Matrix Games Forums

T6 north, SHC act.
The GHC troops on clear hexes were beat back and a good infantry division was cut off and routed.
In the end of the turn, I railed 8 strong divisions to reinforce the front, which would be proved crucial in the battle there next turn.

T6 center, SHC act
The spearheaded divisions got beat back, and my defense there start to take shape.

T6 south, The SHC act.
I retreat. Also could be seen in this picture that 3 divisions are in a pocket, which shows a good herding from Saper.
Saper intentionally left the space for me to cut off his spearhead, but I just ZOC locked the supply line.

Given the discussions on other AARs it would be very interesting to see a battles result at the end of your turn, with some comments about counter attacks and your use of the Red Airforce.

ORIGINAL: mktours

T6 north, SHC act.
The GHC troops on clear hexes were beat back and a good infantry division was cut off and routed.
In the end of the turn, I railed 8 strong divisions to reinforce the front, which would be proved crucial in the battle there next turn.

That is allot of 1v1=2v1 counter attacks vs 3x stacks of infantry and armor.

He is not going to get close to Leningrad any time soon, if ever. The standard north to south tragedy with allot of 1v1=2v1 counter attacks mixed in, plus 15+ hex stacks.

+ the who cares about the south.

Unless he does something very quickly T-10 this is over as the wall will get higher and thinker very quickly with 15+ 1v1=2v1 counter attacks.

WW1 on the Eastern Front will begin shortly unless your not using the Mild Blizzard effects, then it will be 1943 in Dec 41.

@Tom
Sorry for having no time to tender to the AAR at this moment, you would see the battle report later. I am very busy these days with my work and family; so only get little leisure time.
The game with Saper is great, each turn is full of challenge and I felt each turn being as difficult as the T1. Saper is a very experienced player and plays his turns very quickly, while I need more time as it is almost my first SHC game (the only game I played as SHC was completely one sided); hence it is really an honor and privilege for me to get the chance to play with him.

ORIGINAL: Tom Hunter

Given the discussions on other AARs it would be very interesting to see a battles result at the end of your turn, with some comments about counter attacks and your use of the Red Airforce.

@Tom,
This is the situation before the attack, when you get 19 attack CV against 35 defensive CV on a clear hex, it is likely to win.

ORIGINAL: Tom Hunter

Given the discussions on other AARs it would be very interesting to see a battles result at the end of your turn, with some comments about counter attacks and your use of the Red Airforce.

battle result
Note, I only used 6 divisions to attack, while I could have used 9 divisions. I reserved the other 3 for another attack on another hex.
I turned off the air support.

A brief report of the current situation(after T13):
The SHC suffer very heavy casualty, but looks very likely to keep both Leningrad and Moscow in 1941.
I might resume the AAR when I have more time. Thanks for following this AAR!
Happy new year!

Good job MK, you appear to be a very skilled SHC player even vs one of the top 5 GHC players.

I look forward to your AAR.

I may be late to the loop, but why are so many Russian attacks doubling! At a minimum the alteration should be some variable between 1 and 2, not always 2.

Russians should not feel confident their one to one attacks will work. Especially in 41'.!!!

ORIGINAL: BrianG

I may be late to the loop, but why are so many Russian attacks doubling! At a minimum the alteration should be some variable between 1 and 2, not always 2.

Russians should not feel confident their one to one attacks will work. Especially in 41'.!!!

ALLOT of things were broken/not WAD, before morveal started looking at the code-before .11.
It was a mess, simply go back and look at all the messed up stuff he found and fixed.

Because of the 1v1=2v1 and the game is finally WAD a SHC can simply match the displayed German CV, do one bombing run with less then 20 planes, have an ok leader and they win 100% of the time.
Germans must have atleast 2x list SHC CV to win 85% time.

This is summer 1941 this is completely non-historical and a MASSIVE exploit that only true blue Red fanboys will defend.

.14 will fix about everything finally, so I would hold back at starting any new games before that.

Finally games based more on player skills and less on who can exploit the sht out of WAD

One of the things I find interesting about this is the Axis casualty rate is somewhere near historical, maybe a bit higher. I see several sources saying the Axis lost 800,000 men in Russia in 1941.

ORIGINAL: BrianG

I may be late to the loop, but why are so many Russian attacks doubling! At a minimum the alteration should be some variable between 1 and 2, not always 2.

Russians should not feel confident their one to one attacks will work. Especially in 41'.!!!

It's been going on for ages. As long as the Soviet player is set up right doubled to quadrupled CVs are normal. And yes it's mental! According to this game the Soviet leadership was a model of perfection in the first year of the war.

ORIGINAL: Tom Hunter

One of the things I find interesting about this is the Axis casualty rate is somewhere near historical, maybe a bit higher. I see several sources saying the Axis lost 800,000 men in Russia in 1941.

These are the German losses. Counting Romanian losses you'll probably get a higher number. From 22nd June to 31st December 1941 the German Heer (ground forces) in the East suffered 802.452 so-called bloody losses (killed, wounded, missing). Counting sick people leaving the immediate combat zone the Wehrmacht lost 1.094.251 men in 1941 with arrivals amounting to 509.000 for a net drain of 585.251 men

That last attack that the soviets made shows WITE right now is broken. 6 Soviet ID v 3 German Divisions should be an absolute slaughter of Russian troops. I can't think of any other game I have ever played that would yield a win for the Russians in this case. In FITE ( Europa boardgame) the attack would be something like a 1:2 -1 DRM. A suicide attack that only a truly desperate player would make.

This whole X3 or X4 of attacking CV due to leader rolls is completely borked.

The interesting part is that the Axis side can also get their CV to be x3 or x4, but never quite seem to anymore. I have not played WitE since my 'Blitz is On' AAR but it seems that I am not seeing people's combat reports including Axis multipliers like that. Of course most people are only posting the close combats or the ones the Soviets are winning lately.

ORIGINAL: carlkay58

The interesting part is that the Axis side can also get their CV to be x3 or x4, but never quite seem to anymore. I have not played WitE since my 'Blitz is On' AAR but it seems that I am not seeing people's combat reports including Axis multipliers like that. Of course most people are only posting the close combats or the ones the Soviets are winning lately.

I am seeing these numbers in my attacks...not a lot but I do occasionally get them.

I'm seeing a lot of 2x(ish) and some 1.5x from Saper222, and 3x when he hits something you would expect to be brittle, in recent cases when a pnz division broke through and hit a reserve tank brigade, or the third attack in a row on an isolated cavalry corps.

Here are the usual attacks:



I'm also starting to wonder about the delta between the casualties caused by unsuccessful attacks in game vs unsuccessful attacks in the war. Is the 1:1 = 2:1 causing a historical casualty and advance rate to be more likely or less likely?

I agree with a recent post by Michael T pointing out that 6 1941 Soviet infantry divisions would be very unlikely to beat 3 German infantry divisions. I am starting to wonder if the "winning" result is really that important. In most of my attacks that "win" the Red Army takes more casualties and suffers more disruption than the Germans, which sounds right for 1941. However they do put Saper222 a bit off schedule, which also seems right.

Now it would be better if failed attacks and failed defenses causes something like historical casualty rates. Sadly they don't.

I have very serious concerns about how the whole combat system is working. You can take any game at any level and 6 41 Soviet ID just don't beat back 3 German Divisions. For example take HPS Panzer Campaigns, totally different scale but if you set up 3 German Divisions and attacked with 6 Soviet ID in the Smolensk 41 game they would get flogged for very little loss on the German side. The WITE combat system is failing badly. Simple odds based step loss systems do a much better job.

I see some major flaws that include these ludicrous CV multipliers because of successful leadership rolls, losses mainly due to retreats and 2:1 odds guaranteeing a retreat. Its all getting whacky IMO.