Beender vs Chaos45-Soviets concede T17.

[beender]

ORIGINAL: EwaldvonKleist

Thank you for sharing the game with us Chaos and congratulations beender!

Thank you. This game has been a difficult one but also good experience for me. Chaos defence is very resilient and I probably could not have broken through in the center even in the last minute, had there not been false weather forecast of mud. Still, I was nervous about the incoming mud because I don't think I have delivered enough damage to disable soviet from making the winter offensive, though in the long term Axis will probably maintain the initiative.

Again, thank you Chaos for making the AAR and everyone who read and commented. Hopefully next patch will not be too harsh on Axis, otherwise i'll switch side[:D]

[HardLuckYetAgain]

ORIGINAL: beender





Again, thank you Chaos for making the AAR and everyone who read and commented. Hopefully next patch will not be too harsh on Axis, otherwise i'll switch side[:D]

LOL, don't tell me you only play the top dog side Beender ;-P

[beender]

ORIGINAL: HardLuckYetAgain

LOL, don't tell me you only play the top dog side Beender ;-P

Oh no, not everybody does that?[&o]

[Sammy5IsAlive]

I'm not sure if it is correct to say that this is something that has come in with recent patches. If you look back at Stef vs Stelteck at T16 (page 3 of their thread which is over a year ago) they were not in a hugely dissimilar position and the game progressed to Stelteck defending Saratov in the centre being pushed behind the Volga in the south and just about holding on Baku. They are now in 1945 and Stelteck is almost back to the 41 start line. Similarly if you look at Sillyflower v BrianG at T17 you have Leningrad and Moscow about to fall and Rostov taken. Again in 42 the Soviets were pushed back behind the Volga and in that game even lost Baku. That game ended after a catastrophic encirclement for Sillyflower which had the game continued would have probably ended in a similar fashion to the S vs S game ie. the Russians eventually reaching the startline a year behind schedule.

I would suggest that with WITE's logistics system it is impossible to balance the game so that it satisfies the three aims of giving both sides an equal chance of winning; of the Germans normally only reaching the 'historical' high water-line in 41; and of realistically modelling the rebuilding of the Red Army through 1942 and onwards.

[beender]

I think there is some inherent paradox lying around as you implied. First, the game cannot be “too” historical because historically Berlin fell. What is the point of playing if that result cannot be changed? Hence all the ahistorical developments in the game.

Second, and more importantly, Germany having super great advantages in first summer perhaps is an accurate reflection of history. After all, the central problem that Nazi Germany had was a faulted strategical plan, an underestimate of Soviet power. All other minor issues, such as lack of preparation in logistics, one month wait in the center, etc., are the results rather than the cause of this central problem. Who can guarantee if Hitler and OKH get to play, oh sorry, wage the war a second time, they won’t be able to win outright in 1941?

And we players are in exactly that position. We know how much manpower and tanks Soviet has (in very detailed numbers); we know we need to plan and organize the rail repair as first priority; we know what to expect come mud and winter. All these hindsight are huge advantages and probably cannot be affected by manipulating the game mechanics. The developers just cannot take away our memories[:'(]

So in short, I think the imbalance problem exists but is not curable.

[chaos45]

Beender- I agree we all have the knowledge of history but the game has numbers that are different from history is why you see the results in the game you do right now.


AAR comments overall my opinions:

Player skill does matter and it does take good german play to get the results of basically soviet defeats in 1941. The issue is most of the game listed as "normal" by Sammy have all been under the newer extremely flawed patches in my opinion.

German supply or gamey supply tricks are much to good compared to historical. The Baltic re-rail route is simply to fast and to good for german supply compared to historical. The port supply route in the south is also provided much to good of supply to AGS early in the game allowing for the super fast German rush to Rostov there much, much faster than historical.

Couple this with extremely arbitrary soviet CV nerfs and reduced soviet replacements that has been introduced since around the .07 and you see the results of Soviets losing almost all the soviet union every game vs German players than understand the game.

Again as I said skill does matter but the game system has also been heavily balanced to the Axis side over the last several major patches going back about 2+ years...…

I again argue and think history would back me up that the historical 1941 was the best case scenario the Germans could hope to achieve in 1941 and really almost beyond what they had even thought possible. You can look at the German logistics office plans for 1941 they told the manuever planners after this point you will have no supplies.....and strangely thats pretty much what happened in the real war. WITE allows the german to drive far, far to deep and stay supplied in 1941. Players shouldnt be able to massively effect how effective the German supply network is, as it was historically hard capped at a maximum that effectively stopped the entire operation. Even if you have rail lines- the germans then lacked the trains to effectively supply the german army on those rail lines. This issue would plague the German army the entire war. Just like fuel reserves which arent an issue in WITE.

I am all for a good hard fought game where with stuggle and effort the germans have a shot at taking Leningrad, Moscow, and rostov but right now the Germans have an above average chance of doing all of things. As you can see his supply is so good I could do nothing but run and really not even put up an effective fight at leningrad and Rostov.....At moscow between overwhelming German CV and super great german fuel my ability to stop the germans was also minimal.

So IMO the game is currently un-balanced. I dont think it is massively so but just enough that players of equal skill will jade the game in the Germans favor.

There are several ways the balance issues can be addressed but its up to the patch team.


You can not fix german supply and allow them to still be well supplied over historical or you can reduce german supply even more as they move east- 2 different options.

For Soviets- fix all the bugs that have reduced soviet CV and if you dont reduce german supply then Soviets need units returned more quickly and need their replacements returned to pre-nerf levels----these used to all be standard for the soviets pre .07 patch. So its soviet nerfs, reduced capability compared to historical that has allowed the current game balance to be shifted to the Germans.

Yet another option is just fix the soviet bugs change nothing else but make the super lvov move less effective with slight scenario mods- move the southern stavka reserves more east so they cant be zoc locked T1 and give odessa a real fortress unit to make the axis dedicate units/MP to actually take it early in the game- more like historical.

I would also advocate that at a minimum Baltic rail re-do needs to be changed as its allow super fast german rail towards moscow. keep cost the same but reduce to 4 hexes maybe or increase cost so 2 rail units can't re-rail it so fast IDK what change the patch team would see fit.

But between the super fast 6 hexes a turn and army HQ loaded with construction BN doing targeted work in the north it is much much to fast right now.

[EwaldvonKleist]

@Beender: The same hindsight problem exists for the Soviets, unless there are political constraints (not in WitE currently), they will never let the big pockets happen or make attacks with bad ratios unless the game somehow enforces that with better Axis logistics/combat value or nerfing the Soviet one.

@Chaos: Rail conversion in the Baltic rate in the Baltic seems not off, historically the population was supportive initially and the Soviets had not yet converted the european baltic rails to their gauge. The construction batalions do not speed up the conversion east, they only create rails. At least all my attempts to use them for accelertaion of conversion speed failed.

Re port jumping, do you mean using ports to work around the rail conversion limits or merely as a supply source?

I agree that the historical summer-autumn campaign was close to the max the Germans could hope for, there were deficits in their organisation and strategy but the major mistakes were made by the Soviets. But implementing this in a game makes for a boring one, the Axis will fall short in 1941 and then a long stalemate and slow grind towards Berlin. The approach chosen in WitE 1 makes the Axis stronger in 1941 and from AARs the Soviets stronger in the late war, so they can recover even if the Axis is more successful in 1941 land wise.

Re the balance, we can agree over a slight weighing towards the Axis side, but not a massive one as you describe it. I also guess Axis players have evolved over the last years.
If I had to make a change leaving all things equal, I would buff the manpower multiplier in 1941 by 3-5% and move forward the arrival of a few reinforcement rifle divisions that come in between T5 and T10+reduction of respawn time for destroyed rifle divisions by one turn.

Remember that you still need to find people willing to play the Axis side after the next patch.

[beender]

ORIGINAL: EwaldvonKleist
The same hindsight problem exists for the Soviets.

Indeed the same problem or advantage exists for Soviet side, but the effects are not the same. Soviet players can now avoid stupid counter-attacks or stubborn sitting in the pockets. They also know much better about German strength and weakness, and have full confidence in the future. They even have the exact information about when and which German units will be withdrawn from the Eastern Front.

But still I think these are not enough to compensate for what hindsight brought for the Axis players. Soviet units are still too shabby to be of much use. Leaders and organization are in a mess. T1 opening by Axis will disrupt everything. These are things no hindsight can remedy.

[Telemecus]

Although it would not apply to players in this game it is still worth remembering that the overwhelming majority of games end up with Axis conceding after a bad 1941 to give a Soviet win. The above descriptions are for the balance for the very best players who can use every facet of the game to their advantage. For the overwhelming majority of players, the vast bulk of them who are newbies, this simply is not the case.

I know I have spoken of this elsewhere but there is a danger of altering the balance of the game for a small elite at the expense of the vast majority for whom the game is massively balanced to the Soviet side. There may well be a case of having campaign scenarios with different settings and other suggestions for the best players. But we do need to remember that for most players of the game not in that league playing Axis is much harder.

[EwaldvonKleist]

Btw. Chaos, it is really easy to add manpower points in the editor, if your opponent agrees to this.

[chaos45]

@EwaldvonKleist

please fully read my comment- I specifically state- "I dont think it is massively so but just enough that players of equal skill will jade the game in the Germans favor."


Also Im not advocating for every single german nerf and soviet buff in my comments. I'm proposing them as options to the patch team to help adjust to get a more balanced situation.

Fixing the bugged issues- soviet digging, Experience gain, and civilian labor will give the soviets some assistance alone. To me the next choice is then to make scenario modifications- which would not affect non-top tier players anyway as they cant pull off the super lvov...these alone I think would help to balance things alot better.

Then the second question is how far does the team want to go...if no scenario modifications and you want to keep super fast well supplied germans then you need to add more soviet buffs IMO. If your willing to slow the german advance more then no more soviet buffs are needed.

So its something for the patch team to decide on. To me the soviet bug fixes and scenario change are the least invasive fixes and see how it plays out with just that--as the scenario change will not hinder the new players at all. Also they need to fix Flak lol but its not huge in displacing balance just an annoyance for both sides.

[HardLuckYetAgain]

I have to agree with with post #149 by Telemecus. This is pretty much to the point and I think the game is pretty well balanced as it is. I would NOT start going back into the system and change things. I would look at the underlying problem that caused the whole situation.

I know everyone is missing a very KEY ingredient here. That is the action of doing HQ swaps with HQ's with full supply/fuel and attaching the PZ's to them when their current HQ runs dry.. I believe this was used in this game between beender and Chaos45 to throw it out of whack. Hell, I used two in my last game against M60. Otherwise I would not have been able to do what I did. The supply system is pretty restrictive on resupplying the Panzers noting that it took multiple turns for the Panzers to refuel when I was playing my last game against M60. I can not confirm or deny the fact that this was done in this game with beender and chaos45 but if you look at the pictures you can see the tell tale signs. I venture to say that these HQ swaps is the major culprit if not the sole culprit for why this game went out of whack. If beender and chaos45 played again with a house rule of no HQ swaps I would bet you 100% the results would not be what you see in this AAR right now and would be more in-line with everyone's else games.

[chaos45]

Not sure HQ swaps really explains the situation in the south--thus my opinion of for now patch should fix soviet bugs identified and the flak bug and do the slight scenario change then see how things play out as the #1 choice.

The other things may need looked at...Im pretty leery of the northern re-rail in all honesty as having rail all the way to/past moscow before blizzard seems a tad to quick.

[HardLuckYetAgain]

ORIGINAL: chaos45

Not sure HQ swaps really explains the situation in the south--thus my opinion of for now patch should fix soviet bugs identified and the flak bug and do the slight scenario change then see how things play out as the #1 choice.

The other things may need looked at...Im pretty leery of the northern re-rail in all honesty as having rail all the way to/past moscow before blizzard seems a tad to quick.

The Germans have always been able to get rail to Moscow before blizzard.

[chaos45]

I guess im just not used to the Germans getting past Moscow lol.

[beender]

ORIGINAL: HardLuckYetAgain

I have to agree with with post #149 by Telemecus. This is pretty much to the point and I think the game is pretty well balanced as it is. I would NOT start going back into the system and change things. I would look at the underlying problem that caused the whole situation.

I know everyone is missing a very KEY ingredient here. That is the action of doing HQ swaps with HQ's with full supply/fuel and attaching the PZ's to them when their current HQ runs dry.. I believe this was used in this game between beender and Chaos45 to throw it out of whack. Hell, I used two in my last game against M60. Otherwise I would not have been able to do what I did. The supply system is pretty restrictive on resupplying the Panzers noting that it took multiple turns for the Panzers to refuel when I was playing my last game against M60. I can not confirm or deny the fact that this was done in this game with beender and chaos45 but if you look at the pictures you can see the tell tale signs. I venture to say that these HQ swaps is the major culprit if not the sole culprit for why this game went out of whack. If beender and chaos45 played again with a house rule of no HQ swaps I would bet you 100% the results would not be what you see in this AAR right now and would be more in-line with everyone's else games.

Nah we talked about this issue pretty early during the game. Chaos explained to me what it is and I doubted whether it's practical as a trick. In any case I didn't use it.

[HardLuckYetAgain]

ORIGINAL: beender

ORIGINAL: HardLuckYetAgain

I have to agree with with post #149 by Telemecus. This is pretty much to the point and I think the game is pretty well balanced as it is. I would NOT start going back into the system and change things. I would look at the underlying problem that caused the whole situation.

I know everyone is missing a very KEY ingredient here. That is the action of doing HQ swaps with HQ's with full supply/fuel and attaching the PZ's to them when their current HQ runs dry.. I believe this was used in this game between beender and Chaos45 to throw it out of whack. Hell, I used two in my last game against M60. Otherwise I would not have been able to do what I did. The supply system is pretty restrictive on resupplying the Panzers noting that it took multiple turns for the Panzers to refuel when I was playing my last game against M60. I can not confirm or deny the fact that this was done in this game with beender and chaos45 but if you look at the pictures you can see the tell tale signs. I venture to say that these HQ swaps is the major culprit if not the sole culprit for why this game went out of whack. If beender and chaos45 played again with a house rule of no HQ swaps I would bet you 100% the results would not be what you see in this AAR right now and would be more in-line with everyone's else games.

Nah we talked about this issue pretty early during the game. Chaos explained to me what it is and I doubted whether it's practical as a trick. In any case I didn't use it.

Then you staggard your PZ's and did HQ buildups to keep the ball rolling? In either case if you did not use the HQ switch then there needs to be a bigger nerf to German supply as Chaos45 said. I know when I played last I stripped the panzers of everything so HQ BU's were cheaper and they still were costly at that.

[beender]

Yeah this I did. Rotate panzerkorps and build up them whenever it's cost-effective.

[EwaldvonKleist]

Please define precisely what you mean with HQ rotation.

[beender]

ORIGINAL: EwaldvonKleist

Please define precisely what you mean with HQ rotation.

It's panzerkorp rotation, and i used it with its literal meaning: pull back one corps each turn and let them rest and refuel in the rear.

Normally you don't need all the panzers to conduct a pincer attack, if you can take the risk of losing a division once a while.