Slitherine

I think the main problem is that Morris isn't telling what his strategy is. He wants to prove it through playing. So you have to figure it out the hard way.

I agree that sacrificing the British in not historical, but how far should we go to limit ahistorical play? We've already done quite a bit.

What's really happening here is that some players find a way to break the game balance and in the end EVERYBODY will just abandon the game and move on to another game where they feel they have a fair chance of winning. I don't think regular players want to learn a not obvious strategy you have to be really good at handling. That requires a lot of work and time and even if you're taught how to do it you might fail because you don't understand the core of the strategy. If you know there are several "killer" players around that you might face then you will just not expose yourself to wasting weeks of playing a game you in reality have no chance of winning. It's like they have weapons in their arsenal you don't have access to. In order to get a taste of those weapons you need to invest more time than most have.

So it's actually very detrimental to GS if some people find killer strategies for either side and that becomes the norm. Just look at World In Flames with a huge rule page and errata after errata trying to fix things. You can actually never prevent players from being creative and exploit the game rules. That means you're hunting your own tail trying to tweak the game. You will never get it done.

Every time we make a change we end up with need for more testing and a risk of disrupting the game balance. E. g. if Morris hadn't used the German armor blob during testing to crush everybody in his path then we wouldn't have tweaked the balance in Russia so much. Instead people say the Axis have no chance against the Russians and we need to tweak back. I believe that most players would be crushed regardless of side by players like Morris and Supermax because they're not used to super aggressive play. We simply can't tweak the balance so the elite players feel it's balanced.

It's like optimizing a F1 car for e. g. Vettel or Alonso. They need a setup to set the pole positiont ime, but if a regular racing driver tries with the same setup they feel the car is so nervous they will crash. They're not good enough to use the fastest setup so they need a more "forgiving" setup. The problem with the more forgiving setup is that the F1 champions can't then drive the car to pole.

So balancing GS v2.0 for the elite players means that all the rest of us will end up with a game we feel is not fun or balanced at all.

Blathergut wrote:I think many of us are trying to get an understanding of how the Allies can lose so much and still be invincible.

I'm wondering the same myself. Where does Morris get the production to build all the units for North Africa and elsewhere after having lost so many units? He has low income each turn so the main income will come from convoys. They only show up every 4th turn so many turns he should only have PP's to repair losses and nothing more.

Blathergut wrote:mamahuhu...I think supermax is asking if you could describe what the russian strategy was that was so effective against you and by you in those games.

I think he knows what you're asking for, but he's too polite to refuse giving you the answer. I've asked before and got the answer that if you want to know you need to learn the hard way by playing against either of them. I don't have time for that so it would have been better to just explain the strategy and let us do our own analysis. Being a beta tester means you should be interested in getting the balance right and without the proper input then we can't tweak what we have to. So unless we're told what could be done and why then we can't make the tweaks Morris and Mamahuhu mean are needed to balance the game.

We're not competing in a world championship where you don't want to reveal any secrets about your strategy. We're betatesting trying to make the game more balanced before we release GS v2.1. So I hope Mamahuhu could take the time and actually explain HOW he defends with his Russians and western Allies against the Germans to ensure the Germans lose the game. They're the ones claiming that the Axis have no chance winning the game. That might be true, but then we need to hear WHY this is so.

The aborted game against Plaid perhaps gave one suggestion: the massed fighters used to constantly attack the German air and burn up oil and PP in repairs. But I do agree, the strategy should be explained in detail, in the beta section preferred, so it can be discussed widely.

Stauffenberg wrote:

Blathergut wrote:I think many of us are trying to get an understanding of how the Allies can lose so much and still be invincible.

I'm wondering the same myself. Where does Morris get the production to build all the units for North Africa and elsewhere after having lost so many units? He has low income each turn so the main income will come from convoys. They only show up every 4th turn so many turns he should only have PP's to repair losses and nothing more.

My guess is if there are troops showing up here and there, he must have neglected Research since he is "sacrificing" the UK, that means he can put troops out in the field with reasonable compability for 2 years. Adding these leaders that he so often uses they might get an slight advantage early to cause havoc. Maybe that is long enough to keep the axis busy....then US and USSR enters to take over.

Crazyg

Blathergut wrote:I think many of us are trying to get an understanding of how the Allies can lose so much and still be invincible.

Well, i am asking myself the same question. Looking at the british in my game, they keep getting pounded, and yet Moriss finds the PP to have a zillion troops in the Middle east, repair his FTR every turn. HE even twice repaired his CV. Also, a transport is right now on the sea with a FTR probably, and 2 more FTR in Russia, along with maybee other i cant see.

The PP just dont add up like that when you loose England...

I should be walking right over him witht he british. Yet, they still have 5-6 BB, 1 DD, 2 subs, 3-4 FTR, 1 bomber, say 10 INF, GAR...

IF i hadnt pounded on them i would understand... But with all the losses, it seems that the british are even beter replacing their losses than me and i havent neglected my troops in North africa.

You cant help but wonder where the british find all those PP's honestly.

Well, things are still going well for the Axis on all fronts. Russians still hiding, i suspect thay are lying lazily around moscow to defend the place. Well, ive got the troops in place and going into that direction.

First british fighters spotted in Russia... at 2-5 quality, they wont stand a chance against my FTR. Dont intend to get into a pro-tracted struggle against them however, my objective for 1941 is Rostov, and with the troops defending the cities there, i dont need anything but what i have and no heavy air support is necessary.

Guys,

One thing that hits me. Aren't you afraid of Partisans? I see most of the cities unprotected. If Partisan spawn there it will be pain in the ass to get rid of them...

supermax wrote: Well, i am asking myself the same question. Looking at the british in my game, they keep getting pounded, and yet Moriss finds the PP to have a zillion troops in the Middle east, repair his FTR every turn. HE even twice repaired his CV. Also, a transport is right now on the sea with a FTR probably, and 2 more FTR in Russia, along with maybee other i cant see.

The PP just dont add up like that when you loose England...

I should be walking right over him witht he british. Yet, they still have 5-6 BB, 1 DD, 2 subs, 3-4 FTR, 1 bomber, say 10 INF, GAR...

IF i hadnt pounded on them i would understand... But with all the losses, it seems that the british are even beter replacing their losses than me and i havent neglected my troops in North africa.

You cant help but wonder where the british find all those PP's honestly.

Convoys + building very few labs when they are cheapest - its very tough PP resource, more then enough to have army like Morris have.

Kragdob wrote:Guys,

One thing that hits me. Aren't you afraid of Partisans? I see most of the cities unprotected. If Partisan spawn there it will be pain in the ass to get rid of them...

I always am...

But right now priority is to go as fast as possible. Well pick up the pieces later

Actually I can see ALL middle east troops (other then garrisons) fighting for Kasablanka.
Don't you have spare troops to grab some free lands in Egypt and further?

If you will go all-out in USSR and stuck in soviet defences in 3 supply zone it all may end sad, by the way. Atleast it always end like this when I play axis.

Stauffenberg wrote:(...)

So balancing GS v2.0 for the elite players means that all the rest of us will end up with a game we feel is not fun or balanced at all.

This is exactly what I think is happening.

Max

Don´t know if it is already to late, but you might wanna put more effort in taking Casablanca to activate Spain. Situation is a bit serious. If you don´t it can easily backfire and lead to an early exit of Italy. If you succeed you will have valuable PP units gained and some extra units. Might come in handy...

In the east it looks like Morris will hold up behind the Donets river and south east of Rostov, so you should be safe to advance a bit further. I agree also with pushing on Moscow, cause you can´t gain that much in the south.

Crazyg

Crazygunner1 wrote:Max

Don´t know if it is already to late, but you might wanna put more effort in taking Casablanca to activate Spain. Situation is a bit serious. If you don´t it can easily backfire and lead to an early exit of Italy. If you succeed you will have valuable PP units gained and some extra units. Might come in handy...

In the east it looks like Morris will hold up behind the Donets river and south east of Rostov, so you should be safe to advance a bit further. I agree also with pushing on Moscow, cause you can´t gain that much in the south.

Crazyg

Well, with the landings in casablanca, 2 paradrops, 1 more INF corps and another Italian INF corps, i should be able to hold my own. Italy might be an issue, but with the quasi destruction of the british fleet, i wonder how they are going to land anything in italy.

I should also be able to send some air units once the bad weather sets in in Russia.

Besides, its not like i am not building ships with the germans...

As for russia, well it wont end sadly, believe me. I will stave off winter and then be read for another go at it in 1942. If i can dodge the allied 1942 landings, then i might just have a chance

Plaid wrote:Actually I can see ALL middle east troops (other then garrisons) fighting for Kasablanka.
Don't you have spare troops to grab some free lands in Egypt and further?

If you will go all-out in USSR and stuck in soviet defences in 3 supply zone it all may end sad, by the way. Atleast it always end like this when I play axis.

As for the soviet winter, dont worry, i wont get locked in a dire struggle. I know moriss want to draw me in as deep as possible and then contact my troops for me to slug it out. Well, he is going to be dissapointed.

As for the middle east, Not at the moment, no. When winter sets in russia, ill do something about it. My oil expenditure are already very highg, no need to expand them more.

If the us send reinforcement in the middle east while i am at it, all the better they will be far from france.

I don't think the strategy is hard to guess - its just a simple 'wear down' the Axis PP game

if you look carefully, he 'invites' a lot of aggression from the Axis to expend PP's then wins a straight PP fight with the US and Russia v's the Axis

I tend to agree with Supermax that their should be more benefit from taking England.

I have been thinking about this for a bit and I have an idea that I think might work and I hope could be easy to code.

How about you get full production from a captured city if you have one of its capitals?

Once you have a nation effectively 'absorbed' I don;t see why the production should be so severely impaired

If we look at it as a PP issue, we can then adjust things by PP values to get the right balance for the game

Actualy I (probably) know a cure from Morri's strategy.
Unsure until finished, as we are playing again now...
But probably it will work, I will let you know if.

How about if Britain is lost the Brits take a manpower hit, both to the pool and the per-turn manpower income.

Pete

it is difficult for me to describe it clearly. since I only had one experience of defeating him. Maybe I will conclude something next time .