StarDestroyer.Net BBS

Norseman wrote:There's been a *lot* of ass pulling in the Manchurian campaign, mainly in that the Chinese and Manchurian players seem to pull defensive measures from their ass whenever they need them. It's kind of disheartening.

It happened from the fucking start, which is the worst part. It doesn't' take anyone with a half brain that there was a bunch of screwing around to make the invasion as tough as possible.

The way I see it, the Manchurians began mobilization a day or two before the Soviet attack began. And then it took 10 days to reach Hailar, but the Manchurians were only able to put up strong defenses there, and as it was M+12 for them they, with a 5 Infrastructure, were fairly well mobilized and more than capable of stopping the Soviet attack at that point.

Then, a few days later to give time for more Chinese forces, they could launch their attack on the flanks of the Soviet "finger" from the Argun to Hailar.

Also, the rail juncture should be in Hailar.

Finally, can we please keep the uninvolved players out of this discussion? The mods can and will handle it. Last thing we need is a large OOC bitchfest. Well, larger than it already is.

Steve wrote:The way I see it, the Manchurians began mobilization a day or two before the Soviet attack began.

What of Beowulf's arbitrary replacement of Manchurian units with Chinese units at all defensive positions around the breach? I mean, that's just strange and hardly possible. You remove own divisions from their relatively fortified and more or less known/familiar border positions, and instead plant there Chinese division that do not know the lay of the land, have no experience in that territory and have arrived no earlier than a few weeks prior (and that's being generous).

Chinese divisions cannot be used as a "stick the holes" resource; and the efficiency of both the Chinese divisions arriving in unfamiliar locations AND the Manchurian divisions for some reason removed from their defensive positions would be reduced. That is hardly a meaningful action.

And Beowulf's two rail lines, like I said, are 2000 kms of track laid for a purely military project of fortifying the 1000 km wide border (maybe I should say Russia constructed similar railways right along the entire Russo-Manchurian border precisely to easily move forces and attack anywhere?). If there are such tracks, then surely there should be train and rail hand-powered cart depots somewhere along that rail; I would be more justified in moving along THAT railway and attacking the rear of Manchurian communications, taking over line Yat forts and killing their defenders, than trying to take Hailar?

In reality, what backup railways did China have that would stretch from Hailar to around Manzhouli even in the 1960s, when the USSR and China were no longer buddies?

I attacked Hailar presuming it to be the only railway crossing hub with rails leading to the forces in the salient between my border and Mongolian border. In case it's not so and Beowulf has another thousands and thousands of reserve railways everywhere, perhaps I should've assembled several million to attack, and perhaps I wouldn't even bother with Hailar? Perhaps he should've told me how extensive his infrastructure is?

I mean, that's just boring. I'm playing with almost fully fleshed-out forces down to the last division, with more or less close to real-life territory and infrastructure against an enemy who uses vagueness as his defence. That's not interesting. Fog of war in text RPGs is bullshit. I'm clearly spelling out reinforcement rates, speeds and masses of forces that I'm moving to places A, B, C so that anyone can raise objections. Beowulf does nothing. I'm punching air.

To be fair Steve this is everybody's issue, it effects how everybody will play the game. It also means that I have land forts to plan as well. xD

Good news, everyone! My computer got here today, with the google earth layout of the partially completed fortification/infrastructure map for Afghanistan! Shep, we can get that war rolling sooner than expected!

To further prove my point of Beowulf arbitrarily shifting the location and points of his assault.

His first explanation:
Locations of his assault - clearly presuming one point of assault, around 20 km wide maximum, quite far away from the breach itself. That presumes extreme pressure, and I fully expected my forces to fold under such an attack (however, that would draw most his Hulun salient forces and leave the 70 km front below the assault mostly undefended, where my forces could actually attempt to counter-encircle with NO resistance whatsoever! )

His next explanation - main points of assault massively changed, front is widened to almost 70-80 km, and no superiority to Soviet troops in the area, neither in offensive density, is even achieved when plotting his divisions on his map above against my divisions in the area:

My supply lines and Beowulf's forces attacking them

So frankly, I'm tired of the vagueness.

He does have an Infrastructure rating of 5, that should tell you something about how ahistorical his rail network's size is, Stas.

Did you ask him beforehand? If you did and he was vague, well, let's get the vagueness settled shall we?

Steve wrote:He does have an Infrastructure rating of 5

That still doesn't allow him to just move his attack points, front width, unit commitment and type of his attack arbitrarily.

He actually looked at my explanation of how insane it would be to commit almost entire force to a pinnacle assault of 20 km wide front (even as that would decisively crush me, with his density being 3-4 km per division and maybe even denser!) and leave a 60 km gap where most of my forces can just retreat, move in and attack his lines from behind - that's the only explanation I have for changing a 20 km wide front attack to a 70-80 km wide front attack - the increase in front width of THREE times! I can see no other explanation for the change between picture one and picture two of his assault.

And frankly, I asked him for the location of his divisions and such since the war begun. And maybe even prior to that. He did nothing except very vaguely describing where his "corps" are, and that usually was just mentioning the province, regardless of his ahistorical territories (that can mean voluntarily arrangement of over 30-50 km of distance), etc.

Also, is there any whatsoever historical precedent for a purely military 2-line railway for a total of 2000 kms of track to be laid along the border merely to supply border defences? I mean... infrastructure 5? There should be precedents like that in Europe, then. France and Germany, Franco-German border, for example.

Fingolfin_Noldor wrote:

Thanas wrote:

Fingolfin_Noldor wrote:Hmm.. I need to check with Shady about his response. He watches Germany with weariness.

Shady's nation and mine have signed a non-aggression treaty pregame and Germany honours her treaties. And in case he does not intend to, we agreed on a simultaneous demobilization of the frontier making any attack both ways very difficult. Shady need not worry. Also, I have got about 800.000 men on that border plus the forces of my Italian allies.

For that matter, neither do you for a) germany will gladly sign a non-aggression treaty with you and b) Germany has no way to get to you anyway.

He has, but that doesn't stop his suspicions.

But I am willing to sign a treaty as well.

Sent an offer IC and I'll gladly sign it.


As for Norade as far as I am conccerned the timeline is still stuck at 11:50 on the day I presented the ultimatum. So anyone who wishes to capitalize on this just please take a step back. At this point, your nations should have just received the word about the ultimatum and no sane nation would immediately go to war. Frankly, if you wish to capitalize, you should make pretty sure that Germany and France will not fail in their endeavours, which is something that is by no means impossible at this time.

When the first major battles are fought, then and only then would it make sense for anyone not involved in the ultimatum to get involved. And only then if the nations were concerned about a German and/or French presence.

Hey Shep, does Shepistan maintain its side of the Spin Boldak-Chaman railroad, or does that not exist in this timeline?

So, looking carefully at Beowulf's maps - Bluewolf (China) commited 12 divisions to the defence of entire Manchuria (that's the number he reported to me).

10 (TEN) of them conveniently happened to be just around the Manchurian-Soviet border near Hailar, or even in Hailar itself, judging by Beowulf's drawings - and 4 of them manned the border with the USSR, replacing Manchurian divisions. All that in 12 days? Really? And Beowulf formed 4 corps out of these divisions? With corps artillery? Did Bluewolf even specify that he sent these Chinese corps, or just divisions without a higher organizational structure?

And the Chinese expeditionary force was entirely concentrated in Hailar and surroundings, right - no need to defend other areas? Especially their placement North and West of Hailar - that's so smart, putting them all in a salient that can be with quite a little effort on the Soviet side completely cut off from Manchuria (if USSR takes Hailar, railway transport to that salient is gone, and Chinese troops won't dare enter Mongolian territory, which they'd be trapped against).

And there's what, 17 Manchurian CADRE (?!!!) divisions and 4 Manchurian reserve divisions conveniently deployed in the area?

For a total of 31 divisions, of them 21 Manchurian.

Beowulf had only 15 CADRE (non-reserve) mobile divisions (i.e. non-fortress ones) in his ENTIRE Heilongjiang province per his OOB, TOTAL. That is a more than 1000 km wide border! Probably 2000 or 3000 km wide! Am I to believe they all happened to conveniently be in Hailar and surroundings? Load of FUCKING CRAP.

He started to activate 27 reserve divisions in Q1; meaning the total number of MOBILE Manchurian divisions in the entire provice, both cadre and reserve (mid-activation) was 42! For the entire province! That's roughly one infantry division per every 35 km (assuming 1500 km of border of Argun + Amur until the North which is useless permafrost unsuitable for large advances by any part). How did he happen to have 17 cadre, i.e. non-reserve divisions around Hailar? He had 15 cadre divisions in the entire province! And 20 mobile divisions, discounting 1 fortress division, is like half of his entire forces!

So he had an intensity of like, 1 mobile infantry division per 35 km (that is WITH mobilization of the 1-9th reserve infantry corps that he started in Q1) - and now suddenly when I break through at about 20 km wide front, he has 17 CADRE and 4 RESERVE divisions there in 10 days? Really? How can that be?!!! He had a total of 34 (THIRTY-FOUR) cadre mobile (i.e. non-fortress) divisions in his entire army, ENTIRE Army! And he conveniently has HALF of his ENTIRE CADRE mobile units in standing Army at Hailar in 10 days after my attack? Maybe I should've just attacked him with 500 000 men there by fiat - that's like, half of my standing "cadre" Army too

I can't believe this bullshit is happening. So anyone can concentrate 20+ mobile divisions in 10-12 days on a frontline where prior to that there was barely 1 mobile division per 35 km of border territory? Fucking gold!

That's why stupid Soviets started concentrating forces for months! But, stupid that! Beowulf is smarter. You can magic out divisions! Conveniently place the entire forces offered by your ally WHERE YOU NEED THEM NOW, regardless of logistics and common sense. Boost them up to 20 000 per division for a further cheat. Fuck that, and fuck Beowulf. He's fighting a 1980s war in 1925, swinging around corps and divisions and putting them where he likes them to be right now.

Beowulf should now explain - and not to me, but to the mods! - how each division that he claims arrived in the place he claims it to be; from where, at what time and by which rail lines.

Such a mobilization was possible in southern Germany in 1914 iirc - with very short supply lines, a massive rail network (18.000 trains for the rhine area alone, timetable to the last minute), major population centers and rally points within 13-50 miles from the border.

I agree with Stas, this should not be possible in the remote regions in manchuria.

I need to list fortresses in my ORBAT, right? I have extensive coastal fortifications at either end of the Panama Canal, a medium fortress near Caracas, another on the northern coast of Trinidad, and another at Maracaibo.

Do I really need to allocate a 15 000-strong infantry division to each of those, or is a brigade sufficient?

Ryan Thunder wrote:I need to list fortresses in my ORBAT, right? I have extensive coastal fortifications at either end of the Panama Canal, a medium fortress near Caracas, another on the northern coast of Trinidad, and another at Maracaibo.

Do I really need to allocate a 15 000-strong infantry division to each of those, or is a brigade sufficient?

Depends on how suceptible you want to locatiosn to be to assault. What has been shown repeatedly is that fortresses live and die mostly by the ability and availability of the troops within them. A brigade (depending on the geography) may be sufficient to man all the guns with reliefs and reserves while having a sufficent counter-attack force available. Again geography will dictate, a fortress with several approaches that is trying to cover a large swath needs troops for counter-attack purposes or it will be taken.

Actually, now that I see it, Beowulf used 14 Chinese divisions at Hailar (5 corps x 2 division each + 4 separate divisions). That's more than Bluewolf sent to entire Manchuria, IIRC!

Bluewolf wrote:A total of 240.000 (12 divisions) had been amassed who were now filling the Manchurian transport network.

No wonder there's no point in playing. Beowulf magicked out forces.

To be fair there was also 4 divisions but they were sent to the defensive lines and not into the Hailar attack. Given that they would be still on the defensive, they would not be able to take part in the encirclement. On Beo's on troops, well, I cannot control his of course.

Not to be a drama queen but I am out too. I changed my points numerous times in the pregame as it became more and more clear that people didn't want to play realistic nations with definitive strengths and weaknesses. Between Lonestar and Sheps fucking around at the beginning of the game and now Beowulfs magical troops fucking over Stas I don't even want to complete the rest of the shit I have to do. And frankly I almost feel like this should be a told you so moment for the mods. I don't think you guys are doing a bad job but people push this as far as possible every time and when no one stomps on it quick it just becomes worse. This has happened in like 75% of the STGODs I have played in and we need a better response for it.

Would it be too much to ask for everyone involved to post a map with the current placement of all their forces? I'm not only asking this as a disinterested outsider, but as a nation that exclusively shares its borders with all three belligerents. As such, I need to know where people have their forces set up, especially as I'm keeping my border with Manchuria fortified with all of my active forces (about 80 divisions, as I recall) and 4 activated reserve divisions, since I don't know if they're going to try anything against me.

Clarifying Edit: Also, maps of just the entire timeline of the invasion would probably be helpful. At least a map every couple of days or beginning, halfway, and current, or whatever, might go a long way towards clarifying things and ending problems, either through mod rulings or agreement between Beo and Stas or whatever.

Yeah I understand that Bluewolf, but he used more divisions than given to him for the defence of his entire nation in a single point!

Akhlut wrote:Would it be too much to ask for everyone involved to post a map with the current placement of all their forces?

No, it wouldn't - I'm just doing one now because I'm working to transfer the Soviet Union to some other player or, be it so decided, to the Moderators (so then they can use it's future superpower status to clamp down on people who behave badly or something).

I'll also make a by-date map of the Soviet-Manchurian war with all units, all movements and dates etc. drawn on it. Just to demonstrate the point of what happens when players start behaving badly, and not to leave my successor with hands tied and no understanding of the war with Manchuria he got into because of me the previous owner.

To comment on the current situation I'll say I'm heeding the mods and letting them handle it, its what they are for. For my part I'm going to post where all my divisions are and try to figure where the new defensive line I'm building runs to help prevent any repeats of the current fiasco in the case of war in South America.

Like I said in PM, I do not think you should get out of the game. It is your decision, but I do not think you should stop playing the soviets due to some bad experiences with one other player.

Well if Stas is leaving then so will I, quite frankly I only joined because I thought there'd be quick moderator action to quash this sort of thing. Instead all we get are arguments over minutiae of the rules and then... when something is really screwy nothing happens...

Yeah, I'd really rather Stas didn't quit. He just makes the USSR so lovable, like a some dapper rogue. Sure, he's a bit dangerous, but he's oh-so-dreamy!

That and he's offering me a port on the Pacific.

Seriously, though, I think those who want to quit should just see how this rides out first, let the mods get used to their positions and let everyone figure out how this particular game's war mechanics are going to sort themselves out. If after all this is sorted out it still looks like it's not your cup of tea, then you can quit. I just think it looks like people are jumping the gun a bit. Just my $0.02 on the matter.

For God's sake people, let's not get carried away now. That two day period of grace wasn't called for no reason; the moderators are pouring over what went wrong, and how the situation should be resolved appropriately. So at the very least do us other players the favour of holding your resignations until Steve, Rogue and Timothy have made their call. If you feel their eventual decision still renders you unable to derive satisfaction from the game, you can always decide to bail then. But you could at least hold your decision until the moment you can determine that to be the case.