Okay, so the russian stuff really sucks in game?

[RSColonel_131st]

I'm a bit peed off right now. Been playing a PBEM in heavy urban settings.

Before this PBEM, I played mostly small QBs with german armored engineer platoons, same settings. In '42, they have six (small six-man) squads per platoon, one HQ, and seven 251/1 HTs. I found this to be a very flexible combination, where the infantry mostly scouts and close-assaults inside buildings while the HTs deliver all the fire support you need in the streets.

Okay, so for this PBEM, I picked the russians. To try and remodel my tactics, I picked a company engineers (two platoons with 3 squads each) and 7 M3 scout vehicles (which cost about the same as the 251/1 HT and seemed to be about equal).

Now, as it turns out, the russian stuff really sucks. Command delays of over 20 seconds for a simple movement order? They get pinned by MG fire from less than 200 meters but can't spot the enemy position? And when you bring in the M3 Scout for fire support, it RETREATS in the face of a plain boring MG42 and never even returns fire. Oh, got taken out as well by an MG42 salvo - in the first turn of LOS with the enemy.

Somehow, compared to the german material I played with earlier, the russian stuff just seems to really badly suck. My germans would easily spot the enemy, move quickly and without delay, then bring in the HTs to pin and destroy. The russians are busy sulking around getting shot without ever spotting what hit them.

Huh?

I'm sure there are some excellent players who adapted to the russian methods. But I'd have never thought that this is such a night/day difference.

[Tagwyn]

NIce post Col. Thanks, just reinforces my belief in these games and how well they are crafted. Tag

[RSColonel_131st]

Do you ever post something that doesn't insult someone (in this case BFC)??? Don't use my post to latch your thinly veiled provocation on.

I'm sure that there are certain advantages to playing russian side which a trained player will be able to exploit.

But what I can not see is how anyone who's used to german infantry and armored vehicle tactics should use russian stuff.

[imported_no_one]

This can not be!!!You mean that you have to use different tactics for each side?No way!

Stop playing the silly little QBs over and over and start learning instead of complaining.The Russian stuff works just fine,if you know how/when/where to use it.

[stoat]

Some one woke up on the self-righteous side of the bed this morning.

[imported_no_one]

Originally posted by stoat:

Some one woke up on the self-righteous side of the bed this morning.

To whom is your post directed?

[RSColonel_131st]

Originally posted by no_one:

This can not be!!!You mean that you have to use different tactics for each side?No way!

Yes, no way!

The underlying tactic is simple enough. Infantry draws fire, uncovers the enemy and assaults the last 30 meters; armored infantry carriers provide the needed heavy fire support. Anti-Tank Teams, ATRs and Infantry Guns stand by to support.

One would expect, given that the russians have the same kind of engineer infantry squads (similar weapons, similar demo charges etc.), and the same kind of armored vehicles with mounted HMGs, that you could use the same tactics.

In fact, I really don't understand why a 251/1 HT will drive right up to an enemy infantry squad and shoot holes in them all day long, while a M3 Scout (similar armor thickness, TWO MGs) craps his pants and waddles backwards to be taken out by 7.62mm fire.

Or why a german 6-man engineer squad will spot the origin of incoming fire easily at 200 to 300 meters, and in the same settings a russian squad can be beaten up all day long without ever unveiling what hit them. Neither squad is listed as having Binocs.

So, your post was unnecessary. The simple fact is that I would have expected, using the same kind of equipment, that I would be able to use the same kind of tactics. There is absolutly no visible clue that explains why the russians can not do this.

[stoat]

Originally posted by no_one:

</font><blockquote>quote:</font><hr />Originally posted by stoat:

Some one woke up on the self-righteous side of the bed this morning.

To whom is your post directed? </font>

[imported_no_one]

Originally posted by RSColonel_131st:

</font><blockquote>quote:</font><hr />Originally posted by no_one:

This can not be!!!You mean that you have to use different tactics for each side?No way!

So, your post was unnecessary. The simple fact is that I would have expected, using the same kind of equipment, that I would be able to use the same kind of tactics. There is absolutly no visible clue that explains why the russians can not do this. </font>

[imported_no_one]

Originally posted by stoat:

</font><blockquote>quote:</font><hr />Originally posted by no_one:

</font><blockquote>quote:</font><hr />Originally posted by stoat:

Some one woke up on the self-righteous side of the bed this morning.

To whom is your post directed? </font>

[RSColonel_131st]

For what it's worth, I think I just solved the problem. Me and my friend will try a "cooperative PBEM game" where we mail a savegame around, each of us commanding half of the german forces against the AI.

That way we can use our favorite tactics and leave the stuff we don't know about to the computer. And coordinating an assault between two separate "platoon commanders" certainly will be fun.

[stoat]

Originally posted by no_one:

This can not be!!!You mean that you have to use different tactics for each side? No way!

Right off the top you come off as deragatory. What was RSC doing? His idea was to "try and remodel my tactics." Ideally, scouting with engineers, followed by suppression/elimination with light armor could work with forces of any nation.

Stop playing the silly little QBs over and over and start learning instead of complaining.

Maybe QBs aren't the epitome of realism, but what is wrong with other players playing them? The scenario in question wasn't a QB, and I doubt RSC plays QBs exclusively.

How I am self-righteous for stating the obvious?

What did you state that was so obvious?

Or did you just get up on the whinny punk side of the bed this morning

I most certainly did not wake up on the whinny side of the bed, but instead the left side.

[imported_no_one]

Stoat,

First off,it was supposed to be derogatory.Do you know how many inexperienced players I have seen post this same,whinning crap on these forums because something didn't go the way they had hoped in a PBEM?If I had a dollar for each time I could probably go 1/2 a year without working.

Second,if you had taken the time to read and comprehend what RSC wrote,you would have seen that ,yes,he does/did in fact almost exclusively play QB's.And,I don't see anywhere that the scenario in question was a scenario.Also,when someone plays QB's(and I am primarily refering to the ones where each opponent gets to buy their own stuff)this is the result that you get.They get complacent from playing with the same forces,in the same settings,ad nauseam.A scenario will often require you to learn to use obscure equipment that you are not accustomed to,and probably don't want to be.

Finally,the thing that I stated that was so obvious is that you are dealing with two different nationalities and their equipment.How the heck can you compare a M3 scout car to a German HT?If you had said a M5 and a German HT then you may have had some credibility.Also,a MG42 can dish out better firepower that any of the Russian LMGs or even a maxim.

[RSColonel_131st]

Originally posted by no_one:

Stoat,

First off,it was supposed to be derogatory.

'nuff said.

Well, in this case you are violating the forum usage agreement you agreed to when you signed up here.

Certainly in there is no provision/article that allows a poster to insult other posters just because you feel "the same whining crap" has been posted before.

Who exactly made you the forum police?

I suggest you pack up and leave this thread quietly now, after having the nerv to openly state that you feel like you have any right to be derogatory towards other posters. Do we really need to busy the mods with this? I don't think so, so say nicely goodbye and stop playing Forum Police.

[RSColonel_131st]

Oh, and as for your other rant about QBs vs. Scenarios and everyone buying his own forces:

Again, it is not up to you to decide how others should play the game. No one died and left you in charge of guarding this forum against the evil bad people who don't play CMBB the way you play it.

It is unbelivale arrogant that you think you have any right to insult other posters who happen to have an opinion contrary to yours. And, like I said, it is against the forum agreement, so if you can't behave yourself in a civilized manner, find another forum.

Kthnxbye.

[Andrew H.]

Russians can be very effective, but in '42 you can't play them like Germans. This means you want more infantry and you have to use a fairly methodical and conservative approach that takes into account the fact that you won't be able to react quickly.

In an infantry heavy battle with a lot of cover, I like to use green troops - they're not as fragile as people seem to think, and the increased numbers that you get make up for their green-ness...particularly if the German has opted for vets or crack troops that further reduce his numbers. If you don't like the idea of greens, use no better than regulars - you want numbers to count.

How many points is your game? 750? 1000? I would be tempted to buy 3 SMG companies (not platoons, companies) (that's 690 pts), and round out the rest of the point with ATRs and other support weapons.

The approach you take would vary depending on the terrain, but a reasonable way to attack would be one up, two back. Your first company (which probably outnumbers your opponent's entire infantry force) should try to locate, engage, and fix the enemy infantry force you find.

Once again, there are a lot of things you can do here, but a good next step would be, once you've found the enemy infantry, to just shoot at them with your company, preferably from close range - your smgs should give you better firepower than him. Plus - he will start to run out of ammo while you still have two companies in reserve. (At least if things work properly).

If you were German, your next move after fixing the enemy would probably be to use your other squads to manuver for a better position. Sometimes you can do this with russians, too (and using a company to flank a platoon is impressive), but often its best just to hang back and let the first company fight it out with the Germans. When the first company is shot up and/or out of ammo - perhaps after some close assaults - you can then bring up your next company, often right through (or beside) the first one. But don't be in too much of a hurry to bring in the second companies - you're going to suffer a lot of casualties fighting the Germans - you might as well suffer most of them in one company. And remember, you still have a third company in reserve.

This is the best way of using russian troops that I know of - and it's very different from using German troops. But I think it's quite effective.

[RSColonel_131st]

Sounds like massive human wave tactics, not very "pretty" but I can see it working.

[imported_no_one]

Originally posted by RSColonel_131st:

Oh, and as for your other rant about QBs vs. Scenarios and everyone buying his own forces:

Again, it is not up to you to decide how others should play the game. No one died and left you in charge of guarding this forum against the evil bad people who don't play CMBB the way you play it.

It is unbelivale arrogant that you think you have any right to insult other posters who happen to have an opinion contrary to yours. And, like I said, it is against the forum agreement, so if you can't behave yourself in a civilized manner, find another forum.

Kthnxbye.

Oh boo hoo.I am insulting because I didn't hold your hand and explain to you how you were WRONG?You were the one complaining that the Russian stuff sucks,as if it wasn't modeled correctly,or something.If you had taken the time to do a search you would have found many other threads that had people complaining just like you.

Besides,if you didn't want to have an open discusson then you shouldn't have posted this in the first place.

Stop trying to "win the argument" with some technicality bull crap instead of simply admiting that you were wrong.Heck,you don't even have to admit it.Just listen to the advise that you get,and apparently wanted.

[stoat]

Originally posted by no_one:

I am insulting

That's all that I was saying.

[ November 15, 2005, 04:55 PM: Message edited by: stoat ]

[imported_no_one]

Originally posted by stoat:

Originally posted by no_one:

</font><blockquote>quote:</font><hr /> I am insulting

That's all that I was saying. </font>

[stoat]

Your initial post was not helpful, nor educational.

[imported_no_one]

Originally posted by stoat:

Your initial post was not helpful, nor educational.

I disagree.

The Russian stuff works just fine,if you know how/when/where to use it.

This counters the posters main idea,and states that it will work just fine when used in the way it was intended.

Based on his statements,this is possibly the first time that he has played as the Russians.I find it ridiculous that based on that he reached the conclusion that "the Russian stuff sucks".I thought that such an inexperienced player wouldn't need much more than that to persuade him that he was incorrect in his assumption.Obviously I was wrong.

[stoat]

You could say that any country's stuff works just fine if you know how/when/where to use it.

Obviously, the Russian stuff can be used to effect in most situations. But saying "it works if you do it right" can be said of almost anything, CM or otherwise.

[JasonC]

Nobody seems to have noticed that the supposedly sensible German tactics are a complete fantasy, at best a stupid AI trick. Against any competent player you'd just die. Light armor is ridiculously easy to kill, including with light, stealthy shooters.

The Russians don't use light armor, they use infantry and full tanks. Which is a better combination against anyone who knows what he is doing, anyway. Take a platoon of T-34s and a platoon of SMG tank riders. They cost less than the German force and will kick its ass all day.

[zmoney]

stoat said:

I most certainly did not wake up on the whinny side of the bed, but instead the left side.

No, I was pretty sure the Left side was the whinny and weenie side, but other than that I see where your coming from.

Anyway Col. I often use the same tactic as the Germs when I'm pretty sure there is no cannons or tanks etc. around. But like Andrew said the Russians in game and in RL tended to use their advantage in numbers and close range weapons to their advantage. Thats why the infantry units in game are so cheap. That really goes for just about all russian equipment in game. Also like stated before the MG42 was a much more powerful weapon than the Russian maxim, and had more penetration value. So thats why your Russian crew backed off.

IMO the Russian equipment all around, wheather it be armor or infantry weapons are way better suited up close. Like the tanks with thick armor values, quick speed and poor optics were designed to close with the enemy. Smg sqauds as well are second to none at close range and in an urban environments. Where as Germans with great optics, high powered guns and slower speed makes them better for longer range fighting.

Lastly, I'm not 100% sure maybe Jason C or some other knowledgeable person can correct me; The German Pioneer units were elite troops where as the Russian Pioneers wheren't, they where just dudes tasked with that job. So that might explain the German Pioneers spoting better than their Russian counter parts.

P.S. I think/ hope tagwyn was complimenting the designers on how good of a job they did modeling different units strengths and weakness's, like I kind of attempted to explain between the pioneer units of each country. If you were trying to bash them, then get lost and quit posting here.

[ November 15, 2005, 08:49 PM: Message edited by: zmoney ]