Russian NM - A tale of 2 games

[Flaviusx]

Uh, the 5% experience nerf is kind of a big deal. The Sovs are very hard pressed to reach 40% experience by the end of 41, if they are lucky. On top of that they are essentially fighting at infantry speed until the end of 42, and their mech upgrade is also delayed until then, so those units stay fragile much longer than they used to.

The reason these were put in was not because there was a balance problem in 41. It was fine as it was before. Alvaro put this in here to enable a 42 Barbarossa option that absolutely nobody is playing. Like I said: the actual effect of these nerfs is to make life harder for the Sovs in 41-2 during a regular game just to make it possible for the Germans to ignore the Soviets until 42 (which in fact is still a bad idea even with this nerf.)

Personally I don't see any good reason to make it easier for the Axis to put off Barbarossa until 42, and indeed they are positively encouraged now to do it earlier.

[Nirosi]

Seriously, I must do something wrong.

For example, in this PBEM, Barbarossa started in April 1941.

Well if it started in April 41 you are not doing bad at all I would say. An April Barbarossa is very tough in the Soviet (and probably should be). Maybe it is too easy to have April Barbarossas (or not enough opportunity cost whene done) but that is another debate I guess.

But I would still wait a little before a final judgement since I think we have quite a small sample for now and probably with the same 5-6 players too.

If there is one thing I have noticed since looking at all the various posts and AARs is that the level of play makes the biggest difference. What is obviously easy to a player can sometime be close to impossible to another.


PS : Yes experience went down 5% but now corps can upgrade to half armies. That is also a very big deal PP wise. Part of me wonder if by the end of the first winter, the Soviets are not actually better off than before when taken into account both changes?

[ncc1701e]

ORIGINAL: Flaviusx

Uh, the 5% experience nerf is kind of a big deal. The Sovs are very hard pressed to reach 40% experience by the end of 41, if they are lucky. On top of that they are essentially fighting at infantry speed until the end of 42, and their mech upgrade is also delayed until then, so those units stay fragile much longer than they used to.

The reason these were put in was not because there was a balance problem in 41. It was fine as it was before. Alvaro put this in here to enable a 42 Barbarossa option that absolutely nobody is playing. Like I said: the actual effect of these nerfs is to make life harder for the Sovs in 41-2 during a regular game just to make it possible for the Germans to ignore the Soviets until 42 (which in fact is still a bad idea even with this nerf.)

Personally I don't see any good reason to make it easier for the Axis to put off Barbarossa until 42, and indeed they are positively encouraged now to do it earlier.

Why 42 Barbarossa option has started? This is because of the France 1940 all-in strategy. The Germans were so badly destroyed after the fall of France that it was impossible to invade USSR in 1941.

Now that UK is much weaker, France 1940 is much more feasible. And with the new shattering rule, it means more Panzer Corps coming back for the Germans in case of something bad is happening.
For me, 1940 is at the right balance. BoA is very good now too.

With a UK much weaker, and 60 landing craft for Mechanized units, plus a BoA to survive, this is also meaning that a naval invasion to help USSR in 1941 is more unlikely.

USSR in 1941 won't be helped much by lend lease too (UK occupied, USA neutral).

Definitely, I think Soviets are too weak. And, for me, the problem comes from this change:

Change Soviet default experience lowered from 35% to 30%

They were just about right. I think the default experience must go back to 35%.

[ncc1701e]

ORIGINAL: Harrybanana

I think you are doing OK; not great, but not disastrous yet either. How close are you to 42 Heavy Armour tech? If you have maximized research you should be close by August 42. How many armour and mechanized do you have? How many have been destroyed? What is the situation in Africa? Where did the UK invade in the summer of 41?

I have 42 Heavy Armor tech already. Just the units won't upgrade since I have too much casualties to replace.

[ncc1701e]

ORIGINAL: Harrybanana

I think you are doing OK; not great, but not disastrous yet either. How close are you to 42 Heavy Armour tech? If you have maximized research you should be close by August 42. How many armour and mechanized do you have? How many have been destroyed? What is the situation in Africa? Where did the UK invade in the summer of 41?

I have purchased three Tank corps in 1939. Right now, I have:
. 5 armor corps on the map
. 1 armor corps in the Deployment queue (it shatters last turn)
. 12 mechanized corps

[ncc1701e]

But, despite all this, Moscow fell. With a default experience of 35% this was very rare for me. Now it seems to be the norm.
And I was even capable of small deadly counter attacks.

[ncc1701e]

ORIGINAL: Flaviusx

There is a reason Sveint is doing wild things in this 1940 Barbarossa you are seeing. It might not work but prior to this patch it would not even be plausible to try this.

I hear you. I have yet to start my AAR but my Soviets are badly pushed. [:D]

[stjeand]

Based on all the games I have played with the new version...the Soviets seem to be underpowered but the Allies seem to be over powered.

So far the USSR just gets hammered over and over...until the Allies land somewhere early. They have to land early 42 or the war in Russia is close to over.
I have not seen Moscow in Russian hands in any game by the end of 41.

NOW not to say this is every game...but all I have played.

I have seen others that did not go this way...

[ncc1701e]

ORIGINAL: stjeand

Based on all the games I have played with the new version...the Soviets seem to be underpowered but the Allies seem to be over powered.

Over powered in which way?

[ncc1701e]

ORIGINAL: Flaviusx

Uh, the 5% experience nerf is kind of a big deal. The Sovs are very hard pressed to reach 40% experience by the end of 41, if they are lucky. On top of that they are essentially fighting at infantry speed until the end of 42, and their mech upgrade is also delayed until then, so those units stay fragile much longer than they used to.

Personally I would proceed by small steps and just increase the based experience back to 35%. I like the idea that, in 1942, the Red Army is not yet ready for big offensives with their mobile corps and that the deep battle theory is not yet there.

For both players, I like that Germany is still dangerous in 1942 and that they have one last attempt possible to win on the Eastern front.

Like Harrybanana have said earlier, if all their resources are put at one single point of the front, the Germans should still be able to do some breakthroughs in 1942. Much harder than before, i.e 1941, but still possible and not everywhere of course.

[Harrybanana]

ORIGINAL: ncc1701e

ORIGINAL: Harrybanana

I think you are doing OK; not great, but not disastrous yet either. How close are you to 42 Heavy Armour tech? If you have maximized research you should be close by August 42. How many armour and mechanized do you have? How many have been destroyed? What is the situation in Africa? Where did the UK invade in the summer of 41?

I have 42 Heavy Armor tech already. Just the units won't upgrade since I have too much casualties to replace.

I see part of your problem here. It is very important for the Russians to choose either Assault or Anti-tank tech and then go with it. I know many people prefer anti-tank, but since most Russian units start with Assault tech this is the one I prefer to go with. If the 6 research points were taken out of Anti-tank then you could have 6 points in Assault (and 7 once you reach tech level 42), 7 in heavy armour, 6 in interceptors, and 7 in close support. You are better off with all your good Russian armies (40%+ experience) with 42 Assault tech then all of them with either 41 Assault or 41 Anti-tank.

Also the production points you are expending to convert Assault armies to Anti-tank Armies could be better spent upgrading all your Armour and at least some Mechanized to 42 tech.

[Harrybanana]

ORIGINAL: ncc1701e

ORIGINAL: Harrybanana

I think you are doing OK; not great, but not disastrous yet either. How close are you to 42 Heavy Armour tech? If you have maximized research you should be close by August 42. How many armour and mechanized do you have? How many have been destroyed? What is the situation in Africa? Where did the UK invade in the summer of 41?

I have purchased three Tank corps in 1939. Right now, I have:
. 5 armor corps on the map
. 1 armor corps in the Deployment queue (it shatters last turn)
. 12 mechanized corps

If you still have 6 Armour and 12 Mechanized than the loss of Moscow is not that critical. Especially since I assume you will also be receiving the Siberians. The Red Airforce is looking pretty battered, but otherwise you are in good shape. The UK even has enough MS to send maximum LL to Russia, which I assume you are doing. Looking at the map he has not cut the Murmansk rail line so that is very good for you. When the US enters the War and they also maximize LL to Russia this will more than make up for the loss of Moscow.

You didn't say where the UK invaded or how its offensive in Africa is doing. But looking at Force strength I assume the BOA has already been won by you.

[Harrybanana]

ORIGINAL: stjeand

Based on all the games I have played with the new version...the Soviets seem to be underpowered but the Allies seem to be over powered.

So far the USSR just gets hammered over and over...until the Allies land somewhere early. They have to land early 42 or the war in Russia is close to over.
I have not seen Moscow in Russian hands in any game by the end of 41.

NOW not to say this is every game...but all I have played.

I have seen others that did not go this way...

I don't believe the Allies are overpowered and the Russians underpowered. What I do believe is that many Axis players are choosing the All In Russia strategy where they commit just about everything to Russia allowing the Western Allies to invade and attack at whim.

I am pretty sure that Moscow will be in Russian hands at the end of 41 in our game.

[stjeand]

ORIGINAL: Harrybanana

ORIGINAL: stjeand

Based on all the games I have played with the new version...the Soviets seem to be underpowered but the Allies seem to be over powered.

So far the USSR just gets hammered over and over...until the Allies land somewhere early. They have to land early 42 or the war in Russia is close to over.
I have not seen Moscow in Russian hands in any game by the end of 41.

NOW not to say this is every game...but all I have played.

I have seen others that did not go this way...

I don't believe the Allies are overpowered and the Russians underpowered. What I do believe is that many Axis players are choosing the All In Russia strategy where they commit just about everything to Russia allowing the Western Allies to invade and attack at whim.

I am pretty sure that Moscow will be in Russian hands at the end of 41 in our game.

Well I don't think insanely overpowered just that the UK seems to be able to field a lot more units than historically and the USSR seems that they can not hold all that well.


Moscow will be...just because you are not commiting as many forces as you state.
Though my last turn might seal Russias fate.

In 41 I think the Germans can do an all in, in Russia and not be concerned...just need defense in Africa and Italy.
you opted on taking Vichy early...which I was not prepared for...will not happen again...I learn...
And Norway which I get though not sure how useful over all...we will see though.
In 42 they can NOT do an all in due to threat of invasion all over the place.

Once 41 is winter the Germans could pull units out and spread them and ready for 42...

But that is one way to play as you say.

I wish my game as the Axis had gone better to start, which I have been able to address so here is to a next time.

[Flaviusx]

The historical Axis strategy *was* an all in to the east. The only real difference here is the start date. Most Germans will roll in starting in May as opposed to the end of June and it is not unusual to see an April start if the weather is good.

Revert the experience nerf, please. And if you're going to keep the mech as is, then I'd also like to see the reserve armies come in at the current Soviet assault tech. 39 tech rifle armies coming in at 30% are very close to speed bumps. They only do reasonably well in swamps. In the open, they are dogmeat.

As for the British, if they want to build up the amphibs they can do North Africa in 41, but it will cost them in the BoA. As is, they are going to be struggling in the Atlantic even without this early landing. 9 subs and the surface Kriegsmarine can basically wreak havoc in the Atlantic well into 42. They can cripple the UK economy for a very long time this way and you aren't going to see much lend lease to the Sovs until at least the USA enters the war (and the Americans now have to devote huge resources to shipbuilding cap and merchants, too.)

[Harrybanana]

ORIGINAL: Flaviusx

The historical Axis strategy *was* an all in to the east. The only real difference here is the start date. Most Germans will roll in starting in May as opposed to the end of June and it is not unusual to see an April start if the weather is good.

I wouldn't say the historical Axis strategy was the Russia All In. For one thing their were no Italian units in the East until 42 I think and even then not the equivalent of 2 armour and a mechanized Corps (which is what I am seeing in most recent games). There was also a German Mechanized or Armour corps in North Africa along with air assets. North Africa also consumed replacements and supply trucks. The Germans also spent considerable production on U-Boats and the Tirpitz.

Revert the experience nerf, please. And if you're going to keep the mech as is, then I'd also like to see the reserve armies come in at the current Soviet assault tech. 39 tech rifle armies coming in at 30% are very close to speed bumps. They only do reasonably well in swamps. In the open, they are dogmeat.

As for the British, if they want to build up the amphibs they can do North Africa in 41, but it will cost them in the BoA. As is, they are going to be struggling in the Atlantic even without this early landing. 9 subs and the surface Kriegsmarine can basically wreak havoc in the Atlantic well into 42. They can cripple the UK economy for a very long time this way and you aren't going to see much lend lease to the Sovs until at least the USA enters the war (and the Americans now have to devote huge resources to shipbuilding cap and merchants, too.)

If the Germans build 6 subs and pay the production cost to continually repair 9 of them than they are not doing the Russia All In strategy. In this case the UK will be as weak as it was historically. Though I still say it is worth it for the UK to build some landing ships. What needs to be fixed IMHO is to give the UK more shipyards so they can build more MS, escorts and LS simultaneously. The same for the US.

[Harrybanana]

ORIGINAL: stjeand

I wish my game as the Axis had gone better to start, which I have been able to address so here is to a next time.

We can start another game with you as the Axis if you want. I may change my tune if/when I ever play a game as the Allies where the Russians get in serious trouble.

[Flaviusx]

Germany can easily afford to build 6 subs, spare 1 panzer corps in NA, and still throw in a dozen or more mobile corps in the Soviet Union. That's an all in or near enough. The sub investment is very much worth it now and will keep the UK on the backfoot for 2 years. The allies will have to spend several multiple times the cost of those subs to deal with them. It is absolutely cost effective to do this, far more than building two extra mobile corps in lieu of the subs.

Subs are dirt cheap compared to what it takes to deal with them.

This also effectively shuts down lend lease until the Americans come in.

Yes, the Italians can typically spare a couple mobile corps themselves to the East in addition to the above. (They do need to put something in Libya to hold down the British. A single mobile corps, 1-2 mountains corps, and a small German contingent will do the job.)

This is fairly typical play now.

Revert the experience nerf, please. I'm done with PBEM until the Sovs get this back.

[stjeand]

ORIGINAL: Harrybanana
We can start another game with you as the Axis if you want. I may change my tune if/when I ever play a game as the Allies where the Russians get in serious trouble.

Set up...

You may be an anomaly...
I think the issue is more with the average player than the very experienced.
I have not played anyone that has been able to hold. BUT again not played you.
Perhaps everyone is just not playing the USSR right.

For me the main thing I notice is that the game is a year ahead of historical.

IF the Allies don't invaded in 42 than the USSR is lost...and I mean a mainland invasion...
Africa can fall in 42 to the Allies if is has too...
The Allies have to take major pressure off the Russians.


But we shall see. I have to not mess up and get through France.

[ncc1701e]

ORIGINAL: Harrybanana

I see part of your problem here. It is very important for the Russians to choose either Assault or Anti-tank tech and then go with it. I know many people prefer anti-tank, but since most Russian units start with Assault tech this is the one I prefer to go with. If the 6 research points were taken out of Anti-tank then you could have 6 points in Assault (and 7 once you reach tech level 42), 7 in heavy armour, 6 in interceptors, and 7 in close support. You are better off with all your good Russian armies (40%+ experience) with 42 Assault tech then all of them with either 41 Assault or 41 Anti-tank.

Also the production points you are expending to convert Assault armies to Anti-tank Armies could be better spent upgrading all your Armour and at least some Mechanized to 42 tech.

Thanks for your advice Harrybanana as usual. I have learned a lot with you and your AAR.

This thing is that, tech level 1941 or 1942, I am very far from armies at the 40%+ experience. I would be very pleased to just reach this level. So far, as I said, I am barely at 32% experience for my deployed rifle armies.

My best armies are at 35%-34%: