Yet another balance thread (1.11)

[Zeckke]

ORIGINAL: Hubert Cater

ORIGINAL: Zeckke

Thanks¡ Hubert; am going to send you my actually game as axis

tell me if you see something wrong, the bug is that Russia is always now PREPARE FOR WAR on 1940, let me know whats going on with the AI

and for sure play this save game; its getting interesting; the AI

the game now is on 1942-08

sending by wetransfer

Thanks for the file, unfortunately as it is dated already all the way to 1942, I won't be able to tell you in any definitive manner why the USSR prepared for war in 1940, but typically this is due to either not enough units in the East along the border with the Soviet Union, or too much. There may be other factors as well such as how many declarations of war you have committed, and I believe capturing the Suez prior to Soviet entry is also a factor.

Two things I would suggest:

1) Update to the latest version of the game, this saved game is from v1.00, and the game is currently at v1.12.01. There have been quite a few updates, fixes and improvements since the original release, including a information button you can toggle to hide and show map info such as how many units you need to keep along the Soviet border to help minimize Soviet interest in mobilizing for war.

2) Review the Strategy Guides, and in this case specifically the section labelled 'Axis Units Required in the East' as this should really help here.

Hope this helps,
Hubert

OK, Hubert thanks

am going to send you another save file at May-1940 from another game start

tell me what should i do to avoid russia, prepare for war, if possible

I know since the game COS that you have to put units at the border of Rusia, but i dont think is the case, how many do you think?

[Zeckke]

Hubert, dont need to tell how many, its just open a discussion on how many troops we hav e to put at russia border, iknow it should be 5 units to avoid russia prepare for war

but the AI lerns, and i that thats the consecuence, and why russia has lern that has to prepare, plus bulgari is in axis side plus paris is in italian hands plus egypt is almost german, sisnt know that suez is a chance

anyway thx for all

[Hubert Cater]

Hi Zeckke,

Unfortunately as your game version is the original release, I'd be hesitant to make any recommendations for it as I can't be certain what the conditions would be exactly relative to the current release.

Again I would advise upgrading to the latest version, v1.12.01, so there would have been at least 12 updates since the original release that you are playing, and to review the latest 1939 Strategy Guide found in the Manuals folder for the game. This guide can also be accessed in game as well via the upper right hand panel when playing the game map.

From the latest guide here are the relevant sections, found on the 4th page:

Axis Units Required in the East
To prevent the USSR from entering the war before the Axis are ready to fight them, Axis commanders should ensure
that the following criteria are met:
From January 1940
- 2 Axis units are needed within 6 hexes of Warsaw.
- Failure to meet this requirement will swing the USSR by 2% towards the Allies every turn.
From January 1941
4 Axis units are needed within 6 hexes of Warsaw.
Failure to meet this requirement will swing the USSR by 2% towards the Allies every turn.
Both the criteria listed above are cumulative, so from January 1941 if there were less than 2 units within 6 hexes
of Warsaw, then the USSR would swing by 4% towards the Allies.
While the above require a minimum number of Axis units to be in the east, the following requires that there aren’t
an excessive number of Axis units present:
From January 1941
- If there are more than 18 Axis units within 10 hexes of Warsaw, then the USSR will have a 50% chance every
turn of swinging 2-3% towards the Allies.

Hope this helps,
Hubert

[Zeckke]

ORIGINAL: Hubert Cater

Hi Zeckke,

Unfortunately as your game version is the original release, I'd be hesitant to make any recommendations for it as I can't be certain what the conditions would be exactly relative to the current release.

Again I would advise upgrading to the latest version, v1.12.01, so there would have been at least 12 updates since the original release that you are playing, and to review the latest 1939 Strategy Guide found in the Manuals folder for the game. This guide can also be accessed in game as well via the upper right hand panel when playing the game map.

From the latest guide here are the relevant sections, found on the 4th page:

Axis Units Required in the East
To prevent the USSR from entering the war before the Axis are ready to fight them, Axis commanders should ensure
that the following criteria are met:
From January 1940
- 2 Axis units are needed within 6 hexes of Warsaw.
- Failure to meet this requirement will swing the USSR by 2% towards the Allies every turn.
From January 1941
4 Axis units are needed within 6 hexes of Warsaw.
Failure to meet this requirement will swing the USSR by 2% towards the Allies every turn.
Both the criteria listed above are cumulative, so from January 1941 if there were less than 2 units within 6 hexes
of Warsaw, then the USSR would swing by 4% towards the Allies.
While the above require a minimum number of Axis units to be in the east, the following requires that there aren’t
an excessive number of Axis units present:
From January 1941
- If there are more than 18 Axis units within 10 hexes of Warsaw, then the USSR will have a 50% chance every
turn of swinging 2-3% towards the Allies.

Hope this helps,
Hubert

Okay, i see upgrading is what am going to do, condition are clear, thx again, Thanks¡

[Hubert Cater]

Happy to help [:)]

[redrum68]

One additional point on the early vs historical invasion of Belgium/France, the 2nd French HQ and the Heavy Tank unit both don't come til April/May which helps significantly for a historical invasion but come as France is already surrendered or about to for a 1939 invasion. Having these come a bit earlier or tying their spawn to invasion/surrender of Belgium or German being within a few hexes of Paris would be better for balance.

[Chernobyl]

Historically France surrendered in June 1940. It's impossible against a human to get France to surrender in June if German invades Belgium in May (historial). On top of that, France doesn't even surrender when you take Paris. You have to spend another month or two advancing towards Bordeaux. This can push things past October which screws up the Axis timetable.

I understand that a 1939 attack should probably be more difficult, but it should also probably be easier to finish France in a timely manner.

[redrum68]

ORIGINAL: Chernobyl

Historically France surrendered in June 1940. It's impossible against a human to get France to surrender in June if German invades Belgium in May (historial). On top of that, France doesn't even surrender when you take Paris. You have to spend another month or two advancing towards Bordeaux. This can push things past October which screws up the Axis timetable.

I understand that a 1939 attack should probably be more difficult, but it should also probably be easier to finish France in a timely manner.

Agree. I think the issue right now is at higher level play they get invaded in 1939 and surrender possibly even before they did historically. At lower/mid level, play they tend to get invaded in the spring and last longer than they did historically. Most of the changes I'm proposing would primarily impact on the former not the latter.

That being said, having France last a bit longer than they did historically might be better for game balance to avoid Germany being able to invade USSR then in the summer/fall of 1940 (often house rule against this in ELO play).

[pjg100]

A few suggestions:

1. Impose a material but temporary readiness penalty on GE units if Belgium is DOWed prior to March 1940. This would reflect the fact that the GE war machine really couldn't have been ready to dive into another campaign immediately following the Polish campaign. Could do the same for a 1940 Barbarossa. Would also to some extent reflect the resistance of GE officers to going such (IRL) foolhardy things.

2. Make the French NM boost that occurs in October 1940 available a certain number of turns following either a GE DOW on Belgium or taking Metz or Strasburg. So, an early GE attack in the west will trigger a countdown to a French NM boost if GE doesn't cause a French surrender before the specified number of turns has elapsed. Perhaps five turns, i.e., equivalent to May to October if the campaign began in May 1940.

3. Give the French a small NM boost if GE attacks in 1939. This would reflect the fact that they didn't have to wait through an enervating seven months of sitzkrieg prior to the main event.

4. Impose a substantial strength point penalty as well as a morale penalty on tanks, mech and AT that force march. My understanding (which could be wrong) is that tanks tended to break down and need repair quite a bit under normal usage, so running them full tilt across Germany would, one think, have resulted in units that need to be replenished with new equipment.

Not sure how to make it more likely that France will fall on a normal schedule if the attack is delayed until May 1940. It would help if both of the initially starting GE tank units had 6AP. The problem is that there is too much unit density in WAW to slip through the seams with your tanks; you have to blast through several lines before reaching Paris. One thing that would help would be for there to be some incentive for the French to abandon Paris - make it an open city as the French did IRL - which would probably shave at least one turn off of the clock. Perhaps a substantial NM penalty that results in immediate surrender if a GE unit (except PARA) attacks an Allied unit in Paris? This would solve the problem that in the game of course you will turtle up around Paris and defend it to the last man, whereas politically and socially the French government just wasn't going to do that IRL.

[LoneRunner]

Germany already incurs severe penalties for an early invasion of Belgium:
1. A one-turn conquest of Poland appears to cause a 5% increase in Russian mobilization. At least that's what has happened in several of my MP games.
2. Operating panzers and armies from the Eastern Front is expensive, especially before logistics is researched. In the first months of the war Germany scrapes the bottom of the barrel for precious MPPs. Every MPP spent operating units takes away from investing in tech and upgrading units.
3. An early attack is typically conducted with un-upgraded units and maybe with unrepaired units. As a result Germany incurs a lot more losses in attacks on Belgium/France.

I liked pjg100's ideas because they were historically based. Let's be careful about forcing Germany into a preset pattern by creating artificial restrictions that are not historically based.

Why didn't Germany attack Belgium in 1939? Marcin's quote is a great start:
1. They weren't yet prepared.
2. They didn't want to start the invasion during the winter.
3. They were planning the invasions of Denmark and Norway.

I think a couple more reasons could be historically based:
4. Did Germany actually have two full panzer units for the assault on Poland? I've read that Germany's weak tank units were not all that effective except to cause panic. Based on historical accounts I doubt their tank units were strong enough to destroy armies and capture Warsaw like we see in WaW. Perhaps the historians in our group would know more about that subject. But, maybe it would be more historically accurate to start the tank units at half strength and then provide extra MPPs to bring them to full strength.
5. I've read that a lot of German tanks weren't battle ready in time to start the Poland campaign. Instead of starting with two half strength tank units, maybe Germany should start with only one tank unit. The second tank unit would come in as a reinforcement in September, October, or November.
6. Operating units from one front to another should impact readiness. Units unloading from trains took a while to get organized. Currently we operate units up to the frontline and they attack next turn at full strength. Reducing readiness would weaken an immediate German assault on Belgium and might be more historically accurate.

[redrum68]

ORIGINAL: LoneRunner
Germany already incurs severe penalties for an early invasion of Belgium:
1. A one-turn conquest of Poland appears to cause a 5% increase in Russian mobilization. At least that's what has happened in several of my MP games.
2. Operating panzers and armies from the Eastern Front is expensive, especially before logistics is researched. In the first months of the war Germany scrapes the bottom of the barrel for precious MPPs. Every MPP spent operating units takes away from investing in tech and upgrading units.
3. An early attack is typically conducted with un-upgraded units and maybe with unrepaired units. As a result Germany incurs a lot more losses in attacks on Belgium/France.

There are generally ways around these:
1. You don't need to take Poland in 1 turn. Just clear most of the units turn 1 then capture turn 2 with a few remaining units moving the rest towards France. Taking it in 1 turn doesn't technically increase USSR mobilization 5%, I believe it causes the USSR DE not to fire which if accepted decreases USSR mobilization 5% so a net 5% difference.
2. You don't need to operate that many units as many of them can be forced marched in 1 or 2 turns and then recover the morale quickly in good supply, good generals, and some scripted events that increase german unit morale.
3. There is a little bit of trade off there and they might take a few more casualties initially but the key is to focus upgrading/repairing a few units at a time to attack with then upgrade/repair others while they begin the attack as you only have so many hexes/movement anyways. In the end, you probably take less casualties since French/UK are much less prepared.

[DavidDailey]

All the big winners on the Axis side follow the same strategy, turn 1 or 2 knockout of Poland, 1939 invasion of Low Countries and France with her defeat no later than May 1940, earliest possible game allowed invasion of Russia, blowing through all opposition to Perm and a quick victory while the Americans and British launch weak and ineffectual counterattacks. The good Axis players can easily prevent the Baltic and Norweigan raids and prepare for the highly problematical Italian invasion. I refer to this as the Mike Tyson approach to Strategic Command. A punch in the face and a Round 1 knockout.