Remove winterdebuff unless Soviets earn it in blood!

[Zebtucker12]

The German soldiers where fatigued not cold!
Its silly and makes no historical sense that they get debuffed even if the soviets just ran.

[Denniss]

Try fighting in winter with summer uniforms

[Zebtucker12]

They where not using " summer uniforms" and im sure it would have been easier sending up more winter clothing if they did not have to send so much ammuntion to the front.

[loki100]

The German soldiers where fatigued not cold!
Its silly and makes no historical sense that they get debuffed even if the soviets just ran.

really why? its already incredibly easy to take the sting out of the Soviet offensive unless they get very lucky with the weather patterns if you set up a decent logistical network.

add on, with the new pzr losses, you can leave the pzrs just behind the front as a safety net and you still will be able to use the pzr repl battalions as you wish

Then if the Soviets start taking heavy losses and failing to break through, their NM will slip towards 45 and come March its party time in the east

but yeah, lets make it even easier for the axis player

[Zebtucker12]

Why is historical reasons this game is trying to be historical aint it?


Soviets will have plenty of meat to send into the winter grind in the winter if they have just been pulling back so it balances out.


You are the only one i have talked to that thinks its the axis that have it too easy and not the other way around.

[Searry]

but yeah, lets make it even easier for the axis player

What does this mean? I think the SP and PBEM players are thinking completely differently here.
Currently the game is not worth playing in PBEM due to axis weakness.

[AlbertN]

German soldiers were definitely suffering from the cold - but the issues of the 'General Winter' were not just the cold itself.

That the cold freezes the grease of your machine gun has little impact if you're miles away from the action.
Certainly it is of less impact if the lubricants of the panzer or truck engine are frozen in midst of night or early morning and there is an emergency (because the enemy is attacking) and another is if there is time and means to warm them up.

So the 'issue' is that the cold hinders operations itself (and yes Germans had summer equipment, including boots with metal reinforced soles to easen marching - which were awful cold conductors for winter) - but at the same time 'solutions applicable' were not that easily applicable when under direct pressure from the enemy aggressions.

I believe that is (or should at least) be mirrored by the different treatment if something is in urban or not. In truth it should be something related to front distance as well. Because even a garrison in a small town far from the front would not have huge problems to warm up with logs of wood and the like locally provisioned (at the mega-micro scale).

I do not believe though present 1st Winter Rules are excessive - the problem is that the Axis player cannot inflict enough damage on Soviets in Summer / Fall '41. And thus Soviets can do a general all front offensive from Leningrad to Rostov or the like during Winter '41. Which is pretty much completely ahistorical. (By that I am speaking of PvP games with matching / similar skill opponents).

[Zebtucker12]

"the problem is that the Axis player cannot inflict enough damage on Soviets in Summer / Fall '41. And thus Soviets can do a general all front offensive from Leningrad to Rostov"

See if they have to earn the winterdebuff in blood in 1941 hopefully this wont be the case.


Because remember the soviets coped better with winter partly because they had fresh troops while the germans where faituged from all the fighting.

Cold effects russians also they are not snow people and they also had winter releated shortages.

[loki100]

but yeah, lets make it even easier for the axis player

What does this mean? I think the SP and PBEM players are thinking completely differently here.
Currently the game is not worth playing in PBEM due to axis weakness.

I play both .. and am on my third Axis HtH since release.

In my current game the OKH had 658 wins and 69 losses for the first of the December turns. When i got T29 back (ie the start of the Jan turns) I have 706 wins and 93 losses. So I won 48 battles and lost 24 in the period when the Soviets get their best bonus. Thats not enough for them to make any real gains, never mind generate many Gds. And with their NM at 45, losses really hurt as it pushes them towards that 45 value - at that point almost any retreat becomes a rout

In none of my games has the Soviet player mounted a front wide offensive turn after turn.

[Searry]

but yeah, lets make it even easier for the axis player

What does this mean? I think the SP and PBEM players are thinking completely differently here.
Currently the game is not worth playing in PBEM due to axis weakness.

I play both .. and am on my third Axis HtH since release.

In my current game the OKH had 658 wins and 69 losses for the first of the December turns. When i got T29 back (ie the start of the Jan turns) I have 706 wins and 93 losses. So I won 48 battles and lost 24 in the period when the Soviets get their best bonus. Thats not enough for them to make any real gains, never mind generate many Gds. And with their NM at 45, losses really hurt as it pushes them towards that 45 value - at that point almost any retreat becomes a rout

In none of my games has the Soviet player mounted a front wide offensive turn after turn.

It's a skill mismatch most likely. Your opinion seems pretty different from a lot of people.

[ToxicThug11]

The German soldiers where fatigued not cold!
Its silly and makes no historical sense that they get debuffed even if the soviets just ran.

but yeah, lets make it even easier for the axis player

lol

[loki100]

.... Your opinion seems pretty different from a lot of people.

perfectly fair comment, all I can go by is my own experience and the published AARs. On that basis, I see a lot of games where the German player persists then triggering wins (or Soviet concessions), despite falling short of the historical performance in 1941. One reason, again my experience, is that it is relatively easy for an Axis player who understands the logistics system to block the Soviets from gaining much momentum on the northern half of the map and using pre-prepared defensive lines to stall the Soviets in the south. Unless the Soviets get very lucky with the weather its fairly easy to reduce them to isolated attacks, many of which fail

with the now guarenteed stronger Pzrs you can set up a reserve line that will simply be able to rout any Soviet units that move adjacent

so if you want an overview, I agree its hard to match the 1941 performance as the Axis but ... it doesn't matter because the reverse also applies

on the other hand

It's a skill mismatch most likely.

is not a fair comment since you don't know any of the 3 people I've played HtH since release (and 2 were involved in the beta testing)

[Zebtucker12]

.... Your opinion seems pretty different from a lot of people.

perfectly fair comment, all I can go by is my own experience and the published AARs. On that basis, I see a lot of games where the German player persists then triggering wins (or Soviet concessions), despite falling short of the historical performance in 1941. One reason, again my experience, is that it is relatively easy for an Axis player who understands the logistics system to block the Soviets from gaining much momentum on the northern half of the map and using pre-prepared defensive lines to stall the Soviets in the south. Unless the Soviets get very lucky with the weather its fairly easy to reduce them to isolated attacks, many of which fail

with the now guarenteed stronger Pzrs you can set up a reserve line that will simply be able to rout any Soviet units that move adjacent

so if you want an overview, I agree its hard to match the 1941 performance as the Axis but ... it doesn't matter because the reverse also applies

on the other hand

It's a skill mismatch most likely.

is not a fair comment since you don't know any of the 3 people I've played HtH since release (and 2 were involved in the beta testing)

"is that it is relatively easy for an Axis player who understands the logistics system to block the Soviets from gaining much momentum on the northern half of the map"
What does this mean because i have supplied 2 million soviets outside riga using one single railtrack while axis still held leningrad.



"with the now guarenteed stronger Pzrs you can set up a reserve line that will simply be able to rout any Soviet units that move adjacent"
i would love to see axis panzers routing anything but a divison or two 1943.

Why is the skill comment not fair? You seem to have a very diffrent experience from everyone else.

[Killmaster851]

.... Your opinion seems pretty different from a lot of people.

perfectly fair comment, all I can go by is my own experience and the published AARs. On that basis, I see a lot of games where the German player persists then triggering wins (or Soviet concessions), despite falling short of the historical performance in 1941. One reason, again my experience, is that it is relatively easy for an Axis player who understands the logistics system to block the Soviets from gaining much momentum on the northern half of the map and using pre-prepared defensive lines to stall the Soviets in the south. Unless the Soviets get very lucky with the weather its fairly easy to reduce them to isolated attacks, many of which fail

with the now guarenteed stronger Pzrs you can set up a reserve line that will simply be able to rout any Soviet units that move adjacent

so if you want an overview, I agree its hard to match the 1941 performance as the Axis but ... it doesn't matter because the reverse also applies

on the other hand

It's a skill mismatch most likely.

is not a fair comment since you don't know any of the 3 people I've played HtH since release (and 2 were involved in the beta testing)

Are you trolling?

[loki100]

...
"is that it is relatively easy for an Axis player who understands the logistics system to block the Soviets from gaining much momentum on the northern half of the map"
What does this mean because i have supplied 2 million soviets outside riga using one single railtrack while axis still held leningrad.



"with the now guarenteed stronger Pzrs you can set up a reserve line that will simply be able to rout any Soviet units that move adjacent"
i would love to see axis panzers routing anything but a divison or two 1943.

Why is the skill comment not fair? You seem to have a very diffrent experience from everyone else.

I realise you have a point that you wish to stress but ..

a) never seen a situation like this so can't comment. What I have seen both as the Soviets and as the Axis, HtH and vs AI is its hard to sustain operations in the Valdai and north. Maybe lots of situational reasons but ...

b) Pzr losses are now running at around 50% of previous 1941 totals with the latest changes. You've seen the data in the tester's forum.

c) see my AAR vs Speedy Steve - i was routing entire armies in 1944 if I was careful and took my time to wait for the ideal chance.

d) one reason my last HtH game ended was people demanding Steven's saves so as to explain what he was doing wrong. Didn't do much for his overall morale or commitment to the game so before chucking around assertions about player skill I'd suggest thinking about what you are implying? My first post-release AAR was the first time I'd played the Axis HtH in the final 2 years of the testing process, we choose sides as I had far more experience with the Soviets so that put us both in an unusual position.

Since none of my 1941s have exactly been brilliant and 2 of them I only just slipped over the HWM test for Jan 42 I make no claim to competence - but then I find the whole debate about 'elite' players a distinct turn off.

Do I have different experiences? Of the front page of the AARs it looks like 5/7 German wins off 1941 starts (never easy to be sure as games end or the writers stop reporting) and at least 3 of those were wins in 1943 or later.

[Zebtucker12]

A Never experienced supply issues as the Soviets to the point that i think there is somthing wrong with their logistics i got saves to showi if need to.


B But are soviet losses up much? Otherwise the soviets will just drown the panzers in blood.

C I will take a look.

D Nobody said the Soviet players where bad maybe you are a god of war late game.

I counted the axis versus soviet wins in the thread 6 axis versus 21 soviet

[DarkHorse2]

Personally, I absolutely hate the injection of hard-coded values into the combat mechanics during the 1st winter.

Errata: Undocumented rules
Axis units in heavy snow have their defensive CV modified as follows:
Dec 1941 - /2
Jan 1942 - /1.5
Feb 1942 - /1.33
This is reflected in the CV values shown on the map.
In addition, once in combat, there are admin and land combat rating checks
made. For each failed check, the defense value is modified an additional time.
So a unit in Jan 1942 in heavy snow can have their CV divided by 1.5 up to 3
times if it fails both checks

I would have had each unit with a "Winterization" value, that would become more relevant as the weather became colder.

Obviously, the Soviets, Finns, Ski, Mountain units would have much higher values than their Axis counter parts. But, over time, the gap would start to close, although maybe never completely.

The rate of a unit's Winterization would reflect historical trends.

It would be completely integrated into the combat/weather system - not some kind of hard-coded after thought.

[K62]

The German soldiers where fatigued not cold!
Its silly and makes no historical sense that they get debuffed even if the soviets just ran.

but yeah, lets make it even easier for the axis player

lol

Having played both sides I've come to agree that the victory mechanics are significantly tilted towards the Axis side in GC41.

Really the only reason someone wouldn't do well as Axis is impatience. This happens at multiple levels e.g.

• plunging into multiple GC games without reading the manual end-to-end even once

• rushing through, trying to play 5+ turns/week and suffering unnecessary losses as a result

• not spending enough time on logistics, which kills both the summer push and blizzard defense

• giving up at the first setback, especially when the weather turns bad

An Axis player who aims for the 12/31/1944 victory condition and only plays 2-3 turns/week with due care and diligence is nearly unbeatable IMO, at least by people at the same level of experience.

[DarkHorse2]

@K62,

I still find the Soviet AI very challenging in '41.

Are you saying that the typical Soviet player would be any less challenging?

[K62]

If you're playing on 110+ the AI has its own set of challenges.

If you're playing on 100 and you're willing to:
a) read the whole manual at least once
b) take 2 days/turn and pay proper attention to logistics (including reading the full logistics report a few times until you get the hang of it)
I would be very surprised if you can't get a Major Victory in '44.