ORIGINAL: 76mm
I think if the 1:1 rule is gone, the Sovs should suffer the same casualties as the Germans.
Correct me if I am wrong, but isn't the 1:1 still in place until March 42?
Moderators: Joel Billings, Sabre21
ORIGINAL: 76mm
I think if the 1:1 rule is gone, the Sovs should suffer the same casualties as the Germans.
ORIGINAL: janh
ORIGINAL: 76mm
I think if the 1:1 rule is gone, the Sovs should suffer the same casualties as the Germans.
Correct me if I am wrong, but isn't the 1:1 still in place until March 42?
ORIGINAL: 76mm
Speaking of losses, I assumed that when the devs got rid of the 1:1 rule, they would also get rid of the punishing Sov casualties when they lose. This does not seem to be the case, however, and i regularly see losses of 10x or more if my attacks fail. I think if the 1:1 rule is gone, the Sovs should suffer the same casualties as the Germans.

ORIGINAL: 76mm
1) I have no idea about the attacker retreat numbers, I will try to look next time I suffer the 10x losses. Do the Germans suffer this kind of loss when they attack and lose?
ORIGINAL: 76mm
2) I had no idea about the Axis 1:1 fort reduction bonus, and have a hard time understanding the rationale for it, is a counterpart to the (now eliminated) Sov attack 1:1 bonus? Has this always been in the game, or was it introduced recently? Given the changes to the fort rules, I think it is pretty important to get rid of this bonus, maybe it's time for me to start a "flying pig rule" crusade?
ORIGINAL: Flaviusx
But for all of that I remain disatisfied with certain aspects of this patch and think there's room for improvement.
I disagree that the German needs to greatly reinforce AGN to take Leningrad. (I had thought this was the case, but it's not.)
It's mostly a matter of organization, having the right leaders and SUs. PG4 can actually do the job. So long as Leningrad gets pocketed, it will fall if you've set up things correctly, period. You cannot prevent crossing the Neva -- and once across the Neva, then it is over, basically. Even a level 3 fort with a good army and reserves won't hold the Germans off forever at the backdoor.

ORIGINAL: 76mm
BG,
1) I have no idea about the attacker retreat numbers, I will try to look next time I suffer the 10x losses. Do the Germans suffer this kind of loss when they attack and lose?
ORIGINAL: Joel Billings
In March 42 when this no longer happens, I'd guess that the Soviets will be reducing forts when they get a 1 to 1 just like the Germans do.
ORIGINAL: sveint
Just to confirm that Soviet non-winning attacks CAN reduce forts. Had it happen to me several times with the lastest patch.
ORIGINAL: Joel Billings
We'll have to look into it, but the only reason the Soviets didn't reduce forts when they got 1 to 1 but were held was because under the old rules this would never happen. A Soviet 1 to 1 would result in a win. In March 42 when this no longer happens, I'd guess that the Soviets will be reducing forts when they get a 1 to 1 just like the Germans do.
[/center]
[/center]
[/center]
[/center]
[/center]
[/center]
[/center]
[/center]
[/center]
[/center]
[/center]
[/center]ORIGINAL: janh
Ok, if he ain't flying recon, he's setting up himself for some unpleasant surprises. But I'd not expect that to continue, Q-Ball is an excellent tactician with years of wargaming under the hood, so he will not plan to tumble around in the dark.
ORIGINAL: janh
I agree that AGS seems overextended, supply-wise. Unfortunately, the Axis lines are quite short and optimized, no big bulges or so. If you could break through at Voroshilovgrad and gain mobility with your cav and mech units, you could aim for the coast of Taganrog Bay? The catch is the rearward fort line apparently just being dug by axis minors around Stalino, that would be a threat to the right flank of your breakthru columns. Maybe this would be a spot to start reinforcing? Past mud, he might also try another push here, and maybe you can set him up here by giving ground towards Rostov?
ORIGINAL: janh
Don't know for sure, but from your previous large scale map, Q-Balls planned 2nd line fortifications don't look ideal between Kharkov and towards Kursk - lots of bends and overlaps, and the southern main line appears to have a open end at Belgorod... Maybe just threatening a hard push there might require him to place a lot of reserves there?
ORIGINAL: Klydon
I would look at some past AAR's as far as the downsides of an offensive out of the Crimea before you make too many plans down there. Very hard for the Russians to support logistically and not have his troops eventually turn into garbage over time. However, it can certainly take the pressure off the main front in many cases.