Please vote: supply range per year

Moderators: firepowerjohan, Happycat, rkr1958, Slitherine Core

Post Reply
Peter Stauffenberg
General - Carrier
General - Carrier
Posts: 4711
Joined: Sun Jul 08, 2007 4:13 pm
Location: Oslo, Norway

Please vote: supply range per year

Post by Peter Stauffenberg » Sat Oct 29, 2011 6:22 pm

We introduced a rule regarding supply range in each year and the range was 15 / 30 in 1939-1941 and increased to 20 / 40 in 1942 and later. This meant that Germany entered the supply level 3 zone further west in 1941 and that made it harder to storm past Moscow and Rostov in 1941. The major problem was that the Germans at the historical 1941 winter line would be in supply level 3 and lost 1 MP. During the Russian winter offensive this meant the Germans couldn't retreat 2 hexes and then you were in a way forced to retreat to positions further west than you would otherwise have done.

The Russian winter offensive is quite potent so you will be crushed if you defend in open terrain. Some people have therefore suggested changes to this rule. Please vote what you prefer.

1. Supply range
a. Keep at 15 / 30 in 1941 and increase to 20 / 40 in January 1942 (as now)
b. Keep at 15 / 30 in 1941 and increase to 20 /40 after the first October 1941 turn
c. Remove the limit at 15 / 30 for 1941 and increase it to 20 / 40 as before we made the change

The reason behind b is that by October the rail conversion units would have caught up with the front line and thus the supply range could be lengthened. This means the Germans would be able to make operation Typhoon late in 1941 if they want to. They will have supply level 4 along their historical line and can more easily repair and retreat in the area the Russians make a counter attack.

The increase will take place in 1941 because in 1942 the Russians are much stronger and the Germans can't advance so fast during the Summer. So they would never outrun their rail conversion units by so much. They would also have more rail conversion units available for the offensive.

c means we're back to the original setting and then we might risk the same as we saw before when aggressive Axis players managed to storm past Leningrad, Moscow and Rostov before the bad weather begun in 1941. It could make it quite hard for the Russians to hold Moscow. So b is a compromise between a and c. You won't benefit from the longer range during the Summer offensive, but you get the entended range in time to hold better against the Russian winter offensive.

I don't mind if many Axis players can't take Moscow in 1941. The real German also failed to do so and they tried really hard. The Germans performed very well in 1941 and still came short. What I'm concerned about is that that Axis players feel they're forced to retreat back to the supply 4 zone before the winter to have mobility when the Russian offensive begins. So changing to b or c will help against that. The real Germans weren't sitting ducks during the Russian winter offensive. They didn't retreat because of a stupid order by Hitler and not because they couldn't.

Plaid
Brigadier-General - 15 cm Nblwf 41
Brigadier-General - 15 cm Nblwf 41
Posts: 1960
Joined: Tue Apr 27, 2010 10:16 pm

Post by Plaid » Sat Oct 29, 2011 6:28 pm

c.
Its only good if allied player will suffer for running all the 1941 without reasonable delaying action.
Now its normal practice and I don't like it at all.

PionUrpo
Staff Sergeant - StuG IIIF
Staff Sergeant - StuG IIIF
Posts: 265
Joined: Sun Oct 03, 2010 12:29 pm
Location: Helsinki, Finland

Post by PionUrpo » Sat Oct 29, 2011 9:02 pm

I have to say, initially I very much liked this rule but judging from AARs it does lead to the 'run for the hills' thing way too much. I do it a lot as well.

I'm tempted to go for removing it alltogether but obviously AAR games aren't the only one's so I'd like to see more opinions.

For now 1. B

leridano
Captain - Bf 110D
Captain - Bf 110D
Posts: 860
Joined: Mon Sep 08, 2008 9:51 pm

Post by leridano » Sat Oct 29, 2011 9:42 pm

I vote b. The rule, initially implemented for helping against Morris german armoured blob, has had the effect mentioned in the posts above: germans in USSR running to 'safety' once bad weather comes.

    Blathergut
    Field Marshal - Elefant
    Field Marshal - Elefant
    Posts: 5734
    Joined: Tue Jan 22, 2008 1:44 am
    Location: Southern Ontario, Canada

    Post by Blathergut » Sat Oct 29, 2011 10:32 pm

    b...please

    rkr1958
    General - Elite King Tiger
    General - Elite King Tiger
    Posts: 4262
    Joined: Wed Dec 12, 2007 2:20 am

    Post by rkr1958 » Sat Oct 29, 2011 11:01 pm

    c. Remove the limit at 15 / 30 for 1941 and increase it to 20 / 40 as before we made the change

    My experience is that we've made it too difficult for the average and above player to approach Moscow.

    pk867
    Sr. Colonel - Battleship
    Sr. Colonel - Battleship
    Posts: 1601
    Joined: Fri May 08, 2009 3:18 pm

    Post by pk867 » Sat Oct 29, 2011 11:22 pm

    Hi

    I vote for 'b' but change the first range to 16 to 32.


    Paul

    Peter Stauffenberg
    General - Carrier
    General - Carrier
    Posts: 4711
    Joined: Sun Jul 08, 2007 4:13 pm
    Location: Oslo, Norway

    Post by Peter Stauffenberg » Sat Oct 29, 2011 11:23 pm

    I can easily change to 16 / 32 and then the supply 4 zone goes a bit further east

    amcdonel
    Sergeant - Panzer IIC
    Sergeant - Panzer IIC
    Posts: 192
    Joined: Thu Mar 05, 2009 11:48 pm

    Post by amcdonel » Sat Oct 29, 2011 11:27 pm

    I vote for 1 c. back to the original. We have made it too hard for normal Axis players to have a balanced game...

    PanzerGeneral
    Staff Sergeant - Kavallerie
    Staff Sergeant - Kavallerie
    Posts: 341
    Joined: Mon Jul 06, 2009 2:03 pm
    Location: Norway

    Post by PanzerGeneral » Sun Oct 30, 2011 8:19 am

    I vote for c.

    zechi
    1st Lieutenant - Grenadier
    1st Lieutenant - Grenadier
    Posts: 763
    Joined: Wed Feb 27, 2008 1:42 pm

    Post by zechi » Sun Oct 30, 2011 8:39 am

    1b

    leridano
    Captain - Bf 110D
    Captain - Bf 110D
    Posts: 860
    Joined: Mon Sep 08, 2008 9:51 pm

    Post by leridano » Sun Oct 30, 2011 11:57 am

    I think october 1941 option (option b) is good for both sides: soviets by this time begin to recover from the initial morale loss and germans can perform an assault to Moscow and/or Rostov. I fear that if we come back to c we will be seeing again the soviets running for their lives to the Ural mountains specially in case of an early and strong Barbarossa.


      Morris
      Major-General - Tiger I
      Major-General - Tiger I
      Posts: 2278
      Joined: Wed Mar 30, 2011 11:00 am

      Post by Morris » Sun Oct 30, 2011 12:55 pm

      I vote c

      Even so ,it is almost an impoosible mission to take Moscow before winter .

      Peter Stauffenberg
      General - Carrier
      General - Carrier
      Posts: 4711
      Joined: Sun Jul 08, 2007 4:13 pm
      Location: Oslo, Norway

      Post by Peter Stauffenberg » Sun Oct 30, 2011 6:46 pm

      I completed the change and reset the supply range to 20/40 for all years. Change will be out in GS v2.01.33 later today.

      Cybvep
      Lieutenant Colonel - Panther D
      Lieutenant Colonel - Panther D
      Posts: 1259
      Joined: Wed Sep 07, 2011 1:38 pm

      Post by Cybvep » Tue Nov 01, 2011 4:29 am

      What I cannot understand is why you are so keen on forced dates with those things. Why the supply range should be changed if Germany didn't invade the USSR? I presume that you wanted to represent the work of German engineers with this change and it wasn't a bad idea. However, it happens completely arbitrarily. If it would happen several months after the invasion it would make much more sense.

      BTW the whole 1942 Barbarossa scenario is pretty weak IMO. We get the information somewhere during 1941 that factories transferred behind the Urals can start production. What the hell is that supposed to mean? IRL the transfer was done as a emergency measure to keep the factories outside of the German reach. If there is no invasion, why should they be transferred? Also, for some reason, the industry is mobilised. Again, WTF? The Russians have just signed a NAP with the Japanese and they respond by mobilising their industry for war? This doesn't make much sense. I know that 1942 Barbarossa isn't very popular, but it still can happen if someone went for the Sea Lion and the "Med First" strategy. I think that it needs a bit more work. Just saying...

      Peter Stauffenberg
      General - Carrier
      General - Carrier
      Posts: 4711
      Joined: Sun Jul 08, 2007 4:13 pm
      Location: Oslo, Norway

      Post by Peter Stauffenberg » Tue Nov 01, 2011 6:50 am

      There is substantial evidence that Stalin wanted to DoW Germany in 1942. The mobilization of USSR in October 1941 has been part of vanilla CeaW too. Then USSR joined the Allies, but we delayed the join date to May 1942 because it was then USSR would have joined if they joined.

      The mobilization is necessary to gear USSR up for war.

      Russia knew what was going on in the world and that war with Germany was inevitable. Stalin miscalculated and didn't believe Germany was ready for war as early as June 1941.

      PionUrpo
      Staff Sergeant - StuG IIIF
      Staff Sergeant - StuG IIIF
      Posts: 265
      Joined: Sun Oct 03, 2010 12:29 pm
      Location: Helsinki, Finland

      Post by PionUrpo » Tue Nov 01, 2011 8:35 am

      Remove the transfer of industry part from the text to make it look better? Not that it changes anything. The entire 'event' is a balance thing anyway. You could take the entire text box out as long as the effect, added war effort, remains.

      Crazygunner1
      Major - 8.8 cm FlaK 36
      Major - 8.8 cm FlaK 36
      Posts: 959
      Joined: Sun Dec 27, 2009 4:13 pm

      Post by Crazygunner1 » Tue Nov 01, 2011 11:21 am

      On a note with USSR entering in 1942, i have experienced oil problems with the Russians by that time and even throughout the entire game. Those 50 oil barrrels that they have in storage isn´t enough.

      The only possible reason for this as i can see, is to prevent the Russians from having 20 tanks rolling down on the germans.

      Are there more?

      Cybvep
      Lieutenant Colonel - Panther D
      Lieutenant Colonel - Panther D
      Posts: 1259
      Joined: Wed Sep 07, 2011 1:38 pm

      Post by Cybvep » Tue Nov 01, 2011 1:37 pm

      I don't know, it was far more likely for the USSR to enter the war in 1943. It wasn't ready in 1941 and it wouldn't be ready in 1942, either. Even Stalin knew that. Also, whether it would have joined the Allies is another matter.

      And yeah, you should change the text, because it's silly.

      PionUrpo
      Staff Sergeant - StuG IIIF
      Staff Sergeant - StuG IIIF
      Posts: 265
      Joined: Sun Oct 03, 2010 12:29 pm
      Location: Helsinki, Finland

      Post by PionUrpo » Tue Nov 01, 2011 1:58 pm

      Cybvep wrote:I don't know, it was far more likely for the USSR to enter the war in 1943. It wasn't ready in 1941 and it wouldn't be ready in 1942, either. Even Stalin knew that. Also, whether it would have joined the Allies is another matter.

      And yeah, you should change the text, because it's silly.
      Soviet entry could easily be argued to anywhere between '42-'44. Uncle Joe would not be nearly as prepared as possible in '42 compared to '43/'44 but would Uncle Adi be any more prepared (relatively) while fighting in West/Med? Stalin could calculate it's a good time for a backstab while the other guy is busy elsewhere but hasn't won there yet. Waiting might risk Germans winning in West and he knows who's next on their list. Anyway, '42 makes the most sense gamewise since there's a fixed end date.

      Post Reply

      Return to “Commander Europe at War : GS Open Beta”