HLYA GC Step-by-Step German turn 1 featuring the Full Rovno pocket

[Mehring]

I'm not going to try to get inside your head to dissect your subjectivity, it's not something I want or have enough information to do. I'll try to stick to the verifiable facts.

You end by demanding that I "prove [you] wrong on my statement of “Sophistry and falsehood.”" You have supported this mildly slanderous statement with nothing more than unevidenced assertions of what's inside my head. I would remind you that you are no more able to get inside my head to see my motives than I am to get inside yours, though your repeated attempts to ascribe motive to me without evidence, even at the level of pop psychology, reeks of projection.

There is no need for me to disprove what you have't even evidenced. In any case, and in an about turn from your support for Bobo's post, you corroborate the substance of my criticism with "I would have agreed with you [on a thread with my concerns] on that thread to the Devs too." Your baseless allegations regarding my "real" motives should really be irrelevant, you have supported my core assertion. However, I do feel some of your allegations warrant a rebuttal.

You are in no better position to know what I have and haven't raised with the devs over the years than you are to tell how I would or wouldn't raise concerns with them if my motive wasn't just to attack you personally. Where or when, even what version of the game, I couldn't say, but this is certainly not the first time I've raised the issue on the v1 and/or v2 forum. It's just that your thread, titled as it is, complete with unit by unit attacks and screen shots is the most powerful evidence I've found of the need for a degree of pre-T1 Soviet set up flexibility.

I can see how you would take my comment as pissing on your parade. It is. However, if you were merely the messenger you would have written this thread to raise concerns with the devs yourself, but by your own words, you haven't. Instead, unless I've missed something, you've written a completely uncritical guide to a cynical play by rote AGS/C T1. You are indeed doing and encouraging others in what the game allows you to do. That is, for me, the dividing line between playing cynically and cheeting. Why not play the game with two windows, one the game you're playing, the other rolled forward to Soviet T1 after the German makes no moves, so you can see the exact Soviet dispositions? The mechanics of the game won't stop you, but neither would I want to unwittingly find you as my opponent using ruses to gain information that the spirit of the game never intended you to have. I'm not sorry for ruffling your feathers because I'm not saying anything that isn't true. If you can now see that and want to re-raise the issue of a pre-T1 Soviet set up flexibility (and perhaps more generally), that's fine, I'll try to work with you. I don't come here for a bit of social, either to make friends or enemies, just to comment on the game, try to improve it to my way of thinking, and to find opponents.

[jasonbroomer]

Hoping to steer the matter to what interests most readers, I’ll throw in my thoughts.

It is inevitable that an ideal t1 set of moves will be developed, there may well be more than one set though. Look at what has happened with chess. Having to learn endless opening variations is tedious but with the vastness of this game and randomness, the plotted opening is unlikely to ever go much beyond the Axis is first turn. I for one, am delighted that we have a half decent airway opening turn now programmed and that you don’t need to manually plug in scripted commands. The RNG element means that the ground phase can never be entirely like that, although sadly the adjustment to reserve activations on hasties has diminished the RNG element of t1.

I think HLYA’s guide is most helpful, although I believe it commits too many men to the southern front. I appreciate that this was by design to counter the Soviet abandon the south strategy.

What guide does does provide is lots of learning information on how to play this game, which are neither in the manual or intuitive. This is the real value of this work. Learning through practical examples such as this guide have greatly enhanced my appreciation of this great game over the last 12 months that I have played it.

[AlbertN]

When players develop opening moves from experience never available to real life belligerents and worse, publicise them for everyone to copy like parrots, you risk both fundamentally unbalancing the game and turning its beginning into a tediously predictable routine. It's time to introduce variable set ups, giving the defenders a pre-turn 1 move, allowing a certain number of units freedom of movement or perhaps all units the ability to shift a few hexes.

This post isn't helpful. When someone spends the time and effort to share this with the WITE2 community we should be appreciative.

You don't have to follow it just because it's there. There are many ways to open and each has its benefits and drawback. By showing a step by step guide like this, curious players can learn a lot about retreat mechanics for example (i certainly have).

I am with Veterin there.

Sure one can decide to copy / try to replicate HLYA moves, or not. That's subjective.
But I believe to openly criticize what I believe it is objectively an explainatory and helpful thread - in which another player is sinking time by writing a guide / guideline that's another matter.

I believe it would even be favorable if the Mods would erase all the 'discussion-argument' replies here and keep the 'guide' tidy and clean. I'd certainly favor a clean explaination not interluded with the extra to which I am just adding by this post.

[alty59]

I believe it would even be favorable if the Mods would erase all the 'discussion-argument' replies here and keep the 'guide' tidy and clean. I'd certainly favor a clean explaination not interluded with the extra to which I am just adding by this post.

I totally agree with AlbertN


And I am not a parrot...

[EwaldvonKleist]

When players develop opening moves from experience never available to real life belligerents and worse, publicise them for everyone to copy like parrots, you risk both fundamentally unbalancing the game and turning its beginning into a tediously predictable routine. It's time to introduce variable set ups, giving the defenders a pre-turn 1 move, allowing a certain number of units freedom of movement or perhaps all units the ability to shift a few hexes.

The solution to this imho should be via game design, not by limiting player skill or knowledge (sharing). You can always limkt T1 by houserules. Someone created an MS Excel randomizer for WitE1 T1 Soviet setup, may be worth repeating.
(See the library of WitE respurces, 6.5)

[56ajax]

The original postings by HLYA is simply a very detailed, informative T1 AAR. I parrotted every move (ark, ark) and about 90% worked as described. This is what I lean't (more) about

Retreats and rout points
Benefit of tightly grouped pockets
Use of independent rail repair units
Movement of air units during T1
Benefit of divisional breakdowns and change of command

And I had fun. It is a game afterall. Would i play like that all the time? No, as i lack the time, concentration and patience for that approach - I'm a more 'fix bayonets and charge' type.

To suggest that a particular way of playing the game is invalid/wrong, as opposed to not optimal/worse, is just a form of bullying.

[Mehring]

The solution to this imho should be via game design, not by limiting player skill or knowledge (sharing). You can always limkt T1 by houserules. Someone created an MS Excel randomizer for WitE1 T1 Soviet setup, may be worth repeating.

Precisely, hence I have not suggested that the thread be removed and have instead suggested a different game design. Please post a link to the randomiser if you know it, it sounds like a possible workaround.

In the meantime, this thread and its comments in support of this style of play as well as censorship of oppsing views acts as a who's who of players I'll be avoiding.

[Mehring]

To suggest that a particular way of playing the game is invalid/wrong, as opposed to not optimal/worse, is just a form of bullying.

What an absurd generalisation. But if we're talking of bullying, I did receive this message of support from someone who won't even post on this forum anymore, names XXXXed to protect the innocent.

Hi Mehring,

I gave up posting in the wie2 forum some time ago and have no intention of doing so again.

I have been in touch with XXXX who only helps XXXX behind the scenes as he has given up on posting in the forum as well, along with XXXX and XXXX.

I am 100% behind what you have said and yes XXXX might be a very talented player but he is on a self-aggrandizement trip with all his posts.

However, the VOCAL minority has spoken against you. Lol, XXXX is a horrible player and I couldn't agree with anything he has to say.

So, I just wanted to let you know not everyone is against you, but in all honesty, this is a battle you will not win against the ignorant majority of those who still post in the forum today.

I also agree that the first turn presents the Axis with a "Rovo" pocket 100% guaranteed with the extra loss of a large number of Russian mech and armoured divisions. This was not meant to be a WAD feature as they (the devs) tried and succeeded in getting rid of the wite1 Lvov pocket.

Well, now it's been replaced by the Rovno pocket. This as you subtly pointed out gives a huge advantage to the Germans and can easily unbalance the game.

I can't see your suggestion of first-turn realignment of some Russian units being accepted but another thought I had was removing the rule below. It's really not necessary now with the implementation of the reduced CCP loss with higher combat results.

Anyway, good luck.

Cheers,

XXXX

11.2.2. MovEMENt BoNUS
Axis units that meet both of the following conditions will
receive a movement bonus on the 22 June 1941 turn:
§ The Unit is moving from and to a hex north of row 173
§ If Motorized, unit has more than 15 MPs remaining and
if non-motorized it has more than 8 MPs remaining.
These conditions are checked each hex the unit moves so
a unit moving south of row 172 will lose the movement
bonus as long as they are moving to/from that area. The
image below shows where this divide is on the immediate
German-Soviet border region.

[ToxicThug11]

To suggest that a particular way of playing the game is invalid/wrong, as opposed to not optimal/worse, is just a form of bullying.

What an absurd generalisation. But if we're talking of bullying, I did receive this message of support from someone who won't even post on this forum anymore, names XXXXed to protect the innocent.

Hi Mehring,

I gave up posting in the wie2 forum some time ago and have no intention of doing so again.

I have been in touch with XXXX who only helps XXXX behind the scenes as he has given up on posting in the forum as well, along with XXXX and XXXX.

I am 100% behind what you have said and yes XXXX might be a very talented player but he is on a self-aggrandizement trip with all his posts.

However, the VOCAL minority has spoken against you. Lol, XXXX is a horrible player and I couldn't agree with anything he has to say.

So, I just wanted to let you know not everyone is against you, but in all honesty, this is a battle you will not win against the ignorant majority of those who still post in the forum today.

I also agree that the first turn presents the Axis with a "Rovo" pocket 100% guaranteed with the extra loss of a large number of Russian mech and armoured divisions. This was not meant to be a WAD feature as they (the devs) tried and succeeded in getting rid of the wite1 Lvov pocket.

Well, now it's been replaced by the Rovno pocket. This as you subtly pointed out gives a huge advantage to the Germans and can easily unbalance the game.

I can't see your suggestion of first-turn realignment of some Russian units being accepted but another thought I had was removing the rule below. It's really not necessary now with the implementation of the reduced CCP loss with higher combat results.

Anyway, good luck.

Cheers,

XXXX

11.2.2. MovEMENt BoNUS
Axis units that meet both of the following conditions will
receive a movement bonus on the 22 June 1941 turn:
§ The Unit is moving from and to a hex north of row 173
§ If Motorized, unit has more than 15 MPs remaining and
if non-motorized it has more than 8 MPs remaining.
These conditions are checked each hex the unit moves so
a unit moving south of row 172 will lose the movement
bonus as long as they are moving to/from that area. The
image below shows where this divide is on the immediate
German-Soviet border region.

Which vocal minority are you speaking about? The discord server with 100+ players or the guy with a hundred sockpuppet accounts?

[Mehring]

Which vocal minority are you speaking about? The discord server with 100+ players or the guy with a hundred sockpuppet accounts?

I really couldn't say which viewpoint constitutes either a majority or minority but I can vouch for the authenticity of the account messaging me, it's someone who's been around even longer than me. But in the context of defending a T1 Axis cloning method, your reference to "sockpuppet" suggests you're suffering an irony deficiency.

[ToxicThug11]

Which vocal minority are you speaking about? The discord server with 100+ players or the guy with a hundred sockpuppet accounts?

I really couldn't say which viewpoint constitutes either a majority or minority but I can vouch for the authenticity of the account messaging me, it's someone who's been around even longer than me. But in the context of defending a T1 Axis cloning method, your reference to "sockpuppet" suggests you're suffering an irony deficiency.

I don't know why you're polluting this guide thread with weird posts calling people "horrible players", HLYA clearly spent alot of time on this guide to teach new Axis players. The War Room is for "sharing your gameplay tips, secret tactics and fabulous strategies" so I guess I'm just having a hard time understanding why you have come to this thread to derail it.

[Mehring]

I don't know why you're polluting this guide thread with weird posts calling people "horrible players", HLYA clearly spent alot of time on this guide to teach new Axis players. The War Room is for "sharing your gameplay tips, secret tactics and fabulous strategies" so I guess I'm just having a hard time understanding why you have come to this thread to derail it.

If you don't know why I'm "polluting" this thread- I prefer to say criticisng it- you may be reading the content of my posts selectively, without attention or in bad faith, the latter two suggested by your attributing to me the words of someone I'm quoting while also subtlely misrepresenting (single player to plural players) what they say. Or perhaps you share this attitude to the game which I have characterised as cynical and you take the criticism personally. There's nothing like personal investment to destroy objectivity, but who knows, this is speculation informed mostly by general truths.

The issue is not teaching Axis players, so much as what he is teaching Axis players, in this case the perfection of an infallible southern pocket to which the Soviet player has no possible response inherent within which is a cynical attitude to the game. As I answered someone previously, something to the effect that if you want to teach or learn about play mechanics and/or tactics, you can do so in an abstract setting, the context of T1 unbalances the actual game.

The, I hate the term but, "whatabout" position of Bobo regarding cynical Soviet play not replicating Stalin's mistakes I haven't yet answered here yet. Playing Axis I've of course encountered Soviet players who retreat a set number of hexes in advance of the Axis infantry every turn, abandoning viable defensive positions in accord with their equally play by rote strategy. Answering cynicism with cynicism is ultimately a pragmatic solution which takes the game nowhere.

Elsewhere I have argued and will continue to argue to incentivise a forward Soviet defence by enabling the Soviets to inflict meaningfull damage on the Germans and depletion of their supply by counterattacking, as occurred historicaly. This, I believe, should be coupled with morale drops and permanent loss of industry if the Soviet falls back prematurely. The option will remain but it will cost dearly and may well backfire. Instead, the devs seem to have given up on an historical solution and instead built the losses suffered historically by the Soviets in encirclements into the combat loss ratio. This has done nothing to prevent the tedious Russian withdrawal to the "final" defence line which has been built up over the summer to the point of invincibility.

My critisims, then, is twofold. It is fundamentally a criticism of game design which engenders cynical play on both sides. It is also a criticism of pragmatic solutions which pollute play, players attitudes and which do nothing to deevelop the game. That HLYA has attempted to subjectivise these criticisms, with one aspect of which he is personally invested in this thread, is a distraction from the main points. Even HLYA in his last post agrees with my fundamental point, the ability of the Germans to play in this way should be countered by a variable setup option. I've raised this before elsewhere and I now find, thanks to EwaldvonKleist, that others have also noted and attempted to remedy the problem. https://www.matrixgames.com/forums/view ... 2#p4678392

[ToxicThug11]

I don't know why you're polluting this guide thread with weird posts calling people "horrible players", HLYA clearly spent alot of time on this guide to teach new Axis players. The War Room is for "sharing your gameplay tips, secret tactics and fabulous strategies" so I guess I'm just having a hard time understanding why you have come to this thread to derail it.

This, I believe, should be coupled with morale drops and permanent loss of industry if the Soviet falls back prematurely.

I can agree with you here. The Soviets in reality would never accept the loss of cities like Kiev without a fight. Lack industry and no political element makes this game quite hollow. At the very least Soviets should be experiencing morale loss for giving up major cities for free. Good play should be rewarded. If someone seizes Kiev early on turn 5, the desired effect is that the Soviet lose important industry and lose will to fight.

Unfortunately in reality the game does not care about these things. You could seize Stalingrad turn 10 and it would have no impact on Soviet morale and very little impact on Soviet industry due to the nature of the game.

As for an "infallible" turn 1 guide, Jango attempted this turn 1 rovno pocket against me (PBEM, not server, so he had infinite attempts to get it right) and I broke it immediately (which has put the game on hold). Every strategy has counters. This one is difficult to recreate, and certainly not infallible with SW Front reserve activations and differing morale levels.

If for example you think this is "infallible" or otherwise optimal:

8_for_d_u.png (2.77 MiB) Viewed 2205 times

Then I don't think you are really an authority on game balance. Here he has moved through ZOC, fatiguing his panzers and burning through tons of movement points, to ensure that 800 man Fortified Regions are destroyed completely. There is no "optimal" turn 1 and if a turn 1 pocket can be immediately broken by luck alone, it is not an optimal play.

The best turn 1 would be one that seizes the most ground for the least fatigue and destroyed Axis units as possible, captures the most trucks and enemies, and has no opportunity to be broken.

That being said I am making a 1941 "Competitive" GC which remedies the lack of incentive to defend the south. For example, morale is reduced if Kiev is captured early. To compensate the SW Front is stronger so the Soviets have more time to defend.

[ToxicThug11]

Elsewhere I have argued and will continue to argue to incentivise a forward Soviet defence by enabling the Soviets to inflict meaningfull damage on the Germans and depletion of their supply by counterattacking, as occurred historicaly. This, I believe, should be coupled with morale drops and permanent loss of industry if the Soviet falls back prematurely. The option will remain but it will cost dearly and may well backfire. Instead, the devs seem to have given up on an historical solution and instead built the losses suffered historically by the Soviets in encirclements into the combat loss ratio. This has done nothing to prevent the tedious Russian withdrawal to the "final" defence line which has been built up over the summer to the point of invincibility.

To expand on the points I've made, the Soviets are fully capable of damaging the Germans in 1941, even if the Axis successfully pull off this "Rovno T1".

Zebtucker for example has destroyed 250k of my Germans as well as a huge portion of the Luftwaffe, 4k guns on turn 7, the VVS is capable of destroying hundreds of guns per turn if set up correctly, and forward defending is certainly possible in the SW Front (it's just no one attempts it because it's better to send them to irrelevant swamps outside of Leningrad.)

Metas will naturally form, and these metas are centered around poor game design in this case. Zero morale drop for losing the entire grain producing / industrial region of Ukraine, zero implications for losing major cities aside from a lack of railyard in the area.

The only cities that slightly matter in terms of production is Kharkov for T34 production, and maybe a few others which have air frame production, or Leningrad for KV1 Chassis. Which can all be repaired in short order when they are relocated to the Urals...

For now, the meta for Soviets is to teleport every unit from your most vital economic region to the reserve, then to Leningrad swamps where they fight 3x more effectively.

AND why wouldn't you? Kiev afterall contains nothing of relevance. Losing Leningrad dampens your KV1 production, atleast for a few months, and never fell historically.

[ToxicThug11]

Here you can see in this collage defending the SW Front is totally viable, I did this against jubjub who is considered an experienced player. OFC, inexperienced players will struggle to pull off such maneuvers (just use multiple army HQs, mass all your artillery and make sure your number is 2x larger than the enemy) and dont forget air support.

This of course is absurd, Soviets in 1941 severe supply and ammo shortages and struggled to resupply. But then again, Supply Priority 4 across the entire front and infinite trucks is a good trade for a rovno pocket.

[HardLuckYetAgain]

Coming SOON!

1. GC step-by-step German turn 1 featuring the Lvov Pocket! Yup, you guessed it it is 100% possible and still in the game. (in my opinion not worth it but the reader can decide)

2. GC step-by-step German turn 1 featuring BOTH the Lvov pocket AND the Rovno pocket. If you tried the first too and not winning turn 1, you have to wait for this one! Stay tuned.


I have now put Mehring on ignore. Nothing but character assassination and projecting the games woes onto me. Loki did this exact same thing to me in the past, not dealing with it any longer. I will continue to do write-ups, the entity (possible entities but I doubt it) behind the mask will just have to deal with it.

So, until Eric Rutins tells me to stop doing these write-ups, which Mr. Rutins gave me a "Thank You" for writing these by the way, I am not stopping. So either Mr. Rutins and I are wrong or someone else is, the reader can decide.

Thank you and have a nice day!

[HardLuckYetAgain]

I even had a Rovno pocket played against me as the Soviets.

https://www.matrixgames.com/forums/view ... 0#p5063120

Nice to see readers are not parrots and using their own initiative to come up with alternatives. That is what the guide is for, to get people thinking.

I survived just fine turn 1 and we are up to turn 4. Please follow Mr Jasonbroomer as he kicks my butt in this game on the link above.

[Edmon]

I have now put Mehring on ignore. Nothing but character assassination and projecting the games woes onto me. Loki did this exact same thing to me in the past, not dealing with it any longer. I will continue to do write-ups, the entity (possible entities but I doubt it) behind the mask will just have to deal with it.

Calling out people like this is blatant provocation that can only bring more drama to the forums. If you have a problem with what someone is doing, report their posts and/or ignore them.

As in, ignore them silently, not making a big deal of it on the forums and inciting any conversation to move to that as the topic.

Anyone doing this type of thing will get an official warning.

[HardLuckYetAgain]

I have now put Mehring on ignore. Nothing but character assassination and projecting the games woes onto me. Loki did this exact same thing to me in the past, not dealing with it any longer. I will continue to do write-ups, the entity (possible entities but I doubt it) behind the mask will just have to deal with it.

Calling out people like this is blatant provocation that can only bring more drama to the forums. If you have a problem with what someone is doing, report their posts and/or ignore them.

As in, ignore them silently, not making a big deal of it on the forums and inciting any conversation to move to that as the topic.

Anyone doing this type of thing will get an official warning.

Edmon,

Thank you Edmon I did not know telling someone using their name that you put them on ignore is such a great offense.

Board Warning.png (121.4 KiB) Viewed 1978 times

I should have used XXXX in the name area for the ignored person when I typed it. Of course now I know you should do it silently. But putting XXXX in your posts seems to protect you and "using XXXX is not a "blatant provocation" as a Proxy from an email. So the lesson is to hide the identity and the poster is ok. I got the lesson Edmon, Thank you. Hopefully the forum gets the lesson too since my offense was more grievous than the other "blatant provocation.

post.png (368.53 KiB) Viewed 1978 times

Edmon with the above said I want you to "delete" my account. That means all posts everything deleted. I will send a copy of this request to Erik Rutins too. That way the "entity" behind the mask can finally have peace.

[homer82]

Edmon, I am calling you out and will add you to my ignore list.