Greetings,
Maybe that is covered already - and I expressed in the past concerns.
But today my concerns peaked up again.
In an amount of articles there is mention to snowballing effects. That's precisely ONE of the issues. Bad luck in the first turn(s) for Germany.
Graciously in the latest game my opponent agreed on a restart - after the 1st turn. Germany suffered a grandtotal of 8 losses (8.5 if we include fuel due to a motorized division lost), plus 1 Fuel to rush 1 Stuka. That's a third of their seasonal economy. In ONE turn. Specifically the turn where they should be like God descended on Earth (Barbarossa start).
Luck? Unluck? That surely comes into play - but it is a game crippler. You may as well restart than to have a game that is doomed already. What if it's a full ETO campaign? Redo the last turn? Maybe. It's still a bummer.
It's not just a matter of Turn1 anyhow - where to me the solution is that on T1 (and probably extended to the Soviet turn) there is a +1 (or -1 in Soviet turn) modifier to rolls and overruns; or simply roll two dices - Germany picks the one they want. The more I play the more I feel that's needed.
There is an abyss of difference between a game where Germany suffers 0-1 losses on T1, and one where Germany suffers 8. (Seen both). I've been the Soviet in the game where Germany suffered 0-1 losses, and I did not had grand problems later on (Admittedly that game was wrapped in October '41, as Germany had 5 planes in their Destroyed box, 2 Stukas and 2 Ju88. Probably what produced the change in Air Table and how the double plane result in CAS works). In that game, I admit, I expected to obliterate the Luftwaffe in Summer'42. Planning ahead with Flood the Skies card, and Major Air Offensive picked up in Spring'42 as Large Card. (Don't remember atm if VVS reorganization is in '42 - if that's the case to prevent Luftwaffe to fly was primary plan). With the new type of losses - sure denting more PPs as 8-4 gets the hit, all the CAVs ended up on the map. So from November '41 to pratically Spring, save some cavalry losses to happen (which a card may make up for) Soviets would have churned out new planes too.
Cards are also another issue - Germany lacks good cards. Soviets have aplenty, and are better.
There are directly comparable cards (Often Economic based). Soviets have already a better economy (with in general a better ratio of PP spent per unit - once one learns the ropes, you'll get these 4-4 Guards perishing almost each turn to be rebuilt for 1 PP. And maybe you even net a BG out of them to help against overruns!). And these 4-4 are better than anything Germany can throw at you for 1 PP!
So - Economic cards. Small for 4 PP for Soviets, vs Small for 2 PPs. Soviet swing!
You'd think operational / ground cards are better for Germany at least? Let's see... German Generals - 1 shift to all your attacks (at range 6) but it's Medium. Want to look at Katiusha? Small - 1 shift to all your attacks (but your HQ has only range 4).
Zhukov that is a Medium card (so comparable to German Generals) is 1 red bolt (even in bad weather), in attack and defence, for X turns. On a 6 range of hexes. (And you just wait to combined that with some white bolts from Shock Armies that even allow you to reroll blanks! Or a New Tank Model! For 2 ground bolts in attack without even committing a plane).
I could go on - and on - and on - but how all of that is going under the radar, I cannot get a grip of it.
In general Germany has quality of troops and operational superiority - Allies (or Soviets in this case) production / quantity and mass of stuff.
At some point the 'quality' of troops comes short because the production cannot keep up anymore with the losses suffered.
Cohen, With a game as long as this, it would be prudent to have an understanding with one's opponent about what is expected re "hanging in there" should luck take over. I don't think the game needs to be changed for this. It seems that the Germans are at a real RP disadvantage with the otherwise more realistic Leading Strong rule, since KG's are far more rare in '41 and perhaps '42. Alan is well-aware of this concern of ours, and I wish not to belabor the point. I am waiting for playtest verification. For those who are are frustrated with a perceived Russian edge, a playtest doesn't have to use all the current rules. If you end up having a close game with one or just a few different rules that you specify, this has some value, at least in my mind. I have started a solitaire in which the Free Stuff Improvement for the Germans is not limited to KGs, but applies to any unit, and can apply to a unit in Reserve as well as GG. This is no official experiment, just me (!), and I am not using Resiliency. I want to play it first, then politely report on it. I answer to my friend Jay, and we both work for Alan. There is a lot of respect here, and I hope it shows consistently in what I post.
Luck? Unluck? That surely comes into play - but it is a game crippler. You may as well restart than to have a game that is doomed already.
Maybe I'm missing something here. How is that different from any other game that has random (as opposed to deterministic) conflict resolution?
It's not just a matter of Turn1 anyhow - where to me the solution is that on T1 (and probably extended to the Soviet turn) there is a +1 (or -1 in Soviet turn) modifier to rolls and overruns; or simply roll two dices - Germany picks the one they want. The more I play the more I feel that's needed.
The game doesn't need more across-the-board DRMs. Two dice as part of the Blitzkrieg card -- maybe. That's a reasonable "list item" for a Sneak Attack anyway.
This all goes back to my "Kick in the Door" observation. The game can really go sideways quickly with a bad initial kick by the Axis.
Cards are also another issue - Germany lacks good cards. Soviets have aplenty, and are better.
As I've said online before, we just FINISHED balancing the Soviet cards against each other and making sure their "weak sisters" are a fair selection against others in their class. We are now looking at the Axis deck to do the same and then will move onto the Allies. These are HUGE tasks, so give us some time, please.
So - Economic cards. Small for 4 PP for Soviets, vs Small for 2 PPs. Soviet swing!
Did you ever consider that the might be a REASON for that? That, perhaps, the two Factions had different systems here, and this is a representation of that?
I hope so, because that's exactly the case. The Germans preferred to add better-trained manpower while the Soviet tended to scrape up and throw in soldiers with little training. If you want 4 trained Germans in one card, do what the Germans did and recruit them from the Luftwaffe.
Also please note the RETURN rate of the Axis 2 PP card vs. the Soviet 4 PP card. Oh my goodness, it's a huge advantage for the Axis. Well, I'll be... ;-)
So - Economic cards. Small for 4 PP for Soviets, vs Small for 2 PPs. Soviet swing!
German KGs with all of their good Corps and free German KG replacements. Axis swing! It doesn't all go one way.
Let's see... German Generals - 1 shift to all your attacks (at range 6) but it's Medium. Want to look at Katiusha? Small - 1 shift to all your attacks (but your HQ has only range 4).
That's an excellent comparison! Except that I think you have it wrong, I'm afraid.
German Generals also PROVIDES a free Offensive Point, while Katyushas COSTS TWO Offensive Points to employ at an even shorter range! Typically, you cover TWICE the amount of frontage with 6-range HQ as you do with a 4-range HQ, so be sure to DOUBLE the value of the German Generals card in that calculation as well.
Zhukov that is a Medium card (so comparable to German Generals)
That card is, AND IS SUPPOSED TO BE, a real "Soviet Advantage" card. It is uniquely theirs just as the Blitzkrieg! card is uniquely Axis. And between those two, which would you rather have in your deck?
(And you just wait to combined that with some white bolts from Shock Armies that even allow you to reroll blanks! Or a New Tank Model! For 2 ground bolts in attack without even committing a plane).
And what? Are you seeing that all the time? Hold on... I'll be you've NEVER seen that. Could it happen in theory? Yes, Does it happen in practice? Rarely -- which is exactly where it should be. You have to save up a LOT of "card energy" to pull that off and, if you do, you would have PAID sufficient "card energy" to do so (which comes at a real opportunity cost, as we all know).
You seem a little jealous of the Soviet Marshal cards. I think it is Rokossovsky who removes a countdown marker. As I recall, that's a Large card for the Soviets. Yet you don't mention Army Organization (Medium) or Rollbahns (Small) that accomplish similar feats for the Axis. I perceive things to be a lot more evenhanded.
And, for the record, it is the Axis who have a BETTER New Model Tank card, if I'm not mistaken, becomes it returns to play sooner.
I could go on - and on - and on -
So could I. But I'm busy working with Jay to make sure the Axis hand tells the correct storyboard and accomplish all the right things in the right way. Please let us go through that task without taking us to task for doing so. :D
In general Germany has quality of troops and operational superiority - Allies (or Soviets in this case) production / quantity and mass of stuff.
At some point the 'quality' of troops comes short because the production cannot keep up anymore with the losses suffered.
That sounds like a standard high-level summary, but both sides had their operational moments, so to hand them ALL to the Axis as a "given" would simply be wrong. Even troop quality shifted over time -- not just NUMBERS of steps, but their quality shifted in the Allies' favor.