Extended Lvov

[76mm]

ORIGINAL: Ketza

I recall with my 76mm game pocketing vast numbers of Soviet divisions yet struggling to get to 3mill.

IIRC you got to 3.9 million by the blizzard.

[TulliusDetritus]

ORIGINAL: Tarhunnas

Never played WitP, but I did play UV, but tired of it when I constantly beat up the AI. I used to switch sides every 3 months or so just to make things more challenging. I probably should have moved on to PBEM, but never got around to it. Maybe I should try WitP AE. No pockets I suppose! [:)] I am getting a case of pocket-phobia here [;)].

I did play PBEM Uncommon Valor games (really fun). But I have always stayed away from PBEM in WitP. It's a huge committment. The game literally takes years to finish [X(] WitE is much better for that.

And yet you can notice the AARs section of the Witp AE forum is always crowded, with many AARs going on. People are weird, or should I say crazy! [:D]

[Michael T]

I have been watching the game evolve from the sidelines for a few months now since my game with 76mm ended and doing a lot of practice play in my limited spare time

Be careful admitting to that, its deemed unfair and against the rules by some.....

[mmarquo]

Michael,

Your post about the linearity of gas consumption got me thinking; most board games such as EFS give OOS penalites to units after a move or two of being "out of supply", even if they have not moved at all. It would be a real accounting nightmare to do otherwise; any ideas?

Marquo

[Michael T]

@ Marquo, I can't see any way around it unless you were prepared to use some extra counters. So once the unit moves (assuming its OOS) place a 'has moved' counter on it.

[Ketza]

Oh I must have been thinking 3mill instead of 4mill.

Hey 76mm!

[Ketza]

ORIGINAL: Michael T

I have been watching the game evolve from the sidelines for a few months now since my game with 76mm ended and doing a lot of practice play in my limited spare time

Be careful admitting to that, its deemed unfair and against the rules by some.....

I have practiced both AE and WITE Axis moves to death. I think my Japanese AE moves are hardcoded in my brain at this point

[Emx77]

ORIGINAL: Aurelian

ORIGINAL: Encircled

Its not like Michael not to mention any German bias!

I'm amazed that all those AAR's result in Soviet captures of Berlin by '43.

Too many to count.

What do you count? Do you count all games, including those abandoned by '41/'42, or games only played till very end?

[heliodorus04]

Has anyone ever simply thought to implement a Turn 1 house rule where Germany may not break down any units into regiments on Turn 1 (those that start broken down are under no requirement to reform - that's a very small number of regiments in infantry only)?

I know, I'm crazy, but the game needs quite a few house rules as it is, so why not see how the game evolves with that simple attempt at balance first? No programming required.

Note:
This is why you shouldn't put me on your Ignore list, but whatever, Joel, Flavius...

[Aurelian]

ORIGINAL: Emir Agic

ORIGINAL: Aurelian

ORIGINAL: Encircled

Its not like Michael not to mention any German bias!

I'm amazed that all those AAR's result in Soviet captures of Berlin by '43.

Too many to count.

What do you count? Do you count all games, including those abandoned by '41/'42, or games only played till very end?

Sarcasm at times is wasted. (IOWs AFAIK there are no PBEM AARs where the city falls. Even in Terje's, Berlin hasn't fallen yet. If there is one, I'd like to read it)

[lycortas]

I hate getting involved in this crap. I do not always agree with Flavius.
But MichaelT, you are an hypocritical twit. I disagree with virtually every point you try to make. The only thing i agree with is ZOC costs should be scaled or simply removed for very small units.

How about friction? It is cute watching you whine about how the game cheats for the Soviets and your poor Germans have to take every advantage they can find to win. Friction should vastly increase MP costs out of a hex another unit has moved out of this turn. Funny how you do not mention this.

I have read quite a few of the AARs on here and have not read any where the Soviets reached Berlin. "Hi, i am a German player, i can't reach Vladivostock by August, the game is unbalanced! I am going to quit! Wah!"

[heliodorus04]

ORIGINAL: lycortas

I hate getting involved in this crap. I do not always agree with Flavius.
But MichaelT, you are an hypocritical twit. I disagree with virtually every point you try to make. The only thing i agree with is ZOC costs should be scaled or simply removed for very small units.

How about friction? It is cute watching you whine about how the game cheats for the Soviets and your poor Germans have to take every advantage they can find to win. Friction should vastly increase MP costs out of a hex another unit has moved out of this turn. Funny how you do not mention this.

I have read quite a few of the AARs on here and have not read any where the Soviets reached Berlin. "Hi, i am a German player, i can't reach Vladivostock by August, the game is unbalanced! I am going to quit! Wah!"

Your preamble of feigned reluctance is what looks hypocritical.

Yes, yes maybe "Friction should be increased" the more units enter a hex.
But then, how will that affect the Soviets in your hypothetical world?
You have the divisions, which were so historically unwieldy that they were replaced by brigades in the course of 1941 to alleviate that problem. So divisions would have to pay more than Brigades, and Soviets should pay more than Germany, wouldn't you agree?

Then, corps should pay more for these kinds of moves, yet.

But let's backtrack a little. Doesn't the game already give the Soviet 500% advantage to switch divisional HQs compared to Germany (actually, Helio, it's 500 to 700% cost advantage, prior to any successful leadership check, which would halve that figure).

But since none of the Sovie-o-phile community thinks that's 'a-historical' that Stavka is 5 times more efficient at central command than Germany throughout the game, then you'll pardon me if I have a difficult time thinking that any game-wide re-balancing effort a Sovie-o-phile suggests would hit the Soviet as hard as it does the German side.

Because the community majority is a conclave of toddler-whiners who, again let me remind you for the record, will decry anything that gives Germany the ability to do something different than was done in the war, and will use any sliver of an anecdote to justify game-wide Soviet advantages.

Next time you want to stay out of it, just listen to that voice, and stay out of it.

[76mm]

ORIGINAL: heliodorus04
Because the community majority is a conclave of toddler-whiners...

haha, this is actually pretty funny coming from the biggest toddler-whiner of them all.

In the meantime, perhaps you could explain how you came to the conclusion that the Sovs have a 500% advantage to switch div HQs?

[Aurelian]

ORIGINAL: lycortas

I hate getting involved in this crap. I do not always agree with Flavius.
But MichaelT, you are an hypocritical twit. I disagree with virtually every point you try to make. The only thing i agree with is ZOC costs should be scaled or simply removed for very small units.

How about friction? It is cute watching you whine about how the game cheats for the Soviets and your poor Germans have to take every advantage they can find to win. Friction should vastly increase MP costs out of a hex another unit has moved out of this turn. Funny how you do not mention this.

I have read quite a few of the AARs on here and have not read any where the Soviets reached Berlin. "Hi, i am a German player, i can't reach Vladivostock by August, the game is unbalanced! I am going to quit! Wah!"

Well, what's hypocritical is how he will use exploits against you, but doesn't want you to use them against him.

[Aurelian]

ORIGINAL: 76mm

ORIGINAL: heliodorus04
Because the community majority is a conclave of toddler-whiners...

haha, this is actually pretty funny coming from the biggest toddler-whiner of them all.

In the meantime, perhaps you could explain how you came to the conclusion that the Sovs have a 500% advantage to switch div HQs?

I'd like to know that myself. Especially with the constant lack of APs. What to do? Build six divisions? Six Rifle Corps? Beef them up with SUs? Turn those tank/mech brigades into Corps then build a Tank Army HQ? Shift things around so those 10CP armies can get up to 18CPs?

Only 60 per turn to spend.

[carlkay58]

Helio's basis of the 500% advantage for the Soviet vs Axis is that is requires about 1 AP for a Soviet XX to be moved around while a German XX requires 5 or 6 AP. He also did a long explanation and examination of Soviet vs Axis leader abilities and discovered that the Soviet leadership was better than the Axis. Unfortunately, he based it entirely on the Administration ability and only compared the highest Soviet ratings vs the entire German ratings. He never did answer my questions on that, but he did take the time to do the calculations for the whole thing. Unfortunately, while Soviet leaders are great at pushing paper, it only helps in a very small section of the war, the Axis superior ratings in the other abilities (such as Initiative, the combat ratings, etc.) are used in many more instances and kind of determine who actually wins the fight - the Soviets can just pick and choose their side of the fight slightly better. Oh well.

[Aurelian]

A Soviet division is not comparable to a German one. A Soviet Rifle Corps is a better one to make a comparison vis a vis AP cost.

[76mm]

Moreover, the Sovs have much more to spend APs on than the Germans do, so each Sov AP is "worth" more. What he says might have some validity, but without knowing more it is difficult to say. In any event, it is hard to take him very seriously given that he is constantly in heavy-whine mode.

[Aurelian]

Yeah, changing those "better than the German" Sov leaders isn't cheap. Wonder why I even bother if they're better.

[Schmart]

ORIGINAL: heliodorus04
But let's backtrack a little. Doesn't the game already give the Soviet 500% advantage to switch divisional HQs compared to Germany (actually, Helio, it's 500 to 700% cost advantage, prior to any successful leadership check, which would halve that figure).

Well, since the Germans are far more likely to pass the leadership check on a regular basis, we can generally assume the cost is actually half, so instead of 500% we're down to 250%. We could also say that the Russian Army is roughly 250% larger than the German Army and has many more transfers to make, so now we're about equal in transfering costs. But wait:

It costs more to switch a Soviet Tank Corps than a Panzer Division, when in fact Tank Corps were generally smaller in size.
Historically, Rifle Divisions were typically at least 1/2 of the size and strength of a German Infantry Division.
A Rifle Corps (much more comparable in strength and quality to a German Division) costs more to transfer than any German Division.
A Cavalry Corps (really a Division in size and strength) costs more to transfer than any German Division.
A Mech Corps (comparable to a Panzer Division in size and strength) costs more to transfer than any German Division.
It costs the same to transfer a burnt out Tank Brigade (300 men) as a full strength Rifle Division (10,000 men).

And then there's the pesky problem of the Russians having to use APs to replace loses and build an Army, which is difficult enough as it is with the given APs, and I'd suggest that building a historical OOB is actually impossible if you have to replace historical loses.