OCT 41 Sapper nerf in recent patches

[HardLuckYetAgain]

ORIGINAL: HardLuckYetAgain

ORIGINAL: Stelteck

Personnally i wonder if there is any use in building any support unit at all (At least until you can add some to increase combat value of cavalry and tank corps), and save the political point to built as much rifle brigade as possible as soon as possible.

Of course you also have to finish each turn with zero political point left in order not to pay "rebuilding unit penalty when you lost a unit" so you may need to buy some support units, but all these support units have so low CV and cause so few looses. Even the good one.

Most are so useless.
- Soviet AA is non existent.
- Soviet AT kill 3/5 tanks but german production is huge so it will not change anything.
- Soviet artillery do little damage with so few number in a support units, only division size artillery unit show a difference. (And you need a lot of them).
- soviet tanks support unit use light tanks and you lack light tanks during the whole war. And they do not do so much damage anyway.
- Sappers were at least usefull for building.
- We do not know if rocket trucks do anything. (And they are really expansive).
- Mortars at least are cheap and have lots of tube which will frighten the ennemy when he analyze the amount of guns in soviet army.

Stacked AA now is "crazy", putting it nicely. I have been beating this drum and one day it will come to light with others when they figure it out.

The unit that has me the "most" excited about, and it is not a SU, it is the damn AT brigade. I used them in this latest patch and got pretty darn good results with them. Been experimenting with Rifle division, AT brigade controlled hex with AT brigades in reserve mode. Been pretty interesting. But in 41 they are cost prohibitive too

[xhoel]

As far as I can tell the Soviets take horrible losses either when they are beaten up badly and have to retreat or when they try to attack in 1941 (should be the case as it actually happened).

In my GC against Bitburgerdraft during T8 my offensive in the sector of AGC got held back by the Soviets and I suffered terrible losses, while the Soviets suffered either losses that were on par with mine or even lower losses than mine. And this wasn't from hasty attacks but deliberate attacks, by 2-3 German divisions with SUs in them, after ground bombing the enemy and with ground support on. I call that pretty fair. This divisions got their fortifications up pretty fast too.
Now I'm not an expert German player and I still learn new things everyday but for me and for most of the Axis players that are not masters of the game (which are guys that you don't see doing AARs or guys that are not active on the forums), the game is not unbalanced and the Soviets are not nerfed as its claimed. Hardlucks strategy for defending Pskov seems to work quite well for the Soviets, maybe you could try employing that or find other defensive strategies that prioritize certain sectors (eg Moscow).

There have been a lot of changes that make being the Axis harder than you think. The HQ Build Up that I did last turn cost me 37 APs. I'd say that's quite a price to pay for doing a HQ Build Up, not to mention the changes done that affect attacking regiments, or that failed attacks cause no morale loss on the attackers which means that as the Soviets you can do soaking attacks every turn and will only pay the price in casualties but not in morale. Changes in AA are also quite good for the Soviets since as the Germans you can no longer do whatever you feel like and bombing cities causes more losses than gains.

If the game favors the Germans till '42, in '43 even if you have done everything within your power to maintain a strong Axis force the tide will turn against you and the Soviets have the upper hand (just check Stef78 AAR).

I would advise you to play the game as the Axis and see for yourself that playing as the Germans is not a nice picnic trip but takes a lot of effort to get everything right and if you are facing a good Soviet player, he will make you pay for every mistake.

This is my take on things as I have been following both the AAR between you and Beender and the comments made about Soviets being nerfed.

Cheers,
Xhoel

[HardLuckYetAgain]

ORIGINAL: xhoel

As far as I can tell the Soviets take horrible losses either when they are beaten up badly and have to retreat or when they try to attack in 1941 (should be the case as it actually happened).

In my GC against Bitburgerdraft during T8 my offensive in the sector of AGC got held back by the Soviets and I suffered terrible losses, while the Soviets suffered either losses that were on par with mine or even lower losses than mine. And this wasn't from hasty attacks but deliberate attacks, by 2-3 German divisions with SUs in them, after ground bombing the enemy and with ground support on. I call that pretty fair. This divisions got their fortifications up pretty fast too.
Now I'm not an expert German player and I still learn new things everyday but for me and for most of the Axis players that are not masters of the game (which are guys that you don't see doing AARs or guys that are not active on the forums), the game is not unbalanced and the Soviets are not nerfed as its claimed. Hardlucks strategy for defending Pskov seems to work quite well for the Soviets, maybe you could try employing that or find other defensive strategies that prioritize certain sectors (eg Moscow).

There have been a lot of changes that make being the Axis harder than you think. The HQ Build Up that I did last turn cost me 37 APs. I'd say that's quite a price to pay for doing a HQ Build Up, not to mention the changes done that affect attacking regiments, or that failed attacks cause no morale loss on the attackers which means that as the Soviets you can do soaking attacks every turn and will only pay the price in casualties but not in morale. Changes in AA are also quite good for the Soviets since as the Germans you can no longer do whatever you feel like and bombing cities causes more losses than gains.

If the game favors the Germans till '42, in '43 even if you have done everything within your power to maintain a strong Axis force the tide will turn against you and the Soviets have the upper hand (just check Stef78 AAR).

I would advise you to play the game as the Axis and see for yourself that playing as the Germans is not a nice picnic trip but takes a lot of effort to get everything right and if you are facing a good Soviet player, he will make you pay for every mistake.

This is my take on things as I have been following both the AAR between you and Beender and the comments made about Soviets being nerfed.

Cheers,
Xhoel

This was directed at Chaos45 or me?

[xhoel]

ORIGINAL: HardLuckYetAgain

ORIGINAL: xhoel

As far as I can tell the Soviets take horrible losses either when they are beaten up badly and have to retreat or when they try to attack in 1941 (should be the case as it actually happened).

In my GC against Bitburgerdraft during T8 my offensive in the sector of AGC got held back by the Soviets and I suffered terrible losses, while the Soviets suffered either losses that were on par with mine or even lower losses than mine. And this wasn't from hasty attacks but deliberate attacks, by 2-3 German divisions with SUs in them, after ground bombing the enemy and with ground support on. I call that pretty fair. This divisions got their fortifications up pretty fast too.
Now I'm not an expert German player and I still learn new things everyday but for me and for most of the Axis players that are not masters of the game (which are guys that you don't see doing AARs or guys that are not active on the forums), the game is not unbalanced and the Soviets are not nerfed as its claimed. Hardlucks strategy for defending Pskov seems to work quite well for the Soviets, maybe you could try employing that or find other defensive strategies that prioritize certain sectors (eg Moscow).

There have been a lot of changes that make being the Axis harder than you think. The HQ Build Up that I did last turn cost me 37 APs. I'd say that's quite a price to pay for doing a HQ Build Up, not to mention the changes done that affect attacking regiments, or that failed attacks cause no morale loss on the attackers which means that as the Soviets you can do soaking attacks every turn and will only pay the price in casualties but not in morale. Changes in AA are also quite good for the Soviets since as the Germans you can no longer do whatever you feel like and bombing cities causes more losses than gains.

If the game favors the Germans till '42, in '43 even if you have done everything within your power to maintain a strong Axis force the tide will turn against you and the Soviets have the upper hand (just check Stef78 AAR).

I would advise you to play the game as the Axis and see for yourself that playing as the Germans is not a nice picnic trip but takes a lot of effort to get everything right and if you are facing a good Soviet player, he will make you pay for every mistake.

This is my take on things as I have been following both the AAR between you and Beender and the comments made about Soviets being nerfed.

Cheers,
Xhoel

This was directed at Chaos45 or me?

Chaos45. I wouldn't advise you to use your own strategy, which is quite impressive btw! [;)]

[VigaBrand]

ORIGINAL: chaos45

Stelteck----I would disagree on Soviet artillery SU-- I love them.

As well the PVO AA Regiment is good....100x 76mm aa guns in 1x SU added to a battle is huge.

Now these are true support units tho as you cant attach them to units later....but I still stand by 6x artillery SU and at least 1 AA regiment per army....perfect would prolly be 2 AA regiments with how much better airpower is.

As all units in the command should get those AA guns in support against directed air strikes.....and then if you get lucky the general will send a regiment into the ground battle either adding some heavy ground fire or even more deterrence vs the air.

I also really like the lowly 120mm mortar BN 36 tubes...support sucks tho....but it will be awhile before you get the 120mm mortar regiment with same tubes and like 4x the support. So poor mans cheap AP/extra heavy artillery support. I also recommend 1-2 mortar BN per army.

You want lots of support units to give the general alot of rolls and it allows a rotation of support units in alot of battles.....so if you lose a couple battles and those support units are beat up hopefully more battles against the same army will see the still fresh support units deployed. I know is a penalty for lots but with lots I find I still get several in most battles as long as the general is at least 5 Init and the HQ stationary.

I also like the rocket trucks as they are basically free aside from some AP....so even more artillery that is auto built for free each turn......I recommend building these.

+1

two years ago I love the sapper regiments. All my cav and tank corps get three of these beasts and the dig in very well, they get extra cv and most important, they reduced axis fortifications in an attack. So there was a no brainer for me, only built sapper regiments. So yes, this was a nerf to the soviets, but now I think new about the SU units in my cav corps.

[chaos45]

xhoel, yes there are certain things you must do as the Axis to do well.

The comment I will make in reply is most of these things the Soviet player cannot impact really at all, as they all happen about T5 or earlier where the soviet player can do little but put up a delaying action if the German player knows what they are doing.

New German players must understand they must have a perfect Turn 1- easily achievable with practice because the Soviet players gets no influence on T1. Then T2 is even more land grab and destroying soviet units......T3 is re-fuel....T4 the German player should be breaking Soviet delaying actions as the German infantry will now be able to hit the land bridge and Pskov and the super limited amount of soviets cannot stop German infantry and armor.

With a perfect german T1- The soviets options are greatly reduced and again only requires practice on the German players part as they have a resettable sandbox to just keep re-trying until they get it right.

I will tell you a bad German opening is almost an auto soviet win if the soviet player knows the game....a good german opening means as long as the german player manages his rail lines and supply its going to be a tight game if they stay aggressive and shoot for soviet weak points...as the soviets will have weak points for most of the early game with the good opening.

Yes you can HQBU and selectively it greatly assists the German advance esp in the south where the soviets virtually have no chance to defend right now.

I would suggest if you feel bad playing germans, play soviets against a skilled german player and you will quickly see you have very little influence on the game until later turns.

As has been stated the patch team has been told several times by different people about the AA issues im sure its being addressed for next patch its off the charts crazy bonus for both sides vs Air. German AA is even more lethal than soviet.

Is alot of really good German AARs you can look at....Germans are now much faster and soviets much weaker CV wise than many of the older AARs....and in many of these AARs guess what the Germans won....and in many of the currently running AARs the Germans are going to get the win when the game ends....Stef won that game long ago, they are just playing it out.

Also let me caveat---I think balance should be done around no +1 advantage for soviets. With the +1 advantage maybe the soviets are just fine, IDK havent had a german in the last couple months will to give me the soviet +1 lol.....So seems maybe that is to good for soviets? esp as hardluck says in the first winter so no germans want to play with that.

So thats a quick rambling snap shot on balance and how the game should play out...I have little forgiveness for german players doing bad openings, they can practice as much as they want prior to game start......I will give the german player some pointers and tell them to practice more.

[Stelteck]

The problem of most support unit (except maybe sapper regiment) is that they are designed to be usefull in combat phase.

Unfortunately, the combat phase is far from being the most important phase of any battle. The most important phase is CV calculation, which is done after the combat phase with the units not disrupted, damaged or destroyed during the combat.
You can have sometimes miraculous and exceptionnels results, but most of the time, the combat phase impact like 2% of the unit, so i'am not sûre it is important to bother with it.

Event for looses, the most important looses are retreat attrition and even frontline normal attrition. I'am not sûre the combat phase change anything.

I'am a little too strong on this opinion here. I noticed that combat phase can have real effect, but you need massive superiority for it.

My guess is that to begin to have a real effect in the result of a battle, you need 3 times the amount of guns than the ennemy. To begin to suppress a a 300 guns german ennemy division, you need 1000. So you need entire artillery divisions for that, and i fear support units that add 24 to 36 guns do not change a lot.

WITE is an awesome games with lots of factors managed, but i hope i'am wrong but i fear that a lots of these factors and parameters are in fact not very usefull and do not change the outcome of the game, and even could be removed from the game without any effect, except for flavor.

I think the combat phase was maybe more important when the game started, but since a lots of hardcoded scripted mecanism have been added, that nerfed this phase a lot.

[xhoel]

ORIGINAL: chaos45

xhoel, yes there are certain things you must do as the Axis to do well.

The comment I will make in reply is most of these things the Soviet player cannot impact really at all, as they all happen about T5 or earlier where the soviet player can do little but put up a delaying action if the German player knows what they are doing.

New German players must understand they must have a perfect Turn 1- easily achievable with practice because the Soviet players gets no influence on T1. Then T2 is even more land grab and destroying soviet units......T3 is re-fuel....T4 the German player should be breaking Soviet delaying actions as the German infantry will now be able to hit the land bridge and Pskov and the super limited amount of soviets cannot stop German infantry and armor.

With a perfect german T1- The soviets options are greatly reduced and again only requires practice on the German players part as they have a resettable sandbox to just keep re-trying until they get it right.

I will tell you a bad German opening is almost an auto soviet win if the soviet player knows the game....a good german opening means as long as the german player manages his rail lines and supply its going to be a tight game if they stay aggressive and shoot for soviet weak points...as the soviets will have weak points for most of the early game with the good opening.

Yes you can HQBU and selectively it greatly assists the German advance esp in the south where the soviets virtually have no chance to defend right now.

I would suggest if you feel bad playing germans, play soviets against a skilled german player and you will quickly see you have very little influence on the game until later turns.

As has been stated the patch team has been told several times by different people about the AA issues im sure its being addressed for next patch its off the charts crazy bonus for both sides vs Air. German AA is even more lethal than soviet.

Is alot of really good German AARs you can look at....Germans are now much faster and soviets much weaker CV wise than many of the older AARs....and in many of these AARs guess what the Germans won....and in many of the currently running AARs the Germans are going to get the win when the game ends....Stef won that game long ago, they are just playing it out.

Also let me caveat---I think balance should be done around no +1 advantage for soviets. With the +1 advantage maybe the soviets are just fine, IDK havent had a german in the last couple months will to give me the soviet +1 lol.....So seems maybe that is to good for soviets? esp as hardluck says in the first winter so no germans want to play with that.

So thats a quick rambling snap shot on balance and how the game should play out...I have little forgiveness for german players doing bad openings, they can practice as much as they want prior to game start......I will give the german player some pointers and tell them to practice more.

@Chaos45
It's nice to engage in discussion in a constructive manner about something that we both see differently.

Yeah turn 1 is an advantage to the Germans but that is an advantage that is given to them because of how the actual Barbarossa went down. The game must be able to capture the shock and the power that the Germans unleashed on the Soviet units correctly and turn 1 allows players a couple of choices as to where they send some of their PzGroups. I don't expect you to forgive a German player that makes a terrible T1, and most expert German players have done T1 so much that they will rarely give you a chance to break a pocket or do anything that would hurt them.

Is turn 1 what decides who wins or not? I don't think so, or at least my experience is not that. I messed up one of my T1 in the GC and 2 out of 3 pockets got broken. In the end around T11 my opponent gave up after his whole Southwestern front got surrounded on the Dnepr.

On the matters of the HQ Build Up, yes it does help the Germans but its costs are so high now that you cannot spam HQ Build Up and therefore are not able to do what you could have done in older patches.

I agree with you on the AA. I feel it is a bit overpowered in this patch but I have not seen German AA show amazing results even though I have SP Flak Battalions attached to armored formations and LW Mixed Flak Battalions in Panzer HQs the results have been meager. Even if the German AA is more lethal than the Soviet one as you stated, I still think that it is quite a help to the Soviets as it curtails what the Germans can and cannot do in the Air. Just my 2 cents on the matter.

I think BrianG AAR is a perfect example of a Soviet win in 1942 even. Check topeversts AAR too where he is doing quite well as the Soviets. Stef has won the game already I know, but still to make so many mistakes as the Soviets and still be able to reach Prussia is quite something. I did play the Soviets in the Leningrad scenario and was able to pull of a minor victory. Have not had time to go into the GC so I cannot say, but from what I have seen as the Axis, the Soviets have no problem getting fortifications up.

You didn't adress the points I made about the case in my AAR where the Soviets are doing quite well in the center so far though.

Something else I would like to add: The Germans will have supply problems in the South because the Romanian FBD is complete shit and only repairs 2 hexes a week while the German one can repair 4. So the further you advance, the less MPs you will have for the Panzers, not to mention that you have the Dnepr to cross.

I agree on the +1 though. I would LOVE to see Soviets be much more aggressive in summer but like Hardluck says when winter comes +1 simply makes it too easy for the Soviets. Maybe a middle solution would be to stop the +1 in November on the last snow turn as suggested.

[chaos45]

Didn't brianG's game use +1.....

pretty sure it did. Just checked yep it did.

[chaos45]

as to center/Moscow around T10 the germans will have to start fighting harder to move on Moscow that's a given....even against beender Ive managed a couple small counterattacks with no +1....and the game is still going I would say badly for me still waiting for return of T9 to see how bad lol.

Also you have to play full GC as the geramn player will often overload AGN, go weaker in the center relying more on infantry...and overload south with panzers.

THe reason the soviets cant defend in the south- is the germans have 2x decent attack routes you must defend against...the coast and Kiev...as a breach at kiev T4 is very good for the germans the coast is almost impossible for the soviets to guard esp since you will lose almost the entire Southern front T2 if done right. Also you must send southern units north to have a chance to hold Leningrad and Moscow....the only thing stopping the germans in the south is supply....and well as you can see Beender seems to have no trouble with supply there, as well Ive had another game awhile back that got as far as fast in the south. So its not an exception it can be done.

When they fix EXP gain...the soviets will have a slighter better chance to at least defend the crimea since the new units wont all be CV 1 for 5+ turns turns. Many german players are like life is so hard on the german side, but when they flip to play a GC as the soviet player against a good german opening their eyes open as to how much is stacked against them.

[xhoel]

I tend to play the game without overloading AGN, but that depends on the players strategy.

Again we can both choose certain AARs that have gone this way or the other and which would prove your point or mine. It doesn't matter.

I'm very sure that you will not change your mind on things, I'm just saying that you should keep in mind that there are other players that play this game that don't have the same expertise as you or some of the experienced Axis/Soviet commanders. To me, since I have not yet reached the kind of level that you or the other experts have, the game doesn't seem to be so stacked against the Soviets but seems balanced. I hope other Axis players that have a similar experience level as I do, would also share their opinions on the matter whatever they are. It would be good for all of us, and for morvael and Dennis too, to know where people stand on certain points so that the future patches are not a nerf for this side or the other but keep/restore the balance of gameplay.

I am all for a balanced game that is both challenging and fun for both sides and which rewards strategic thinking and efficient ways of operations.

I apologize for hijacking the thread, since I got out of topic but thought it would be better to engage you here than in the other posts that you have made.

Cheers,
Xhoel

[GamesaurusRex]

Regarding the Grand Campaign Scenario game balance...
1) The current state of the game requires boosting the initial Russian MORALE setting at the outset in order to get a "level playing field". (How much depends on the players.)
2) The Russian "+1 attack" mode is required, if you expect the Russians to achieve any significant number of "Guards" units.
3) If you are playing the game without the "extreme blizzard"... then you are NOT playing a simulation of the historical event.

All of this can be done through adjusting the initial game settings.
(Just my opinion after playing this thing repeatedly for 5 years.)

[HardLuckYetAgain]

ORIGINAL: GamesaurusRex

Regarding the Grand Campaign Scenario game balance...
1) The current state of the game requires boosting the initial Russian MORALE setting at the outset in order to get a "level playing field". (How much depends on the players.)
2) The Russian "+1 attack" mode is required, if you expect the Russians to achieve any significant number of "Guards" units.
3) If you are playing the game without the "extreme blizzard"... then you are NOT playing a simulation of the historical event.

All of this can be done through adjusting the initial game settings.
(Just my opinion after playing this thing repeatedly for 5 years.)

I can make the Russians work without the +1. But for the game as a whole for other players I believe it is necessary but really should end before blizzard as I first posted in another post. The +1 in blizzard is over the top.

[xhoel]

ORIGINAL: HardLuckYetAgain

ORIGINAL: GamesaurusRex

Regarding the Grand Campaign Scenario game balance...
1) The current state of the game requires boosting the initial Russian MORALE setting at the outset in order to get a "level playing field". (How much depends on the players.)
2) The Russian "+1 attack" mode is required, if you expect the Russians to achieve any significant number of "Guards" units.
3) If you are playing the game without the "extreme blizzard"... then you are NOT playing a simulation of the historical event.

All of this can be done through adjusting the initial game settings.
(Just my opinion after playing this thing repeatedly for 5 years.)

I can make the Russians work without the +1. But for the game as a whole for other players I believe it is necessary but really should end before blizzard as I first posted in another post. The +1 in blizzard is over the top.

+1