Over rated Russian rail system.

[Klydon]

I am not a fan boi for either side, but I will point out that although Flaviusx is one of the resident Russian experts, he is generally fair about things for both sides.

Flaviusx, I don't think there is likely any doubt that the armaments multiplier is going to get a tweak up soon to help. That is a fairly easy fix.

Lvov pocket is too hard of a judgement call to say "this was a Lvov pocket" or it wasn't. The other issue is it takes away the beauty of the game to a point; much like Russians don't have to stand and fight, the Germans should not be so constrained in how they use their forces in terms of what goes where. In hindsight, it absolutely appears more force in the south would have been beneficial.

This is different from a broken production mechanic that renders HI useless at the moment. My suggestion of a enforced ratio is to keep the rail cap in perspective with what the Russians can realistically expect after a fix comes out for the HI and it becomes important to move it again.

My suggestion about reducing/limiting the HQ buildup mechanic is also to help prepare the Germans for the day it likely won't be available or even more limited by changes to the game. Even if the Germans pull the Lvov manuver, the Russians have more security as far as panzers suddenly full of gas doing massive encirclements.

If you have a suggestion to make for those who would like to play a head to head game with the game in its current form, I am sure the community would be receptive (other than trying to say the Lvov opening should not be used).

[Wild]

Look i think everyone just wants to make this great game better. I think it's obvious and desirable that the production model make sense and stay as close to history as possible but also taking into account gameplay. Therefore Heavy industry must be fixed.

If the production is right then i think the rail will more or less take care of itself.

I see nothing wrong with the Lvov opening but i would give it up if that's what it takes to bribe the devs to fix production and make cities worth fighting for.

I also think Hq buildups have been abused and should be limited. I don't like the factory raiding but also think Soviets should be garrisoning their cities better.

I'm a German player but i don't want to skew the game so they can always win. I just want a fun game that is historical but has great playability and i think improving production and making cities more important thus giving more objectives will do that.

[mmarquo]

Stoat wrote:

So the way I see it, reduced down to the crux of it, Pelton is the greatest champion of making the game better, and FlaviusX is the greatest proponent of destroying the game. I think they're both smart and I like them both. But this is why I stand with Pelton & why I stand against FlaviusX.

What absolute drivel. You have have contributed anything absolutely nothing to the development of this game - you are a recruit with no stars by your name; OTOH Flaviusx 5 stars after his name. Your claim that he wants to destroy the game has destroyed your credibility.

Frankly the problem with Pelton's posts is that they are accusatory and filled with acerbic innuendo - this makes them very difficult to read; however I like to read them because he raises interesting points.

Now, why am reacting at all? Because I wasted my time reading your flaming post when I could have been reading something constructive.

Enjoy the game.

Marquo

[hugh04]

I am a new player but an old gamer. So far 1 game vs a human as axis up through the blizzard and another vs a human soviet. One thing I find interesting is looking at the 1942 GC starting forces. German and Soviet forces are really beat up. The entire southern soviet front is a mass of 1 cv units. These 2 armies really fought each other.

I have seen the front line in 42 of some AAR's and it is scary how strong the Soviet are. Pelton vs Kamil has russian front line cv's made up of infantry corps with strengths in the 50+ range down the entire front.

I think 2 easy ideas to make the sides truly fight are realistic automatic victory conditions. Example 2 out of 3 Leningrad, Moscow and Kharkov/stalino taken by Axis so long as soviet player holds none of Pskov, smolensk, kiev and D or Z town. The test would be in March of 42. You might add automatic win if Axis holds Rostov, Leningrad and Moscow at the end of any 2 or 3 consecutive turns.

In March of 43 make holding Baku and Stalingrad or just Moscow an automatic win.

Lastly, make the industrial evacuation schedule automatic. Tactical soviet rail capacity would be less as the industrial evacuation would take a set amount each turn. Soviet could have a choice to delay 1/2 of any turns industry evac for a turn increase in rail cap.

Great game that could be even greater and less predictable if the 2 sides would really go all out against each other.

Vandev

p.s. in my play as a soviet I run backwards to river lines and try to avoid massive encirclements.

[76mm]

ORIGINAL: Pelton

Read what I post...Go back and read the posts, thks.

You're on. I've posted the relevant parts of your post below, and then discuss. I welcome any counter-arguments.

ORIGINAL: Pelton
2. It is a fact of history we know that 50% of all the industry in the areas the Germans over ran were destoryed or 64 armerment pts. With the current system it not historicaly possible to hit these numbers, because the rail system is broken.

Fact of history according to whom? And 50% of what? 50% of the factory sites (ie, 100% of 50% of the factory sites?)? Or 50% of 100% of the factory sites? Or it is simply that the Germans overran some factories with some remaining, perhaps non-essential, equipment in 50% of the factories? Your 50% figure is literally almost completely meaningless.

But assuming for a moment that the 50% figure is true, it is impossible to equate 50% of "all industry" with any percentage of armament points, for the simple reason that the Sovs probably evacced arm factories first. What they left behind was could have been making baby-carriages for all you know. Moreover, as I've also previously explained, there is no reason to think that the Sovs had to evac 100% of every factory, just the most critical equipment.

ORIGINAL: Pelton
I clearly explained the % and then simply found a map on line of all the areas the Germans over ran...Totalled up the numbers ect ecte cet...I went with 50% to split the 40-66% of claims.

Gee this is a rigorous and obviously very weighty piece of analysis...[8|]. I can see why the devs should rework the whole production and rail transport model based on this!

[76mm]

ORIGINAL: Panzeh
Also, I think 1941 is really un-fun in this game for the Soviets as it is essentially scripted for him, even if it's effective.  The game's swings are really obvious and gamey, there's just not much give and take.  Even when it's time for the Red Army to kick ass the best strategy is really boring and there's rarely much of a choice.  I also think the Germans only really have many options in 1941, afterward they, too, get boring.

I guess this post is kind of OT, but I have to agree.

[76mm]

ORIGINAL: vandev
I have seen the front line in 42 of some AAR's and it is scary how strong the Soviet are. Pelton vs Kamil has russian front line cv's made up of infantry corps with strengths in the 50+ range down the entire front.

You have not seen 1942 AARs with the 1.05 patch, it will make a huge difference.

[76mm]

Of course the Lvov Opening and panzer raiding are closely connected with factory evac/rail capacity--the effectiveness of factory evac depends on the speed of the German advance which depends on German tactics. Tactics such as the Lvov Opening and panzer raiding increase the speed of the German advance and thus make factory evacs more difficult. How can anyone say that the issues are separate? The most definitely are closely related.

[ComradeP]

The game is quite different from before going from 1941 to 1942 now, as the Germans get Hiwi's, Soviet national morale is reduced and forts are less impressive, and it will be a while before the long term effects of recent changes are felt.

To say, like Pelton and now Stoat too, that the developers essentially only care about the Soviet side, is complete rubbish. To say that Pelton and Stoat represent most of the community is also false.

After the recent changes, there are more minor and major issues with the system than there are minor and major issues with a certain side, which was the case before, so in my opinion we're on the right track at least in that regard. Could that have been achieved earlier? Maybe, but we probably would've broken more things than were broken now with changes being applied more gradually.

Also, Stoat: We jump on Pelton because he rants and doesn't really provide evidence supporting his cause. What he says wouldn't be the problem if it would not be a rant (coming from a not so very articulated person) and if it would be based on the average situation and not what he views as a problem at the time. For obvious reasons, the game is more likely to be adjusted if something goes wrong on average than if something goes wrong in one single game, as long as it doesn't concern a bug, but an outcome.

[BletchleyGeek]

ORIGINAL: ComradeP
Also, Stoat: We jump on Pelton because he rants and doesn't really provide evidence supporting his cause. What he says wouldn't be the problem if it would not be a rant (coming from a not so very articulated person) and if it would be based on the average situation and not what he views as a problem at the time. For obvious reasons, the game is more likely to be adjusted if something goes wrong on average than if something goes wrong in one single game, as long as it doesn't concern a bug, but an outcome.

Let me break a lance for Pelton. He might not be as articulated as other forum regulars, and might be prone to cry wolf at the sight of the shadow of a goat, but still he's made quite a few fine points over the last months. Some of the points on the Soviet rail transportation system have an obvious "western" bias. Consider the apocryphal story about how much dollars NASA spent developing a pen for the astronauts that worked on Zero G without blotting the entire spaceship with ink, and how a Soviet astronaut, when told the story, started to laugh out loud and said "We just used pencils!".

They just got the job done. Consumer satisfaction and comfort, insurance policies ("signaling not up to western standards" [:D]) and the like weren't a concern for the Soviet system economy.

However ComradeP makes here an excellent point by separating the notion of "on average" from "exceptional". The problem is that proving the former usually requires some dedication and care.

[ComradeP]

Certainly, Pelton has made a few points, but that's not an excuse for his usual style of delivering those points, valid or not.

[Encircled]

The Soviet evacuation of their industry is well documented

The "Pelton" (ie piling across Russia with no interest in logistics, or keeping crack German troops alive) has about as much basis in history as "Braveheart" does.

Thanks for the post, Stoat, it made an interesting read, though your conclusions are flawed

[heliodorus04]

ORIGINAL: Encircled

The Soviet evacuation of their industry is well documented

The "Pelton" (ie piling across Russia with no interest in logistics, or keeping crack German troops alive) has about as much basis in history as "Braveheart" does.

Yes, but given you're in Northern England, we can assume you support Longshanks, and therefore your opinion is hopelessly biased!

As far as THIS American is concerned, Braveheart is actual history!

Now where's the blue face paint![:D]

[Encircled]

Seventy miles from the Scottish border

Mel "I hate the English" Gibson is a legend up there!

[johnnyvagas]

The whole concept of Kilts and going commando while wearing a dress seems overly drafty to me. I just don’t think Highland troops sporting kilts would perform particularly well with the current blizzard rules.

[Aurelian]

Ehhh, a few gallons of scotch will fix that.

[ComradeP]

Elements of 2nd Shock Army tried heavy drinking when trying to break out of its encirclement after the Lyuban offensive failed and the German operations had isolated the army from the rest of the Soviet forces in the area. Results were predictable.

[Peltonx]

76mm hmmm, I am not going to lower myself to your level I just take the time and slowly explian things again.

50% of industry destoried is 50% of war industry not baby carriers, Good Sir.

We all 100% know and some are tring to address the exploit that Russian players are using.

So wasting poeples time tring to say its not an exploit or that 50% of war industry was not destoryed in the areas over run by the Germans is making you seem close minded and that you don't have the best interests of the game at heart.

1. Hvy means nothing.
2. 45% to 66% of all war industry was destoryed in the areas that the Germans over ran or in WiTe terms of industry that means something = 53 to 80 arm pts. (again HVY means nothing)
3. Russian players are exploiting this to death, in every ARR. Same as 1v1=2v1 and the old HQ build-up rules were exploits. Crappy rules cause exploiting by the player base in any game.
4. Because of this exploit the rail system is over rated.
5. Its impossible because of this exploit to reach historical levels of industry destoryed.
6. Its impossible because of this exploit to reach historical levels of men killed because russian players simply evac and run east leaving 75 to 80% of the front dead. With the russians staying just out of supply range. 3/4 of the front is a bore after turn 7.
7. Flaviusx wants whats good for the game, he did not want the 1v1=2v1 rule put into the game at all.
He saw the airbase bombing exploit and wanted it fixed. So even though he has an army of many fan boys (many might want to try thinking for themselfs at times) backing him up, if something is screwed up I beleive he will and has taken the time and do the right thing in the end for the game or atleast put his 10 cents into 2by3.

Dropping the manpower output would have helped, but because of the exploit russian players never have to worry about issues with equipment or manpower because they only have to fight around Leningrad and Moscow. They can easly keep the red army above 4 million men before mud sets in.

The current rail/hvy/evac rule set is broken and unbalancing the game. This is really not something thats is even a debate anymore its a clear matter of fact all sides see.

The only question is are you going to defend this exploit that is unbalancing the game or are you looking for a fair fix that will make the game better in the long run?

I think its more then clear to all sides other then the hard liners who really don't care about fair play or a better game that something needs to be done to address this exploit.

Pelton

[DTurtle]

Could you cite a source for the 50% of war industry in the invaded areas being destroyed?

[76mm]

ORIGINAL: Pelton
76mm hmmm, I am not going to lower myself to your level I just take the time and slowly explian things again.

50% of industry destoried is 50% of war industry not baby carriers, Good Sir.

We all 100% know and some are tring to address the exploit that Russian players are using.

So wasting poeples time tring to say its not an exploit or that 50% of war industry was not destoryed in the areas over run by the Germans is making you seem close minded and that you don't have the best interests of the game at heart.

I'm afraid you're going to have to keep explaining some things, because I still don't understand...

As to the 50%:
--I might have missed where this "historical fact" was established, along with an explanation of what this 50% means, so please provide the relevant cite and I will take a look;
--Similarly, I don't see where you or anyone else has established that 50% of "war industry" equates to 50% of armaments? How do you know it was not all Hvy?
--Even assuming that 50% of war industry in the areas taken by Germany was armaments which were completely destroyed, it did not exactly cripple the Sovs, did it? They produced massive quantities of everything they needed. So how does that help you?

As to it being an exploit:
--if hvy in fact means nothing, it is a game design issue, and Sov players can hardly be blamed for adopting strategies that will maximize their chances to win. It is no more an exploit than the way that certain German players take advantage of the deficiencies in the game's logistic modelling to achieve unrealistic advance rates;
--Moreover, as far as I understand, the devs/testers assert that hvy is important later in the game, and that Sovs players that ignore their hvy will regret it. I have no idea if this is true, but if so it is much too early to say. For instance, I note that hvy is used to produce ammunition, so shortages of hvy which are not noticeable when the Red Army is at 4 million and retreating could mean ammo shortages when it is at 7.5 million and attacking. But no one has gotten nearly far enough into the game under 1.05 to determine that... If hvy plays the non-role it seems to now, it would be removed or fixed.

Finally, as to your comment about "lowering yourself" my level, that I am close-minded, or (my favorite) "don't have the interests of the game at heart"...I'm not sure what exactly to say, other than:
--you are generally very loose with your facts and I consider it to be "in the best interest of the game" to point this out;
--I actually agree with you that a game in which the optimal Sov strategy is to simply retreat as fast as possible is neither particularly fun nor particularly realistic (you can see my massive 1941 losses in my AAR with Ketza to see how I tried to defend forward, and how that strategy is a complete loser in-game). I just don't agree with you as to why this strategy is favored, or how to fix the problem. I certainly don't agree that the problem should be fixed by placing unrealistic restrictions on evaccing Sov industry so to force the Sovs to defend in the West or have Sov industry crippled.