New patch E.T.A

[Panzer987]

Same goes for me. The North African campaign has become pretty much unwinnable for the Axis unless you are willing to commit troops from continental Europe to the fight (I do). All the way up until 1.05, you could wait for the Allies to attack en masse and flank them on each side once they proceed past the mountain pass and pound them into submission. That strategy doesn't work anymore. I bring an extra Italian corp and tank division to the fight and it's still a tough one to win, and it takes some time getting bogged down before you can advance to Cairo.

One new trick I'm working on is declaring war on Turkey immediately following the conquest of Yugoslavia. That way, Istanbul falls prior to war with Russia and my tanks pour into Asia Minor at the same time as my initial "Barbarossa" advance (which I start on 6/2/41). This may seem superfluous because getting an invading force capable of sacking Ankara takes some time and advancing through the mountains of Central Turkey is slow and arduous, but the advantage is the closeness of proximity to Mosul and Tehran once you make the trek. I can take Mosul and Tehran before my forces can get to Baku using this strategy, meaning my tanks in Northern Russia lose very little time due to fuel problems.

[borsook79]

Same goes for me. The North African campaign has become pretty much unwinnable for the Axis unless you are willing to commit troops from continental Europe to the fight (I do). All the way up until 1.05, you could wait for the Allies to attack en masse and flank them on each side once they proceed past the mountain pass and pound them into submission. That strategy doesn't work anymore. I bring an extra Italian corp and tank division to the fight and it's still a tough one to win, and it takes some time getting bogged down before you can advance to Cairo.

One new trick I'm working on is declaring war on Turkey immediately following the conquest of Yugoslavia. That way, Istanbul falls prior to war with Russia and my tanks pour into Asia Minor at the same time as my initial "Barbarossa" advance (which I start on 6/2/41). This may seem superfluous because getting an invading force capable of sacking Ankara takes some time and advancing through the mountains of Central Turkey is slow and arduous, but the advantage is the closeness of proximity to Mosul and Tehran once you make the trek. I can take Mosul and Tehran before my forces can get to Baku using this strategy, meaning my tanks in Northern Russia lose very little time due to fuel problems.

Which scenario do you mean? In 1.05 1939 I feel NA is easier for the Axis than in 1.04 as Italy has more inf corps.

[rkr1958]

Axis vs Allied AI w/advantage even. Situation so far for September 1942. Suez canal captured by June 1942 by sending four or five additional Italian corps to NA and just outflanking, cutting off and eventually destroying the British forces. The Italians lost two or three corps in the effort. The Axis are having trouble in Russia and have not reached Moscow. The Western Allies are bombing the heck out of the Axis defensive forces in France. However, the Germans have two fighter wings stationed there and they're taking a toll on the the British bombers. Also, the Germans focused on subs ... which is a good thing. German subs are playing havoc on the UK/US navy; especially their transports. Axis subs have sunk at least five transports and five UK BB/destroyers. One thing the Allied AI is doing very poorly is protecting tansports. In does a great job protecting convoys but does a very poor job protecting transports. They're sitting ducks and the allied AI just keeps sending them to their demise.

[syagrius]

Which scenario? 1939, 1940 or 1941?

[rkr1958]

Which scenario? 1939, 1940 or 1941?

1939.

[Magpius]

Nice thread hijack guys!
(-not really complaining; good to see the game's being played!)
-but as a matrix purchaser, I'm starting to feel like a 2nd class citizen...
...any news on when the beta, or the 1.05 patch will be available for us too?

[dippy]

Nice thread hijack guys!
(-not really complaining; good to see the game's being played!)
-but as a matrix purchaser, I'm starting to feel like a 2nd class citizen...
...any news on when the beta, or the 1.05 patch will be available for us too?

dont worry as a cdv purchaser I feal like 3rd class , if only I would have known that you could buy from Slitherine direct.

[Magpius]

if only I would have known that you could buy from Slitherine direct

ditto
Matrix beat Slitherine to online sales by a few hours, and it seems like I'm suffering from my initial eagerness to acquire this game.

[syagrius]

Wow in the 1941 campaign the Axis run out of fuel very quickly, so I had to rely on infantry however it very costly in manpower; its February 1943 and the Germans have only 200 manpower left (the Italians have more now). I will have to rely on the Axis allies to keep up the offensive. Yep, 1941 is definitly more a challenge than the 1939 campaign.

[borsook79]

if only I would have known that you could buy from Slitherine direct

ditto
Matrix beat Slitherine to online sales by a few hours, and it seems like I'm suffering from my initial eagerness to acquire this game.

Well, not getting the beta patches is not that terrible... they're beta after all and full 1.05 patch should be available to Matrix users at the same time. It's not like you're losing anything else, so cheer up.

[Panzer987]

Wow in the 1941 campaign the Axis run out of fuel very quickly, so I had to rely on infantry however it very costly in manpower; its February 1943 and the Germans have only 200 manpower left (the Italians have more now). I will have to rely on the Axis allies to keep up the offensive. Yep, 1941 is definitly more a challenge than the 1939 campaign.

I'm not sure how this stacks up historically, but I recall seeing information that the Germans really were never shorthanded due to lack of oil. Therefore, it seems like it wouldbe helpful to a large degree (especially in the campaign scenarios) if the Germans had double the oil to start the game. If not double, at least 50% more. As is, even on the 1939 campaign, any force with a few tanks can run dry by 1942. I don't feel this is realistic historically.

I'm playing the 1943 Kursk scenario right now. I tried to start using oil and determiend it is 100% unwinnable for the Axis is "even" mode to win with the oil option on. I've now set the options to "no oil" on "even" just to see if I can win. I don't like to play with the 1945 time limit, so it's all about turning the tide. From my studies, while it would taken a helluva scheme for Germany and the Axis to win once the battle of Kursk started, theorectically it would have still been possible. I don't feel that is the case in this game.

[syagrius]

Yeah your absolutely right. Oil shortage is even worst in the 1941 campaign! The Germans should have at least the double stockpile of oil. Its not accurate to run dry in 1941 or 1942. However I am aware that it is more of a gameplay feature than something historical. I guess we should play without oil limitiations when playing any scenario outside 1939.

I have noticed that armor is burning a lot more oil than air and naval units. Maybe the tanks should consume less oil.

[firepowerjohan]

Yeah your absolutely right. Oil shortage is even worst in the 1941 campaign! The Germans should have at least the double stockpile of oil. Its not accurate to run dry in 1941 or 1942. However I am aware that it is more of a gameplay feature than something historical. I guess we should play without oil limitiations when playing any scenario outside 1939.

I have noticed that armor is burning a lot more oil than air and naval units. Maybe the tanks should consume less oil.

You do not run dry on oil. Every turn you get new oil so can still move some oil units, but not all of them

[syagrius]

I understand, lets say the shortage of oil instead of running dry.

[JyriErik]

There are a couple of historical asides to the oil problem. Based on what they captured when France fell, Germany had far more fuel oil in July of 1940 than they had in May, despite the heavy usage in the French campaign. I also read in an analysis of Barbarossa where, according to its daily diary, Army Group Center filled around 30% of its POL (petrol/oil/lubricants) needs using captured Soviet stocks.

What the solution to this is, I can't say for sure. From what I've read, while the Germans were restricted in what they could do due to their oil stocks, they weren't really debilitated by the oil situation until Ploesti fell, and when the lake Balaton fell most of Germany's oil supply was gone and the situation was crippling. Maybe Ploesti's output could be increased?

Unfortunately, Axis oil availability needs very fine balancing if you want to play with some sort of historical basis while using the oil rules. Too much oil available in the areas historically held & you allow for too many ahistorical situations (for that, just play without the oil rules).

Jyri

[Panzer987]

Idea:

Maybe each city should have it's own oil "reserve", so that if an Axis army captures an enemy city, they would receive the oil that is stored there. It would then be advantageous for the Axis to storm into France and Russia and capture as many cities as possible in the hsortest time possible.

For example, for each production point a city offers, maybe that point corresponds to 25 oil credits.

[Ryben]

Idea:

Maybe each city should have it's own oil "reserve", so that if an Axis army captures an enemy city, they would receive the oil that is stored there. It would then be advantageous for the Axis to storm into France and Russia and capture as many cities as possible in the hsortest time possible.

For example, for each production point a city offers, maybe that point corresponds to 25 oil credits.

I agree with you. There should be an option that rewards you with some kind of "loot" after taking a country. You take over the production centers but also on their oil reserves and army surplus. After all, Germany took a lot of very useful Chzeck tanks that helped a lot on building early panzer divisions and also used a lot of captured French equipment.

An extra PP´s and oil points after taking a country would be a very interesting addition.

[rkr1958]

Yeah your absolutely right. Oil shortage is even worst in the 1941 campaign! The Germans should have at least the double stockpile of oil. Its not accurate to run dry in 1941 or 1942. However I am aware that it is more of a gameplay feature than something historical. I guess we should play without oil limitiations when playing any scenario outside 1939.

I have noticed that armor is burning a lot more oil than air and naval units. Maybe the tanks should consume less oil.

The thing about armor and oil, and I found this out the hard way, is that if you move and then attack with an armor corp that costs 6 oil points (3 for moving & 3 for attacking). So let's say you have six armor corps when you invade Russia and say on average 4 attack & move and 2 attack then that's 30 oil points. Add on top of that support from a couple of tactical bomber wings supported by two fighter wings then thats another 12 oil points. That's 42 oil points per turn in those units alone. Also, if on average 3 of the 6 armor units are counterattacked and the two fighter wings fly defensive air support in the opponents turn then thats another 15 oil points. That's 57 oil points per turn to keep these 10 units going. The axis can easily burn through their oil stockpiles at that rate. I really like the oil rules; however, I feel that the axis run short too easily, which really cripples their main attack forces (i.e., armor and air) and also your naval units.

With oil on the axis have to make a dash for the oil fields in Iraq and Persian, which historically that got stopped cold at Alexandria, far short of those fields and for the oil fields in Southern Russia.

Also, the Western Allies (UK/US) seem to have an unlimited supply of oil. Historically, Patton's 3rd Army ground to a halt in the Fall of 1944 because of fuel shortages.

[Ryben]

Also, the Western Allies (UK/US) seem to have an unlimited supply of oil. Historically, Patton's 3rd Army ground to a halt in the Fall of 1944 because of fuel shortages.

Yes, but not because a lack of fuel in Allied production centers but failures in the logistics and how the fuel could be transported to where it was needed. You could have plenty of oil in depots but, without trucks to deliver it, it is useless.

[syagrius]

The Germans had around 5600 tanks in 1941 and 13 300 in 1945. That means they had enough fuel to field a larger numbers of panzers.