41 Campaign, tyonec (A) vs Dodo98 (v).

[M60A3TTS]

ORIGINAL: HardLuckYetAgain
At #6 I am "not" in the best category of players. I just know enough to make me dangerous.

In a similar vein, if I've set the bar for Soviet gameplay, it's not particularly high. I just know stuff that others are only now learning.

Still, I'll take the complement. [:)]

[M60A3TTS]

ORIGINAL: tyronec

Tyrone is still doing the trick of not moving up the LW

To label this as a trick is not appropriate. The game is designed so that players can allocate their supplies where they want to, I chose to direct mine primarily towards the Panzers and next towards the German ground forces.
It may or may not be effective for the Soviets to make more use of the VVS, my approach in past games has been to preserve the bomber force during the early turns and then to use them for GS and GA. In this game I have endeavoured to have fighter cover at the front all the time so not moving up the Luftwaffe bombers up is really not a factor in how much impact the VVS would have.

Trickery isn't even needed as you routinely dispatch one opponent after another.

[carlkay58]

quote:

ORIGINAL: HardLuckYetAgain
At #6 I am "not" in the best category of players. I just know enough to make me dangerous.


In a similar vein, if I've set the bar for Soviet gameplay, it's not particularly high. I just know stuff that others are only now learning.

Still, I'll take the complement.

I guess that proves my point then.

[DeletedUser1769703214]

ORIGINAL: tyronec

Tyrone is still doing the trick of not moving up the LW

To label this as a trick is not appropriate. The game is designed so that players can allocate their supplies where they want to, I chose to direct mine primarily towards the Panzers and next towards the German ground forces.
It may or may not be effective for the Soviets to make more use of the VVS, my approach in past games has been to preserve the bomber force during the early turns and then to use them for GS and GA. In this game I have endeavoured to have fighter cover at the front all the time so not moving up the Luftwaffe bombers up is really not a factor in how much impact the VVS would have.

Label it, point at it, call it whatever this needs to be labeled, called, or pointed at & not get lost on proper word play labeling. Too many people seem to get offended on words, sheesh. By the way "trick" is totally appropriate. See Merriam-Webster dictionary result #2 in the snapshot below. 2.a.1 A quick or artful way of getting a result 2.a.2 An instance of getting a desired result. Sheesh

The impact is in the supply & how much is of it is getting to the front. That is the issue & what the conversation should be on.

[DeletedUser1769703214]

ORIGINAL: M60A3TTS

ORIGINAL: HardLuckYetAgain
At #6 I am "not" in the best category of players. I just know enough to make me dangerous.

In a similar vein, if I've set the bar for Soviet gameplay, it's not particularly high. I just know stuff that others are only now learning.

Still, I'll take the complement. [:)]

Yes, your knowledge is pretty extensive, I have been impressed on more than just a few occasions.

[DeletedUser1769703214]

ORIGINAL: M60A3TTS

ORIGINAL: tyronec

Tyrone is still doing the trick of not moving up the LW

To label this as a trick is not appropriate. The game is designed so that players can allocate their supplies where they want to, I chose to direct mine primarily towards the Panzers and next towards the German ground forces.
It may or may not be effective for the Soviets to make more use of the VVS, my approach in past games has been to preserve the bomber force during the early turns and then to use them for GS and GA. In this game I have endeavoured to have fighter cover at the front all the time so not moving up the Luftwaffe bombers up is really not a factor in how much impact the VVS would have.

Trickery isn't even needed as you routinely dispatch one opponent after another.

Yes, Tyronec has mastered a great deal. Even if Tyronec and I played two games playing one as German and other as Soviets we would both lose Moscow as Soviets to the Germans, 100%.

[xhoel]

ORIGINAL: Nix77

This is probably not a bug after all. Could be that received replacement freight can't be lost. 17th PzDiv received 200+ tons worth of replacements that round, probably all the freight from Kraslava was replacements. The save was actually Carlkay's AAR T9.

I dont think that is quite correct. Freight is moved to the unit and only after it reaches it it gets converted. So it is a bit abstract. There should def be freight losses for such a long run. I´ll check Carlkays game and see if i can get a save that replicates this. It does seem like a bug to me.

[Zovs]

I have been talking to other players, mainly average to maybe good. And I think the censes is that the game is not balanced towards the Germans at all. In fact its much harder for the average player as the Axis. So I would caution against suggesting changing the game outright because the cream of the crop players (Tyrone, HLYA and M60) can out play anyone as either side and the to claim the game is unbalanced for one side or another is just not right nor fair.

The way this should be managed is how its done in board war games like ASL. There is a listing of all the thousands of scenarios and their records (win, loss and draw) culminated over the years and there is also the players listing from #1 to #15,000 (or whatever) so the top 10 players can disrupt the balance of any scenario. But the proof if that scenario is balanced towards one side or the other is in the scenario statics of that scenario.

I don't think we have had enough playing's to say that the entire game is skewed towards the Axis or the Soviets at this point. And circling back a lot of average players are not in agreement with the "expert" opinions that the game is broken or out of balanced.

Case in point I have two C41 games going on, with me as the Axis in both games. In one against Keitherson its on turn 14 and I think by January I'll loose to a Sudden Death for not taking another 313 VPs to continue. In the other against SmokingDave, I am doing much better on turn 7 and while I don't think I'll get a SD in October, I also don't think he will get a SD in January and that one will continue on.

[DeletedUser1769703214]

ORIGINAL: Zovs

I have been talking to other players, mainly average to maybe good. And I think the censes is that the game is not balanced towards the Germans at all. In fact its much harder for the average player as the Axis. So I would caution against suggesting changing the game outright because the cream of the crop players (Tyrone, HLYA and M60) can out play anyone as either side and the to claim the game is unbalanced for one side or another is just not right nor fair.

The way this should be managed is how its done in board war games like ASL. There is a listing of all the thousands of scenarios and their records (win, loss and draw) culminated over the years and there is also the players listing from #1 to #15,000 (or whatever) so the top 10 players can disrupt the balance of any scenario. But the proof if that scenario is balanced towards one side or the other is in the scenario statics of that scenario.

I don't think we have had enough playing's to say that the entire game is skewed towards the Axis or the Soviets at this point. And circling back a lot of average players are not in agreement with the "expert" opinions that the game is broken or out of balanced.

Case in point I have two C41 games going on, with me as the Axis in both games. In one against Keitherson its on turn 14 and I think by January I'll loose to a Sudden Death for not taking another 313 VPs to continue. In the other against SmokingDave, I am doing much better on turn 7 and while I don't think I'll get a SD in October, I also don't think he will get a SD in January and that one will continue on.

The game company caters to the masses, so you have nothing to worry about. The so-called "experts" are wrong since it obviously can't be done. But when a how to is written on how it is done then it will follow with the masses following the "how to" script. Then it will be addressed. I have time.

[Zovs]

I be just part of the unwashed masses, swimming in seas of confusion...

[DeletedUser1769703214]

ORIGINAL: Zovs

I be just part of the unwashed masses, swimming in seas of confusion...

Just curious, but wouldn't you be washed in a sea? ;-P

This is why I share my details in my AAR many times a step by step and reasons why I did the move instead of just a before and after shot. But very few people ever ask questions which leads me to believe that people either 1) understand or 2) afraid to ask or whatever. So it all depends on how far you want to take your game. If the masses are happy being part of the masses then that is great! If you want to excel then an effort has to be made towards that.

Take a look at this conversation I had with a Great player today back when he first started. Anyone can do the same thing. It is just about where you are happy at.

I won't take up any more space in the AAR. But realize I always answer my emails and PM's if you or anyone ever wants to ask a question. I may not know the exact rule in the manual but I know the tactics and strategies to make it work.

[Nix77]

ORIGINAL: xhoel

ORIGINAL: Nix77

This is probably not a bug after all. Could be that received replacement freight can't be lost. 17th PzDiv received 200+ tons worth of replacements that round, probably all the freight from Kraslava was replacements. The save was actually Carlkay's AAR T9.

I dont think that is quite correct. Freight is moved to the unit and only after it reaches it it gets converted. So it is a bit abstract. There should def be freight losses for such a long run. I´ll check Carlkays game and see if i can get a save that replicates this. It does seem like a bug to me.

There's several divisions on that T9 save that have received freight without any lost freight. I think all of them also received replacements.

[Speedysteve]

Sheesh...Just read through this for the first time.....Stalin is kaput ja.....wowzer..

[tyronec]

T05.

18th Army getting ready to assault Pskov.

PG4 continues to drive towards Moscow. Most of the work still being done by the Panzers but a couple of Infantry Corps into action.

PG3 driving around the rear of Bryansk.

PG2 rests one Panzer Corps while the other sets up to assault/pocket D’town next turn.

PG1 rests up ready to assault across the river next turn.

[tyronec]

T06.

18th Army take Pskov, have Luftwaffe up for GS with the glut of supplies in the North.

I mess up with PG4, make a pocket but can’t seal it off. Just spreading out and consolidating here, no rush as the FBD catches up.

PG3 make a small pocket and threaten Bryansk from the South. Again no rush as the FBD is some way behind.

PG2 tried an assault across the river but it failed. Well set up for next turn, if the Soviets don’t retreat expect there will be a pocket around D’town.

PG1 assault across the river and make a pocket.

The Soviets manage to cut my rail line for AGS with a pocketed division behind the lines that I was not aware of, however while annoying is not much of a problem.

VVS were active and paid the price as I had Luftwaffe fighter cover all along the front.

We agreed to terminate the game at this point.