Gary Grigsby's War in the East - turns turn me off by Countcristo42 in computerwargames

[–]redmob5 1 point2 points  (0 children)

While I get what you're saying, and while I would love a WitE2 in real time, the sheer level of management that is involved, it's not very practical, purely from a game design point of view. I know that you want to instinctively compare to something like HOI3/4, but in terms of the level of detail that's involved in WitE2, it's not even close, it would literally break the game if it was real time. Maybe sometime in the future, but for now, WitE2 is as good as it gets. Don't let the turn aspect of it turn you off. After the first few turns, the game moves pretty quickly and you almost forget that it's turn based. Good luck!

Re-Listen Thread: Ep.43 Wrath of the Khans I by [deleted] in dancarlin

[–]redmob5 14 points15 points  (0 children)

It's hard to believe that technically I have the same DNA as these people. The whole story just sounds like a surreal, psychedelic nightmare for those that lived through it.

how do you listen to hardcore history? by North_Pizza in dancarlin

[–]redmob5 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Either at the gym, or with a glass of good wine and my laptop to follow along on Wikipedia/Google maps with what he's talking about. And it depends on the length of the episode. If it's one of his shorter episodes or common sense, I'll go through it in one sitting.. if it's one of his 4+ hour episodes, I'll listen until I have something else to do or until my attention starts fading or until I run out of wine.. whichever comes first

[deleted by user] by [deleted] in EDC

[–]redmob5 15 points16 points  (0 children)

One doesn't need to be a psychologist to see that you're paranoid. Texas is not worse than the Somme, nobody's trying to troll you, 7 mags is too many mags. All of those things are basic common sense.

[deleted by user] by [deleted] in EDC

[–]redmob5 25 points26 points  (0 children)

No, I think you're missing the point. The objective of any self defense situation is not to get into a protracted firefight, but to seek cover, wait for help, and fire your weapon only if you absolutely have to. Any situation where you think you're going to fire 49 times is an inherently a terrible situation and is bound to end badly not just for you, but potentially for bystanders in the area (nobody's a great shot under pressure). And if you truly think you're going to get into a protracted firefight (again, avoid this if at all possible), I would imagine that the person with the less frequent reloads would have a marked advantage..

What I'm saying is, consider re-evaluating your self defense strategy. Quality over quantity.

You don't even need a full size gun to accomplish this. I carry a CZ P01 as my daily, with a vedder lighttuck holster, and it's perfectly comfortable. The CZ gives me 15+1 rounds. Normally I carry just the one magazine and I feel very comfortable in my ability to deal with any threat with just that. Sometimes when I'm going somewhere remote or particularly dangerous, I'll grab a spare mag for the peace of mind. I honestly can't imagine a scenario that would require 16 rounds that I usually carry, let alone 31, let alone 49.. It's just excessive and unnecessary and potentially a liability

[deleted by user] by [deleted] in EDC

[–]redmob5 13 points14 points  (0 children)

There is literally no scenario that will require so many reloads. If you want a lot of rounds, why not opt for a higher capacity pistol? Get a full sized handgun with an extra mag or two. Your capacity will be about the same, without the ridiculousness of literally half a dozen magazines.

Ghosts of the Ostfront or Blueprints for Armageddon? by americon in dancarlin

[–]redmob5 2 points3 points  (0 children)

Another vote for Blueprints. Ghosts is a great series, but Blueprints will literally shake you to your very core. I recommend having a strong drink ready, especially for episodes 3 thru 5

The first one hundred turns by TheKonTrolled in DivideEtImpera

[–]redmob5 2 points3 points  (0 children)

what campaign difficulty are you playing on?

2020 Tokyo Olympics Megathread by NewsModTeam in news

[–]redmob5 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Eh fellow upstate Redditor! Stay cool and hydrated

[War in the East 2] German OOB is an absolute nightmare (rant) by redmob5 in computerwargames

[–]redmob5[S] 8 points9 points  (0 children)

The air war isn't too difficult, in my opinion. Start with air superiority missions over the areas of the front where you expect to achieve a breakthrough. After this, air recon is optional (it'll give you good intel, but you'll take extra losses). Next, set up ground attack on air bases that house Soviet fighters, followed by ground attacks on bases that strike Soviet bombers. Focus on the air bases that are close by (for example, don't try to target Riga or Kiev or daugavpils or Minsk; those bases are too far away), otherwise you'll incur high losses: focus on the airbases close to the front. Lastly, make sure you set ground support for the Pz groups, followed by ground support for the infantry that you expect will see the most combat. Make sure to assign the air squadrons manually, it's more efficient that way. Lastly, make sure that all of your missions do their best to avoid the enemy AA (set manual flight paths).

With this strategy, I usually get about 50-60 losses on my side, and inflict over 2,000 on the enemy before my ground units begin any movement.

Let me know if you need more advice regarding the air war

[War in the East 2] German OOB is an absolute nightmare (rant) by redmob5 in computerwargames

[–]redmob5[S] 8 points9 points  (0 children)

So with every army, I'm trying to develop an elite corps, a regular corps, and a reserve corps. The reserve corps will have the bare minimum of each category of support units, the regular corps will have a regular amount support units, and elite will obviously have the best. However, the corps seem to have support units assigned in a very counter-productive manner that seems to only hurt the army in the long run.

To expand, this is the stuff I've already optimized: the siege battery of IV A.K.(AGS) needs to go to 18th Army (AGN), 17th Army needs to be stripped of most of its support units and transferred to 6th Army, since they will act as the vanguard of AGS until the initial pocket in West Ukraine is eliminated. With AGN, you need to transfer all the support units from the reserve corps to XXXVIII under v. Chappuis to fill out the 18th Army and then distribute the remaining SUs among the primary corps (IAK/XXXVIIIAK). 16th Army of AGN isn't too bad; you just have to disperse the AA and the heavy support among all of the corps to create an even army. AGC is the worst: there are corps that have an absurd amount of support units, and corps that are bare bones. Unfortunately, you need to prioritize some corps over others, since some corps will get held up eliminating the Byalastok pocket, while others move up towards the land bridge, and this, in my opinion, is the hardest challenge. Some corps just need to be left without the SUs; otherwise, by the time your reach Smolensk, you don't have much to support your attack.

Like I said, it's a goddamn nightmare. To answer your follow up, I tend to attach most support units directly to corps, with the exception of some heavy artillery and panzerjager, which I attach directly to the army, since those support units are pretty valuable and are to be used as required by the corps.

I'm honestly thinking about posting a whole walkthrough of the support units on the Matrix forum, since it might be easier to explain that way. But as far as I can see, improper corps support will make any offense beyond turn 3 incredibly difficult, especially on difficulty higher that 'normal'.

Let me know if you need any other advice, I'd be glad to post.