Slitherine

zechi wrote:

Morris wrote: Hi Borger : It will not only take 30 minutes for me to explain all details of my point .

Even if it takes a little bit longer, it would be really helpful if you would explain your strategy in detail. You are part of the Beta-Testing group, i.e. you should give your best to improve the game.

I donot agree that nothing prove from the AAR between Plaid & me . even if Plaid add two more panzer ,it still could not change the situation there .

Perhaps, but you can’t know it for sure. Furthermore, there are other things in the game which were greatly in your favour, like the invasion of Sicily. You got lucky that you captured Palermo so easily and quickly, even without any supply source. Would have Plaid repelled the invasion, then the game would have taken another direction. Plaid also did not play perfectly when he switched to the defence in the east (placing wrong units in the first line) and he could have defended Sicily much better.

So if Supermax gain this advantage ,maybe he will show you a prove that Axis has a chance to defeat Allies on the base of the present 2.01 ; but if Supermax unfortunely lose the game by carrying such great achivement in 1941 ( ocuppy England &Scotland ,whole Vichy France，& maybe plus Giberoto & Spain ), Will you accept that the game is unbalance at present ?

From my point of view this will prove nothing at all, neither if Supermax wins nor if you lose. Supermax is an extreme player who takes extreme risks, so his playing style is not very representative (but very entertaining, interesting and full of surprises).

As Plaid said the fatal problem which the Sicily mission caused was PP consumption of the FTR's fight , even if I did not take the Palermo so easily,the Ftr's fight still there , since My CV & malta air base were there .

regarding to the defence of east , I think Plaid had almost done a good job ! Your opinion is so easy to say because you are a watcher of the game & provide your words after the game . Anyplayer will make mistakes during the game , during the present AAR with supermax , we both made a lot mistakes , I made much more than him , but I still have hope to win , If supermax made as many mistakes as mine , Game will be over soon .

Morris wrote:Hi Borger : It will not only take 30 minutes for me to explain all details of my point .

I think you don't see my main point, i. e. TIME. If we're supposed to tweak the game balance we need to know WHY. How can we actually alter things we don't what is? We haven't seen how you defend with the Allies. Therefore we can't fix anything, if there actually is anything to fix.

I think it should be very easy for you to explain how to implement your strategy. E. g. something like this.
Russia: Get 3 labs in armor (focus blitzkrieg), 3 labs in general (focus organization). Then labs in infantry (focus artillery) and air labs (no focus). Form the main defense line along the Don in 1941 with a fallback position to the Volga if the Germans get too close. Build 10+ armor units in 1941 and place them in the south for a strong counter attack.

UK: Ignore labs and just build land and air units that can be placed in France and UK (if Sealion). Send units to Russia via Persia.

USA: Get labs in armor and air and some in infantry with focus on artillery and build only armor/mech and air with the goal to land in France in 1942.

By bleeding the Germans with the UK you give Russia a chance to counter strike with an armor blob late 1941. Many Axis units should be destroyed and that means a much weaker Axis 1942 offensive. If USA lands in force in 1942 (or 1943) in France then the Axis will fight on 2 fronts etc.

The above text is just an example of what can be written. Then we can have a discussion why the Axis can't deal with that strategy and suggest game balance tweaks.

As long as we don't know the "winner" strategy for the Allies we can't do anything about it and that means GS v2.1 that will be released will NOT contain such a tweak. Is that really better than not taking the time to explain WHY you feel the Axis have no chance? Isn't the purpose of being a beta tester to find such situations and tell the developers about them so they can be fixed?

I just can't tweak the game balance in favor of the Axis without knowing why it's necessary. With pretty normal play it seems the Axis can do quite well with the latest changes.

I simply won't change the balance again for no apparent reason. We need to know something is broken so we can fix it. We also have to replicate the situation by letting others try. If you can stop every Axis attack, but nobody else can do it then the game balance is not broken. Then you're better at playing than the rest of us.

In order to find real game balance issues we need to let quite experienced, but not elite, players try out strategies and see how the balance is. That's why we need to know the strategy you're using so we can try it out as well and see if we can stop every Axis attack using it. If we do then we have a problem. If we fail it many times then there is no problem.

So I agree with Zechi that game reports from you, Supermax and other elite players aren't as useful to analyze the game balance. The AAR's are fun to read, though.

We can't hope to have the game balanced for every playing style. It seems to me that being very aggressive with the Axis is a way to increase the Axis chances to win. Not all players are comfortable with that and they might struggle. Maybe aggressive Allied players increase their chances too. How you play will determine the end result more than the tweaks we make to the game balance.

Morris wrote:Will you accept that the game is unbalance at present ?

No, I will not. First of all. In GS v2.01.24 that will be out then the western Allies can't send units into core Russian territory. So it's not possible anymore to send e. g. 4 UK fighters to southern Russia. That will affect how you defend in Russia.

We might consider doing something about the UK max morale if they lose London. E. g. dropping it by 10 for all units until USA joins the Allies.

We can do something abou the convoys as well like sending the northern convoy to UK instead of USSR if London and Liverpool are Axis controlled. The reason would be that UK would give priority to liberate their lost home territory instead of risking sending a convoy all the way to Murmansk without even a chance to support it near Scotland.

That means you can weaken the Russians by taking out England and you force the British to work hard to get their home country back. They can't actively help the Russians until they get Liverpool or London back. Then the convoys will resume.

If we implement such changes then I think your strategy in Russia will fail against players like Supermax. You would also have been defeated in Africa more easly due to the 10 morale loss from loss of London.

Stauffenberg wrote:

Morris wrote:Hi Borger : It will not only take 30 minutes for me to explain all details of my point .

I think you don't see my main point, i. e. TIME. If we're supposed to tweak the game balance we need to know WHY. How can we actually alter things we don't what is? We haven't seen how you defend with the Allies. Therefore we can't fix anything, if there actually is anything to fix.

I think it should be very easy for you to explain how to implement your strategy. E. g. something like this.
Russia: Get 3 labs in armor (focus blitzkrieg), 3 labs in general (focus organization). Then labs in infantry (focus artillery) and air labs (no focus). Form the main defense line along the Don in 1941 with a fallback position to the Volga if the Germans get too close. Build 10+ armor units in 1941 and place them in the south for a strong counter attack.

UK: Ignore labs and just build land and air units that can be placed in France and UK (if Sealion). Send units to Russia via Persia.

USA: Get labs in armor and air and some in infantry with focus on artillery and build only armor/mech and air with the goal to land in France in 1942.

Your guess is great . It seems you know me much than myself . But I have to add one point ,everything will adjust by the particular case in each pbem . For examnple, the main defence line is up to the style of Axis , if axis is very agreesive like Supermax , I will make it more back maybe .If axis Babarosa in 1942 , I will move it much forward . Regarding to the lab , I usually forcus on industry . German's organization is already very high at the begining .

Stauffenberg wrote:If we implement such changes then I think your strategy in Russia will fail against players like Supermax. You would also have been defeated in Africa more easly due to the 10 morale loss from loss of London.

I completely disagree with your point ! we may have another AAR to show who will be defeated then !

Stauffenberg wrote:
If we implement such changes then I think your strategy in Russia will fail against players like Supermax. You would also have been defeated in Africa more easly due to the 10 morale loss from loss of London.

I completely disagree with your point . I will invite Mr supermax to have an new AAR (if he will accept my invitation)on the base of the coming 2.01.24 . We will see who will be defeated .