• Blitz Shadow Player
  • Caius
  • redboot
  • Rules
  • Chain of Command
  • Members
  • Supported Ladders & Games
  • Downloads


Moscow '42 balance opinions thus far?
04-08-2013, 09:30 AM,
#9
RE: Moscow '42 balance opinions thus far?
You bring up several points which I have seen in different (PzC) games.

When I defend a map, the first thing I do is add up the victory points in objectives that I can surrender to the enemy. I then compare it to the actual victory levels. If I can get a victory by pulling back, I will pull back. Some scenarios you can evacuate the whole map and win.

I seem to play the Russians a lot. Kharkov '42 and Stalingrad '42 being the largest and I noticed some movement issues. Non Guard Russians usually cannot assault after moving one hex. As Comrade stated, that means the Germans can back up a hex a turn and minimize any damage to just one round of shot. In Stalingrad, it usually meant that I had 1000+ Russians shoot once after moving..and after a few turns would end up breaking the retreating Axis units, so in that case it may not be a bad thing. When I play Moscow I would probably do the same thing..except there they usually have terrain.

Another movement anomaly I noticed was that Russian foot on (non primary) roads do not move any faster in travel mode then in non travel mode...if you take into account losing 1/3rd of your movement to leave the mode. And that doesn't even factor in the windiness of the road. Or the fact that your division will end up strung out along the road.

As well, I noticed the same thing about being unable to meet actual historical objectives in the historical amount of time. While I believe the game favours the attacker..it does seem to favour the defender for delay. During Operation Uranus, it took the Russians from the morning of the 19th to the 22nd to encircle the Germans. Being generous I call it 40 turns in game. But the distance the army has to travel to do this encirclement is 100-120 hexes. Without any enemy units on the map, infantry cannot make the distance in the right amount of time, let alone make it while opening a bunker line.

And yet, on a much finer scale.....it would be ludicrous to give Russian infantry tactical mobility as it would imply an ability to react to changing conditions.

At the very least, all infantry should be able to assault after moving one (open) hex. They should be able to shoot if they move two hexes.

Objectives (in HtH play) should be put down on the map with end turn conditions in mind. I find it very silly when a 750 turn scenario (like Normandy) has objectives that fall on the first day. Really...500 points for a beach hex? I know the AI needs the help though. It should also be possible to achieve a Minor victory at least by objective points alone. Make the defender want to defend them.

As for casualties coming back...I did notice that in Normandy I could regrow some of the German divisions in a couple of days to full strength. In some ways that is good, as it keeps the pressure on the attackers up, and gives an incentive to pulling back and resting units.. But you have to give the attackers the ability to overcome this rate. And the problem I found in Normandy was the German soft attack and assault values were just too high...causing the allies far more causalities then they could do in return.
Quote this message in a reply


Messages In This Thread
RE: Moscow '42 balance opinions thus far? - by Liquid_Sky - 04-08-2013, 09:30 AM

Forum Jump:


Users browsing this thread: 21 Guest(s)