loki100
Posts: 10920
Joined: 10/20/2012
From: Utlima Thule
Status: offline
|
quote:
ORIGINAL: gingerbread
Since I'm a minor collaborator in the patch project, I'd like to comment on some of the issues you bring up, and some that you don't. This will hopefully be read by others as well, so I will allow myself to say things that are probably self evident to you, but perhaps not to everyone. These are my personal views.
First, thanks for hanging in there and for your informative and interesting AAR. It's an enjoyment to read and also a reference when evaluating the impact of the changes in the patches. Thanks also goes to SigUp for his(*).
One of the ideas was to get a more dynamic 1942 in the '41-'45 CG. The main change to implement this was to reduce the Soviet NM to 40 during 4/42-8/42. I admit I was very sceptical to this at first, but since the Training Army concept showed it's possible to mitigate the lower quality with quantity, I'm now very much in favour. It keeps the Axis initiative active and requires the Soviet players to realize, perhaps after a failed 2nd Kharkov or its equivalent, that even though large, in 1942 the Soviet army is not up to offensive operations yet.
Have to say I completely support this, I've long been convinced that 1942 should be the year when the Soviet state is at serious risk, not 1941. The consequences of the relative failure of the winter offensive, Kharkov and that the Germans seemed to still have the ability to drive deep into Soviet positions really wrecked both military adnd civilian morale. While Stavka (but not Stalin) knew that 42 had to be on the strategic defensive they really did not anticipate how much offensive capacity the Germans had retained.
I like the training army concept, done well it can be hidden (don't let your rifle brigades take on more than 3000 men), but provides a high morale/mixed experience reserve to hurl into the line and replace losses. But the other key aspect is Gds, too many and the lower NM problem is lost, too few and it is amplified
quote:
ORIGINAL: gingerbread
While if following a historical script you should have, or at least have been able to launch Op Uranus or such, SigUp is not quite as extended as the Axis were and his usage of reserves as fingers in the dyke does prevent breaches but it also ties up his powerful units on the defense, since they must conserve MP's to be able to react. You OTOH have to make the kind of attacks you make to keep the Axis player honest. If no Soviet attacks necessitating reserves then I would expect more Axis ones, though perhaps not from SigUp who is as you say playing conservatively. It is an intermediate step in the power shift, a step that I'm not sad to see.
In a way SigUp has done what the Germans should have done. Not used that capacity in the hunt for the chimera of outright victory but instead as a means to stalemate things. The problem in this is it fails to reflect the over-riding German imperative of having to win having started this war. From the point of view of their leadership it made little difference if they lost in 1945 or 1947, losing had to mean complete and utter defeat.
quote:
ORIGINAL: gingerbread
With that said, I'd like to comment some of the issues you have and still are experiencing.
The supply system is not that good in a hand-to-mouth situation. It performs much better if there is some buffer. I think it tries to keep more than one turns worth of supplies for production of ARM & ground elements at factories, so the required number in the production screen is not quite as exact as it seems. In your case, you suffered an unexpected reduced multiplier (SupM) mid game. Your situation led to an as yet unreleased increase of the SupM so we'll see from there.
I realize it does not do you any good, but short of hacking you an extra million supply points, there is not much that can be done. (morvael is on vacation, so there is no one available to do that anyhow.) You will have to stay selective until you have at least 200%. You could try some reallocation using air transport, but that does not change the total. Your army is rather large at 7.75M though I confess I don't know what you could do without.
I do think that your 75% of need in vehicles does have an impact on supply deliveries. A tad too many tank/Mech Corps or at least they were formed to early? This will change slowly once the LL deliveries ramps. You might check just how many vehicles you airbases employ (CR-Units-Current-Abs), and evaluate if you think you are getting your money's worth from the air force given your truck shortage. I'll not recommend anything except an evaluation.
I have 20 Tank and 5 Mech Corps, may have formed some tank corps too early but this is one of those feedback loops, lack of Gds+low morale rifle divisions, so felt I needed them to have any meaningful offensive capacity.
For air I think its more complex. Even empty airbases want 97 supply and 357 vehicles, so there is little gain to operating much below that – other than that a local reserve may build up only to be burnt off immediately that planes are deployed. In this context I only have 2 airbases that are demanding more than the basic and inevitable request, one has my 2 transport units so I could reduce that, but its marginal in the overall scheme of things
quote:
ORIGINAL: gingerbread
You do have an ample pool of ARM, so I expect that in future games, the Soviet players will modify the evacuation priorities somewhat. I don't think it's feasible to take on the supply mechanics more than the things that has been done. This is a better the devil you know case.
Here is where urban myths have too much power. The peltonic arms pts crunch has entered too deeply into most people's understanding of this game, in truth it seems no big issue compared to running out of supply
quote:
ORIGINAL: gingerbread
As to the air aspect, have you read any AAR of WitP:AE? They have coined the expression Ablative Armor (Am spelling since it is a name) for the use of lower quality Japanese fighters in the mid & end game. I think Soviet FB's and F's should be seen as such. It is a very cynical view, but war what it is. In short, the main mission is to get the bomber through to assist the ground fight. If the Soviet FB's achieve that by wiggling their noses at the Germans to attract attention, that's mission accomplished. Taking bullets for the bombers is another way to get the same result.
I'm happy at this, it does reflect VVS doctrine and tactics. The only reason to have fighters was to disturb German bombers or give some protection to Soviet bombers. Air superiority, as understood both in the WW2 and NATO eras, was not really a Soviet concept, what mattered was the effective projection of air power.
My only problem is being so circumscribed in terms of actual capacity for one of the aspects of the Soviet armed forces where I could do real damage.
quote:
ORIGINAL: gingerbread
I do think that once the effect of the '43 values (NM, HI) are seen, you can get attrition started. As to if you will get over the Dnepr while it is still frozen a year from now, that's one thing I will enjoy reading about.
* Since SigUp does not read your AAR, please consider forwarding this to him, with suitable redaction's.
Have passed it on as it is. One of the delights of a good PBEM is not just coming up with nasty plans but also chatting about the game.
_____________________________
|
Printable Version
RE: T70-T73 15 October – 12 November 1942 - 
IMHO you won't be in position to "exploit" opening attacks for quite a while as it will take a long grinding campaign to wear down the whole German army first. Any chance you can take out your aggression on some Rumanians?
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