Eastern Front 1941-1945 v6 Soviets vs Axis PO

[gwgardner]

This is really fun to watch. Tx for posting the updates! (I am kinda proud of the Axis PO, I only wish it 'd move its air units forward, but you could do it for it )


Could you share the amount of

- Rifle+Sapper squads
- Trucks
- T34+KV1 ( minus those in the attrition box at the bottom left)

Tx!

Not sure what you're referring to concerning the attrition box. Please advise.
These figures are from the current turn 21, Nov 9th.

On turn 19 I disbanded probably ten of the early Soviet units, and also had one of the 'dummy' reinforcement units appear - disbanded that too.

[gwgardner]

There is a problem with AXIS PO between Leningrad and Moscow, see screenshot. Remember I have fog of war OFF. The PO has failed to bring up forces as shown. Is this because the rail repair is so far behind?

I did move up some of the PO air units a couple of turns ago.

I'm attaching some recent saves, if you want to review them.

[gwgardner]

Is there a way to reduce the instances of the PO advancing individual units too far, without support - perhaps increasing the zone of control effect (is that possible in TOAW?)?

[gwgardner]

How is the Finnish front?

The Finns heavily reinforced their southern sector over the last month, but have remained static. I have not been able to send anything up there to reinforce the Soviet defense, but have taken a desparate chance on not doing so. It certainly has the appearance of a potential for an Finnish flood against my weak force, however.

[gwgardner]

Turn 23, late Nov.

Sadly, the PO situation is rather dire.

After Soviet counter-attacks, and with the exception of the PO troops right around Leningrad and those near Moscow, there is now very little stopping a widespread Russian advance other than the weather.

What I observed, contributing to the German line disintigrating between Leningrad and Moscow, and in Ukraine:
1) tendency of the PO to advance unsupported in breakthroughs, allowing easy isolation by a local Russian counter-attack.
2) Soviet counter-attacks often caused German corps to break up into easily destroyable divisions. This caused huge gaps to open up in the German lines, which only grew wider as the phenomena repeated itself over and over.

Can 1) above be addressed by changing some PO factor concerning aggressiveness, or perhaps the zone of control strength?
Can 2) above be addressed by disallowing breakdown of the German corps, when attacked and forced to retreat?

I'm guessing not many players go against the AXIS PO in this scenario, so perhaps some such tweaking is possible for the PO. I say tweaking, because up until above problems evidenced themselves, the PO did a great job.

I hope that these screenshots and saves will help in improving the scenario's AXIS PO. Obviousy outstanding work on this scenario, over a long period of time, great documentation.

Unless otherwise advised (eg to start over with rev 8.1), I'll continue on for a while to see if the 1942 AXIS PO can restore itself.

[gwgardner]

Turn 24
PO also has a supply problem. Advanced far beyond logistics, example in the south. Makes the Soviet counter-attack more effective.

[governato]

You are hitting on some of the limitations of a 90ies era scripted AI such as the one in TOAW...still the PO made it one hex from Moscow, Leningrad and Rostov, took Sevastopol, not bad! And yes...overextended itself...umm this all sounds like as it happened in RL .

here is some clarifications/suggestions ..other than playing a a human

- The PO does not know when to stop and pause for supply considerations (e.g. when it's overextended) or how to efficiently bring forward the Rail Repair (the human player should do that) and repair bridges which are important aspects of this scenario where the initiative changes hands many times and in different parts of the front.
- It also does not plan for a continous front, so for a good player it' s easy to isolate enemy units.
- The Axis PO is set to go on the defensive (as a general bias and also individual formations) in December, maybe it could be made to stop earlier but then the historical fun of the Winter counteroffensive goes away.....but even then the PO will not efficiently dig in..(PO units fidget alot)

A few rebalancing suggestions currently available other than those in the scenario description

- Have you used the TO (available to the Soviet side) to give the Axis better supply & logistics? It has been added specifically to help the PO. (I am thinking that I could add another TO that speeds up automatic rail repair for your opponent)
- For more expert players the PO opponent should be given an advantage in the advanced game settings ...
- Playing with fog of war ON for the human player also helps and makes it more fun.
- Also a few formation tracks and logistics in the Valdai have been improved since version 6.

Excellent East Front Games with a good AI are Decisive Campaign Barbarossa and GWITE.

Hope it helps!

[rhinobones]

A few rebalancing suggestions currently available other than those in the scenario description

- Have you used the TO (available to the Soviet side) to give the Axis better supply & logistics? It has been added specifically to help the PO. (I am thinking that I could add another TO that speeds up automatic rail repair for your opponent)
- For more expert players the PO opponent should be given an advantage in the advanced game settings ...
- Playing with fog of war ON for the human player also helps and makes it more fun.
- Also a few formation tracks and logistics in the Valdai have been improved since version 6.

To your list I would add:
Advanced Game Options - No Borders ON

Regards

[gwgardner]

I totally forgot about TOs. Don't recall a popup on that ingame, I guess I have to go to the menu and check for it.

I also did not even check for setting the difficulty level for the PO, etc. Thx for all the suggestion, and for a better idea of what the PO is actually capable of doing by itself.

What do you think about disabling retreat breakdowns of units and increasing the zone of control strength, as a means of improving the POs chances?

[rhinobones]

What do you think about disabling retreat breakdowns of units and increasing the zone of control strength, as a means of improving the POs chances?

I’ve always felt that the existing disengagement penalties are completely unrealistic. Sure, once in a while a unit might have a disastrous withdrawal, but that would be the exception to a general rule. Wish Norm was around to give us his thinking on disengagement.

My preferred solution is much as you suggest. Active Disengagement is turned OFF and I increase the movement cost thru an enemy ZOC to 150%. The increased movement cost prevents most unrealistic envelopment maneuvers. Note that a unit can still be split due to combat.

A second method of preventing/reducing the disengagement penalty is to modify the equipment file and give selected equipment types reconnaissance capability. Recon helps units to disengage without penalty.

Regards

[gwgardner]

I played a few turns quickly to see if the AXIS PO was consistently repairing RRs. Did not seem so, I saw RR units sitting on repaired rails, which did not move along the line next turn to the next broken rail.

I'm going to wait for a future revision, hoping that some of the changes you guys have mentioned will be made, then try again with that, making sure that any adjustments are done from the beginning turns. Or start a multiplayer go at it someday. Or even play both sides.

Thanks for the great scenario, Governato.

[governato]

most of the suggested changes can be done by the player at any time! Just go to the Play/Game Options and change the defaults as you'd like. Make the PO life easier and it should provide a better challenge for you.



As a designer I am happy with the ZOC costs and disengagement rules as they are set *specifically* for the EF scenario. Retreating from contact is the most complex operation and units in EF are "sticky" by design.
In particular the Red Army units in 1941 have low recon values and they will have trouble separating from a much more agile, better trained, with better C&C enemy.
Well that is how the Red Army lost a few million people in encirclements...Note that the Axis has lower ZOC costs in 1941. Again you can change the disengagement rules if you find that the PO has a hard time for your taste.

RR units: yeah they are not actively repairing at the historical rate. This is an engine feature (or lack of) as RR unit tend to sit or wander around even if given precise PO tracks*. For now you can do it manually and one day there will be a PO only automatic repair option. Will check if other big scenarios have smarter solutions.

*Again the PO was written in the 90ies (some improvement in the early 200s) and it focuses on division level encounters where extended Railways were probably not a design priority.

[rhinobones]

RR units: yeah they are not actively repairing at the historical rate. This is an engine feature (or lack of) as RR unit tend to sit or wander around even if given precise PO tracks*. For now you can do it manually and one day there will be a PO only automatic repair option. Will check if other big scenarios have smarter solutions.

You might consider adding a TO for the PO game that reduces automatic R/R destruction to an acceptable level.

Regards

[StuccoFresco]

The PO charging forward with zero regards for possible envelopments is a constant in almost every scenario I have played. Big enemy units plow through the first line, gets bogged down and encircle, then destroyed.