Strat movement & game balance

[pompack]

ORIGINAL: Reconvet

ORIGINAL: pompack

The fact that I happen to agree with you in no way changes my opinion of how unproductive this thread has become (with the exception of Zort of course)

I agree that the level of discussion and analysis is ebbing up and down. Way down when people jump in and throw around whining complaints and insults. Should that scare more serious people away and choke off something which might yet end in improving an already excellent game?

I'm glad we agree again because that was precisely my point. Providing numbers, reasoned logic and especially source material (once removed of course since I don't read Russian) is stimulating, thought provoking and can lead to convincing the developers to make changes. Repetitive whining is simply boring as well as unproductive.

[Reconvet]

I got a pbem offer of an Axis player via e-mail, the game has not started yet because he seems to be live in a different time zone.

I'll document my rail pool usage, try to put it in context with the strategic situation for each turn as good as I can (giving reasons why I used rail movements the way I did). I'm curious if I'll have to revise my theory that Soviets have too much rail mobility in '41.

I'll publish this stuff in this forum (AAR-section would make sense I guess). I have no problem if my current assumptions are proven wrong. If this data proves that there has to be more finetuning, then all of us will get more interesting pbem-games in the future.

[Reconvet]

ORIGINAL: pompack

I'm glad we agree again because that was precisely my point. Providing numbers, reasoned logic and especially source material (once removed of course since I don't read Russian) is stimulating, thought provoking and can lead to convincing the developers to make changes. Repetitive whining is simply boring as well as unproductive.

Good post, except the whining part about whining...

[wildweasel0585]

You're the only one trying to turn this into some crusade against good and bad. i was merely making an observation of this thread.

"The large issue right now is people have not played enough human vs human to provide them with sufficient information to make certain changes." exactly... remember I havent't been saying for 7 pages that something needs to be changed. Reconvet has his mind set that something is broken or needs to be changed despite not having sufficient info to back up his claim.

just like you don't have info to back up your claim of me stirring up trouble. I don't like people claiming to be psychic so you're getting the GB. [:-]

[Aurelian]

ORIGINAL: Reconvet

ORIGINAL: Aurelian

ORIGINAL: abulbulian



Lol, Reconvet. It's funny cause I've dealt with this in my threads before. You give them historic facts or REAL game experiences and when they nothing to counter with, they give you that type of reply. Or better yet they will throw in an 'axis fanboy' remark and have nothing of any value to say. Just ignore them. I think you're on to something myself. But if you get close to something that will look as if a change is needed, these same people will just start to get frustrated and their remarks become even more delusional and unrelated to the subject.

What historical facts has he given?

Complaining that the Sovs have the ability to move some 60 full strength or near full strength divs? What facts has he presented that shows that they coild not?

"As the railroads moved 2.5 million men to the front in June, July, and August, they moved industrial machinery on their return journeys." How many divisions does that make? Where are the facts that refute that?

Real game experience? Flaviusx's real game experience is being ignored. Why? In my own game, I would just love to have these 60 divisions to rail around, but I don't have them. I just railed all the KV-1 factories out of Leningrad. That took a huge chunk out of my rail cap.

You might be surprised, but: We are talking about a GAME, not history. I present GAME FACTS. You CAN move 60 combat ready Divisions fight now, come on and present something which might contribute to make this good game even better. And getting a better challenge playing as Soviet in '41 should be in your interest too. Current rail mobility in '41 makes for an easy mode for Soviets, that's my opinion. You're welcome to have your own, but don't travel down the insult road too...

I am not dealing with historic balance, but with GAME balance. Early Soviets are overpowered I believe, and my analysis is that early Soviet rail mobility is mainly responsible. Why do you feel so much threatened? Is overblown rail mobility a holy cow for you too?

You might be surprised, but my GAME EXPERIENCE shows shows you are wrong. My GAME FACT is that there is that the Sviets are not overpowered. Why do "you" fell so threatened? Is this because of your inability to deal with it? Your holy cow?

[Reconvet]

ORIGINAL: wildweasel0585

Reconvet already thinks after years of hard work the devs screwed up horribly. no need trying to convince him otherwise.

This, my good lad, is not merely making an observation, that's an accusation (an utterly wrong one at that) and an attempt to choke off a discussion to which no one was trying to force upon you. Participate or leave it be, your kind of participation is utterly useless...

ORIGINAL: wildweasel0585

You're the only one trying to turn this into some crusade against good and bad. i was merely making an observation of this thread.

Crusade?? You are one of those fanatics rushing to the defense of a holy cow in threat of getting slaughtered. I merely put up one or the other theory and proposition... Theories are not turned worthless with your kind of input.

ORIGINAL: wildweasel0585

Reconvet has his mind set that something is broken or needs to be changed despite not having sufficient info to back up his claim.

just like you don't have info to back up your claim of me stirring up trouble. I don't like people claiming to be psychic so you're getting the GB. [:-]

I very early invited guys defending the current Soviet strat mobility to play Axis against me. No one chose to accept... I now got a pbem offer as mentionned, let's see what data we get out of that. See my post above.

As for psychic etc: Shows your potential. GB works two ways. Begone, boy, there had to be a first time for this...

[abulbulian]

Aurelian, what is your game experience? Against human or AI? It's not necessarily about sov being OP IMO. It's the fact that some considerable constraints are enforced on the Axis (harsh winter conditions no matter what you do to prep for it) and the ability for the sov army to retreat vast portions of his army each turn not allowing for the possibility historical pockets.

I'm fine with being consistent. Thus, allow one then allow the other. If you want a simulation at the expense of playability then force constraints on both sides. If you want to allow players to chose unhistorical directions, which game does mostly, except for blizzard penalities on def axis units. I've gone into more detail on this subject in other threads.

Off topic, Aurelian I'm looking for an axis opponent (41-45) .. would you like to play me? It will give you a chance to beef up your game experience as axis. [;)]

[Reconvet]

ORIGINAL: Aurelian

You might be surprised, but my GAME EXPERIENCE shows shows you are wrong. My GAME FACT is that there is that the Sviets are not overpowered. Why do "you" fell so threatened? Is this because of your inability to deal with it? Your holy cow?

A claim is a claim and remains a claim. I can base my observation on accessible AAR's by other people. Go watch notenome's enormous checkerboard pop up in turn 2 for example...

I'm starting a pbem and will DOCUMENT '41 Soviet railway capacities. Facts convince, I'll get facts and publish them (see my post above). Maybe I'll have to revise my theory, I'd have no problem with that, maybe the holy cow defenders will have to revise theirs. As simple as that.

[Flaviusx]

Reconvet, if I had the time, which I do not, I'd pose a counterchallenge: I'd play you as the Soviet with rail transport set to 50%.

The result of such a playtest would of course be a litany of complaints that the Soviets are still overpowered. But at least it would clarify matters and demonstrate that if they are overpowered, it's not because of the rails.

[Reconvet]

ORIGINAL: Aurelian

You might be surprised, but my GAME EXPERIENCE shows shows you are wrong. My GAME FACT is that there is that the Sviets are not overpowered. Why do "you" fell so threatened? Is this because of your inability to deal with it? Your holy cow?

And by the way: I don't feel threatened, I'm being insulted by several people. One weasel just got a ticket doing so.

Once more: No one gets a gun to his head to participate here. Those objecting my theory and don't feel compelled to participate, agree or oppose constructively, they can simply stay out and live their merry life else where.

[Reconvet]

ORIGINAL: Flaviusx

Reconvet, if I had the time, which I do not, I'd pose a counterchallenge: I'd play you as the Soviet with rail transport set to 50%.

The result of such a playtest would of course be a litany of complaints that the Soviets are still overpowered. But at least it would clarify matters and demonstrate that if they are overpowered, it's not because of the rails.

Thanks for the proposal. Might have come sooner. But I can't gather data on Soviet capabilities while playing Axis. As said: I got a pbem offer, I'll document Soviets and report.

I'd really enjoy playing Axis against you to try out tactics against a good Soviet player. I hope you have an open game slot for me after this pbem (I have no time for playing two games at once), I have full respect for your playing skills and would feel happy to meet a tough opponent. But factfinding before pleasure.

[Jakerson]

ORIGINAL: TulliusDetritus
Don't forget the Soviet forces in the Russian Far East (facing the Japanese in Manchuria and Inner Mongolia). Quite many forces there. When the Germans attacked the Soviet Union, the Japanese said they would respect the pact, but of course the Soviets kept many forces there... The only thing which really stopped the Japanese (and the Turkish) from attacking the Soviet Union was the Moscow counter-offensive. And the fact that the Japanese Army truly feared the Russians [:D] And of course Pearl Harbor. But even after the winter counter-offensive and the Pearl Harbor attack, there were many troops in the Russian Far East.

I already said the Germans had zero chance of winning (if the 1941 Blitzkrieg failed that is) so I will not repeat that again [:)]

Yeah but Germans could still mount up pretty nasty defensive warfare even if they can’t harm Soviets properly 1941 Blitzkrieg phase there are plenty of tactical and strategically options for defensive warfare.

Historically Finland was able to consume Soviet troops in the way that made them wanting peace with Finland and Finland remained as only nation on the losing side witch capital was never occupied by foreign troops. I think Germans could have made the same by fortifying Polish Soviet border and German Border heavily and pulling most of their troops intact this way German troops could have fought their war properly supplied with good logistics and not the other end. Defensive line would also be a lot shorter allowing Germans to actually have some reserves supporting first line rather than huge line of defense in soviet territory with full of gaps. German tanks would have been able to fight their tanks full fuel and ammo instead of empty as need for fuel would have been a lot smaller in shorter logistical lines.

Same like in the WITP Japanese end up being overwhelmed but they could still mount up nasty defensive warfare with proper planning and consume USA resources in the way that USA start to want peace with Japan.

Soviet and Allied having larger resources than German do not mean that allied resources is limitless.