Game Has Serious Problems

[Klydon]

Are you guys playing with fog of war or not? Playing with it would make it harder for either side to find the "weak spot", but especially the Russians.

Without screen shots, it is hard to judge what is going on, but if the Germans in this case are trying to pocket Russians with single stacks of Germans piled in among a lot of Russians, the retreat results are going to be fairly predictable if he is allowed to gang up 9-12 divisions on a single German that is not dug in and especially if it is a motorized division or regiment. Regiments are somewhat dangerous. Some people swear by them while others don't like to use them and certainly they won't hold against any sort of determined attack in the time period you discuss. If there are a lot of Russians around, I can see him bumping 2 division stacks depending on what they are, the shape of the Russians and if they have a good commander.

[larryfulkerson]

ORIGINAL: vicberg
...I do think that the discourse on this forum is turning people away. For every one post: "I'm thinking about buying it but I'm reading on the forum....", there's 10 that don't post and go on to the next matrix offering.

Oh yeah? I'm retired and living on a fixed income but I like this game so much I'll buy it for somebody who wants to play it. I like it that much. All I ask is that YOU, whoever you are that take me up on this, buy it for somebody else too if you like it as much as I do. Just send me a PM and we'll trade email addresses etc.

EDIT: I've already bought it. Who wants it? Speak up! I'd rather this pooch go to a deserving parent so tell me a little bit about yourself in your PM.

EDIT 2: Okie dokie......hold your horses everybody. We have a taker. It's nice to see the pay-it-forward chain continuing this way.

[alfonso]

Carl,

I understand your frustration at not being able to finish the Soviets. I think this is similar to the original frustration felt by your historic counterparts back in 1941. Your reaction is more or less the same as Hitler's when he said to Guderian "Had I known the Russians had as many tanks as you said in your book, I would have never purchased this game". From your data (24 Soviet attacks in 4 September turns: 6 attacks per week), I think he is being rather selective in his attacks. Compared with his historical predecessors, he is saving himself a lot of failed attacks. You are lucky that the game penalizes silly attacks, because you could suffer dozens of "mosquito bites" each turn.

In view of the propensity of your opponent to open your encirclements, I would assume that he needs to concentrate some forces to deliver those succesful hits. That means that he will have more additional forces dangerously near of your Panzer Forces. Try to make an opportunity of what now seems to be a problem: trap them too! In the AAR between 2ACR and Tullius (both very talented players), turns 2 and 3, you will see how things can be wonderfully turned upside down .

If you read other posts, you will find that some other players are complaining that there is zero chance to stop the Germans during summer 1941. Therefore the possibility exists that what you perceive as a serious problem is mostly the result of the tenacity and skill of you Soviet enemy. Another possibility is that you are right, and that Oleg is mistaken.

[randallw]

I'm in my 2nd campaign against the computer ( computer as Axis ) and I certainly don't see an average of 6 good attack chances per turn in September and October 1941;  I guess I suck. [:'(][:D]

[76mm]

ORIGINAL: randallw

I'm in my 2nd campaign against the computer ( computer as Axis ) and I certainly don't see an average of 6 good attack chances per turn in September and October 1941;  I guess I suck. [:'(][:D]

Me too

[saintsup]

ORIGINAL: randallw

I'm in my 2nd campaign against the computer ( computer as Axis ) and I certainly don't see an average of 6 good attack chances per turn in September and October 1941;  I guess I suck. [:'(][:D]

Me too (on challenging).

An other point though is that early soviet attacks have more a psychological effect (inducing more cautiousness in the german player) than effective results.

So why wasting manpower to have a psychological efect on a computer ?

[alfonso]

ORIGINAL: randallw

I'm in my 2nd campaign against the computer ( computer as Axis ) and I certainly don't see an average of 6 good attack chances per turn in September and October 1941;  I guess I suck. [:'(][:D]

How many encirclements have you suffered against the Axis AI in September/October 1941? The axis AI seems to be more cautious than human players.

[76mm]

I haven't suffered many encirclements lately, currently finishing Turn 13. Nonetheless, I've got to say that with 1.03 and on Challenging, the AI is coming right at me, not very subtle, but really pushing hard.

[alfonso]

ORIGINAL: 76mm

I haven't suffered many encirclements lately, currently finishing Turn 13. Nonetheless, I've got to say that with 1.03 and on Challenging, the AI is coming right at me, not very subtle, but really pushing hard.

Yes, with challenging the AI is not more "intelligent", but at the tactical level it is a very tough opponent, like a juggernaut. In this case it is really more difficult to win battles than against aggressive human players that happen to leave some weak points in their encirclements.

[JWW]

It might be interesting that I made the plunge on this game after reading threads like this. Got a bonus check and after wisely donating the majority of it to my good wife to get whatever she wanted -- she immediately bought some jewelry from QVC -- told her I was buying this game with the rest. She liked that agreement. Anyway, I've been reading the threads and soaking up info on the game, and it just seems to be about the most fascinating, immersive game I've ever read about, maybe with the exception of WITP. I could not resist. I've had a love for east front games ever since the first AH east front game I played, not Russian Campaign, but wasn't there one before that? Though I've been playing lighter games lately like Battlefront, I decided to make the commitment.

And the point I want to make is that I made it in part based on threads like this, reading the arguments back and forth on various aspects of the game. If there is that much to argue about, there must be one helluva lot in this game. So I have it and played the tutorial last night and am about to embark on the bootcamp road to Leningrad.

Keep arguing guys. People are reading, and the arguments aren't necessarily turning people off.

[Rugens]

You won't regret spending the money JW. I remember someone on the WITP AE forum mentioned that since both the Japanese & Allied players were complaining that Matrix must be doing something right. AH's Stalingrad may be the title you are thinking of. We have come a long way since then. As far as a boardgame the only thing I'm aware of that comes close is my all time favorite monster game Fire In The East/Scorched Earth.

Yes, we are playing with fog of war.

Perhaps in stating my thoughts I should not have mentioned that part of the problem was forming pockets. That is really more of a symptom. If I break down what bothers me it is that I simply don't believe the Soviets were capable in 1941 of making the kinds of successful attacks that the current game system allows. From what I've read over the years the feeling I've gotten has been that in 1941 the Germans took very heavy losses because of the determined Soviet assaults but rarely had difficulty in holding them off even when significantly outnumbered. One of the unfortunate effects at least in game terms is the increased difficulty in creating pockets. Another effect I did not mention is that all these retreats result in an unfortunate decrease of morale with the way the current model works.

[alfonso]

Well, the Soviets (counter)attacked a lot during 1941, and although the vast majority of those attacks failed, there were some outstanding local victories. What seems at first sight odd in the results you described, is not the existence of Soviet victories, but the lack of Soviet defeats. Therefore, I must assume that, in contrast with their historic counterparts, you opponent has the skill to select your weakest points: perhaps even you have more weak points than was historically the case.

Well, I am assuming that it was not a 18=54 stack which has been defeated in your game, but something like a 5=5 Inf Div. If 4 or 5 CV 1=1 Soviet ants happened to force back a Panzer 36=72 stack or something like that, it would be very very very strange.

[randallw]

Perhaps my lack of attack opportunities is from the tendency to deploy the defense in depth, without situations where 5 or 6 divisions can gang up on a target with deliberate attacks.

I'm currently on a challenging setting, and it looks so bad in 1941 to have CV 1 or 2 units trying to stop Germans at 6 or 9, pre blizzard.  I might freak out on challenging.