What's going on???

[vicberg]

Please note the modified combat values. 188 Sov to 137 German. How did that becomes a 2.3 to 1? I thought the 1-1 becoming a 2-1 for Soviets was removed? Am I correct?

[elmo3]

See 5.4.11.3. That is the modified combat odds that determined who won and lost the battle, not the odds at the start of the battle.

[vicberg]

yes, take a look.

Modified 188 to 137 is 1.3 to 1. But the final result was 2.3 to 1. I thought the 1-1 becoming a 2-1 for the Soviet in blizzard was removed.

[KenchiSulla]

Its removed somewhere in 1942, not during blizzard..

[vicberg]

OMG. LOL. Thanks. I'll probably be stopping my games soon.

That's unbelievable.

[KenchiSulla]

Why?

[vicberg]

Well let's see....

If you don't mule, and the Soviets do an orderly retreat without standing their ground too much, whether carpet or checkboard, Germans can't encircle or do enough damage to either to the Red Army or the production centers before they are shipped out.

If you can't damage either, you face a huge army, made worse by the massive impacts of the blizzard and now the 1-1 becomes 2-1 rule, leaving the German army absolutely incapable of doing much in 42. This is my third game against a good carpet/hedgehog, without muling, and the same results are happening repeatedly. BigAnorak says that a war of attrition can work and for him it is, but I haven't seen his early turns to figure out what he did in 41 or what his opponent allowed him to do.

Throw in that FOW is too extreme in this game, hasty attacks only allowed from a single hex, and no true probe or recon type attack to determine the contents of the hex and the games nothing but frustration for the Germans. Who on earth wants to play a frustrating game?

[karonagames]

I know how frustrating the game can be as I have quit testing/playing 3 times. While on a break I analysed what was causing my frustration and figured out the ways and means to overcome my problem, and each time I came back I enjoyed the game more.

One thing I learned was to not get fixated on specific freak results - you can plan the best attacks in the world and then have Gary's halving attacks/doubling defence ruin your day. It takes a lot of practice to run an effective offence that doesn't rely on muling, and if you make too many mistakes an offensive can stall.

At the end of the day, it is not how you play, but who you play, and in very general terms, the player who makes the fewest mistakes will generally come out on top. If you look at my "another year at the front" AAR, I made major mistakes up to turn 17, but my opponent made a bigger mistake by allowing me to grind him down to levels where I could survive the blizzard with relative ease. In 1942 he made an even bigger mistake that I took full advantage of that forced his surrender.

Take a break, analyse your game honestly and figure out what you could be doing better. I'd be happy to play a scenario like Road to Moscow with you and give you a few pointers.

[vicberg]

I'll consider it.

Two things you said are key:

1) Who you play. If the Soviet doesn't make a mistake in 41, it's extremely difficult for the Germans in 42. Too much so. Having played the Soviets for the first time against a relatively inexperienced German player, I can say that the Soviets are WAY more forgiving and since winning this game as the German is categorized by not losing, it's out of balance. Most games should last until 44 or 45, not just the games where the German's have had a successful 41.

2) Gary's games are too extreme, period. I've seen the same massive AV shifts in WITPAE as well as CV in this game. Plus production is too extreme for the Soviets, FOW is too extreme, etc., etc., He has wonderful ideas, brilliant. They get executed strangely.

[AFV]

Is there a patch note someone can point to that indicates 1:1=2:1 for the Soviets was removed only sometime in 42 but not for prior to that?

[JAMiAM]

Read the "readme" file. It's called that for a reason...[;)]

ORIGINAL: AFV

Is there a patch note someone can point to that indicates 1:1=2:1 for the Soviets was removed only sometime in 42 but not for prior to that?

Ps...it's searchable. From the Windows Start Menu, choose WITE from the Programs Menu, then the WhatsNew, then search by the original Rule Section number (15.8).

You should be returned the following result.

29) Rule Change – The Soviet attack doctrine discussed in section 15.8 of the manual now
only applies from June 1941 to February 1942 (inclusive).

My work is done here. You may contact me regarding payment of my usual fee...[;)]

[Klydon]

What Big A said for the most part.

That the 1:1 becomes 2:1 got turned off after a certain point early in the game was a fairly big change (and needed).

One of the things you may want to look at from this battle (rest of us can't see it from the screen shot) but was the FZ attached to OKH? If it was, you took a huge negative modifier hit to your CV.

Was this an AI attack? I find it interesting they attacked with a big pile of cav corps with apparently no support units directly attached.

Note that the Russians did suffer more casualties than the Germans in this battle despite the fact that they "won".

[karonagames]

Gary's games are too extreme, period. I've seen the same massive AV shifts in WITPAE as well as CV in this game

Yep, that was one of the issues that stopped me playing - the degree of variance drove me nuts. In the end I accepted that the variance affects both sides and evens out over the length of a full game. I still wince when I see some of the really freaky stuff, but I don't throw stuff at the screen any more!

[vicberg]

The 1-1 to 2-1 rule is absolutely one of the most absurd rules I've come across. Let's see. 1/3 the CV of the defenders and bump the up the odds of the attackers. And I guess that blizzard used to be MORE extreme for the Germans? It comes under the category of "what planet were you on when you designed this game because it certainly wasn't Earth!"

[vicberg]

ORIGINAL: BigAnorak

Gary's games are too extreme, period. I've seen the same massive AV shifts in WITPAE as well as CV in this game

Yep, that was one of the issues that stopped me playing - the degree of variance drove me nuts. In the end I accepted that the variance affects both sides and evens out over the length of a full game. I still wince when I see some of the really freaky stuff, but I don't throw stuff at the screen any more!

Yep, that was one of the issues that stopped me playing - the degree of variance drove me nuts. In the end I accepted that the variance affects both sides and evens out over the length of a full game. I still wince when I see some of the really freaky stuff, but I don't throw stuff at the screen any more!

I'm not there yet. I still throw stuff. "Hey, I got an idea. Let's create a game where every attack is an absolute crapshoot? What do you say guys? Who's for it?" Gary is a brilliant game designer, but he really needs someone to reign him in and my understanding is that he's the principle programmer in these fuzzy logic routines that do the heavy lifting in his games. Oh boy.

[Baron von Beer]

It's in the readme, just doesn't include 2:1, odds, etc in the entry which I imagine most people searched for (I know I did).

29) Rule Change – The Soviet attack doctrine discussed in section 15.8 of the manual now only applies from June 1941 to February 1942 (inclusive).

[karonagames]

I can't really comment, as I now know the blizzard inside out, and find that the 1.06 blizzard relatively easy to cope with. Again it takes planning and preparation to get all the ducks in a row, If you suffer a net loss of more than 400 hexes come the end of March, only then will you be doing badly. I have yet to see axis strength lower than it was historically at the start of Case Blue in any published AAR. Pelton lost 50 divisions, but he never published the numbers.

I tested the game when 1:1 +1 existed permanently, and saw that reserve mode was the counter-balance to this, hence I developed a defence designed to make maximum use of this mechanic. It works even better when the +1 is taken away. The soviets suffer additional losses with +1 in place, and it is possible for them to attack themselves to death and be very vulnerable come the March snows.

[RCHarmon]

BigAnorak,

I would like to see a write up or a demonstration of your blizzard defense. If you have a informative link then please provide it. Myself, I have reserved to just run. I hate running, but any mistake is very bad for the Axis.


Thanks

[Tophat1815]

ORIGINAL: RCH

BigAnorak,

I would like to see a write up or a demonstration of your blizzard defense. If you have a informative link then please provide it. Myself, I have reserved to just run. I hate running, but any mistake is very bad for the Axis.


Thanks

+1 to see what/how you did it as well

[Helpless]

the degree of variance drove me nuts.

Biggest contributor for the (visual) variation is FOW. Non-modified CV for the defending side in reports are recon values which are usually much higher then actual CV.