attacks against you, which have cut off your schwerpunkten, and have driven you back on your river crossings. You need to focus on bringing enough forces to the area you mean to attack, and then attack it with sufficient ferocity, and executon, to disrupt the enemy enough so that he is unable to effectively muster the forces to counter-attack against the multiple threats that you are causing. If you had bloodied the enemy reserves enough, then they would be more likely to be in a routed, depleted, or unready state come his turn, and they would be much less likely to be able to execute succesful counterattacks.

Finally, even if the enemy counterattack against your single hex penetration point fails, there is still the issue of supply movement through the ezoc restricted hexes. This directly impacts the following turns resupply of your units and reduces their potential for following up with what success you might have been able to manage.

I'll post a screenshot here, from one of my games that illustrates how the crossing of the Dnepr 'should' be made. Keep in mind that my opponent had level 2-3 forts along the front line, and level 1-2 forts on many of his second-line, and checkered third line and deep reserve units. Also, keep in mind that this attack was fairly impromptu. I was not in an ideal starting position to launch the attack, but after choosing to execute it, was able to muster and shift sufficient forces from along my front and reserves to make good on the breach. In the next post, I'll show another example against slightly different defensive techniques.

Apologies for the poor image quality, since I had to resize the jpeg to 80% in order to meet the upload limits.




Attachment (1)

< Message edited by JAMiAM -- 2/1/2011 9:17:10 PM >

(in reply to ComradeP)
Post #: 130
RE: 1:1 odds, counterattack casualties etc - 2/1/2011 8:22:42 PM   
JAMiAM

 

Posts: 6165
Joined: 2/8/2004
Status: offline
This screenshot shows the northern compliment to the breakout that I am performing across the lower Dnepr. Both were accomplished on the same turn, turn 8, in the same game. Between the two developments, my opponent will be hard pressed to restore lines, mass forces for counterattacks, and to evacuate industry. In short, it is an example of what I consider proper German doctrine for 1941.

Now, before anyone starts saying that my opponent is a slouch, he is not. He has played a few games as Soviets, has been a VERY active participant and reader of the various threads on this board, and has taken much of that knowledge to heart in tightening up his game. He is competent. This game was my first CG, and so I have made a few mistakes along the way, as well. I didn't understand just how important morale is in the game for the first few turns, and didn't maximize morale gain for my units, not morale hits for my opponent. This can have a cascading effect, as the game progresses, and has made me weaker than I could be, and him stronger. Again, apologies for image quality.

I'll have further comment later. Since I'm work, and it's getting busy, I'll have to get back to it. Maybe other will comment on the pictures in the meantime...




Attachment (1)

< Message edited by JAMiAM -- 2/1/2011 8:42:19 PM >

(in reply to JAMiAM)
Post #: 131
RE: 1:1 odds, counterattack casualties etc - 2/1/2011 8:26:56 PM   
MengJiao

 

Posts: 232
Joined: 12/18/2010
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: ComradeP

quote:

But how fishy is it really? The Pz divisions are already operating much closer to peak efficiency than the Russians formations. To take a really crude way of looking at it:

1) Manstein makes a few good suggestions to a Panzer formation that is already using its 80 tanks very well and adds 20 CV factors
2) Some reasonable Russian makes some very basic suggestions (like get to the front and use your radios!) to say 400 tanks that are mostly
not getting used well at all (say at 1/10 effectiveness), to quadruple he just has to get 160 out of 400 tanks to operate reasonably, unlike Manstein who has to do something miraculous to get 80 tanks to function as well as 160. The Russian could double it all again to a 320-tank level and still be operating at less than half of Manstein's magic level.


The problem is that the modification isn't transparent in any way. All notenome's previous attacks failed, most without any significant modifiers, and then suddenly the Soviets get their 4x initial CV? notenome probably doesn't know what happened, and neither do I.

I can somewhat plan for the odds modifier's effect, although it seems it's still really easy for the Soviets to remove good divisions from their hexes if they want to, but how am I supposed to plan for the instance that, maybe, the Soviets will suddenly get a heavily inflated CV, whilst I don't get much of a boost?

If this were, say, an SSG game, and my opponent would roll 6/6/6, I'd be able to see that and verify what happened. I have absolutely no idea what happened in the two attacks where Soviet CV's were so heavily inflated.


It's not so much that the CVs are inflated, its that the relatively large potential soviet forces are underutilized. You can see what the game is trying to get at: most of the time up til 1943, the Germans are able to attack with say 600 tanks to 1200 (6th Army in Blau I) and effectively have a crushing superiority. But what happens that one in a few times that the Russians manage to turn on their radios and fuel all their tanks at the same time? Suddenly 1200 tanks show up (metaphorically exaggerated). Even in the midst of Blau I that could happen when a decent tank army turned up with a good commander. So you can either completely discount the Russian 1200 tanks (which is what games used to do) and just rate a tank army as 1/4 as effective as a PZ Corps, or you can occasionally let the Russian command structure function and get a good CV.

Anyway, that's what I think is going on.




< Message edited by MengJiao -- 2/1/2011 8:29:28 PM >

(in reply to ComradeP)
Post #: 132
RE: 1:1 odds, counterattack casualties etc - 2/1/2011 8:42:28 PM   
Redmarkus5


Posts: 4417
Joined: 12/1/2007
From: 0.00
Status: offline
Mawdsley's figures for killed and PoW to Jan '41




Attachment (1)

_____________________________


(in reply to MengJiao)
Post #: 133
RE: 1:1 odds, counterattack casualties etc - 2/1/2011 8:42:53 PM   
Smirfy

 

Posts: 1057
Joined: 7/16/2004
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: redmarkus4

Hi Smirfy. I'm not sure we are really saying different things, possibly just focusing on different facets of the problem.

Yes, my opponent did divert large forces into the Crimea, but once I spotted his movement I was able to halt it without too much difficulty before the blizzard struck.

He is using a more flexible defence than Hitler, but our losses are on par with history (see my later post) while my gains on the ground are probably about twice what they were historically. His commitment of armour to stop my advance around Lake Ilmen also tells me that he is very stretched, flexible defence or no.

I don't have a million extra men - I have lost almost exactly the historical number, as have the Axis - I just lost them in different ways and in lots and lots of smaller pockets. I do agree that I was able to evade pockets way too easily. When I made this observation 1 day after buying the game I was dismissed in these forums, but every game reconfirms it.

Carnage's result at Leningrad was only historical if you take a snapshot in Nov 41, but it's surely not historical now - he is being pushed steadily away from the city. I don't buy the argument that this is an example of a flexible defence in that sector - Carnage has fought tooth and nail to hold the line there.

Something just doesn't feel right about the balance of forces in Jan '42. I have too many divisions and too many options for manoeuvre, IMO. I don't really mind (it's fun) but unless the Axis turns around and kicks me back to the Volga or Moscow come summer, I will be sorely disappointed.


Enjoying the AAR Red

In diverting forces into the Crimea your opponent wernt putting them somewhere else and with the frontage in the Crimea that kinda of plays to the Russian strength ie zero frontage. My point you cant expect the axis to cover all the bases, 40 miles from Moscow against a player in September is pretty imateriel of what happens through the winter of 41.

As for the million men I'll give you an example from my game I destroyed AGN in 2 weeks surrounded and destroyed say 50-60 divisions. Your million men instead of meekly surrendering took Germans with them. Russian casaulties are horrendus in this game. (I have lost 11,000 T34s of all types by Mud 1944 yet beat up continually on the AI).


I have flagged up the problems numerous times but all I hear is German v Russian when the actual problem is mechanics. Interdiction does not work so airforces cannot be used to induce pockets, CiC is too good so units function too well, logistics are too generous. There are too many sources of supply for units. The mechanics need tightened up its that simple. The player can get himself out of virtually every problem when the reality was so different.

As for 42 like I said if the German player pockets more Russians in 41 less Germans die in the winter its that simple. Logistics should act as a break for both sides and they dont it is a simple as that. At various stages each side has way too much supply and can operate too many offensives.


(in reply to Redmarkus5)
Post #: 134
RE: 1:1 odds, counterattack casualties etc - 2/1/2011 8:43:13 PM   
ComradeP

 

Posts: 7192
Joined: 9/17/2009
Status: offline
Your posts shows that you really need to play against a competent Soviet opponent to see that the situation you describe is highly utopian.

At the times when I am making a one hex breakthrough, there's a simple reason for it: German mobile unit hasty attacks suck, period. A Rifle division in a hex with 2=8 is in many cases going to stay in that hex, even if you bring a Panzer corps.

I'd really like to cause more casualties to, but I can't.

Why? Because Soviet units that are hasty attacked by mobile units rarely rout, usually retreat and usually don't suffer significant losses.

Units that do rout usually recover and reappear in the line again next turn. You'll notice that there's usually a large pile of Soviet routed units near my breakthrough areas. At the start of my next turn, very few are still routed.

I'm facing a checkerboard or wall of units, and my mobile units (despite what their CV's might indicate) don't have the power to remove many of them from their hexes.

When the infantry attacks, the Soviets might suffer around 2500-3000 losses and the units might rout, but there are always more.

A crossing like the one you made, at just one point, can fairly easily be contained. The speed with which you've advanced with limited mobile units just shows that your opponent has a thing or two to learn about defence in depth and maintaing reserves. Crossings in one area are generally a bad idea.

As for the second picture: punching two Panzer Groups through what seems to be a poorly held part of the front, without substantial Soviet reserves in the area is child's play as long as there are no protected natural defences in the way. Anyone can do that. A maximum of 10 pocketed divisions also isn't too great for an operation like that.

< Message edited by ComradeP -- 2/1/2011 8:59:20 PM >


_____________________________

SSG tester
WitE Alpha tester
Panzer Corps Beta tester
Unity of Command scenario designer

(in reply to MengJiao)
Post #: 135
RE: 1:1 odds, counterattack casualties etc - 2/1/2011 8:45:46 PM   
Redmarkus5


Posts: 4417
Joined: 12/1/2007
From: 0.00
Status: offline
One table of German losses.




Attachment (1)

_____________________________


(in reply to Redmarkus5)
Post #: 136
RE: 1:1 odds, counterattack casualties etc - 2/1/2011 8:48:41 PM   
kirkgregerson

 

Posts: 497
Joined: 4/9/2008
Status: offline
ComradeP you are so correct. We can try and explain to people that haven't played against a human or decent human sov player in the 41-45 campaign, but they will never understand the issues we're tried to convey without 1st hand experience.

I know only of one other game besides yours, abulbulian's which is deep in 41 or start 42. We all seem to agree that problems facing the axis in balance are very real and very substantial.

IMO, the latest changes will help, but not solve the balance problem entirely.



< Message edited by kirkgregerson -- 2/1/2011 8:51:14 PM >

(in reply to ComradeP)
Post #: 137
RE: 1:1 odds, counterattack casualties etc - 2/1/2011 8:50:49 PM   
kirkgregerson

 

Posts: 497
Joined: 4/9/2008
Status: offline
redmarkus4, in your knowledge and research, how many total loses KIA + wounded + MIA would you say the Soviet forces suffered from June 22 - Dec 31 1941? If you have any source that is great, if not, give me your thoughts.

thanks

BTW: I'm not trying to be snarky at all. Do really want other people thoughts and knowledge.

< Message edited by kirkgregerson -- 2/1/2011 8:52:13 PM >

(in reply to kirkgregerson)
Post #: 138
RE: 1:1 odds, counterattack casualties etc - 2/1/2011 8:51:43 PM   
Redmarkus5


Posts: 4417
Joined: 12/1/2007
From: 0.00
Status: offline
I agree. The logistical side of things needs some thought.

_____________________________


(in reply to Smirfy)
Post #: 139
RE: 1:1 odds, counterattack casualties etc - 2/1/2011 8:54:14 PM   
MengJiao

 

Posts: 232
Joined: 12/18/2010
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: ComradeP

Your posts shows that you really need to play against a competent Soviet opponent to see that the situation you describe is highly utopian.

At the times when I am making a one hex breakthrough, there's a simple reason for it: German mobile unit hasty attacks suck, period. A Rifle division in a hex with 2=8 is in many cases going to stay in that hex, even if you bring a Panzer corps.

I'd really like to cause more casualties to, but I can't.

Why? Because Soviet units that are hasty attacked by mobile units rarely rout, usually retreat and usually don't suffer significant losses.

Units that do rout usually recover and reappear in the line again next turn. You'll notice that there's usually a large pile of Soviet routed units near my breakthrough areas. At the start of my next turn, very few are still routed.

I'm facing a checkerboard or wall of units, and my mobile units (despite what their CV's might indicate) don't have the power to remove many of them from their hexes.

When the infantry attacks, the Soviets might suffer around 2500-3000 losses and the units might rout, but there are always more.

A crossing like the one you made, at just one point, can fairly easily be contained. The speed with which you've advanced with limited mobile units just shows that your opponent has a thing or two to learn about defence in depth and maintaing reserves. Crossings in one area are generally a bad idea.


I've only suggested a general model of what the game is doing that causes some suddenly large CVs. I also think players are over-reacting to operational problems. For example, we know that, to get anywhere after say Oct 1941, the Axis had to concentrate on relatively narrow parts of the front and ruthlessly strip other parts of the front. The game allows this, but Axis players seem to think they can use delusive visions of very large CVs to secure what otherwise is problematic.

(in reply to ComradeP)
Post #: 140
RE: 1:1 odds, counterattack casualties etc - 2/1/2011 8:54:52 PM   
Redmarkus5


Posts: 4417
Joined: 12/1/2007
From: 0.00
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: kirkgregerson

redmarkus4, in your knowledge and research, how many total loses KIA + wounded + MIA would you say the Soviet forces suffered from June 22 - Dec 31 1941? If you have any source that is great, if not, give me your thoughts.

thanks


Well, I am not sure if you are serious or teasing me, but anything between 5m and 7m total (KIA+MIA+WIA+PoW) feels about right to me. Many of the WIA would return to action, so irreplaceable losses, which is normally what writers focus on, might be 6m?

Any comments anyone? I'm not a genuine expert, just opinionated.

_____________________________


(in reply to kirkgregerson)
Post #: 141
RE: 1:1 odds, counterattack casualties etc - 2/1/2011 8:57:38 PM   
ComradeP

 

Posts: 7192
Joined: 9/17/2009
Status: offline
Certainly, supplies are too forgiving for both sides in terms of the quantities reaching the frontline. In 1941 for the Germans and later in the war for the Soviets.

There are many mechanics that could use some further finetuning, but the developers are aware of that and numerous things are being tested currently. Of course, major changes require a lot of data and a lot of testing.

_____________________________

SSG tester
WitE Alpha tester
Panzer Corps Beta tester
Unity of Command scenario designer

(in reply to Redmarkus5)
Post #: 142
RE: 1:1 odds, counterattack casualties etc - 2/1/2011 9:02:00 PM   
kirkgregerson

 

Posts: 497
Joined: 4/9/2008
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: redmarkus4


quote:

ORIGINAL: kirkgregerson

redmarkus4, in your knowledge and research, how many total loses KIA + wounded + MIA would you say the Soviet forces suffered from June 22 - Dec 31 1941? If you have any source that is great, if not, give me your thoughts.

thanks


Well, I am not sure if you are serious or teasing me, but anything between 5m and 7m total (KIA+MIA+WIA+PoW) feels about right to me. Many of the WIA would return to action, so irreplaceable losses, which is normally what writers focus on, might be 6m?

Any comments anyone? I'm not a genuine expert, just opinionated.


Was not teasing and I know people might find some of my posts a bit too aggressive. But I agree with your values. In reality we'll never know the exactly figures. But I will never disagree with somebody using 5-7 million as a good range.

Sorry again if you thought I was trying to tease.

(in reply to Redmarkus5)
Post #: 143
RE: 1:1 odds, counterattack casualties etc - 2/1/2011 9:12:11 PM   
Redmarkus5


Posts: 4417
Joined: 12/1/2007
From: 0.00
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: ComradeP

Certainly, supplies are too forgiving for both sides in terms of the quantities reaching the frontline. In 1941 for the Germans and later in the war for the Soviets.

There are many mechanics that could use some further finetuning, but the developers are aware of that and numerous things are being tested currently. Of course, major changes require a lot of data and a lot of testing.


Thanks that's good to know. A bit more of a challenge on the logistics side will have a huge impact on the planning required for operations and the choices players need to make.

May I make a few suggestions?

1. Increase the importance of cities to make them essential objectives for both sides. They should give a boost to nearby units when captured to reflect seizure of civilian stockpiles, booty and plunder, all common features of this war.

2. Do something to reduce the absolute impact of partisan cutting of rail lines, but at the same time make it more important for the Axis to use both security and regular troops behind the lines. Regular units were often pulled into anti-partisan operations, I believe.

For WiTE 2, we need a road net, the ability to construct new roads and rail using engineers or AP (the log roads were critical on the Volkhov front and in the Pripyat) and a proper modelling of the rollbahn to carry a percentage of supply forward by truck in addition to rail. I should be making decisions about vehicle allocations (supply vs movement) and suffering vehicle attrition that varies based on those choices. These are all key strategic/operational judgements that a WW2 AG or Front commander would have to make and they will slow the attack rate down and give us a more realistic tempo of operations - build up-assault-exploit-consolidate.

< Message edited by redmarkus4 -- 2/1/2011 9:13:39 PM >


_____________________________


(in reply to ComradeP)
Post #: 144
RE: 1:1 odds, counterattack casualties etc - 2/1/2011 9:13:19 PM   
Redmarkus5


Posts: 4417
Joined: 12/1/2007
From: 0.00
Status: offline
No, your post wasn't aggressive at all. Some other people are pretty aggressive and I wasn't sure where you were coming from :)

_____________________________


(in reply to kirkgregerson)
Post #: 145
RE: 1:1 odds, counterattack casualties etc - 2/1/2011 10:09:13 PM   
randallw

 

Posts: 2043
Joined: 9/2/2010
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: ComradeP

Units that do rout usually recover and reappear in the line again next turn. You'll notice that there's usually a large pile of Soviet routed units near my breakthrough areas. At the start of my next turn, very few are still routed.



How do you think the routing/recovery rules should be changed?

(in reply to ComradeP)
Post #: 146
RE: 1:1 odds, counterattack casualties etc - 2/1/2011 10:15:42 PM   
bwheatley

 

Posts: 3489
Joined: 12/13/2004
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: MechFO

@mods

Can we maybe make a consolidated historical discussion theread/subforum? While some of the discussions are interesting, they also tend to rapidly clutter up what should be gameplay threads.


+1

(in reply to MechFO)
Post #: 147
RE: 1:1 odds, counterattack casualties etc - 2/1/2011 10:19:55 PM   
bwheatley

 

Posts: 3489
Joined: 12/13/2004
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Flaviusx

Bob thinks the Sovs need it during the transitional 42-3 period, Notenome. I'm agnostic on this point.

I will say this. Am presently testing a Stalingrad scenario and it would be pretty difficult to do it without this extra little bump as the Sovs. Some of the testers are having problems recreating the pocket. I managed to do it, but it took some work. This mid war Red Army isn't amazing, lacking as it does the sheer mass of artillery that comes along later. The mobile troops are largely green. Rifle corps are fairly rare. So Bob's point isn't without some basis. On the other hand, a player doing a GC can probably contrive to optimize the Red Army and get a better showing from it even during this stage. Then again, you still aren't going to get those big guns until December 1942 (and effectively until virtually 1943, since it takes several turns for freshly raised arty divisions to become combat capable.)

On the whole I tend to agree with Pieter on this issue, but it's not quite the slam dunk he believes when taking the larger view.


In my game vs ara i had 60 rifle corps by june 42. I had 15 tank corps too so maybe soviets might have too many AP?

I'm not an expert on the # of corps russia managed to pull together by june 42 so i'm not trying to start a war just curious if it was devs intentions to let russia have this ability to build big corp stacks so early?

That being said i have a few armys not right in C&C so i could just be robbing peter (not setting my c&c properly) to pay paul (going crazy with corp creation)

maybe there should be a cap similar to guards limit if that's not the intention?

(in reply to Flaviusx)
Post #: 148
RE: 1:1 odds, counterattack casualties etc - 2/1/2011 10:21:57 PM   
bwheatley

 

Posts: 3489
Joined: 12/13/2004
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Jakerson

quote:

ORIGINAL: Flaviusx

Bob thinks the Sovs need it during the transitional 42-3 period, Notenome. I'm agnostic on this point.

I will say this. Am presently testing a Stalingrad scenario and it would be pretty difficult to do it without this extra little bump as the Sovs. Some of the testers are having problems recreating the pocket. I managed to do it, but it took some work. This mid war Red Army isn't amazing, lacking as it does the sheer mass of artillery that comes along later. The mobile troops are largely green. Rifle corps are fairly rare. So Bob's point isn't without some basis. On the other hand, a player doing a GC can probably contrive to optimize the Red Army and get a better showing from it even during this stage. Then again, you still aren't going to get those big guns until December 1942 (and effectively until virtually 1943, since it takes several turns for freshly raised arty divisions to become combat capable.)

On the whole I tend to agree with Pieter on this issue, but it's not quite the slam dunk he believes when taking the larger view.


Even with this bonus you cannot go on the offensive as much as soviet did historically during that time period I already complained in some other thread ridiculousness how much troops soviet need to mount an assault against German stacks of three panzer divs in the same hex that have CV power of 30-37. Taking away this bonus will only make it worse.

I have assaulted against three German panzer divs with six fully equipped tank corps and nine rifle divisions at same time (that is five full stacks of Soviet troops) without being able to get any other result than hold and I prepared assault by bombarding that same German panzer stack ten times with whole soviet air force witch most of it I had deployed same sector couple turn before and that is thousands of planes.

Those German panzers divs stack had zero forts lvl and no help from reserves other than couple artillery attachments.

Hold hold hold is only result I get and Me loosing 10k-15k troops eatch attack and German 1k troops. Now I see people lobby for chance that makes this even worse.

This test was run on summer 42 and done with the Soviet bonus. If german stack up their mobile troops in stack of 3 with or without bonus Soviet have nothing or no way to make any type of offensive against those stacks even if Soviet attack from 5 sides same time with full stacks it end up soviet taking 15k German 1k casulties.

Head on Soviet counter attack against German spearhead on 3 panzer divs on same hex simply no possible in 42 no matter how much troops Soviet have around them attacking.





That is weird. With my game i am having a super easy-ish time of beating back panzer corps with rifle corp & cav corp stacks. Seems almost two easy at times. I wonder if it's just how i played the russians thats different? I cared less about making sure my C&C was right in early 42 and more about getting tank and rifle corps so i horded AP's.

(in reply to Jakerson)
Post #: 149
RE: 1:1 odds, counterattack casualties etc - 2/1/2011 10:25:30 PM   
Smirfy

 

Posts: 1057
Joined: 7/16/2004
Status: offline
I have to say Jamaim I appreciate your use of Roumanians to enable concentration of German units

(in reply to bwheatley)
Post #: 150
Page:   <<   < prev  3 4 [5] 6 7   next >   >>
All Forums >> [New Releases from Matrix Games] >> Gary Grigsby's War in the East Series >> RE: 1:1 odds, counterattack casualties etc Page: <<   < prev  3 4 [5] 6 7   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

0.188