The Velukie Luki gambit seems bad?

Matrix Games Forums

Forums Register Login Photo Gallery Member List Search Calendars FAQ

My Profile Inbox Address Book My Subscription My Forums Log Out

The Velukie Luki gambit seems bad?

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 >> The War Room >> The Velukie Luki gambit seems bad?

Page: [1]

Message

<< Older Topic Newer Topic >>

The Velukie Luki gambit seems bad? - 5/2/2018 8:39:14 PM

Joneleth

Posts: 47
Joined: 5/1/2018
Status: offline

I've heard about the VL gambit quite a few times, where you rush moscow by repairing the railroad leading to VL, but as far as I can tell that isnt the best solution. Ive tried running some tests, can anyone tell me if the VL gambit is just a placebo strategy or is my test faulty somehow?

Premise:

1. The test will measure the distance from railhead to W Moscow ( X 105, Y 45)

2. I've identified 4 routes to Moscow as the 4 plausible routes. The routes are:

2a. Route North(The supposed VL Route since this is the only one going through VL) Starts with FBD 4 in the top of the german army goes through: Siauliau - Jelgava (turn east) - Rezekne - Novosokolniki - Velikie Luki
2b. Route Mid(Still goes through some Baltic area but will be the east bound rail line below route North) Starts with FBD 4 in the top of the german army goes through: Radviliskis - Rokiskis - Polotsk - Vitebsk
2c. Route South(Only goes through the Kaunas/Vilnius baltic area, othervise stays out of it) Starts with FBD 3 near Kaunas, goes through: Kaunas - Vilnius(turn north) - Postavy - Glubokoe Polotsk - Vitebsk
2d. Route Minsk(Only goes through the Kaunas/Vilnius baltic area, othervise stays out of it) Starts with FBD 3 near Kaunas, goes through: Kaunas - Vilnius(turn south) - Shumsk - Minsk - Smolevichi - Orsha - Smolensk

3. The rails will go towards 3 targets which is exactly 28 hexes from W Moscow, those are Novosokolniki (town just west of Velikie Luki, target for route North), Hex X 77, Y 46 (hex just west of Vitebsk, target for route Mid and South) and Hex X 81, Y 52 (hex a little west of Smolensk, target for route Minsk) NOTE ALL 3 TARGETS ARE EXACTLY 28 HEXES AWAY FROM W MOSCOW

4. The data will be presented as Turn X, Route, X, (X). Turn refers to which turn it is, Route refers to which route is in question, X refers to how many rail hexes were built this specific turn, (X) refers to how many rail hexes has been built in total (more total hexes does not neccesarily mean they are closer to W Moscow as the baltic routes spend alot of hexes going north)

5. The perfect conditions has been made for building rail as to not interfere with the result, all soviet units has been pulled back, panzers has preclaimed all the hexes so the FBD is just building rail in friendly hexes throughout the test.

Data:
-----------------------------------------------
Turn 1
North 4 (4)
Mid 4 (4)
South 4 (4)
Minsk 4 (4)

Turn 2
North 7 (11)
Mid 6 (10)
South 6 (10)
Minsk 6 (10)

Turn 3
North 7 (18)
Mid 6 (16)
South 4 (14)
Minsk 4 (14)

Turn 4
North 6 (24)
Mid 6 (22)
South 4 (18)
Minsk 4 (18)

Turn 5
North 6 (30)
Mid 5 (27)
South 4 (22)
Minsk 4 (22)

Turn 6
North 3 (33)
Mid 4 (31)
South 4 (26)
Minsk 4 (26)

Turn 7
North 4 (37)(Still 32 Hexes from W Moscow)
Mid 4 (35)(Target Reached Exactly 28 Hexes from W Moscow)
South 3 (29)(Still 32 Hexes from W Moscow)
Minsk 4 (30)(Still 37 Hexes from W Moscow)

Turn 8
North 4 (41)(Target reached exactly 28 hexes from W Moscow)
Mid 0 (0)(Target reached last turn)
South 4 (33)(Target reached exactly 28 hexes from W Moscow)
Minsk 4 (30)(Target still 33 Hexes from W Moscow)

--------------------------------------

Conclusion:
Going through VL towards Moscow isn't actually the best route, it isn't even the second best route. The 2 clear winners are route Mid and South for the following reasons:

1. Route Mid finished a whole turn before North and South and 2 turns before Minsk, so this is clearly the fastest supply route to Moscow.
2. Route South while only being 1 turn behind route Mid has 2 big advantages, it uses FBD 3 which means that FBD 4 is free to go towards Leningrad uninterrupted, so you don't sacrifice Leningrad supply for a Moscow push, secondly route South also has rail lines much lower than North and Mid, which means it gives much better supply to AGC and the Mogilev-Smolensk-Bryansk-Gomel area.

So my conclusion is you should never use the VL route (North) nor the Minsk route. If you want the fastest push possible for Moscow you should go for route Mid, if you want to not interrupt Leningrad supply and have better supply in the Mogilev-Smolensk-Bryansk-Gomel area then you should go for route South.

Can you see any flaw in my test? Or is VL gambit just a placebo strategy?

Post #: 1

RE: The Velukie Luki gambit seems bad? - 5/2/2018 11:45:34 PM

Crackaces

Posts: 3858
Joined: 7/9/2011
Status: offline

a gambit is defined as giving up something to get even more advantage at a later time. I don't know what you mean by a placebo strategy?

The VL route has lots of defendable terrain and thus can be a sink hole for the German attack.

But I am more of a Leningrad kind of guy .. follow ST for his multiple Moscow exploits.

_____________________________

"What gets us into trouble is not what we don't know. It's what we know for sure that just ain't so"

(in reply to Joneleth)

Post #: 2

RE: The Velukie Luki gambit seems bad? - 5/3/2018 12:17:17 AM

beender

Posts: 184
Joined: 2/23/2017
From: Beijing, China
Status: offline

Those are very impressive calculations.

Personally i almost always repair rail towards Moscow through VL, but almost always do that based on current circumstances rather than a prior plan. It appears once German apply enough pressure on leningrade and smolengsk, VL naturally becomes a weak spot and just attracts you there.

(in reply to Joneleth)

Post #: 3

RE: The Velukie Luki gambit seems bad? - 5/3/2018 2:18:51 AM

thedoctorking

Posts: 2297
Joined: 4/29/2017
Status: offline

Depends on whether you can take Velikie Luki. It's lousy terrain and the Russians can put up a fight north of the Dvina.

(in reply to beender)

Post #: 4

RE: The Velukie Luki gambit seems bad? - 5/3/2018 7:45:17 AM

Joneleth

Posts: 47
Joined: 5/1/2018
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: thedoctorking

Depends on whether you can take Velikie Luki. It's lousy terrain and the Russians can put up a fight north of the Dvina.

But this is a reason even more why you shouldnt go through VL, but through Vitebsk/Smolensk (Route Mid/South). going through VL you need to go through 7 Rivers (Lovat, Dvina, Mezha, Volga x 2, Lama and Moskva) where as through Vitebsk you only need to go through 1 (Dnepr), VL also has alot more rough, swamp and forest terrain, where as Vitebsk has mainly plains.

I cannot see any reason to ever go through VL?

(in reply to thedoctorking)

Post #: 5

RE: The Velukie Luki gambit seems bad? - 5/3/2018 7:47:40 AM

Joneleth

Posts: 47
Joined: 5/1/2018
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Crackaces

a gambit is defined as giving up something to get even more advantage at a later time. I don't know what you mean by a placebo strategy?

The VL route has lots of defendable terrain and thus can be a sink hole for the German attack.

But I am more of a Leningrad kind of guy .. follow ST for his multiple Moscow exploits.

I mean a placebo strategy by that people only think it is good but it has no real effect, akin to placebo medicin.

< Message edited by Joneleth -- 5/3/2018 7:49:31 AM >

(in reply to Crackaces)

Post #: 6

RE: The Velukie Luki gambit seems bad? - 5/3/2018 9:18:21 AM

Kantti

Posts: 87
Joined: 6/10/2016
Status: offline

Well, some Soviet players tend to put up quite a formidable wall of steel to Land-bridge. In that case it might seem enticing to divert to Velikie Luki to throw Soviets off balance. Even then it depends on exact situation if the middle route is still best (after Soviets have been unhinged from Landbridge by offensive in V-L area).

(in reply to Joneleth)

Post #: 7

RE: The Velukie Luki gambit seems bad? - 5/3/2018 10:23:26 AM

Telemecus

Posts: 4689
Joined: 3/20/2016
Status: offline

At least my understanding is the Velkie Luki route has never been about the quickest rail route to Moscow, but to create some sort of ambiguity as to whether the main attack is heading towards Leningrad or Moscow. Thrusting to Velkie Luki first leaves open the option of switching either way.

I tend to prioritise your route 2b Mid going through Polotsk and Vitebsk. Indeed I would say by using just one FBD on it you are losing ground. On turn 1 by doubling or even tripling up FBDs you should be able to get 5,6,7 or even 8 hexes of the line repaired on turn 1, and more than 6 sometimes on other turns. Only outside of the Baltic repair zone in straight sections of the line are you restricted to only 4 hexes repair per turn. In turn 1 you should expect to have three FBDs in the Baltic repair zone by railing one up north, and I have even played with four there. If you are delaying the unfreezing of the Rumanian border the fourth FBD would be wasted for a turn in south otherwise.

I would also say on the way to Leningrad you should not really need to use an FBD to repair north of Pskow or Dno, by then it is redundant. The Minsk route is usually less useful than doubling up FBDs repairing to Smolensk and then turning south with one of them.

(in reply to Kantti)

Post #: 8

RE: The Velukie Luki gambit seems bad? - 5/3/2018 10:54:29 AM

Joneleth

Posts: 47
Joined: 5/1/2018
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Telemecus

At least my understanding is the Velkie Luki route has never been about the quickest rail route to Moscow, but to create some sort of ambiguity as to whether the main attack is heading towards Leningrad or Moscow. Thrusting to Velkie Luki first leaves open the option of switching either way.

I tend to prioritise your route 2b Mid going through Polotsk and Vitebsk. Indeed I would say by using just one FBD on it you are losing ground. On turn 1 by doubling or even tripling up FBDs you should be able to get 5,6,7 or even 8 hexes of the line repaired on turn 1, and more than 6 sometimes on other turns. Only outside of the Baltic repair zone in straight sections of the line are you restricted to only 4 hexes repair per turn. In turn 1 you should expect to have three FBDs in the Baltic repair zone by railing one up north, and I have even played with four there. If you are delaying the unfreezing of the Rumanian border the fourth FBD would be wasted for a turn in south otherwise.

I would also say on the way to Leningrad you should not really need to use an FBD to repair north of Pskow or Dno, by then it is redundant. The Minsk route is usually less useful than doubling up FBDs repairing to Smolensk and then turning south with one of them.

What you are saying about using mutiple FBD doesnt make any sense, there is still the restrictions on how far away from the railhead you can build rail (6 hexes in baltics, 4 outside).

I tried using 2 FBD going route Mid, I got +2 hexes on turn 1, +1 on turn 4 and -1 on turn 5.

So it didnt even advance the rail a full turn only 0,5 turns (2 hexes), and you would have wasted an entire FBD for 7 turns for 2 hexes worth of rail.

Using 2 FBD in the same area is extremely inefficient due to the range limitations, using 3 or 4 seems completely useless?

Also i tried every combination of FBD, on turn 1 you cannot get more than 6 hexes worth of repair.

(in reply to Telemecus)

Post #: 9

RE: The Velukie Luki gambit seems bad? - 5/3/2018 11:18:01 AM

Telemecus

Posts: 4689
Joined: 3/20/2016
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Joneleth

quote:

ORIGINAL: Telemecus
Only outside of the Baltic repair zone in straight sections of the line are you restricted to only 4 hexes repair per turn. In turn 1 you should expect to have three FBDs in the Baltic repair zone by railing one up north, and I have even played with four there.

What you are saying about using mutiple FBD doesnt make any sense, there is still the restrictions on how far away from the railhead you can build rail (6 hexes in baltics, 4 outside).

I think you missed the key point about straight and curved sections - and the limit is from railhead not total on a rail route. So long as the rail repair remains within 6 hexes of a railhead you can repair more than 6 rail hexes in a line. Typically this means the rail line is not straight but curves somewhere if you do more than 6 (or 4 outside Baltic zone).

quote:

ORIGINAL: Joneleth
I tried using 2 FBD going route Mid, I got +2 hexes on turn 1, +1 on turn 4 and -1 on turn 5.
So it didnt even advance the rail a full turn only 0,5 turns (2 hexes), and you would have wasted an entire FBD for 7 turns for 2 hexes worth of rail.

Using 2 FBD in the same area is extremely inefficient due to the range limitations, using 3 or 4 seems completely useless?

The picture gives one example for a turn 1 opening with rail repair using an extreme version of doubling up (e.g. do not do this with a normal south opening!). In this case you would be able to get 12 hexes in the first two turns. 13 even towards Riga! (forgot to say thanks for the original provision of the picture)

Clearly you have a choice of maximising your rail repair eastwards - or maximising the number of hexes of rail you repair. I am very much in the former camp. Using an FBD for 7 tuns to get 2 hexes of rail further east is far more valuable than what it could have achieved in rear area repair. When you get to turn 18 and are just short of the fuel you need to get that final push for Moscow I think you would much rather have those two extra hexes.

Similarly with two FBDs you should always be able to get 6 hexes repaired in Baltic zone or 4 outside. If you are falling short that could be because you left some of those hexes in enemy control. Again that is a choice, but I would put clearing and holding rail lines the turn before to maximise movement and rail repair line as priority. If you are making a pocket over where you intend the rail line to go you will be even more delayed.

If you do want to just maximise the number of hexes of rail repair anywhere I would suggest spending points to reassign construction SUs to HQs that will repair. Not just Army groups/ OKH but in RHG commands and using your minors construction units too. Corps HQs with construction SUs many hexes from the front will do no rail repair and are an extra logistical cost for moving them and supplying them away from the railhead. Getting them to HQs that will will do far more to bulk up your rail network and make some loops for redundancy. Using RHG HQs even means you can decide which routes they will repair along.

Attachment (1)

< Message edited by Telemecus -- 5/3/2018 12:35:19 PM >

(in reply to Joneleth)

Post #: 10

RE: The Velukie Luki gambit seems bad? - 5/3/2018 11:28:13 AM

Joneleth

Posts: 47
Joined: 5/1/2018
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Telemecus

quote:

ORIGINAL: Joneleth

quote:

ORIGINAL: Telemecus
Only outside of the Baltic repair zone in straight sections of the line are you restricted to only 4 hexes repair per turn. In turn 1 you should expect to have three FBDs in the Baltic repair zone by railing one up north, and I have even played with four there.

What you are saying about using mutiple FBD doesnt make any sense, there is still the restrictions on how far away from the railhead you can build rail (6 hexes in baltics, 4 outside).

I think you missed the key point about straight and curved sections - and the limit is from railhead not total on a rail route. So long as the rail repair remains within 6 hexes of a railhead you can repair more than 6 rail hexes in a line. Typically this means the rail line is not straight but curves somewhere if you do more than 6 (or 4 outside Baltic zone).

quote:

ORIGINAL: Joneleth
I tried using 2 FBD going route Mid, I got +2 hexes on turn 1, +1 on turn 4 and -1 on turn 5.
So it didnt even advance the rail a full turn only 0,5 turns (2 hexes), and you would have wasted an entire FBD for 7 turns for 2 hexes worth of rail.

Using 2 FBD in the same area is extremely inefficient due to the range limitations, using 3 or 4 seems completely useless?

The picture gives one example for a turn 1 opening with rail repair using an extreme version of doubling up. In this case you would be able to get 12 hexes in the first two turns. 13 even towards Riga!

Clearly you have a choice of maximising your rail repair eastwards - or maximising the number of hexes of rail you repair. I am very much in the former camp. Using an FBD for 7 tuns to get 2 hexes of rail further east is far more valuable than what it could have achieved in rear area repair. When you get to turn 18 and are just short of the fuel you need to get that final push for Moscow I think you would much rather have those two extra hexes.

Similarly with two FBDs you should always be able to get 6 hexes repaired in Baltic zone or 4 outside. If you are falling short that could be because you left some of those hexes in enemy control. Again that is a choice, but I would put clearing and holding rail lines the turn before to maximise movement and rail repair line as priority. If you are making a pocket over where you intend the rail line to go you will be even more delayed.

If you do want to just maximise the number of hexes of rail repair anywhere I would suggest spending points to reassign construction SUs to HQs that will repair. Not just Army groups/ OKH but in RHG commands and using your minors construction units too. Corps HQs with construction SUs many hexes from the front will do no rail repair. Getting them to HQs that will will do far more to bulk up your rail network and make some loops for redundancy. Using RHG HQs even means you can decide which routes they will repair along.

But then you agree that your first post about reparing 7 or 8 hexes in the first turn is a fallacy. Yes you can repair 12 hexes in 2 turns with 2 FBD, but you can repair 11 hexes with 1, so your using an entire FBD for just 1 hex.

I didnt miss the point about curved sections, but they are relatively rare, and i went through the entire route with 2 FBD and as mentioned the grand total improvement was 2 hexes, which incidently was the first 2 from turn 1. after turn 1 2 FBD didnt help at all.

Sure if you feel 2 hexes towards moscow is more worth than 28ish hexes somewhere else is more worth it then go for it. My main point was that using 2 FBD gives very minimal results and you made it sound like it catapulted you forward.

Also you talk about supply in turn 18, your rail line will reach Vyazma in turn 14 with 1 FBD, and it will literally connect with moscow in turn 17 (assuming it is unopposed by enemy units), So your supply lines would be perfect with just 1 FBD at those turns.

< Message edited by Joneleth -- 5/3/2018 11:36:25 AM >

(in reply to Telemecus)

Post #: 11

RE: The Velukie Luki gambit seems bad? - 5/3/2018 11:45:32 AM

Telemecus

Posts: 4689
Joined: 3/20/2016
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Joneleth
Sure if you feel 2 hexes towards moscow is more worth than 28ish hexes somewhere else is more worth it then go for it. My main point was that using 2 FBD gives very minimal results and you made it sound like it catapulted you forward.

OK then!

I suppose for me being 2 hexes forward to Moscow is being catapulted. When you are there on turn 17 or 18 you know just how critical those extra hexes East are. Probably your whole of Army Group Centre will have that railhead as their nearest supply. Multiply 60 divisions worth of supply by two hexes less of vehicle use is massive alone.

If you prioritise the mid route as in the picture above, versus using just one FBD, you are 4 hexes ahead. If you have a turn repairing only 5 hexes instead of 6 of the route that is yet another. By turn 18 you could be maybe two or three turns of rail repair behind where you could be on the route to Moscow. That is huge.

The key point about FBDs is they are the units where you can direct where the rail repair will go. I think they should be used for that. If you want bulk repair generally of your network, that is what auto rail repair with construction battalions is for. There is rapidly diminishing returns for rear area rail repair. Getting 1 or 2 loops for redundancy from partisan attack is useful. Your FBDs can do this - for example if the FBD going to Pskow or Dno then goes south to complete a loop, or the FBD through Vilnius connects with the mid route. After that you may want to get rail repair to garrison cities, more direct routes for arrivals in Germany to get to the front, or any route that allows Hungarian units in Hungary to get to the front. None of those last ones in my view are worth delaying an FBD heading East as fast as possible.

quote:

ORIGINAL: Joneleth
But then you agree that your first post about reparing 7 or 8 hexes in the first turn is a fallacy. Yes you can repair 12 hexes in 2 turns with 2 FBD, but you can repair 11 hexes with 1, so your using an entire FBD for just 1 hex.

I think the point about the picture is that you can by doubling up do far more on both the rail line to Riga and Moscow.

Often a FBD on its own, even in clear weather, will only repair three hexes in a rail line. This happens whenever you hit swamps, multiple river lines and so on - which is common. Only doubling up FBDs will guarantee you get the full 4 or 6 rail repairs every turn and make it more likely on curved sections to do more.

quote:

ORIGINAL: Joneleth
Also you talk about supply in turn 18, your rail line will reach Vyazma in turn 14 with 1 FBD, and it will literally connect with moscow in turn 17 (assuming it is unopposed by enemy units), So your supply lines would be perfect with just 1 FBD at those turns.

If so you are doing extremely well. Most using just one FBD do not get that far. But if you have supply all the way to Moscow then you should be talking about how far you can get your troops East of Moscow then. I have never known a situation where you have too much supply from turn 18 on.

< Message edited by Telemecus -- 5/3/2018 12:00:52 PM >

(in reply to Joneleth)

Post #: 12

RE: The Velukie Luki gambit seems bad? - 5/3/2018 11:59:16 AM

Joneleth

Posts: 47
Joined: 5/1/2018
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Telemecus

quote:

ORIGINAL: Joneleth
Sure if you feel 2 hexes towards moscow is more worth than 28ish hexes somewhere else is more worth it then go for it. My main point was that using 2 FBD gives very minimal results and you made it sound like it catapulted you forward.

OK then!

I suppose for me being 2 hexes forward to Moscow is being catapulted. When you are there on turn 17 or 18 you know just how critical those extra hexes East are. Probably your whole of Army Group Centre will have that railhead as their nearest supply. Multiply 60 divisions worth of supply by two hexes less of vehicle use is massive alone.

If you prioritise the mid route as in the picture above, versus using just one FBD, you are 4 hexes ahead. If you have a turn repairing only 5 hexes instead of 6 of the route that is yet another. By turn 18 you could be maybe two or three turns of rail repair behind where you could be on the route to Moscow. That is huge.

The key point about FBDs is they are the units where you can direct where the rail repair will go. I think they should be used for that. If you want bulk repair generally of your network, that is what auto rail repair with construction battalions is for. There is rapidly diminishing returns for rear area rail repair. Getting 1 or 2 loops for redundancy from partisan attack is useful. Your FBDs can do this - for example if the FBD going to Pskow or Dno then goes south to complete a loop, or the FBD through Vilnius connects with the mid route. After that you may want to get rail repair to garrison cities, more direct routes for arrivals in Germany to get to the front, or any route that allows Hungarian units in Hungary to get to the front. None of those last ones in my view are worth delaying an FBD heading East as fast as possible.

quote:

ORIGINAL: Joneleth
But then you agree that your first post about reparing 7 or 8 hexes in the first turn is a fallacy. Yes you can repair 12 hexes in 2 turns with 2 FBD, but you can repair 11 hexes with 1, so your using an entire FBD for just 1 hex.

I think the point about the picture is that you can by doubling up do far more on both the rail line to Riga and Moscow.

Often a FBD on its own, even in clear weather, will only repair three hexes in a rail line. This happens whenever you hit swamps, multiple river lines and so on - which is common. Only doubling up FBDs will guarantee you get the full 4 or 6 rail repairs every turn and make it more likely on curved sections to do more.

If by far more you mean 2 Hexes by turn 7 then yes, but we disagree as to whether the words "far more" is appropriate for 2 hexes.

I dont know where you got "4 Hexes" from, i duplicated the entire test with 2 FBD and you only gain 2 hexes.

Yes a single FBD will be blocked by rivers swamps and rough terrain, which is terrain at VL but not terrain at the Smolensk line, which is another reason not to go VL. I will literally test the entire railroad to moscow now to settle just how much 2 vs 1 matters.

(in reply to Telemecus)

Post #: 13

RE: The Velukie Luki gambit seems bad? - 5/3/2018 12:18:27 PM

Telemecus

Posts: 4689
Joined: 3/20/2016
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Joneleth
I will literally test the entire railroad to moscow now to settle just how much 2 vs 1 matters.

It will be really useful for us if you can publish that map. There is another rail map you can find in the Library of WitE resources which is stickied at http://www.matrixgames.com/forums/tm.asp?m=4317692

Perhaps you can send in what you find as an update to that?

(in reply to Joneleth)

Post #: 14

RE: The Velukie Luki gambit seems bad? - 5/3/2018 1:48:36 PM

Joneleth

Posts: 47
Joined: 5/1/2018
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Telemecus

quote:

ORIGINAL: Joneleth
I will literally test the entire railroad to moscow now to settle just how much 2 vs 1 matters.

It will be really useful for us if you can publish that map. There is another rail map you can find in the Library of WitE

Perhaps you can send in what you find as an update to that?

The forum forbids me from uploading pictures or links because my account is less than a week old so i can only send my data.

DATA:

Turn 1

Mid 1 - 4 (4)
Mid 2 - 6 (6)
Advantage: 2

Turn 2

Mid 1 - 6 (10)
Mid 2 - 6 (12)
Advantage: 2

Turn 3

Mid 1 - 6 (16)
Mid 2 - 6 (18)
Advantage: 2

Turn 4

Mid 1 - 6 (22)
Mid 2 - 7 (25)
Advantage: 3

Turn 5

Mid 1 - 5 (27)
Mid 2 - 4 (29)
Advantage: 2

Turn 6

Mid 1 - 4 (31)
Mid 2 - 4 (33)
Advantage: 2

Turn 7

Mid 1 - 4 (35)
Mid 2 - 4 (37)
Advantage: 2

Turn 8

Mid 1 - 3 (38) (Vitebsk repaired)
Mid 2 - 4 (41) (Vitebsk repaired)
Advantage: 3

Turn 9

Mid 1 - 4 (42)
Mid 2 - 4 (45)
Advantage: 3

Turn 10

Mid 1 - 4 (46)
Mid 2 - 5 (50) (Smolensk repaired)
Advantage: 4

Turn 11

Mid 1 - 4 (50) (Smolensk repaired)
Mid 2 - 4 (54)
Advantage: 4

Turn 12

Mid 1 - 4 (54)
Mid 2 - 4 (58) (Vyazma repaired)
Advantage: 4

Turn 13

Mid 1 - 4 (58) (Vyazma repaired)
Mid 2 - 4 (62)
Advantage: 4

Turn 14

Mid 1 - 4 (62)
Mid 2 - 4 (66)
Advantage: 4

Turn 15 - Ingame date: 25/09/1941

Mid 1 - 4 (66)
Mid 2 - 3* (69) (W Moscow repaired after with 3rd repair, rest of the moment unused)
Advantage: 3

Turn 16 - Ingame date: 02/10/1941

Mid 1 - 3* (69) (W Moscow repaired after with 3rd repair, rest of the moment unused)
Mid 2 - NA
Advantage: NA

Conclusion:
The double FBD gains 2 hexes on turn 1, 1 hex on the Dvina river at Vitebsk and 1 hex at the Smolensk curve, for a total of 4 hexes or equivalent to exactly 1 turn advantage over 15 turns.

a single FBD reaches Vyazma on turn 13, I cannot imagine the super blitz your running to be needed to have Vyazma on turn 12 to keep in supply, if your opponent has already lost moscow at turn 13-14 then I dont think you need to worry about supply.

If you would rather have 4 more forward supply hexes for moscow than 60ish hexes elsewhere, then youre more than welcome. But i refuse to accept terms about it used as "far more".

< Message edited by Joneleth -- 5/3/2018 1:50:50 PM >

(in reply to Telemecus)

Post #: 15

RE: The Velukie Luki gambit seems bad? - 5/3/2018 2:29:37 PM

Telemecus

Posts: 4689
Joined: 3/20/2016
Status: offline

I am sure EwaldvonKleist would be happy to upload it for you. I think it would be really useful for everyone.

Taking the most extreme case you give I would still say 4 more forward supply hexes is still more valuable, by a very large margin, compared to 60 hexes repaired elsewhere. 60 in the rear will do nothing to improve your supply - and 60 multiplied by zero is still zero. The only argument that could be made is for things other than supply. 4 more hexes multiplied by say the 60 divisions it is helping is 240.

The reality is the doubling up would still mean lots of extra branch lines being started further forward where you can and have the spare movement and RRV to do so. There would not be times when two FBDs are only repairing 4/6/more hexes on one main line and nothing more. So clearly many of the sixty you mention are double counting. But even if not, what do you gain for sixty hexes elsewhere?

As I understand your data you are talking about having Vyazma already repaired on turn 13 or 14 (the turn after repair) and Moscow on turn 16 or 17. Anything more then five hexes away from that will definitely have a vehicle cost. That looks to me like you are about to get the typical experience of the blizzard offensive from the Soviets. You will find your damaged or destroyed vehicle numbers going up and your working vehicles far below the number you need. You will get supply penalties and movement penalties. Again every hex you could get the rail closer to your units means a disproportionate gain. 60 repaired rail hexes in the rear is completely irrelevant.

At least the experience I see from most is that it is quite common to get either Moscow or Leningrad by turn 17- but without a buffer around Moscow you could well lose it. Getting Moscow on turn 17 before the mud or else during the snow is good, but holding in the Blizzard is ideal. Capturing it on turn 17 as indicated by your data is not a win. I will leave it for others to comment, but I cannot even conceive of a game where anyone has said they had no supply problems.

< Message edited by Telemecus -- 5/3/2018 2:32:15 PM >

(in reply to Joneleth)

Post #: 16

RE: The Velukie Luki gambit seems bad? - 5/4/2018 9:58:59 PM

Crackaces

Posts: 3858
Joined: 7/9/2011
Status: offline

Joneleth vs The "Femtomanager" Telemecus discussing the string theory of WITE logistics

_____________________________

"What gets us into trouble is not what we don't know. It's what we know for sure that just ain't so"

(in reply to Telemecus)

Post #: 17

RE: The Velukie Luki gambit seems bad? - 5/4/2018 10:25:03 PM

Joneleth

Posts: 47
Joined: 5/1/2018
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Telemecus

I am sure EwaldvonKleist would be happy to upload it for you. I think it would be really useful for everyone.

Taking the most extreme case you give I would still say 4 more forward supply hexes is still more valuable, by a very large margin, compared to 60 hexes repaired elsewhere. 60 in the rear will do nothing to improve your supply - and 60 multiplied by zero is still zero. The only argument that could be made is for things other than supply. 4 more hexes multiplied by say the 60 divisions it is helping is 240.

The reality is the doubling up would still mean lots of extra branch lines being started further forward where you can and have the spare movement and RRV to do so. There would not be times when two FBDs are only repairing 4/6/more hexes on one main line and nothing more. So clearly many of the sixty you mention are double counting. But even if not, what do you gain for sixty hexes elsewhere?

As I understand your data you are talking about having Vyazma already repaired on turn 13 or 14 (the turn after repair) and Moscow on turn 16 or 17. Anything more then five hexes away from that will definitely have a vehicle cost. That looks to me like you are about to get the typical experience of the blizzard offensive from the Soviets. You will find your damaged or destroyed vehicle numbers going up and your working vehicles far below the number you need. You will get supply penalties and movement penalties. Again every hex you could get the rail closer to your units means a disproportionate gain. 60 repaired rail hexes in the rear is completely irrelevant.

At least the experience I see from most is that it is quite common to get either Moscow or Leningrad by turn 17- but without a buffer around Moscow you could well lose it. Getting Moscow on turn 17 before the mud or else during the snow is good, but holding in the Blizzard is ideal. Capturing it on turn 17 as indicated by your data is not a win. I will leave it for others to comment, but I cannot even conceive of a game where anyone has said they had no supply problems.

Messing around with it a bit, I've come to what i consider myself the most optimal solution. You start turn 1 by doubling FBD in baltics for the +2 hex.

After turn 1 one FBD goes north towards Leningrad to give supply there and you do single FBD towards moscow, which means with 1 FBD after turn 1 you would only be 2 hexes behind 2 FBD.

Then use the other 2 FBD to double FBD from Lublin-Rovno-Kiev, there is alot of curves in that area which would make double FBD alot better, and then focus on going to Odessa-Crimea from Romania so you have a solid supply at all areas.

(in reply to Telemecus)

Post #: 18

RE: The Velukie Luki gambit seems bad? - 5/5/2018 12:34:55 AM

beender

Posts: 184
Joined: 2/23/2017
From: Beijing, China
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Crackaces

Joneleth vs The "Femtomanager" Telemecus discussing the string theory of WITE logistics

Couldn't find better expression to describe my impression!

(in reply to Crackaces)

Post #: 19

RE: The Velukie Luki gambit seems bad? - 5/5/2018 10:00:20 AM

STEF78

Posts: 2094
Joined: 2/19/2012
From: Versailles, France
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: beender

quote:

ORIGINAL: Crackaces

Joneleth vs The "Femtomanager" Telemecus discussing the string theory of WITE logistics

Couldn't find better expression to describe my impression!

From a rational point of view, you're right but 1941's campaign for the axis relies greatly on the ability to keep momentum and thus Pzd well supplied.

After my first GC lost HvH, I also did such calculation to optimize the supply of my units.

(in reply to beender)

Post #: 20

RE: The Velukie Luki gambit seems bad? - 5/5/2018 12:57:54 PM

Telemecus

Posts: 4689
Joined: 3/20/2016
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: beender

quote:

ORIGINAL: Crackaces
Joneleth vs The "Femtomanager" Telemecus discussing the string theory of WITE logistics

Couldn't find better expression to describe my impression!

I do feel we have treated nano and pico very badly. I thought the issue used to be micromanagement - and suddenly we have skipped over those two and gone straight to Femto?

quote:

ORIGINAL: Joneleth
Then use the other 2 FBD to double FBD from Lublin-Rovno-Kiev, there is alot of curves in that area which would make double FBD alot better, and then focus on going to Odessa-Crimea from Romania so you have a solid supply at all areas.

I would put a word of caution on this. Many people who start the game first try to make rail routes on this route - and all eventually drift to a more southernly route. Inspite of the victory points and historical significance of Kiev it is not very important in game terms. The key objective for your troops in the south is the industry in the Donbas - which means the southern rail repair to Stalino/Makeevka/Gorlovka might need to be the priority. Also railing your FBD to Rumania has a very similar effect to concentrating rail repair in the Baltic zone. Rail repair gets further east by starting further east in Rumania - even if delayed until after Rumania unfreezes. Even if repairing towards Kiev, you might still be better of doing it out of the North East of Rumania perhaps?

If interested you can see a rail repair map I proposed for one game here http://www.matrixgames.com/forums/tm.asp?m=4250683&mpage=5 see start of post 134

There is also a lot of discussion about FBD routes under a very old forum thread called something like "Life without FBD5" that I really recommend reading. Even though there is now a Rumanian "FBD" it does need to have extra construction units in it to get a full RRV and withdraws.

< Message edited by Telemecus -- 5/5/2018 1:12:32 PM >

(in reply to STEF78)

Post #: 21

RE: The Velukie Luki gambit seems bad? - 5/5/2018 1:36:52 PM

HardLuckYetAgain

Posts: 6987
Joined: 2/5/2016
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Joneleth

is VL gambit just a placebo strategy?

Any strategy can become a placebo strategy & any placebo strategy can become the thing to do. This all depends on the opponent you are playing and how well you can adapt to the situation. If you play this game and follow a strategy line by line like a computer program you are going to get your butt handed to you. If you can adept and foresee things then you do well. To me there is no placebo strategy, nor is there a strat that will work 100% of the time. Good luck in your endeavor.

_____________________________

(in reply to Joneleth)

Post #: 22

RE: The Velukie Luki gambit seems bad? - 5/5/2018 6:01:34 PM

Joneleth

Posts: 47
Joined: 5/1/2018
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: HardLuckYetAgain

quote:

ORIGINAL: Joneleth

is VL gambit just a placebo strategy?

Any strategy can become a placebo strategy & any placebo strategy can become the thing to do. This all depends on the opponent you are playing and how well you can adapt to the situation. If you play this game and follow a strategy line by line like a computer program you are going to get your butt handed to you. If you can adept and foresee things then you do well. To me there is no placebo strategy, nor is there a strat that will work 100% of the time. Good luck in your endeavor.

True im not disputing the value of mind games. Im mostly just trying to confirm theres no real substance behind the VL route, so if your going that route its solely to try and psyche out your opponent.

There is a difference between a strategy that has no mechanical value and a strategy that does despite of any mind games you might try to do.

(in reply to HardLuckYetAgain)

Post #: 23

RE: The Velukie Luki gambit seems bad? - 5/5/2018 7:51:16 PM

Crackaces

Posts: 3858
Joined: 7/9/2011
Status: offline

@Joneleth

The VL strategy all depends on situation.

Let us say that the Lvov pocket does not go so well and lots of Soviets escape. Add that .. The Soviet Pskov defense stop AGN cold. Now AGN is trying to find a way with the Soviets in a strong position maybe close to 5M manpower. Going through VL is simply going to seal the German defeat.

Now let us assume AGN has done well and are haunting the Neva. AGS has pocketed multiple Soviet units and is haunting D-town with a threaten crossing at multiple points. AGC has bagged much at the land bridge .. the Soviets have 4.2M manpower. Striking and pocket units at and around VL becomes icing on the cake.

Two extremes of the spectrum. As a German you have to first focus on pocketing as many Soviets as possible and destroy the Soviet air force while advancing toward industry that you force the Soviet to make some decisions. I personally don't think a certain avenue of advance but figure out what the Soviet is going to give me .. they cannot defend it all and if they do they defend nothing.

_____________________________

"What gets us into trouble is not what we don't know. It's what we know for sure that just ain't so"

(in reply to Joneleth)

Post #: 24

RE: The Velukie Luki gambit seems bad? - 5/5/2018 11:59:53 PM

HardLuckYetAgain

Posts: 6987
Joined: 2/5/2016
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Joneleth

quote:

ORIGINAL: HardLuckYetAgain

quote:

ORIGINAL: Joneleth

is VL gambit just a placebo strategy?

Any strategy can become a placebo strategy & any placebo strategy can become the thing to do. This all depends on the opponent you are playing and how well you can adapt to the situation. If you play this game and follow a strategy line by line like a computer program you are going to get your butt handed to you. If you can adept and foresee things then you do well. To me there is no placebo strategy, nor is there a strat that will work 100% of the time. Good luck in your endeavor.

True im not disputing the value of mind games. Im mostly just trying to confirm theres no real substance behind the VL route, so if your going that route its solely to try and psyche out your opponent.

There is a difference between a strategy that has no mechanical value and a strategy that does despite of any mind games you might try to do.

This is not Star Wars and the Jedi Mind Games. It is simple and no mumbo jumbo required to understand it. Read the map from recon & figure out your opponent as quickly as possible and plan accordingly. Then make your strat and adapt when needed as quickly as possible. To me, the overcomplication here is going to make this difficult and that is what this is turning into. I still stand by what I wrote above.

_____________________________

(in reply to Joneleth)

Post #: 25