Slitherine

McGuba wrote: ↑Thu Feb 06, 2020 3:21 pm In 2.0 there are probably more Soviet units on the map in the beginning, but many of them are "frozen" whereas in v2.1x there are less pre-placed units, but more reinforcements in 1941-42. The latter gives more freedom to the Allied player and makes the job of the Axis player harder as he cannot massacre hordes of valuable but immobile units like artillery. I think it is better and more realistic this way. Although in v2.0 most frozen units do activate if Moscow is captured, the Axis player could exploit it by not taking one victory objective hex in Moscow. However, it is no longer like that in the latest v2.1 beta 4.

Hmmm. Ok. Then its my ineptitude. In Single Player 2.0 I took Moscow and the Soviet counterattack was pretty hefty. Peter took all of Moscow in MP as well.
I began a game against Pete, he took all of moscow (no 1 hex exploit), I was waiting for that wave that constituted the soviet counterattack in my SP to materialize in my game vs Pete as well - thinking Red hoards are just around the corner I threw my unfrozen units at Pete's advance (instead of shielding them) and they got overrun. By turn 30 he's driven me basically to the Volga. Lesson learned: pull your units back, lest you will have nothing to defend with.

Then I started a paired match 2.14 with Uhu, and here my impression is that I just had more units to play with as the Soviets... perhaps it's just an erronous impression because I took better care of them and didn't waste them, but I could swear I got more tanks and Inf between the center and southern fronts and I am doing a better job there. It was a surprise. 'oh, I got all these toys to play with?' The same surprise for me as Axis, as I tried to recreate Pete's eastward run to the Volga, only to smash against Uhu's Red Wall (and I was like 'where did this come from'?)
All in all, I have to say that 2.14 feels 'better' than 2.0 for me.

However, it is also to be mentioned that Alex is doing a great job here!

@Alex, as you know yourself, maybe you have played a bit too offensively in the beginning (e.g. around Moscow) but this game is not lost for the Allies yet... and for a long time not even close to be won for the Axis as the real fun/trouble will start very soon for the Axis ...

PeteMitchell_2 wrote: ↑Thu Feb 06, 2020 9:11 pm However, it is also to be mentioned that Alex is doing a great job here!

@Alex, as you know yourself, maybe you have played a bit too offensively in the beginning (e.g. around Moscow) but this game is not lost for the Allies yet... and for a long time not even close to be won for the Axis as the real fun/trouble will start very soon for the Axis ...

I know, I know. This was is far from over.
and that defensive aggregation was at fault.
but it was based on a question: should one throw everything one has (including the kitchen sink) at the axis because there are reinforcements on the way, or not?
It seems important when planning the strategy to be able to anticipate what SOV forces one can expect. Uhu told me that I can get the info in the editor, but alas, the editor map scrolls with the speed of a snail and keep 'jumping' (cant find a better term) so I was hoping there might be a description for the less technically inclined ^^.
It's ok, live and learn and avoid the mistakes next game.

alexfilip wrote: ↑Fri Feb 07, 2020 7:40 am It seems important when planning the strategy to be able to anticipate what SOV forces one can expect.

Yes, I hear you man. Previous knowledge of the scenario indeed helps a lot. But it is also changing from beta to beta as I try increase the balance so that both sides have a more or less equal chance to win. I think it is getting better and better with each release, slowly-slowly.

In general, I would say that do not rely on hoping for more reinforcements before starting an offensive, just rely on what you have at the moment and then if you get some more units in the next turn, just take it as a nice unexpected surprise. Then you cannot go wrong too badly.

In winter 41 a limited offensive here and there is possible with the Allies, but overdoing it may also have its drawbacks. In our current match with Uhu with v2.1 beta 2 I defrosted almost the entire Soviet army after taking Moscow early which resulted in an all-out Soviet counter offensive. Although it was really successful in the south near Rostov, causing me heavy losses and halting my advance, at other areas he achieved much less and I could destroy lots of Soviet units which he was missing during the defense in 42.

Other than that, the spawning of Soviet units follows the historical production rates i.e. for each 1,000 tank produced the Soviets get 1 tank unit (although in this mod 1 tank unit represents 200 serviceable tanks - the rest makes up the reserve pool of the same unit: when it is damaged losses can be replaced from that pool). In 1942 they produced some 12,000 T-34s so 12 of these should appear during that year. 4,000-5,000 T-60 and T-70 were produced each so there will also be 8-9 light tanks. (And it is about the same with air units.) In 1943 they produced 15,000 T-34 so 15 new T-34 tank units can be expected, but only if the situation is more or less the same as historically. After the Axis (unhisorically) capture one or more important industrial and population centers like Moscow or oil some fields, these numbers can be reduced. Therfore, since the number of new Allied reinforcements depend on how successful is the Axis advance, it is impossible to create such a document as that would require a seperate document for each alternative history path. In one, only Moscow is taken by mid 42, in another Leningrad as well, in a third one only Stalingrad, and so on, and so forth. In each case there would be different new reinforcement units for the Soviets.

McGuba wrote: ↑Fri Feb 07, 2020 7:06 pm

alexfilip wrote: ↑Fri Feb 07, 2020 7:40 am It seems important when planning the strategy to be able to anticipate what SOV forces one can expect.

Therfore, since the number of new Allied reinforcements depend on how successful is the Axis advance, it is impossible to create such a document as that would require a seperate document for each alternative history path. In one, only Moscow is taken by mid 42, in another Leningrad as well, in a third one only Stalingrad, and so on, and so forth. In each case there would be different new reinforcement units for the Soviets.

Roger that
Also, I agree that 2.1 feels more balanced so far.

alexfilip wrote: ↑Fri Feb 07, 2020 9:05 pm

McGuba wrote: ↑Fri Feb 07, 2020 7:06 pm

alexfilip wrote: ↑Fri Feb 07, 2020 7:40 am It seems important when planning the strategy to be able to anticipate what SOV forces one can expect.

Therfore, since the number of new Allied reinforcements depend on how successful is the Axis advance, it is impossible to create such a document as that would require a seperate document for each alternative history path. In one, only Moscow is taken by mid 42, in another Leningrad as well, in a third one only Stalingrad, and so on, and so forth. In each case there would be different new reinforcement units for the Soviets.

Roger that
Also, I agree that 2.1 feels more balanced so far.

Personally, I don't mind if the MP mod is unbalanced at different points in time (showing actual history)... if possible, it can be balanced overall of course (e.g. first Axis strong, then Allies strong)... on the other side, to me and IMHO, the Axis don't really have to have the possibility to win this as they were outproduced 4:1 in reality...

PeteMitchell_2 wrote: ↑Sat Feb 08, 2020 9:41 am Personally, I don't mind if the MP mod is unbalanced at different points in time (showing actual history)... if possible, it can be balanced overall of course (e.g. first Axis strong, then Allies strong)... on the other side, to me and IMHO, the Axis don't really have to have the possibility to win this as they were outproduced 4:1 in reality...

Agreed.

double post..

Actually I think, exactly that happened with the latest changes: both sides became more balanced in the given time periodes.
As I played now several versions with Pete, McGuba and Alex, I feeld the difference from both sides and the mod is just going better and better!

PeteMitchell_2 wrote: ↑Sat Feb 08, 2020 9:41 am

alexfilip wrote: ↑Fri Feb 07, 2020 9:05 pm

Roger that
Also, I agree that 2.1 feels more balanced so far.

Personally, I don't mind if the MP mod is unbalanced at different points in time (showing actual history)... if possible, it can be balanced overall of course (e.g. first Axis strong, then Allies strong)... on the other side, to me and IMHO, the Axis don't really have to have the possibility to win this as they were outproduced 4:1 in reality...

alexfilip wrote: ↑Thu Feb 06, 2020 11:33 am is there a list of triggers for either version? I am talking about a document

@Alex: I think what could be prepared manually (based on our collective knowledge) is some basic overview of
a) major events (i.e. what happens/can happen at certain turns, many things are dependent on overall situation)
b) possible objectives (i.e. what could/should be achieved by when)
e.g. as some sort of orientation (of course based on a certain strategy... maybe there are more than one strategy, of course )

Possibly for both Axis and Allies... (such a document would be a bigger spoiler for first time players, of course ... so not too sure actually)

GeneralWerner had done something similar (re point b) once for SP, maybe compare here if interested:
viewtopic.php?f=145&t=82546

PeteMitchell_2 wrote: ↑Sun Feb 09, 2020 8:15 am
@Alex: I think what could be prepared manually (based on our collective knowledge) is some basic overview of
a) major events (i.e. what happens/can happen at certain turns, many things are dependent on overall situation)
b) possible objectives (i.e. what could/should be achieved by when)
e.g. as some sort of orientation (of course based on a certain strategy... maybe there are more than one strategy, of course )

Possibly for both Axis and Allies... (such a document would be a bigger spoiler for first time players, of course ... so not too sure actually)

GeneralWerner had done something similar (re point b) once for SP, maybe compare here if interested:
viewtopic.php?f=145&t=82546

Thank you: another question occurred to me: what is the starting prestige for the Axis in MP hotseat barbarossa?
I started a game with Uhu with starting prestige 1290 in turn 1 for Axis. V2.14
I picked 'General' Level, only change to settings was dice chess. Uhu said starting level makes no difference in hotseat.
Pete just told me that the starting prestige in our game (where he is axis, V2.0) is 2850.
Could there be some error in my installation? Or is it the differences in game versions?

Hi. I played this mod back a few years ago, but so much is changed since then (and also my memory of strategies used)

Any tips for invading the UK? I tried a winter 41/42 invasion, but so far failed (but I also messed up too much in the east, so need to restart from turn 1 anyway). I tried to gather my naval units, and escort my troops over, but it seems hard to get a decent amount of troops on land with mines and all.

- Invade at all, or focus on Soviet/Africa first?
- If invading- when? Early like I tried, or later?
- How much troops and planes to redirect?
- Which landing spots do people like to use?
- Dealing with mines - trying to kill them, or move around?

Appren wrote: ↑Sun Feb 09, 2020 12:07 pm Any tips for invading the UK? I tried a winter 41/42 invasion, but so far failed (but I also messed up too much in the east, so need to restart from turn 1 anyway). I tried to gather my naval units, and escort my troops over, but it seems hard to get a decent amount of troops on land with mines and all.

Many people have tried various different approaches on this... especially GeneralWerner, JimmyC and Uhu have written (AARs) about it, too. So many timings and possible landing sites seem available. Here is my view on the topic (starting around turn 21, preparations already early, almost from turn 1):
viewtopic.php?f=145&t=86481&start=40#p734555

Appren wrote: ↑Sun Feb 09, 2020 12:07 pm - Invade at all, or focus on Soviet/Africa first?

Depends on your objectives, for a DV you need take the victory objectives in the UK/on the British Isles, too. Plus, if you hold one victory objective in the UK, you can prevent D-Day...

Appren wrote: ↑Sun Feb 09, 2020 12:07 pm - If invading- when? Early like I tried, or later?

I would advocate an early invasion. At that point in time your Luftwaffe has still a chance and you can avoid many UK/US bombers on Germany from 1943 onwards.

Appren wrote: ↑Sun Feb 09, 2020 12:07 pm - How much troops and planes to redirect?

Depends on many factors I guess, my above AAR link shows what I had when I did it back then (however please note, version 1.9 and 2.0 or later might be different re Operation Sealion)...

Appren wrote: ↑Sun Feb 09, 2020 12:07 pm - Which landing spots do people like to use?

There were (successful) examples from most directions. However, some might be more efficient/effective. I preferred from the south. Big problem is having no spot to land (i.e. as the AI is blocking the entire coast) or once you got on land, your troops might surrender due to British artillery fire (i.e. being pushed back into the sea).

Appren wrote: ↑Sun Feb 09, 2020 12:07 pm - Dealing with mines - trying to kill them, or move around?

Some you need to clear to get access to the British coast but I wouldn't bother about clearing too many as the bigger problem are occupied coast hexes on land (IMHO).

Hey and let us know in case you are interested in MP as well?

alexfilip wrote: ↑Sun Feb 09, 2020 8:50 am Thank you: another question occurred to me: what is the starting prestige for the Axis in MP hotseat barbarossa?
I started a game with Uhu with starting prestige 1290 in turn 1 for Axis. V2.14
I picked 'General' Level, only change to settings was dice chess. Uhu said starting level makes no difference in hotseat.
Pete just told me that the starting prestige in our game (where he is axis, V2.0) is 2850.
Could there be some error in my installation? Or is it the differences in game versions?

No, it is because of the different versions. In 2.1x there is less presige in the beginning, but more later. I found that in the earlier versions there was too much prestige initially that the players tended to waste, and then too few later when the advanced and more expensive units become available. Therefore in the latest version the starting prestige is significantly lower, and the initial normal per turn prestige (without U-boats on convoy bonus) is lower as well, 290, as opposed to 450 in the earlier versions. However, there is an increase in turn 25(?) when it goes up to over 450, and then another in 1943 when it becomes even higher. Finally, for players in the losing path there can be one more fixed prestige income increase in 44.

But in the latest version the player only gets the default maximum per turn prestige if he keeps alive a certain number of Minor Axis infantry units - different numbers for each nation (and it is all explained in a seperate message box). So basically they should not be used as cannon fodder or having disbanded to free up core slots. But freeing core slots is less important as the maximum number of core slots also goes well over 200 in two steps in 42 and 43.

McGuba, a few questions. As usual, fan of this mod for years so thank you for your hard work.

First, regarding your supply system, like how units must go to Germany to upgrade. I get that, and understand (and grudgingly) support your logic behind this. However, my questions are first...in Italy, Romania, and Hungary respectively....would it be possible to have one upgrade depot per country for ground units? For example: Budapest, Bucharest, and Rome (or Turin) as these were the central hubs of each nation, and they had significant amounts of supply?

Second, a proposal. In Africa for example, the main Axis supply hub was Tripoli. It seems to make little sense to me that these units are stuck just as they are so with the respect that places like Tunis, Tripoli, Tobruk, and Alexandria were major ports and supply hubs, would it be practical to have an upgrade depot in those spots? Africa is a bit of a sideshow in this scenario as opposed to the Eastern Front, then Western Front, but important nonetheless.

Third, Soviet Union. As the Axis pushed deeper into the country, major cities fell under their control. Would it be practical to make cities, for example, upgrade depots like Stalingrad, Kharkov, Vorenezh, Moscow, Rostov? There were historically major supply depots in these places that the Germans used. This makes the fighting in the scenario all the more important and in my opinion, fun. The Soviets will always be launching vicious counterattacks at these locales.

There are some other cities where units can be upgraded, including in Africa, this message is from the beginning of the scenrio:




Budapest and Bucharest are not included as in that case players would take there all their German tanks for upgrade as those are closer to the eastern front which would be weird. On the other hand, taking Hungarian and Romanian units for upgrade to Germany is not so weird as it actually happened a few times when they received training there for German equipment.

There are some Soviet upgrade cities as well, but currently only in the multiplayer version. And these are closer to the Ural where the main factories were moved. These are cities like Ufa, Perm, five cities all together.

Turn 91 of the match between Uhu and me... Allied victory...

Casualties
Ground Map
Air Map

Anyone up for a new game/match?!

PeteMitchell_2 wrote: ↑Tue Feb 11, 2020 3:41 pm Turn 91 of the match between Uhu and me... Allied victory...

Congratulations on the victory!
And both player with the completion of the game
It looks like every day you did 1 turn.

I updated the multiplayer list. Check it out.
https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/ ... 1907476535

Thanks!

Well, we played around three months but also with a few breaks due to some travel (mainly on my side). Thanks for updating the multiplayer list!

We may also share some lessons learnt, will see...