Matrix Games Forums

What do people think about leaving the morale rules as they are and removing the 1-1=2-1? The higher CV would allow the Soviets to defend forward and still be able to counter attack but wouldn't be as easy to retreat German units as in the current version. This would also tone down the blizzard hopefully creating a 41 where the Soviets don't feel they have to run so far during the summer and the Germans don't feel they have to give up 15-20 hexes in the winter. I know it's not a perfect fix, but thought I would throw it out there.

ORIGINAL: Oberst_Klink

A general question about how you'd customise the moral settings in the options screen. What percentage would you recommend, even for the AI? Not that I am an inexperienced wargamer, but I noticed in the latest version that the Soviet units at the Road to Series... are a tad too resilient. They barely rout and even when XXXXI. & LVI.PzK are around Leningrad at turn 3; there are already a bunch of CV-4 Soviets along the Volkhov!

Klink, Oberst
temporarily in Pskov, Luftflotte 1

I started a game with the Soviets on 119 against the AI and by turn 8 or so I reduced it to 110. It was no fun, running into boatloads of Soviet Rifle Divisions at 70 (!) morale. So, I think perhaps 115 or so is perhaps better for 1.07 games against the AI. Though I have to note, that I am not a particularly good player (and I am playing with an extensive set of house rules against the AI, like no fuel drops with bombers, no chaining, limited recon). But I am pretty happy with the results. Turn 23 (11-20-41) and I am around the historical frontlines. In the North I failed to capture Leningrad (well, three 70-morale Soviet divisions in level 3 forts at the crossing of Pavlovo, with loads of divisions in reserve, good luck with that) and hold a half-circle from Kolpino to the Volkhov. In the centre AGC is 10 miles away from Moscow, Tula and Kashira have fallen and my infantry is like six hexes away from Voronezh. In the South the lines run from Stary Oskol down the Oskol to Izyum. Stalino unfortunately has not fallen and my attempt to capture the city before blizzard will fail (thanks to the mud [:@]). The losses are 763.000 men for the Axis and 3.5 million for the Soviets. As I'm having much fun with the game, I'm contemplating whether I should write a story-telling AAR about the game. [:D]

Removing the 1:1 => 2:1 is not a possibility at this time because Joel says 'easy' fix and that one is not as I understand it.

It irrelavent anyhow. From what I see the Soviets with inflated CV and Leadership can easily get 3 and 4 to 1 against entire Pz Cp in open terrain.

If they have a rested army in reserve at the site of the breakthrough, maybe. Those tend to be in short supply in '41 against a competent GHC.

Easy fix? How about simply undoing the morale gain bug fix in recent patches. It never really seemed off to me before the bug fix, so even if the morale gain system wasn't WAD, it still felt somewhat realistic. Undo the bug fix and change the rule to match the "WAD Bug" until WitE 2.0 overhaul.

That would be very damaging to Germans from 1943 onwards. Let's start with something simple as using MIN(NM,50) in the various morale gain formulas and set Soviet NM to 45 for both '41 and '42.

Wouldn't MIN(NM,50) limit the Germans in all years?

But simple is good - I suggest a morale limit of 45 + bonuses during 1941 for gains due to the 3rd bullet of 9.1.1 ONLY. No other changes to morale rules (but a check for another bug as I think that bonuses (Elite/Guard & type) are not considered when determining an individual units NM for the purposes of 9.1.1). I'm assuming some kind of Romania nerf as well as an air fueling nerf though I respect that the details of such are not to be discussed in this thread.

Limiting attainable morale to 45 (aside from combat wins) would increase Soviet casualties due to prevalence of routs. Grinding over the entire front from Turn 10 could well see the Soviets being unable to mount an effective blizzard offensive due to casualties if the Axis player so chooses. That would be an Axis 'I Win'-button.

I don't think it would be a limit. I suggest putting min(NM,50) where in current rules there is placed 50 (bullet 1,2), MIN(NM,75) where 75 is (bullet 4), and leaving NM in bullet 3. That would leave Germans as in the current version, while lowering Soviet and Axis minors to their intended NM rather than 50. If 45 is too low, perhaps 46 or 47 would be ok?

50 is the intended training level, attainable by refit 10+ hexes from the front.

Per above, I think there has to be a way to prevent the Soviet army from turning into mush. Fresh (not fresh = green) troops should have some stamina.

If players are new and evenly matched SHC easly wins.

If players are average and evenly matched SHC wins easly.

Again for the 2000th time there are only 5-7 players who can play GHC side and stand a chance of getting draw or win. ALL and I mean all others get their heads handed to them on a plater by 42.

Very very few GHC players are even worth playing the learning curve is very steep, everyone is a good SHC player by default.

And that is the current problem. With a runaway by the Soviets, all of their reinforcements come in at 50 morale and are able to stop the Axis like a brick wall by the third or fourth week of July.

Gingerbread, have you ever played this game against a competent human?

I ask because your take on 45 morale units being mush are at odds with my experience. As a Soviet player I would be very happy with an Army of predominantly morale 45 units. Given I had an Army of mostly 50 morale units, well my wife could be at the controls and win.

To add to the evidence for my stated request at the start of this thread I offer we are now seeing players making thier own adjustments to morale settings. So far I have only seen adjustments that favour the Axis. I am yet to EVER see a Soviet player try to adjust morale in thier favour. That in itself tells you something.

People can theorise all they like. Try playing a game as Axis against a competent Soviet and see how you go.

If you are a good german player and your oponent is no lucky you destroy him easy.

The game is balanced , the german has his chances.

PBEM Campaigng 6-0-0

Mr anauso, with respect, if you stick around long enough and play some good Soviet players you will come to realize how mistaken you are.

ORIGINAL: Michael T

Mr anauso, with respect, if you stick around long enough and play some good Soviet players you will come to realize how mistaken you are.

I would add, as it is currently, the Axis player must be much better than the Soviet player to put Soviets under serious pressure (expert vs average, average vs inexperienced player with this game etc). Before the changes, when equal players played, Soviets would always win, but games with not equal players (expert vs good or good vs average) were relatively balanced.

The Axis to be successful need to capture a lot of industry in '41 and destroy the Red Army (deplete in '41, continue in '42 and onwards). If the industry is not captured, Red Army will be able to build expensive in ARM/Vehicles (but cheap for manpower) units in '42 and onwards which will make Axis play tough (especially when both ARM and vehicles are available for the Red Army). To capture much of the industry, one needs to advance quicker than historical which is tough when Soviets can defend a hex against tanks (and now they often can).

Destroying Red Army in '41 is not really possible (as generally the units return free of charge). However plenty (at least 3 millions) troops must be destroyed (preferably pocketed) in '41 to drain Soviet resources, so in winter '41 and in '42 Soviet army is a bit limited by manpower. Encirclements are usually only possible due to misjudgment(s) made by the Soviet player and the margin for error is now bigger than it was before. With all the changes, it is true that Axis may be slightly stronger in '42 and onwards, but unless the industry is captured, Soviets can resist almost as well as before, especially that now they can muster the brigades to passable morale of 50 quicker than before (and thus having new 50 morale divisions quicker).

The problem is that all apparently small changes in the game have big impact because the game mechanics reinforces the side which is winning. So if the Axis gets over the tipping point, the snowball effect occurs, and they tend to win big. On the other hand, if Axis does not reach the tipping point, the Soviets quickly become impossible to overcome. Bouncing back from the tipping point as Soviets is often possible in '41 due to Blizzard rules (and generally very large production of equipment), so Axis generally needs to reach it again in '42. Bouncing back from the tipping point as Axis is almost impossible due to limits in manpower and production. Also if Axis does not achieve its goals in '41, achieving them later is very tough (I know about a single case that it happened, but it was only possible because Axis losses in winter '41 were very small, and in '42 Axis suddenly started playing much better than it played in '41).

Reaching the tipping point is obviously dependent on player skills, but small changes in morale affects that much more than one would expect by simply seeing the numbers (50 average morale Soviet army is quite different to 48 average morale Soviet army, and very different to 46 average morale Soviet army).

T.

Michael. i read your aar against Kamil, it is clear that German could achieve overwhelming advantage by railing troops to Romania. and i didn't think why any German player can't do that (i would do it myself), so isn't the game is favor German in that way? the morale change can't match it, it is huge advantage, see the whole south destroyed.

ORIGINAL: Michael T

Mr anauso, with respect, if you stick around long enough and play some good Soviet players you will come to realize how mistaken you are.

michael. you mean the Russian shouldn't be allowed to do any counter attack even in a territory that favor them, or have overwhelming number advantage? what fun is it if the Russian could do nothing but run away?
in history, Zhukov punched the Germans hard both in Leningrad and Smolensk, with the Germans had to retreat temporarily. only by doing so, he stabilize the situation in Leningrad, which is crucial to defend the city, and earn time for defend Moscow.

ORIGINAL: Michael T

It irrelavent anyhow. From what I see the Soviets with inflated CV and Leadership can easily get 3 and 4 to 1 against entire Pz Cp in open terrain.

No, even with the Rumanian sneak attack Russia will win easily under the current rule set.