Philo32b wrote:That Kazan fight was something. I've never wanted to stop "winning" battles before, but I certainly wanted the ride to stop there.Too many more victories like that and my force would have been toast.
Pyrrhic victories? At least you have some victories.
1919 seems promising. You hear the singing? Those are the White troops marching out to the battleline.
"Let bullets fly
And cannons roar
Let trenches make new borders
We will bravely make our dash forward
For we are Russian Soldiers!"
For united Russia!
Orel wrote:1919 seems promising. You hear the singing? Those are the White troops marching out to the battleline.
"Let bullets fly
And cannons roar
Let trenches make new borders
We will bravely make our dash forward
For we are Russian Soldiers!"
Obligatory:
[video=youtube;zZqVOFSYRWI]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zZqVOFSYRWI[/video]
One day I will defeat you, Orel. It is a historical inevitability.
le Anders wrote:Obligatory:
[video=youtube;zZqVOFSYRWI]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zZqVOFSYRWI[/video]
One day I will defeat you, Orel. It is a historical inevitability.
"Raze banks and prisons to the ground"?... Aha! So *that's* how Altaris' Reds are undermining my regional capitals!
(I must keep my secret agenda for more banks and prisons a better secret from now on.)
I just re-downloaded and installed the last files I received (on 1/9), which was the late Oct. 1918 turn, which I now see I then submitted last Thursday. You folks must have received another email with the Nov turn on 1/10, Friday, but mine must have been filtered out or something before it hit my in box. I will email Durk and ask him to email it again to me. Sorry for the delay!
Orel and I agreed we would not recognize any independence in this game. Also, on the topic of house rules, I am not using any fighting units from the interventionists, although I did agree up front that I could use material (such as tanks, HQs, boats) and supplies that they provide. After starting the game I didn't know how interventionist leaders should be categorized so I decided to leave them out of it as well.
Yikes! Those Anarchists turned out to be pretty useless after all! Wish I had my 11 NM (4 from activating them, 7 from the battle of Kharkov lost) back now!
Don't know if that will ultimately spell the death knell of the Reds or not, but it definitely hurt!
I seriously underestimated how tough the Southern Whites are. After all these battles at Kharkov, I don't think I've destroyed even 1 White unit yet.
Don't know if that will ultimately spell the death knell of the Reds or not, but it definitely hurt!
I seriously underestimated how tough the Southern Whites are. After all these battles at Kharkov, I don't think I've destroyed even 1 White unit yet.
Altaris wrote:Yikes! Those Anarchists turned out to be pretty useless after all! Wish I had my 11 NM (4 from activating them, 7 from the battle of Kharkov lost) back now!
Don't know if that will ultimately spell the death knell of the Reds or not, but it definitely hurt!
I seriously underestimated how tough the Southern Whites are. After all these battles at Kharkov, I don't think I've destroyed even 1 White unit yet.
Kharkov is the Civil War Verdun. I, to be honest, missed the activation of Anarchists by you and had not expected them to be at Kharkov. Probably the only reason why I held is because of having so much cavalry, that becomes the gift of Mars during the winter due to decreased time to the assault phase.
For united Russia!
And I was partly expecting you were going to move at least 1 of those Corps out of Kharkov. I also expected that Mankho's expert withdrawal ability would get me out of a bad jam... but didn't turn out to be the case.
Lesson learned, the hard way
I have noticed that in general losses tend to be a whole lot higher in this game than other AGEOD games. And the morale hits are brutal!
Will probably be tomorrow night before I get a chance to work on this one, pretty busy tonight.
Lesson learned, the hard way
I have noticed that in general losses tend to be a whole lot higher in this game than other AGEOD games. And the morale hits are brutal!
Will probably be tomorrow night before I get a chance to work on this one, pretty busy tonight.
Altaris wrote:And I was partly expecting you were going to move at least 1 of those Corps out of Kharkov. I also expected that Mankho's expert withdrawal ability would get me out of a bad jam... but didn't turn out to be the case.
Lesson learned, the hard way
I have noticed that in general losses tend to be a whole lot higher in this game than other AGEOD games. And the morale hits are brutal!
Will probably be tomorrow night before I get a chance to work on this one, pretty busy tonight.
Admirable attack on Kuban you've made. I still cannot overcome its' effect.
By the way, have you studied the historic Russian Civil War?
I have to warn all, I may have some difficulty sending orders starting from tomorrow to the middle of next week. I will do my best to keep the pace of the game as is, but I'm telling this just in case.
For united Russia!
I have studied a fair amount of Russian history in the 19th and early 20th centuries, not much specific to the civil war itself though. I like the different works on Russia that British historian Orlando Figes has written, I read one about Russia from the reign of Nicholas II to the early years of the revolution (and it does contain about 100 pages on the civil war), and another about life during Stalin's rule, both were really fantastic, and seemed to be very well researched and vetted with actual Russians (western history tends to have a negative slant on Russia, in my experience, (likely due to the decades of Cold War) - I thought Figes did a good job of trying to present the history from the Russian side rather than typical western approaches. But being American, I concede I'm not an expert in this area of history.
No worries if the turns slow down a bit, I'm actually pretty tied up this week too.
No worries if the turns slow down a bit, I'm actually pretty tied up this week too.
Altaris wrote: (western history tends to have a negative slant on Russia, in my experience, (likely due to the decades of Cold War)
Before that -Why do you think the Entente between Britain and Russia was secret- try the Crimean War (Constantinople could have been European today if not for Perfidious Albion).
What turn are you two on now?
Well, Crimea stemmed out of the Great Game, which was more of Britain vs Russia thing than West vs Russia. I was thinking more along the lines of US opinion, which is almost always anti-Russian... that was due to Cold War.
We're in March 1919 turns now. I took a massive nose-dive to < 60 NM after activating the Blacks, and having them get utterly demolished the next turn (-4 NM for activating them, then -7 NM from the big battle losses, plus a few more here and there). I had taken Ufa with Trotsky, but as soon as the good weather came out, Trotsky lost 1200 CP worth of forces to the Siberians. I think a lot of that had to do with cohesion down < 40%.
The really bad thing is that I've yet to inflict any sort of meaningful unit losses on either white player, they've taken some casualties, but hardly any destroyed elements. That's bad, that means he's bouncing back from any losses I inflict in pretty much no time at all.
Don't know that it's completely over yet, but looking pretty bad for the Reds. I overestimated how capable the Red soldiers were, I think, and played a bit too aggressively with them in 1918. The really are crap soldiers, largely due to abysmal cohesion levels.
We're in March 1919 turns now. I took a massive nose-dive to < 60 NM after activating the Blacks, and having them get utterly demolished the next turn (-4 NM for activating them, then -7 NM from the big battle losses, plus a few more here and there). I had taken Ufa with Trotsky, but as soon as the good weather came out, Trotsky lost 1200 CP worth of forces to the Siberians. I think a lot of that had to do with cohesion down < 40%.
The really bad thing is that I've yet to inflict any sort of meaningful unit losses on either white player, they've taken some casualties, but hardly any destroyed elements. That's bad, that means he's bouncing back from any losses I inflict in pretty much no time at all.
Don't know that it's completely over yet, but looking pretty bad for the Reds. I overestimated how capable the Red soldiers were, I think, and played a bit too aggressively with them in 1918. The really are crap soldiers, largely due to abysmal cohesion levels.
Altaris wrote:Well, Crimea stemmed out of the Great Game, which was more of Britain vs Russia thing than West vs Russia. I was thinking more along the lines of US opinion, which is almost always anti-Russian... that was due to Cold War.
We're in March 1919 turns now. I took a massive nose-dive to < 60 NM after activating the Blacks, and having them get utterly demolished the next turn (-4 NM for activating them, then -7 NM from the big battle losses, plus a few more here and there). I had taken Ufa with Trotsky, but as soon as the good weather came out, Trotsky lost 1200 CP worth of forces to the Siberians. I think a lot of that had to do with cohesion down < 40%.
The really bad thing is that I've yet to inflict any sort of meaningful unit losses on either white player, they've taken some casualties, but hardly any destroyed elements. That's bad, that means he's bouncing back from any losses I inflict in pretty much no time at all.
Don't know that it's completely over yet, but looking pretty bad for the Reds. I overestimated how capable the Red soldiers were, I think, and played a bit too aggressively with them in 1918. The really are crap soldiers, largely due to abysmal cohesion levels.
In reality, neither the Reds nor even Makhno himself cared about his army. If in trouble, I would hear Makhno would leave his army and get away with his personal guard armed exclusively with Lewis machine guns. So, I think the VP points for Anarchists should be modded(I'll probably do that in the mod I am working on).
It might sound surprising, but our game(the one where me and Altaris play) is very similar to the real civil war. With the Siberian retreat to Ufa, Red attacks and even the raid on Voronezh with Shkuro. That's why I asked whether you have studied this war, since the operations were so similar.
Though the White soldiers are generally better trained, the Reds have the advantage in resources. The White player must balance between the Scylla and Charybdis of using the scarce money supply to buy replacements or to construct troops. So though to you, the losses incurred do not seem meaningful, they have actually had a sensible effect on White unit construction.
le Anders wrote:Oh, and the turn's up in our game.
Yes, Orel regularly wipes the floor with my Red Army whenever he plays the Southern Whites. In the game where he's Siberia, I'm actually managing to hold my own- seems the Southern player there is a novice.
All of us were novices at first. It is a good thing there are novices to this game since that increases the number of experienced players with whom to play with in the future.
And don't worry, Kolchak is somewhat similar to Denikin in terms of troop quality, but the Southern White's flaw of low resources is non-existent in rich Siberia. So, be prepared Commissars...
For united Russia!
So I wonder why Stalin didn't attack Ekaterinador? I had him on Red/Red, he should've, should he not (especially since he ended his turn there)? Had sorta been banking on that to hurt your morale a bit and even the playing field. I think that ruined my last good chance of having a shot here, very weird result.
I agree with you that -7 NM for a single battle involving only anarchists is just... well... weird. Probably a stupid attack on my part, I just didn't realize it was going to be such a lop-sided disaster.
So I think the lesson I've learned in this game is that it's very foolish as a Red player to make aggressive moves forward in 1918. I had the firepower to take them, but I can't hold the lines in 1919, particularly with 5000ish CP White stacks moving around in the south, and what looks like about 4000 CP heading my way from the east. I guess the Red just as to sit back and build/build/build until they have an adequate number advantage to make a move?
I agree with you that -7 NM for a single battle involving only anarchists is just... well... weird. Probably a stupid attack on my part, I just didn't realize it was going to be such a lop-sided disaster.
So I think the lesson I've learned in this game is that it's very foolish as a Red player to make aggressive moves forward in 1918. I had the firepower to take them, but I can't hold the lines in 1919, particularly with 5000ish CP White stacks moving around in the south, and what looks like about 4000 CP heading my way from the east. I guess the Red just as to sit back and build/build/build until they have an adequate number advantage to make a move?
Altaris wrote:So I wonder why Stalin didn't attack Ekaterinador? I had him on Red/Red, he should've, should he not (especially since he ended his turn there)? Had sorta been banking on that to hurt your morale a bit and even the playing field. I think that ruined my last good chance of having a shot here, very weird result.
Did you have any other Red units in that same region with Stalin? My understanding is that the army unit (with the three-star general) will not initiate combat if there is any other friendly units in the same region.
Altaris wrote:So I wonder why Stalin didn't attack Ekaterinador? I had him on Red/Red, he should've, should he not (especially since he ended his turn there)? Had sorta been banking on that to hurt your morale a bit and even the playing field. I think that ruined my last good chance of having a shot here, very weird result.
I agree with you that -7 NM for a single battle involving only anarchists is just... well... weird. Probably a stupid attack on my part, I just didn't realize it was going to be such a lop-sided disaster.
So I think the lesson I've learned in this game is that it's very foolish as a Red player to make aggressive moves forward in 1918. I had the firepower to take them, but I can't hold the lines in 1919, particularly with 5000ish CP White stacks moving around in the south, and what looks like about 4000 CP heading my way from the east. I guess the Red just as to sit back and build/build/build until they have an adequate number advantage to make a move?
Ah, you ran into the same "game feature" that I ran into 6 months ago with OneArmedMexican: Army stacks often act very strangely in RUS, they could even not attack despite the order to do so. I had an army stack in one game stand 2-3 turns with orders to attack, yet it still did not attack the enemy force in the same area. I personally find this very illogical.
I have to say, it was far from thoughtless. The attack had good reasons, and it severely delayed my advance for the next few months. However, I find two things that could have been improved:
1. Units out of divisions are vulnerable and take up the same frontage as divisions in battle. By themselves, individual units are easily destroyed, since 20 hits on a division of 400 power is like a mosquito bite to an elephant, while the same 20 hits to a regiment-sized unit destroys it.
2. I would use the Anarchist cavalry to strike against Novocherkassk or Rostov. Using them in a direct combat battle in my opinion was a less successful decision.
In the beginning you created probably the best situation that could be possible for the Reds. Rarely do the Whites end up in a situation similar to the one in the beginning of the Kolchak coup scenario, at least according to my experience. And even now, there is very little lost.
If you need NM, I recently thought of the possibility of attacking the Baltic states by the Reds, since they are very weak in the military sense.
I can't say you have made any strategic mistakes in the game. I was quite surprised to find corps during the Winter in the Kharkov/Kursk/Voronezh triangle when I expected to find only the Ukrainian Soviet Army and garrisons.
For united Russia!
Return to “PBEM and multiplayer matchups (all games)”
Who is online
Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 6 guests