RE: Helio's Axis AAR (v Cannonfodder Soviet)

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: Helio's Axis AAR (v Cannonfodder Soviet)

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: Helio's Axis AAR (v Cannonfodder Soviet)

Page: << < prev 1 2 [3] 4 5 next > >>

Message

<< Older Topic Newer Topic >>

RE: Helio's Axis AAR (v Cannonfodder Soviet) - 10/19/2011 7:53:03 PM

heliodorus04

Posts: 1647
Joined: 11/1/2008
From: Nashville TN
Status: offline

Richard, I got your message. I'll reply shortly.
I think I definitely got bad die rolls. I also noted after the fact (and am ashamed to confess) that my initial 48 Panzer 3-division hasty attack did not have any artillery support.

Overall in this game, I tried to use the auto-sort routine to move SUs up to OKH so they could be "free-pushed" out of OKH into corps as necessary. There are two problems with this: First, pioneers DO NOT MOVE using the auto-move function. This is a major problem to using AP effectively (does this happen to the Soviet side, or is this another axis-only bug?).

Second, the "up-stream" movement of SUs is really unreliable unless everything is set to 0. I tried to set 16 and 18 Army to an support level of 3 so that theoretically they would get 3 pioneers and 3 artillery. However, what you end up with is 3 "guns," 3 "howitzers," 3 "artilerry" and 3 "nebelwerfer" (not to mention the various flavors of AA from SP light AA to motorized AA.

This aspect of the game is a train wreck that never got designed well, and while that's not a serious complaint, my conclusion is this:
Set Armies to 0, Army Groups to 0, OKH to 9, then lock any corps. Move OKH into range so that any SUs you want OUT of someplace are sent directly to OKH (1 AP each) and then you can move artillery using OKH into corps (free) and you can use "assign/form" on units to assign pioneers and Stugs. I think controlling it is the best way to save AP...

_____________________________

Fall 2021-Playing: Stalingrad'42 (GMT); Advanced Squad Leader,
Reading: Masters of the Air (GREAT BOOK!)
Rulebooks: ASL (always ASL), Middle-Earth Strategy Battle Game
Painting: WHFB Lizardmen leaders

(in reply to Richard III)

Post #: 61

RE: Helio's Axis AAR (v Cannonfodder Soviet) - 10/28/2011 5:10:18 AM

heliodorus04

Posts: 1647
Joined: 11/1/2008
From: Nashville TN
Status: offline

I�m starting with Finland and moving south. The short summary is that AGC achieved a coup de main at the land bridge, but AGS is a train wreck of constricted movement corridors, beaten-down armored forces, and the usual �perfect ZOC blanket� by the Soviet (and I intend to bitch about it, so be warned).

Simple stuff in Finland. No point moving too much along the west shores because you can�t do anything down there anyway. Save the trucks. Up north, I encircle the 3 divisions up there � I was hoping the one division that moved west to hold open a retreat path would itself retreat to the SW, but it retreated E along the river. I have decided that the plethora of Finnish regiments will set up camp around this cancerous cell and starve it until turn 15 or so (which turn is the cutoff for �free� replacement of surrendered divisions?). I don�t care if it�s gamey. So are perfect ZOC blankets, so deal with it. The Soviets have too many advantages as it is.

Attachment (1)

< Message edited by heliodorus04 -- 10/28/2011 5:11:24 AM >

_____________________________

(in reply to heliodorus04)

Post #: 62

RE: Helio's Axis AAR (v Cannonfodder Soviet) - 10/28/2011 5:12:24 AM

heliodorus04

Posts: 1647
Joined: 11/1/2008
From: Nashville TN
Status: offline

In AGN, I suffered from an absence of a logical plan.

The way the turn started, I just didn�t have a lot of great options. This was mostly a factor of my infantry being a bit too far behind, with the exception of 1.Corps. So I pushed and shoved a bit, and I used 56.Panzer to drive to the sea and simply bag the relatively strong tank division that I didn�t want to attack (plus 1 rifle div and 1 inf brigade). And given the way the turn was playing out, that motorized division from 39.Panzer wasn�t going to get very far unless he attacked a brigade across the river, I decided to have 39.Panzer sit idle this turn and draw fuel bonuses for next turn. It won�t help as much here in the north as it would elsewhere simply because forest costs panzers 3 MPs, and swamp is worse, and it�s entirely possible that if things go very well next turn, 39.Panzer may head back toward Vellikie Luki, but the rest helps the panzers, so resting they are.

Attachment (1)

< Message edited by heliodorus04 -- 10/28/2011 5:13:52 AM >

_____________________________

(in reply to heliodorus04)

Post #: 63

RE: Helio's Axis AAR (v Cannonfodder Soviet) - 10/28/2011 5:14:58 AM

heliodorus04

Posts: 1647
Joined: 11/1/2008
From: Nashville TN
Status: offline

AGC

Attachment (1)

_____________________________

(in reply to heliodorus04)

Post #: 64

RE: Helio's Axis AAR (v Cannonfodder Soviet) - 10/28/2011 5:19:10 AM

heliodorus04

Posts: 1647
Joined: 11/1/2008
From: Nashville TN
Status: offline

Land Bridge battles:
Here was my best results for the turn, enabled by my decision last turn to say �Screw fighting across the river� and concentrating virtually all of AGC across a 50-mile front. Here, my division tracking of every Soviet division proved essential. The turn began with a double and triple-line linear defense, with the forward line being mostly units that had not been attacked before, and rear lines being units I had bashed on prior turns.

The first wave of attacks pushed north to give breathing room. I used a few hasty attacks to drive the Soviet north flank further north. This was all conducted with infantry. The next wave saw infantry use deliberate attacks against the forward line of defense, inflicting heavy casualties and forcing retreats. The third wave saw infantry again move forward and use hasty attacks against targets that had been battered over prior turns, and the retreats kept coming.

Finally, 3.Panzer Group elements drove east and the last of the defenders began to route or retreat generally out of my way. So once I had the 3-lines depleted and retreated, then came 2.Panzer Group armor. As a refresher, last turn 24.Panzer moved from the Mogilev area to an area SW of Vitebsk and very close to the railhead. They received supply in the low 30s this turn (I forget whether they saved a lot of MPs last turn). Meanwhile, 46.Panzer Corps (the terrors of Lvov) sat idle SW of Mogilev and their MP allowances were between 35 and 38 at turn start. Good bonuses this time from an idle turn. Commander morale seems to make a lot of difference (or maybe bad skill checks when AGN panzers were idle around turn 4).

Upon investigation, both panzer units could drive into the gap, drive south at Smolensk, and outflanked the northern Dnepr. Suck it Ivan! Nice forts though!

As you can see, a second line of defense lies east of Smolensk, but the odds are these are weak divisions. There is nothing that can move from the Dnepr to getting into my way on the drive east, and I have absolutely plenty of infantry to protect my right flank from his Dnepr defense moving east along with me (I hope he does!). The down-side is that next turn, the infantry isn�t going to be able to do much but move east into the converted terrain. I expect that next turn, rest will be necessary for fuel recovery, but we shall see.

Here in the land bridge area, I benefitted immensely from tracking HQs and divisions. In tracking a division�s �men� and �guns� stats, there�s some error inherent because of SUs. In the long run, that error isn�t affecting my tracking, at least under my theory that any given�s Army will have a predictable average of SU supports, and the same SUs turn to turn. However, by also tracking HQs, I can get a general idea the attrition that the artillery SUs are taking. I think in the long run, that will help me know which HQs are depleted. For example, looking at my stats, I see 20 Army was attacked 10 times (5 on one division somehow, which never held but never routed). 24 Army was attacked 13 times (3 held results overall, and 2 routes). I know that each attack had on average 1 artillery SU (possibly 2), and I can figure that the guns on these SUs aren�t numerous anymore.

On to the disaster on the lower Dnepr�

_____________________________

(in reply to heliodorus04)

Post #: 65

RE: Helio's Axis AAR (v Cannonfodder Soviet) - 10/28/2011 5:19:39 AM

heliodorus04

Posts: 1647
Joined: 11/1/2008
From: Nashville TN
Status: offline

AGS

Attachment (1)

_____________________________

(in reply to heliodorus04)

Post #: 66

RE: Helio's Axis AAR (v Cannonfodder Soviet) - 10/28/2011 5:21:22 AM

heliodorus04

Posts: 1647
Joined: 11/1/2008
From: Nashville TN
Status: offline

You can easily see how little new territory I covered.

Let me start at Odessa: by the end of the turn, I was so befuddled that I moved on Odessa and attacked, when really, my original plan was to camp the Romanians there and move on until he gave it up. It�s not really important.
Moving north: The 6 divisions I isolated last turn reconnected to the main body, although none of my tanks were isolated (to date only 1 panzer division has been isolated in this game, and 1 infantry division). And they were arranged in just such a fashion as to make it very difficult to move around the northeast side of them.

Meanwhile, the hex I used to own but could never reinforce on Turn 4 across the Dnepr from Kiev was reinforced, though it�s CV wasn�t particularly high. I did ground attack missions (2 or 3) on it, and then used one division to conduct a deliberate attack with the heavy artillery in support. Unfortunately, the heavy artillery didn�t support� Only one battalion came to bear, and it wasn�t heavy, and I saw there were 42,000 men and more than 500 guns in support. That left me with very little to do with 6.Army and 1 Panzer Group.

On the northern side, 3 divisions of 48.Panzer Corps had 28-31 MPs, while 2 more (it has 5 divisions currently) had 10-13 (the ones south of the river and west of Cherkassy). Not much to do there. Further south, 3.Panzer Corps was in fine position to wrap around and ensure the 6 (whoo, 6! �sarcasm) divisions didn�t escape. They may not be many in number, but they are experienced, and the infantry is numerous � hadn�t been attacked prior to encirclement). And I might as well get them.

So 3.Corps shored up the south, and 48.Corps shored up the east, with 17.Army preparing to end the pocket next turn. I still had 3 divisions of 48 corps, and 48.Corps itself was eligible for buildup (remember, it had 5 divisions at turn start). So without much to do with these divisions that wasn�t wasteful, I moved them across to the Cherkassy-side of the Ros river, and then I fired HQ buildup (for a pretty economical 19 AP for 5 divisions!). The 3 divisions still had 10-15 MPs remaining, but what was I going to do? I saw no better option.

Next turn, perhaps I can isolate some more divisions along the west of the Dnepr. My fundamental annoyance is that 6.Army and 17.Army are going to lose the momentum they had reaching the Dnepr in a slow crawl along the shore trying to find a soft spot. And since CF is no longer a beginner, he�ll know better how to handle the avoidance of soft spots. Nobody fights west of the Dnepr unless they are new� Remember, to date the only Armaments I�ve captured were at Minsk. That�s it�

Further north, elements of 6.Army will hold the Kiev region, and the crawl will resume. I�m certainly open to tips on crossing the Dnepr in force. Should 48.Panzer and its 5 divisions do some deliberate attacks? What SUs do I need most? Pioneers or Arty.

Side note:
One interesting thing happened this turn, back in the AGN area: I had a division of roughly 2:1 CV attack a rifle division in swamp, and oddly got a �scouted� result due to abysmal leadership roll. I attacked again immediately, another odd leadership roll (that�s not the point of the story) and another �scouted.� Seeing the bad leadership rolls, I immediately checked the commander (6 Infantry rating, which certainly is adequate, and that�s still not the point), but I noted he had 12-0 record. This leads to the idea that �scouted� combats don�t count as lost for leader tallies? Or is it collected at the start of the next turn and updated then? And why can�t we voluntarily commit �scouting� attacks? Well, actually nevermind, I think the game already provides the players with too much enemy combat details, as you can see from my tracking�

_____________________________

(in reply to heliodorus04)

Post #: 67

RE: Helio's Axis AAR (v Cannonfodder Soviet) - 10/28/2011 5:21:48 AM

heliodorus04

Posts: 1647
Joined: 11/1/2008
From: Nashville TN
Status: offline

End turn remarks:

Attachment (1)

_____________________________

(in reply to heliodorus04)

Post #: 68

RE: Helio's Axis AAR (v Cannonfodder Soviet) - 10/28/2011 5:22:06 AM

heliodorus04

Posts: 1647
Joined: 11/1/2008
From: Nashville TN
Status: offline

I could use help in 2 areas:
1) How am I doing in the south, relatively speaking? What should I focus on after I cross the Dnepr (assuming that I don�t have any chance at armament factories unless I switch to complete-raiding tactics, which won�t be fun)? If I�m doing poorly, where did it begin and how can I fix it?

2) Air war. You can see my air war losses � this turn, my penetration around Smolensk displaced at least 6 airfields and more than 150 tons of fuel for the panzer corps. I destroyed a fair number of aircraft on the ground, so the losses are in fact worse than it seems. I can�t seem to get 1.5:1 in the air against him, and it�s pissing me the hell off. I�ve turned off interdiction. What am I doing wrong?

_____________________________

(in reply to heliodorus04)

Post #: 69

RE: Helio's Axis AAR (v Cannonfodder Soviet) - 10/28/2011 1:26:56 PM

Ketza

Posts: 2227
Joined: 1/14/2007
From: Columbia, Maryland
Status: offline

Post your air doctrine settings.

_____________________________

(in reply to heliodorus04)

Post #: 70

My Air Doctrines - 10/28/2011 1:38:05 PM

heliodorus04

Posts: 1647
Joined: 11/1/2008
From: Nashville TN
Status: offline

I just got turn 7 back, so I can tell you what I used at end of last turn:

Percent Required to Fly: 35%

Ground Support/Escort: 75/75

Ground Attack/Escort 125/150 (I did about 3-5 of these last turn.)

Airfield Attack/Escort 100/150 (I did 1 AF attack last game prior to displacing an AB near Smolensk)

Interdiction Attack/Escort 0/0 (no interdiction since T5)

Fighter Intercept 80
Night Fighter 80

_____________________________

(in reply to Ketza)

Post #: 71

RE: My Air Doctrines - 10/28/2011 1:47:53 PM

Ketza

Posts: 2227
Joined: 1/14/2007
From: Columbia, Maryland
Status: offline

quote:

I just got turn 7 back, so I can tell you what I used at end of last turn:

Percent Required to Fly: 35%

Ground Support/Escort:� 75/75

Ground Attack/Escort 125/150 (I did about 3-5 of these last turn.)

Airfield Attack/Escort 100/150 (I did 1 AF attack last game prior to displacing an AB near Smolensk)

Interdiction Attack/Escort 0/0 (no interdiction since T5)

Fighter Intercept 80
Night Fighter 80

Try this:

% required to fly 5 or 10%
GS/Escort 75/150
Fighter intercept 150 or higher.

Your airfield seems about right.

A high intercept is the best way to kill Soviet planes if he is using interdiction and GS. Also bombing Soviet bases that are not mutualy supporting with fighters.

Whatever you do by 1943 the Soviet airforce will mushroom. In my game against 76mm I have killed somewhere around 48k planes but he is still pushing a Soviet airforce around 18k in the spring of 43. I am consistently getting a 10-1 kill ratio but its not enough!

< Message edited by Ketza -- 10/28/2011 1:51:05 PM >

_____________________________

(in reply to heliodorus04)

Post #: 72

RE: My Air Doctrines - 10/28/2011 1:54:47 PM

heliodorus04

Posts: 1647
Joined: 11/1/2008
From: Nashville TN
Status: offline

Look at the result of 4 Soviet Airfield Attacks on his Turn 6:

So here are the stats of these pulled out:

Attack 1 KIAs
3 German, 3 Soviet

Attack 2 KIAs
5 German 12 Soviet

Attack 3 KIAs
5 German 10 Soviet

Attack 4 KIAs
6 German 14 Soviet

Total 19 German
Total 39 Soviet

2:1 ratio.
What explains that? Wish I had data on my old AF attacks, because I think I take much higher casualties
This is making me frustrated

Attachment (1)

< Message edited by heliodorus04 -- 10/28/2011 1:57:50 PM >

_____________________________

(in reply to Ketza)

Post #: 73

RE: My Air Doctrines - 10/28/2011 2:17:06 PM

Ketza

Posts: 2227
Joined: 1/14/2007
From: Columbia, Maryland
Status: offline

Clump your airbases together and put your intercept up and usage and you will kill a lot more of his raids. Also keep them out of range of his bi planes.

_____________________________

(in reply to heliodorus04)

Post #: 74

RE: My Air Doctrines - 10/28/2011 2:37:44 PM

heliodorus04

Posts: 1647
Joined: 11/1/2008
From: Nashville TN
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Ketza

Clump your airbases together and put your intercept up and usage and you will kill a lot more of his raids. Also keep them out of range of his bi planes.

What distance am I looking for in that? And where do my short-range Bf-109s go?

_____________________________

(in reply to Ketza)

Post #: 75

RE: My Air Doctrines - 10/28/2011 2:48:42 PM

Ketza

Posts: 2227
Joined: 1/14/2007
From: Columbia, Maryland
Status: offline

I keep my airbases 5-7 hexes away from the front. I do not know the exact distance that is required but it seems to work.

If the Soviet is playing the airbase raid game then keep your short legged fighters in your airbase clumps. If not put them closer to the front.

The main issue I think your having is your usage at 35% and fighter intercept being to low. When your usage setting is too high your planes are sitting on the ground while he is bombing you. If your fighter intercept is set higher you could be meeting his raids with 100+ fighters if your clumped. A few turns of that in 1941 a Soviet player will think twice about continued bombing.

I have had a few games when Soviets start airbase bombing early and have lost 150 planes in a single raid.

_____________________________

(in reply to heliodorus04)

Post #: 76

More Air War issues - 10/29/2011 6:25:01 PM

heliodorus04

Posts: 1647
Joined: 11/1/2008
From: Nashville TN
Status: offline

Is it normal to have your fighter corps with such high fatigue while your bomber corps has 1/3rd as much?

I don't understand why my games vs. CF feature such bad air ratios than any of the other AARs I'm seeing.

Here are comparisons of my top fatigue in fighters and in bombers.
I've never seen such high fatigue on my fighters before, and CF is not bombing airfields often (the 4 posted above this post were the first concerted efforts I've noticed).

Attachment (1)

_____________________________

(in reply to heliodorus04)

Post #: 77

Turn 7 Start - 10/30/2011 3:37:16 PM

heliodorus04

Posts: 1647
Joined: 11/1/2008
From: Nashville TN
Status: offline

Turn 7 arrived, and there�s no real nastiness to surprise me, other than the air war issues I�ve already posted as the prelude to the turn�s discussion. This turn, I�m going to discuss more, because I have the time, and because I�d like to share how I try to set goals in hopes others share their methodologies and heuristics.

I�m going to start with AGN; nothing happened in Finland worth noting.

Attachment (1)

_____________________________

(in reply to heliodorus04)

Post #: 78

AGN at end T7 - 10/30/2011 3:38:24 PM

heliodorus04

Posts: 1647
Joined: 11/1/2008
From: Nashville TN
Status: offline

On the left flank, 56.Panzer (Mannstein) has subsumed 2 infantry divisions (one from 18.Army, one from OKH). Mannstein will be staying in the area, and he commands infantry just fine, thank you. This turn, they are positioned to consolidate the Luga and welcome 26.Corps from Talinn, and the panzers will, as I�m starting to think works pretty well when supply line is within 15 hexes, rest.

16.Army actually has a chance to take Novgorod because I know the unit defending had 12.7k men, and 150 guns, and had 1 held and 1 retreat last turn. Still, a CV of 11 is intimidating, and it goes against a lower tiered �rules of 1941� which is not to attack where he�s strongest. Holding Novgorod actually does nothing interesting for me this turn anyway, I�d rather attack the unit northeast. Meanwhile, the tank division to the north of the lead 16.Army infantry has not been attacked yet in the game.

But that�s not really the way the turn played out. I don�t know if my approach to herding was wrong, but it was �herding FAIL� with every attack. Units kept retreating NE rather than across the Volkhov. But in the end it didn�t turn out too bad at all.

Attachment (1)

_____________________________

(in reply to heliodorus04)

Post #: 79

RE: AGN at end T7 - 10/30/2011 3:39:04 PM

heliodorus04

Posts: 1647
Joined: 11/1/2008
From: Nashville TN
Status: offline

All HQs were moved very close to the front so that they could support counter-attacks with the high volume of artillery and pioneers I have up here. I took a lot of terrain, difficult terrain at that, for little cost. There were 19 attacks up here, about 50/50 hasty/deliberate, and only 1 held result. I generated some morale this turn, though I didn�t pay close attention to how much. I did see that 39.Panzer�s divisions are all above the critical 86 threshold.

I�m curious how good or bad supply will be up here next turn, and when I will hear the call clearly that it�s time for 39.Panzer to go home. As I debate that while writing this, I keep thinking of the 3-Ms, MASS. I�m doing well here each turn because I have the panzer mass to be a bully. A 3-stack of panzer/panzer/motorized deals a great deal of �retreat momentum� even when doing hasty attacks. Next turn, ALL hasty attacks will have support, but I�m not sure hasty will get me very far next turn.

_____________________________

(in reply to heliodorus04)

Post #: 80

AGC outflanks the upper Dnepr - 10/30/2011 3:40:01 PM

heliodorus04

Posts: 1647
Joined: 11/1/2008
From: Nashville TN
Status: offline

AGC breaks through past the Dnepr bend SE of Smolensk.

Attachment (1)

_____________________________

(in reply to heliodorus04)

Post #: 81

RE: AGC outflanks the upper Dnepr - 10/30/2011 3:41:24 PM

heliodorus04

Posts: 1647
Joined: 11/1/2008
From: Nashville TN
Status: offline

This turn went about as I expected, with very few attacks and a lot of infantry moving as hard and as fast as it could to get into the gap. I debated having all 4 panzer corps rest this turn, but in the end only 47.Panzer and 24.Panzer rested all but 46.Panzer moved across the eastern Dnepr. I pursued this because next turn, the two stationary HQs will possibly be in good position for the divisions to do some hasty attacks within 5 hexes of the HQ, enabling it to use Buildup if it goes well. Otherwise one will almost certainly do a buildup and the other can exploit.
By my observations (I hope they�re accurate), the units NE of Smolensk are newly arrived over the last 2 turns, and are hopefully weak, and the remainder will be the units devastated by last turn�s land bridge battles. A drive NE that way can probably inflict a lot of retreats on depleted units, and infantry could move fast.

Otherwise, a drive in force East moves along the most favorable terrain on the way to Kaluga. I can make good speed here with armor in the lead. The gambit is what CF does with those units I bypassed along the river. And what he does with the northern flank around Vellikie Luki. That flank is over-extended, and while I can�t do much about it, any units there that are needed in defense of Moscow are going to have to start walking soon. He has lots of good order divisions south of Smolensk, but they won�t be able to dig in well, and again, hasty-stack-attacks by armor can cause a lot of retreats, and the infantry can make good speed eastward. What I feel is the imperative is to keep driving east and unbalancing set defenses.

Things are going well in the center, I think, and I�m seriously contemplating bringing the AGN FBD down here to help move the supply line toward Moscow. The HQ and SU situation here is optimal, with 9. & 4.Armies each having a well-lead, 4 division, artillery-saturated corps to drive forts, with a corps or two to protect flanks. The infantry corps of 2. & 3.Panzer Groups are going to support their respective breakthroughs. 12. & V.Corps are well lead, and VI.Corps is a local reserve.

Aside: As I�ve started to recognize units that have taken multiple retreats over prior turns, I�ve noticed that the penalty for multi-HQ attacks seem to matter a lot less, and the artillery spillover might wash it out. A multi-corps hasty-stack-attack (I�m going to abbreviate that as HSA hereforward) just needs to have sufficient numbers of bodies, it seems, to have the power to force retreats. So this turn, my HQs are at the front line or 1 hex behind. I want any hasty attacks I have to be supported next turn.

_____________________________

(in reply to heliodorus04)

Post #: 82

AGS forces a bridgehead at Kremenchug - 10/30/2011 3:42:26 PM

heliodorus04

Posts: 1647
Joined: 11/1/2008
From: Nashville TN
Status: offline

AGS is the usual assortment of problems. Here�s how things looked after my turn.

Attachment (1)

_____________________________

(in reply to heliodorus04)

Post #: 83

RE: AGS forces a bridgehead at Kremenchug - 10/30/2011 3:42:56 PM

heliodorus04

Posts: 1647
Joined: 11/1/2008
From: Nashville TN
Status: offline

I scoured up and down the river with 6.Army looking for weak spots, and there were a couple. But it didn�t look promising, as y�all said on page 2, the terrain west of Cherkassy makes it a bad crossing point, and it�s easily defended. I was hatching a plan to use 3. & 48.Panzer corps to get behind Krivoi Rog and encircle 12 divisions down there, possibly. But as the attacks moved along the Ingulets River, I scouted Kremenchug, defended by a Motorized Rifle that looked pretty bad. Motorized divisions tend to be retreat-happy, so I brought up 48.Panzer, and had 1 panzer division that had enough MPs to deliberate attack across the Dnepr, so it was on. I figured the deliberate by 1 division would fail, but with proper arty support, much disruption would be done, and the remainder of the corps could hasty attack, forcing the retreat. At that point, the 3 panzer divisions of 3.Panzer corps were to cross the bridgehead.

As it turned out, HuzAA! 13.Panzer division�s deliberate forced the retreat, and his fellows crossed with enough MPs to attack east, clearing another hex. This windfall was occupied by 3.Panzer corps, and 14.Panzer corps basically holds the southern shores. This basically was the net outcome of one HQ buildup, each, on turns 6 (48.Panzer corps� 5 divisions) and turn 5 (3.Panzer corps� 4 divisions). As pelton says, when you use Buildup you basically get 2 turns of extra movement points. 3.Panzer consumed their 2. Next turn, 48.Panzer will have some remaining, and it�s across the Dnepr.
I was pretty upset on Turn 5 when those attacks failed across the Dnepr, and the rolls had something to do with it. This turn, getting 3 hexes (only 2 occupied) across the Dnepr more than cancels it out; I�m back on schedule playing a little stronger than I customarily do.

In the south, it was another turn of few attacks, but that will all be changing shortly. OKH is on its way down here to help sort out the SU situation. When I set out this game to improve my AP use efficiency, I was not aware that pioneers did not automatically move up and down the HQ chain as pushed/pulled by settings. Overall, I�m about caught up now, but I didn�t save any APs over my usual sloppy approach.

Getting caught up in the Pripyet marshes, I think, is a rookie German mistake. I�m covering the perimeter of the marsh with 1 security division and 1 low-morale infantry division, both broken into regiments. The loss of momentum isn�t worth the supply block. The Soviets can�t hurt you from inside of it IF you pay attention to his borders, and retain blocking forces (6 regiments are plenty, it appears).

_____________________________

(in reply to heliodorus04)

Post #: 84

RE: AGS forces a bridgehead at Kremenchug - 10/30/2011 3:43:41 PM

heliodorus04

Posts: 1647
Joined: 11/1/2008
From: Nashville TN
Status: offline

End of Turn Musings

Attachment (1)

_____________________________

(in reply to heliodorus04)

Post #: 85

RE: AGS forces a bridgehead at Kremenchug - 10/30/2011 3:44:15 PM

heliodorus04

Posts: 1647
Joined: 11/1/2008
From: Nashville TN
Status: offline

Oddly, after following Ketza�s advice to the letter on my air doctrine settings, my kill ration hit 5:1. I only did 1 ground attack, no airfield attacks (and no aircraft were caught on the ground). That�s sustainable, for a bit at least.

Summing my division tracker per number of attacks, the total for the turn was 42 (this figure never includes attacks against isolated units, nor attacks against lone brigades, because those are almost always assumed a win). Of the 42, 3 resulted in Held. I am operating under the directive that it�s better not to attack than to get a Held result. Of the Soviet divisions which Held, 2 of the 3 were forced to retreat thereafter in the turn. I don�t like to let successful Soviet units go unpunished if I can help it.

_____________________________

(in reply to heliodorus04)

Post #: 86

Start of Turn 8 Sitreps - 10/30/2011 3:45:27 PM

heliodorus04

Posts: 1647
Joined: 11/1/2008
From: Nashville TN
Status: offline

Turn 8 has started and the one big change I�ve seen in the F11 battle view is that I did a lot of interdiction, and with the exception of a few battles, my airframe losses were 1:2 of the Soviets in those, and most of my attacks did damage to ground troops. I decided last turn that I would use interdiction since it seems more effective all the sudden. And with all the moving in open going on south of Smolensk and along the eastern shores of the lower Dnepr, I figured 2 could play the interdiction game. The down-side is that I set interdiction doctrine settings to 100 and 150 (escort) and I did have a lot of bombers show up � 20-30 often, with escorts number 50% to 150% of those. The battles were rather large, but at least I was fairly dominant.

After scouting, there are some interesting issues to consider in all Army Groups, so I think I�ll cover that. I�m not likely to finish the turn today, since I spent all day yesterday on it.

First, let�s look at pools and losses:

So this turn for the first time I came CLOSE to keeping the Red Army from growing. That�s somewhat disheartening, but this is the typical Soviet strategy: the slow-Robinsky ZOC blanket, with lines from time to time as well. I�m starting to catch up now, and hopefully the attack volume continues to grow, with the same 85% success rate or better. My own tank losses have slowed (but not for long, I suspect), and the air war was well-managed on Turn 7. These are good trends to have.

Attachment (1)

< Message edited by heliodorus04 -- 10/30/2011 3:46:02 PM >

_____________________________

(in reply to heliodorus04)

Post #: 87

RE: Start of Turn 8 Sitreps - 10/30/2011 3:46:34 PM

heliodorus04

Posts: 1647
Joined: 11/1/2008
From: Nashville TN
Status: offline

This is the AGN SitRep prior to moving. Does anyone have an opinion on whether this AGN FBD should keep moving the rail line? I�m strongly tempted to move the FBD down to Smolensk and keep that line moving at maximum possible rate. It�s worked very well for me down South.

When planning, I try to recognize what CAN be done based on movement allowances. 39.Panzer has MPs in the 26-31 range, which is quite good considering they did not sit idle last turn. 56.Panzer has 35/12 (motor/inf) and that won�t buy it much due to it�s location on the far western side of the battlefield. 41.Panzer has MPs from 24 to 32, and so it�s quite possible to perform one or two deliberate attacks into that corridor headed for Ladoga. I may have CF with his pants a bit down, trying to hold the Finns off in the far north� The down side to changing your avenue of approach up here is that extracting yourself from a bad position takes at least a full turn. But I feel that I should try to bust that route open this turn, because the alternative, attacking onto the Neva-line, is sure to be costly and it won�t upset his defensive plans at all even if I am successful.

Attachment (1)

< Message edited by heliodorus04 -- 10/30/2011 3:47:09 PM >

_____________________________

(in reply to heliodorus04)

Post #: 88

RE: Start of Turn 8 Sitreps - 10/30/2011 3:47:28 PM

heliodorus04

Posts: 1647
Joined: 11/1/2008
From: Nashville TN
Status: offline

In the AGC area, the Soviets got quite good movement overall.

Attachment (1)

_____________________________

(in reply to heliodorus04)

Post #: 89

RE: Start of Turn 8 Sitreps - 10/30/2011 3:47:57 PM

heliodorus04

Posts: 1647
Joined: 11/1/2008
From: Nashville TN
Status: offline

His moves played out very much like I expected. My 2 Panzer Corps that rested now have 38-40MPs (up from the low 20s/high teens last turn). My 2 panzer corps that were positioned for buildup are able to build up. I�m leaning right now towards the idea of hitting the divisions between me and Bryansk, because they are in favorable terrain and low forts, and they should be fatigued from moving. This is going to be a hard decision.

In the south, things are just slow. I�m starting to believe that CF�s play changes this game have had a lot to do with our last game. Last time I kept 47.Panzer corps in the south, but I was slower crossing the Dnepr (although I got more factories last time). And I made slow progress in Leningrad, but I made progress every turn. I�m thinking that he�s reinforced the south, whereas I�ve weakened it compared to last game. And I�m thinking he�s underestimated the center since I have 47.Panzer up there, and in the north, I think he�s a bit resigned to losing Leningrad while extracting the highest possible cost.

_____________________________

(in reply to heliodorus04)

Post #: 90

Page: << < prev 1 2 [3] 4 5 next > >>

All Forums >> [New Releases from Matrix Games] >> Gary Grigsby's War in the East Series >> After Action Reports >> RE: Helio's Axis AAR (v Cannonfodder Soviet)