Hell bent on Lebensraum (no 821Bobo)

[sillyflower]

Hats off to you Michael for 'optimising ' German supply which makes you unbeatable ( ably assisted by your 1st turn move in the South that I have copied ever since[:)]) but it just makes it unplayable for the Russians

[Michael T]

David, I have refined that Southern opening now to something even better. But glad you find it useful. And since our game my supply optimization has improved by around 20% I would reckon.
Anyway I think I will probably play as Russian next up, but not sure yet.

[Flaviusx]

Yeah. It's amazing what you can do when logistics cease to be a constraining factor.

We should have nuked HQ buildups in retrospect. I voted against doing this and now regret it.

[Peltonx]

Yes I am going back to my old system of supply also.

I thought they were going to nerf it so I went to a more standard system of only a few hq build ups (1 in north and 3 in south) and no muling.

All my 1.06 games were basicly normal games, so going back to old rotation. I am guessing it be a while before I catch up to you on the logistics curve heheheh, but I be close enough.

[Peltonx]

MT let Robert know my computer has a cold and it be a few days before I can do a turn, thks

[comsolut]

The poeple that have given me the most trouble fight before river (Hoooper 1.03, Kamil 1.04 and Flaviusx 1.05), the easyest run to rivers. The river crossing has to be held for 7 turns by russian player. If the German gets over before that, its trouble for the Red army until the blizzard hits. Saying you can't fight forward just is not true.

Your AGS advance is about normal over the river turn 6, again down here logistics is really not an issue until the 2nd turn over the river. D-town turn 4, Kharkov turn 6 and Stalino turn 7 is above average. Your enemy foolishly did not run over river and paid for it. I just dont see any kind of defence down here at all.

-----------

Pelton, your killing me here. [:-] I have been reading and listening to your advice to try and improve my game, since I consider you one of the top German players. So which is it - fight before the river or run to the river. I took your first advice and I am getting slaughtered in a PBEM game in the South because I fought before the river. And my opponent complimented me on my defensive lines but he believes in your second statement that fighting before the river just does not work (too close to German supply and extra German army from Grp 2), and after the thrashing I am getting, I think so too. It tough to to try and fight the supply system and fight forward as the Russian (maybe impossible).

By the way - not a personal attack - I'm just confused and want you to continue and post all your opinions. It is how I learn, that and getting smacked around a lot. [&o]

[Flaviusx]

ORIGINAL: Pelton

Yes I am going back to my old system of supply also.

I thought they were going to nerf it so I went to a more standard system of only a few hq build ups (1 in north and 3 in south) and no muling.

All my 1.06 games were basicly normal games, so going back to old rotation. I am guessing it be a while before I catch up to you on the logistics curve heheheh, but I be close enough.

Don't get too comfy with that. Micheal T has presented an open and shut case for eliminating the buildup entirely and I'm very tempted to go back and present the issue for reexamination. We came close to doing so. You could remove it entirely and the game's logistics are still far too generous for the offensive. The buildup is just overkill on top of the rail situation.

Honestly, are you guys not even slightly troubled by how over the top this is? This is pure fantasy. I find it very ironic too given the way Micheal beat the drum for months for the silly alt scenario, a scenario he probably will never need to play since he wins the game in 1941 every time as a result of his scheme to bypass logistical constraints completely.

As I stated uptopic, this is glorious, but it's not war.

[Flaviusx]

ORIGINAL: comsolut

The poeple that have given me the most trouble fight before river (Hoooper 1.03, Kamil 1.04 and Flaviusx 1.05), the easyest run to rivers. The river crossing has to be held for 7 turns by russian player. If the German gets over before that, its trouble for the Red army until the blizzard hits. Saying you can't fight forward just is not true.

Your AGS advance is about normal over the river turn 6, again down here logistics is really not an issue until the 2nd turn over the river. D-town turn 4, Kharkov turn 6 and Stalino turn 7 is above average. Your enemy foolishly did not run over river and paid for it. I just dont see any kind of defence down here at all.

-----------

Pelton, your killing me here. [:-] I have been reading and listening to your advice to try and improve my game, since I consider you one of the top German players. So which is it - fight before the river or run to the river. I took your first advice and I am getting slaughtered in a PBEM game in the South because I fought before the river. And my opponent complimented me on my defensive lines but he believes in your second statement that fighting before the river just does not work (too close to German supply and extra German army from Grp 2), and after the thrashing I am getting, I think so too. It tough to to try and fight the supply system and fight forward as the Russian (maybe impossible).

By the way - not a personal attack - I'm just confused and want you to continue and post all your opinions. It is how I learn, that and getting smacked around a lot. [&o]

There's no contradiction here. The Soviet can delay some in the south. A pure runaway to the Dnepr makes things too easy for the Axis. It's especially important imo to throw up some kind of screen to slow down the infantry and force the German to clear lanes of advance with his mobile units -- and make them move north or south rather than east.

Mind you, this will only buy you a turn or two, but every little bit helps.

[KamilS]

Flaviusx

ORIGINAL: Pelton

Yes I am going back to my old system of supply also.

I thought they were going to nerf it so I went to a more standard system of only a few hq build ups (1 in north and 3 in south) and no muling.

All my 1.06 games were basicly normal games, so going back to old rotation. I am guessing it be a while before I catch up to you on the logistics curve heheheh, but I be close enough.

Don't get too comfy with that. Micheal T has presented an open and shut case for eliminating the buildup entirely and I'm very tempted to go back and present the issue for reexamination. We came close to doing so. You could remove it entirely and the game's logistics are still far too generous for the offensive. The buildup is just overkill on top of the rail situation.

Honestly, are you guys not even slightly troubled by how over the top this is? This is pure fantasy. I find it very ironic too given the way Micheal beat the drum for months for the silly alt scenario, a scenario he probably will never need to play since he wins the game in 1941 every time as a result of his scheme to bypass logistical constraints completely.

As I stated uptopic, this is glorious, but it's not war.

Open and shut case? hmmm


How many other players have achieved as much as him?

Shouldn't we judge by referring to majority of results?



Michael progress is incredible, but apart from his tactical and logistic skill I assume it is the case of limited skill of his opponent too.

[Encircled]

Non-random weather?

Only going to keep happening if you play with knowing exactly what it is going to do for the next four years

[Flaviusx]

Kamil, what he's doing shouldn't possible by anybody. And eventually others will figure out how to do it.

[KamilS]

Flaviusx

Kamil, what he's doing shouldn't possible by anybody. And eventually others will figure out how to do it.

It depends how well his opponent played.

If he was competent and Michael has to do some intensive fighting, then yes that speed of advance is very wrong.


But I don't think it is case of build-ups only, because everyone uses them and effects are well known and accepted. It is more than that, and without knowing what Michael is doing any changes can be counter-productive.

[Michael T]

The only things silly around here Flavius are your uninformed and biased opinions. I hope 2by3 ingnor your dribble entirely. You have no idea how I play the game or what my opponents do or don't do.
 
I have said it before. Take HQBU away and the game does not work. Period. Replace it with something better is the only answer. But to subscribe my successes down to nothing more than using HQBU is simply insulting.
 
I would not even bother playing the game as *Russian* without HQBU. To cite Pelton, even a monkey could win as Russian without HQBU.

[Ron]

ORIGINAL: Flaviusx


Don't get too comfy with that. Micheal T has presented an open and shut case for eliminating the buildup entirely and I'm very tempted to go back and present the issue for reexamination. We came close to doing so. You could remove it entirely and the game's logistics are still far too generous for the offensive. The buildup is just overkill on top of the rail situation.

Your knee jerk reaction is right on cue, proving again you really have no perspective. If you really have any sway as you allude, then the worse for the game.

[Flaviusx]

ORIGINAL: Michael T


The only things silly around here Flavius are your uninformed and biased opinions. I hope 2by3 ingnor your dribble entirely. You have no idea how I play the game or what my opponents do or don't do.

I have said it before. Take HQBU away and the game does not work. Period. Replace it with something better is the only answer. But to subscribe my successes down to nothing more than using HQBU is simply insulting.

I would not even bother playing the game as *Russian* without HQBU. To cite Pelton, even a monkey could win as Russian without HQBU.

I was one of the folks who rejected this, btw. I have since changed my mind. You are largely the reason why Michael. What you're doing is indefensible.

Also, if you get a chance, here's the best book I've read yet on German military logistics in 1941. (The sequel is also quite good.)

http://www.amazon.com/Operation-Barbaro ... 828&sr=1-2

[Michael T]

Flavius you are not privy to what transpires in my games. You only see the result. For example there was not a single unit between the Donets and Stalingrad. I had one SS unit that had 46mp because I always keep if possible at least one unit at full fuel to act as a fire brigade or for an opportunistic shot such as this. This one unit drove 170 miles through uncontested open terrain right in to Stalingrad. If Robert had simply placed one Inf unit behind the Don Stalingrad would still be safe.
You can not go around advocating rule changes because of one players success against a few guys whose skill set may not be as honed as mine. If there was a succession of games ending in 1941 between players of roughly equal skill then sure there would be a case for examining the reasons why. But I don't see that right now.

[Flaviusx]

Micheal T, you are 70 miles east of Moscow on turn 12. Res ipsa locquitur.

Are all your opponents incompetent? I'm having a difficult time believing this. You have yet to play a game into 1942. The common theme I see in all your games are these incredible rates of advance that can only be explained by a scheme in which the entire logistical apparatus is being systematically bypassed.

Pelton has already indicated he's going back to HQ muling, and this is pretty obviously what you are doing. I expect lots of other Axis players will start doing this in due course.

[comsolut]

What if, instead of looking at the supply system, we change armor and mech to act like regiments and only convert the control of the actual hex they enter rather than all six surrounding hexes. Would this not make the spearheads a lot more vulnerable to being cut off, make encriclements leak more like they did in WWII, and possibly slow down follow up infantry divisions.

Just an out of box idea, for discussion. Allows the German the option to make the deep drives but I bet they would be very risky.

[vicberg]

He's maximized the process, but it's not hard. There's nothing arcane about this supply model. Always keep two empty HQs back (steal an HQ from a infantry army, if needed) and buildup. Cheap on APs because there's nothing attached to them. Move them to front, reassign troops into built up HQ, rinse, repeat. The only thing is my mind is if he's doing mulling for one or 2 HQs per PZG and how many PZGs per turn? It's quite possible to do 6 HQ buildups a turn (without anything assigned into them) and then transfer divisions over. Fuel in panzers far outweighs SU assignment, leader reassignment.

I don't do it because it's very gamey. These divisions didn't switch HQs every week. Strikes me as maximizing the model vs. playing a game.

But I can understand why it's being done because without it, the Germans can't grab enough land or do enough damage in 41 against a competent Soviet opponent. I've played against 2 inexperienced soviet opponents and without mulling or chaining, I can win and have already won one game. I'm playing against 2 compentent soviet opponents in other games and I've lost the 1st game and the 2nd game isn't going well either. Hedgehog defense without the ability to launch a hasty attack from two spots or defense in depth brings the advance to a halt without serious fuel/supplies and it takes TOO long to get the rail lines up to the front before the campaign season is ended. It takes 10 turns to get a rail lines accross the Denpr in the south. Cross the Denpr before that and your running on fumes without mulling. Same even in the north. Rail lines convert quicker for the most part but it's still a long time while the soviet defenses build up.

Remove HQ buildup? I can live with that. Unnerf the restrictions on rail conversions, reduce the blizzard effects first year, etc. etc., stuff that has already been talked about many times.

[Flaviusx]

Vicberg, in that case I'm wondering if we should disallow buildups on units freshly transferred to an HQ -- make them eligible only for units that begin the turn attached to the HQ in question.

But something needs to be done about this.

As far as taking too long to push rail lines forward...only true in the very south. (And even there you only pull up short around Rostov and Voronezh, which is a long ways.)

Not true elsewhere. You can get rail lines past Smolensk by the end of August and have a full month of clear weather to attack Moscow. I know because it's happened in my last two games. Leningrad of course is a gimme so far as supply goes.