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: Operation Barbarossa - Alpha AAR

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

Logged in as: Guest
Users viewing this topic: none
  Printable Version
All Forums >> [New Releases from Matrix Games] >> Gary Grigsby's War in the East Series >> After Action Reports >> RE: Operation Barbarossa - Alpha AAR Page: <<   < prev  20 21 [22] 23 24   next >   >>
Login
Message << Older Topic   Newer Topic >>
RE: Operation Barbarossa - Alpha AAR - 3/13/2010 12:15:02 AM   
Joel Billings


Posts: 32265
Joined: 9/20/2000
From: Santa Rosa, CA
Status: offline 		Just to be clear, a fortified zone is not a fort. It is a unit, that contains around 2000k, of which 270 are labor. The rest are about 2 companies of men and support troops. That's when they are up to full strength. They will help increase the fortification level of the hex (because like all troops they will dig), but not by a bunch. Units adjacent to the enemy dig less than those in the rear (since they can't spend all their time digging but have to worry about the enemy).

(in reply to Joel Billings)
Post #: 631
RE: Operation Barbarossa - Alpha AAR - 3/13/2010 12:22:22 AM   
Joel Billings


Posts: 32265
Joined: 9/20/2000
From: Santa Rosa, CA
Status: offline 		By the way, Lee's doing a great job given it's his first game and considering all the posting he's doing. Thank you for the AAR.

Lee was mistaken about attrition. All units take attrition each turn. Attrition is greatly increased for units that are adjacent to enemy units. Lee, didn't we tell you about that rule? Actually, the difference in the level of attrition taken was added months ago, but it's easy to miss all the changes made during development (not sure if Lee was even testing when we made that change).

(in reply to Joel Billings)
Post #: 632
RE: Operation Barbarossa - Alpha AAR - 3/13/2010 12:51:42 AM   
elmo3

 

Posts: 5820
Joined: 1/22/2002
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: Joel Billings

By the way, Lee's doing a great job given it's his first game and considering all the posting he's doing. Thank you for the AAR.

Lee was mistaken about attrition. ...


Thanks. Didn't know about the attrition so it's good you caught that. It's probably in the manual already but there is a lot to remember.


_____________________________

We don't stop playing because we grow old, we grow old because we stop playing. - George Bernard Shaw

WitE alpha/beta tester
Sanctus Reach beta tester
Desert War 1940-42 beta tester

(in reply to Joel Billings)
Post #: 633
RE: Operation Barbarossa - Alpha AAR - 3/13/2010 1:04:15 AM   
wmcalpine

 

Posts: 131
Joined: 8/23/2004
Status: offline 		Lee,

Thank you for posting the OOB from the beginning of Barbarossa. The increase in strength of the Russian army from June is scary. Winter will be interesting to be sure. I am looking forward to it.

By the way, is there a level of detail in the OOB totals by equipment type (i.e. AFVs by specific equipment type)? It would be interesting to see the quantative and qualitative changes in each force over time.

Bill

< Message edited by wmcalpine -- 3/13/2010 1:08:51 AM >

(in reply to elmo3)
Post #: 634
RE: Operation Barbarossa - Alpha AAR - 3/13/2010 2:31:51 AM   
stevekten

 

Posts: 13
Joined: 11/19/2004
Status: offline 		Keep up the good work! reading this post is a daily ritual with my coffee :)

(in reply to Joel Billings)
Post #: 635
RE: Operation Barbarossa - Alpha AAR - 3/13/2010 2:36:26 AM   
PyleDriver


Posts: 6152
Joined: 4/19/2006
From: Occupied Mexico aka Rio Grand Valley, S.Texas
Status: offline 		Winter is scary. If you havn't spent the time to stop (mid Oct.) and dig in, it gets outright ugly for the Axis. Its 12 weeks of pure hell, and seems to never end...I know Gary worked a good AI for it a long time back. I would like to see what it does now...

_____________________________

Jon Pyle
AWD Beta tester
WBTS Alpha tester
WitE Alpha tester
WitW Alpha tester
WitE2 Alpha tester

(in reply to wmcalpine)
Post #: 636
RE: Operation Barbarossa - Alpha AAR - 3/13/2010 2:42:06 AM   
elmo3

 

Posts: 5820
Joined: 1/22/2002
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: wmcalpine

...

By the way, is there a level of detail in the OOB totals by equipment type (i.e. AFVs by specific equipment type)? It would be interesting to see the quantative and qualitative changes in each force over time.

Bill


Dunno. Don't recall seeing that but I'll defer to one of the OOB guys on that one.


_____________________________

We don't stop playing because we grow old, we grow old because we stop playing. - George Bernard Shaw

WitE alpha/beta tester
Sanctus Reach beta tester
Desert War 1940-42 beta tester

(in reply to wmcalpine)
Post #: 637
RE: Operation Barbarossa - Alpha AAR - 3/13/2010 2:44:43 AM   
kfmiller41


Posts: 1063
Joined: 3/25/2003
From: Saint Marys, Ga
Status: offline 		I guess like smurfy I am just confused by the number, and don't get me wrong, I could imagine lower losses in a more conservative play style. That would also probably mean a front that didn't go as far east as historically and with less wear and tear, which seems like what is happening. But just judging from the numbers being posted (which is what we have to go by) it seems like the German army has increased it's tank numbers by 400. Based on what I have read on the 41 campaign (Glantz, Erickson, Carell etc) the Germans lost many more tanks than they could replace from enemy action and attrition/wear and tear from the distances involved. Are we just not seeing all the losses?

Also thank you Elmo for posting this great AAR, and matrix for getting it made. I can hardly wait till it is ready and look forward to seeing it evolve some more.

_____________________________

You have the ability to arouse various emotions in me: please select carefully.

(in reply to Joel Billings)
Post #: 638
RE: Operation Barbarossa - Alpha AAR - 3/13/2010 5:48:55 AM   
PyleDriver


Posts: 6152
Joined: 4/19/2006
From: Occupied Mexico aka Rio Grand Valley, S.Texas
Status: offline 		Miller, enjoy that Lee loves the game, If Andy or I had jumped on this AAR, well things would have different. Buts those are things that lead us on...Or job is to get it as close to historic we can...An the challenge is set before us...

_____________________________

Jon Pyle
AWD Beta tester
WBTS Alpha tester
WitE Alpha tester
WitW Alpha tester
WitE2 Alpha tester

(in reply to kfmiller41)
Post #: 639
RE: Operation Barbarossa - Alpha AAR - 3/13/2010 8:13:39 AM   
Smirfy

 

Posts: 1057
Joined: 7/16/2004
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: elmo3

Only look at the total losses on the reports I post.  Current turn and recent battle losses are meaningless due to the point at which  I take the screen shot.


If you look at your total losses and divide them by 20 that gives you an average of 56 AFV's per turn. AFV in this game I assume means Tanks, AG/SPA, Armoured Cars and Armoured troop carriers.

(in reply to elmo3)
Post #: 640
RE: Operation Barbarossa - Alpha AAR - 3/13/2010 8:37:18 AM   
Smirfy

 

Posts: 1057
Joined: 7/16/2004
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: Joel Billings

By the way, Lee's doing a great job given it's his first game and considering all the posting he's doing. Thank you for the AAR.



Yup first rate AAR

quote:

Lee was mistaken about attrition. All units take attrition each turn. Attrition is greatly increased for units that are adjacent to enemy units. Lee, didn't we tell you about that rule? Actually, the difference in the level of attrition taken was added months ago, but it's easy to miss all the changes made during development (not sure if Lee was even testing when we made that change).


Glad to hear this feature is included

(in reply to Joel Billings)
Post #: 641
RE: Operation Barbarossa - Alpha AAR - 3/13/2010 8:54:33 AM   
Smirfy

 

Posts: 1057
Joined: 7/16/2004
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: PyleDriver

Miller, enjoy that Lee loves the game, If Andy or I had jumped on this AAR, well things would have different. Buts those are things that lead us on...Or job is to get it as close to historic we can...An the challenge is set before us...

quote:

I guess like smurfy I am just confused by the number, and don't get me wrong, I could imagine lower losses in a more conservative play style. That would also probably mean a front that didn't go as far east as historically and with less wear and tear, which seems like what is happening. But just judging from the numbers being posted (which is what we have to go by) it seems like the German army has increased it's tank numbers by 400. Based on what I have read on the 41 campaign (Glantz, Erickson, Carell etc) the Germans lost many more tanks than they could replace from enemy action and attrition/wear and tear from the distances involved. Are we just not seeing all the losses?

Also thank you Elmo for posting this great AAR, and matrix for getting it made. I can hardly wait till it is ready and look forward to seeing it evolve some more.


Nope I dont believe we are. German Tank engines were worn out before the Kiev operation that is to say before truly deep penetration had begun. They were sent 300 replacement engines for the whole Russian Front which was descrided as "totally inadequate". They were also denied replacement tanks as they were being sent to set up new formations. Somebody mentioned the repair shops at Kursk which did a magnificent job. During Barbarossa the repair shops were not near the front but located in Germany so all serious breakdowns had to be returned. No matter how conservatively anyone is playing you would not expect to see those increases.

< Message edited by Smirfy -- 3/13/2010 8:55:31 AM >

(in reply to PyleDriver)
Post #: 642
RE: Operation Barbarossa - Alpha AAR - 3/13/2010 9:05:23 AM   
Smirfy

 

Posts: 1057
Joined: 7/16/2004
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: Joel Billings

I tried to explain this in an earlier post. You are not seeing casualties. You are seeing Killed, and Captured numbers. You are also seeing a "disabled" number which are not all casualites. 2% of these are sent back to the manpower pool each turn. There are many many more casualties going on in the units. They are the damaged units that are not destroyed. Some amount of these elements remain with their unit as damaged (they don't fight), and some amount are repaired within the unit and put back into action, and some are disbanded and sent back to the manpower pool to be used as general replacements.

IIRC, someone posted that Axis losses were around 300k (actually killed) up through November. So the game is not as far off as you think, although as I was saying it does look like lighter losses than history, and I think a big part of that is Lee's play. The fact that he's stopped attacking in October instead of December will reduce losses as well.


The men Killed figure would be what you would expect but men injured is far too low. I'm not sure the recovery time (and in some cases if at all) for the various wounds but I would expect that the incapcitated pool would be large compared to the killed.

(in reply to Joel Billings)
Post #: 643
RE: Operation Barbarossa - Alpha AAR - 3/13/2010 1:27:34 PM   
elmo3

 

Posts: 5820
Joined: 1/22/2002
Status: offline 		11/6/41 (turn 21)  We called off the assault on Leningrad for the winter after seeing that we were facing fresh Soviet troops following our assaults last turn.  That is a meat grinder right now so we'll need to push the defenders out of Pavlovo in the Spring to get better odds on Leningrad.  We made one minor attack on the Rumanian front and will continue trying to reach Nikolaev if it looks practical this month.  Other than that it was an uneventful turn where we mostly cleaned up or lines and positioned reserves behind the line.  I don't expect much to happen for a few turns so I'll just show big picture shots until something breaks.

Edit - Forgot to mention I took Joel's advice and did not build any more fortified zones.








< Message edited by elmo3 -- 3/13/2010 1:51:26 PM >

_____________________________

We don't stop playing because we grow old, we grow old because we stop playing. - George Bernard Shaw

WitE alpha/beta tester
Sanctus Reach beta tester
Desert War 1940-42 beta tester

(in reply to Smirfy)
Post #: 644
RE: Operation Barbarossa - Alpha AAR - 3/13/2010 1:46:38 PM   
elmo3

 

Posts: 5820
Joined: 1/22/2002
Status: offline 		Losses through turn 21.  There were no Soviet attacks in their part of turn 21.  Weather zones 1 thru 3 are Snow (Ice 1) and zone 4 is Mud for turn 22.








_____________________________

We don't stop playing because we grow old, we grow old because we stop playing. - George Bernard Shaw

WitE alpha/beta tester
Sanctus Reach beta tester
Desert War 1940-42 beta tester

(in reply to elmo3)
Post #: 645
RE: Operation Barbarossa - Alpha AAR - 3/13/2010 2:03:19 PM   
ComradeP

 

Posts: 7192
Joined: 9/17/2009
Status: offline 		If I were the AI, I'd try to break through in the Pskov area and race to the coast, trapping most of AGN or at the least forcing it to withdraw.

I'd also try to pocket the quality units of AGC by advancing to Smolensk from both Velikiye Luki and the area between the "V" and the "I" in the words Soviet stamped on the map.

AGS has plenty of reserves, it doesn't look like it will be in trouble in the winter. You might want to relocate some of those Panzer forces to the north, Elmo.

(in reply to elmo3)
Post #: 646
RE: Operation Barbarossa - Alpha AAR - 3/13/2010 3:59:44 PM   
Banzan

 

Posts: 288
Joined: 3/13/2010
From: Bremen, Germany
Status: offline 		Well, i think that would be a quite large target for the sovjet army in late '41. And it would also adding a very high risk for a large pocket to get all your assault divisions caught in. Not sure how strong mobile german forces are in blizzard, but in WiR they could still fight quite good with enough supply. :)

But i agree on the AGC :)

Well, i mainly registered to tell you how i like this AAR (and the game at all).
Having a long list of games i already played from Gary Grigsby (started with Panzer Strike on the C64) i am pretty sure this one will be great, too. :)


Edit: For some reason i missed your comment on AGC, must have been blind. :)

< Message edited by Banzan -- 3/13/2010 4:04:46 PM >

(in reply to ComradeP)
Post #: 647
RE: Operation Barbarossa - Alpha AAR - 3/13/2010 4:16:16 PM   
ComradeP

 

Posts: 7192
Joined: 9/17/2009
Status: offline 		Welcome to the forums Banzan.

The "Pskov to the sea" drive would be likely to fail, but it would require AGN to engage it instead of helping out AGC. As soon as the railroad at Pskov is cut, German supplies and rail transported forces will have to take a detour through the Baltic states. Pouring expendable Rifle formations into the area could achieve the desired result for minimal long-term costs to the Soviets.

The Soviets on either flank of AGC at Smolensk only have to move 5 hexes to meet up at Smolensk and cut off most of the fighting power of AGC. That should be possible, especially with masses of armoured formations.

Instead of Stalin's rather loopy plan to try and encircle all AG's at once, more limited offensives could yield good results.

(in reply to Banzan)
Post #: 648
RE: Operation Barbarossa - Alpha AAR - 3/13/2010 4:23:36 PM   
Zorch

 

Posts: 7087
Joined: 3/7/2010
Status: offline 		Anyone here remember Chris Crawford's Eastern Front? That had great playability.

(in reply to ComradeP)
Post #: 649
RE: Operation Barbarossa - Alpha AAR - 3/13/2010 4:59:53 PM   
Great_Ajax


Posts: 4774
Joined: 10/28/2002
From: Alabama, USA
Status: offline 		Smirfy, what Joel is saying is that in the casualties list you are only seeing equipment that are total writeoffs and killed soldiers. The units deployed in the game consist of certain quantities of equipment and manpower squads. These quantities can become damaged and do not participate in combat. These represent your tanks that need an overhaul and soldiers that are wounded but will eventually be RTD (Return to Duty). You will not see these "losses" portrayed on the end of turn casualty screen but directly within your units.

Trey


quote:

ORIGINAL: Smirfy


quote:

ORIGINAL: Joel Billings

I tried to explain this in an earlier post. You are not seeing casualties. You are seeing Killed, and Captured numbers. You are also seeing a "disabled" number which are not all casualites. 2% of these are sent back to the manpower pool each turn. There are many many more casualties going on in the units. They are the damaged units that are not destroyed. Some amount of these elements remain with their unit as damaged (they don't fight), and some amount are repaired within the unit and put back into action, and some are disbanded and sent back to the manpower pool to be used as general replacements.

IIRC, someone posted that Axis losses were around 300k (actually killed) up through November. So the game is not as far off as you think, although as I was saying it does look like lighter losses than history, and I think a big part of that is Lee's play. The fact that he's stopped attacking in October instead of December will reduce losses as well.


The men Killed figure would be what you would expect but men injured is far too low. I'm not sure the recovery time (and in some cases if at all) for the various wounds but I would expect that the incapcitated pool would be large compared to the killed.



_____________________________

"You want mercy!? I'm chaotic neutral!"

WiTE Scenario Designer
WitW Scenario/Data Team Lead
WitE 2.0 Scenario Designer

(in reply to Smirfy)
Post #: 650
RE: Operation Barbarossa - Alpha AAR - 3/13/2010 11:24:23 PM   
critter


Posts: 139
Joined: 3/26/2004
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: Joel Billings

Just to be clear, a fortified zone is not a fort. It is a unit, that contains around 2000k, of which 270 are labor. The rest are about 2 companies of men and support troops. That's when they are up to full strength. They will help increase the fortification level of the hex (because like all troops they will dig), but not by a bunch. Units adjacent to the enemy dig less than those in the rear (since they can't spend all their time digging but have to worry about the enemy).


What happens to the FZ's when they're no longer needed? Do they get absorbed by the units or dumped back in the repl pool?

(in reply to Joel Billings)
Post #: 651
RE: Operation Barbarossa - Alpha AAR - 3/13/2010 11:38:44 PM   
PyleDriver


Posts: 6152
Joined: 4/19/2006
From: Occupied Mexico aka Rio Grand Valley, S.Texas
Status: offline 		I think Joel ment 2k, and when units disband they go back into the pool...Now the fort zone stays, but if units arn't there, they go down in level over time...

_____________________________

Jon Pyle
AWD Beta tester
WBTS Alpha tester
WitE Alpha tester
WitW Alpha tester
WitE2 Alpha tester

(in reply to critter)
Post #: 652
RE: Operation Barbarossa - Alpha AAR - 3/14/2010 1:02:14 AM   
The SNAFU


Posts: 48
Joined: 3/10/2010
Status: offline 		Great idea to post a panorama of the entire front. It gives us a clear picture of the overall situation.

While the game is in Alpha, I think it is safe to assume that casualties and everything else will be as close to historical as a game can be by release.

Hope you brought your longjohns along. You will soon be needing them.

< Message edited by The SNAFU -- 3/14/2010 1:08:54 AM >

_____________________________

However beautiful the strategy, you should occasionally look at the results. Winston Churchill

(in reply to PyleDriver)
Post #: 653
RE: Operation Barbarossa - Alpha AAR - 3/14/2010 1:14:14 PM   
elmo3

 

Posts: 5820
Joined: 1/22/2002
Status: offline 		11/13/41 (turn 22)  Another turn where we were primarily repositioning units into reserve status and digging in.  We made a couple of attacks along the Rumanian front to stabilize the line.  The Soviets countered with a couple of attacks up north, one of which pushed back a regiment of the 9th Army near Smolensk and caused the fortified zone unit to surrender.  Other than that there was nothing to report.  So since some people asked to see the Soviet side of the lines, here are three shots showing what we are up against.  Not all German forces are shown due to fog of war.








_____________________________

We don't stop playing because we grow old, we grow old because we stop playing. - George Bernard Shaw

WitE alpha/beta tester
Sanctus Reach beta tester
Desert War 1940-42 beta tester

(in reply to The SNAFU)
Post #: 654
RE: Operation Barbarossa - Alpha AAR - 3/14/2010 1:34:50 PM   
JJKettunen


Posts: 3530
Joined: 3/12/2002
From: Finland
Status: offline 		Bloody hell, that middle picture is frightening!

_____________________________

Jyri Kettunen

The eternal privilege of those who never act themselves: to interrogate, be dissatisfied, find fault.

- A. Solzhenitsyn

(in reply to elmo3)
Post #: 655
RE: Operation Barbarossa - Alpha AAR - 3/14/2010 1:39:02 PM   
Jim D Burns


Posts: 4013
Joined: 2/25/2002
From: Salida, CA.
Status: offline 		Wow, the importance of creating and then reducing huge pockets of Soviet units in the summer of 1941, rather than simply pushing through them, is made starkly clear with this last set of screenshots.

I expect you are in for one tough winter.

Jim


_____________________________


(in reply to elmo3)
Post #: 656
RE: Operation Barbarossa - Alpha AAR - 3/14/2010 3:10:51 PM   
ComradeP

 

Posts: 7192
Joined: 9/17/2009
Status: offline 		That second picture's pretty scary indeed, although there are also a lot of brigades in there, it's not all divisions, and many divisions are Rifle divisions which in 1941 are not that scary.

Any idea why the AI places its units like a carpet across Russia, instead of concentrating them? It seems the AI would get much better results by concentrating units in stacks, as even though the total amount of units is high, there don't seem to be a lot of placed the Axis could not slice through if they wanted (of course they don't, but the Soviets don't know that).

(in reply to Jim D Burns)
Post #: 657
RE: Operation Barbarossa - Alpha AAR - 3/14/2010 3:53:20 PM   
elmo3

 

Posts: 5820
Joined: 1/22/2002
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: ComradeP

...

Any idea why the AI places its units like a carpet across Russia, instead of concentrating them? ...


I think the AI is trying for defense in depth which is a good idea to keep the Axis from punching through a thin line and being free to make pockets. However they may be overdoing it a bit. It will be looked at I'm sure.


_____________________________

We don't stop playing because we grow old, we grow old because we stop playing. - George Bernard Shaw

WitE alpha/beta tester
Sanctus Reach beta tester
Desert War 1940-42 beta tester

(in reply to ComradeP)
Post #: 658
RE: Operation Barbarossa - Alpha AAR - 3/14/2010 3:53:55 PM   
Capitaine

 

Posts: 1043
Joined: 1/15/2002
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: ComradeP

That second picture's pretty scary indeed, although there are also a lot of brigades in there, it's not all divisions, and many divisions are Rifle divisions which in 1941 are not that scary.

Any idea why the AI places its units like a carpet across Russia, instead of concentrating them? It seems the AI would get much better results by concentrating units in stacks, as even though the total amount of units is high, there don't seem to be a lot of placed the Axis could not slice through if they wanted (of course they don't, but the Soviets don't know that).


I tend to agree. The Soviet unit placement doesn't look very realistic, and possibly also makes it seem like they have too strong a force. I've played a lot of Eastern Front board games in my time and I don't recall seeing so many Soviet units all along the front in 41-42. Maybe concentrated around Moscow, but definitely more sparse than what we're seeing here.

Of course, maybe this is totally historical, IDK...

(in reply to ComradeP)
Post #: 659
RE: Operation Barbarossa - Alpha AAR - 3/14/2010 4:28:19 PM   
Smirfy

 

Posts: 1057
Joined: 7/16/2004
Status: offline
According to Glantz the Russians raised 821 divisions (or equivalant) and 266 Brigades through to December 41 losing 229 division equivalents. Russian divisions had a smaller establishment than their German counterparts I believe. Perhaps Corps would be a better unit size for the Russians

(in reply to Capitaine)
Post #: 660
Page:   <<   < prev  20 21 [22] 23 24   next >   >>
All Forums >> [New Releases from Matrix Games] >> Gary Grigsby's War in the East Series >> After Action Reports >> RE: Operation Barbarossa - Alpha AAR Page: <<   < prev  20 21 [22] 23 24   next >   >>
Jump to:





New Messages No New Messages
Hot Topic w/ New Messages Hot Topic w/o New Messages
Locked w/ New Messages Locked w/o New Messages
 Post New Thread
 Reply to Message
 Post New Poll
 Submit Vote
 Delete My Own Post
 Delete My Own Thread
 Rate Posts


Forum Software © ASPPlayground.NET Advanced Edition 2.4.5 ANSI

0.781