2 v 2 [In Prgress... again]
Moderator: Vic
RE: 2 v 2 [In progress]
Turn had not arrived, got it now
RE: 2 v 2 [In progress]
I have stared some partime night shifts so my turns wil be delayed Saturdays, Monday's and possibly onr other night.
I dont get home until 1.15 am.
It wont be much delay but thought I would let you know
I dont get home until 1.15 am.
It wont be much delay but thought I would let you know
-
ironduke1955
- Posts: 2037
- Joined: Wed May 17, 2006 9:52 am
- Location: UK
RE: 2 v 2 [In progress]
Just surrendered well done Mean and Lazy well played
Are we like late Rome, infatuated with past glories, ruled by a complacent, greedy elite, and hopelessly powerless to respond to changing conditions?
RE: 2 v 2 [In progress]
Too bad, I was thinking that the game was not decided yet... But it seems that Iron did some unsuccesful production decisions (concentrating on heavy artillery). My role as a supremo was really minimal. I just proposed a general strategy and left almost everything else to Iron to decide.
-
ironduke1955
- Posts: 2037
- Joined: Wed May 17, 2006 9:52 am
- Location: UK
RE: 2 v 2 [In progress]
I just had a well entrenched city with AT Guns taken out by 16 unsupported Light Tanks. I just can't stop laughing at it. 4 AT guns 4 Heavy Art 76 rifle 40 Staff 2 machine guns 5 submachineguns 2 motors all well entrenched in a city([;)]Tanks in house to house fighting). And not one single Tank was lost[8|] I know the soviets developed a system of using tanks in Urban area's A company of infantry with some combat engineers would support each Tank and these tanks would be heavy tanks with formidable firepower KV1 Stalins and later T-34's. There are similar results all along my front, so I clearly misjudged the Mechanics of this game. Perhaps I should try playing the game and forget what I have learned from history.
Are we like late Rome, infatuated with past glories, ruled by a complacent, greedy elite, and hopelessly powerless to respond to changing conditions?
RE: 2 v 2 [In progress]
I guess we can imagine that 16 tanks took out the 4 AT guns and after that the infantry panicked and left the city. [:)] But yeah, I agree that unsupported light tanks entering well entrenched city should suffer severe losses even from infantry. Infantry can attack light armour with hand grenades, molotov coctails etc.
RE: 2 v 2 [In progress]
Good game guys.
I feel for the tank city thing, but that is not why you lost.
Look back at the map on turn 1, and pay particular attention to my northern most city, Tottori.
If you guys had both concentrated 60% of your combat production into taking Tottori and forcing me back to the next natural defense line, you would have been able to liberate over 1/3 of my oils and 1/3 of my raws ( which would then help to feed your war machine). I would have been on the strategic defensive right from turn 2 or 3.
That is just one of several strategic errors made in this game.
There are almost no players in this game who see this stuff.
Perhaps we might switch up the teams for the rematch.
I will take Kombrig and we will see how well Lazy has been learning in the Meanfcker School of Strategy.
Let me know if you guys are interested. It is Sunday afternoon. I could get it going by tonight.
With all of your permission I would like to post a full critical, After Action Review of this game on my website.
Meanfcker.
I feel for the tank city thing, but that is not why you lost.
Look back at the map on turn 1, and pay particular attention to my northern most city, Tottori.
If you guys had both concentrated 60% of your combat production into taking Tottori and forcing me back to the next natural defense line, you would have been able to liberate over 1/3 of my oils and 1/3 of my raws ( which would then help to feed your war machine). I would have been on the strategic defensive right from turn 2 or 3.
That is just one of several strategic errors made in this game.
There are almost no players in this game who see this stuff.
Perhaps we might switch up the teams for the rematch.
I will take Kombrig and we will see how well Lazy has been learning in the Meanfcker School of Strategy.
Let me know if you guys are interested. It is Sunday afternoon. I could get it going by tonight.
With all of your permission I would like to post a full critical, After Action Review of this game on my website.
Meanfcker.
RE: 2 v 2 [In progress]
I'm always ready to play and I have nothing against AAR on your site.
However I disagree with your analysis. I believe there can be more than one approach and our strategic plan was simply different. Most of our front against you had good defensive terrain and we decided to remain in defense there (my initial advances there were simply to distract your attention - this was actually success, because you built fighters in the north obviously in order to counter my non-existent dive bombers [;)]). We planned that if we both concentrate against Lazy and defeat him then you will be an easy prey. However Iron had bad luck when choosing his tactics how to stop Lazy's initial assault... That is why he gave up the game. I think if he would have countered Lazy with medium tanks and dive bombers, then the game would have continued and I'm not sure who would have won it.
However I disagree with your analysis. I believe there can be more than one approach and our strategic plan was simply different. Most of our front against you had good defensive terrain and we decided to remain in defense there (my initial advances there were simply to distract your attention - this was actually success, because you built fighters in the north obviously in order to counter my non-existent dive bombers [;)]). We planned that if we both concentrate against Lazy and defeat him then you will be an easy prey. However Iron had bad luck when choosing his tactics how to stop Lazy's initial assault... That is why he gave up the game. I think if he would have countered Lazy with medium tanks and dive bombers, then the game would have continued and I'm not sure who would have won it.
RE: 2 v 2 [In progress]
And to be honest, I don't see why loosing Tottori would have cost you 1/3 of your resources. Maybe 5-6 six oil and 5-6 six raw. Not a loss which would force you into strategic defense. To occupy these resources it would have taken 3-5 turns, but at the same time we would have left free hands to Lazy.
RE: 2 v 2 [In progress]
Strategically, I was given no choice but to attack out of Tottori. I then had no choice but to fight for the supply line. When you guys get better at strategy you will be able to see my priorities as I see all of yours. Once I was committed to attacking Ironduke, it made sense that Lazy should as well. One of your bigest errors is attacking in too many places, leaving all of the attacks too weak to be dangerous.
If you are going to go on defense, you still must have a mobile strike group, otherwise you have to just sit there and take it, and that sucks.
i think both of you guys could become really good players once you start to dream bigger and commiting everyting to accomplishing your vision.
You certainly have shown resolve and tenacity.
Meanie
If you are going to go on defense, you still must have a mobile strike group, otherwise you have to just sit there and take it, and that sucks.
i think both of you guys could become really good players once you start to dream bigger and commiting everyting to accomplishing your vision.
You certainly have shown resolve and tenacity.
Meanie
RE: 2 v 2 [In progress]
Before I noticed that you have posted a message, I managed to edit my message.
This game result was all about Iron's bad luck when choosing tactics. The game ended too early in order to see, who had better strategy. It was no surprise to me that you both will be attacking Iron.
This game result was all about Iron's bad luck when choosing tactics. The game ended too early in order to see, who had better strategy. It was no surprise to me that you both will be attacking Iron.
RE: 2 v 2 [In progress]
The point I was trying ineptly to make, is that successful attacks must go to certain places.
It is not enough just to concentrate tanks and cav and attack here because it is convenient.
The attack must always be directed by a thorough and careful examination of all players road/rail, resources and city distribution, with the eye always upon grand strategy.
That being said, I can usually predict my enemy sherpunkt with acceptable accuracy, and take cost effective counter measures early.
That would have been to no avail this game if you had notice my vulnerablity.
It would have been an unmitigated disaster for me if you guys had rushed Tottori.
Another thought, you could have produced an army right into Ironduke's threatened areas.
We have done this before and it is effective.
Meanie.
It is not enough just to concentrate tanks and cav and attack here because it is convenient.
The attack must always be directed by a thorough and careful examination of all players road/rail, resources and city distribution, with the eye always upon grand strategy.
That being said, I can usually predict my enemy sherpunkt with acceptable accuracy, and take cost effective counter measures early.
That would have been to no avail this game if you had notice my vulnerablity.
It would have been an unmitigated disaster for me if you guys had rushed Tottori.
Another thought, you could have produced an army right into Ironduke's threatened areas.
We have done this before and it is effective.
Meanie.
RE: 2 v 2 [In progress]
How about it Iron, you and Lazy v me and Kombrig?
Lazyboy is one of only two players in the world who beat me in a one on one.
Lazyboy is one of only two players in the world who beat me in a one on one.
-
ironduke1955
- Posts: 2037
- Joined: Wed May 17, 2006 9:52 am
- Location: UK
RE: 2 v 2 [In progress]
I would be happy to play again. My idea was to await the rush from Lazy it was not difficult to predict where this would be, quickly building fortifications and digging in infantry AT and HA, Doing so quickly enough so that entrenchment values would reach 140 or higher. The HA would take out the soft targets as they started to do and the light tanks would blunt themselves trying to take out Urban/City and fortified area's, this I caculated is what would happen in the real world. Lazy would need to take out the fortified points with Art and air attacks. Assets he did not possess in sufficient quantities in these area's I had switched to Medium tank production and would start to mop up what was left. That was the theory it has a couple of holes (Don't point them out I am aware of them) just typing it makes me aware of them. But for better or worse that was it. If only the Germans had known that to take Stalingrad all they needed to do was to drive up to the city with light tanks and honk there horns. And the Soviets would have fled the city throwing themselves in the Volga[:D]
Are we like late Rome, infatuated with past glories, ruled by a complacent, greedy elite, and hopelessly powerless to respond to changing conditions?
RE: 2 v 2 [In progress]
I find the combat system has way too much random luck in it.
The different results you can get from one combat are stagering.
It is in my mind the single biggest problem in what is one of the best stratgy games around
In real life generals had a pretty good idea how a battle would pan out, they "mostly" didnt just chuck their troops in and hope.
In this game you have very little idea how it is going to go.
The xlarge map does defuse the combat system some what because each battle has a smaller impact on the game
A number of units I feel are over powered.
Cavalry can attack infantry in terrain totally unsuited to them and have a major combat advantage, i.e fortifcations, forests and cities
I think resources are far more important than most peaple.
Every oil or raw you take is worth double it value, minus the value for the loser and + for the victor.
Taking easy resources whitles down a players production and mechanised movement and soon forces him into decisions he would not have to make if he still had them.
The different results you can get from one combat are stagering.
It is in my mind the single biggest problem in what is one of the best stratgy games around
In real life generals had a pretty good idea how a battle would pan out, they "mostly" didnt just chuck their troops in and hope.
In this game you have very little idea how it is going to go.
The xlarge map does defuse the combat system some what because each battle has a smaller impact on the game
A number of units I feel are over powered.
Cavalry can attack infantry in terrain totally unsuited to them and have a major combat advantage, i.e fortifcations, forests and cities
I think resources are far more important than most peaple.
Every oil or raw you take is worth double it value, minus the value for the loser and + for the victor.
Taking easy resources whitles down a players production and mechanised movement and soon forces him into decisions he would not have to make if he still had them.
RE: 2 v 2 [In progress]
Lol, hindsight is 20/20, if only they had known.
Might actually have happened if they hadn't turned back and gone for the oilfields, when they got back to Stalingrad it was too late.
I will start a game tonight with the teams mentioned. I will use the same drop box we used last game.
I will invite Kombrig to new team dropbox.
good luck have fun.
Meanie.
Might actually have happened if they hadn't turned back and gone for the oilfields, when they got back to Stalingrad it was too late.
I will start a game tonight with the teams mentioned. I will use the same drop box we used last game.
I will invite Kombrig to new team dropbox.
good luck have fun.
Meanie.
RE: 2 v 2 [In progress]
Please clear the old games out of the dropbox ( when no longer needed )
RE: 2 v 2 [In progress]
ORIGINAL: Meanfcker
[/quote]
If you didn't guess our strategic plan this does not mean that there was no plan.[;)]
Our schwerpunkt was north of Lazy's capital. My tank and cavalry army supported with AT and flak and air assets was advancing through the desert in order to cut Lazy's capital area with a lot of resources. The capital area had just one railroad connecting it with the rest of his empire. At the same time I was advancing also south of the capital (the railroad in the jungle) and was planning to flank the capital area also from the south. Lazy concentrated his attack power against Iron's centre. When he noticed my schwerpunkt he started to concentrate there and inevitably his effort against Iron would have weakened. All the offensives against you were simply a distraction (I actually disbanded the trains in my capital on turn 1 in order to get extra raw to build up this kind of distractions). Most of the front against you had good defense terrain. Even if you would have had success there, it would have taken a lot of time. But at the same time Lazy would have been under the direct pressure of two players, whereas his terrain was not especially good for defense. Sorry - but strategically I didn't see any bright future for your team.[:)]
Iron actually produced an army into his threatened areas but the army composition turned up faulty - instead of dive bombers and tanks he hoped at first to rely on fortified cities and heavy arty. By the end of turn 4 Iron produced only a couple of tanks SFTs and no planes.
Concentrating on Tottori would not have been good strategy in my opinion because the cost of success there would have been giving free hands to Lazy against Iron's centre. But Iron's centre was extremely vulnerable - good tank terrain. When we would have captured from you one city plus 5-6 raw, Iron would have probably lost at the same time 4-5 border zone cities plus a couple of raw in the centre. Hardly the Tottori operation would have been worth it.
[/quote]
The point I was trying ineptly to make, is that successful attacks must go to certain places.
It is not enough just to concentrate tanks and cav and attack here because it is convenient.
The attack must always be directed by a thorough and careful examination of all players road/rail, resources and city distribution, with the eye always upon grand strategy.
That being said, I can usually predict my enemy sherpunkt with acceptable accuracy, and take cost effective counter measures early.
That would have been to no avail this game if you had notice my vulnerablity.
It would have been an unmitigated disaster for me if you guys had rushed Tottori.
Another thought, you could have produced an army right into Ironduke's threatened areas.
We have done this before and it is effective.
Meanie.
If you didn't guess our strategic plan this does not mean that there was no plan.[;)]
Our schwerpunkt was north of Lazy's capital. My tank and cavalry army supported with AT and flak and air assets was advancing through the desert in order to cut Lazy's capital area with a lot of resources. The capital area had just one railroad connecting it with the rest of his empire. At the same time I was advancing also south of the capital (the railroad in the jungle) and was planning to flank the capital area also from the south. Lazy concentrated his attack power against Iron's centre. When he noticed my schwerpunkt he started to concentrate there and inevitably his effort against Iron would have weakened. All the offensives against you were simply a distraction (I actually disbanded the trains in my capital on turn 1 in order to get extra raw to build up this kind of distractions). Most of the front against you had good defense terrain. Even if you would have had success there, it would have taken a lot of time. But at the same time Lazy would have been under the direct pressure of two players, whereas his terrain was not especially good for defense. Sorry - but strategically I didn't see any bright future for your team.[:)]
Iron actually produced an army into his threatened areas but the army composition turned up faulty - instead of dive bombers and tanks he hoped at first to rely on fortified cities and heavy arty. By the end of turn 4 Iron produced only a couple of tanks SFTs and no planes.
Concentrating on Tottori would not have been good strategy in my opinion because the cost of success there would have been giving free hands to Lazy against Iron's centre. But Iron's centre was extremely vulnerable - good tank terrain. When we would have captured from you one city plus 5-6 raw, Iron would have probably lost at the same time 4-5 border zone cities plus a couple of raw in the centre. Hardly the Tottori operation would have been worth it.
RE: 2 v 2 [In progress]
I will have to opt out of the new game, sorry.
The new hours are causing havock with my sleep and I dont think I will be able to give the game the attention it needs.
Sorry
The new hours are causing havock with my sleep and I dont think I will be able to give the game the attention it needs.
Sorry