RE: Half Again: Axis Perspective

Matrix Games Forums

Forums Register Login Photo Gallery Member List Search Calendars FAQ

My Profile Inbox Address Book My Subscription My Forums Log Out

RE: Half Again: Axis Perspective

View related threads: (in this forum | in all forums)

Logged in as: Guest

Users viewing this topic: none

Printable Version

All Forums >> [Current Games From Matrix.] >> [World War II] >> WW2: Road to Victory >> After Action Reports >> RE: Half Again: Axis Perspective

Page: << < prev 1 [2] 3 next > >>

Message

<< Older Topic Newer Topic >>

RE: Half Again: Axis Perspective - 4/13/2009 3:54:24 AM

jjdenver

Posts: 2247
Joined: 11/2/2007
Status: offline

Jun16_41, Axis T+7 turn (8th turn of Barbarossa) (continued)

Around Gomel the Soviets shift forces north from Kiev and the German advance is halted.

AGS continues to just chip away at the forces opposing it but makes no progress at all. The Soviets are successfully trading men for time.

Italians, Spanish, Germans continue to raid the convoy lines to Russia.

Attachment (1)

_____________________________

AARS:
CEAW-BJR Mod 2009:
http://www.matrixgames.com/forums/tm.asp?m=2101447
AT-WW1:
http://www.matrixgames.com/forums/tm.asp?m=1705427
AT-GPW:
http://www.matrixgames.com/forums/tm.asp?m=1649732

(in reply to jjdenver)

Post #: 31

RE: Half Again: Axis Perspective - 4/13/2009 10:40:38 AM

gwgardner

Posts: 6722
Joined: 4/7/2006
Status: offline

How do you do the convoy raiding? subs?

_____________________________

(in reply to jjdenver)

Post #: 32

RE: Half Again: Axis Perspective - 4/13/2009 3:40:23 PM

jjdenver

Posts: 2247
Joined: 11/2/2007
Status: offline

I'm spreading raiders (mostly subs but also some surface from France and Italy now) across 3 sea zones starting with the north sea.

For some reason the game shows me his convoy lines when I start my turn -I think it's a bug in the sequencing of the game...but anyway I'm very disappointed w/ the damage I'm doing to his convoy lines. I'm hitting for about 5-10 PP's per turn. This is with every sub I own and the Spanish navy and the Italian navy out there. I'm considering forming up IT navy as a regular fleet to try to catch some patrolling Brits - but anything that quickens the pace of naval attrition probably benefits allies in the long run so I may not do that.

_____________________________

AARS:
CEAW-BJR Mod 2009:
http://www.matrixgames.com/forums/tm.asp?m=2101447
AT-WW1:
http://www.matrixgames.com/forums/tm.asp?m=1705427
AT-GPW:
http://www.matrixgames.com/forums/tm.asp?m=1649732

(in reply to gwgardner)

Post #: 33

RE: Half Again: Axis Perspective - 4/13/2009 10:35:59 PM

jjdenver

Posts: 2247
Joined: 11/2/2007
Status: offline

Jun24_41, Axis T+8 turn (9th turn of Barbarossa)
AGN continues to skirmish for Talinn. The Soviets have executed a very rapid buildup there including the addition of an armored division that appears to have approached the area from Leningrad.

The war for the swamps running from Talinn to Pskov appears to have been won by the Wermacht as the Soviets who advanced out of the swamps last turn as well as the divisions remaining in the swamps are wiped out.

This battle combined w/ the continued northward push by the main AGN force east of Pskov succeeds in isolating the city so I think the defenders will have much reduced supply next turn? Although I'm not sure - perhaps he can open the supply line during his turn then I will still face full strength defenders next turn.

One Pz Korp is refit this turn.

Attachment (1)

< Message edited by jjdenver -- 4/13/2009 10:41:00 PM >

_____________________________

AARS:
CEAW-BJR Mod 2009:
http://www.matrixgames.com/forums/tm.asp?m=2101447
AT-WW1:
http://www.matrixgames.com/forums/tm.asp?m=1705427
AT-GPW:
http://www.matrixgames.com/forums/tm.asp?m=1649732

(in reply to jjdenver)

Post #: 34

RE: Half Again: Axis Perspective - 4/13/2009 10:39:44 PM

jjdenver

Posts: 2247
Joined: 11/2/2007
Status: offline

Jun24_41, Axis T+8 turn (9th turn of Barbarossa) (continued)
AGC has been working around the east flank of Smolensk and the Soviets have refused to fall back from the city. This turn panzers race north and succeed in cutting the city off completely. If the ring holds the city should have reduced supply next turn.

Farther south a big gap is developing between the Gomel army and the main AGC forces.

Around Gomel there is no real progress and it looks like this army will have to fall back soon due to the mass of Soviets in the area.

AGS approaches Vinnitsa and skirmishes w/ the large number of Soviet divisions/corps in the area.

At sea battles continue for the convoy lines.

One down side to this turn is that the Luftwaffe flew max sorties and took heavy losses. Those will be expensive to repair next turn.

Attachment (1)

< Message edited by jjdenver -- 4/13/2009 11:05:22 PM >

_____________________________

AARS:
CEAW-BJR Mod 2009:
http://www.matrixgames.com/forums/tm.asp?m=2101447
AT-WW1:
http://www.matrixgames.com/forums/tm.asp?m=1705427
AT-GPW:
http://www.matrixgames.com/forums/tm.asp?m=1649732

(in reply to jjdenver)

Post #: 35

RE: Half Again: Axis Perspective - 4/14/2009 12:30:54 AM

Chocolino

Posts: 2095
Joined: 2/14/2009
Status: offline

Great AAR. Thank you JJ.

Did you build more Air armies or are you still using the three you began the game with? How is the air opposition in skies over Russia? If you did build more air units, how do you judge the effectiveness of this investment as compared to - say - having purchased more tanks instead. (Hard to answer probably, just trying to see what your experience with the Luftwaffe for offensive operations is and how many units are the sweet spot in your opinion given the PP constrains of course).

(in reply to jjdenver)

Post #: 36

RE: Half Again: Axis Perspective - 4/14/2009 3:24:56 PM

jjdenver

Posts: 2247
Joined: 11/2/2007
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Chocolino
Great AAR. Thank you JJ.
Did you build more Air armies or are you still using the three you began the game with? How is the air opposition in skies over Russia? If you did build more air units, how do you judge the effectiveness of this investment as compared to - say - having purchased more tanks instead. (Hard to answer probably, just trying to see what your experience with the Luftwaffe for offensive operations is and how many units are the sweet spot in your opinion given the PP constrains of course).

Hey Choc - glad you are enjoying it. I love to read all the AAR's for games I play. Chuck is a great opponent - just so competent at everything he does in the game, a master of it really. But no one can cover every eventuality so it's been fun to try to figure out ways to counter his play.

I have a total of 4 air units. I built the extra air because it gave me options:
- easier to take out minors
- I can send a couple air to counter Brit/US airborne drops in the west and still have 2 to counter the Soviets in the east
- If I really need to hit a tough hex in USSR, the extra air gives me a better chance to succeed
- I can rotate air units in USSR. But this hasn't worked out too well because you can't choose which air to use in an air strike so the game seems to use the first movement point of multiple air units instead of using the same unit twice when I do multiple air strikes.

I think maybe that an extra lvl 3 armor corp would have been as useful so far in USSR. However I love also the flexibility that the extra air gives me. I've had some really tough attacks succeed only because I had overpowering air to use. For example I killed a lvl 2 or 3 tank corp in front of Smolensk by hitting it w/ multiple air strikes then 3 pz korps. The 3 pz korps alone couldn't get high enough odds. It's nice as the attacker in Russia to know that any hex is probably vulnerable since you can choose to bring air power to bear. I used air power to complete the encirclement of Smolensk and Chuck chose to disband 3 tank corps as a result. That's huge.

So if I had it to do over again I'd probably buy the air unit I think. I'd say 4 is my max for this phase of the game as they are so expensive to purchase and repair and they almost always take losses. Losing the Italian air army to no purpose because I accidentally moved it out of supply still stings - that's so many PP.

< Message edited by jjdenver -- 4/14/2009 3:26:37 PM >

_____________________________

AARS:
CEAW-BJR Mod 2009:
http://www.matrixgames.com/forums/tm.asp?m=2101447
AT-WW1:
http://www.matrixgames.com/forums/tm.asp?m=1705427
AT-GPW:
http://www.matrixgames.com/forums/tm.asp?m=1649732

(in reply to Chocolino)

Post #: 37

RE: Half Again: Axis Perspective - 4/14/2009 3:31:08 PM

jjdenver

Posts: 2247
Joined: 11/2/2007
Status: offline

Jul01_41, Axis T+9 turn (10th turn of Barbarossa)

Soviets manage to surround major elements of the force advancing on Talinn. A furious counter-attack is organized to drive supply into the pocket but even with Luftwaffe support (some really bad luck on the air strikes and attacks) it's unsuccessful. The trapped corps could be disbanded but it might be tough for the Soviets to destroy them all so the "every man for himself" order is not issued.

The Pskov pocket is reduced - now only the armor corp in Pskov itself remains. Its' supply is low so it should fall next turn.

Attachment (1)

_____________________________

AARS:
CEAW-BJR Mod 2009:
http://www.matrixgames.com/forums/tm.asp?m=2101447
AT-WW1:
http://www.matrixgames.com/forums/tm.asp?m=1705427
AT-GPW:
http://www.matrixgames.com/forums/tm.asp?m=1649732

(in reply to jjdenver)

Post #: 38

RE: Half Again: Axis Perspective - 4/14/2009 3:40:13 PM

jjdenver

Posts: 2247
Joined: 11/2/2007
Status: offline

Jul01_41, Axis T+9 turn (10th turn of Barbarossa) (continued)

The Soviet tank corps defending Smolensk are disbanded. AGC faces 3 basic options I think:
1) Drive north to surround Velikiye Luki, eliminating a big threat to the flank of AGC and AGN.
2) Drive NE to Tver, gaining a supply source that can be used as a springboard toward Moskva, to surround Velikiye Luki, but that is quite vulnerable to being cut off.
3) Drive SE toward Bryansk and Kaluga, advancing in the general direction of Moskva.

I'd evaluate (1) as the safest option since Velikiye Luki is a real threat to both AGC and AGN and the Soviets have a lot of armor there. Option (3) is a safe bet also since it gives 2 supply sources closer to Moskva and having both cities makes it very unlikely that the Soviets can threaten to cut off supply to any advance on Moskva. However option (2) achieves a rapid advance on Moskva, and also directly threatens to create a Soviet kessel at Velikiye Luki - perhaps forcing the Soviets to abandon that city. So I choose (2) - drive for Tver.

2 Pz Korps from AGC had to be diverted south toward Gomel this turn as the Soviets drove mobile units west to try to encircle the German army assaulting Gomel. The threat was largely neutralized but now the Panzers will have to spend a full turn catching back up. The upside is that they will help to cover the flanks of the drive on Tver as they advance.

Attachment (1)

_____________________________

AARS:
CEAW-BJR Mod 2009:
http://www.matrixgames.com/forums/tm.asp?m=2101447
AT-WW1:
http://www.matrixgames.com/forums/tm.asp?m=1705427
AT-GPW:
http://www.matrixgames.com/forums/tm.asp?m=1649732

(in reply to jjdenver)

Post #: 39

RE: Half Again: Axis Perspective - 4/14/2009 3:43:26 PM

jjdenver

Posts: 2247
Joined: 11/2/2007
Status: offline

Jul01_41, Axis T+9 turn (10th turn of Barbarossa) (continued)

AGS makes some progess as an increasing number of Soviet units are drawn off to reinforce Gomel. A soviet defense of Kiev and Vinnitsa pales in importance compared to the threat looming west of Moskva and Leningrad. The soviets must draw units north in my opinion before it's too late....although of course I could be completely wrong if they already have strong defenses built at Leningrad and Moskva. There is some indication of this since the Soviets committed an armored division from Leningrade to encircle the Talinn offensive.

This turn the investment of Vinnitsa makes progress and Kiev is in sight.

Attachment (1)

< Message edited by jjdenver -- 4/14/2009 3:57:29 PM >

_____________________________

AARS:
CEAW-BJR Mod 2009:
http://www.matrixgames.com/forums/tm.asp?m=2101447
AT-WW1:
http://www.matrixgames.com/forums/tm.asp?m=1705427
AT-GPW:
http://www.matrixgames.com/forums/tm.asp?m=1649732

(in reply to jjdenver)

Post #: 40

RE: Half Again: Axis Perspective - 4/14/2009 4:07:25 PM

gwgardner

Posts: 6722
Joined: 4/7/2006
Status: offline

It's interesting that in your game no continuous front has formed. I suppose that is due to the Soviets just not having enough time to create enough forces. I would be having panic attacks, on either side, as both of you seem to leave wide gaps that just look like inviting targets for counter-attacks. However, your tactics are obviously working. I believe you've made more headway than any other human vs human on the Eastern Front.

_____________________________

(in reply to jjdenver)

Post #: 41

RE: Half Again: Axis Perspective - 4/14/2009 4:43:02 PM

jjdenver

Posts: 2247
Joined: 11/2/2007
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: gwgardner
It's interesting that in your game no continuous front has formed.� I suppose that is due to the Soviets just not having enough time to create enough forces.� I would be having panic attacks, on either side, as both of you seem to leave wide gaps that just look like inviting targets for counter-attacks.� However, your tactics are obviously working.� I believe you've made more headway than any other human vs human on the Eastern Front.

Hi, that's a great observation. I've observed the lack of contiguous lines w/ delight, and not just because I'm the attacker in 1941. One of the main flaws that I saw in RTV from the AAR's that I read before the game was the WW1 style warfare that took place on all fronts and in particular on the east front. Really the situation in Russia was so fluid that I didn't think RTV simulate it well at all based on the AAR's that I've seen, and the war in Russia is in many ways one of the most interesting aspects of any WW2 game. Obviously(?) the other flaw that I saw was the lack of air/naval interaction and the naval model in general.

One of my goals coming into Barbarossa was to concentrate all of my offensive combat power in one sector (the north in this game) to disrupt the Soviets and allow my offensive to continue rather than stagnating into 2 long contiguous lines of units parked hub to hub. This was helped by my production advantage in the game we're playing since I was able to field an extraordinary number of panzer korps going into Barbarossa I think. I also didn't spend too much on research before Barbarossa - choosing to get as many (panzer) boots on the ground as possible.

My builds have in general focused not on adding more infantry korps but saving for panzer korps since they are really the way to generate enough offensive power to keep an offensive rolling. Infantry korps just don't bring enough power to bear on a single hex in this game to achieve devastating results. Panzer korps can do that. So, I'm quite light on number of units compared to the front I'm advancing on, but most important to me is to be able to keep the Soviet front disrupted so my PP's have gone into air, armor, armor repairs, air repairs. Each turn I have a temptation to buy more infantry korps and divisions but I try to limit that to save for panzer korps. I've added 2 since Barbarossa began. These help me sustain momentum as the Soviet units get stronger. If I ever allow the Soviets to solidify their front I'm doomed, so I've taken chances on the offensive and left flanks more open that I'd like to leave them.

I've also been conscientious about making the Soviets pay for leaving small units on the front lines or trying to encircle me with them. For example the Soviets sent a mot div and mot corp to within 4 hexes of my air unit at Smolensk in an attempt to drive into the wedge between the Gomel forces and Smolensk forces this turn. I immediately diverted 2 panzer korps to punish those units. You might note that the Soviets now hang back more w/ their small units than they did at start. If they expose them I try to destroy them with high odds attacks. I think this deters attempts at encirclement to some extent although Chuck scored a big victory by encircling my Talinn assault force. However his decision to deploy units around Talinn cost him in other area as those units weren't deployed to prevent encirclements at Pskov and Smolensk.

At this point I'm considering screening Talinn and going back for it during the winter since my units in Baltic states I think don't suffer winter effects.(?)

As a final thought I'm kind of interested in trying a game with all countries set to -50% production. I think this would reduce unit density and allow us to see this sort of interesting, fluid front throughout the war and on all fronts. A war that involves more manuever than straight lines is both realistic and fun. :)

< Message edited by jjdenver -- 4/14/2009 4:44:23 PM >

_____________________________

AARS:
CEAW-BJR Mod 2009:
http://www.matrixgames.com/forums/tm.asp?m=2101447
AT-WW1:
http://www.matrixgames.com/forums/tm.asp?m=1705427
AT-GPW:
http://www.matrixgames.com/forums/tm.asp?m=1649732

(in reply to gwgardner)

Post #: 42

RE: Half Again: Axis Perspective - 4/14/2009 6:17:49 PM

Posts: 14
Joined: 3/24/2009
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: jjdenver
A war that involves more manuever than straight lines is both realistic and fun. :)

It is, but not for Axis in this game

Because of supply "rules", Axis are in much worser position during maneuver war - you will learn it, when you will loose your first precious armored corps due to encirclement by some level 1 infantry division

PS. Very interesting ARR - thanks for sharing!

< Message edited by IS -- 4/14/2009 6:18:15 PM >

(in reply to jjdenver)

Post #: 43

RE: Half Again: Axis Perspective - 4/14/2009 6:52:58 PM

James Ward

Posts: 1183
Joined: 5/9/2000
From: Baltimore, Maryland, USA
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: gwgardner

It's interesting that in your game no continuous front has formed.� I suppose that is due to the Soviets just not having enough time to create enough forces.� I would be having panic attacks, on either side, as both of you seem to leave wide gaps that just look like inviting targets for counter-attacks.� However, your tactics are obviously working.� I believe you've made more headway than any other human vs human on the Eastern Front.

Until you and Chuck posted your AAR's I had never seen continuous lines across the front in Russia. I never found the need due to the supply rules. As long as you hold the cities it doesn't make any differance how far the enemy advances because pretty soon they are out of supply. I would just defend out to a point where the enemy would be out of supply. Of course my buddies and I don't use air power like you guys did

(in reply to gwgardner)

Post #: 44

RE: Half Again: Axis Perspective - 4/14/2009 7:18:23 PM

gwgardner

Posts: 6722
Joined: 4/7/2006
Status: offline

Man I have to rethink my whole way of doing things. I haven't been daring enough, I guess, to NOT try keeping a continuous front. When I've played Chuck, any time I left a hex uncovered, he moved in. I'm always trying to avoid my nightmare situation, in which the enemy encircles my forward push because I didn't guard my flanks.

I think it's a factor of WHEN you launch barbarrosa. Early on, the Russkies don't have time to build a lot. If you look in my first AAR, I deliberately waited till June 22, 41, thus giving Chuck time to build a humongous defensive force.

In that regard, you may be right about the -50% experiment.

_____________________________

(in reply to James Ward)

Post #: 45

RE: Half Again: Axis Perspective - 4/14/2009 7:21:00 PM

gwgardner

Posts: 6722
Joined: 4/7/2006
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: James Ward

Until you and Chuck posted your AAR's I had never seen continuous lines across the front in Russia. I never found the need due to the supply rules. As long as you hold the cities it doesn't make any differance how far the enemy advances because pretty soon they are out of supply. I would just defend out to a point where the enemy would be out of supply. Of course my buddies and I don't use air power like you guys did

You know, that's pretty much the AI defends Russia. Together, the two of you are teaching me some lessons.

_____________________________

(in reply to James Ward)

Post #: 46

RE: Half Again: Axis Perspective - 4/14/2009 7:55:00 PM

James Ward

Posts: 1183
Joined: 5/9/2000
From: Baltimore, Maryland, USA
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: gwgardner

quote:

ORIGINAL: James Ward

Until you and Chuck posted your AAR's I had never seen continuous lines across the front in Russia. I never found the need due to the supply rules. As long as you hold the cities it doesn't make any differance how far the enemy advances because pretty soon they are out of supply. I would just defend out to a point where the enemy would be out of supply. Of course my buddies and I don't use air power like you guys did

You know, that's pretty much the AI defends Russia. Together, the two of you are teaching me some lessons.

The supply system is one of the things I like most about the game. You really have to protect your supply lines or else you are toast.

(in reply to gwgardner)

Post #: 47

RE: Half Again: Axis Perspective - 4/14/2009 8:28:39 PM

Joshuatree

Posts: 507
Joined: 12/30/2007
From: Netherlands
Status: offline

Quote jjdenver:

"Hi, that's a great observation. I've observed the lack of contiguous lines w/ delight, and not just because I'm the attacker in 1941. One of the main flaws that I saw in RTV from the AAR's that I read before the game was the WW1 style warfare that took place on all fronts and in particular on the east front. Really the situation in Russia was so fluid that I didn't think RTV simulate it well at all based on the AAR's that I've seen, and the war in Russia is in many ways one of the most interesting aspects of any WW2 game. Obviously(?) the other flaw that I saw was the lack of air/naval interaction and the naval model in general."

Well phew, I thought it was just me thinking exact the same thing. I'm used to Avanced Tactics, but eagerly reading your AAR's, and what keeps me suprising in the AAR's is the WWI warfare style... That really is not what happened and is certainly not the way in which one plays Advanced Tactics, that is: attack with armour/bombers on a narrow front, breakthrough and cut off his supply lines and encircle your opponents units. A fluid way of gaming so to speak. Not much fun in slugging it out on a static front. So I am really happy that the same works with RtV as well.

(in reply to James Ward)

Post #: 48

RE: Half Again: Axis Perspective - 4/14/2009 8:59:04 PM

jjdenver

Posts: 2247
Joined: 11/2/2007
Status: offline

quote:

The supply system is one of the things I like most about the game. You really have to protect your supply lines or else you are toast.

I think that the supply problem referred to by IS is that there is an imbalance between the way that Axis and Allied units get supply. I think - I may be wrong definitely - but I think it works like this:

A) Axis move
B) Allied move
C) Supply check for all forces

So if during (A) an allied unit is put out of supply it gets a chance to extricate itself by attack or move during (B) before supply is checked in (C). However for an axis unit placed out of supply by allies during (B), supply is checked in (C) before the axis unit gets a chance to move in (A). So any Axis unit placed out of supply is next seen by the Axis player usually as a 1-0, 1-1, 0-1, or 0-0. If an Allied unit is placed out of supply the Allied player next sees it as a full strength/move unit and has a chance to use it before it's judged out of supply by the game.

This is quite unfair for the Axis player and I think this is what he's referring to.

Someone correct me if I'm wrong about all this.

_____________________________

AARS:
CEAW-BJR Mod 2009:
http://www.matrixgames.com/forums/tm.asp?m=2101447
AT-WW1:
http://www.matrixgames.com/forums/tm.asp?m=1705427
AT-GPW:
http://www.matrixgames.com/forums/tm.asp?m=1649732

(in reply to James Ward)

Post #: 49

RE: Half Again: Axis Perspective - 4/14/2009 9:18:00 PM

James Ward

Posts: 1183
Joined: 5/9/2000
From: Baltimore, Maryland, USA
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: jjdenver

quote:

The supply system is one of the things I like most about the game. You really have to protect your supply lines or else you are toast.

I think that the supply problem referred to by IS is that there is an imbalance between the way that Axis and Allied units get supply. I think - I may be wrong definitely - but I think it works like this:

A) Axis move
B) Allied move
C) Supply check for all forces

So if during (A) an allied unit is put out of supply it gets a chance to extricate itself by attack or move during (B) before supply is checked in (C). However for an axis unit placed out of supply by allies during (B), supply is checked in (C) before the axis unit gets a chance to move in (A). So any Axis unit placed out of supply is next seen by the Axis player usually as a 1-0, 1-1, 0-1, or 0-0. If an Allied unit is placed out of supply the Allied player next sees it as a full strength/move unit and has a chance to use it before it's judged out of supply by the game.

This is quite unfair for the Axis player and I think this is what he's referring to.

Someone correct me if I'm wrong about all this.

Yes you are correct there is an imbalance in the when supply is calculated. I think that is being corrected in the patch. Still many games don't force you to protect your supply lines like this one does.

(in reply to jjdenver)

Post #: 50

RE: Half Again: Axis Perspective - 4/14/2009 9:19:49 PM

Posts: 14
Joined: 3/24/2009
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: jjdenver
This is quite unfair for the Axis player and I think this is what he's referring to.

Someone correct me if I'm wrong about all this.

Yes, that is exactly what I meant

It is extremely dangerous for Axis (especially, if Allies use a lot of airborne troops) - you can easily loose entire army because of this supply queue.

(in reply to jjdenver)

Post #: 51

RE: Half Again: Axis Perspective - 4/14/2009 10:08:00 PM

gwgardner

Posts: 6722
Joined: 4/7/2006
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Joshuatree

�

Well phew, I thought it was just me thinking exact the same thing. I'm used to Avanced Tactics, but eagerly reading your AAR's, and�what keeps me suprising in�the AAR's�is�the WWI warfare style... That really is not what happened and is certainly not the way in which one plays Advanced Tactics, that is:�attack with armour/bombers on a narrow front, breakthrough and cut off his supply lines and encircle your opponents units. A fluid way of gaming so to speak. Not much fun in slugging it out on a static front. So I am really happy that the same works with RtV as well.

Believe me, I didn't want that static line like that. But will jjdenver's technique work if the enemy has time to get a line formed in depth? The key that he seems to have mastered is not to allow that situatino to develope.

_____________________________

(in reply to Joshuatree)

Post #: 52

RE: Half Again: Axis Perspective - 4/15/2009 9:30:16 PM

Chocolino

Posts: 2095
Joined: 2/14/2009
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: jjdenver

Jul01_41, Axis T+9 turn (10th turn of Barbarossa) (continued)

The Soviet tank corps defending Smolensk are disbanded. AGC faces 3 basic options I think:

For the supply reasons mentioned above, the tanks around Smolensk may have been transferred out of the pocket via strategic movement instead of being disbanded. This can be done by the Allies even when units are out of supply in the turn immediately after the pocket forms. As the Axis player you don't have this option and luxury of course (so far as of V1.3).

(in reply to jjdenver)

Post #: 53

RE: Half Again: Axis Perspective - 4/16/2009 2:39:34 AM

jjdenver

Posts: 2247
Joined: 11/2/2007
Status: offline

Jul09_41, Axis T+10 turn (11th turn of Barbarossa)

AGN continues efforts to extract the out of supply units near Talinn. One inf korp has been destroyed by the remaining inf korp & inf div might still survive. A web of units is thrown out to ZOC all possible hexes in case the 8 movement Soviet armored division roars back into the area.

Units around Pskov refit and begin to prove toward Novgorod.

There are several options at this point for AGN:
1) Move to reduce Talinn but as previously discussed I think I'll leave this and perhaps address it during the winter since it's outside of USSR I guess(?)
2) Advance directly on Leningrad to try to reach it before the Soviets are prepared. This would be a serious supply stretch though.
3) Drive on Novgorod - this would provide better supply for assaulting Leningrad, and Velikiye Luki and Talinn would both threaten AGN's flanks
4) Clean up Velikiye Luki before going back north. This would spend time and let Leningrad get stronger.

Attachment (1)

< Message edited by jjdenver -- 4/16/2009 3:56:37 AM >

_____________________________

AARS:
CEAW-BJR Mod 2009:
http://www.matrixgames.com/forums/tm.asp?m=2101447
AT-WW1:
http://www.matrixgames.com/forums/tm.asp?m=1705427
AT-GPW:
http://www.matrixgames.com/forums/tm.asp?m=1649732

(in reply to jjdenver)

Post #: 54

RE: Half Again: Axis Perspective - 4/16/2009 2:41:13 AM

jjdenver

Posts: 2247
Joined: 11/2/2007
Status: offline

Jul09_41, Axis T+10 turn (11th turn of Barbarossa) (continued)

AGC was driving for Tver but the Soviets appeared to be there in some force, and the opportunity to flank Kaluga seemed available so the panzers were diverted south to approach Kaluga. Most Soviet units around Kaluga were eliminated, while a screen was deployed to face Tver.

I also built my first Panzer division. An extra high movement unit could prove useful.

Unfortunately the Wermacht gets its first taste of partisans this turn. I choose to pay 100 PP to suppress them. Time is too valuable to waste.

Attachment (1)

< Message edited by jjdenver -- 4/16/2009 2:51:50 AM >

_____________________________

AARS:
CEAW-BJR Mod 2009:
http://www.matrixgames.com/forums/tm.asp?m=2101447
AT-WW1:
http://www.matrixgames.com/forums/tm.asp?m=1705427
AT-GPW:
http://www.matrixgames.com/forums/tm.asp?m=1649732

(in reply to jjdenver)

Post #: 55

RE: Half Again: Axis Perspective - 4/16/2009 2:56:40 AM

jjdenver

Posts: 2247
Joined: 11/2/2007
Status: offline

Jul09_41, Axis T+10 turn (11th turn of Barbarossa) (continued)

AGS surrounds Vinnitsa and seizes a bridgehead near Kiev (perhaps a risky move given the large number of Soviets to the north).

At sea there are more skirmishes. I'm moving my naval raiders around, leaving some zones empty to avoid allowing the Brits to focus their naval patrols in any one area. I'm not sure if it works but it feels like it helps.

Attachment (1)

_____________________________

AARS:
CEAW-BJR Mod 2009:
http://www.matrixgames.com/forums/tm.asp?m=2101447
AT-WW1:
http://www.matrixgames.com/forums/tm.asp?m=1705427
AT-GPW:
http://www.matrixgames.com/forums/tm.asp?m=1649732

(in reply to jjdenver)

Post #: 56

RE: Half Again: Axis Perspective - 4/16/2009 4:15:40 AM

gwgardner

Posts: 6722
Joined: 4/7/2006
Status: offline

Kaluga?! Never heard of it. Oh yeah, because I never made it that close to Moscow! Congrats on your effort so far.

_____________________________

(in reply to jjdenver)

Post #: 57

RE: Half Again: Axis Perspective - 4/16/2009 4:50:44 AM

jjdenver

Posts: 2247
Joined: 11/2/2007
Status: offline

Jul16_41, Axis T+11 turn (12th turn of Barbarossa)

Thanks GW - glad you are enjoying the AAR - Chuck's a great opponent and the game is a lot of fun.

AGN continues to skirmish around Talinn, screen Velikiye Luki, and begins the advance on Novgorod.

Attachment (1)

_____________________________

AARS:
CEAW-BJR Mod 2009:
http://www.matrixgames.com/forums/tm.asp?m=2101447
AT-WW1:
http://www.matrixgames.com/forums/tm.asp?m=1705427
AT-GPW:
http://www.matrixgames.com/forums/tm.asp?m=1649732

(in reply to gwgardner)

Post #: 58

RE: Half Again: Axis Perspective - 4/16/2009 4:54:13 AM

jjdenver

Posts: 2247
Joined: 11/2/2007
Status: offline

Jul16_41, Axis T+11 turn (12th turn of Barbarossa) (continued)

AGC manages to surround Kaluga and Bryansk. With these as a base the drive on Moskva can commence from a strong supply source.

Attachment (1)

_____________________________

AARS:
CEAW-BJR Mod 2009:
http://www.matrixgames.com/forums/tm.asp?m=2101447
AT-WW1:
http://www.matrixgames.com/forums/tm.asp?m=1705427
AT-GPW:
http://www.matrixgames.com/forums/tm.asp?m=1649732

(in reply to jjdenver)

Post #: 59

RE: Half Again: Axis Perspective - 4/16/2009 4:57:09 AM

jjdenver

Posts: 2247
Joined: 11/2/2007
Status: offline

Jul16_41, Axis T+11 turn (12th turn of Barbarossa) (continued)
AGS takes Vinnitsa. Some korps and divisions are transferred to AGN and AGC to support the imminent drives on Moskva and St Petersburg. The rest of AGN marches for Kiev.

Battles continue on the convoy lines to Russia.

Attachment (1)

_____________________________

AARS:
CEAW-BJR Mod 2009:
http://www.matrixgames.com/forums/tm.asp?m=2101447
AT-WW1:
http://www.matrixgames.com/forums/tm.asp?m=1705427
AT-GPW:
http://www.matrixgames.com/forums/tm.asp?m=1649732

(in reply to jjdenver)

Post #: 60