Matrix Games Forums

ORIGINAL: Michael T
People play games for many reasons. Personally, I just don't get why people who are 100% historical sticklers play these games. They are never going to be happy. I don't even know what they are trying to achieve. Because it seems unless the exact same historical result is reached they claim 'the game is broken'.

I think you misread people there. It is not about getting the same results out, that would be a reproduction or reenactment. It is about have different options and different courses, but have them within the realms of the realistically possible. The issue is that within the 3 days the 1st turn represents, the defender only sits idle, while the Axis can bypass and cause havoc. And we all know that particularly AGS found a somewhat prepared, and fiercely fighting opponent that delayed progress a lot. No way the defender should be watching with not at least a single unit moved into the path, or a counterattack here or there. If it would not be for the huge implications that Lvov has, it would probably not worth a discussion, but it is as much a game changer as two or three random mud turns would be for Axis.

However, some of the other points are surely one I'd also hope to see evolve in the next titles. The ZOC thing I find particularly funny. The issue with the static defender and all that derives from that just ranks higher in my list. There is a lot of potential to develop the future titles, and with some luck we may still get some retrofits.

Michael T, that list of fluff and nonsense you laid out doesn't change the fact that right now it is entirely possible for an Axis player to do very well without muling or that crazy Lvov opening. Leningrad falls every game more or less, and Moscow is falling as often as not. From this position the German is well set up to get at least a draw and possibly a marginal victory.

But that's not enough for you, you are looking for an outright win in 1941. This simply shouldn't happen given two equal players.

I got absolutely zilch from that list on how to respond to your optimizations. It's just propaganda. I challenge you to do the following: play yourself solo, and see how well you can do as the Soviets against your own Germans. You will do no better than any of your past Soviet opponents.

There was me thinking that one of the big pleasures of playing such a massive wargame was that it would actually take up a lot of your time, and you would enjoy it.

I don't know of any Russian player who would enjoy a game, knowing full well that he was going to lose at the start.

Using this guarantees that.

Massive difference in enjoyment between losing in early '42 as the Russians, and losing as Germany in '45 (thats before anyone chimes in with "But Germany always loses")

h

I think Michael raises few fair points. As much as I like this game I am aware it is full of flaws and his efficiency makes then plainly visible and possibly unbearable. (I used to love WitE, but I am getting tired of its design shortcoming and it simplified logic.)

Flaviusx

From this position the German is well set up to get at least a draw and possibly a marginal victory.

Don't get me wrong Flaviusx it is not personal attack, but only slight irony. It is very telling, that You are accepting the fact that Germans only should be able to get marginal victory at best, while Soviet can achieve major victory.

I thought both sides should have equal chance of wining game (not talking about wining war by Axis, but wining game by player playing Axis)

ORIGINAL: Kamil

I think Michael raises few fair points. As much as I like this game I am aware it is full of flaws and his efficiency makes then plainly visible and possibly unbearable. (I used to love WitE, but I am getting tired of its design shortcoming and it simplified logic.)

Flaviusx

From this position the German is well set up to get at least a draw and possibly a marginal victory.

Don't get me wrong Flaviusx it is not personal attack, but only slight irony. It is very telling, that You are accepting the fact that Germans only should be able to get marginal victory at best, while Soviet can achieve major victory.

I thought both sides should have equal chance of wining game (not talking about wining war by Axis, but wining game by player playing Axis)

This is a very good point.

Kamil between two equal opponents and given a well balanced game system and VP conditions...yes, draws are what you want from a design standpoint. Not blowouts.

What is telling is that some people want the blowouts.

ORIGINAL: matt.buttsworth

Hello Everyone,

I restate my point.
Unless the Russians have a limited ability to move on June 15 (such an early opening already exists in War in the Pacific in the allied turn before the Japanese attack on Pearl Harbor) so that the Germans do not know the exact disposition of their forces on the first turn this game will suffer as the German attack on the first move becomes ever more devastating as it is based upon total perfect knowledge of Russian disposition which did not exist in real life.
It is a flaw which the designers of the game need to fix by offering an optional June 15 scenario.

Matthew Buttsworth

+1

Not to mention the fact that:

1. The notion of real life Axis panzer regiments driving all alone down to the Romanian border in the first week of operations is nonsense.
2. The idea that the Romanian army can suddenly 'activate' just because a few Axis tanks turn up next to them (ignoring all logistical rules of war, command and control factors and political decision making) is just piling even more nonsense on top.

Please stop the madness and fix the game!!!

To "fix the game" the developers need to know how many and which units you want to save.

Maybe you can present a list of units that should be able to run behind the dnepr [;)]

I have no problem to play without lvovpocket and also without HQups.
But to compensate this, the Axis need something against "running" sovs.
E.g. better logistic depending on how far away the nearest enemy hex is (railhead) or the chance to destroy more factories.

...seriously..better logistics for the germans....most games already prove the germans can easily do with the current logistics,you will not see a lot of AAR after 43,simply because most russians gave up then,most of the time leningrad  and moscou are taken,and the germans are past rostov then and have taken tons of industry ,atm im playing another GC as russian and he didnt do the lyovpocket,he doesnt mule grind and all that other stuff and its a pretty balancend game so far ,hes still getting dam fast forward but thats because i retreat fast  i think

You are right. Logistic is ok, but only if no partisans or paratroopers stop a whole AG for 2 turns.
I suggest a penalty for running sovs in exchange for no HQup and no lvovpocket.
I just want to stop this running, on both sides (blizzard). In this context we also need to rethink the balancing of moral.

and gids....seriously....if you still lose tons of industry (without muling), you do something wrong.

nah atm it seems to be ok ,i can move everything in time atm but were only turn 5 :p

ORIGINAL: Flaviusx

Michael, you do not need to mule in order to make very convincing advances in 1941; right now the state of the game is such that Leningrad is practically an autoloss and Moscow is a 50/50 proposition in games where no muling is done.

Flav, I'm going to say this again. Losing Leningrad doesn't matter to the Soviets. In one game, I took Leningrad and Moscow in 41, and I still faced a 8 million man army in 42. Without mules, it's game over for the Germans in 42 unless the Soviets make a serious mistake in 41. By serious mistake, I mean allowing encirclements. As long as Soviets don't allow encirclements, they have plenty of time to pull out industry. So, if the Germans can't encircle or capture cities faster than the Soviet can pull them out, and mules are required for both against good defenses, then it's game over.

3 games. 3 similar results. Other people report games mirroring mine. Many have simply quit playing. I'm getting quite a few PMs about that.

There's no denying this. In spite of Lvov pocket, Leningrad, even Moscow, the Soviets have a huge advantage in 42 if the Soviets don't make a mistake in 41 and the Germans don't use mules. Now, this German opening might prevent the need to mule. But this opening is needed or mules needed to a have a competitive game. Pick your poison.

The game is not balanced.

I'm in Nov 42 in a PBEM. Where is this huge advantage that says "Game over."?

Berlin falls before 43 does it?

Game isn't over. The game is *far* from over.

ORIGINAL: vicberg

ORIGINAL: Flaviusx

Michael, you do not need to mule in order to make very convincing advances in 1941; right now the state of the game is such that Leningrad is practically an autoloss and Moscow is a 50/50 proposition in games where no muling is done.

Flav, I'm going to say this again. Losing Leningrad doesn't matter to the Soviets. In one game, I took Leningrad and Moscow in 41, and I still faced a 8 million man army in 42. Without mules, it's game over for the Germans in 42 unless the Soviets make a serious mistake in 41. By serious mistake, I mean allowing encirclements. As long as Soviets don't allow encirclements, they have plenty of time to pull out industry. So, if the Germans can't encircle or capture cities faster than the Soviet can pull them out, and mules are required for both against good defenses, then it's game over.

3 games. 3 similar results. Other people report games mirroring mine. Many have simply quit playing. I'm getting quite a few PMs about that.

There's no denying this. In spite of Lvov pocket, Leningrad, even Moscow, the Soviets have a huge advantage in 42 if the Soviets don't make a mistake in 41 and the Germans don't use mules. Now, this German opening might prevent the need to mule. But this opening is needed or mules needed to a have a competitive game. Pick your poison.

The game is not balanced.

Just a quick question Vic, have you ever played the Soviets?

Currently I have two opponents and we have mirror games. Maybe the winner is the one who gets to Berlin first as the Soviets. At least you can say that is fair, until more patches reduce the, I think one poster called it the "steam roller" aspect of the game. I speculate half in jest and half in seriousness.

Glav, per your request I posted screen shots of my game as Soviets. Unfortunately, I posted in the wrong thread. Please look at the next WITE leap thread for screen shots.

Comsolut, the games are playing out the same. My games mirror. Other's mirror. Many have just simply quit. The only way the Germans can last into 44/45 is to have a very successful 41. The only way the Germans can have a successful 41 is 1) if Germans mule, 2) the Soviets allow for encirclements.

Something needs to be done to address carpets, so that mules aren't required to have success in 41.

1) Either reduce the extreme FOW or provide a probe/recon attack, with less losses, costing 1 MP instead of 2 or more
2) Allow for hasty attacks from multiple hexes into a single hex
3) Provide an overrun capability, so if a deliberate attack nets 80-1 odds, it becomes an overrun costing 2.

I nearly 'ruined' a good PBEM game by dropping some paras onto axis rail lines way over by Romania. Random weather coincidentally produced Mud in an important zone so much of the Ostheer turned yellow or red. So now I have unilaterally self-imposed a house rule on no paratroop operations-as-suicidal-commandos, but only as part of a Market-Garden type Op. Fortunately my opponent made lemonade out of lemons and encircled 35 divisions on another part of the front, and threatened Moscow so I had to Evac Industry to be safe...

ORIGINAL: Callistrid

This is an unfair open from the german.
If any player will do that against me, I'll leave the game.

Had the move used against me. Incredible. I left the game at turn 6 having suffered well over 3 million casualties. Once the Russian gets hit like that turn 1 its a done thing. In the future I'll probably exit the game the moment I see the the move to avoid wasting my time. Lvov Pocket I see as an exploit, but so common its part of the game. this addition absolutely wipes out gaME BALANCE - remember your opponent has signed on for months of play. A cheap exploit at the start of play really shapes the spirit of the game.