Armor and Mech Blob - What Needs to Be Done?

[Morris]

ok , let's try . May I send you pbem ?

[Peter Stauffenberg]

ok , let's try . May I send you pbem ?

No. I don't like dealing with the blob. Better to make sure it becomes less lucrative.

[ncali]

I think it would be great if there was a screen showing the number of enemy units, with the suggestion included that there be a randomized error built in so it is not an exact number. I also think the case can be made for slightly increasing armour corps costs to say 85. As I mentioned, I like the soft limits proposed to deal with the blob - but I think I'd increase the maximum units somewhat to allow more flexibility and see how that worked first.

[Schnurri]

I don't like the blob but...if the Axis delays or doesn't do Barbarossa at all the Russians should be able to build quite a few MECH's realistically.

[Morris]

Hi Borger , How about you use Axis , I will use allies without armor blob . BTW , How is the size to be a blob ? 20? 30? Mech 15? 20?Armor

[Morris]

Hi Doug , It seems also control the Russia's Mech production. Even no Babarosa ,Russia only could build 12 Mech in 1942( is this including the original deploy Mechs ?)

[Aryaman]

Prior to the Summer of 1942 the Soviet tanks were organized in mech corps. This is what the game reflects.

Yes, but what I mean is that during play the soviet player has more incentives to build Mechs than Tanks and Infantry, while historically it was the opposite.

[ICED]

am playing a game that the russ player has about 10 mech (that i can see) -- about 5 tanks (that i can see) -- now the mech are 8/8 - his inf are 5/5 and tanks at 6/6-air at 5/5 -- 1/2 the mech are guards with leaders all over the place -- and its late apr 42 - his mech are as strong as my tanks - a little early for that much stuff i would think

[Peter Stauffenberg]

I can't see how the Russians can become that advanced without some kind of advantage. Are you playing with the option where the Russians can purchase guards units? I don't think they can get many guards if they need to earn them on the battlefield.

[Peter Stauffenberg]

Prior to the Summer of 1942 the Soviet tanks were organized in mech corps. This is what the game reflects.

Yes, but what I mean is that during play the soviet player has more incentives to build Mechs than Tanks and Infantry, while historically it was the opposite.

Why? They're already above the mech limit and must pay extra for each new they buy and if they get higher above the limit the extra cost increases. So they will be better off building up armor units to the limit as well.

[ICED]

yes we are playing with purchase guards -- but my point is -- even if we where not playing with it on - he could buy more mech at 8/8- am losing as much amror to his mechs- at less cost to repair ??

[Aryaman]

Prior to the Summer of 1942 the Soviet tanks were organized in mech corps. This is what the game reflects.

Yes, but what I mean is that during play the soviet player has more incentives to build Mechs than Tanks and Infantry, while historically it was the opposite.

Why? They're already above the mech limit and must pay extra for each new they buy and if they get higher above the limit the extra cost increases. So they will be better off building up armor units to the limit as well.

If that limit is indeed implemented that would be good for that, i was talking about the game as it is now.
BTW I have also played sometimes with Americans Air only armies, leaving the British to produce land units, maybe a limit on Air units could also be imposed?

[Peter Stauffenberg]

The limit applies to all unit types except garrisons, corps and destroyers. This can be altered in general.txt by setting a flag for each unit type to 1 or 0.

[Schnurri]

I don't think this penalization works at all. It is April 42 and I have 7 German TACs plus the Italian and Romanian and I activated Spain so have them as well. Costing me a fortune in oil. Game will end soon.

[ncali]

I was thinking some more about the "blob" and it occurred to me that focusing too heavily on the "blob" strategy itself may ignore some related issues. I think the fact is that even if the Germans could have fielded a super-large panzer force (at the expense of other ground forces and airpower), the "blob" of armour would not have been effective as it may be in the current version of the game.
Here are my thoughts as to why:
(1) First, armour has trouble in rough terrain, like cities and forest, against entrenched opponents. Without airpower to break up a defensive line, armour could easily bog down.
(2) A large armour force (without other ground forces) would be vulnerable to counterattacks and could not effectively cover a large front.
(3) Armour units would attrition and could struggle to replace losses, particularly if they moved very quickly.
(4) As previously mentioned, the Soviets would have known something about the composition of German forces and could have taken countermeasures - including research focus and build strategy.

And here are some thoughts as to other game rules that may be considered that would make the detrimental effects of the armoured blob less significant:
(1) Perhaps the surprise bonus against the Red Army lasts a little too long. It should only be a few turns before the Germans should have to be wary of counterattacks or more effective defenses. The Germans should not be able to "get away" with operating a larged armoured force without effective airpower or other ground forces.
(2) I think that if Moscow were threatened very early (say July or Auguest), Stalin would likely have taken his chances with the peace treat with Japan and withdrew some forces from Siberia. Why not have the Siberian force join the earliest of either (1) October of '41 as now or (2) when the Germans get within a certain range of Moscow or (if that doesn't work per current game mechanics) when they take key hexes near Moscow.
(3) I'm not sure how it works now, but why not have a bigger supply penalty until cities within a certain range of forces are repaired. This could simulate the stretched German supply lines.

[Peter Stauffenberg]

I don't think this penalization works at all. It is April 42 and I have 7 German TACs plus the Italian and Romanian and I activated Spain so have them as well. Costing me a fortune in oil. Game will end soon.

The limit in 1942 is 9 and you're below the limit so you don't pay extra at all. Only the betatesters have access to the change and it was sent just a few hours ago to them.

Air units use quite a bit of oil so if you have too many and use them for missions almost every turn then you burn too much oil. Saving up oil is very important for the Axis. E. g. you should have more than 700 oil in the reserve before you start Barbarossa.

Also look at the techs and know which updates give you an increase in oil consumption. You can focus on something else or decide to not upgrade to not get too much oil consumption per turn.

The Axis can't be on the offensive everywhere because they don't have the oil for that. You need to focus on your battles. If you fight heavily in the Med, Middle-East and Russia at the same time then you will run out of oil for sure.

[Peter Stauffenberg]

And here are some thoughts as to other game rules that may be considered that would make the detrimental effects of the armoured blob less significant:
(1) Perhaps the surprise bonus against the Red Army lasts a little too long. It should only be a few turns before the Germans should have to be wary of counterattacks or more effective defenses. The Germans should not be able to "get away" with operating a larged armoured force without effective airpower or other ground forces.
(2) I think that if Moscow were threatened very early (say July or Auguest), Stalin would likely have taken his chances with the peace treat with Japan and withdrew some forces from Siberia. Why not have the Siberian force join the earliest of either (1) October of '41 as now or (2) when the Germans get within a certain range of Moscow or (if that doesn't work per current game mechanics) when they take key hexes near Moscow.
(3) I'm not sure how it works now, but why not have a bigger supply penalty until cities within a certain range of forces are repaired. This could simulate the stretched German supply lines.

We will try out with the changes we have made now and then we will see. If we make too many changes at the same time we get a hard time analyzing the data. We also want to make sure the Germans have a fair chance getting to Leningrad and Moscow with normal play as well. So the changes have been done to hamper blob play only and not normal play. If you reduce the halved surprise recovery time in Russia then it will also affect normal play. We reduced it from 6 to 4 just prior to release. We also advanced the spawn time of the Siberian reserves from December 1941 to October 1941 just prior to release. I think we need to see the result of these changes first.

It's also possible we're discussing a moot issue after we've added the latest changes. Maybe people won't try to attack with 15 armor in May 1941 anymore.

[gerones]

(1) Perhaps the surprise bonus against the Red Army lasts a little too long. It should only be a few turns before the Germans should have to be wary of counterattacks or more effective defenses. The Germans should not be able to "get away" with operating a larged armoured force without effective airpower or other ground forces.

This was already reduced from 6 to 4 turns. We need to simulate that the soviets weren´t well prepared for war in summer 1941 and this effectiveness reduction seems to reflect this well. The real germans after the disaster of Kiev in september 1941 (where tons of russian soldiers were captured) were still able to encircle and destroy many soviet armies in october 1941 in the Vyazma-Bryansk pockets. October is 6 turns after Barbarossa starts. It seems that the soviets had a hard time until they can recover from the initial huge losses. Only the unlimited manpower of USSR could make possible that recover. We were used in vanilla game to a strong USSR from the start of Barbarossa and this did not reflect well what happened in WW2.

(2) I think that if Moscow were threatened very early (say July or Auguest), Stalin would likely have taken his chances with the peace treat with Japan and withdrew some forces from Siberia. Why not have the Siberian force join the earliest of either (1) October of '41 as now or (2) when the Germans get within a certain range of Moscow or (if that doesn't work per current game mechanics) when they take key hexes near Moscow.

IMO Moscow can only be threatened that early (july or august) if the axis player is determined to take Moscow in 1941. This supposes to also use armoured forces in the assault of Moscow. But this also supposes not to properly progress in other zones of Russia like the south or Leningrad. So here you are a similar dilemma for the germans like in the real war happens: Army Group Centre captured Smolensk in july 1941 and they could have continued advancing to Moscow but they were finally ordered to advance towards south to close the pocket of Kiev in co-operation with Army Group south.

[LOGAN5]

I think I changed my mind about the blob, it needs to be fixed.. I built only mech as soviets and was able to completely crush barbarossa even with all the penalties and marched straight into berlin within a matter of months.

[Plaid]

I think I changed my mind about the blob, it needs to be fixed.. I built only mech as soviets and was able to completely crush barbarossa even with all the penalties and marched straight into berlin within a matter of months.

Did you play vs AI?