Slitherine

quote:

ORIGINAL: JAMiAM

In the meantime, to further fuel the flames of debate, I call this screenshot "Counterattack: Revenge of the Untermenschen!"

German Panzer Korps bounced back into Rumania by hordes of Russians advancing to the rear...

Sorry Trey...couldn't resist...

quote:

ORIGINAL: kirkgregerson

quote:

I agree with the fact that Soviet air and support artillery units alone could be accounted for the majority of the losses the German force suffered. Therefore the "crack Panzerdivision vs. puny Rifle Division" argument is a moot point.

Well if 20 German Me 109 vs 10 Hurricans and 20 Il-2 can give the Sov some sort of incredible air superiority and air attack strength in 1942.. what happens in later when sov are flying 50 or more of Il-2s?

I have to laugh how many of you have twisted and morph'd this post into some other than what it was questioning. That's fine you want to goof on other people's legitimate concerns that's on you. I've still yet to see any proof in the context of the east front that this battle outcome could have occurred. So I guess since nobody can produce it, they just dance around and make fun of the thread starter like a bunch of immature children.

If the results are because this was a hasty attack according to Joel, that's good to know. I think that reduces the effectiveness of the German Panzer forces as historically they did act as fire brigades w/good success and were making 'hasty' type attacks in most situations after Case Blau.

If I need to be concerned about doing a hasty attacks with a well rested, elite Pz Div in WitE in 42 against a sov inf div in the open w/o entrenchment then I guess knowledge is power.

quote:

ORIGINAL: bjmorgan

quote:

ORIGINAL: 2ndACR

Bull crud......I was a 11b (infantry) before I went Cav. I know dang well an infantry (leg) can do a delaying action on a mechanized unit. In any kind of country. Any country  is better than clear, but I know it can be done. We practiced it, without armor, brad, and even without our guided anti tank. Just AT4 and small arms. It can be done.

Is it expected.......NO, not expected, but can be done.

This all boils down to using 1941 expectations and results versus a 1942 Russian. You have to change and expect the enemy to get better as it goes.

Maybe for a short period of time. But the game scale is a week. No leg infantry without AT can successfully delay for a week against a combined arms team, with substantial tanks, as the 101st Airlanding learned when they developed their then new AT doctrine in 1975. We went through them like crap through a goose when it was tested in the piney woods of the Florida panhandle. My tank company alone overran two full airborne battalions, and the controlers had to pause the war when I got to less than a mile from the 101st TOC. We started at daylight and it was not yet noon. They then had four hours to redeploy to make another go of it. Nevermind, we overran another BN by dark. Three days later, and two days before it was suppsed to end

Sure it wasn't real, but it was a close as can be done without real bullets. The commander of the 101st even admitted that "they had more work to do" with their doctrine. No s***.

quote:

ORIGINAL: bjmorgan

quote:

ORIGINAL: 2ndACR

Bull crud......I was a 11b (infantry) before I went Cav. I know dang well an infantry (leg) can do a delaying action on a mechanized unit. In any kind of country. Any country  is better than clear, but I know it can be done. We practiced it, without armor, brad, and even without our guided anti tank. Just AT4 and small arms. It can be done.

Is it expected.......NO, not expected, but can be done.

This all boils down to using 1941 expectations and results versus a 1942 Russian. You have to change and expect the enemy to get better as it goes.

Maybe for a short period of time. But the game scale is a week. No leg infantry without AT can successfully delay for a week against a combined arms team, with substantial tanks, as the 101st Airlanding learned when they developed their then new AT doctrine in 1975. We went through them like crap through a goose when it was tested in the piney woods of the Florida panhandle. My tank company alone overran two full airborne battalions, and the controlers had to pause the war when I got to less than a mile from the 101st TOC. We started at daylight and it was not yet noon. They then had four hours to redeploy to make another go of it. Nevermind, we overran another BN by dark. Three days later, and two days before it was suppsed to end

Sure it wasn't real, but it was a close as can be done without real bullets. The commander of the 101st even admitted that "they had more work to do" with their doctrine. No s***.

quote:

ORIGINAL: MechFO

quote:

ORIGINAL: 2ndACR

No problem. Won't work every time. I am just trying to point out that it CAN happen in real life.

For all we know the hasty attack did not start until day 6-7 of the week. Sunday the Russian unit is spotted, the recon sits in a REMF inbox until Tuesday when it is finally sent to Army and down the chain of command. Movement starts on Wednesday night, hasty on Thursday, which for some reason has issues. Not enough fuel made it front, the combat trains took that left instead of right and is now in the div next to you rear area. On Friday, you are ready to go again only to find the enemy has pulled back 10 miles. Plausible and could happen. Maybe it did. I know danged well it could and does happen all the time even today. I remember moving road signs around in Germany and mixing units up like no tomorrow.

I would love to have 1 day turns. But as a WITP guy, it would not be horrible, but prefer the longer turn time.

Sure.

For me that represents running out of MP's and explains why moving without disengagement penalties is possible in the players turn.

I would be for 1/2 day day - night turns, with the option to export combats into Steel Panthers and then reimport loss/readiness stats.

There can never be too much micro.

quote:

ORIGINAL: bwheatley

quote:

ORIGINAL: bjmorgan

quote:

ORIGINAL: 2ndACR

Bull crud......I was a 11b (infantry) before I went Cav. I know dang well an infantry (leg) can do a delaying action on a mechanized unit. In any kind of country. Any country  is better than clear, but I know it can be done. We practiced it, without armor, brad, and even without our guided anti tank. Just AT4 and small arms. It can be done.

Is it expected.......NO, not expected, but can be done.

This all boils down to using 1941 expectations and results versus a 1942 Russian. You have to change and expect the enemy to get better as it goes.

Maybe for a short period of time. But the game scale is a week. No leg infantry without AT can successfully delay for a week against a combined arms team, with substantial tanks, as the 101st Airlanding learned when they developed their then new AT doctrine in 1975. We went through them like crap through a goose when it was tested in the piney woods of the Florida panhandle. My tank company alone overran two full airborne battalions, and the controlers had to pause the war when I got to less than a mile from the 101st TOC. We started at daylight and it was not yet noon. They then had four hours to redeploy to make another go of it. Nevermind, we overran another BN by dark. Three days later, and two days before it was suppsed to end

Sure it wasn't real, but it was a close as can be done without real bullets. The commander of the 101st even admitted that "they had more work to do" with their doctrine. No s***.

All then tanks destroyed were P II & P IV (close support varient)'s. Those are crap tanks. My division had a full compliment of AT guns. A full compliment of AT rifles for the squads. And it's using the 42A TOE which is the most powerful TOE that the russian infantry gets the whole war.

quote:

ORIGINAL: Sabre21

quote:

ORIGINAL: bwheatley

quote:

ORIGINAL: bjmorgan

quote:

ORIGINAL: 2ndACR

Bull crud......I was a 11b (infantry) before I went Cav. I know dang well an infantry (leg) can do a delaying action on a mechanized unit. In any kind of country. Any country  is better than clear, but I know it can be done. We practiced it, without armor, brad, and even without our guided anti tank. Just AT4 and small arms. It can be done.

Is it expected.......NO, not expected, but can be done.

This all boils down to using 1941 expectations and results versus a 1942 Russian. You have to change and expect the enemy to get better as it goes.

Maybe for a short period of time. But the game scale is a week. No leg infantry without AT can successfully delay for a week against a combined arms team, with substantial tanks, as the 101st Airlanding learned when they developed their then new AT doctrine in 1975. We went through them like crap through a goose when it was tested in the piney woods of the Florida panhandle. My tank company alone overran two full airborne battalions, and the controlers had to pause the war when I got to less than a mile from the 101st TOC. We started at daylight and it was not yet noon. They then had four hours to redeploy to make another go of it. Nevermind, we overran another BN by dark. Three days later, and two days before it was suppsed to end

Sure it wasn't real, but it was a close as can be done without real bullets. The commander of the 101st even admitted that "they had more work to do" with their doctrine. No s***.

All then tanks destroyed were P II & P IV (close support varient)'s. Those are crap tanks. My division had a full compliment of AT guns. A full compliment of AT rifles for the squads. And it's using the 42A TOE which is the most powerful TOE that the russian infantry gets the whole war.

I hope you mean 41a TOE since the 41b doesn't begin until August 41 and then the 41c in Dec 41 followed by the 42a in March of 42.

quote:

ORIGINAL: kirkgregerson

quote:

I agree with the fact that Soviet air and support artillery units alone could be accounted for the majority of the losses the German force suffered. Therefore the "crack Panzerdivision vs. puny Rifle Division" argument is a moot point.

If I need to be concerned about doing a hasty attacks with a well rested, elite Pz Div in WitE in 42 against a sov inf div in the open w/o entrenchment then I guess knowledge is power.

quote:

ORIGINAL: kirkgregerson

To the Gates of Stalingrad: Soviet-German Combat Operations, April-August 1942: David Glantz
The 6th Panzer Division 1937-1945: Helmut Ritgen
"Destruction of the Barvenkovo Salient

Both sides spent the 20th of May reorganizing their forces in and around the Barvenkovo salient. During the 20th, the 14th Panzer Division captured Protopopovka, which narrowed the neck of the pocket to only twelve miles.
On the 22nd, German forces began their attempt to seal the neck of the pocket. In the south the 14th and 16th Panzer Divisions attacked northwards from Protopopovka and Zagorodnoe toward Chepel and the 14th Panzer Division reached Bayrak, to the south of Balakleia. In the north, the redeployed elements of the 3rd and 23rd Panzer Divisions attacked southwards from Balakleia and Andreevka smashing through the 337th and 47th Rifle Divisions, forcing crossings of the Northern Donets River at Chervonyi Donets and Krasnaia Gusarovka."

quote:

Having glanced over your AAR with NN, James took far bigger swathes of the map vs me, and far sooner, than you did against NN.

quote:

ORIGINAL: Paul McNeely
Could not possibly happen in the real world...much like it surely can't be possible to loose 4 fleet carriers off some dinky island midway across the pacific to an utterly uncoordinated (and botched) attempt at launching an air strike from 3 dispersed CVBGs...nah if that happened clearly the game is borked and the AI is cheating.

quote:


If the Americans had been as bad as everyone thought they were, the Germans as good as everyone thought they were and the British as bad as themselves thought they were the outcome of the campaign would have been very different.

quote:

ORIGINAL: Paul McNeely
Could not possibly happen in the real world...much like it surely can't be possible to loose 4 fleet carriers off some dinky island midway across the pacific to an utterly uncoordinated (and botched) attempt at launching an air strike from 3 dispersed CVBGs...nah if that happened clearly the game is borked and the AI is cheating.

quote:

ORIGINAL: Shellshock

quote:

ORIGINAL: Paul McNeely
Could not possibly happen in the real world...much like it surely can't be possible to loose 4 fleet carriers off some dinky island midway across the pacific to an utterly uncoordinated (and botched) attempt at launching an air strike from 3 dispersed CVBGs...nah if that happened clearly the game is borked and the AI is cheating.

Or cite a less famous example, that a force of 4 battleships, 8 cruisers, and 11 destroyers in a daylight surface engagement eventually retreated in the face of 6 puny escort carriers, 3 destroyers and 4 escort destroyers as happened in the battle off Samar. World War II was totally borked.

Since these players can't rant on their generals for their supposed failures as Hitler did, I suppose they have to rant on the system.

quote:

ORIGINAL: Paul McNeely
I find it odd how when Leyte Gulf comes up the first battle...where the US battleline of aging Battleships obliterated the Japanese is never mentioned.  The second force then sailed right by the burning wreckage of the Fuso on their way to that meeting with the jeep carriers.  It is purely speculative on my part...but I kinda think that experience had something to do with their retreat from the destroyer screen.  I, again guessing, figure its highly likely they retreated from the DDs more because they were afraid of what they thought was behind them (and which they knew had just vaporized half the attack force) then from the efforts of the ships they were facing.  I could be wrong...it is just the thought that I can't help but having over the situation.

quote:

ORIGINAL: Paul McNeely
What I would like to see is some sort of listing of what happened in each "phase/range band/whatever you want to call it.  This would be available if you click on a button in the show battles mode.
So you could see:
Long Range Fire Phase
20 122mm Hwz fired 1200 rounds and produced 15 men, 3 guns and 2 tanks in losses.
etc.

quote:

ORIGINAL: Paul McNeely

I'm fairly sure there were more than a few Japanese Admirals that would have loved to "gone back to a saved game" more than a few times...

I find it odd how when Leyte Gulf comes up the first battle...where the US battleline of aging Battleships obliterated the Japanese is never mentioned.  The second force then sailed right by the burning wreckage of the Fuso on their way to that meeting with the jeep carriers.  It is purely speculative on my part...but I kinda think that experience had something to do with their retreat from the destroyer screen.  I, again guessing, figure its highly likely they retreated from the DDs more because they were afraid of what they thought was behind them (and which they knew had just vaporized half the attack force) then from the efforts of the ships they were facing.  I could be wrong...it is just the thought that I can't help but having over the situation.

I agree completely...ranting at the system...or the generals is a typical reaction of tin plated dictators everywhere...and isn't that a good description for us Grognards?  (err that is a joke or an attempt at humor...which is impossible to convey over the internet...)

quote:

ORIGINAL: Paul McNeely

I still remember there was a Squad Leader scenario that introduced the US Airborne in Anvil of Victory that gave you this artillery piece that could only fire HE...and you were squared off against Tiger I's.  Firing HE at a Tiger I is an exercise in pointlessness, I don't think you can roll low enough to take out the tank, but when you read the aftermath description the gun is credited with destroying and driving off 2 or 3 Tiger I tanks if not more.  It played a major part in the victory in reality.

Beta Tester for:
Flashpoint Campaigns: Sudden Storm
War in the East 1 & 2
WarPlan & WarPlan Pacific
Valor & Victory
DG CWIE 2
SPWW2 & SPMBT scenario creator

quote:

To be fair to Admiral Kurita who commanded the force at Samar, he thought he had run directly into Halsey's 5th Fleet.

quote:

ORIGINAL: dlazov66
The most notable is when we were playing a Budapest scenario and I had a JapPz with a German 9-2 armor leader (buttoned up) and moved on to the board and expended all my MP to get on top of a hill, I pivoted and then fired at a T-34/85 with a 9-2 Armor Leader in it at 26 hexes (we were playing a threesome, I was the Germans and the SS, and my two buddies were playing the Russians and the Soviet Guards (that is how we split up the forces) I had no chance of hitting the damn thing, but guess what I rolled snake eyes twice and a 1 for a burning wreck. The Soviet commander retreated to a couch lit up a smoke and went to sleep, my other buddy was so pissed at him, since it was only the first turn and if failed his PMC (personal morale check)....

EDIT: Now that is some Utter Madness!

quote:

ORIGINAL: ComradeP

JAMiAM: I'll set up a game. In my opinion, random weather just makes 1941 more difficult for the Axis...

quote:

ORIGINAL: ComradeP
...and I prefer historical weather for both sides, but if you want to play random weather, that's fine too...

quote:

ORIGINAL: ComradeP

I'll start with locked HQ's. If you don't want locked HQ's you can fix that in a few seconds in the CR screen, and there's no automated support unit movement on turn 1.

quote:

ORIGINAL: Paul McNeely

I find it odd how when Leyte Gulf comes up the first battle...where the US battleline of aging Battleships obliterated the Japanese is never mentioned.  The second force then sailed right by the burning wreckage of the Fuso on their way to that meeting with the jeep carriers.  It is purely speculative on my part...but I kinda think that experience had something to do with their retreat from the destroyer screen.  I, again guessing, figure its highly likely they retreated from the DDs more because they were afraid of what they thought was behind them (and which they knew had just vaporized half the attack force) then from the efforts of the ships they were facing. 

quote:

ORIGINAL: Shellshock

quote:

ORIGINAL: Paul McNeely
I find it odd how when Leyte Gulf comes up the first battle...where the US battleline of aging Battleships obliterated the Japanese is never mentioned.  The second force then sailed right by the burning wreckage of the Fuso on their way to that meeting with the jeep carriers.  It is purely speculative on my part...but I kinda think that experience had something to do with their retreat from the destroyer screen.  I, again guessing, figure its highly likely they retreated from the DDs more because they were afraid of what they thought was behind them (and which they knew had just vaporized half the attack force) then from the efforts of the ships they were facing.  I could be wrong...it is just the thought that I can't help but having over the situation.

The Japanese fleet at Leyte Gulf acted in an odd manner. Sometimes reckless, sometimes timid. Two cruisers were lost to submarines before the battle was even joined because lttle effort was made to bother with an proper ASW screen.

To be fair to Admiral Kurita who commanded the force at Samar, he thought he had run directly into Halsey's 5th Fleet. That those escort carriers and destroyers in front of him were fleet carriers, battleships and cruisers. However, his orders were to smash his way through to the landing beaches on Leyte and there was no point in retreating and saving his ships for later, as events proved. By 1945 they were all eventually sunk or laid up for lack of fuel. Plus catching 5th Fleet's carriers in daylight in a surface action should have been seen as a golden opportunity. (even if only in error.)