Morris vs Joe Rock

After action reports for Commander Europe at War.

Moderators: rkr1958, Happycat, Slitherine Core

Post Reply
gchristie
Sergeant - 7.5 cm FK 16 nA
Sergeant - 7.5 cm FK 16 nA
Posts: 220
Joined: Thu Jan 28, 2010 8:02 pm
Location: Maine, USA

Post by gchristie » Fri Jan 27, 2012 6:37 pm

Stauffenberg wrote:A little more accurate solution could be to let the # turns needed to use a captured city be dependent upon the hex column.

It could be 1 turn for the westernmost cities like Minsk, Vinnitsa etc. 2 turns for cities like Kiev, Dnepropetrovsk, Vitebsk, Smolensk etc. 3 turns for Rostov, Kursk, Moscow etc. 4 turns for Stalingrad etc.

Then we can count a number of hexes from the border to find a hex column and increase the turn until you can use the city by a fixed number of columns (like 10). We could make it so the number is decreased by 1 per year after 1941 (but not lower than 1). That would simulate bigger rail conversion capacity for the Germans later in the war.

This would only be used for Axis advance into core Russian territory. Could be called rail conversion rule.

By doing this we could keep the supply rules as is.
I think that this is an idea worth pursuing. It has historical precedent, deals with the perceived problem, but doesn't overly penalize a successful German advance when severe winter hits. Perhaps by GS 4.0 I too will rise above "average player" status and this will all be moot :)
"Despite everything, I believe that people are really good at heart."
~Anne Frank

Diplomaticus
Sergeant First Class - Elite Panzer IIIL
Sergeant First Class - Elite Panzer IIIL
Posts: 447
Joined: Mon Sep 22, 2008 4:10 pm

Post by Diplomaticus » Fri Jan 27, 2012 7:49 pm

I'm really liking Stauffenberg's proposal--it's an elegant solution, and it feels very true to life.

At the same time, I think Morris's point (above) deserves recognition. The question is this: Is, in fact, the game now too easy for Axis? If the answer is "yes," then the proposed changes to rail seem like a no-brainer.

Speaking for myself, I'm very glad to see a return to a dynamic action on the Eastern front. And, after all, if players learn from history, make better choices than Hitler did, and start early to-boot, why shouldn't they enjoy better-than-historical success? Well, to answer my own question, they shouldn't if it then turns out that competent players can regularly K-O Russia with devastating Barbarossa attacks.

Do we have data on this? Are we seeing a rash of Axis victories? Or is it just a matter of a number of games where the Axis start out hugely successful in Barbarossa, but they end up collapsing in the end?

petertodd
Corporal - Strongpoint
Corporal - Strongpoint
Posts: 70
Joined: Wed Jun 02, 2010 3:31 am

Re: An Alternative Idea for Barbarossa Supply

Post by petertodd » Sat Jan 28, 2012 3:19 am

Morris wrote:
petertodd wrote:It seems to me that the problem with having supply level 3 in Russia is that the Axis infantry corps have their movement reduced to one hex in winter, and thus become easy prey for the Russians, since they cannot escape. This can lead to wholesale massacres of Axis infantry that is just too severe. Would it make sense to combine supply level 3 with Infantry corps being able to move two hexes instead of one (in winter)?
you did not get Borger's point , he wanted to weak Axis not enhance them :)
My suggestion includes going back to the more supply level 3 for the Axis, which would definately slow the Axis advance during Barbarossa, which seems to be the point of the discussion. My suggestion of also tweaking the movement of infantry corps to 2 during winter in supply level 3 would only help the Axis in winter, where previously they were getting beat up pretty severely (in many AARs). Some AARs had Axis players stopping their advance into Russia specifically to avoid entering the supply level 3 zone--which I don't think is realistic. I think Borger's ideas for more realistic supply rules are great if they can be implemented. However, I still think that tweaking infantry movement in winter could improve the balance by making the Axis a bit less vulnerable in severe winter.

Morris
Major-General - Tiger I
Major-General - Tiger I
Posts: 2289
Joined: Wed Mar 30, 2011 11:00 am

Post by Morris » Sat Jan 28, 2012 8:36 am

Stauffenberg wrote:Here we see that German panzers (not infantry) captured Rostov, but had to give it up after just 7 days. In GS it's standard procedure to withdraw the panzers and rail corps units to the front line in Rostov. That won't be possible now unless you take the city so early so you can use it when the winter starts. Rostov would probably be in a 3 turn before use zone. So if you capture Rostov in October you need to keep the panzer there until December until you can rail infantry to the city.

So the more I think of the change the more I like it.

We can't have equal time for all cities because the westernmost Russian cities were linked up quite fast to the German rail network (Minsk, Vinnitsa etc.). These cities should still have 1 turn before use. Kiev and Smolensk should have 2 turn before use and so on.

I can easily program this change and have it ready for release candidate 9 this weekend. I will post a poll thread where you can vote on possible solutions.
If this has to be changed , will this rule also work when Russia counterattack back in 1942 0r 1943 ? ie : if Russia takes back Minsk in 1943 , will Russia also need any turns to be able to rail to Minsk ? I think they should meet the same situation as Axis in 1941 , Axis had destroyed all railways hubs before they retreat . If Axis has to suffer this in 1941, Russia also need to suffer this on their way to Berlin . :)

Morris
Major-General - Tiger I
Major-General - Tiger I
Posts: 2289
Joined: Wed Mar 30, 2011 11:00 am

Post by Morris » Sun Jan 29, 2012 2:08 am

I am so sorry to inform everyone that Mr Joe made a sick leave from Jan 26 2012 . We will continue this story when Joe feels better . God bless Joe will recover soon !

Morris
Major-General - Tiger I
Major-General - Tiger I
Posts: 2289
Joined: Wed Mar 30, 2011 11:00 am

Joe is back

Post by Morris » Thu Feb 02, 2012 7:11 am

Joe is back , we will continue our story

Oct 20 1941 Mud

Nothing special but prepare for winter .

Image




Image




Image

Morris
Major-General - Tiger I
Major-General - Tiger I
Posts: 2289
Joined: Wed Mar 30, 2011 11:00 am

Post by Morris » Sun Feb 05, 2012 1:36 pm

Nov 9 1941 winter

Russia concentrate several Mechs & INF around Uralsk . They seems try to take it back in severe winter . We just upgrade & wait for the severe winter .


Image


Image



Image

Diplomaticus
Sergeant First Class - Elite Panzer IIIL
Sergeant First Class - Elite Panzer IIIL
Posts: 447
Joined: Mon Sep 22, 2008 4:10 pm

Post by Diplomaticus » Sun Feb 05, 2012 3:42 pm

Question: Now that Axis has cut the southern Caucasus off from the rest of Russia, all of those units should be in '3' supply and unable to either rail or build new units. In GS 2.0, however, this was not the case. Since Russian units there could draw '4' supply from the middle east, these isolated areas could still rail and build. Morris, can you report on this? You should be able to tell what supply level those Red Army units are in. Do you have any guesses about whether Joe is able to rail or build?

Morris
Major-General - Tiger I
Major-General - Tiger I
Posts: 2289
Joined: Wed Mar 30, 2011 11:00 am

Post by Morris » Mon Feb 06, 2012 3:22 am

Diplomaticus wrote:Question: Now that Axis has cut the southern Caucasus off from the rest of Russia, all of those units should be in '3' supply and unable to either rail or build new units. In GS 2.0, however, this was not the case. Since Russian units there could draw '4' supply from the middle east, these isolated areas could still rail and build. Morris, can you report on this? You should be able to tell what supply level those Red Army units are in. Do you have any guesses about whether Joe is able to rail or build?
Because of my limited English , I wonder whether I can report the problem you mentioned well . Would you please do it for me ? Thank you !

Regarding to Joe's Caucasus's supply ,rail & production , I think He should be able to use rail there ,but probably can not deploy there .I also do not understand why part of their Caucasus troops are supply 3 , rest of them are supply 4 ? Is it because of mountain ?

Morris
Major-General - Tiger I
Major-General - Tiger I
Posts: 2289
Joined: Wed Mar 30, 2011 11:00 am

Post by Morris » Mon Feb 06, 2012 3:26 am

Nov 29 1941 winter

It seems there will be a big battle around uralsk . I have tried my best to enforce there & provide air support . let's see what will happen there . In Caucasus , we upgrade & wait for severe winter .


Image



Image

Kragdob
2nd Lieutenant - Panzer IVF/2
2nd Lieutenant - Panzer IVF/2
Posts: 678
Joined: Sat Aug 20, 2011 7:55 pm
Location: Poland

Post by Kragdob » Mon Feb 06, 2012 6:29 am

Wouldn't it be better if you evacuate all those troops once winter hits? Then Before Soviets reach Stalingrad it will take 3-4 turns and you can settle line there behind the river.
Never in the field of human conflict was so much owed by so many to so few.

Morris
Major-General - Tiger I
Major-General - Tiger I
Posts: 2289
Joined: Wed Mar 30, 2011 11:00 am

Post by Morris » Mon Feb 06, 2012 6:41 am

Kragdob wrote:Wouldn't it be better if you evacuate all those troops once winter hits? Then Before Soviets reach Stalingrad it will take 3-4 turns and you can settle line there behind the river.
Maybe it would be better . It is the first time I conquer Uralsk in 1941 ( before there was not this city on the map) . I had thought about your idea , But I am afraid of low effectiveness ,& losing a good position to start in 1942. I think in severe winter , my troops will all around 40-55 effective ,with much higher tec lvl & entrenchment & leaders . To elimilate such a bloc of Axis troops , USSR will have to concentrate a huge blob of troops here . Maybe including the Siberean troops . Let's see whether they can survive from winter .

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

Re: Morris vs Joe Rock

Post by PionUrpo » Mon Feb 06, 2012 2:49 pm

I think a leader to boost your air units' effectiveness would be a good idea if you're going to stay in those positions.
Suomi, Finland, Perkele!

Morris
Major-General - Tiger I
Major-General - Tiger I
Posts: 2289
Joined: Wed Mar 30, 2011 11:00 am

Re: Morris vs Joe Rock

Post by Morris » Tue Feb 07, 2012 3:03 am

PionUrpo wrote:I think a leader to boost your air units' effectiveness would be a good idea if you're going to stay in those positions.
Yes , I have done it as your order ! :)

Morris
Major-General - Tiger I
Major-General - Tiger I
Posts: 2289
Joined: Wed Mar 30, 2011 11:00 am

Re: Morris vs Joe Rock

Post by Morris » Fri Feb 10, 2012 4:58 am

Dec 19th 1941 severe winter !

Axis & USSR all concentrate more than 80% of their elite troops around Uralsk !
Axis 4 arm 6 mech 4 INF
USSR 1 arm 8 mech (including siberean guards) 8 INF at least with whole USSR air force .
Since I have to play this AAR on RC8 , I forgot to take the screen shot of Uralsk , & I am lazy to switch back for a screen shot . I will make it next turn . I am sure next turn will be bloody . I just want to see if the low lvl USSR blob really can badly damage or eliminate the high tch lvl Axis blob in severe winter .

Morris
Major-General - Tiger I
Major-General - Tiger I
Posts: 2289
Joined: Wed Mar 30, 2011 11:00 am

Re: Morris vs Joe Rock

Post by Morris » Thu Feb 16, 2012 9:01 am

Jan 9th 1942 severe winter

Uralsk compaign begin . USSR troops try encircle my blob & eliminate one Germany INF & an Italian fighter(I send it to sacrify for our Uralsk mainbody ) . To revenge we kill a Mech by the help of our airforce bloc & reinforce another one Mech & one INF to Uralsk . It is just like a game of Texas Poker ! :)

screen shot at the beginning of this turn

Image



screenshot at the end of this turn

Image


My airsupport group

Image

trulster
Sergeant First Class - Panzer IIIL
Sergeant First Class - Panzer IIIL
Posts: 362
Joined: Thu Sep 03, 2009 2:20 pm
Location: London

Re: Morris vs Joe Rock

Post by trulster » Thu Feb 16, 2012 9:39 am

IMO a mistake for the Soviets to concentrate all on this Uralsk blob and not even trying to take back the Grozny oilfield? Should be both strategically more important and easier against defending tanks.

richardsd
Lieutenant Colonel - Fw 190A
Lieutenant Colonel - Fw 190A
Posts: 1127
Joined: Sat Nov 03, 2007 5:30 am

Re: Morris vs Joe Rock

Post by richardsd » Thu Feb 16, 2012 7:01 pm

but they can't rail to the area

trulster
Sergeant First Class - Panzer IIIL
Sergeant First Class - Panzer IIIL
Posts: 362
Joined: Thu Sep 03, 2009 2:20 pm
Location: London

Re: Morris vs Joe Rock

Post by trulster » Thu Feb 16, 2012 8:49 pm

But surely can place newly built units?

Morris
Major-General - Tiger I
Major-General - Tiger I
Posts: 2289
Joined: Wed Mar 30, 2011 11:00 am

Re: Morris vs Joe Rock

Post by Morris » Fri Feb 17, 2012 2:45 am

trulster wrote:But surely can place newly built units?
They could not deploy new unit in Caucasus since Axis have cut the link between Caucasus & Moscow . But they can enforce there by ship .

Post Reply

Return to “Commander Europe at War : AAR's”