Bandwagon or reality for non-elite players?

[willgamer]

I see a number of posts lamenting the OP 1.02x German juggernaut. This does make me curious if many non-elite players, using the full PP game, are experiencing similar easy victories vs. the AI.

I don't see many AARs vs. the AI using the full PP game.

So I wonder who's winning with no helpers, no what ifs, and starting options that are at least this difficulty level?

[Flaviusx]

Hell, I beat the AI on 1.01.

[WingedIncubus]

I am uncomfortable eith the idea that Helpers are considered cheats.

It is wriiten black and white in the game manual that there are circumstances when it becomes necessary to court defeat and VPs to push the red button. It is part of the design.

Do it too much, and you risk losing anyway. I could see a desperate Soviet player call a all-retreat order... or a general counter-offensive.

[Falke]

ORIGINAL: willgamer

I see a number of posts lamenting the OP 1.02x German juggernaut. This does make me curious if many non-elite players, using the full PP game, are experiencing similar easy victories vs. the AI.

I don't see many AARs vs. the AI using the full PP game.

So I wonder who's winning with no helpers, no what ifs, and starting options that are at least this difficulty level?

With Normal AI, Historical and Geneva conventions

1.01 - As Russian, took Königsberg at end of october ending the game. Warsaw was about to be taken. In South was pushing
back after retaking Kharkov

1.02 As German. Took Rostov at end of october to finish game( Moscow beginning of october, lennigrad end September).
The russians had under 700k troops left. BUT had no Mud delaying.

1.02 As Russian - Not finished, but in November was starting to push back, but had to divert a lot of reinforcements
to the south.



In General the 1.02 changes:-

i) Make it harder to form a solid early block in the centre (Good IMO)
ii) Significantly delay the use of defensive posture (Not so good)

[willgamer]

ORIGINAL: Flaviusx

Hell, I beat the AI on 1.01.

LOL!!! You must have missed the non-elite player part [&o]

[:D] [:D] [:D]

[Speedysteve]

I still say let's not make or ask for any rash changes. I do believe 1.02 is probably too nerfing on the Sovs but we must also remember all we can see and base our views on are our individual games played and public AAR's. There'll be 10 fold that number of games that are played behind closed doors vs AI and PBEM. Let's hope they have metrics turned on and Vic and Cameron can see the macro view.

[governato]

ORIGINAL: Speedy

Let's hope they have metrics turned on and Vic and Cameron can see the macro view.

Metrics is by far my favorite feature of this game, and there are many that I like!

[baloo7777]

ORIGINAL: Speedy

I still say let's not make or ask for any rash changes. I do believe 1.02 is probably too nerfing on the Sovs but we must also remember all we can see and base our views on are our individual games played and public AAR's. There'll be 10 fold that number of games that are played behind closed doors vs AI and PBEM. Let's hope they have metrics turned on and Vic and Cameron can see the macro view.

Well, I am as far from an elite player as is possible, without being a complete noob (been wargaming since the days of AH Afrika Korps), and I have metrics turned on too. This should help compensate for at least 1 or 2 of you "elite" players...[8|]

Seriously though, the AAR's and this forum are like textbooks on what to do (and NOT do) and I appreciate this.

[warspite1]

ORIGINAL: baloo7777

ORIGINAL: Speedy

I still say let's not make or ask for any rash changes. I do believe 1.02 is probably too nerfing on the Sovs but we must also remember all we can see and base our views on are our individual games played and public AAR's. There'll be 10 fold that number of games that are played behind closed doors vs AI and PBEM. Let's hope they have metrics turned on and Vic and Cameron can see the macro view.

Seriously though, the AAR's and this forum are like textbooks on what.... NOT [to] do.

warspite1

Glad to be of service [;)]

[ChuckBerger]

Just finished a 1.01 game against Russian AI, took all three major objective by October 4 and eliminated the Red Army. (AI had less than 500K troops left, and about half of those were encircled and doomed.)

The AI, though very good, still allows large-scale encirclements. If you aren't biting off chunks of 15-30 divisions from the AI's front, things will be much harder, though victory by November or December should still be not all that difficult against regular AI.

[willgamer]

ORIGINAL: ChuckBerger

Just finished a 1.01 game against Russian AI, took all three major objective by October 4 and eliminated the Red Army. (AI had less than 500K troops left, and about half of those were encircled and doomed.)

The AI, though very good, still allows large-scale encirclements. If you aren't biting off chunks of 15-30 divisions from the AI's front, things will be much harder, though victory by November or December should still be not all that difficult against regular AI.

How were your options set (see first post)?

[ChuckBerger]

Exactly as in your first post, except with "slow" AI. No alternate history options or helpers used.

[Vic]

ORIGINAL: ChuckBerger

Just finished a 1.01 game against Russian AI, took all three major objective by October 4 and eliminated the Red Army. (AI had less than 500K troops left, and about half of those were encircled and doomed.)

The AI, though very good, still allows large-scale encirclements. If you aren't biting off chunks of 15-30 divisions from the AI's front, things will be much harder, though victory by November or December should still be not all that difficult against regular AI.

The v1.02 AI received a number of extra master classes in strategic situation comprehension. It should prove less sensitive to large scale encirclements.

Best wishes,
Vic