Barbarossa

[Orm]

ORIGINAL: bo

ORIGINAL: Orm

I am glad that you feel you play better now. [:)]

Playing Barbarossa over net play might be happening soon. [:)]

Playing better now as the Germans Orm, have not seen much testing of netplay lately.

Bo

Just remember, Bo, that you play against a renowned master who is undefeated when playing the Soviet Union. [:)]

[gw15]

Tested netplay Barb Monday night. Still needs work but it has come a long ways in the past 6 months.

[Rasputitsa]

ORIGINAL: Neilster

It's worth noting that the historical Red Army set-up was awful, with forces and supply dumps etc far too far forward and just asking to be overrun or encircled. Added to this was the incompetent handling of the Red Army early in the campaign, such as stand-fast orders and suicidal counter-attacks.

Aside from the Moscow or Kiev debate, OKH handled the German forces professionally. In MWiF, the Soviet player is likely to play the Red Army in a superior manner to Stalin/STAVKA. As a result, it's no surprise if the historical outcome is difficult to achieve. A complicating factor is that it appears for play balance reasons that the early war Wehrmacht is stronger than historical.

Cheers, Neilster

Absolutely correct and the source of the play balance issues in wargaming Barbarossa, because, if you give the Soviets an accurate OOB and any decent command and control they become unbeatable very early on. In reality Soviet command and control quickly collapsed, dependent on fixed line communications, with little use of radio, as soon as units began to move the communication system broke down.

Soviet commanders didn't know where the Germans where, didn't know where friendly troops were, recon was negligible, if you reproduce that in a game it becomes unplayable for the Soviet side, with the Soviet player looking at a mainly blank map and unable to control most units.

Soviet standing orders were to immediately counter-attack and carry the battle onto the enemy's territory, with no realistic doctrine, or training, for defence and a probable death sentence for failure to carry out orders.

No Soviet player will want to use such a strategy, so the historical outcome is not possible, unless there are fudge compromises, or use an AI that will behave that way. [:D]

[pzgndr]

ORIGINAL: Jagdtiger14

...I think the Barbarossa scenario is meant only as a WiF training experience/tool.

Of course, but given that the setups could be improved. And as I mentioned, there should be different Fast Starts for the different rule sets. Ditto for Guadalcanal scenario. Surely some of the wizards here could take a little bit of time to do that so others can train accordingly?

[bo]

ORIGINAL: pzgndr

ORIGINAL: Jagdtiger14

...I think the Barbarossa scenario is meant only as a WiF training experience/tool.

Of course, but given that the setups could be improved. And as I mentioned, there should be different Fast Starts for the different rule sets. Ditto for Guadalcanal scenario. Surely some of the wizards here could take a little bit of time to do that so others can train accordingly?

Hi pzgndr, how are you glad to see your still around. Wizards? Where is that playing [:(] There are no wizards, there are just beta testers and non beta testers who want to see a great game come together someday. There are experienced board game players who may have never played Guadalcanal or even Barbarossa.

Why should beta people take the time that most of the players here can set up a scenario better than I can. The game has been out a year and a half now and even though I vehemently disagreed with the release of this game it is what it is. I have set up numerous new games in every scenario including Fascist Tide and Day of Infamy.

I personally like to try new setups with different rules in play, a new game setup can be done in a matter of minutes with Guadalcanal and Barbarossa scenarios, of course somewhat longer with Global War. Some might disagree but I think a new player benefits in doing new game setups but then again that is just my opinion.

The beta testers are now on the same ship as the general public is and to put this on wizards or beta testers makes no sense to me at all, and if the name of the ship is the Titanic, guess what, we all go down together.[:(] Or we fix the gash in the hull together and sail on, MWIF gamers choice [;)]

I am just a player like the rest of you nothing more nothing less.

Bo

[pzgndr]

Bo, we know we can manually set up our own scenarios. The whole point of Fast Starts is convenience. And seeing different setups with the different default rule sets gives us something to think about, and ideally these should be good setups that newbies can learn from. This isn't a tough request really. It's more annoying not seeing any bones like this thrown our way. Oh well.

[bo]

ORIGINAL: pzgndr

Bo, we know we can manually set up our own scenarios. The whole point of Fast Starts is convenience. And seeing different setups with the different default rule sets gives us something to think about, and ideally these should be good setups that newbies can learn from. This isn't a tough request really. It's more annoying not seeing any bones like this thrown our way. Oh well.

Understood now pzgndr, what you say makes sense, bones should be thrown paying customers way, but everyone I know, Steve and beta testers are still working on game problems, hopefully after the game gets all of its problems fixed, half maps, optional rules, bugs etc. whatever, then and only then we could possibly construct some very good fast starts with different optional rules in each one.

Bo

[Twisted1]

"You must be out of your mind. And why is your transmission not in code?" Soviet HQ to forward commander, morning of June 22, 1941

[bo]

ORIGINAL: Twisted1

"You must be out of your mind. And why is your transmission not in code?" Soviet HQ to forward commander, morning of June 22, 1941

Cool, I love levity thrown into the posts, well done[;)]

Bo

[Twisted1]

>Cool, I love levity thrown into the posts, well done

Thank you Sir!

[juntoalmar]

On my personal experience, Germany advances fast until the rain/snow falls... and that's almost the end of it. I'm still learning how to play better, but I either play really bad with the russian in the first two turns (which I do) and Germany has some luck with the dices, or it's almost impossible to me to win as German player.

[DQ2004]

Just some of my thoughts on Barbarossa (more with a mind to the overall campaign rather than the introductory scenario, but it is all relevant).
It is definitely different with solitaire (which I'm not very good at doing), but for mine it is much harder for the Russians. Yes you have time on your side until the winter but even then you are vulnerable in 1942.
For the Germans it is simple.
You do not need to take any ground at all. None.

What you need to do, and fast, is to destroy Russian armies. And you need to do it faster than they can be replaced.
Your moves on the first impulse of any turn are critical to the rest of the turn. Firstly, you don't want to flip any of your HQs if you can possibly avoid it. Being able to move units forward and keep them supplied is essential.

A smart Russian will be on the lookout to flipping an HQ and will happily sacrifice a TAC unit to do so. It could mean saving half of his army.
Secondly, what you need are kill-stacks. It may seem obvious but its worth repeating. Two or three groups of high-strength units (preferably a mix of ARM, MECH, MOT & INF) that will wander about the front destroying stacks or single Soviet units at will. Your other units are there to mop up and block OOS Russians from retreating so that you can finish them off later.
The Russian will have no choice but to retreat from the kill-stacks and in that retreat you will find further stragglers to pick off and destroy.

Thirdly, it's best that if you have an O-chit not to use it unless you need to smash open his line. It's also best to have at least two O-chits available to use, so that when the first has blasted his front to smithereens he is still living in perpetual fear of the other one. The Russian won't use his own free O-chit unless he's a fool - not in the first summer of the Barbarossa campaign, that's for sure. Only if the Wehrmacht is doing very badly and you want to kick them while their down. The other reason why you don't want to blow those offensives too quickly is because then your HQ is bogged down in the middle of Poland and will do you no good at all.
Fourth, use your aircraft wisely. TAC ground-strike as little as possible - two or three unit stacks only, and only if they'll be OOS later when you move past them. No point in flipping units in Kiev or Minsk unless you've nothing better to do. Try not to intercept Frontal Aviation counterattacks unless you have spare FTR - why? Because you will be laughing later when you overrun & destroy those short-range Russian pieces of junk.

You should start off with a decent air-superiority - don't waste it all in the first impulse.

Five, keep an eye on his HQs. Try to put them under pressure. If nothing else it makes Soviet counter-attacks harder, and of course best of all they are expensive units to replace. Once the Russian loses an HQ he will start getting nervous about the others and may be more inclined to retreat than sit there and cop a pile of panzers.

Finally, as before, I don't believe that it's worth worrying about particular objectives. It's nice to get Leningrad but it's not critical. It's nice to get Moscow but it won't break the Russians, although it is a bonus.

It is far better to overrun factories and destroy them. Once you start getting near them Stavka will have to start railing them out to avoid losing them, and that means armies won't be moving about by rail.
But all of that is going to happen if you are concentrating on destroying the Soviet armies.
Regards

[Jagdtiger14]

Very good DQ! This is exactly the way it goes in Barbarossa. The first real stand the USSR try's to make is at the Dnieper. After that the factory line, and after that the Volga. Rostov is a city the Russians typically defend heavily, and the Germans desire greatly as it is the gateway into the Caucuses. In the Rostov area the USSR has to be careful to not get too committed and trapped...and trapped is easy to be there.

And this is why I like to save the two O-chits and not use them in France (I would prefer to not have to buy another one if possible). Germany really does need at least two O-chits from the outset of Barbarossa.

[Ur_Vile_WEdge]

You're taking a huge risk by not using the O-chits in France. A tough French setup, I'm not even talking a Big BEF or a strategy where you funnel a ton of BP's to the French, often requires an O-chit to crack, or at least an O-chit to crack in an acceptable timeframe without much in the way of losses. The French can be pretty tough.

[Jagdtiger14]

Ur: It depends on how you conduct your beginning strategy (Fall Gelb vs Fall Weiss)...we had a big debate about this recently in the AAR threads and War Room threads. I've been shocked by a strong French army and BEF in one of my face to face games a long time ago, so since then I prefer to take on France early and not worry too much about Poland (Fall Gelb). I would say its about 50/50 that one O-chit needs to be used, and of course a lot depends on weather and turn ends.

[Neilster]

ORIGINAL: DQ2004

Just some of my thoughts on Barbarossa (more with a mind to the overall campaign rather than the introductory scenario, but it is all relevant).
It is definitely different with solitaire (which I'm not very good at doing), but for mine it is much harder for the Russians. Yes you have time on your side until the winter but even then you are vulnerable in 1942.
For the Germans it is simple.
You do not need to take any ground at all. None.
What you need to do, and fast, is to destroy Russian armies. And you need to do it faster than they can be replaced.
Your moves on the first impulse of any turn are critical to the rest of the turn. Firstly, you don't want to flip any of your HQs if you can possibly avoid it. Being able to move units forward and keep them supplied is essential.
A smart Russian will be on the lookout to flipping an HQ and will happily sacrifice a TAC unit to do so. It could mean saving half of his army.
Secondly, what you need are kill-stacks. It may seem obvious but its worth repeating. Two or three groups of high-strength units (preferably a mix of ARM, MECH, MOT & INF) that will wander about the front destroying stacks or single Soviet units at will. Your other units are there to mop up and block OOS Russians from retreating so that you can finish them off later.
The Russian will have no choice but to retreat from the kill-stacks and in that retreat you will find further stragglers to pick off and destroy.
Thirdly, it's best that if you have an O-chit not to use it unless you need to smash open his line. It's also best to have at least two O-chits available to use, so that when the first has blasted his front to smithereens he is still living in perpetual fear of the other one. The Russian won't use his own free O-chit unless he's a fool - not in the first summer of the Barbarossa campaign, that's for sure. Only if the Wehrmacht is doing very badly and you want to kick them while their down. The other reason why you don't want to blow those offensives too quickly is because then your HQ is bogged down in the middle of Poland and will do you no good at all.
Fourth, use your aircraft wisely. TAC ground-strike as little as possible - two or three unit stacks only, and only if they'll be OOS later when you move past them. No point in flipping units in Kiev or Minsk unless you've nothing better to do. Try not to intercept Frontal Aviation counterattacks unless you have spare FTR - why? Because you will be laughing later when you overrun & destroy those short-range Russian pieces of junk.
You should start off with a decent air-superiority - don't waste it all in the first impulse.
Five, keep an eye on his HQs. Try to put them under pressure. If nothing else it makes Soviet counter-attacks harder, and of course best of all they are expensive units to replace. Once the Russian loses an HQ he will start getting nervous about the others and may be more inclined to retreat than sit there and cop a pile of panzers.
Finally, as before, I don't believe that it's worth worrying about particular objectives. It's nice to get Leningrad but it's not critical. It's nice to get Moscow but it won't break the Russians, although it is a bonus.
It is far better to overrun factories and destroy them. Once you start getting near them Stavka will have to start railing them out to avoid losing them, and that means armies won't be moving about by rail.
But all of that is going to happen if you are concentrating on destroying the Soviet armies.
Regards

If I could make one suggestion mate, it's to break your posts into spaced paragraphs. I found that block of text a bit difficult to read.

Cheers, Neilster

[Ostwindflak]

I wish I understood the rules and game mechanics more to really get into this game like you guys. I have found playing my war board games to be easier to pick up and learn than I have with MWiF.

I still come here to read the posts about the game such as these last few above mine as I find it interesting still even though I can't seem to get a hold on this game.

[bo]

ORIGINAL: Ostwindflak

I wish I understood the rules and game mechanics more to really get into this game like you guys. I have found playing my war board games to be easier to pick up and learn than I have with MWiF.

I still come here to read the posts about the game such as these last few above mine as I find it interesting still even though I can't seem to get a hold on this game.

If I lived in one of the most beautiful states in America I would be outside enjoying the view instead of being concerned by some computer war game [;)]

But putting that aside where and how can I help you? I knew nothing about this game until I became a beta tester 4 years ago, I still find the game mind blowing with all it's nuances, if you are a beer and pretzel player like me and many others the game becomes daunting even just setting the different scenarios up.

With all the problems Steve seems to be having with netplay I had given up for awhile as I really do not like solo play. The last week or two I have been tackling Barbarossa with vigor and malice [;)] I go back over and over trying different tactics such as ground attack instead of ground support, bypassing units instead of taking them out at a cost of time and casualties.

I am enjoying the game again even though it is me against me and of course the die roll [:(] This is not a beer and pretzels game it is far beyond that but in reality I could never go back to those kind of games again as there is nothing there. Errrr except the beer and pretzels [;)]

Bo