New retraet rules are no treat

[Wuffer]

@ SigUp
Only very few PzIII were commited at Kursk as Mehring said, by the time the design was considered allready as outclassed for a main battle tank.
And please include the 'kills' of Ferdinands, Tigers and Panthers, as well as StuG's and StuH's
(edit: but you have a point; Kursk was _not_ a tactical soviet victory if one compare the losses..)

But 12'ooo operating German AFV's with a 4.5 mio army??????
Quite fertil, this folks...

As you are playing pbm, why not just move back to the last turn without the beta(b e t a )?

[Wuffer]

@ chaos
afaik, Viga has hibernated 2(two) armies of inf. and panzers each(!) in Prussia...
obviously now equipped with Leopard tanks

[SigUp]

ORIGINAL: Wuffer

@ SigUp
Only very few PzIII were commited at Kursk as Mehring said, by the time the design was considered allready as outclassed for a main battle tank.
And please include the 'kills' of Ferdinands, Tigers and Panthers, as well as StuG's and StuH's
(edit: but you have a point; Kursk was _not_ a tactical soviet victory if one compare the losses..)

Army Group Centre tank losses 5-14 July 1943:

2nd Panzer Division: 14 Panzer IV
4th Panzer Division: 6 Panzer IV
9th Panzer Division: 2 Panzer IV
12th Panzer Division: 1 Panzer IV
18th Panzer Division: 2 Panzer III, 9 Panzer IV
20th Panzer Division: 1 Panzer III, 3 Panzer IV

505th PanzerAbteilung: 4 Tiger
177th StuGAbteilung: 1 StuG
185th StuGAbteilung: 3 StuG
189th StuGAbteilung: 1 StuG
244th StuGAbteilung: 5 StuG
245th StuGAbteilung: 2 StuG
904th StuGAbteilung: 2 StuG
909th StuGAbteilung: 3 StuG
656th PzJägerRegiment: 19 Ferdinand
216th StuPzAbteilung: 10 StuPz

Army Group Centre tank losses July 1943

2nd Panzer Division: 13 Panzer III, 29 Panzer IV, 3 BefPz
4th Panzer Division: 3 Panzer III, 15 Panzer IV, 1 BefPz
5th Panzer Division: 11 Panzer III, 43 Panzer IV, 1 BefPz
8th Panzer Division: 14 Panzer III, 24 Panzer IV, 3 BefPz
9th Panzer Division: 7 Panzer III, 18 Panzer IV, 1 BefPz
12th Panzer Division: 13 Panzer IV, 1 BefPz
18th Panzer Division: 14 Panzer III, 12 Panzer IV, 1 BefPz
20th Panzer Division: 3 Panzer III, 20 Panzer IV, 1 BefPz

505th PanzerAbteilung: 5 Tiger
216th StuPzAbteilung: 17 StuPz IV
656th PzJägerRegiment: 39 Ferdinand

Army Group South tank losses 5-17 July 1943

3rd Panzer Division: 6 Panzer III, 3 Panzer IV
11th Panzer Division: 2 Panzer III, 3 Panzer IV
Großdeutschland: 3 Panzer III, 16 Panzer IV, 1 StuG
Leibstandarte: 1 Panzer III, 9 Panzer IV, 1 Tiger, 1 StuG
Das Reich: 1 Panzer III, 6 Panzer IV, 1 Tiger, 1 StuG
Totenkopf: 2 Panzer III, 8 Panzer IV, 1 Tiger, 1 StuG
6th Panzer Division: 3 FlammPz, 9 Panzer III, 13 Panzer IV
7th Panzer Division: 8 Panzer III, 2 Panzer IV
19th Panzer Division: 8 Panzer III, 19 Panzer IV

503rd PanzerAbteilung: 3 Tiger
10th PanzerBrigade: 44 Panther
911th StuGAbteilung: 3 StuG
905th StuGAbteilung: 5 StuG
228th StuGAbteilung: 1 StuG
393rd StuGBttr: 5 StuG

Total tank and assault gun losses along the entire Eastern Front from 1 July to 31 August 1943 amounted to 1331 units.

[sillyflower]

ORIGINAL: Wuffer

@ chaos
afaik, Viga has hibernated 2(two) armies of inf. and panzers each(!) in Prussia...
obviously now equipped with Leopard tanks

You should try playing 'Making History 2'. My Pz units were all equipped with Leopard tanks when I invaded Russia in 1940, whilst ME 262s protected them from bombing raids by massed Russian airships.

That has to be the worst WWII game ever..............

[gingerbread]

Hmm. Seems risky using Me 262s against airships. Loose cloth can clog the air intakes to the jet engine.

[loki100]

ORIGINAL: Wuffer

@ SigUp
Only very few PzIII were commited at Kursk as Mehring said, by the time the design was considered allready as outclassed for a main battle tank.
And please include the 'kills' of Ferdinands, Tigers and Panthers, as well as StuG's and StuH's
(edit: but you have a point; Kursk was _not_ a tactical soviet victory if one compare the losses..)

But 12'ooo operating German AFV's with a 4.5 mio army??????
Quite fertil, this folks...

As you are playing pbm, why not just move back to the last turn without the beta(b e t a )?

problem with going back is there is plenty in the patch that is good. Sorting out the German swapping bugs should improve the end game (for both sides). The over-powered air changes can be controlled by a simple houserule. Also I'd spent the two turns before the patch setting up a trap, and the last 4 turns slowly putting it in place. Not got a clue if it will work (or if I will have any tanks left by the time its over) but with the best will in the world vigabrand can't ignore the threat to his flank at Kiev.

so really there is no point going back. Clearly I've just got to put up with an imposed change and lose 1000 tanks a week. I am really impressed at how well equipped German security regiments are as even they are now deadly if a Soviet tank gets near to them.

We'll have to see, but if the recent trend of the German Pzr divisions to become stronger as my armour weakens then this becomes another game lost due to the impact of patches ... at least it got to 1944 so that is an improvement.

[Peltonx]

Games are all different and some small things add up.

Looking at a 1 battle or even a few turns is not helpful.

You need a 10 turn sample window and yes I know this sucks as I have had to do it for yrs.

I feel your pain loki as you probably are right, but for sure grind all along the front - rifle Corps generally win games

[Wuffer]

@SigUp
the forum software eat my longish comment.
Thanks anyway for clarification - impressive data, especially as Kursk was interpreted as a great _tactical_ victory for the Red Army...
nearly everyday the remains of previously not counted victims are found, so the real casuality numbers by the Russians will probably for ever unknown.
In WiTE terms, they crushed a forficationed hex, level '3' I would guess, guarded by at least one reinforced Guards Rifle Corps including reserve activations by at least one additional Tank Corps, perhaps more. And all were utterly trashed.
Anyone is free to his own conclusions regarding the defensive values of RCs in the game.

[Wuffer]

@ Loki

ok, a calm analysis of the battle results came to following concerns

(1.) He is very near to the 'Endsieg', because SHG's will to fight is breaking.

(2.) You acted on determinated assumptions - for example that the Red Army will conquer Berlin someday, that he was broken in the blizzard, that your tanks were superior etc. - which is not only dangerous in wars, but also could very easily come to utterly devasting results (especially, one might add, if your are fighting Prussia, lol. Ask whomever you want, but don't forget the Czar.
No, seriously, the millions of battlehardend soldiers you face are indeed astonishing; even more, as it is impossible for Germany to field such an army (we could neglect Austria for a moment). There is only one conclusion: This aren't Germans! Somehow they found a lot of volunteers... Let's take for example your partisans: While they might have been useful once in a while in blowing up some minor railroads, there overall numbers are... very small. One would exspect hundred of thousend taking arms against the foreign occupier, but no, alltogether they are no more than a few clustered squads. But where are all the other guys gone? Yes, you guessed it. Some of them were not allowed to take arms.

(3.) Let's be honest: Your tanks are crappy. And your army sucks.
At some point, however, this will change.
Unfortuneatly your advisers have lured you in the dangerous assumption, even twice, that the German army was beat and finished, as if some weaks in the winter could break their spirit, what a myth.
So, at some point you have to kill'em all - it's hard at the beginning, as Pelton said, but it will improve.

(4.) Especially with a new patch, lol

ps: you gave up muuuuuch to early against SigUp...
again based on questionable comparisions - but neglecting the little fact that it's a GG game, lol

at some point, they will crash.
it's up to you, Loki Germanicus.

[Michael T]

and the game gets no better, possible worse.

Inclined to agree with this

[loki100]

ORIGINAL: Wuffer

..., that your tanks were superior etc. - which is not only dangerous in wars,

....
ps: you gave up muuuuuch to early against SigUp...

To be fair, I'm not saying the first. There are plenty of comments in the AAR (well before the patch) about how outclassed the T34/76 was by this stage of the war and how that was really pushing up my tank losses. I was losing 4-600 in an active week before the patch (ie more than production) and accepted that as perfectly reasonable.

The problem in the game with SigUp was fundamental. If you added up rail points used I had *enough* HI and Arms Pts, but I didn't have enough HI once the .08.01 patch shifted the basis of industrial strategy. Apart from in very narrow corridors my army was under-supplied. That meant in turn I was not recovering to the shifting NM - don't forget I was fighting the summer with a NM of 38. You try attacking when 70% of your rifle divisions at the end of 1943 are 1 cv (and low on morale) and you even have rifle corps at 4 cv.

Without that I would have carried on - not least you learn a lot as the game moves through its various phases. I didn't/don't care about winning, I play a game this length for the enjoyment and the process. So if in that game the best I might have done was to clear the USSR by mid-45 I'd have been happy to go on. But the supply situation was ridiculous and making it pointless.

I am very conflicted over the patch process. I like the dedication to bug elimination, I like the willingness to bring in new ideas. I realise what 'beta' means but this is something like the 4th massive change in the .08 iterations that really messes around with the game system. Over two patches we've gone from airpower being meaningless to vastly over-powered all to address a non-problem (that most players used a simple house rule to control for). Now apparently the German tanks need to be protected again radically shifting how the game plays out.

[morvael]

Unfortunately this requires a bit of patience, and is risky so that's why I created Patch Archive for those who want to fall back to an earlier version. But all games such as yours offer invaluable feedback that we miss during patch development process, and this feedback is used to tweak new features. Speaking of 1.08.09: with extra protection for German AFVs removed and ability to retreat with little losses reduced the numbers show a certain improvement. Because replacements now prioritise fighting elements over support elements, the battles are more bloody, yet units remain a bit stronger. I will now consider improving repair skills of the Soviets for late war phase, that should help with tank losses in late war a bit.

[Iorwerth]

Don't want to butt in here, but I am a new player and was thinking of starting my first full campaign against the AI. Should I hold off until the problems talked about in this thread have been patched? Just that it is such an huge investment of time and I don't want it to be pointless because of some current problem with the current game. I may have misunderstood what you are all talking about, as it is a bit above my pay grade, so may be worried for nothing, but thought I would ask. Hope you all don't mind my asking it on this thread.

[loki100]

ORIGINAL: Iorwerth

Don't want to butt in here, but I am a new player and was thinking of starting my first full campaign against the AI. Should I hold off until the problems talked about in this thread have been patched? Just that it is such an huge investment of time and I don't want it to be pointless because of some current problem with the current game. I may have misunderstood what you are all talking about, as it is a bit above my pay grade, so may be worried for nothing, but thought I would ask. Hope you all don't mind my asking it on this thread.

you should be fine. This change seems to affect 1941 to some extent with much lower German tank losses at that stage. But I don't think that really matters as 1941 is all about movement not combat. I guess it will help the Germans quite a bit towards the end of the summer as they will have an even stronger tank force than usual but I don't think its game breaking.

With the Soviets, up to the end of 1942 you can't really use all the tanks you produce in any case. So this is really only messing up games that have got into mid-43 or later when the Soviets become much more reliant on their armoured formations.

[Iorwerth]

Thanks [:)]

[BrianG]

I reiterate that the new retreat attrition rule are horrible. In blizzard, I just retreated german units thru zoc. 12 casualties.

Other battles as well, some really low for blizzard. And I don't think these were top German units.

I thought they had large number of frozen solders. We should get the historic record of disabled by frostbite and apply it to the blizzard rules.

[M60A3TTS]

I haven't started any games since finishing up with Dave, so I don't know first hand what's being experienced with the latest patch.

Having said that, in looking at some of Loki's combat results, what I see are cases where high Soviet AFV losses occurred and there wasn't exactly an overwhelming advantage in attacker numbers.

Top 5 battles involving Soviet AFV losses:

location men ratio sov afv losses
Birzai 131179 v 37422 3.5 to 1 138 losses
Tetlev 52988 v 32711 1.6 to 1 135 losses
Uman 65529 v 37746 1.7 to 1 133 losses
Zhashkev 47415 v 32191 1.5 to 1 131 losses
Uman 39417 v 23496 1.7 to 1 91 losses

The first battle in my mind makes his point, the other 4 not so much IMHO. Tanks, particularly Soviet ones, are a poor substitute for overwhelming numbers, and in only one of these battles was there a manpower advantage of greater than 2:1. There wasn't a massive application of artillery either, so what I see is a lot of German 43 rifle squads that start showing up in Sept 43 are not suppressed running around with panzerfausts.

If you want to reduce your AFV losses, I suggest applying more men and guns to these battles.

[sillyflower]

ORIGINAL: BrianG

I reiterate that the new retreat attrition rule are horrible. In blizzard, I just retreated german units thru zoc. 12 casualties.

Other battles as well, some really low for blizzard. And I don't think these were top German units.

I thought they had large number of frozen solders. We should get the historic record of disabled by frostbite and apply it to the blizzard rules.

As Brian's opponent, whilst I would rather take all the credit for his relative lack of success in the blizzard, I have to agree that he has a point.

Part of the answer may be that full fat blizzard rules should be the standard again, though that won't help current games.

[ericv]

Have to agree with Brian as well. I only play soviets vs german AI, no serious vs humans going on, but still with the latest patches, german losses are very low, no matter what I try. Deep into 1942. Playing full blizzard doesn't really make a difference. Winning the battles is not the point nor the problem, but german losses are meager at best and without doing real damage, advancing in the blizzard is just going to ruin the trucks. Doesn't reflect the actual war at all. I know this is a model for a game, and a fairly good model, but this issue could be really improved upon.!)

[loki100]

ORIGINAL: ericv

Have to agree with Brian as well. I only play soviets vs german AI, no serious vs humans going on, but still with the latest patches, german losses are very low, no matter what I try. Deep into 1942. Playing full blizzard doesn't really make a difference. Winning the battles is not the point nor the problem, but german losses are meager at best and without doing real damage, advancing in the blizzard is just going to ruin the trucks. Doesn't reflect the actual war at all. ...

here's an attack from my PBEM vs stef78. So the German unit retreated a total of five hexes, through two zocs. I outnumbered it 10-1. Naturally no tanks were even damaged never mind destroyed.