Game Balance - Germany Still Able to Strike in Spring 1942?

[matt.buttsworth]

As our game is over in January 1942 with the German army in ruins and continually retreating, I have one question for the forum:
Who in a player versus player game has

A) Totally defeated the Germans by January/February 1942 so that German defeat is inevitable?

B) Successfully survived the winter as German to the extent that they are able to launch a serious Spring/Summer offensive in 1942 capable of threatening Soviet survival as the Germans did in 1942 with their advance into the Caucasus and Stalingrad?

It will be interesting to see how the player versus player games have turned out.

Thank You

Matthew Buttsworth
Germany

[2ndACR]

LOL....read my AAR versus Kelblau. I think I had the most powerful post 41 winter army I have seen so far. But, I don't think I can really do anything from here to game end. Not until Beta 3 is out anyway.

[heliodorus04]

What I'd like to see is a thread discussing balance ideas (that can actually be programmed into the game).
I'm sure there are those on the testers' forum, but obviously only they can see that.

[heliodorus04]

Hmm, here are my 2 ideas:
1) Command modifiers for multiple corps/armies in an attack only apply to Soviet.
(Germany was famous for kampfgruppen, doctrine emphasizing initiative, and communications better than Soviet).

2) Combat modifier in favor of attackers (or penalizing defenders) when attacks come from multiple hexsides.
(Flanking is a critical force multiplier).

3) German Rail Repair units not being AS badly impacted for movement by mud and 'pending' friendly hexes. Perhaps not paying the latter penalty if moving with a friendly unit/into a friendly occupied hex.

[Redmarkus5]

I think there are just too many Soviet reserves and replacements...

[alfonso]

ORIGINAL: matt.buttsworth


B) ... they are able to launch a serious Spring/Summer offensive in 1942 capable of threatening Soviet survival as the Germans did in 1942 with their advance into the Caucasus and Stalingrad?


Thank You

Matthew Buttsworth
Germany

But what happens if that was only possible due to blunders made by the Soviets in 1941-42? If you don't think that the Soviet player has the right to avoid those blunders, perhaps you could consider playing the 1942-45 campaign, as suggested elsewhere.

[heliodorus04]

If the game as is creates conditions that the Germans go into a WW1 style defense as soon as (and in fact before) the 41/42 Winter ends, it's EXACTLY as much fun as a game where the Germans can get a 'game-over' win in 1941 by taking Moscow.

From a playability standpoint, as a customer, I will quit playing.

So if the 41 campaign creates an inevitable stalemate in 42, what's the point of playing it?

[alfonso]

ORIGINAL: heliodorus04

If the game as is creates conditions that the Germans go into a WW1 style defense as soon as (and in fact before) the 41/42 Winter ends, it's EXACTLY as much fun as a game where the Germans can get a 'game-over' win in 1941 by taking Moscow.

From a playability standpoint, as a customer, I will quit playing.

So if the 41 campaign creates an inevitable stalemate in 42, what's the point of playing it?

Yes, yes, I know that for many of us the 41 campaign IS the game, and perhaps we do not like the idea that it might (with "perfect play" from both sides) be as one-sided scenario as, let's say, the 44 campaign.

[Pipewrench]

ORIGINAL: alfonso

ORIGINAL: heliodorus04

If the game as is creates conditions that the Germans go into a WW1 style defense as soon as (and in fact before) the 41/42 Winter ends, it's EXACTLY as much fun as a game where the Germans can get a 'game-over' win in 1941 by taking Moscow.

From a playability standpoint, as a customer, I will quit playing.

So if the 41 campaign creates an inevitable stalemate in 42, what's the point of playing it?

Yes, yes, I know that for many of us the 41 campaign IS the game, and perhaps we do not like the idea that it might (with "perfect play" from both sides) be as one-sided scenario as, let's say, the 44 campaign.

If this is to become the final product then a warning disclaimer should be on the PBEM when playing Germany and also on any advertisement to create sales.

might I suggest:

"You are about to participate in a simulation that cannot be changed.

With a sober Russian player a simple husbanding of forces and fortification building will forever doom the German player to many, many futile hours of click fest."

[:D]

all in fun...this will be fixed and it probably is as simple as increasing the build times for fortifications until mid 43 or even limiting effects.

[raizer]

its the trains..everyone is telling me Im a retard for complaining about them but they give too much mobility to a good soviet player-and there are small scenarios for this game too, and the trains have an even more profound effect in those games

[alfonso]

ORIGINAL: pipewrench

all in fun...this will be fixed and it probably is as simple as increasing the build times for fortifications until mid 43 or even limiting effects.

You can already change that in the options screen, although for the whole war, not only until 1943. Maybe it can be tested which value makes the game more interesting, or historic, or whatever, and make it the new 100% neutral value...I know nobody likes to play PBEMs with values different from default...

[gradenko2k]

I think the general consensus in other threads was that it's possible for the German player to reach troop levels and lines that roughly equal or slightly than historical by summer 1942, as long as you're prepared for it.

Unfortunately, you don't get nearly as much striking power as loading up the actual 1942 scenario, because TOE changes will basically screw you over on exp and morale levels.

The next patch should help that, along with reducing the amount of manpower you can expect from the Soviets, as well as limiting the Soviet's ability to retain high morale numbers.

[randallw]

I believe the 1.03 patch ( not the one being worked on but the last released ) has dice rolls that can drop a unit's morale if it's above national morale; applies for all nationalities in the game.

[Krieg]

Historically the Germans tried to encircle and eliminate as many Soviet formations as possible. They believed that by destroying the Soviet Army at the operational level, the Soviet Union would crumble at the National level. Turned out that was not the case and the Soviet Army could not be eliminated in the numbers needed to cause a collapse. So I would think that in WiTE, in order to satisfy people and not have them playing a game that is doomed from the start as the Germans, that their needs to be something built into the programming that would allow for that national collapse. For example if the German player thinks that manpower is the key to breaking the Soviets then he would go over the manpower centers for the Soviet Union and also eliminate as many Soviet Forces as possible so that the Soviet Army is defeated and at the National level the Soviet Union Collapses. Now this is just an example and I am not saying it would always be the case, but I think you need to allow players to develope their approach to the campaign and that approach if successful would have some impact on the game. As it stands now I try and try to encircle as many Soviet Units as possible, but I dont see how that affects the Soviet Army. They constantly receive reinforcements so I grind my Army trying to achieve an objective that has no apparent impact on the game. I should at least see, if I am successful, grinding the Soviet Army down in 41 so that the winter 41 counter attack does not materialize or if so not at the strength levels it would be if i did not eliminate those units. Again I am not trying to illustrate the only example of how German objectives should impact the Soviet Army and their future operations but just one in which German actions result in a reaction on the Soviet side. Unless you are just trying to make a historical game only with no leeway for deviation, then there should be some approaches that are possible for the Germans to achieve and a resultant affect on the Soviet Army. In any case, I love the game and despite whether patches nerf it or not I still have a blast playing it and it is one of the best WWII games imo out there. Oh well just my two cents!

[Swenslim]

Common, a lot of people play in WITP AE for Japan side which is  definitly doomed from the begining. But in this game german side  is not doomed, it has real chance to win  in the 1941.

[alfonso]

Besides, if the Axis player has 40 VP or more at the end, he wins. Some players here seem to think that an axis victory in the game is conquering the Urals or something like that.

[BletchleyGeek]

ORIGINAL: gradenko_2000
Unfortunately, you don't get nearly as much striking power as loading up the actual 1942 scenario, because TOE changes will basically screw you over on exp and morale levels.

That's very unfortunate and destroys - for me - the fun of the campaign. I've decided to throttle down my PBEM GC a bit, waiting for a fix for that. That way I expect - actually, I want - my opponent to put together a nice show in 1942.

[BletchleyGeek]

ORIGINAL: raizer
its the trains..everyone is telling me Im a retard for complaining about them but they give too much mobility to a good soviet player-and there are small scenarios for this game too, and the trains have an even more profound effect in those games

I think that the MP cost for training and de-training should depend on Admin leader checks. Nonetheless I think that these changes would be far more damaging to the Axis player, especially from 1942 onwards.

Soviet units which have to board a train, travel some significant distance, like say, from the Volkhov river to Moscow, and de-train usually have only 5 or 6 MPs left. Not enough to mount a deliberate attack (you can't detrain on a hex adjacent to the enemy).

[2ndACR]

Instead of a throttle down, push hard so you know what to look for once Beta 3 is released and then re-start so he can take advantage of the OOB changes etc.

That is what I plan to do anyway.

[BletchleyGeek]

ORIGINAL: 2ndACR
Instead of a throttle down, push hard so you know what to look for once Beta 3 is released and then re-start so he can take advantage of the OOB changes etc.

Ach. The thing is that we have now a quite interesting strategic situation. He's taken Leningrad so he has the Finns but has also taken heavy losses there and elsewhere. I keep Rzhev and Vyazma after a massive motorized offensive was stalled by my troops 8 hexes southwest of Moscow. I also keep the Donbass. He's been reading people AAR's and he's figuring strategies to weather the impending Winter Storm. I consider him good enough to turn the tables on me, provided that he can get proper replacements in 1942. I think it would be waste, unless something really silly happens (such as the Soviets entering Poland in late 1942).