Can we nerf this at some point next patch?

[gradenko2k]

The amount of hand-waving and cognitive dissonance in this thread is really quite astounding.

Even if the German player was not someone who you feel deserves some sort of come-uppance, and even if he played in such a manner that an 18-hex para-drop in early 1941 doesn't cripple his logistics; Hell, even if the logistics system of the game was overhauled to the point where you can never cut-off an Army Group with an 18-hex para-drop ... the game still allows the Soviet player to make 18-hex para-drops! In early 1941!

Regardless of who Pelton is, what he's done and what kind of effect the para-drop actually had, how can you willfully justify the ability to make drop in the first place?

[Klydon]

ORIGINAL: Zebedee

Not sure how that matters. Two drunk Mongolian shepherds on a meths binge could starve out Pelton's Ostheer in almost every campaign he's ever posted on the forums. And, likewise, do significant damage to the 1941 campaigns of most other German players.

That's the problem. Not the historic capabilities of the Soviets performing an airlift. Not the historic capabilities during any specific week after such an airdrop. But that any interdiction of the rail line stops that infinite supply and that effect is multiplied for German players who rely too heavily on 'optimised' (I believe that's the polite way of phrasing it) railroad building in 1941.

Only thing that's new is that someone's outcheesed Pelton with the game mechanics for a change and provoked this new plea to 'history'. Even the paradrop 'exploit' isn't new for a GG game; in fact, at least this is a brigade rather than just a squad.

Relative capabilities mean diddly squat when the problem is one of game mechanics. Could the Soviets put some men on a plane and dump them into swamps (not even with parachutes) with a sufficient survival rate for them to appear as a counter on map? Yup. Anything beyond that is the logistics mechanic - infinite supplies or not a bean. Can remove some options from the Soviet commander to prevent some elements of the clearly exploitative use possible but the fundamental issue remains. And it cuts both ways eventually.

Congrats on your Russian "I win" button.

By allowing the Russians to continue with this paratroop farce as it relates to the rail lines is to allow the game to be so totally broken, it isn't worth playing unless there is an agreement beforehand between players not to use such a manuver. The Germans don't have a lot of choice on how the railroad mechanics work, but according to you, it appears that the Germans should really worry about making sure every single line is taken care of in eastern Poland, regardless of where the front is.

Once again, there are all of two rail repair units that the Axis control in the southern part of the front. The rest is up to the AI.

I can't wait for some Russian to waste a brigade dropping on Berlin for giggles. (Or some other heavy industrialized/urban hex).

[Seminole]

Once again, there are all of two rail repair units that the Axis control in the southern part of the front. The rest is up to the AI.

I've asked, but no one has offered to explain, what happened to FBD1 in Pelton's game? Had the rail line it starts NW of Lvov been connected through Proskurov, this 'exploit' from Odessa to the Rumanian border is for naught.

I can't wait for some Russian to waste a brigade dropping on Berlin for giggles.

How? Oh, I forgot, how doesn't matter. When there isn't enough to bitch about people start making things up to bitch about.

Either they were well equipped, supplied, supported, and motivated and could pull off precision drops in '41, or they couldn't.

No in between, huh? Totally binary situation, whereupon we ignore that prior to the '41 invasion the Red Army conducted airborne operations moving brigade size units, and insist it must be 'well equipped, supplied, supported, and motivated and could pull off precision drops in '41' or nothing?

Have you tried dropping a para unit to see what it does to it?

But sorry, others here *are* supporting that, basically claiming because in '41 the SU had pushed a few soldiers out of planes that meant they could drop anywhere (in range of a plane), anytime, effectively, precisely, and consistantly.

Then quote them, because I read the thread and don't see anyone supporting the Red Army's ability to 'drop anywhere (in range of a plane), anytime, effectively, precisely, and consistantly.' You're creating a strawman, and it's not helping to the discussion whatsoever.

By all means, keep up the red herring assaults on Berlin and strawmen arguments about efficacy that no one suggesting airborne has a place in the game are making.

[Farfarer61]

I can't wait for some Russian to waste a brigade dropping on Berlin for giggles. (Or some other heavy industrialized/urban hex).
[/quote]

One game - everything in Ploesti instantly to 100% damage with the 4 surviving squads.

[gradenko2k]

ORIGINAL: Seminole
I've asked, but no one has offered to explain, what happened to FBD1 in Pelton's game? Had the rail line it starts NW of Lvov been connected through Proskurov, this 'exploit' from Odessa to the Rumanian border is for naught.

No in between, huh? Totally binary situation, whereupon we ignore that prior to the '41 invasion the Red Army conducted airborne operations moving brigade size units, and insist it must be 'well equipped, supplied, supported, and motivated and could pull off precision drops in '41' or nothing?

Have you tried dropping a para unit to see what it does to it?

Again, even if the German player somehow sets up his rail system such that a single para-drop cannot cut-off his supplies, the Soviet player is still allowed to make a para-drop very deep into German lines.

Short of the unit not materializing at all, any sort of unit appearing on the map would be enough to hurt rail-lines, no matter how demoralized or under-equipped it is after the drop action has been resolved.

It's not that they MUST be well-equipped, supplied, supported and motivated, it's that even when they're unequipped, isolated and have low morale, that parachute counter is still going to cause damage, and you still have to dislodge it with an actual on-map unit of your own, which you probably don't have any to spare since ... the para-drop was so far behind your front in the first place!

[Seminole]

It's not that they MUST be well-equipped, supplied, supported and motivated, it's that even when they're unequipped, isolated and have low morale, that parachute counter is still going to cause damage, and you still have to dislodge it with an actual on-map unit of your own, which you probably don't have any to spare since ... the para-drop was so far behind your front in the first place!

I think all para drops needs randomness in the target hex.
I think deep drops should result in the creation of a Partisan unit.
I think short drops should be on map, to allow for historical use as rear area disruption force. Distance on this thresh hold needs some debate to consider factors.

[Aurelian]

I dropped one para. It had a CV-Move of 0-0.

[Gorforlin]

ORIGINAL: Savanniperkele

Sorry for peeking,

I just realized this is the game I am playing with GP. I was just browsing and pondering if I should report of this game something as well. Now you go on here

Luckily you have not posted last three turns so I shouldn't get too much intel. But I'd like to ask if I am welcome to read this or is it against common courtesy or your will, in which case I wont peek in again?

P.S. It would be very very interesting what you are going to post of this new STAVKA deviced partisan tactics utilizing those paradrop brigades in a small field test? I got the idea for it from the reports that Germany is only building three raillines to east (of which the center line has splitting into two), without connecting those into a unified network. There is some suspicion in the air but I'll put it bluntly. Has Hitler in his zeal disbanded small railroad repair units in the east to accumulate those horrific manpower pools Germany seems to start generating?


P.S. Couldn't help myself from inserting this screen capture from the Turn 9 as there might be a response for lightning advance of German supply with doubled FDB's on one rail.

How would you know if someone is doubling up on a line or not when its 250+ miles behind your lines on turn 9?

I am new to game and have only played Russian side vs AI, which is not easy. What kind of recon planes can see enemy rail lines or is it some kinda partisan recon?

[Zebedee]

ORIGINAL: AFV

"Not sure how that matters. "
As I see it, that is actually all that matters. I really do not care about Pelton's game, his failures, successes, who's winning, losing, etc (no offense to Pelton or his opponent).

The only thing I care about is that in the GC, WITE will let the Soviets, in 1941, drop an airborne brigade at least 18 hexes (perhaps longer, we don't know for sure), with precision, accurately, every time, with a combat unit ready for action.

Yes, they had planes, men, petrol (and parachutes). You need more than that to insert a combat ready unit into enemy territory with precision.

Use a bit of common sense then and houserule it or don't play people who cheese the game mechanics. Simples. Getting so excited about a cheesefest is silly. Though you will find that, even if you imposed your own personal take on history upon the system, paradrops will remain open to exploitative use. GG games and paradrops. Good job there aren't sub transports I guess...

-----

Klydon - not sure why you even bothered to quote me. What you wrote has so little relationship to what you're quoting that the only linking factor is that they're both in the same thread. I laughed a lot though so well done on that score. Maybe try again by quoting someone who made even the vaguest suggestion that the fault solely lies with rushing rail line building?

[Klydon]

ORIGINAL: Zebedee


Klydon - not sure why you even bothered to quote me. What you wrote has so little relationship to what you're quoting that the only linking factor is that they're both in the same thread. I laughed a lot though so well done on that score. Maybe try again by quoting someone who made even the vaguest suggestion that the fault solely lies with rushing rail line building?

As I have said, the written word can suck at times for intent, especially since many do not have English as a first language.

You seem to come across with saying "right on" to the person making that para drop because Pelton "cheeses" the rail building mechanics that he supplies his troops all through 1 rail line at that point in time in the south. I call BS on such a comparison and that you continue to give a "well done" and defend that paradrop as "realistic" is silly.

I have tried (repeatedly) to point out that the game system and set up leave the German player little choice in part because of how the AI handles the repair units. I have also tried to point out that large sections of the front (even army groups) were fed by 1 line (or had a single choke point) in the real campaign, yet you appear to insist this is a valid tactic on the part of the Russians.

I don't have a dog in this fight. I have played both sides. Flat out, this abuse of paratroopers breaks the game as it stands. At least you recognize this with your comment about a "house rule".

[AFV]

Zebedee, I think we agree? Here's the problem: It would be nice if I magically could know who will "cheese" the game mechanics ahead of time, but I don't.
So, as a paying customer, I depend on the developers to fix bugs in the game. This is one they need to fix, not me, with house rules.
 
Like Klydon, I play both sides. I want a game that is balanced, and is fun to play from either side. That balance will keep the game alive.

[Zebedee]

ORIGINAL: Klydon

As I have said, the written word can suck at times for intent, especially since many do not have English as a first language.

You seem to come across with saying "right on" to the person making that para drop because Pelton "cheeses" the rail building mechanics that he supplies his troops all through 1 rail line at that point in time in the south. I call BS on such a comparison and that you continue to give a "well done" and defend that paradrop as "realistic" is silly.

I have tried (repeatedly) to point out that the game system and set up leave the German player little choice in part because of how the AI handles the repair units. I have also tried to point out that large sections of the front (even army groups) were fed by 1 line (or had a single choke point) in the real campaign, yet you appear to insist this is a valid tactic on the part of the Russians.

I don't have a dog in this fight. I have played both sides. Flat out, this abuse of paratroopers breaks the game as it stands. At least you recognize this with your comment about a "house rule".

No, I really didn't. Maybe a language issue, but when someone calls something 'cheesy', labels it as clearly exploitative and says removing options for the Soviets would help but there'd still be a fundamental problem, they're not giving a 'well done' to exploiting the game system and labelling it as 'realistic'. Just saying. And I primarily play Axis but don't see the game mechanics as being something which need to be slanted to favour one side or the other. So there you go.

[LiquidSky]

Too much focus is being placed on the paratroopers. They are not the problem. It is quite possible for the Russians to fly to the limit of their transports, drop men who are trained in the art of paradrops, who can then live off the land as partisans. The only thing they are trying to do is find a rail line, which isnt exactly a pin-point on a map. And sadly..they did fly paratroopers far behind german lines and dropped them to be partisans..you know..the people who blow up infrastructure...

While it is valid to say that the railnet should be more 'robust' with multiple lines....that also is a red herring, that detracts from the real issue.

The real problem is it is a UGO IGO game. So there is no reaction from the other player. Just like the Lvov opening..you can fly your paratrooper and put him wherever the enemy is weakest, without any of those enemy moving to do anything about it. And because the game is one week long, the effect is at least one week long, before you can do anything about it. In reality, the first train the hit the break would either stop (or get derailed) and whatever soldiers that were on the train (being transported as replacements at the very least) would hop out and disperse the partisans while the engineers on the train would fix the break. Probably a day at most would be lost.