AAR Hellraiser (Allies) vs Terif (Axis)

[Terif]

As a contrast to the game vs Liam as Allies, here now an opposite game as Axis against Hellraiser on the same day :

As used to with my luck, everything here went perfect for Hellraisers Allies :

- Warsaw got conquered in turn 3, but Poland refused several turns to surrender and continued to fight even with only 3 units left till December 1939.

- In the west the french campaign started with the standard LC and Denmark turn 2. But when Allies got clear weather 2 turns later they employed a new aggressive approach and landed with a UK amphib in Brussel (delaying the Norway invasion for this till April 1940) that was empty due to the polish refusal to surrender. Together with a french army they managed to kill one of the german airfleets standing next to it. Germanys counterstrike got hindered by mud and later winter weather so they came through with it nearly untouched and UK was able to evacuate its forces in LC by using fisherboats via Dunkirk while the german tanks had to halt only a few miles away due to the bad weather. France nevertheless fell with the first clear turn at May 5, 1940 the destroyed airfleet already rebuilt. Research and diplo at full capacity – diplo in Spain with 5 chits since turn 3.

- But Axis diplomats were obviously bribed by allied agents...the first diplo hit in Spain (8 Axis chits, no counter diplo by Allies) came in December 1940 after 18 turns diploing the country...Spain never joined Axis (happened only 3 times so far during the last around 100 games)....while Allies got one hit after the other in Iraq and USA...USA already joined in February 1941.

- Research went also perfect for Russia with IW 3, AT 3, HT 2 (Germany HT 0, later HT 1) and Motor 1 at Barbarossa, Siberians already were equiped with Motor 2. Western Allies not so successful at first, but till the real battle in Spain started USA also got IW 3.

Like used from Hellraiser he executed a very aggressive approach as Allies. Took Brussel in September 1940 for some turns till Allies got finally kicked out by several german armies and tanks, defending Norway when Axis entered Skandinavia via Sweden and later started an extensive Med campaign.

Barbarossa started August 31, 1941 by occupying the usual border cities in the north and approaching Leningrad with heavy airsupport, Odessa and Kiev got conquered turn 2.

Since Spain was still neutral, Axis decided to be more defensive in Russia and collect first some more minors than usual to leverage their economy. So Yugoslavia and Greece got conquered additionally to the usual minor feast (Vichy, Switzerland, Syria, Tunisia). Allies dowed Iraq, Iran and Vichy Algeria. In Africa an allied task force landed and forced Vichy Algeria to surrender and later did the same with Ireland. So in the end Axis had only a slight morale boost and in its own turn got not above 150% morale and 120% readiness – even this effect was soon over. But since in Russia no battles took place, this didn´t matter anyway. Russia invaded Finland with 2 tanks and several armies, but retreated without a shot after german elite forces arrived while airstikes nearly killed one of the red armies.

Axis approached fast Leningrad, cutting it off in October 1941 and conquered it before summer 1942. Siberians arrived in March 1942, but in the south it was trench warfare – or something similar...later more .

In the meantime Axis conquered all minors, accompanied by heavy fights in Africa. Allies lost several corps at Algier before it got finally liberated by a strong german task force. The push towards Cassablanca however got stopped by several allied bombers and airfleets (Long Range 2) combined with US armies and UK corps. So the german survivors retreated to Algier and entrenched deep into the mountains while countless enemy bombs let the earth above them tremble each turn...The italian fleet moved into battle when the weather cleared up with a hit and run tactic: so they lost only one cruiser while the enemy fleet had to mourn about 5 sunk ships in these battles . Allies bombarded the whole coast till Tunisia the turns before, but after these losses they didn´t dare any more to move with their ships past Algier.

In Spring 1942 Germany finally invaded Spain with 2 HQs and a dozen combat units. Allies landed reinforcements in northern Spain and conquered Portugal, establishing a US outpost with several armies + HQ during this campaign. But after a last heroic battle around Madrid, Spain nevertheless surrendered to Germany. Portugal got liberated a few turns later despite heavy bomb showers by 5 allied bombers/AFs and 4 carriers – the axis troops had to achieve their goals without any air support since all Axis air was needed in Russia.

In the east Axis was not as strong as usually when Spain regularly joins Axis via Diplo, so Axis didn´t expose their units to a possible counterattack in the south but instead prepared a little trap :

Since no real battle took place in Russia during the first year after Barbarossa and with excellent tech for the russian ground forces, a mighty army including Siberians gathered around Kharkov and the mines. To give them the first strike would have been deadly, so Axis removed all guard units except a romanian army in Odessa from this area and sent them to hide in the swamps around Kiev to wait for their opportunity.

And they didn´t have to wait too long: In June 1942 Russia started its summer offensive with everything they got via Odessa towards Romania. Russia knew some Axis forces were waiting at Kiev for them, but as revealed after the war, expected them to be not too strong and only be a minor threat with Axis just busy in Spain and Africa. So the russian forces avoided the north and moved directly towards the romanian oil.

The romanian army got a medal postum for their willingness to sacrifice themselves for the greater goal and the axis units stayed quiet and hidden...preparing the deadly blow... while their comrades got slaughtered and slaphappy russian units moved by some hexes south on their way into the romanian death trap... In Romania an amhip transport additionally unloaded at the coast, hoping for an empty capitol – but there it found only a fully entrenched army waiting for such an expedition .

So when the oilfield was under attack from 4 sides by russian units, it was the right time and Germany now unleashed its deadly counterstrike starting from Kiev and the swamps around it - supported by 6 elite axis airfleets. The spearhead with several high experienced armies and tanks aimed to cut the invasion force off from supply and their possibility to retreat by taking back Odessa. In the first 2 turns of the strike Russia lost all its 4 tanks and several corps + armies. A russian airfleet standing in Romania got slaughtered by german soldiers on the ground. Heavy losses for Germany too since Russia now threw everything into battle....Germany had to rebuild a dozen units...but at the end of the day, Russia had lost all its previous power and had nothing left than a few battered armies and corps. Some units got stranded in Romania when Odessa fell to Axis and hunted down later. So Russia had no other choice than to operate what was left far back to Rostov and Stalingrad. Kharkov and the mines now fell without a fight to Axis. Since Russia had nothing left, the north was also more or less undefended, so Moskov, Voronezh, Vologda and Gorky fell in quick order.

When Axis finally conquered Rostov in October 1942, with their whole army approaching Stalingrad and in the west just Portugal and Spain had been fallen too, Allies surrendered unconditionally. At that point Germany had built all available corps, armies and tanks as well as several units from the minor nations to protect their coastal cities. Russia blooded dry on the other side and also quite some losses for Western Allies in the battle for Iberia and Africa.

France was never threatened – the first time Axis built extensive fortifications through whole France from Bordeaux till the german border...but they never saw any action or even enemy units nearby .

[ October 20, 2006, 05:33 PM: Message edited by: Terif ]

[jon_j_rambo]

Yodl is on a roll.

[Blashy]

That's weird, Hellraiser not using an AF to spot German troops. He must have been drinking, hehe.

I tried to do that maneuver and also had two people try and do it to me twice. Each time no one fell for it because we saw the mass of troops in the swamps and around Warsaw.

That was not one of Hellraiser's better days or I should say, better move .

[n0kn0k]

Wow, sounds like an awesome game.

This really makes me wanna have a replay/demo recording function.

[Terif]

Airfleets only have a spotting range of 4 - so no way he could have spotted the troops there without kamikazing the AF by moving it too close to them - both AFs were placed in the Odessa area, nevertheless he only saw a small part of the gathered Axis forces.

And the most important one:

Russia had 4 tanks, 10 armies and a dozen corps there all with IW3, AT3, HT2, Motor 2. A dozen Axis units was still fighting in Africa and Spain, so Russia thought it could handle whatever would be standing at Kiev .

[Kuniworth]

Originally posted by Terif:

Russia had 4 tanks, 10 armies and a dozen corps there all with IW3, AT3, HT2, Motor 2. A dozen Axis units was still fighting in Africa and Spain, so Russia thought it could handle whatever would be standing at Kiev .

So in other words; axis got all the advantages and can afford slip ups?

[Terif]

@Kuniworth:

Just read the other AAR here - both sides are balance in V1.04. Axis have no initial advantage. It depends on the actions of both players which side will win .

Slip ups or bad luck can be compensated by both sides if they take the right consequences and change their plans accordingly - only if someone surrenders too early he has lost, in the course of the following years there is always the chance to change the tide of the war again if you are willing to fight for it.

There are many luck components in SC2, but as my last 100 games show (no loss ), the players decisions are much more important and can compensate any bad luck - SC2 is pretty robust as far as I can tell and strategy matters much more than any random influences .

[ October 21, 2006, 02:49 AM: Message edited by: Terif ]

[Desert Dave]

And so,

Unlike the unfearing,

Yet, become-vulnerable Max Schmeling

Of yester year,

Terif the Myth

Remains!

Undisuputed - SC World Champeen!

Roll out the barrels of non-Gaullic Champagne!

__________________________________

OK, down to business,

And now - a pertinent question:

Given what you have learned after 100 + games,

And,

Given that you claim that V 1.04 is "balanced,"

**What changes would you MOST like to see

For V 1.05?

Proviso: that would MAINTAIN your perceived "balance."

Excluding "excessive morale boosts"

Due to ruination of hapless Minors.

How about a short list, say, ~ 5 or so.

Or more,

If you feel like it.

Conversely, don't do it if you don't, etc.

Thing is this... best way to learn HvsH play,

As many will say, no - nix - insist!

Is to play... the very best.

We got some feisty Cats doing just that,

Like Liam & Hellraiser and Rambo jr,

And so they ALL contribute

To the "learning curve"

For all still in class-room.

Cool. :cool:

And yet... playing Myth Ist Terif,

Is NOT the same

As emulating, or duplicating,

Or even,

ACCOMPLISHING his sehr assorted Strategems.

Since,

We sure realize,

He has... his S&T... in depth.

IOW,

No good to merely COPY.

Must also have, at minimum,

TWO YEARS planning - extending outward until

That apparently insignificant little move

Several YEARS prior, becomes

Ack!

HUGE in a later oft awful... Achtung! LOL!

Good show.

Excellent write ups.

Nearly TOTAL... Mojo Mastery.

Ball-hat must come off.

[... worn forward, as is de rigeur

for actual... Players, yep!]

[Terif]

Changes for V1.05:

Since according to the various announcements it already includes all important things mentioned in the tech forum (like morale boosts, liberating countries with other nations than the parent etc), I have no open wishes at the moment - in V1.04 it is balanced and both sides have many opportunities and possiblities for different strategies .

The only small thing I have not found covered so far that comes in my mind is a comfort thing for TCP play:

That enemy units don´t disappear immediatly during the same turn under the FoW when the unit that can spot them gets killed, as well as the air units that were just in action. They only appear for a split second and then are again under the FoW so ATM this forces the player a bit to stare at the monitor not to miss something - would be better if already spotted units would stay visible till the end of the turn and then when the turn ends disappear under the FoW and not before.

[Desert Dave]

How about for Solo Play?

Should you ever do such a thing, I mean.

You must?

Mustn't you? :confused:

Estimates are 80% do play it thatta way, mostly, even if to "practice" moves... and now, it's happening!

AI is very much improved... so, maybe?

*For instance,

Do you think the "balance" has been achieved

In North Afrika?

For solo-play?

If not, what would you do DIFFERENT in that Theatre?

______________________

And,

You are no longer concerned with the game being

TOO "offensively oriented?"

As you had stated in the past.

Several times.

[Terif]

Can´t comment on solo-play since I didn´t play the AI - not a single game so far .

SC2 is still offensively oriented with the high attack values - that is also why mpps don´t matter that much here in contrary to SC1.

It is very unlikely you get into a trench or attrition warfare, so the mpps of the opponent don´t determine the outcome of the game. The only important thing is that your side has enough mpps to keep their war machine going - especially true for Axis .

Allies are usually far outproducing Axis throughout the game, but as long as Axis have intact combat forces and enough mpps to replace their losses, they are able to kill much more enemy units/mpps than they loose since they are the offensive power and can choose where and when to strike and with the advantage of the inner line can concentrate their forces whereever needed. As Allies on the other side it is important to choose the right defensive positions so they don´t loose too much more than Axis and can build up for a counterstrike.

In the right terrain and with some fortifications to cover the weak spots, it is possible to establish strongholds where the enemy can´t attack directly and only with overwhelming forces if he doesn´t want to risk loosing his units to a counterattack. And that´s the art of SC2 war: to know where and when to defend and also to be willing to give up certain (undefendable) areas in order to free units for the fronts where an advance is planed.

Allies have the numbers, but Axis the inner line - so both sides have to be played completely differently .

In Africa both sides have the choice if they want to fight for it and they both can conquer it. Here it is quite balanced and it depends on the abilities of both sides who will finally get Africa . Allies have a good entry point in Cassablanca for Western Allies and Middle East for Russia while Axis can reinfoce its troops from Italy and Spain. Interesting battles for Africa happen more and more as players now slowly recognice that it is possible and worth to fight for Africa - only a few minutes ago a game ended where my Allies were in the process of conquering Africa via Cassablanca and Iraq .

[ October 21, 2006, 09:24 AM: Message edited by: Terif ]

[Desert Dave]

All these assorted gambits

Are - Not TOO!

1) Exploitive? (... I keep hearing, rather SEEING that word on the boards... often)

2) A-historical?

3) CONTRARY to "traditional" WW-2 GS gaming

as we've come to know it over 50 + years, board or computer?

4) Strategems that were NEVER EVEN CONSIDERED by the actual WW-2 leaders, are really OK?

5) No need for ANY small adjustments?

6) Not "off the mark" that a GErman Panzer can kill off a Russian Corps, or even, an Army... 10 to nothing? Whole Army destroyed, no losses to the panzergrenadiers?

[... I am thinking of the many games where 2:1 attacks cause significant casualties for the attacker; 1:1 attacks even worse, possibly utter ruin and retreat]

7) No problem with GErman air fleets that can reach 4 or 5 medals by 1942 or 1943, when the Allies have NO medals?

**IOW, "experience differential" has NO bearing on the outcome, or, perhaps more importantly, the good FUN in playing the game?

OK, I am likely pushing the oncoming tide back into the moon-beam Sea here,

But I am EQUALLY concerned that the "Solo Gamers" will have a similar amount of "competitive excitements" that the HvsH players do.

Ever improving AI, and some of the Mods help, it is certain.

Thanks for responses thus far, and any further commentary RE: above questions, as you please. :cool:

[Terif]

Points 1-5:

This depends on your personal preferences and how you see what is historical or not - when looking at the forum, there seem to be many different opinions if a certain action is now historical accurate / possible or not .

SC2 is a game and here you have not endless, but lots of different possibilities to wage the war - and that´s what makes the fun in playing it. Depending on your opponent and the current situation you can choose between many different options .

Point 6:

Tanks with high Heavy Tank levels are in deed monsters - here a limit like at IW and AT could be useful as long as the system stays this way (my original proposal concerning tech to Hubert was to halve the tech effect, i.e. each level increases combat values only by 0.5 points instead of 1.0 and then remove the tech cap - would reduce the offensive bias in SC2 and not everyone would have maxed land techs more sooner than later).

Nevertheless 10 to nothing can only happen if the enemy (=usually Russia) didn´t research Anti-Tank - but in every normal game all sides get till around 1942 AT level 2-3 and then the tank also looses 3-4 strengh points with each attack. Since a high level tank is worth 2-3 times the mpps of a corps, the tank is not really in the advantage then .

Point 7:

No, there is no problem so far. Even when airfleets have full experience, ground units are still more cost effective in an open battle. Airfleets are most useful for special operations where certain key spots need to be conquered (like Leningrad).

Experience at all is no problem. For ground units it makes no real difference anyway with the high combat values. For air units experience is more important as long as they are on anti-ground missions. But when the enemy sends own airfleets for cover, they will loose their experience just like the ground units, especially since in any longer war both sides will research jets. So it is up to each player if he covers his ground units by own air - or if not, then he only has to use the right terrain so the enemy air gets no free shots at them .

[John DiFool the 2nd]

A number of potential German moves were..."politically

impossible", in that Hitler, due to his determination

to keep on the attack (for whatever reasons: Big Ball

contest with Stalin, keep morale of the troops up,

propaganda value back home, etc.) would simply never

consider them. Terif's gambit, while audacious and

ultimately successful, simply would have never crossed

Adolf's mind.

I could see the Germans doing something like that

in May-July '42, but since Hitler felt he HAD to

stay on the offensive from start to end, and

embarked on the ultimately unsuccessful Citadel

plan. It would have been interesting to try a

"retreat to attack later" series of traps in 1943;

I tried it in Schwerpunkt's RGW, but that game has

a chance of non-disengagement when attempting

manual retreat from armored units so I lost too

many in the withdrawal.

[Liam]

Terif is right Offensives and concentrated firepower bare the most fruit in this game, but at the cost of what? You have to balance your Checkbook before you do it or you may leave a front open to collapse. Every move has a countermove, it only know which to perform, how to perform and most of all after you've the basics when!

Now there is some plus to hit run, hide and then hit again. Attacking builds the most Experience, which is a big plus for Air Units, those valuable strength points are better used attacking then being dwindled in air combat. Attacking also gives you the option to choose the battlefield

but if you should hide and execute a perfect counterstroke, it could be deemed a trap ? This game is a lot like chess, mobilization and attack... You can stalemate chess, but since the Axis have say 3 Queens and the Allies have seen 15 pawns, not really advisable, plus your GameBoard is a lot bigger

Originally posted by John DiFool the 2nd:

A number of potential German moves were..."politically

impossible", in that Hitler, due to his determination

to keep on the attack (for whatever reasons: Big Ball

contest with Stalin, keep morale of the troops up,

propaganda value back home, etc.) would simply never

consider them. Terif's gambit, while audacious and

ultimately successful, simply would have never crossed

Adolf's mind.

I could see the Germans doing something like that

in May-July '42, but since Hitler felt he HAD to

stay on the offensive from start to end, and

embarked on the ultimately unsuccessful Citadel

plan. It would have been interesting to try a

"retreat to attack later" series of traps in 1943;

I tried it in Schwerpunkt's RGW, but that game has

a chance of non-disengagement when attempting

manual retreat from armored units so I lost too

many in the withdrawal.

[Hubert Cater]

Tanks with high Heavy Tank levels are in deed monsters - here a limit like at IW and AT could be useful as long as the system stays this way (my original proposal concerning tech to Hubert was to halve the tech effect, i.e. each level increases combat values only by 0.5 points instead of 1.0 and then remove the tech cap - would reduce the offensive bias in SC2 and not everyone would have maxed land techs more sooner than later).

This is a good idea and one I considered but the problem is the data type I used for this specific unit attributes which was INTEGER... going to REAL would break the data map and make all unit maps for any mods null and void which is never good after the game is released.

So far all data changes have been pretty much Campaign extensions so it preserves the structure of the original data, i.e. allowing for import/export of all the sub data, but not breaking anything already set out from v1.00.

Often I don't go into such detail on why I do or don't implement various ideas but I think this might give everyone an idea on why some things are easier and/or more desirable to do than others and how you often have to balance out change with compatability and well... just how it can get pretty messy and complicated if you are not careful.

BUT, if things go right, there is nothing stopping me from doing major overhauls for the future

[SeaMonkey]

Well it is so good to see some of the "big name" players touting SC2 balance, I'm in complete agreement.

Many times I have seen players surrender in a condition that is easily salvageable, one of the reasons I almost never concede.

To me SC2 presents many occasions throughout gameplay to alter the situation, significantly, ie. there is much ebb and flow, much opportunity.

A lot of players feel they must create something critical in the early stages when in fact I believe it is better to avoid that situation and wait. Like a cagy cat, patient, awaiting the prey to assume a vulnerable position, perhaps helping to lead them down that path.

This AAR is a perfect example. Just because it was Terif that sprang the trap doesn't mean that other less capable SC2 players can't receive the same benefits. It is "SO" possible in SC2 that anyone can do it.

And just because you may become a hapless victim does not mean that you have lost...not by a longshot, "what goes around, comes around".

As far as the tech levels, especially for the ground units, I would like to see IW3, AT3, and HT5 become a more drawnout affair. Maybe reducing the % chance they happen in the early years with an increasing % as time moves on.

Ideally, the max levels for most of the techs shouldn't be realized until 44 or 45, predominantly. Still the unpredictability of war needs to be viable in SC2 so that in perhaps a very very small % those upper level tech values could be attained.

My feeling is that as all tech levels rise there could be a higher % variable that would allow the attainment earlier, due to byproducts(knowledge, ideas, discoveries) of researching.

In this manner players would be rewarded for a more diversified tech investment strategy.

[hellraiser]

Originally posted by Blashy:

That's weird, Hellraiser not using an AF to spot German troops. He must have been drinking, hehe.

I tried to do that maneuver and also had two people try and do it to me twice. Each time no one fell for it because we saw the mass of troops in the swamps and around Warsaw.

That was not one of Hellraiser's better days or I should say, better move .

Nope, in fact I didn't care to spot them - I knew Yoda is up to no good lying in ambush near Kiew. I foresaw a counterstrike aimed at my spearheads and kept a sizeable force near Kharkow for a counter-counterstrike. But they failed me, and thus failed the people of ussr dream to get the world rid of nazism

I guess I put too much faith in my reserve force - I deliberately chose this as a turning point - and indeed it was Had my tactic paid off, his axis would have suffered a very serious setback.

Game was pretty wild indeed, but apparently I still have to grasp some things before I become fully competitive

[Gavrok]

Hubert

If attack/ defence numbers can only be integers what about doubling each attack/ defence value and making the tech up steps only 1. This may capture the same effect that you like.

Gues the current attack/ defence formulas may then need examination......then more follow on effects would impact

Probably being naieve here with this solution

Thanks

G

[Hubert Cater]

Yeah as you suspected it can get messy if you are not careful... I have some ideas for down the road though as partial step ups is a good idea whether it is by whole numbers or by real

[Blashy]

I don't know what everyone finds wrong with current Offense and Defense.

If you find it too much of a offensive game, then simply making defense values equal to offensive values will be enough.