AAR - PBEM Game 2 (The FIRST public AAR)

[paullus99]

The militia rule will also help Japan quite a bit - I don't think we'll see an early surrender of Japan like we did here anytime soon.

[Oleg Mastruko]

Soviet turn again. Again we counter-attacked, retaking some territory...

Somehow I didn't expect war on the Ostfront to be one of punches and counter punches, but that's how it is... I expected German will go forward up to the point I start pushing him back, but the fighting here is so fierce, provinces change hands turn after turn, leaving only scorched earth where once proud Soviet factories, mines and railways stood.

Oleg

[Oleg Mastruko]

Here's the scoretable. We're still in the area of draw...

War is hell...

O.

[neuromancer]

ORIGINAL: MButtazoni
well we just got version 1.700 Alpha today and it has incorporated this feature with the caveat that it may need some tweaking.

Oh!

Joel must have liked the idea more than he said. He had indicated he was going to hold the idea for a while to see how the playtesting pan out, and if it was a necessary tool to prevent too easy conquest of core territories.

Guess he changed his mind.

Cool. [8D]


Tweaking. The joys of play balance, gotta love it.
[:)]

[Becket]

Query: are there any "combined arms" rules in place (i.e., unsupported armor has a penalty, or armor supported by air power gets a bonus, that kind of thing)?

[Oleg Mastruko]

ORIGINAL: Becket

Query: are there any "combined arms" rules in place (i.e., unsupported armor has a penalty, or armor supported by air power gets a bonus, that kind of thing)?

Not at the moment, but some, very small, bonus for combined arms operations is planned for future builds.

O.

[neuromancer]

ORIGINAL: Oleg Mastruko
This war is proving way tougher than expected..

All we are saying, is give peace a chance!


Nah.
[:D]

[Oleg Mastruko]

ORIGINAL: neuromancer

ORIGINAL: Oleg Mastruko
This war is proving way tougher than expected..

All we are saying, is give peace a chance!

Nah.
[:D]

GENEVA, Switzerland, 3rd September 1943. -- Exactly four years after it was started, WW2 officially ended as the result of peace talks in Geneva today. Leaders of three principal belligerents - Komrade Mastrukovsky, Herr Paullus, and Mr. Buttazoni reached an agreement and shook hands in front of reporters from all sides of the world.

"May we live in a thousand year Rei... err, I mean thousand years of peace" - Herr Paulus said to the reporters. Mastrukovsky and Buttazoni reportedly had a shouting match in the backstage, as they shared accussations over who screwed up the war vs. Germany more.

Members of all delegations finished the day holding hands and singing Kumbaya at the shore of Geneva lake, while the sun settled on the new, peaceful world...

This AAR is hereby officially finished!



Oleg

[Oleg Mastruko]

ORIGINAL: Oleg Mastruko

This AAR is hereby officially finished!

...NOT!

I was only joking. [:D] The slaughter continues.

[:@]

Turn is with MB now.

O.

[neuromancer]

I remember mention this some time back, that Research in Strategic Command was a little too effective, it sounds like that might be the case here as well.

I would recommend one of two courses of action:

1. Reduce the effectiveness. Don't make it a linear progression, and especially not an exponential progression. Make it diminishing returns. I.e. If a 1 point difference is a a +2 bonus, a 2 point difference should not be a +4 bonus, instead maybe a +3.
Yes increasing technology does have huge impact, the M1A1 versus T72s is a testament to that. The original M4 Sheman (75mm cannon) versus Tigers and Panthers is a good example, but on the other hand. Because Germany rushed the Tigers and Panthers into production (and were significantly different from their earlier PzW brothers), they had many technical problems (the M1A1 is more reliable because it had many years of development, not being rushed out in 2 years). Also, it is a bunch cheaper/ easier to make a whole lot of basic M4 Shermans (or T72s) than it is to make their much higher tech contemporaries.
An interview I saw with a German tank commander who had been at Normandy in June 1944 reported a tank battle where the German Panzers slaughtered the American and British Shermans in an open field battle. Then the RAF and USAAF close support planes came in and blasted many of the German tanks to scrap. He indicated that the next day more Shermans were being rolled off transports, enough to replace the entire force lost the day before. The Germans received two replacement Tigers over the entire month of the campaign.


2. Similar to 1, but coming at it from the other direction. Increase the cost of research. It sounds like it is already an increasing cost of research for the higher levels, but maybe not high enough, allowing the Germans to move through it relatively quickly. So make it more expensive to make those 'uber tanks'.
After all, the T34 and KV (that right?) were damn good tanks, the problem was the Soviet tactical doctrine for their use sucked, and they had few trained crews (a guy who had been operating a horse drawn plow the week before was not going to make a good tank driver the next week). But by the battle of Kursk the Soviets more or less had that figured out.


Anyway, that's my nickle.

[neuromancer]

ORIGINAL: Oleg Mastruko
"May we live in a thousand year Rei... err, I mean thousand years of peace" - Herr Paulus said to the reporters. Mastrukovsky and Buttazoni reportedly had a shouting match in the backstage, as they shared accussations over who screwed up the war vs. Germany more.

And so the Cold War begins.

[:D]

I was only joking. The slaughter continues.

Glad to hear it!

[MButtazoni]

I remember mention this some time back, that Research in Strategic Command was a little too effective, it sounds like that might be the case here as well.

don't be too hasty based on one AAR, the research imo is working beautifully.

[neuromancer]

ORIGINAL: MButtazoni

I remember mention this some time back, that Research in Strategic Command was a little too effective, it sounds like that might be the case here as well.

don't be too hasty based on one AAR, the research imo is working beautifully.

Valid point.
Again, just something to consider for the future.

[Oleg Mastruko]

I am not complaining re the research either, at least not for now, it just takes little getting used to, and I definitely mis-judged the impact that few points of tech advantage have on combat (which is my mistake).

Oleg

[Joel Billings]

ORIGINAL: Oleg Mastruko

ORIGINAL: Becket

Query: are there any "combined arms" rules in place (i.e., unsupported armor has a penalty, or armor supported by air power gets a bonus, that kind of thing)?

Not at the moment, but some, very small, bonus for combined arms operations is planned for future builds.

O.

Not entirely true. Air units attack first, then artillery, then all ground units (including arty again). If you've been attacked, you lose 1 from your evasion for all future attacks during the battle. This is a huge benefit of having air and arty to "prep" units for attack by your land units (even if they don't hit them).

[MButtazoni]

well the Germans may have unstoppable tanks and super heroes for infantry, but without a Navy they still have weaknesses.

Since i can sail anywhere i want, i did. Into the Baltic with my Carriers and Transports to perform a couple commando raids. Western Poland was easy as there was no garrison. Berlin was tougher but that's why my carriers were brought in. after some waves of air the defenders were softened up enough to bring in an Armor unit from BR and some Long Range Air from BR as well. Berlin fell to the attack. after all factories (2) and resources (4) and the rail were sufficiently torched all the "commandos" and carriers returned to BR for the next wave.

Russia also recieved 40 supply from the US and 20 supply from China this turn. next turn it should be more as the US produced 130 supply (along with 18 research points)

[MButtazoni]

Force Pool and Production Queue at the end of Summer 1943

[Oleg Mastruko]

ORIGINAL: MButtazoni

Russia also recieved 40 supply from the US and 20 supply from China this turn.

Receiving supply... from China. How... humiliating. [&o]

O.

[Joel Billings]

ORIGINAL: neuromancer

I remember mention this some time back, that Research in Strategic Command was a little too effective, it sounds like that might be the case here as well.

I would recommend one of two courses of action:

1. Reduce the effectiveness. Don't make it a linear progression, and especially not an exponential progression. Make it diminishing returns. I.e. If a 1 point difference is a a +2 bonus, a 2 point difference should not be a +4 bonus, instead maybe a +3.
Yes increasing technology does have huge impact, the M1A1 versus T72s is a testament to that. The original M4 Sheman (75mm cannon) versus Tigers and Panthers is a good example, but on the other hand. Because Germany rushed the Tigers and Panthers into production (and were significantly different from their earlier PzW brothers), they had many technical problems (the M1A1 is more reliable because it had many years of development, not being rushed out in 2 years). Also, it is a bunch cheaper/ easier to make a whole lot of basic M4 Shermans (or T72s) than it is to make their much higher tech contemporaries.
An interview I saw with a German tank commander who had been at Normandy in June 1944 reported a tank battle where the German Panzers slaughtered the American and British Shermans in an open field battle. Then the RAF and USAAF close support planes came in and blasted many of the German tanks to scrap. He indicated that the next day more Shermans were being rolled off transports, enough to replace the entire force lost the day before. The Germans received two replacement Tigers over the entire month of the campaign.


2. Similar to 1, but coming at it from the other direction. Increase the cost of research. It sounds like it is already an increasing cost of research for the higher levels, but maybe not high enough, allowing the Germans to move through it relatively quickly. So make it more expensive to make those 'uber tanks'.
After all, the T34 and KV (that right?) were damn good tanks, the problem was the Soviet tactical doctrine for their use sucked, and they had few trained crews (a guy who had been operating a horse drawn plow the week before was not going to make a good tank driver the next week). But by the battle of Kursk the Soviets more or less had that figured out.


Anyway, that's my nickle.

Problem of commenting with limited info. Reasearch already costs more as you go up. There is a "world standard" for every stat. Once you go over this standard, research costs begin to go up substantially. This makes it easy for those starting behind the curve to catch up, but those pushing the envelope will pay more for it. I can't imagine what the Germans paid to get those great Panzer Groups.

[neuromancer]

ORIGINAL: Joel Billings
Not entirely true. Air units attack first, then artillery, then all ground units (including arty again). If you've been attacked, you lose 1 from your evasion for all future attacks during the battle. This is a huge benefit of having air and arty to "prep" units for attack by your land units (even if they don't hit them).

Oh, I like that. Simple, but effective. Elegant even.

And possibly a way for the SU to deal with those pesky late model PzWs they are running into. Get out those SU ground attack planes (what were those called again?) which were apparently a real nightmare for the Germans, and the old rocket arty, and then line up the Workers (and NKVD Commissars), and the T34s, and attack!