Attacking the USSR in 1.7.

[Harbinger]

You get a 20% morale hit from doing so...and a 100% benefit to your WE.

Are these effects present should the Soviet player wait until later in the war to DoW? Or is it a condition that applies to the Soviet regardless of when the DoW occurs?

And is running around with 250% WE and literally 200+ infantry corps, 50ish armor corps, etc. A human Soviet player can't come anywhere near this kind of production.

I wouldn't agree that a human Soviet player can't do this. Whether or not a human Soviet would is....well, pretty much dependent on that human player and what they may feel is necessary.

Personally, I would be hesitant to agree with any House Rule designed to penalize and/or restrict the Soviets for a DoW on Germany until thorough playtesting/research shows that the human Soviet player does indeed gain an unfair advantage for such a DoW.

[Flaviusx]

A human Soviet player most certainly cannot hope to get 250% WE by mid 1941 with hundreds of corps to match. Not even remotely. Only the AI can achieve those numbers within that time frame. Nor would you want this to happen in a player versus player game, it would completely unbalance it.
 
Also, something similar seems to be the case with the German AI, I'm pretty sure their production gets inflated as well.
 
 
 

[Harbinger]

Ahh..yes, I see your point. It's the Events and such that allow for the inflated AI Soviet WE and the construction of the numbers of units. However, I should point out that the original statement that a human player can't do this did not include a time reference of "mid 1941".

My solo 1.7 as the Germans is now Christmas 1941. Britain was puppetized in June 1941. The attack on Russia began in May 1941 and the Nazis hold Moscow and Stalingrad, and are nearing Leningrad. The Soviets have not yet concluded the Winter War in Finland. The Crimea is cut off and under severe threat.

Soviet WE = 265% Soviet SU = 0%
SMP = 24
STP = 0
AIP = 0

LWD = 1 .... Arty Tech = 2 .... Tank Tech = 2 .... Air Tech = 2 .... Sub Tech = 1 .... Ships Tech = 1 .... Nuke Tech = 1

Inf Div = 194.......Inf Corps = 218
Mot. Div = 62.......Mot. Corps = 6
Armor Div = 65....Armor Corps = 7
Para = 11

Ftr Air = 8....Tac Air = 8....SB Air = 2

I cannot remember what the Soviet ground forces consisted of when the attack began, but I do remember being somewhat dismayed when compared to the forces I had generated for the campaign. I made it a point to destroy both Mot. Corps and Armored Corps at every opportunity, sometimes even going out of my way to do so.

I agree that a human Soviet disposition will differ greatly from the AI Soviet. How it will differ is subjective of course. The WE will play a significant role and the the facts postulated in this thread tend to bear out that WE will not be near the levels of the AI Soviet capabilities.

The settings for the standard scenario is 1% per month. If the human Soviet DoW's on 1 Sept 1939, then this will result in a 26% increase to WE at July 1941, in addition to any events that increase WE.

I can see where the human Soviet may consider themselves at a disadvantage compared to the AI capabilites given the hard numbers. This may be offset somewhat by the flexibility of the human player to use the PP and unit pools as they see fit compared to the AI restriction of doing only what is programmed.

The Russian Shock is a separate issue. That it renders the Soviets units helpless (zero Str) does appear to be more harsh than is necessary. My opinion is that these units were capable of defending themselves in a more reasonable manner than just getting in the way. Perhaps an adjustment to the loss of effectiveness and an adjustment to the length of the Shock for the Human player might mitigate this harsh reality. Especially in conjunction with the limited ability of the human vs. AI control of the WE.

Anyway, just my 2 cents worth...

[Flaviusx]

I don't consider myself "disadvantaged" compared to the AI. I think the AI bonuses are wildly unbalanced in the hands of a human player, and I'm primarily a pbem player of this game now. (Where I play the Sovs.) Not for a second would I want them for myself.
 
Rather, it's kind of sad that this is what it takes to make the AI competitive against a human opponent.

[Harbinger]

I have not played 1.7 from the Soviet position, therefore my thoughts and opinions are speculative, based solely on experience from 1.6 and posts made by others.

I'm confused. I don't recall any mention being made of the "wildy inflating events" being available to the human Soviet. Are they in fact available for the human Soviet? If so, I agree that they may indeed unbalance PvP games.

Posts have been made suggesting that these events are not available for a human Soviet. In fact, I believe that Flaviusx uses this argument to support his strategy of an early Soviet DoW on Germany, not only to begin the growth of WE but also to offset the effects of the Shock event at a time in which Germany is least prepared to take advantage of it.

The Event Engine is the only tool available for the AI to conduct gameplay.

[Flaviusx]

No, this WE effect is available to the AI only. You won't see it as a human player, nor should you.

I think you've misunderstood my points regarding 1.7 from the pbem perspective and conflated them with my comments about the AI, they are seperate issues entirely.

My 1.7 Soviet strategy is for player v. player games and I was completely candid about my intentions here and hoping for Uxbridge to stop me because I don't want to use that strategy. It would ruin our pbem games. The other players would rightly object to it, as it would decide the game on turn 1 for all practical purposes. That's bad form. However, the 1.7 changes, absent house rules, make that strategy compelling.

In a pbem situation you of course want to win, but have to balance that out against the desire to have a challenging game. Winning trivially isn't satisfying nor historical, nor very fun for your opponents who will feel cheated by it.   

Edit: at the risk of sounding hopelessly old fashioned, it comes down to a question of honor and respect for your opponent.

[Uxbridge]

Well, Flavio do you feel stopped? Or would you rather not tell this in the open. [:)]

We have to get rid of the shock event! If we can have the Soviets losing 35 % of their effectiveness when first at war with Germany, fine. Losing it altogether is just silly.

If anybody could tell me what events are in play to administer the shock (not "chock" as I see I have written earlier, that's Swedish) I can have them either removed or altered. I have found some of them, but there seems to be more.

[Flaviusx]

It's a tough choice now. The show stopper for me is probably the increased maintainance cost. Over the long term, that will balance out any economic gains resulting from a preemptive Soviet declaration of war. It will severely limit the size of your army, and I'm definitely a believer in quantity so far as the Red Army goes.