loki100
Posts: 10920
Joined: 10/20/2012 From: Utlima Thule Status: offline
|
with respect, its not the result of the combat that mattered. The Germans, past the Dneipr, were in a supply black hole - even for no operations they could scarcely rebuild their supplies, every Soviet offensive forced the depletion of stocks that were too limited in any case. In terms of manpower, by about August, the Germans were out of manpower (ie what was in the Reserve Army was too few to bring the Ostheer back to strength). So every Soviet attack consumed impossible to replace German supplies and manpower just by being made. If they had managed more operational/tactical competence, its not impossible that they would have escalated this advantage into actual victories - as it is the time they finally retook the heights at Yeln'ya was a rare competently executed attack, indicating how close to the wire AGC was. So yes, they weakened both armies and probably on balance they did more damage to their own - opening the gates to the early German wins in Operation Typhoon - but it was a close judgement. In game, that suggests trying to get the Soviets to attack #because they did, is flawed and likely to lead to frustration. Offering the opportunity to try and weaken the Axis while preserving your own strength better than history is a way to make counter-attacking a tempting strategy (and, to be frank, a damn sight more fun to play). In turn you run the risk of tactical disaster - wrecking individual formations - or an operational disaster, if the Germans manage to turn the tables. Again, all in all, sounds like more fun to me.
_____________________________
|