Page 2 of 12

RE: Bwheatley vs abulbulian GC 1.5.18 beta (no abulbulian)

Posted: Fri Sep 16, 2011 7:57 am
by 76mm
ORIGINAL: ComradeP

They do, but with the new fort rules, there's less need to build them compared to earlier versions, as the benefits are much more limited. Your units can generally build a level 2 fort by themselves fairly easily, you mostly needed the brigades for either instant-forts in the next enemy logistics phase (when your forts are build) or higher level forts.

Good point, I hadn't thought about that...

RE: Bwheatley vs abulbulian GC 1.5.18 beta (no abulbulian)

Posted: Fri Sep 16, 2011 9:50 pm
by Aurelian
Ahh. Wasn't aware of the new rules. D'oh.

RE: Bwheatley vs abulbulian GC 1.5.18 beta (no abulbulian)

Posted: Sat Sep 17, 2011 11:58 pm
by bwheatley
ORIGINAL: ComradeP

They do, but with the new fort rules, there's less need to build them compared to earlier versions, as the benefits are much more limited. Your units can generally build a level 2 fort by themselves fairly easily, you mostly needed the brigades for either instant-forts in the next enemy logistics phase (when your forts are build) or higher level forts.


AHh cool thanks comrade nice to know. I'm still getting used to the changes since 1.3

RE: Bwheatley vs abulbulian GC 1.5.18 beta (no abulbulian)

Posted: Sat Sep 17, 2011 11:59 pm
by bwheatley
Ok got my turn from ara i'll get the start screens up shortly.

RE: Bwheatley vs abulbulian GC 1.5.18 beta (no abulbulian)

Posted: Sun Sep 18, 2011 4:37 am
by bwheatley
Ground Losses
Image

Air Losses
Image

Destroyed Units
Image

North at the start of the turn
Image

Center at the start
Image


South at the start
Image







RE: Bwheatley vs abulbulian GC 1.5.18 beta (no abulbulian)

Posted: Sun Sep 18, 2011 4:38 am
by bwheatley
In the north we were able to cut off a mobile unit
Image

Near smolensk we have a very thin line we need to try to hold on the dnepr
Image

RE: Bwheatley vs abulbulian GC 1.5.18 beta (no abulbulian)

Posted: Sun Sep 18, 2011 4:44 am
by bwheatley
To respond to the threat on smolensk we moved the remnants of the 20th army forward to get some attrition damage on the nazi's. We also moved the 24th army that was building from the rzhev area to hold smolensk.
Image

It seems like this push was a lot faster then i remember last time i played but we can hopefully keep him out of smolensk for a few more turns if he stays careful.


RE: Bwheatley vs abulbulian GC 1.5.18 beta (no abulbulian)

Posted: Sun Sep 18, 2011 4:49 am
by bwheatley
In the south we have a new pocket with the 6th army west of kiev. We were 1 hex away from opening up the pocket.
Image

In the Lvov pocket area we were able to fly in 5% of supplies required so we got the bulk of the units setup with beachhead supplies.
Image

It will only delay the inevitable.

We worked on clearing out a few cities of their armaments but the rail points do not last that long now a days. We worked on bringing our reserves forward to try to get a line in place.

Their are troops at the gates of pskov and kiev. Hopefully the nazi's will have to slow down next turn to try to kill off those pockets.

RE: Bwheatley vs abulbulian GC 1.5.18 beta (no abulbulian)

Posted: Mon Sep 19, 2011 2:20 pm
by bwheatley
Should have T3 today so i can start going over it and seeing what damage there is. Also with the rail penalty gone i should be able to start getting armament points out. Do folks think i should just ignore vehicles or heavy industry? It seems like heavy industry will still be important at least down the road when it's my turn to be on the attack. What good will having all my armament points do if i'm unable to have the supplies to push folks forward?

RE: Bwheatley vs abulbulian GC 1.5.18 beta (no abulbulian)

Posted: Mon Sep 19, 2011 4:05 pm
by kirkgregerson
Good stuff so far. Will be interesting to see how the supply works in the pocket. So what is the rail modifier that changes now for Soviets? Was it 2x to rail factories before t3?

Hopefully you'll get another turn in today.

[:D]

RE: Bwheatley vs abulbulian GC 1.5.18 beta (no abulbulian)

Posted: Mon Sep 19, 2011 6:41 pm
by bigbaba
great game so far.

RE: Bwheatley vs abulbulian GC 1.5.18 beta (no abulbulian)

Posted: Mon Sep 19, 2011 6:45 pm
by bwheatley
lol that was a nice save with the edit. For a few i was looking back to see if pelton somehow posted in here. But it reminds me of my question is armaments really the big thing? I think i still need to balance HI and vehicle as well. Without any HI i won't have any bullets to shoot :)

RE: Bwheatley vs abulbulian GC 1.5.18 beta (no abulbulian)

Posted: Tue Sep 20, 2011 2:53 pm
by jzardos
Yeah, I'm curious too about how the air supply helps units.  As Axis, I normally don't care about that Lvov pocket as much since there sort of out of the way of the main advance and rail lines.  It will be interesting how the advanced in the south goes in this game.  Looks like the Axis might be pushing here unless the extra panzer units were just for the pocket and will now start to move back north towards Moscow.

yes, more turns please...
[&o]

RE: Bwheatley vs abulbulian GC 1.5.18 beta (no abulbulian)

Posted: Wed Sep 21, 2011 1:48 pm
by kirkgregerson
No turn 3 from axis yet?  Need my AAR fix today from you guys.

[:(]

RE: Bwheatley vs abulbulian GC 1.5.18 beta (no abulbulian)

Posted: Wed Sep 21, 2011 11:55 pm
by bwheatley
Ok got T3

RE: Bwheatley vs abulbulian GC 1.5.18 beta (no abulbulian)

Posted: Thu Sep 22, 2011 7:33 pm
by bwheatley
Needless to say with the new update i have to pay a lot more attention to the HQ a unit is attached to :/ A lot of -20%, -10% because of bad hq's setup. :(

RE: Bwheatley vs abulbulian GC 1.5.18 beta (no abulbulian)

Posted: Thu Sep 22, 2011 8:13 pm
by larryfulkerson
ORIGINAL: bwheatley
Needless to say with the new update i have to pay a lot more attention to the HQ a unit is attached to :/ A lot of -20%, -10% because of bad hq's setup. :(
Yeah, speaking of bad setup's what are they all.....anybody know? I've heard of one for -20% for being a combat unit being attached to STAVKA still instead of a "regular" HQ, and it seems like I remember one for -10% for a combat unit being out of range of it's HQ unit. Things like that. Are there any more?

RE: Bwheatley vs abulbulian GC 1.5.18 beta (no abulbulian)

Posted: Thu Sep 22, 2011 9:11 pm
by bwheatley
North:
We see that pskov was bypassed and conquered. I've got reinforcements getting to the leningrad area this turn hopefully. And it's T3 and ara is not a gamey player who abuses HQ buildup so i feel it safe to think the panzers are probably in need of a rest next turn.
Image

Center:
Looks like the panzers could not force their way over the dnepr which is a small favor. They did manage to take Vitebsk though.
Image

SouthWest:
Kiev has been isolated.
Image

South:
Romanian progress has been slow and hopefully we'll at least put up a fight by odessa that will require the 11th army to step in.
Image

RE: Bwheatley vs abulbulian GC 1.5.18 beta (no abulbulian)

Posted: Thu Sep 22, 2011 9:12 pm
by bwheatley
ORIGINAL: larryfulkerson
ORIGINAL: bwheatley
Needless to say with the new update i have to pay a lot more attention to the HQ a unit is attached to :/ A lot of -20%, -10% because of bad hq's setup. :(
Yeah, speaking of bad setup's what are they all.....anybody know? I've heard of one for -20% for being a combat unit being attached to STAVKA still instead of a "regular" HQ, and it seems like I remember one for -10% for a combat unit being out of range of it's HQ unit. Things like that. Are there any more?

Well the what'snew.pdf says -10% for a front HQ as well.

RE: Bwheatley vs abulbulian GC 1.5.18 beta (no abulbulian)

Posted: Fri Sep 23, 2011 3:59 am
by bwheatley
Ground Losses

Image

Air Losses
Image

Destroyed Units
Image