Is WiTE Balanced?

[Aurelian]

ORIGINAL: elmo3

ORIGINAL: Aurelian

...But on what target though....

"Berlin, flat as a pancake." Bonus points if you know who said that, but you'll be showing your age.

Sgt Schultz of Hogan's Heroes. Hogan turned him into a military genius, having London bomb targets the ole Hans picked, all to divert the bad guys into defending the wrong target.

(I'll hit 52 next month.)

[M60A3TTS]

ORIGINAL: Aurelian

ORIGINAL: elmo3

ORIGINAL: Aurelian

...But on what target though....

"Berlin, flat as a pancake." Bonus points if you know who said that, but you'll be showing your age.

Sgt Schultz of Hogan's Heroes. Hogan turned him into a military genius, having London bomb targets the ole Hans picked, all to divert the bad guys into defending the wrong target.

(I'll hit 52 next month.)

The real target was Zuglitz. Don't know if there are double bonus points for that. [:)]

[Aurelian]

ORIGINAL: M60A3TTS

ORIGINAL: Aurelian

ORIGINAL: elmo3




"Berlin, flat as a pancake." Bonus points if you know who said that, but you'll be showing your age.

Sgt Schultz of Hogan's Heroes. Hogan turned him into a military genius, having London bomb targets the ole Hans picked, all to divert the bad guys into defending the wrong target.

(I'll hit 52 next month.)

The real target was Zuglitz. Don't know if there are double bonus points for that. [:)]

[:D] We get to share the prize.

[elmo3]

Wow you guys are good, and old. [:'(] I'll be 61 in May...

[wadortch]

Hey, let's start some discussion about nuking the Italians and moon exploration.
Can we get back to 2 coded game changes?
1) Game ends end of May, 45.
2) Auto victory VP set at 260.

Both of these changes will make both sides go for it, not turtle.

[AFV]

I just finished (well sorta) my first GC, vs AI, normal, 1.05.
As the Axis, I totally mangled the SU (not bragging, it was just normal, but hey, my first game).
For the hell of it, I took Baku. I also took Leningrad, Moscow, and Stalingrad, and I have still not gotten 290 points, Any human SU player would have quit long ago.
Point is, 290 VP is ridiculous high for Axis auto victory- seriously.
Someone in another thread, or maybe this one, said well if the Axis have an auto victory point, so should the Soviet, and I agree. When a game is at that point, and you know it when you see it, its not fun anymore, the game is over, and should be coded as such. Don't make me "fix" it myself with house rules. I bought the game, you fix it!
 

[janh]

ORIGINAL: AFV

I just finished (well sorta) my first GC, vs AI, normal, 1.05.
As the Axis, I totally mangled the SU (not bragging, it was just normal, but hey, my first game).
For the hell of it, I took Baku. I also took Leningrad, Moscow, and Stalingrad, and I have still not gotten 290 points, Any human SU player would have quit long ago.
Point is, 290 VP is ridiculous high for Axis auto victory- seriously.
Someone in another thread, or maybe this one, said well if the Axis have an auto victory point, so should the Soviet, and I agree. When a game is at that point, and you know it when you see it, its not fun anymore, the game is over, and should be coded as such. Don't make me "fix" it myself with house rules. I bought the game, you fix it!

Depends on whether PBEM or AI? If playing PBEM, I can see how players want a fair game with even a criterium that allowed a chance of success rather than replaying some kind of alternative history with the well-known, and realistically inevitable end -- i.e. be able to win by delaying and performing better than history or such.
I guess for PBEM a shorting of the campaign to late June would make most sense, since at least by then the Western Allies would have waited no longer and occupied Berlin themselves (whatever implications for the relationship with Stalin might follow).
However, best would indeed be avoiding to fix the Victory to some deadline, but rather to some "holding VP sites for X turns" rule, since that would also avoid "VP raids". Also, assume that the Soviets would by some chance get to Berlin several months earlier than assumed by the victory rules -- then the game ought to be over after a few turns (in which Axis fails to retake it, showing it is on its knees...).
If there is an option to continue after the victory screen, any change to victory rules would be fine with me since players can still themselves decide how long to slug it out.

Against AI, I would not ask for any change of V rules. That would simply be unnecessary. And any time spent by the devs on coding new victory rules that could as easily be covered by house-rules will simple be time that could have instead been spent on coding significant improvements to the engine. In that sense, a consensus on house-rules for those that are unhappy with the present V conditions would seem most desirable...

From the poll it seems anyways that there would be no compromise that would make everybody happy, perhaps half of the players at best... Maybe Joel should have differentiated in the poll between PBEM and AI players?

[Jeffrey H.]

ORIGINAL: Farfarer

..but I want to move the whole German army back to safe winter quarters as all of captured russia is a complete strategic liability of no value in the game... save Leningrad for the Finns.

You've solved the puzzle.

[gradenko2k]

ORIGINAL: elmo3
Wow you guys are good, and old. [:'(] I'll be 61 in May...

25 this March. Is there an award for youngest player?

ORIGINAL: AFV
I just finished (well sorta) my first GC, vs AI, normal, 1.05.
As the Axis, I totally mangled the SU (not bragging, it was just normal, but hey, my first game).
For the hell of it, I took Baku. I also took Leningrad, Moscow, and Stalingrad, and I have still not gotten 290 points, Any human SU player would have quit long ago.
Point is, 290 VP is ridiculous high for Axis auto victory- seriously.
Someone in another thread, or maybe this one, said well if the Axis have an auto victory point, so should the Soviet, and I agree. When a game is at that point, and you know it when you see it, its not fun anymore, the game is over, and should be coded as such. Don't make me "fix" it myself with house rules. I bought the game, you fix it!

This is pretty much how I feel as well. Saying that those 290 VPs are needed because the Soviets would never have surrendered is a political wrinkle that we as players have already been freed from everywhere else. From a purely military POV, holding everything from Leningrad down to Baku would mean that Operation Barbarossa has been a success and then some.

[wadortch]

Just to be sure everyone following this thread knows. Joel has posted started two "Polling" threads wherein votes are being taken regarding the end of game date and auto-victory VP total adjustments.

[Tentpeg]

Joel is giving us a chance to make a real impact on the the game.

To all of those who care it is time to vote.

[Mehring]

Back to the thread title, no it's not, and it's getting worse.

After two PBEMs as Germans way back in the beginning, I switched to playing Russian as it was more of a challenge. If the Russian survived the first year in reasonable shape, things became tediously easy for the Russians but 1941 was a nail biter against all but the most inexperienced opponent.

I would have expected 1941 to have become slightly easier and late war substantially more difficult for Russia after so many patches, but as of mid August 1941 in patch 1.06, Russia now looks like unplayable against a skilled opponent.

I'm playing an old opponent again. Last time, I took Berlin in late 1943. This time, by turn 8, that is mid August, he's approaching Leningrad, Moscow and Tula, has taken Kharkov and for the most part is under 40 MP from supply net. Because the Russsians are so slow, particularly moving into enemy hexes, and weak, he is able to skeleton man his extended flanks and concentrate phenomenal force at a few key points.

The NKVD are all but gone, even forts stuffed with sappers and RR diggers seem to drink tea instead of building defences. I'm so far ok with arms evacuation but 20 vehicle and all Kharkov's T34s were lost. I could so far only evacuate three HI, the rest, too bad. But now I have just encountered for the first time the worst rule I have yet witnessed in WitE. All the hexes inside a pocket not adjacent to my combat units turned to Axis control. A picture is a thousand words so-

[Mehring]

and after. This was accomplished by just a handful of Axis units in a week-

[Mehring]

In case anyone thinks he's been driving right down behind my lines, he hasn't.

The rule states that this loss of ground simulates the contraction of units on being pocketed. What if they want to get out of the pocket? They have to pay to move through enemy hexes the enemy could not possibly have converted. It makes a mockery of the logistical brake supposedly applied to the Axis in 1941.

[Flaviusx]

Mehring, you gotta picket the whole Axis line, man, and make them think twice about those narrow penetrations. ZOC the whole thing, one unit every 3 hexes, keep in contact with the enemy at all times. Yes it's expensive and you'll lose the units more often than not, but there it is. If they ignore your picket line you can cause them a ton of headaches.

[wadortch]

Well, if you took Berlin in 1943 there were some player errors involved as there would also be with a loss of Kharkov on Turn 8, don't you think?

[Mehring]

ORIGINAL: Flaviusx

Mehring, you gotta picket the whole Axis line, man, and make them think twice about those narrow penetrations. ZOC the whole thing, one unit every 3 hexes, keep in contact with the enemy at all times. Yes it's expensive and you'll lose the units more often than not, but there it is. If they ignore your picket line you can cause them a ton of headaches.

I don't see it in 1.06 Flavius. Sure, a picket would have slowed the southward drive a bit, a division or two actually did, but that 40+ MP division he's saved for the final drive will usually get through, just like the turn before, it got through my main line and countless pickets in front of Kharkov, as well as the garrison, to take the city. That's always been the case, and it's good play. But I'm highlighting a shift in play balance which makes the Russians phenomenally weak in 1941 in stead of making them stronger, which when playing German, I thought they needed.

The Russians can barely move and attack and they can barely move through enemy controlled ground, let alone through ZOC. You need 5 or 6 Russian divisions to hit one German regiment, and that's starting to look like an army, not a picket. So unless the Axis railnet is within a hex or two of the front, what headaches can the Russians cause these days? A smart Axis player will ignore a Russian picket and be thankful for the handfull less divisions between him and the Russian industry.

The summer 1941 game looks to me like having moved in the wrong direction and this pocket hex loss rule is absurd.

[Flaviusx]

I'm doing it now and it's working just fine, Mehring.

Admittedly I'm playing a GC with random weather and just got crushingly generous gift: mud in South and Central Soviet on turn 5.

[Mehring]

ORIGINAL: Flaviusx

I'm doing it now and it's working just fine, Mehring.

Admittedly I'm playing a GC with random weather and just got crushingly generous gift: mud in South and Central Soviet on turn 5.

I always play random weather, but the gods haven't smiled on me yet. I trust your opponent is grade 1 material, but let's see how it goes. meantime my objections stand.

[AFV]

The game has changed. Previously, it took very little effort/dkill to get a decisive victory as the Russian. Now it is more evenly matched, and I believe you are seeing that.

I don't think the summer of 41 has moved in the wrong direction, however I was not aware of the hex flip rule and not really sure I am on board with that.

FYI, I will put $10 on Flavio to win his current game, because I do not believe it is unbalanced in the Axis favor. It will be good to see how new AARs play out, and we will have confirmation of the current balance.