This is a test game to see if the allies get victory points too easily.
Really? Is that a concern now? IMO the game is too heavily weighted towards the Axis as it is.
In my opinion, both are true.
The Germans on the ground are tougher than RL, especially after the rockets were nerfed. It's really tough to get into Germany vs. an alert opponent. From this standpoint, the Axis are too strong.
However, if the Allied just land in France and sit there, they will win on VPs. That's because it's too easy to gain a few points each turn from bombing, and too costly to suffer casualties it takes to advance.
The allies are the more powerful side...they are in the drivers seat for victory. If they play smart...they cant lose.
The problem is...it is hard for the allies to be played smart. A bad invasion...and you can lose. Don't manage your airforce reasonably well...you can lose. Don't bomb victory point locations...you can lose.
If the allies are winning....it is very difficult for the Germans to stop it. The only tool in their toolbox is to inflict casualties. A German who thinks he is going to refight WWI by digging in and making a trench line will be in for a very rude shock when my allies blitz through it. Unfortunately the recipe for that will have to await another day...I wouldn't want Harry to use it against me.
Basically....a poor allied player will probably lose all the time. An average one against an average German will probably lose. But a good allied player will never lose against a average german and will probably beat a good german. There is a tipping point once a player 'figures out' how to play the allies and while the German can give the allies a few anxious moments....
I plan to go into a lot more detail on this once I finish the game with Harry.
“My logisticians are a humorless lot … they know if my campaign fails, they are the first ones I will slay.” – Alexander the Great
This is a test game to see if the allies get victory points too easily.
Really? Is that a concern now? IMO the game is too heavily weighted towards the Axis as it is.
In my opinion, both are true.
The Germans on the ground are tougher than RL, especially after the rockets were nerfed. It's really tough to get into Germany vs. an alert opponent. From this standpoint, the Axis are too strong.
However, if the Allied just land in France and sit there, they will win on VPs. That's because it's too easy to gain a few points each turn from bombing, and too costly to suffer casualties it takes to advance.
Yes, I agree with you on both points. I just don't want to see the game become one-sided to the degree that it's no longer fun to play as the Allies. I only ever play the AI.
Despite being by a defensive general by nature, I enjoy playing the Allies more than the Axis.
I look forward to reading LiquidSky's analysis of this game after it has concluded.
Beta Tester for:
War In The East 2 & Steel Inferno Expansion
War In The West Operation Torch
Strategic Command American Civil War
Strategic Command WWII: War in the Pacific
XXXCorps 1941 Hitler's Dream Scenario for WITE 2
I spent a lot of time thinking at work about what to do and what might have been.
I've come to the conclusion that *if* I lose this game...it happened when I pulled back from Rome.
At the time, Rome was fortified to level 4. The Depot was chock full of supplies...I don't recall the number but it was certainly over 125,000. I didn't know what the VP cost for the city itself was..I knew it would be some...but it turns out that it is 30 city points...which divided by 4 in 1942 is a little over 7 vps a turn. Just for that one hex.
I should have put 3 infantry divisions in it. Maybe even 3 parachute divisions. And a couple of flak regiments in the city. They would have been kissed goodbye, but with all that supply and high CV value ( and maybe a Parachute HQ on an airfield to prevent Isolation? ) they might have held indefinitely...or until the freight in the city ran out. Something I have to test later.
In 1944...the city is worth 5 vps a turn.
So now I find myself in a bit of a pickle. I now suspect that there is not going to be a second invasion somewhere. Another invasion invites risk....and he is winning the game with 412 vps. A major is 500 points away. With over 50 turns left, that is 10 points a turn...I suspect not doable without pushing inland and taking more city points. But sitting on a minor victory? Certainly possible.
So how do I turn this ship around? Well....several ideas did occur to me. Ranging from the criminally insane to the psychotically brilliant. With so much risk that I may be bumping up his easy cruise to a minor victory into a probable major victory...and maybe even a Decisive....(AACK!)
I am going to have to do something though. I refuse to go quietly into that long night. I shall rail against the forces arrayed against me. I am going to bend but not break....I will buy low and sell high. I shall walk up to the teenager who sold me my hamburger and cry "Where's the beef!"
But first I am going to bed. A good night sleep before I do something rash.
As usual I agree with most of what you say LiquidSky. IMHO you should have held onto Rome a bit longer. But I don't think it is quite as bad as you say. The Manual is wrong with respect to the City Control Point Divisors; it is 6 in 1943 and 9 for the first half of 44. So I was gaining 5 VPs per turn for occupying Rome for 8 or so turns in 43 and 3 per turn in 44. But if you had left a strong force in Rome you would not have gotten as many VPs for over garrisoning Northern Italy either.
Second Invasion?? Will have to wait and see, but probably not. As you say I have a comfortable lead in VPs, but you always seem to find ways to surprise me.
The Germans on the ground are tougher than RL, especially after the rockets were nerfed. It's really tough to get into Germany vs. an alert opponent. From this standpoint, the Axis are too strong.
However, if the Allied just land in France and sit there, they will win on VPs. That's because it's too easy to gain a few points each turn from bombing, and too costly to suffer casualties it takes to advance.
I agree with all of this. Do you have any suggestions for fixing this?
The allies are the more powerful side...they are in the drivers seat for victory. If they play smart...they cant lose.
The problem is...it is hard for the allies to be played smart. A bad invasion...and you can lose. Don't manage your airforce reasonably well...you can lose. Don't bomb victory point locations...you can lose.
If the allies are winning....it is very difficult for the Germans to stop it. The only tool in their toolbox is to inflict casualties. A German who thinks he is going to refight WWI by digging in and making a trench line will be in for a very rude shock when my allies blitz through it. Unfortunately the recipe for that will have to await another day...I wouldn't want Harry to use it against me.
Basically....a poor allied player will probably lose all the time. An average one against an average German will probably lose. But a good allied player will never lose against a average german and will probably beat a good german. There is a tipping point once a player 'figures out' how to play the allies and while the German can give the allies a few anxious moments....
I plan to go into a lot more detail on this once I finish the game with Harry.
I agree. Do you see this as a problem that the Allies will win all games between equal and competent players? If so what solution, if any, would you propose?
BTW, just to throw another variable into the mix, when the East Front option is on, the game can run long. In that case in theory a German player faced with an passive Allied opponent trying to win on bombing points will at least gain the large penalty points if they can hold in the East. Not saying it's easy to do, but it is another factor that doesn't come into play when the East Front option is off. It does seem like the German army is able to stay too strong when the East Front option is off, especially with disbanding of various weak/non-combat units keeping the combat strength higher than it should be. I'd probably be looking for a way to give the Allies negative points based on how much of Western Europe was still German occupied when the Soviets roll into Berlin.
All understanding comes after the fact.
-- Soren Kierkegaard
BTW, just to throw another variable into the mix, when the East Front option is on, the game can run long. In that case in theory a German player faced with an passive Allied opponent trying to win on bombing points will at least gain the large penalty points if they can hold in the East. Not saying it's easy to do, but it is another factor that doesn't come into play when the East Front option is off. It does seem like the German army is able to stay too strong when the East Front option is off, especially with disbanding of various weak/non-combat units keeping the combat strength higher than it should be. I'd probably be looking for a way to give the Allies negative points based on how much of Western Europe was still German occupied when the Soviets roll into Berlin.
I agree Joel. Playing with East Front On would force the Allies to keep attacking to take Berlin. The problem is that playing with East Front On seems to have it's own balancing issues. I recall reading AARs of earlier versions where the German Player could strip the East Front and still the Russians would not capture Berlin until about the same time as historical. Maybe this has been fixed with the current version. Guess I will have to play it to find out.
I agree with giving the Allies negative points if they don't capture certain Cities by the first turn of May 1945 (I assume you were only talking about the East Front Off game). But this has to be balanced with the Allies not losing so many points for casualties. Otherwise they will be damned if they do keep attacking and damned if they don't, with no hope of winning.
Yes, I was proposing it just for EF off. Playing with the EF on is a different game, and thus a different set of balance issues. The EF on game was rebalanced last summer when Gary spent a lot of time trying to refine it and we did some additional research on just exactly what units were sent there and when. Speaking just for the 43 campaign now, it had been too easy to not send additional units to the EF in 43 and in fact players were able to send units west and not pay a big enough price. That should not be the case now. If you don't start sending units east, you will fall behind, and if you pull units out you should have real problems on the East Front. Some amount of rotation can be done, pulling weak units out of the east and sending in fresh units, but overall, the movement of units should be overwhelmingly to the east. I can't say for sure how it's doing now, but it certainly isn't anywhere near as easy on the Germans as it was at release.
All understanding comes after the fact.
-- Soren Kierkegaard
I am thinking that the +25 city points for Rome should probably go. It makes Rome worth too much victory in 1943. As it is, any Allied player who can take Southern Italy in 1943 is going to do well anyways for victory points.
“My logisticians are a humorless lot … they know if my campaign fails, they are the first ones I will slay.” – Alexander the Great
I wish I could say it was there for the AI, but as we all know, the AI is not very smart at dealing with cities. They are there purely because Rome was seen as a big prize, and we want the Allies to be motivated to take it and the Germans motivated to try and hold it. Clearly knocking out Italy is the bigger prize, but with that comes the removal of Axis forces from the game (and some limited Allied Italian forces), so there is already plenty of motivation.
All understanding comes after the fact.
-- Soren Kierkegaard
OKW - Feldmarschall Wilhelm Keitel
OKL - Generalfeldmarschall Hermann Goering
OBWest - Feldmarschall Gerd von Rundstedt
Army Group B - Generalfeldmarschall Erwin Rommel
Army Group C - General Maximilan Fretter-Pico
Army Group G - Generalfeldmarschall Albert Kesselring
On the agenda - the allied invasion and how to reduce their vps
First off, I would like to thank you all for attending, I know that the front is stable at the moment, which affords us this moment to discuss strategy.
AGC - I hate to interrupt, but we have detected movement on the Italian front. A British corp has violated the neutral zone, and is now adjacent to Pescara. I'm afraid we are no longer going to gain any vps for garrison Denmark.
Fretter-Pico? What are you doing in AGC? What are you doing Kesselring?
AGG - Ummm...errr....after my failed attempt at pushing the allies back to Rome, you sacked me. I then took control of AGG.
Army Group G? We have an Army Group G? Why wasnt I told!
AGG - It's ummm....kind of small. One Corp actually. 4 infantry divisions. But with them we have kept all of Southern France clear of the allies!
Enough of that....what do you have to say about the Brittany front Rundstedt
OBWest - The allies have invaded in strength...they bomb us everywhere! Make peace you fools!
AGB - I'd like to say that the allies have been held to a line across Brittany, and will no longer be making any forward movement. I would suggest that we move the Panzers back around Paris to form a mobile reserve that can strike any further invasions that surely must be weaker with the bulk of their army in Brittany and Italy.
I am not sure that is wise...you should be attacking! Drive the allies out of Brittany!
OBWest - Make peace you fools!
Alright! There will be no peace! We will last a thousand years! What do you suggest Fretter-Pico?
AGC - Transfer the panzers to me! I can drive the allies out of Italy! Already they have advanced out of there trenches and are ripe for a counter attack!
AGG - Because that worked oh so well last time...
AGC - But surely it must be better to attack in Italy then Brittany...there are less allies down here!
AGB - That would seriously undermine the defence of France. And let me remind you that I am holding more vps here then you could gain down there.
What about the bombing campaign? Goering?
OKL - Bombs will never fall on Berlin!
OBWest - They just fall everywhere else! Make peace you fools!
Alright! I've heard enough! Pulling back to the Seine only makes sense if the allies follow. If they stay where they are and just keep bombing we wont be able to get vps! The reich needs vps! We need vp supremecy! We need to attack! Attack! ATTACK!
AGB - I've taken the liberty of umm...already pulling back the panzers though.
Hmmph.....okay. Well...I think I have heard enough today....Back to the front!
“My logisticians are a humorless lot … they know if my campaign fails, they are the first ones I will slay.” – Alexander the Great
I may have just gotten the bloodiest result I have ever seen in a WiTW game.
6 Fallschirmjaeger divisions...stuffed with assault guns and other assorted toys...attack 2 French Armour divisions and a British division....a South African armour division reserves in...
The screen seems to freeze for several seconds....I am wondering if I broke something...
Then the results are in:
Half my divisions are wiped out...mostly due to the British 25 pdrs
My other attack with infantry on a Canadian infantry division and an American para regiment was much tamer.
Attachments
BloodyBattle.jpg (147.73 KiB) Viewed 450 times
“My logisticians are a humorless lot … they know if my campaign fails, they are the first ones I will slay.” – Alexander the Great
Yes, there does seem to be a surprising amount of damage caused by the 25 Pdrs.
The second most surprising thing to me is that even though your attack only generated 1:4.8 odds and the halt range was 750, you still managed to knock my fortifications down from 2 to 0. True you did use 5 pioneer battalions in the attack, so I guess that is what did it.
That is a crazy result. It almost sounds like some kind of rollover bug happened, although Gary says the combat system fires each gun so it's more like a loop repeating much more than it should. What exe was being used for this, not that there have been any changes made in this area recently. I suggest if you ever see this kind of result, stop and immediately save the game, then contact me. I can download the last 2 saves, and that gives me a chance to repeat the problem. I can see that the 25 Pdrs went crazy in the after save, unlike any of the other weapons in the battle but I can't repeat it. I did notice you have red fort graphics showing in the battle report, and no 0 value showing. Is this WitE2 artwork? Is the 0 missing in that artwork? When I loaded your save and looked at the battle report I saw a value of 2 with a grey background and value of 0 with a grey background indicating as you said that the forts had been destroyed
All understanding comes after the fact.
-- Soren Kierkegaard
For those who are interested below are the maps of Brittany and Italy as of Turn 57: July 29, 1944. Circled in Red are the hexes LiquidSky attacked last turn. Circled in Blue is the only hex I own that is preventing LS from gaining negative VPs for over garrisoning.
As you can see the Allies are digging in. We'll let Mr. Stalin and his boys have the rest of Europe, but not before we bomb it back to the stone age.
Below is some of the Info as of Turn 57. The only important stat for me at this time is the VPs. With about 40 turns to go Liquid Sky has to knock me down by 163 VPs to get the draw. Against anyone else I would say that is impossible. But with LS as my opponent I am not going to get too cocky yet.
For those who are not aware, this game between LiquidSky and myself came about because of a Post I made some time ago that the VP System of the Campaign Game was whacky because in an EF Box Off game it encouraged the Allies to turtle at some point in the Summer or early Fall of 1944. The reason for this turtling is that the Allies reach a point where they will lose more VPs in casualties than they will gain from capturing more Cities. As well, because the Allies can gain so many VPs from Strategic Bombing they don't need to capture too much territory to win anyway. So my purpose in this game is to try and win as the Allies by doing just that.
At the time I invaded Brittany I had a second invasion planned as well in the Le Havre area. The same location actually where QBall performed his 2nd Invasion in our game; proving once again that great minds think alike. Once I gave away that I was going to invade Brittany I almost made this my first invasion site; but in the end decided to go ahead with the invasion of Brittany. A few turns after invading Brittany I then had to make the biggest decision of the game; namely whether to go ahead with the Le Havre invasion or not. The advantage of invading Le Havre is that it would then give me a chance to take Paris and start reaping its VPs. If Liquid Sky was weaker I probably would have done this 2nd Invasion, but it appeared to me that he was too strong. I would have been able to take Paris eventually, but I felt that the casualties I would incur doing so would be greater than the reward. So I decided to hold where I am and let LiquidSky batter himself against me.
Oh yeah, I was also planning an invasion of Southern France for August using the TFs I had used for my first invasion. But this plan got scrapped at the same time as the Le Havre invasion got scrapped.
So now it is just a case of seeing what LS can throw against me and what further surprises he has in store.
