Leader Deaths

[tm1]

ORIGINAL: HardLuckYetAgain

Turn 1

Beginning of Turn

Gotta love it! 17 Dead Leaders even before I move. Seems to me the increase in leaders KIA has gone up substantially. /shrug oh well I will just use whatever leader anyway.

Visions of a " The Great Officer Purge II " seem to come into view before my eyes but this time Comrade Stalin has given the German Armed forces his blessing to carry it out on his behalf [:D].

All humour aside I cant recall reading a post from this forum and the WITE 1 forum from days long ago that had the figure of 17 killed on any turn let alone the first turn of a match in both games ( WITE 1 / 2 )

Back in the old days of WITE 1 there was a Gentleman's rule of limited bombing of HQ's then I believe there was a patch that somewhat fixed this issue ( I could be wrong ).

@stamb's post on the percentages from patch 1.02.15 to me does sound reasonable on the face of it, particularly the 50% for isolated troops.

If a unit decides to fight to the last man or there about's there is going to be a good chance the General falls with his men, or at the very least gets captured.

@HLYA I am stunned at 17 on the first turn and some big names on it as well , that has just got to be just a plain fluke of a turn, it could not be repeated surely.

@xhoel I agree it certainly needs to be looked at specially for PvP player games.

regards

[DesertedFox]

ORIGINAL: xhoel

@Stamb: This guy is just a sad a troll that just wants to bother people. He isnt interested in having a discussion. Just ignore him.

I see mathematics isn't a strong trait with either of you.

[Stamb]

Right now according to a manual and fixes we should have 50% chance of leader death in case if it is overrun in a pocket.
Units can not move out of a pockets.
But surprisingly you can move leaders out of a pockets for AP with 0% chance of being killed. While other units can not move out of a pocket at all!
If there would be no (I call it bug/exploit) "trick" that you can reassign isolated leaders then this leader would die in 50% cases. And I propose 30%.

[loki100]

ORIGINAL: DesertedFox

ORIGINAL: xhoel

@Stamb: This guy is just a sad a troll that just wants to bother people. He isnt interested in having a discussion. Just ignore him.

I see mathematics isn't a strong trait with either of you.

why does every debate you enter into degenerate into personal abuse? Its perfectly feasible to disagree, set out why someone is wrong and not insult them as you do so

[DesertedFox]

ORIGINAL: loki100

ORIGINAL: DesertedFox

ORIGINAL: xhoel

@Stamb: This guy is just a sad a troll that just wants to bother people. He isnt interested in having a discussion. Just ignore him.

I see mathematics isn't a strong trait with either of you.

why does every debate you enter into degenerate into personal abuse? Its perfectly feasible to disagree, set out why someone is wrong and not insult them as you do so

And being called a "troll" first wasn't a personal attack on me?

Thx for your nonbiased and fair adjudication in this matter.

[Beethoven1]

If this isn't changed, then for any new games I start there will be a house rule that we start the first few turns, until the initial pockets are cleared, we will be using a patch from before the leader deaths were put on steroids like this. Once the initial pockets are cleared, then we can switch to an updated patch.

Targeted leader assassination drone strike tactics are just bad gameplay, in particular when it involves good leaders like Tolbukhin that don't even start in command of an army, but which are automatically put in charge of an army as a replacement commander before the Soviet player can even move a single unit. I think it is a different matter if a leader is killed subsequently on turn 10 or 50 or something because you were careless with placing the HQ and the enemy made a deep breakthrough, but this turn 1 stuff along with deliberately precision targeting Malinovsky, Galanin, Rokossovsky etc is just dumb and unrealistic.

[HardLuckYetAgain]

I have seen other posts about leader deaths. I posted about it a LONG time ago. If the powers in charge say that this is correct & the numbers are correct then so be it. I am not looking for change but just pointing out that this Strat will become previliant once more start doing this. You "can't" house rule this out either. Just not possible the way turn 1 works. So, seems a bit not historical losing good Soviet leaders to repeated HQ displacements since that is the only way I could have lost Tolbukhin. But whatever, I care not and will use any leader at my disposal. Again, I believe I won't replace any leaders turn 1 and see how many more good Soviet leaders are killed to "isolated" HQ's this time since turn 1 everyone should be NON-isolated, right? Doesn't seem like it.

I do have to agree that 15% non-isolated leader loss does not seem to be the case since this is turn 1 of the GC. Plus if you add up the HQ's in the affected area then the number become even more pronounced. If done correctly, the Germans can keep hitting HQ's as they are displaced from combat and continue to add leader losses to the HQ if displaced over and over and over again if lucky.

My recommendation, back in BETA I believe but can be wrong, was to not replace any leader in an HQ that had a leader killed until the phasing players turn. Yes, you will still have a leader death but you can't go fishing for more leader deaths from the same HQ displaced again.

[HardLuckYetAgain]

ORIGINAL: Beethoven1

If this isn't changed, then for any new games I start there will be a house rule that we start the first few turns, until the initial pockets are cleared, we will be using a patch from before the leader deaths were put on steroids like this. Once the initial pockets are cleared, then we can switch to an updated patch.

Targeted leader assassination drone strike tactics are just bad gameplay, in particular when it involves good leaders like Tolbukhin that don't even start in command of an army, but which are automatically put in charge of an army as a replacement commander before the Soviet player can even move a single unit. I think it is a different matter if a leader is killed subsequently on turn 10 or 50 or something because you were careless with placing the HQ and the enemy made a deep breakthrough, but this turn 1 stuff along with deliberately precision targeting Malinovsky, Galanin, Rokossovsky etc is just dumb and unrealistic.

A house rule for turn 1 is just not possible if you think about it. That could end up crippling the German 1st turn

[HardLuckYetAgain]

ORIGINAL: HardLuckYetAgain

ORIGINAL: Beethoven1

If this isn't changed, then for any new games I start there will be a house rule that we start the first few turns, until the initial pockets are cleared, we will be using a patch from before the leader deaths were put on steroids like this. Once the initial pockets are cleared, then we can switch to an updated patch.

Targeted leader assassination drone strike tactics are just bad gameplay, in particular when it involves good leaders like Tolbukhin that don't even start in command of an army, but which are automatically put in charge of an army as a replacement commander before the Soviet player can even move a single unit. I think it is a different matter if a leader is killed subsequently on turn 10 or 50 or something because you were careless with placing the HQ and the enemy made a deep breakthrough, but this turn 1 stuff along with deliberately precision targeting Malinovsky, Galanin, Rokossovsky etc is just dumb and unrealistic.

A house rule for turn 1 is just not possible if you think about it. That could end up crippling the German 1st turn

And playing with an earlier patch is a good idea but what other situations does that bring up?

[HardLuckYetAgain]

ORIGINAL: xhoel

@HLYA: The changes have increased the leader deaths too much and should be reduced. Leader deaths should not be something that the players are gaming for and unfortunately currently the game incentivizes just that.

I agree that the current ruleset "incentivizes" the Germans to target HQ's. Soviets better get used to losing good leaders the first 3ish turns since this looks like it could be the norm. Anyway, lets see how many leaders I lose turn 2

[DesertedFox]

ORIGINAL: HardLuckYetAgain

My recommendation, back in BETA I believe but can be wrong, was to not replace any leader in an HQ that had a leader killed until the phasing players turn. Yes, you will still have a leader death but you can't go fishing for more leader deaths from the same HQ displaced again.

1. This to me makes the most sense.

2. If this was to be implemented you could also look at the transfer out issue raised in an

isolated hex having a 15% chance of a death as well, due to

a.possibly flying off a makeshift runway or

b. fighter interception or

c. bad weather or

d. mechanical fault.

No need to do a check on the incoming leader as usually anyone

flown out of a pocket was replaced by a similar or lower-ranked officer already in the pocket.

My stance on item 2 would depend on item 1 being implemented. I feel 17 deaths on turn 1 is way too much.

Heck someone had 12 deaths a little while ago as well and I feel that figure is pushing it.

[HardLuckYetAgain]

Linking this to my AAR


https://www.matrixgames.com/forums/tm.asp?m=5134139

No post on the AAR about this but want for reference between the two

[Jango32]

That would probably require changing it so leaderless HQs are possible to have, and then have the checks done at the higher HQ level for divisions that belong to the HQ that got its leader killed. Not against the idea, but it would require a programmer from the dev team to comment on how easy it would be to do; or maybe Joel.

[Beethoven1]

ORIGINAL: HardLuckYetAgain

And playing with an earlier patch is a good idea but what other situations does that bring up?

I have another idea. In the StB scenario, some leaders (e.g. Rotmistrov) are not available until a certain date. So I presume in the editor it is possible to make leaders like Tolbukhin only be available starting on, say, turn 3 or 4 or so.

If so, then what I would do is make a modified scenario where the particularly good/irreplaceable leaders like Tolbukhin don't exist in the game until turn 3 or 4. That would stop them from being re-assigned to doomed HQs within the pockets on the first turn or two.

Mind you, I don't have a problem with some of the normal/bad leaders (in particular the ones that were actually there on the front) getting killed - it even adds a bit of atmosphere. But this is a different thing as compared to that.

[HardLuckYetAgain]

ORIGINAL: Beethoven1

ORIGINAL: HardLuckYetAgain

And playing with an earlier patch is a good idea but what other situations does that bring up?

I have another idea. In the StB scenario, some leaders (e.g. Rotmistrov) are not available until a certain date. So I presume in the editor it is possible to make leaders like Tolbukhin only be available starting on, say, turn 3 or 4 or so.

If so, then what I would do is make a modified scenario where the particularly good/irreplaceable leaders like Tolbukhin don't exist in the game until turn 3 or 4. That would stop them from being re-assigned to doomed HQs within the pockets on the first turn or two.

Mind you, I don't have a problem with some of the normal/bad leaders (in particular the ones that were actually there on the front) getting killed - it even adds a bit of atmosphere. But this is a different thing as compared to that.

OH! I like that idea, especially what Jango32 mentioned in the post above, to put in an available date! Excellent idea.

[K62_]

Just for extra context, I was playing Axis on that T1 and I was not intentionally targeting Soviet leaders. Tolbukhin and Bobkin got assigned to the same corps HQ that kept displacing in the path that PG3 was going to take anyway.

[HardLuckYetAgain]

ORIGINAL: K62

Just for extra context, I was playing Axis on that T1 and I was not intentionally targeting Soviet leaders. Tolbukhin and Bobkin got assigned to the same corps HQ that kept displacing in the path that PG3 was going to take anyway.

It is the nature of the beast of turn 1 and displacing HQ. It happened to Jubjub in my game and wrote about it in that AAR it was not intentional. It is just not something you can control & thank you for adding this to this post for context. Maybe I can get lucky and get a few good replacement leaders that don't get knocked off after replacing the previous ones in turn 2 . If I have to I will enter Berlin with

[Denniss]

These losses seem way over the top.

[Stamb]

I let AI do the first turn and he killed 7 leaders. With 15% chance it is also too high. 46 displacement had to be made. 46*0.15 = 6.9

[HardLuckYetAgain]

Here is another game that has 22 leader kills beginning of turn 2 post 22 https://www.matrixgames.com/forums/tm.asp?m=5137928

And I quote MSAG, " Altogether 22 Leaders are KIA to date. Notable ones lost this turn are Kuznetsov (Mech 4, Inf 6) and Andrei Vlasov"


I did not see MSAG's 1st turn leader loss & may have missed it