Hell bent on Lebensraum (no 821Bobo)

[Flaviusx]

I didn't realize he was already in the dead zone and using air supply to get the job done.

[gids]

i think i played against a player and im not sure it was michael ,fact is it was one of the few times i gave up a game as  russian player,whatever i did there was no stopping to it nor halting it ,im pretty sure that player would have taken Stalingrad in 41 :p, it was pretty amazing to see and dishartening aswell ,you wont stop a good german player anymore taking leningrad and moscou in 41 and he will take a good chunk of industry aswell :p,i dont expect historical results but  i Rarely till never succeed to keep any of the main cities except if i play against total new people,russian players dont have the tools till 44 against good players  ,am i a bad player i dont know but i did try every defense now,forward ,carpet ,line .... and theres 1 constant factor you get punished til 43 .....playing russias is like flogging yourself  and the only reason i do it is because i like to play the underdog :p,i would love some more random options in settings before you play,because now the first 3 turns  are like scripted almost ,and i still dont think the russians were that bad in WW2 their officers more or less sucked badass with a few exceptions but you dont see the russian tenacity to keep ground and fight back  in the game,the airforce of 10000 planes of russia in 44 is practically still ass usseles as in 41
small example in the ,GC against humans you wont see the starting situations of the scenarios of (danube ) ,you wont be able to do those nice russian opening moves .im playing a GC against  Anorak now and tried the Supercarpet approach ,and made less mistakes then former games,but its sad you are forced to sacrifice Hundreds of thousands of lives ,you cant play it smarter then the russian generals in WW2 ,the german players are allowed to besmarter  with supply ,menlives ,conserving panzers and what not .....but the russians are forced to pocket themselves by the 1000000 to stall the enemy :/,losing arms ,equipment ,giving ground is no option ,tried it against anorak :p soon im against the frigging border of the map
this is no critisicm towards the game it is just an opinion and some observations
 
 
 
 
 
 
 

[Michael T]

We have never played gids, unless you went by another handle.

@David FWIW I never used muleing in our game. At that stage I am pretty sure HQ BU was not limited by range.

Neccessity is the mother of all invention. As things for the German side have been nuted over and over I have looked at other ways to remain competitive. I beleive as the game stands now there is no way that Germany can win the game (not war) without HQ BU and its variations. There is no way I am going to sit down at my PC and start a game knowing I cannot win.

Without HQ BU there is no way to prioritise supply. That should be a fundamental feature of any game like WITE. I am astonished actually that if what Flavius says is correct in that HQ BU was a late inclusion in WITE.

Again I use the two most advanced boardgame systems that cover the same subject. EFS and OCS. Both have discrete supply/fuel counters and trucks/wagons that are used to move the supplies forward from railheads to either directly supply units or create dumps. This is what WITE lacks. We have such low level control on so many aspects in the game yet something as critical as logistics is totally under the control of the AI, bar HQ BU. It is a game design problem/deficiency.

Give players control of there logistical assets and HQ BU can go.

[sillyflower]

I remember that HQBU range came in pretty near the end our our game. I recall thinking for a brief moment that it might help a little....................

There seems to be an emerging agreement that the key is 'prioritise'. Germans need to be able to do that. Simply removing HQBU from the game would make it wholly unbalanced in Russian favour - killing the patient to cure the disease. The game would become like SPI's original War in the East ( which I was possibly playing before you were born [;)]) where soviets would just run back out of reach. At the moment the lack of balance can largely be achieved by simple agreement - no muleing or chaining.

HQBU does not prioritise but simply adds a lot of (and non existent) capacity at no real short term cost so it is too powerful especially if/when people use ways to use the rules to maximise its efficiecy and/or minimise the cost so it can be done even more.

I'm old enough to remember all the old board games where being in supply was being x hexes/MPs from railhead. Some games then became more sophisticated and gave Germans mobile supply units or trucks to add flexibility and prioritisation. However, I can't see it being possible to separate supply from C&C in WiTE 1

[Flaviusx]

Supply priority by definition cannot exist in a situation where supply is infinite. This game does not limit supply in any meaningful way save distance to railhead. Once that single condition is satisfied, everybody is in supply. This is a very crude model and doesn't really allow for supply "priority."

I don't agree that the Axis would stall without buildups. I've seen very convincing Axis advances made with just a handful of buildups. They are, imo, a crutch. But it's not buildups per se that bother me. It is this muling crap, which takes an already extremely generous supply model and breaks it.

Muling reminds me of the bad old days of Fire in the East (Europa series) when the Axis could chain as many truck counters as he wanted to and extend the range of supply at no cost to the rest of his army.

[gids]

just playing against anorak ,tbh i think this will be my last Pbem game till i found my peace back,im a bit dishartened by the russian weakness overall to  achieve something ,he took stalingrad and without some more resilient troops there is nothing much i could do then retreat,hel i attacked a rumanian Cavdivision with 7000 men ,with a tankcorps and mechanized corps rested ,together 17000 men and over 300 tanks they didnt even move,oh yea they lost 150 men or something and yes it was a planned attack things like that get me angry lol

[Michael T]

As usual Flav you only ever see the so called German abuses LOL.

I would be quite willing to adopt a bunch of house rules as long as some Soviet abuses we ruled out as well. Like:

The use of super human security regiments as a screen
The ridiculous over power of putting every unit in reserve
Carpet defenses that abuse the overly simplistic zoc rules
The oh so so flexible Soviet command structure
Totally unrealistic run aways
etc
etc
etc

Axis players are no more gamey than Soviets. I know because I play both sides. It takes two to tango. For every Axis abuse there is a Soviet one too.

The difference between you and I Flav is that I am quite willing to play either side with the supply rules as they stand. Because in my mind the abuses balance each other out.

[Flaviusx]

Micheal, what you are doing with supply breaks the game. All of this other stuff is small beer in comparison. You have never even seen 1942+, probably never will. And what boggles me is you aren't even slightly disturbed by this. I would think at a minimum you'd be curious to at least play something beyond the first 6 months of the game.

[Michael T]

Like I said, I am happy to play either side with what I do with HQ BU. All those Soviet abuses easily compensate for any supply abuse. Period.

You disagree. Fine your entitled too. You worry about your game and I will worry about mine. Over and out.

[Flaviusx]

Soviet players are going to start insisting on no muling as a house rule, Michael. And you are going to run out of willing lambs lining up for the slaughter. You're in total denial here, man.

[Aurelian]

If the Soviet can't use his paratroopers when/how he wants, then the Axis player can't use HQ buildup in its various forms either.

[karonagames]

@MichaelT. I hope you get invited to the WITW beta test team, as you are clearly going to make sure that the new logistics system based on rail capacity is going to work and therefore be applied to WITE2.

If you had been a tester for WITE, and had discovered the muling/chaining technique, and posted 18 AARs showing how you had used it to achieve Axis victory before 1942, would you have expected WITE to have been released with HQBU in it's current form?

The fact is that HQBU was introduced 2 months before the game shipped, and none of the testers discovered the muling/chaining technique. In the November before shipping, I raised a concern in the Dev forums saying that I thought HQBU was OP as it could be used in scenarios for end-run grabs of VPs as that is what I was testing at the time, but my concerns were not considered.

I fully understand that everyone plays the game for their own reasons and get's satisfaction from achieving certain things within the game; I have always played within the "how am I doing against history", and am I using "historically feasible strategies and tactics". In the 2 41 GCs I have played that have got into 1942, I am happy that both objectives have/can been achieved without muling/chaining.

I am less sure that the game should lose HQBU altogether, as I feel that there are some circumstances where a so-called "average" player will need it to reach historical benchmarks.

While HQBU remains in it's current form, I have absolutely no problem with what you are doing, as it is perfectly "legal". What I do have a problem with is with you developing a strategy that can be derailed (pardon the pun) by something as simple as a parachute drop, and then trying to protect this strategy by preventing the one thing that counters it.

Would I play paper, scissors, stone with you if you had all three and I had just paper and scissors? WITE does self- balance, and as you noted there exists a mechanic to counter every other mechanic, but it relies on both players having access to those mechanics.

Imagine how your strategy would be affected if partisans were player-controlled.

[sillyflower]

ORIGINAL: Flaviusx

Supply priority by definition cannot exist in a situation where supply is infinite. This game does not limit supply in any meaningful way save distance to railhead. Once that single condition is satisfied, everybody is in supply. This is a very crude model and doesn't really allow for supply "priority."

I don't agree that the Axis would stall without buildups. I've seen very convincing Axis advances made with just a handful of buildups. They are, imo, a crutch. But it's not buildups per se that bother me. It is this muling crap, which takes an already extremely generous supply model and breaks it.

Muling reminds me of the bad old days of Fire in the East (Europa series) when the Axis could chain as many truck counters as he wanted to and extend the range of supply at no cost to the rest of his army.

I remember FitE too - but it was OK because there were only fixed no. of trucks.

I think you are wrong about axis not needing buildups. I agree you don't need many ( I think 6 is my max in a game and I've won every game as German except one against Baelfiin which is going to the wire). It is also eqally important as a threat in being, to use Mahan's expression. Playing a German with house rule of no HQBU would be as pointless at the moment as playing Michael or someone as good as him, with muleing etc allowed.

[Michael T]

Big A the Para drop thing derails any strategy. In my book it is a no brainer to limit it. As far as I am conerned if I play Russian with all unrealistic advantages I listed above I will kick any German's ass who is limited to playing without so called muleing. Without muleing, as German you consign yourself to merely a war of survival. Thats not why I play German.

I would be more than happy to play without muleing if most of the Soviet abuses were outlawed as well. But I leave it too the devs to sort that out. If HQ mueling goes with no Russian quid pro quo then I just play as Soviets. No problem.

One thing I find amusing is the theme in this thread that asumes doing muleing guarantees a German victory in 1941. Its laughable. There are so many other factors at play here too. And a failing of any can potentially bring the whole machine to a grinding halt. Its a recipe for success but its also a recipe for disaster.

If someone said to me pick a side to play and if you win you will collect a million bucks I would still choose to play Russia. Its money in the bank if you know your business.

[Michael T]

I still play FITE/SE. I actually have just started a new game last week. It too is (RAW) heavily in favour of the Soviets. But we created some house rules to overcome the NODL's. I believe the new version, if it is ever printed has solved the NODL problem as well.

[sillyflower]

ORIGINAL: Michael T



I would be quite willing to adopt a bunch of house rules as long as some Soviet abuses we ruled out as well. Like:

The use of super human security regiments as a screen
The ridiculous over power of putting every unit in reserve
Carpet defenses that abuse the overly simplistic zoc rules
The oh so so flexible Soviet command structure
Totally unrealistic run aways

Secirity regt problem much reduced now they disappear soon anyway
since when did any of your opponents have enough units left after 3 turns to weave a carpet in '41. What was Kursk if not a carpet defence?
soviet command flex - you have point but hardly a game changer
runaways - simply doing in 41 what russians did in 42 so not that ahistoric. I just don't think it's a very good tactic either except when russian army has no option and then there is an economic price to be paid.
use of ants to delay, reserves and runaways are all open be used by both sides and are. You've never played german long enough to see they can save your bacon too. Whilst some of these tactics may be silly ( thinking of v small units that delay with fewer casualties than divisions as opposed to simply being destroyed) they don't unbalance the '41 GC as a whole. In GCs with later start date they help axis more.

The only real 'abuse' russians can do is unlimited air attacks per hex to soften up for ground attacks or vs airbases -tho' the latter is far less effective now. Not many german stacks hold their ground after being bombed 20 times first. Would work for Germans too but they don't need and don't have enough aircraft. Resticting to say max 5 per turn is what I would want as house rule whichever side I'm on to go with no muleing/chaining.

[Flaviusx]

ORIGINAL: sillyflower

I remember FitE too - but it was OK because there were only fixed no. of trucks.

I think you are wrong about axis not needing buildups. I agree you don't need many ( I think 6 is my max in a game and I've won every game as German except one against Baelfiin which is going to the wire). It is also eqally important as a threat in being, to use Mahan's expression. Playing a German with house rule of no HQBU would be as pointless at the moment as playing Michael or someone as good as him, with muleing etc allowed.

I dislike the buildup in general and can't wait until we get a proper supply model that allows us to dispense with it. (A model with actual supply limits also makes it possible to prioritize supply, but that won't be via buildups.) But it's not a game breaker. Muling is.

So far as FITE goes, the trucks were ridiculous when combined with the fact that you could also burn them to resupply units. Even if you somehow managed to cut off the supply lines of the spearhead, they'd just flip over a truck, and be good to go. The whole model was extremely crude and biased heavily towards the offensive. I think we can do better than this in the 21.st century.

[vicberg]

Michaelt is right. You can't remove players from the equation when it comes to HQBU. If you get a better German player than a Soviet, the German players looks like a great player. The opposite situation and the German player looks awful. Very rare to get two equal opponents and this game almost demands that because the game can get lopsided so quickly. For example, in my game against Viktor, he denuded the south because of the logistical "dead" zone and put everything in front of Moscow. I should have seen that and sent my panzers where he was weak and made progress elsewhere. Instead, I wasted turns trying to pound through his strength and succeeded in depleting my infantry and armor.

BigA's approach is the first viable strategy I've seen that removes the need for muling. However, even with that strategy, I'm looking at my depleted infanty corps and seeing huge stacks in front of me and wondering how much I actually can attack. Viktor is also aggressive and consistently attacks back, even in 41, so I'm not sure yet against him that I'll be able to win a war of attrition.

It seems to me that this game really comes down to players and play style.

[gids]

well my game now i getting ridiculous the front line is getting so close to the edge of the map :p,dont know how this wasnt tested or checked out ,i play on because i actually want to see how far it goes and its silly to give up :p tbh if the germans had this supply in WW2 there wouldnt have been a debacle "stalingrad" 
anorak didnt make Huuuge superpockets  ,he just grinded and grinded and switched his panzers left and right  like a madman;hes a great player and only uses the system in place there ,but there is still a major flaw in the game
i dont even think he uses HQ BU that much
But yea please adjust that ridiculous german supplymodel ,its not even coming close to reality anymore ,in my game he should have been run out of gas a long time ago after that offensive ,but i start to think he will get to
grozny and then he will roll over that flank towards finland

[Flaviusx]

Vicberg, in the hands of a strong Axis player, muling is nigh impossible to stop. Nobody has figured out how to do it. I myself don't believe I could. Michael's list of past opponents include what I consider to be some competent players.

After a while it starts looking like this has no counter save:

1. Random weather, or;

2. The egregious 20 hex paradrops. (And it's very telling that you need to do something this ridiculous to stop the ridiculous muling. Two wrongs don't make a right.)

Michael refuses to play with either of these.

Maybe Kamil will be the first to crack this invincible strategy. I am very much doubting it.