Speedy vs Saper 222 (no Saper 222)

[Harrybanana]

I am currently in a game with Saper myself and accordingly have been closley following this game, his game with Kamil and his game with Mike29 (which Saper won some time ago). I was very fortunate in that my game was started earlier than any of the other games before Saper fully learned his stuff. I employed the same type of fighting withdrawl defense that Taurannas did in his game with Micahel T and Speedy did in this game. It worked very well for me in our game; so well in fact that it is now nearing the end of summer 43 and my lead units are about half way between Warsaw and Berlin. I have told Saper that I will accept his surrender, but he insists on fighting to the bitter end.

I am telling you this not because I am looking for a pat on the back, but because I agree (god forgive me) with something Pelton said long ago. Namely that this type of forward defense that many Soviet players (even the good ones like Tarhaunnas) use successfullyagainst most German players, just won't work against the really skilled players. Saper has already told me that he wants a rematch when our current game is finished. I know that to beat him in our rematch I will have to change my defensive style. I know this, but at the same time I fear that I will not be able to make the adjustment. I am just too set in my ways. But if I don't adjust it may be a very long war for me as I would feel honour bound to play the game to the bitter end.

[janh]

ORIGINAL: Schmart

ORIGINAL: Pelton
2by3 needs to 1.Tweek manpower out put of SHC so the can fight forward

My ears are bleeding. Pelton is actually proposing that Russian abilities should be increased!? [:'(]

Yes, there was good hints of him changing his opinion in other posts over the past few weeks. Seems like switching sides and experiencing the SHC challenge live made some impact...

[janh]

ORIGINAL: Pelton

ORIGINAL: Flaviusx
If I knew the Red Army could fight forward and afford the losses, I would do so, rules or no rules. The reason I run (in the south anyways, not up north) is precisely because this isn't possible. Running away, for me anyways, is purely an artifact of the Lvov opener (people are still underestimating how much this is distorting the game) and the fragility of the replacement situation.

You would fight forward we know, but most would just take the extra troops and send them up north. There would need to be something to give people a reason to fight forward other then there word heheh.

I am for and have been tweaking the lvov pocket, but there has to be a trade off or it will be impossible to get over rivers.

So far we have seen a few games, where SHC fell back or was forcefully pushed back too far East, loosing LG, Moscow, Voronesh, Rostov and a lot more up to the Saransk area and Chererovpets. Yet I can't remember any SHC player that was at this line by late 42 or still in 43 getting anywhere close to Berlin again, aka. of the ongoing AARs there is indication that they won't be fast enough (e.g. Tulius or Terje's AARs) -- independent of whether he retreated so far because SHC got trashed (and weak/er after), or voluntarily (in which case SHC should be much stronger, and more likely to regain something).

With a German player skilled and disciplined on the defense, making no major mistakes and knowing when to switch to a holding stance, the going for in 43-45 is going to be slow. No 10 hex deep breakthrus with pockets like Axis in 41, maybe at best now and then a 3-4 hex breakthru or a 1-2 hex pocket. It still looks like retreating beyond the line where terrain would allow fighting (Landbridge, Pskov, Vyasma-Rshev...) is likely to surrendering any chance of a late victory. So does it really need more rules except the knowledge that every hex lost in 41-42 will be much much harder to regain after?

I concur that upping the manpower pools, either by an injection at the game start, or by the multiplier would be one thing. Yet without increasing the combat effectiveness, aka morale/experience, or respectively how the latter parameters figure in the combat engine, you'd only set up more bowling pins. But not get to the kind of fighting to death, counterattacking, desperately defending rivers etc. all of us probably would prefer. My impression with the combat engine is that forces with a strong disparity often lead to results, in which one side losses 100s- some 3000-400s men, but the opponent losses 0 (aside from FoW) -- like in the case of highly experiences Axis divisions fighting off a SHC infantry attack with low experience units. It rather expect the defender to loose a few dozen to 100 men disabled as well, which in effect would rate the SHC more combat worthy, increase Axis losses/attrition and make fighting tougher, and progress slower/costlier.

Maybe that would be better than to increase morale/experience, because that carries the risk that Axis may get stuck with some SHC moves: e.g. if you'd forgo Lvov voluntarily, and wanted to fight it out with AGS, you might well see the SHC withdraw behind the Djenpr or run all the way to Stalino/Kursk (since this open terrain would by the books not be a wise choice to contest), and just as presently transfer all the spare forces to LG and Moscow -- Axis would probably still overrun the south, but might not even get near LG or Moscow. You would sort of have to require an SHC player to loose two huge 700k+ pockets like Kiev and Wjasma-Brjansk (and perhaps waste a few 100k men and tanks in futile counterattacks), else the balance may have shifted to far toward SHC. The ground to get a campaign that is fluid and reaches a high-water mark at LG-Moscow-Rostov, where both sides have some chance to either take or hold it, appears very small for this war.

[Klydon]

Man, all this credit for Pelton! Who would have thought it possible. [:D]

Seriously guys, you can go back and read his other posts LOOOONNNGGG before he ever tried the SHC and he was making suggestions for the Russian side from the German perspective that would have helped the Russians.

Pelton may or may not rightly deserve some of the wrath for his hyper posting over various points at times, but to say he has only recently just posted some suggestions for the Russian side isn't true either. He has a wealth of experience playing the game AND is active on the forums here. There are a lot of things he has come up with/exposed to help make the game better overall. I believe his goal is the same as many of us and that is the evolution of the game and game engine in a way that makes sense for both sides and provides a entertaining game for both sides.

He may not be everyone's cup of tea, but I do appreciate how much extra effort he has put into posting his AAR's and generally engaging on the forum with ideas, etc. (Although I cringe at times, hehe. [;)] ).

[hugh04]

This great AAR and the discussiion after Speedy gave up shows me again that in games as in life the true battlefield is the mind. When your opponent gives up, you have truly lost. A turn 9/10 surrender during one of the very black times for the SHC player is a failure of nerve. Yes losses are bad, yes you got a turn with a bunch of pockets, yes there does not seem like much to put in front of the very competent Axis attack, yes the future looks very bleak.....this is a psychological tough time for the SHC.

However, I look at the SHC and see plenty of inf div with a strength 3 or greater spread around the front (maybe all of them should be at Moscow). I see plenty low quality troops that can be ordered to die. For those who know old stories: the horse could die, the King could die or the horse could learn how to talk. A clever way to say bad things in the future only happen in the future not right now.....and things can change. I am not against giving up, but wait till Blizzard. There is alot you can learn in this very desperate situation and Saper deserves a chance to enjoy a great 41. You never know, he may actually make a mistake.

The difference between a good axis player and an average one is night and day. But then the same is true for the SHC and for anything. Even in this game, some retreats should have been made and some retreats by the SHC were more about fear. I read all about more experienced posters making conclusions about how tough it is for the SHC to win if too much bad stuff happens. It could all be true. However, better to say that after you have properly put your troops too the front and done everything possible to give you a chance for victory.

Too bad we are not talking what creative unit placements and tactics could retrieve this situation...maybe none but you have to try. You never know and there is alot to learn in trying.

Vandev

[Flaviusx]

Vandev, this wasn't a "failure of nerve" but rather an attack of common sense. The game simply doesn't allow the Soviet Union to recover from this kind of situation and will rapidly snowball out of control. It's all about the numbers.

Speedy could have kept playing on until the inevitable German marginal victory in 1945. No point. In his shoes I would have also resigned. The main thing is to learn from mistakes and then do better next time, not to continue a bad game out of some misguided notion of manhood or keeping your nerve.

After literally watching dozens of games clear patterns emerge and it becomes very easy to predict how things will develop.

[hugh04]

Flaviusx, with the greatest respect, I have to disagree. You have much more experience in this game then I do and your judgements about trends and likely results I am sure are exactly right. I am not suggesting an investment of another 100 turns and countless hours in a fruitless fight. I am suggesting, however, that playing out the summer could be fun, exciting and fruitful for Speedy and a great read for the rest of us. There is alot too learn in how to react to disaster, even if you can't stave it off.

For example, what if the first thing speedy did each turn from here on out was make sure that there was a fort line behind the river that bisects Moscow from north to south end points being the major rivers. Initially, put single division shells with alot of digging support. By turn 14 or 15 when Saper is approaching make sure this line is stacked 2 high (3 if it can be attacked from 3 hexes) with brigades behind in reserve. Until this 10 or 12 hexes is dealt with, nothing else is done in the Soviet turn. Next, keep 4 or 5 hexes away from the front lines to prevent german infantry from attacking and retreat until 3 or 4 hexes west of moscow. Then stage a fighting retreat back to the final line referenced above.

In the south, every good division goes to moscow. Every one. Leave only the cv 1 and 2 units. Then give up what ever land you have too. In the north you could fighting foward in the better terrain but so what if you move back if you are pushed. Make it your goal to save moscow and sacrifice everything to that goal. Why does the soviet keep anything but a light screen between bransk and Kharkov. Alot of divisions can be harvested from there. Forget moving factories as you are going to surrender once mud hits anyway. You are not playing to win, you are playing to stop the fall of moscow before mud. If you can, you are a moral winner cause the situation now is really that bad. Another 8 turns, not much time and with a new attitude, could be a ton of fun. And as I said before, who knows? And yes I play Lotto every week(G).

I am not trying to criticize anyone, rather trying to point out that attidude and emotions are key to decision making and that when it is darkest some times you need to redefine success to find the light. This could be fun and informative.

Vandev