Micheal T (Ger) vs Kamil (Sov)

Matrix Games Forums

Forums Register Login Photo Gallery Member List Search Calendars FAQ

My Profile Inbox Address Book My Subscription My Forums Log Out

Micheal T (Ger) vs Kamil (Sov)

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 >> Micheal T (Ger) vs Kamil (Sov)

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

Message

<< Older Topic Newer Topic >>

Micheal T (Ger) vs Kamil (Sov) - 4/23/2013 10:58:02 PM

KamilS

Posts: 1827
Joined: 2/5/2011
Status: offline

Our rules

Alt 41CG scenario
Server game
Locked HQ Support Axis/ Unlocked Soviet
Full FOW
Non Random Weather

House Rules

No Para drops to break pockets at anytime in the game. No Para missions at all by the Soviets until the first
Blizzard.

No bombing of air bases more than 3 times a turn (after turn 1).

No bombing of HQ's unless stacked with a ground unit

No attacks on partisans: they are to be reduced buy movement into or within their ZOC

Only 3 air attacks on city/ports per city per turn.

Reserves:
German: Only 4 CP for Corp and 6 CP for Armies/Army Groups can be placed in Reserve

Soviet: Prior to Sept 1941: Only 2 CP for Corp and 4 CP for Armies/Fronts
From Sept 41 on: 6 for Armies/Fronts

Also no units under Stavka or OKH can be placed in reserve.
And all units placed in Reserve must be within 5 hexes of their HQ.

The German player is only allowed to disband 3 Corp HQ at most during the game. Soviet disbandments are not limited.

Any single Leader can only be reassigned manually once per turn.

Additional Auto VC (in place to prevent ludicrous runaways) If the Axis player holds
Leningrad, Moscow, Voronezh and Rostov concurrently at the end of 1941 he wins
an Auto Victory.

If the Soviet player holds Pskov, Smolensk, Bryansk,
Kharkov and Stalino concurrently at anytime in 1942 he wins an Auto Victory

< Message edited by Kamil -- 4/23/2013 11:09:03 PM >

Post #: 1

RE: Micheal T (Ger) vs Kamil (Sov) - 4/23/2013 11:01:43 PM

Peltonx

Posts: 7250
Joined: 4/9/2006
Status: offline

Study his past games its always the same MO.

1. Hold Moscow as it is really the only one you can for sure hold.

After that you know what to do.

Thats it good luck.

_____________________________

Beta Tester WitW & WitE

(in reply to KamilS)

Post #: 2

RE: Micheal T (Ger) vs Kamil (Sov) - 4/23/2013 11:04:31 PM

KamilS

Posts: 1827
Joined: 2/5/2011
Status: offline

quote:

Pelton

Study his past games its always the same MO.

Well, I did go through turns 1 to 3 in many of AARs, but once initial phase is over former scenarios rarely apply.

quote:

Thats it good luck.

I hope goddess of dice will smile upon me.

< Message edited by Kamil -- 4/23/2013 11:11:30 PM >

(in reply to Peltonx)

Post #: 3

RE: Micheal T (Ger) vs Kamil (Sov) - 4/23/2013 11:08:32 PM

KamilS

Posts: 1827
Joined: 2/5/2011
Status: offline

T1 north and centre (German)

In the north Michael went for speed in the centre for size.

Turn number two will tell me more about his intentions ... but I assume they are not good

Attachment (1)

(in reply to KamilS)

Post #: 4

RE: Micheal T (Ger) vs Kamil (Sov) - 4/23/2013 11:12:14 PM

KamilS

Posts: 1827
Joined: 2/5/2011
Status: offline

T1 south (German)

Quality start in the south.

Attachment (1)

(in reply to KamilS)

Post #: 5

RE: Micheal T (Ger) vs Kamil (Sov) - 4/24/2013 12:00:56 AM

KamilS

Posts: 1827
Joined: 2/5/2011
Status: offline

T1 north (Soviet)

I plan to stop withdrawing and fight once favourable ground is reached.

Attachment (1)

< Message edited by Kamil -- 4/24/2013 12:08:54 AM >

(in reply to KamilS)

Post #: 6

RE: Micheal T (Ger) vs Kamil (Sov) - 4/24/2013 12:02:47 AM

KamilS

Posts: 1827
Joined: 2/5/2011
Status: offline

T2 centre (Soviet)

I won't attempt to defend land-bridge.

Attachment (1)

(in reply to KamilS)

Post #: 7

RE: Micheal T (Ger) vs Kamil (Sov) - 4/24/2013 12:05:32 AM

KamilS

Posts: 1827
Joined: 2/5/2011
Status: offline

T2 south (Soviet)

I show no sportsmanship here either.

I run away and accept inevitable losses in armament industry - losing 20 to 30 points should not make big dent in production output.

Attachment (1)

(in reply to KamilS)

Post #: 8

RE: Micheal T (Ger) vs Kamil (Sov) - 4/24/2013 2:49:40 PM

Manstein63

Posts: 688
Joined: 6/30/2010
Status: offline

Your making it too easy for him by giving up so much ground he will be hitting the Dnepr almost at full strength (almost like a quiet drive in the country side). If you haven't sent the VVS scuttling into reserve change all your I53's I16's and the other obsolete fighter bombers to Bomber mode
& use them to attack his Panzers you won't inflict very much damage but it will cause some disruption.
Manstein63

(in reply to KamilS)

Post #: 9

RE: Micheal T (Ger) vs Kamil (Sov) - 4/24/2013 3:34:20 PM

HITMAN202

Posts: 714
Joined: 11/10/2011
Status: offline

Seeing how THEPROS played against (and made me nearly impotent), 1) I don't see the same large total number of units on the map as I faced against THEPROS (which is particularly puzzling in AGN since it appears he routed a good number of units outside pockets of isolation), 2) even though you say that you are not going to defend the Smolensk landbridge you have a huge number of units there that need to be north or south, and 3) Manstein IMO is wrong about AGS. ThePROS kept a tight gaggle of units 3-4 hexes in front of my infantry. The infantry were never in position to make effective hasty attacks and the Pz could do little against a packed front cordon

< Message edited by HITMAN202 -- 4/24/2013 3:49:41 PM >

_____________________________

WITE is a good addiction with no cure.

(in reply to Manstein63)

Post #: 10

RE: Micheal T (Ger) vs Kamil (Sov) - 4/24/2013 4:55:03 PM

Manstein63

Posts: 688
Joined: 6/30/2010
Status: offline

ORIGINAL: HITMAN202

quote:

ThePROS kept a tight gaggle of units 3-4 hexes in front of my infantry. The infantry were never in position to make effective hasty attacks and the Pz could do little against a packed front cordon

If you look at AGS you can see that there is nothing between Michael's Panzers & the River Dnepr apart from FZ's & a stray unit. so all he has to do is head east at 50 MP's per turn & he will be across the river by Turn 3 or 4 he can also spend AP's to motorize his slower infantry units the turn after his tanks have taken the ground & they can follow on at speed as there are no enemy units to impede them. Just to be clear I am not criticizing Kamil's choices (he is playing the game not me) I am just saying that I would be more inclined not to give up as much territory without more of a struggle.
Manstein63

(in reply to HITMAN202)

Post #: 11

RE: Micheal T (Ger) vs Kamil (Sov) - 4/24/2013 5:20:44 PM

HITMAN202

Posts: 714
Joined: 11/10/2011
Status: offline

I thought the cost of moving infantry with trucks is so ridiculously expensive that it's never on option ???? Also if you move them up, Kamil moves 4 hexes east and deliberate attacks are still a no go. And even if the infantry eventually is able to make deliberate attacks on the 14-17 th turns in front of Voronezh and Rostov, they are out of supply and paper tigers. Am I wrong ???

_____________________________

WITE is a good addiction with no cure.

(in reply to Manstein63)

Post #: 12

RE: Micheal T (Ger) vs Kamil (Sov) - 4/24/2013 5:30:17 PM

Seminole

Posts: 2105
Joined: 7/28/2011
Status: offline

quote:

I thought the cost of moving infantry with trucks is so ridiculously expensive that it's never on option ????

I don't think that is what he means. The infantry will be moving at full speed in the wake of the panzers already converted territory, whilst the panzers will pay no additional MP related to ZOC or hasty/deliberate attacks because the ground has largely been ceded without a fight.

We haven't seen what Kamil is planning on the Luga. The key will be which way MT goes from Pskov (due East, or Northeast?)

< Message edited by Seminole -- 4/24/2013 5:36:20 PM >

(in reply to HITMAN202)

Post #: 13

RE: Micheal T (Ger) vs Kamil (Sov) - 4/24/2013 7:29:04 PM

KamilS

Posts: 1827
Joined: 2/5/2011
Status: offline

quote:

Manstein63

If you look at AGS you can see that there is nothing between Michael's Panzers & the River Dnepr apart from FZ's & a stray unit. so all he has to do is head east at 50 MP's per turn & he will be across the river by Turn 3 or 4 he can also spend AP's to motorize his slower infantry units the turn after his tanks have taken the ground & they can follow on at speed as there are no enemy units to impede them. Just to be clear I am not criticizing Kamil's choices (he is playing the game not me) I am just saying that I would be more inclined not to give up as much territory without more of a struggle.

I don't have enough troops to be able to spare enough units for sensible check-boarding in the south. I still could have risked doing it, but it would have jeopardised my efforts in the centre and north. Moreover defences would not have enough depth to make it possible to front line to fall back to trench lines built by units positioned farther to the west.

(in reply to Seminole)

Post #: 14

RE: Micheal T (Ger) vs Kamil (Sov) - 4/24/2013 7:32:04 PM

KamilS

Posts: 1827
Joined: 2/5/2011
Status: offline

quote:

Seminole

We haven't seen what Kamil is planning on the Luga. The key will be which way MT goes from Pskov (due East, or Northeast?)

I agree. Michael has initiative so I have to react according to his actions.

(in reply to KamilS)

Post #: 15

RE: Micheal T (Ger) vs Kamil (Sov) - 4/25/2013 1:48:47 AM

Peltonx

Posts: 7250
Joined: 4/9/2006
Status: offline

You can lose 80 armament points and will see no effect after late 42, both manpower pools and armaments will grow.

Its pointless to defence south, MT only lightly checker boards the south and give up a few arm pts. It so easly to pocket units in the south, even when its defended GHC can cross river by turn 5 easly.

Your simply throwing a way units in south in 41 and 42.

MT almost always thrusts north of the landbridge, then disides where to go. The fastest railheads are just behind his northern landbridge thrust is why he always does it.

The most exploitable hexes are on that line and easyist to convert.

Once he has the ground north of landbridge hes in control IF you do not defend as Flaviusx has pointed out a 100 or so times. Checked board unit 5 to 7 hexes east of Smolensk.

FZ's near Moscow help allot as hexes will be a carpet of 3 lvl forts.

Also with the fixing of ammo bug, GHC national morale bug and the squad converting / arm pt sink, balloning manpower pool/ crashing OOB its going to be allot harder to break GHC lines.

The seeming uber SHC stream roller we have all seen crack GHC lines in early 44 will have to do all the work with out the help of bugs.

So the old running for the hills tactic's employed by everyone playing SHC including myself is going to see a very different out come.

As Flaviusx pointed out a while back GHC choke point should be manpower and not armaments. That is what should be happening once the fix for the 43 bug is in. Before the choke point was arm pts becuase of several bugs.

So now tring to crash GHC OOB by depleting GHC arm pts will be much much harder.

The standard ballooning of GHC manpower pool will be very hard to acheive with out the help of bugs.

< Message edited by Pelton -- 4/25/2013 2:07:04 AM >

_____________________________

Beta Tester WitW & WitE

(in reply to KamilS)

Post #: 16

RE: Micheal T (Ger) vs Kamil (Sov) - 4/25/2013 2:28:04 AM

TulliusDetritus

Posts: 5521
Joined: 4/1/2004
From: The Zone�
Status: offline

Good luck, Kamil! You will certainly need it

_____________________________

a nu cheeki breeki iv damke

(in reply to Peltonx)

Post #: 17

RE: Micheal T (Ger) vs Kamil (Sov) - 4/25/2013 8:09:26 AM

sillyflower

Posts: 3509
Joined: 8/4/2010
From: Back in Blighty
Status: offline

I will watch closely as I'm next

and in the hope you can teach me how to stop him..............

< Message edited by sillyflower -- 4/25/2013 8:10:37 AM >

_____________________________

web exchange

Post: I am always fearful that when I put this game down on the table and people see the box-art they will think I am some kind of neo-Nazi

Reply: They already know you're a gamer. What other shame can possibly compare?

(in reply to TulliusDetritus)

Post #: 18

RE: Micheal T (Ger) vs Kamil (Sov) - 4/26/2013 8:35:53 AM

randallw

Posts: 2057
Joined: 9/2/2010
Status: offline

I suppose Michael may be dropping fuel to his mobile divisions; finding and bombing the German transport planes may be disruptive?

(in reply to sillyflower)

Post #: 19

RE: Micheal T (Ger) vs Kamil (Sov) - 4/26/2013 2:51:04 PM

Ketza

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

Transport trap - Set up airbases within range of his deep Panzers and give them a decent air leader. Load them with cheap fighters and set your air intercept to 200+ and watch his fuel lorries drop from the air like leaves in fall.

Much more effective then bombing airbases.

(in reply to randallw)

Post #: 20

RE: Micheal T (Ger) vs Kamil (Sov) - 4/26/2013 6:50:43 PM

KamilS

Posts: 1827
Joined: 2/5/2011
Status: offline

quote:

randallw

I suppose Michael may be dropping fuel to his mobile divisions; finding and bombing the German transport planes may be disruptive?

I am in the process of reorganising my air forces, so in turn or two I will be hopefully able to inflict some casualties.

quote:

Ketza

Transport trap - Set up airbases within range of his deep Panzers and give them a decent air leader. Load them with cheap fighters and set your air intercept to 200+ and watch his fuel lorries drop from the air like leaves in fall.

Much more effective then bombing airbases.

Interesting advice. Thank you.

(in reply to Ketza)

Post #: 21

RE: Micheal T (Ger) vs Kamil (Sov) - 4/27/2013 9:27:10 AM

randallw

Posts: 2057
Joined: 9/2/2010
Status: offline

Remember that fighters have fairly limited range; bases will have to be relatively close ( 10-15 hexes? ).

(in reply to KamilS)

Post #: 22

RE: Micheal T (Ger) vs Kamil (Sov) - 4/27/2013 11:01:15 AM

KamilS

Posts: 1827
Joined: 2/5/2011
Status: offline

T2 north & centre (German)

Contrary to my expectations Michael pushed towards Velikie Luki and practically outflanked my positions at land-bridge.

It is not an issue, because I planned to make a stand to the east, near Smolensk.

Attachment (1)

< Message edited by Kamil -- 4/27/2013 11:02:07 AM >

(in reply to randallw)

Post #: 23

RE: Micheal T (Ger) vs Kamil (Sov) - 4/27/2013 11:02:30 AM

KamilS

Posts: 1827
Joined: 2/5/2011
Status: offline

T2 south (German)

Transitory turn in the south.

Attachment (1)

(in reply to KamilS)

Post #: 24

RE: Micheal T (Ger) vs Kamil (Sov) - 4/27/2013 11:08:07 AM

KamilS

Posts: 1827
Joined: 2/5/2011
Status: offline

T2 north & centre (Soviet)

I managed to establish defences strong enough to feel secure until arrival of German infantry. But everything has its price and I think, that soon I might get punished in the south for overcommitment in centre.

Attachment (1)

(in reply to KamilS)

Post #: 25

RE: Micheal T (Ger) vs Kamil (Sov) - 4/27/2013 11:15:36 AM

KamilS

Posts: 1827
Joined: 2/5/2011
Status: offline

T2 south (Soviet)

One more turn and Michael will arrive at the banks of Dnieper. Turn later I will be extremely vulnerable and easy to surround. Hopefully he won't have enough MP to do it.

If everything goes well, at turn 4 I abandon Kiev and Cherkassy and form defence lines just west of Poltava.

Attachment (1)

(in reply to KamilS)

Post #: 26

RE: Micheal T (Ger) vs Kamil (Sov) - 4/29/2013 9:53:44 AM

KamilS

Posts: 1827
Joined: 2/5/2011
Status: offline

T3 north & centre (German)

Michael's rapid advance continues.

Attachment (1)

(in reply to KamilS)

Post #: 27

RE: Micheal T (Ger) vs Kamil (Sov) - 4/29/2013 9:55:01 AM

KamilS

Posts: 1827
Joined: 2/5/2011
Status: offline

T3 south (German)

I think Germans are 1 turn from crossing the river.

Attachment (1)

(in reply to KamilS)

Post #: 28

RE: Micheal T (Ger) vs Kamil (Sov) - 4/29/2013 10:01:37 AM

KamilS

Posts: 1827
Joined: 2/5/2011
Status: offline

T3 north & centre (Soviet)

My lines still lack required density so withdrawals will continue.

I launched two successful attacks on German marauding motorised troops - just to keep Michael more cautious.