smokindave34 (Axis) vs M60A3TTS (Soviet) 41 CG

[M60A3TTS]

ORIGINAL: erikbengtsson

ORIGINAL: jubjub

ORIGINAL: HardLuckYetAgain




That would be a very good step in the right direction.

I think this touches on the main issue I see. CPP build up just happens too fast. Historically, it took months to build up for an offensive in one sector, not two weeks. I think this is the main reason that the Soviets can sustain offensives much longer than they were able to historically.


I think an elegant solution is to subject CPP build up to leadership rolls. This would give the Axis an edge in building up their armies, as well as slow down the rate of CPP build up for both sides. It does seem kind of silly that almost everything in game has to be rolled for, but the most important stat in the game is an automatic buff every turn.

Reading that, it seems like a very good suggestion.

Not really, because it wouldn't likely yield the kind of definitive results you are looking for. CPP buildup would most likely be tied to leader admin ratings.

Someone once did a thread that showed how the Axis had so many more good leaders than the Soviets, and I had problems with their conclusions from the beginning. In this case, the Soviets have no less than 41 leaders with an admin value of 6 or more. A rating of 6 is considered to be a good one. They have a dozen leaders at 7.

Yes, the Germans have far more, but that isn't the point. The point is the Soviets have enough to get done what needs to be done in key areas of the map. Not every part of the front is gearing up for an offensive at any one time.

[AlbertN]

Agreeing with M60 there now that I read that stance.

Especially as Soviets are not that short of Admin Points to substitute leaders on need - or at least I've that perception in general.

[smokindave34]

ORIGINAL: HardLuckYetAgain

ORIGINAL: M60A3TTS

ORIGINAL: smokindave34
Well done M60! I reserve the right for your first official match for WITE3 (or War in Europe....)

Thanks Dave. You're always first in line for re-matches. [:)]

I absolutely admire Smokindave. Great guy!

Your making me blush......by the way I've been "studying" your AAR's lately in an attempt to improve my play. I'm counting on you to show us axis players the way to Moscow. Don't let us down.

[Hardradi]

Finally got back to finishing your AAR. Really enjoyed it. Awesome tips.

A terrifying build up of force. Historically, if this had played out, Operation Unthinkable would have been on the table.

[RoadWarrior]

ORIGINAL: HardLuckYetAgain

ORIGINAL: Q-Ball

ORIGINAL: HardLuckYetAgain

Tyronec and Roadwarrior are far better players than me & I believe Tyronec said it the best on the current state of the game. I can only parapharse it but went something on the line of, "if you don't take the Soviet out in 41 early 42 then the Soviets will grow massive and Germany will die in 44". Of course Tyronec put it much more elegantly.

I do think that the game does favor the Soviets. But it isn't that bad at the moment, I think...

I think this is an excellent point, and I am coming to agree with this. I am about to start a Stal to Berlin as Germany vs. a good opponent (Speedysteve) and I expect to get quashed. In testing I played the other side vs. Loki, and by early '44 was rolling toward Romania.

I don't think the solution is necessarily to help the Germans in '41 take out the Soviet Union, but rather some later help for the Germans....not sure how, since 1943 turns into a feedback loop where Soviets win, increase morale, get stronger, while Germans constantly doing the opposite.

I really don't know the cure......the game certainly favors a supplied attacker, especially in clear terrain

The crux is the casualty rate to the Soviets. The Soviets can control the flow in 41 with retreat & retreat and retreat.
The Germans are hard pressed to do anything about it if the Soviets retreat correctly.
To have a chance the Germans have to surround then force surrender many many Soviets and it isnt going to happen in WITE2.
By the time the Germans get to a Soviet line the units are rested, with good leaders, well supplied.
Thus when the germans do attack the casualties are way low and Soviets retreat from a combat with minimial losses.
Then during their turn the Soviets just rotate out the Divisions that got hit for a rest.
I saw this and was no way I was going to play the Soviets again in WITE2 and decided to end a game before even getting started when I came back this month.
I like a challenge and thus went back fully to the German side. On top of that my game is a no early end which will be "Hell on Earth" for me to even survive til 1944.
I don't think it can be done as Germany. But that is just me looking into my crystal ball.

Don't even get me started on the free AP's given tot he Soviets by mid 1943. 1500 AP is a very large number of AP to do anything with.
If you are going to give APs then subdivide the gifted AP where you have the normal AP you get a turn then break it down to what it was given for and only can be used for it.
Thus the AP for Cav should only be used to purchase Cav & not build a whole bunch of forts instead.

+1 to HLYA
Great AAR by the way and grats to you both on your game.


The logistics system currently is at the heart of the unhistorical results we see in the AARs

1. SHC is unhistorically rewarded to retreat a few hexes a turn until the logistic chain stops GHC in the center and south. An Army that is simply marching forward turn after turn and hardly fighting is using very few supplies, this is just basic math!!!!!! Supplies shortages for Germans and Russians were caused by heavy fighting or fuel by long advances, not both sides holding hands taking a summer walk together 30 miles a week to the east.
2. So moral, KIA and factory loses are far lower than historical, supplies for some reason are low based on a lack of combat and long summer walks?????
3. By 1942 German Army is at 1943 levels and Russian Army at 1944 levels. There is no 1942, which is why games will end in 44.
The massive encirclements of spring and summer of 1942 are not possible because SHC has 1/2 dozen Armies that can easily break open almost any pocket in 1942, when historically that simply was not the case. Supplies and replacements were a major issue in 42 for SHC, but not in this game. The combat tempo of 41 is simply not happening and a logistics system that is hard wired to output data that says the combat tempo is high when it simply is low, very low if the hand holding is done right.
4. The logistics system is a single system for both sides when historically it simply was not. This is by far the biggest problem with the game.
5. Because of the logistic system (1 system for both sides) simply is not working historically; it causes a feedback loop where the attacker never runs out of supplies after summer of 41.
When historically the Russians took months to build up supplies for major operations and then had to stop after some small gains because they ran out.

Summer 1941 was a blood bath. The Russians caused supply issues for the Germans, because they attacked causing shortages and delaying German advances. The 1941 supply issues were not caused long summer walks.

The logistic system appears to need allot of tweaking, allot.

Sadly I would have to say 1.0 is more of a historical simulation than 2.0. No idea if the logistics system can be fixed or if the will is their to fix it's clear short coming.

[HardLuckYetAgain]

ORIGINAL: RoadWarrior

ORIGINAL: HardLuckYetAgain

ORIGINAL: Q-Ball




I think this is an excellent point, and I am coming to agree with this. I am about to start a Stal to Berlin as Germany vs. a good opponent (Speedysteve) and I expect to get quashed. In testing I played the other side vs. Loki, and by early '44 was rolling toward Romania.

I don't think the solution is necessarily to help the Germans in '41 take out the Soviet Union, but rather some later help for the Germans....not sure how, since 1943 turns into a feedback loop where Soviets win, increase morale, get stronger, while Germans constantly doing the opposite.

I really don't know the cure......the game certainly favors a supplied attacker, especially in clear terrain

The crux is the casualty rate to the Soviets. The Soviets can control the flow in 41 with retreat & retreat and retreat.
The Germans are hard pressed to do anything about it if the Soviets retreat correctly.
To have a chance the Germans have to surround then force surrender many many Soviets and it isnt going to happen in WITE2.
By the time the Germans get to a Soviet line the units are rested, with good leaders, well supplied.
Thus when the germans do attack the casualties are way low and Soviets retreat from a combat with minimial losses.
Then during their turn the Soviets just rotate out the Divisions that got hit for a rest.
I saw this and was no way I was going to play the Soviets again in WITE2 and decided to end a game before even getting started when I came back this month.
I like a challenge and thus went back fully to the German side. On top of that my game is a no early end which will be "Hell on Earth" for me to even survive til 1944.
I don't think it can be done as Germany. But that is just me looking into my crystal ball.

Don't even get me started on the free AP's given tot he Soviets by mid 1943. 1500 AP is a very large number of AP to do anything with.
If you are going to give APs then subdivide the gifted AP where you have the normal AP you get a turn then break it down to what it was given for and only can be used for it.
Thus the AP for Cav should only be used to purchase Cav & not build a whole bunch of forts instead.

+1 to HLYA
Great AAR by the way and grats to you both on your game.


The logistics system currently is at the heart of the unhistorical results we see in the AARs

1. SHC is unhistorically rewarded to retreat a few hexes a turn until the logistic chain stops GHC in the center and south. An Army that is simply marching forward turn after turn and hardly fighting is using very few supplies, this is just basic math!!!!!! Supplies shortages for Germans and Russians were caused by heavy fighting or fuel by long advances, not both sides holding hands taking a summer walk together 30 miles a week to the east.
2. So moral, KIA and factory loses are far lower than historical, supplies for some reason are low based on a lack of combat and long summer walks?????
3. By 1942 German Army is at 1943 levels and Russian Army at 1944 levels. There is no 1942, which is why games will end in 44.
The massive encirclements of spring and summer of 1942 are not possible because SHC has 1/2 dozen Armies that can easily break open almost any pocket in 1942, when historically that simply was not the case. Supplies and replacements were a major issue in 42 for SHC, but not in this game. The combat tempo of 41 is simply not happening and a logistics system that is hard wired to output data that says the combat tempo is high when it simply is low, very low if the hand holding is done right.
4. The logistics system is a single system for both sides when historically it simply was not. This is by far the biggest problem with the game.
5. Because of the logistic system (1 system for both sides) simply is not working historically; it causes a feedback loop where the attacker never runs out of supplies after summer of 41.
When historically the Russians took months to build up supplies for major operations and then had to stop after some small gains because they ran out.

Summer 1941 was a blood bath. The Russians caused supply issues for the Germans, because they attacked causing shortages and delaying German advances. The 1941 supply issues were not caused long summer walks.

The logistic system appears to need allot of tweaking, allot.

Sadly I would have to say 1.0 is more of a historical simulation than 2.0. No idea if the logistics system can be fixed or if the will is their to fix it's clear short coming.

You are not wrong. I believe many feel the same.

I still believe the crux is the 2 Assault HQ's given to the Soviets. The Assault HQ's are like the Soviets recover their fiasco mess in just a few turns and now can go toe to toe with Germany. (don't even get me started why Assault HQ's have 45 points worth of units can attach to them, that is insane. should be less units in assault, not more! But that is just me I guess) Coupled with the Soviets constantly retreating and getting full CCP & rest staying out of the reach of the Germans. You can get close in the North and fight but you aren't going to get the casualties you need to survive a long Game. In the the South you will be extremely lucky to get anything of value casualty wise on a runner. In the Center you can get some encirclements but you are still dealing with poor terrain and long supply lines. Thus if the Soviets put their 2 assault HQ's in the right place the Soviet casualties can stay low the whole of 41 if done correctly, have high defense values. There is definatly some work that needs to be done in the game.

[Sammy5IsAlive]

ORIGINAL: RoadWarrior

ORIGINAL: HardLuckYetAgain

ORIGINAL: Q-Ball




I think this is an excellent point, and I am coming to agree with this. I am about to start a Stal to Berlin as Germany vs. a good opponent (Speedysteve) and I expect to get quashed. In testing I played the other side vs. Loki, and by early '44 was rolling toward Romania.

I don't think the solution is necessarily to help the Germans in '41 take out the Soviet Union, but rather some later help for the Germans....not sure how, since 1943 turns into a feedback loop where Soviets win, increase morale, get stronger, while Germans constantly doing the opposite.

I really don't know the cure......the game certainly favors a supplied attacker, especially in clear terrain

The crux is the casualty rate to the Soviets. The Soviets can control the flow in 41 with retreat & retreat and retreat.
The Germans are hard pressed to do anything about it if the Soviets retreat correctly.
To have a chance the Germans have to surround then force surrender many many Soviets and it isnt going to happen in WITE2.
By the time the Germans get to a Soviet line the units are rested, with good leaders, well supplied.
Thus when the germans do attack the casualties are way low and Soviets retreat from a combat with minimial losses.
Then during their turn the Soviets just rotate out the Divisions that got hit for a rest.
I saw this and was no way I was going to play the Soviets again in WITE2 and decided to end a game before even getting started when I came back this month.
I like a challenge and thus went back fully to the German side. On top of that my game is a no early end which will be "Hell on Earth" for me to even survive til 1944.
I don't think it can be done as Germany. But that is just me looking into my crystal ball.

Don't even get me started on the free AP's given tot he Soviets by mid 1943. 1500 AP is a very large number of AP to do anything with.
If you are going to give APs then subdivide the gifted AP where you have the normal AP you get a turn then break it down to what it was given for and only can be used for it.
Thus the AP for Cav should only be used to purchase Cav & not build a whole bunch of forts instead.

+1 to HLYA
Great AAR by the way and grats to you both on your game.


The logistics system currently is at the heart of the unhistorical results we see in the AARs

1. SHC is unhistorically rewarded to retreat a few hexes a turn until the logistic chain stops GHC in the center and south. An Army that is simply marching forward turn after turn and hardly fighting is using very few supplies, this is just basic math!!!!!! Supplies shortages for Germans and Russians were caused by heavy fighting or fuel by long advances, not both sides holding hands taking a summer walk together 30 miles a week to the east.
2. So moral, KIA and factory loses are far lower than historical, supplies for some reason are low based on a lack of combat and long summer walks?????
3. By 1942 German Army is at 1943 levels and Russian Army at 1944 levels. There is no 1942, which is why games will end in 44.
The massive encirclements of spring and summer of 1942 are not possible because SHC has 1/2 dozen Armies that can easily break open almost any pocket in 1942, when historically that simply was not the case. Supplies and replacements were a major issue in 42 for SHC, but not in this game. The combat tempo of 41 is simply not happening and a logistics system that is hard wired to output data that says the combat tempo is high when it simply is low, very low if the hand holding is done right.
4. The logistics system is a single system for both sides when historically it simply was not. This is by far the biggest problem with the game.
5. Because of the logistic system (1 system for both sides) simply is not working historically; it causes a feedback loop where the attacker never runs out of supplies after summer of 41.
When historically the Russians took months to build up supplies for major operations and then had to stop after some small gains because they ran out.

Summer 1941 was a blood bath. The Russians caused supply issues for the Germans, because they attacked causing shortages and delaying German advances. The 1941 supply issues were not caused long summer walks.

The logistic system appears to need allot of tweaking, allot.

Sadly I would have to say 1.0 is more of a historical simulation than 2.0. No idea if the logistics system can be fixed or if the will is their to fix it's clear short coming.

Brief thought #1 on this - I don't think we have enough data at this point - how many AARs have gone well into 42? I can just think of this game (which IMHO doesn't tell us a great deal given the differing levels of experience of the two players); Loki v SpeedySteve; jubjubs 'comeback' AAR that he started in 42 (which seems to be following a more historical path) and the GloriousRuse v Bobo AAR that was going on pre-release.

Brief thought #2 - I disagree on the logistics system. Not so much that I don't think it has any flaws/problems - more that it is miles better than WITE1 where you could supply all of your panzer armies at the end of a single rail line etc.

Brief thought #3 - If there is an issue with the Soviets being able to retreat too easily and avoid losses I think the simpler way to deal with it is to look at the victory conditions. So for example I'd maybe move the current 1st January check to 1st December and set the mark at something like the cities historically taken + 40VPs or something like that. So the Soviet player would have to fight further forward in the South to prevent the Axis player getting too many time bonuses and the 'fringe' victory cities in the centre like Rzhev/Tula/Orel (which many Axis players are reluctant to take at the moment because of the risk of losing them and the time bonus in the Soviet counter-offensive) become more contested.

Brief thought #4 As a general principle the way I see it is that as long as the Devs/players are satisfied that various mechanics are working 'adequately' and that the very broad pattern of the outcomes are historical (so you aren't seeing the Axis taking Moscow every game or the Soviets continuing their winter counteroffensive all the way to Berlin etc) it makes more sense to try and balance the game through the victory point system rather than having a situation where the balance 'pendulum' keeps on swinging between the two sides as the developers fiddle with mechanics.

EDIT

Agree on the Assault HQs - they just don't quite feel 'right' at the moment in the way they are working. If the HQs are going to have an effect on CPPs it makes more sense to me for the rule to be that units in Assault HQs lose half as many CPPs when attacking rather than regaining them twice as quickly.

[AlbertN]

VPs are very rarely a good way to balance the game. Because the 'final picture' is 'final'. A player has to get there, a player needs to have some fun. If PlayerA(xis in this case) is to take the beating without hopes from Winter 41 til surrender date ... or just play for the same of 'sticking there' but really not enjoying it til '44 or '45 ... how many do that?

In general the good balancing factors are Economics and 'Quality' level of units. (How many and how good).

VPs unless netting a sudden Auto-Win (or Auto-Loss) mean little. Would the Soviet player in '41 have a 4M army and have Axis at 600 VP, or have a 5M army and have the Axis at 650 VP (Numbers are an example). I am sure in this game any Soviet player will pick the 2nd, simply because of the Snowball effect. Their position in '42 will be way better, they'll start to pound back Germany way earlier, the 50 VP difference they'll regain cheaply by being in Berlin a year ahead or so! (Concept wise).

Thus, even if I advocate deeply a more granular spreading of VP cities that is an extra.

The CCP and Assault Armies alone won't cut it - because the Soviets still can retreat an amount. Positioned their units, it will be 200 SMP / 24 * 3; instead of 200 SMP / 12 * 3, assuming units are not adjacent to Germans and have not moved. Even without Assault Armies, a generic Soviet infantry unit could move 1 hex or so and still get 20-24 CCP a turn without being in Assault mode. (The hex being hopping out of enemy ZoC and a fresh Soviet unit pops in.) It's simply math that.

Logistics, I'd not touch them yet but I feel the iffy part of Germany unable to bring Panzers to Panzer Divisions in Poland, or severely struggling to do so.

There must be a reason for the Soviets to stay and fight, in '41. And fight in kind of desperate way, not going toe to toe with Germany and shanking Axis formations. That reason to me has to be that they -must- protect their factories. If the Soviets run too quick they'll lose production. Forever. Save your gear now or have more gear in the future - call your shots.
Currently it's pratically a no brainer with guaranteed massive production later on - so one can as well save right now your troops.

My forecasting skills have other vibes for the future in the late game, just by some testing I did in the Vistula to Berlin vs the AI.

[Sammy5IsAlive]

ORIGINAL: AlbertN

VPs are very rarely a good way to balance the game. Because the 'final picture' is 'final'. A player has to get there, a player needs to have some fun. If PlayerA(xis in this case) is to take the beating without hopes from Winter 41 til surrender date ... or just play for the same of 'sticking there' but really not enjoying it til '44 or '45 ... how many do that?

In general the good balancing factors are Economics and 'Quality' level of units. (How many and how good).

VPs unless netting a sudden Auto-Win (or Auto-Loss) mean little. Would the Soviet player in '41 have a 4M army and have Axis at 600 VP, or have a 5M army and have the Axis at 650 VP (Numbers are an example). I am sure in this game any Soviet player will pick the 2nd, simply because of the Snowball effect. Their position in '42 will be way better, they'll start to pound back Germany way earlier, the 50 VP difference they'll regain cheaply by being in Berlin a year ahead or so! (Concept wise).

Thus, even if I advocate deeply a more granular spreading of VP cities that is an extra.

But that was my point - that the part of the VP system that would be changed would not be the 'final' victory levels in 1945 but the auto-victory levels and dates throughout the course of a game. So to use your example numbers - if 600 is theoretically an Axis autovictory then the Soviets have to take the extra million losses in order to stay in the game.

[RoadWarrior]

ORIGINAL: Sammy5IsAlive

ORIGINAL: RoadWarrior

ORIGINAL: HardLuckYetAgain




The crux is the casualty rate to the Soviets. The Soviets can control the flow in 41 with retreat & retreat and retreat.
The Germans are hard pressed to do anything about it if the Soviets retreat correctly.
To have a chance the Germans have to surround then force surrender many many Soviets and it isnt going to happen in WITE2.
By the time the Germans get to a Soviet line the units are rested, with good leaders, well supplied.
Thus when the germans do attack the casualties are way low and Soviets retreat from a combat with minimial losses.
Then during their turn the Soviets just rotate out the Divisions that got hit for a rest.
I saw this and was no way I was going to play the Soviets again in WITE2 and decided to end a game before even getting started when I came back this month.
I like a challenge and thus went back fully to the German side. On top of that my game is a no early end which will be "Hell on Earth" for me to even survive til 1944.
I don't think it can be done as Germany. But that is just me looking into my crystal ball.

Don't even get me started on the free AP's given tot he Soviets by mid 1943. 1500 AP is a very large number of AP to do anything with.
If you are going to give APs then subdivide the gifted AP where you have the normal AP you get a turn then break it down to what it was given for and only can be used for it.
Thus the AP for Cav should only be used to purchase Cav & not build a whole bunch of forts instead.

+1 to HLYA
Great AAR by the way and grats to you both on your game.


The logistics system currently is at the heart of the unhistorical results we see in the AARs

1. SHC is unhistorically rewarded to retreat a few hexes a turn until the logistic chain stops GHC in the center and south. An Army that is simply marching forward turn after turn and hardly fighting is using very few supplies, this is just basic math!!!!!! Supplies shortages for Germans and Russians were caused by heavy fighting or fuel by long advances, not both sides holding hands taking a summer walk together 30 miles a week to the east.
2. So moral, KIA and factory loses are far lower than historical, supplies for some reason are low based on a lack of combat and long summer walks?????
3. By 1942 German Army is at 1943 levels and Russian Army at 1944 levels. There is no 1942, which is why games will end in 44.
The massive encirclements of spring and summer of 1942 are not possible because SHC has 1/2 dozen Armies that can easily break open almost any pocket in 1942, when historically that simply was not the case. Supplies and replacements were a major issue in 42 for SHC, but not in this game. The combat tempo of 41 is simply not happening and a logistics system that is hard wired to output data that says the combat tempo is high when it simply is low, very low if the hand holding is done right.
4. The logistics system is a single system for both sides when historically it simply was not. This is by far the biggest problem with the game.
5. Because of the logistic system (1 system for both sides) simply is not working historically; it causes a feedback loop where the attacker never runs out of supplies after summer of 41.
When historically the Russians took months to build up supplies for major operations and then had to stop after some small gains because they ran out.

Summer 1941 was a blood bath. The Russians caused supply issues for the Germans, because they attacked causing shortages and delaying German advances. The 1941 supply issues were not caused long summer walks.

The logistic system appears to need allot of tweaking, allot.

Sadly I would have to say 1.0 is more of a historical simulation than 2.0. No idea if the logistics system can be fixed or if the will is their to fix it's clear short coming.

Brief thought #1 on this - I don't think we have enough data at this point - how many AARs have gone well into 42? I can just think of this game (which IMHO doesn't tell us a great deal given the differing levels of experience of the two players); Loki v SpeedySteve; jubjubs 'comeback' AAR that he started in 42 (which seems to be following a more historical path) and the GloriousRuse v Bobo AAR that was going on pre-release.

Brief thought #2 - I disagree on the logistics system. Not so much that I don't think it has any flaws/problems - more that it is miles better than WITE1 where you could supply all of your panzer armies at the end of a single rail line etc.

Brief thought #3 - If there is an issue with the Soviets being able to retreat too easily and avoid losses I think the simpler way to deal with it is to look at the victory conditions. So for example I'd maybe move the current 1st January check to 1st December and set the mark at something like the cities historically taken + 40VPs or something like that. So the Soviet player would have to fight further forward in the South to prevent the Axis player getting too many time bonuses and the 'fringe' victory cities in the centre like Rzhev/Tula/Orel (which many Axis players are reluctant to take at the moment because of the risk of losing them and the time bonus in the Soviet counter-offensive) become more contested.

Brief thought #4 As a general principle the way I see it is that as long as the Devs/players are satisfied that various mechanics are working 'adequately' and that the very broad pattern of the outcomes are historical (so you aren't seeing the Axis taking Moscow every game or the Soviets continuing their winter counteroffensive all the way to Berlin etc) it makes more sense to try and balance the game through the victory point system rather than having a situation where the balance 'pendulum' keeps on swinging between the two sides as the developers fiddle with mechanics.

EDIT

Agree on the Assault HQs - they just don't quite feel 'right' at the moment in the way they are working. If the HQs are going to have an effect on CPPs it makes more sense to me for the rule to be that units in Assault HQs lose half as many CPPs when attacking rather than regaining them twice as quickly.

1. If your open minded and simply look at the newer AAR's the data is one sided. If your just here axe grinding, your not open minded and everyone can see that.
ALL the players that read the newer AARs understand that 1941 is about both sides holding hands taking a summer walk together 30 miles a week to the east. While special rules limit the German advance, if the logistics system was so good why the special rules?

2. The logistic system 2.0 is worse far worse than 1.0. Again if your open minded and read the AARs 1.0, you can see that with evenly matched players the game goes to 45.
The Russians generally go on the offensive in mid to late 43 ( OMG historical ) not spring of 42. 1.0 43-45 the Germans can put up some kind of a defense.
If your not grinding an axe 2.0 1942 Germany can't put up a defense, because SHC does not have a supply issue. The Russian logistic system was horrible, it took them months to build up enough supplies for offences.
The current system gives all sides the same system, that's not historical.

3. The VP system as is looks historicaly right to me. Changing the 1941 VP conditions does nothing to fix the core issue, its a Band-Aid on a 3 inch wide 6 inch deep knife wound.

4. Its clear to everyone ( hello ) its not working. Russia going on the offensive in 1942 after players putting in 100's only to find 2.0 yields unhistorical results, while 1.0 yields historical results.
No player I know is going to love dumping 100's of hours into a game only to find out it is flawed.

The core issue is the logistics system, if not why are there special rules for Germany in 1941. If the logistics system was not the core issue, there would be NO as in NO special rules.

I personally hope that it can be saved. Ignoring the issue and hoping the Band-Aid stops the bleeding is not going to save the patient.

[loki100]

ORIGINAL: RoadWarrior
...
2. The logistic system 2.0 is worse far worse than 1.0. Again if your open minded and read the AARs 1.0, you can see that with evenly matched players the game goes to 45.
The Russians generally go on the offensive in mid to late 43 ( OMG historical ) not spring of 42. 1.0 43-45 the Germans can put up some kind of a defense.
If your not grinding an axe 2.0 1942 Germany can't put up a defense, because SHC does not have a supply issue. The Russian logistic system was horrible, it took them months to build up enough supplies for offences.
The current system gives all sides the same system, that's not historical.
...
4. Its clear to everyone ( hello ) its not working. Russia going on the offensive in 1942 after players putting in 100's only to find 2.0 yields unhistorical results, while 1.0 yields historical results.
No player I know is going to love dumping 100's of hours into a game only to find out it is flawed.

The core issue is the logistics system, if not why are there special rules for Germany in 1941. If the logistics system was not the core issue, there would be NO as in NO special rules.
....

there are no special rules so really not sure what you are referring to.

and believe me, once the Soviets go on the offensive they hit huge logistics problems. As with so much in #2, its more useful to play both sides than just one - gives you a far better handle on how the game really plays.

[Isokron]

ORIGINAL: loki100

there are no special rules so really not sure what you are referring to.

See manual section 8.6.1
(always wanted to say that to loki [;)] )

[Aurelian]

ORIGINAL: AlbertN




There must be a reason for the Soviets to stay and fight, in '41. And fight in kind of desperate way, not going toe to toe with Germany and shanking Axis formations. That reason to me has to be that they -must- protect their factories. If the Soviets run too quick they'll lose production. Forever. Save your gear now or have more gear in the future - call your shots.

If I have to play the Soviets the way Axis players want, then there's no point in playing. Unless the Axis play the way the Soviets want.

As for factories..... https://www.mhistory.net/comrades-we-ar ... y-in-1941/

As early as June 30, 1941, the Soviets established the State Defense Committee, i.e. the organization managing and coordinating the transport of industrial centres to the east, far from the approaching rapid pace of the Germans. The Committee, which had virtually unlimited authority to evacuate people and equipment, used everything that could have helped in any way – mainly the Soviet railway fleet. Even outdated locomotives and wagons in poor technical condition were used in acts of desperation..........

Despite all these difficulties, as well as the organizational chaos and warfare that spread across more and more of the USSR territory, it is estimated that by the end of 1941 more than 1500 large factories were deported, together with millions of workers, engineers and their family members. Nearly 500 factories were moved to the Urals, more than 200 to Western Siberia and 250 to Central Asia. The others were evacuated further east, even off the Pacific coast. Locations rich in raw materials and far from the front were chosen so that they would not be exposed to Luftwaffe air raids.

In the long term, the USSR industry benefited from the evacuation action despite the great chaos that accompanied the whole operation. Powerful industrial centres were created and many factories were built or expanded, such as the factory in Chelyabinsk, where tanks were produced. This factory was so large that the whole city was called “Tank City”. In addition, a more efficient system of work was developed in many factories by tightening ever lower time limits for the production of equipment.

Factory losses were not, and should not be, permanent. If you can expand them, you can also build them.

Sadly, I keep reading about how the Soviets are supposed to adhere to history, but never, unless I bring it up, do I see the same about the Axis. (Like how the Axis can't take Leningrad and Moscow because that isn't historical.)

It's a game. A historically based game. You get the chance to make your own mistakes instead of being forced to repeat the mistakes of history.

As an aside, I've never seen Japanese players in WiTP or WiTP AE write how the Allies don't play 1941 the way they actually did. The Japanese are far harder to play, but that's the side most people play.

[loki100]

ORIGINAL: Isokron

ORIGINAL: loki100

there are no special rules so really not sure what you are referring to.

See manual section 8.6.1
(always wanted to say that to loki [;)] )

well I'd quibble that they are a significant issue to the discussion - the issue is not axis losses in the winter (which can be readily managed) but the expansion of the Red Army at a time when it was surviving hand to mouth?

[Jango32]

I think factory evacuations could be improved by starting the moving process only in the next Soviet logistics phase and use rail capacity. Everything caught by the Axis will be lost. How much should be evacuated every turn once the process has started (if bit by bit or all of it at once) and even if it's possible to implement such a system in the game, I don't know.

I also think that units moving from the map into a theatre box should be delayed until the next logistics phase, to prevent instant teleportation and give the opposing side a chance to prevent the unit's evacuation into a TB. In that next logistics phase there could be a check to verify that the unit earmarked for TB transport is on a rail line still connected to the network and there are no enemy units nearby.

[AlbertN]

We'll have to agree to disagree here.

To me it's a game - yes - and gameplay >> total historical accuracy.
Otherwise it's a written book.

The risk issue is about survival of the an active gaming community past the initial hype has been there.

I've read an amount actually on War in the Pacific and there are loads of commentaries on how to play - but ultimately the effect is way, way different and cannot be truly compared.

The one that can tinker with their 'economics' to some extents are the economically weak side (Japan).
The 'Land Units' and 'Naval Assets' coming in play are written on both ends, give or take some 'planned' Japanese ships. I am sure the US side will play very differently if suddenly with Admin Points they could build and shape Marines, Infantry and other ground assets like the Soviets can do here or the like.
Japan decline is written nowhere on their end (No Auto-Loss of National Morale due to time passing) - but it factually requires a perpetual attrition of their trained assets and force a replacement with untrained ones.

There are far too many differences between the games to even make a parallel to them, Aurelian - plus one had years of testing, PvP trial and fine tuning.

WITE2 is pratically a baby.
And this AAR here has shown - besides difference of player skill / practice - that the Soviets by early '42 can reach operational capabilities of '44 pretty much.

If one wants a totally adhering 'game' that is historical - then no point in playing Axis.