RE: Operation Barbarossa - Alpha AAR

RE: Operation Barbarossa - Alpha AAR (Full Version)

All Forums >> [New Releases from Matrix Games] >> Gary Grigsby's War in the East Series >> After Action Reports

Message

elmo3 -> RE: Operation Barbarossa - Alpha AAR (3/12/2010 11:29:15 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Captain B Elmo, Sabre 21 is right...time to prepare for the winter is now....not after it hits.[:-] 5 more weeks of good weather is probably a bit optimitsitc. Remember, your requisitions for winter clothing were denied... We are preparing now in the sense that we are working on a defensible position by reducing the bulge. I was joking about getting 5 weeks of clear weather. But if it's 5 weeks of mud then yes we are in big trouble. Andy and Trey have a lot more experience with the game than I do so if they say I'm doomed then I probably am. You'll see soon enough.

Balou -> RE: Operation Barbarossa - Alpha AAR (3/12/2010 12:30:11 PM)
elmo, when looking at the AGC map, there are numerous sov airbases around. What is the AI up to and what could be the benefit of having that much airbases around ? They have to be supported somehow, or is it of less importance ?

elmo3 -> RE: Operation Barbarossa - Alpha AAR (3/12/2010 12:34:01 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Balou elmo, when looking at the AGC map, there are numerous sov airbases around. What is the AI up to and what could be the benefit of having that much airbases around ? They have to be supported somehow, or is it of less importance ? The only way for me to know for sure would be to look at the other side. To this point I have not done that. If enough people really want to see the Soviet side I can post some shots. I'm almost afraid to look...

SGHunt -> RE: Operation Barbarossa - Alpha AAR (3/12/2010 12:41:48 PM)
Those infantry regiments (from Pz Grp 2 I think - light green) you have strung out West to East along the North flank of your AGC bulge have not moved for weeks - have they not dug into create a high fortification level by now? If not, how does this work? Thanks for your continuing rapid responses to all our queries S

Balou -> RE: Operation Barbarossa - Alpha AAR (3/12/2010 12:48:25 PM)
elmo, yes, please, give us some real nasty screenshots about the sov buildup for Doomsday.

elmo3 -> RE: Operation Barbarossa - Alpha AAR (3/12/2010 1:57:03 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: von Jaeger Those infantry regiments (from Pz Grp 2 I think - light green) you have strung out West to East along the North flank of your AGC bulge have not moved for weeks - have they not dug into create a high fortification level by now? If not, how does this work? Thanks for your continuing rapid responses to all our queries S Most are level 1's, some of 9th Army (dark green) are level 2's. I'll have to answer how it works later if nobody else on the team chimes in. I've got car trouble this morning so it's problematic if I'll get in a turn any time soon.

elmo3 -> RE: Operation Barbarossa - Alpha AAR (3/12/2010 6:13:32 PM)
10/30/41 (turn 20) We have started the assault on Leningrad with mixed results. Even though we had the defenders outnumbered about 3 to 1 we broke even on casualties, and obviously they have more troops to replace losses than we do. If teh AI is smart and swaps out battered units we probably can't take the city this year. We would have to dig in and try to pry the hex east of Leningrad from Soviet hands next year to be able to attack from three sides. We did push back the Soviets south of Pushkin to help straighten our line. And we are building fortifications all along the front now as you can see. [image]http://i285.photobucket.com/albums/ll55/Andru_Hammerskjold/AARAGNturn20.jpg[/image]

elmo3 -> RE: Operation Barbarossa - Alpha AAR (3/12/2010 6:22:49 PM)
10/30/41 (turn 20) Forces of AGC liquidated the Soviet pocket as expected. We have abandoned any thoughts of pushing north to a Velikie Luki - Rzhev line this year. Not going to happen. So we are digging in here too. My plan is to move the armor behind the line and put then into reserve mode for the coming onslaught. Even one more turn of Clear weather would greatly expedite my reorganization. [image]http://i285.photobucket.com/albums/ll55/Andru_Hammerskjold/AARAGCturn20.jpg[/image]

elmo3 -> RE: Operation Barbarossa - Alpha AAR (3/12/2010 6:29:38 PM)
10/30/41 (turn 20) It's been a while since I showed the area east of the Pripyat Marsh so here it is. We took Gomel this turn and are digging in here as well. I had hoped to take Chrenigov too but it is well defended and time is short. [image]http://i285.photobucket.com/albums/ll55/Andru_Hammerskjold/AARcenterturn20.jpg[/image]

elmo3 -> RE: Operation Barbarossa - Alpha AAR (3/12/2010 6:35:17 PM)
10/30/41 (turn 20) And last but not least is the AGS sector. Here too we have called off and offensive operations and will start digging in next turn as soon as the line is stable. The Rumanians are having trouble taking Nikolaev in the far south and I'm not going to subject my panzers to the wear and tear needed to go down there and bail them out. They can sit out in the cold if they can't take the city. Unless the Soviets try and early offensive before the Blizzards come the next few turns will probably be uneventful. Losses an OOB shot coming in a while. [image]http://i285.photobucket.com/albums/ll55/Andru_Hammerskjold/AARAGSturn20.jpg[/image]

elmo3 -> RE: Operation Barbarossa - Alpha AAR (3/12/2010 6:56:23 PM)
Losses and OOB through turn 20: [image]http://i285.photobucket.com/albums/ll55/Andru_Hammerskjold/AARturn20groundlosses.jpg[/image] [image]http://i285.photobucket.com/albums/ll55/Andru_Hammerskjold/AARturn20airlosses.jpg[/image] [image]http://i285.photobucket.com/albums/ll55/Andru_Hammerskjold/AAROOBturn21.jpg[/image] There were no Soviet attacks in their part of turn 20. For turn 21 the southern two zones are clear and the northern two are mud. Snow would be much better than mud for me right now

Joel Billings -> RE: Operation Barbarossa - Alpha AAR (3/12/2010 7:09:07 PM)
My observation is that Lee has played a more conservative game than others I've seen. The fact that he has over 3.5 million men and the Soviets have over 5 million at this time is an indication of this. I've usually seen higher losses, although as things keep changing with the game, it's hard to say if this is in fact just Lee's style, or the way the game has been moving. The Soviets with over 5 million are going to put the hurt on Lee in winter. On another front, I think Lee misunderstands what Fortified Zone units will do for him. By using admin to build all of these, he is getting some additional labor squads to help dig. However, he's going to end up with a bunch of very inexperienced troops on the front lines instead of giving replacements to the units that need them that have high experience and would absorb the replacements at a higher experience level. Also, fortified units do not retreat, and can be a death trap. I think Fortified Zones can be useful for building fort lines in the rear when you don't have enough units to prepare a fall back position. But using them in the front is very dangerous. We'll have to see what happens. Also, these units cost admin points to build. I'm impressed that Lee had enough admin points available to create all of those units. But then, Lee has said he's not a micro manager (micro managing does expend admin points in many cases).

Smirfy -> RE: Operation Barbarossa - Alpha AAR (3/12/2010 7:40:24 PM)
quote: My observation is that Lee has played a more conservative game than others I've seen. The fact that he has over 3.5 million men and the Soviets have over 5 million at this time is an indication of this. I've usually seen higher losses, although as things keep changing with the game, it's hard to say if this is in fact just Lee's style, or the way the game has been moving. The Soviets with over 5 million are going to put the hurt on Lee in winter. I think something aint working properly and needs looked at. I dont want to appear flippant but I have played bloodier games of paintball. By late November 41 the Germans had suffered around 750,000 casaulties which was a 23% of the forces involved. I'm not sure how conservatively you can invade Russia and hope to achieved losses under half that. German AFV and Russian artillery strengths after what has passed dont add up to what one would reasonably expect. On a positive the airforces seem to be suffering

elmo3 -> RE: Operation Barbarossa - Alpha AAR (3/12/2010 8:15:17 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Joel Billings ... On another front, I think Lee misunderstands what Fortified Zone units will do for him. By using admin to build all of these, he is getting some additional labor squads to help dig. However, he's going to end up with a bunch of very inexperienced troops on the front lines instead of giving replacements to the units that need them that have high experience and would absorb the replacements at a higher experience level. Also, fortified units do not retreat, and can be a death trap. I think Fortified Zones can be useful for building fort lines in the rear when you don't have enough units to prepare a fall back position. But using them in the front is very dangerous. We'll have to see what happens. Also, these units cost admin points to build. I'm impressed that Lee had enough admin points available to create all of those units. But then, Lee has said he's not a micro manager (micro managing does expend admin points in many cases). Now you tell me! [;)] I had the max of 500 admin pints and was actually losing them from not using them. Oh well if nothing else this AAR will show new players what not to do as the Axis. [:'(]

ComradeP -> RE: Operation Barbarossa - Alpha AAR (3/12/2010 8:18:59 PM)
If both you and the enemy decide not to fight, you will obviously lose less men Smirfy. If the Soviets pull a limited Sir Robin, which the AI in Elmo's game has done, they'll lose less men, but the line will probably straighten about where it is now. Luftwaffe losses are below the historical level thus far, not sure about the Soviet air force. Joel: I think Elmo's AFV losses, being on the low end, will really help him out. Keep in mind that during the actual winter offensive the Soviets might've had about 1 million more men than they have now, but the German units were also a lot more beaten up than they are now. If the Soviets can roll over near full strength quality Axis formations in winter, the game isn't historically accurate. They should be able to roll over weak, extended Axis formations, not fairly prepared near full strength formations unless they get encircled. Can you give us an indication of what the winter weather will do precisely? The Germans lost more men in terms of casualties (dead/wounded) to frostbite than to Soviet attacks for most of the winter, and the Soviets also froze to death by the thousands. The Soviets shouldn't suddenly turn into supermen in the winter. If the Germans and the rest of the Axis can establish a line, with perhaps a few fortification levels, close to converted rail lines, the Soviet winter offensive should really be far less ugly for them than in real life. The fortified zones will probably at least buy him some time, as the Soviets have to take them out one by one, although I don't think it's a good idea to use that many of them and still think his line is by far not straight enough. Edit after Elmo's last post: I don't like the idea of losing points if I don't use them.

Smirfy -> RE: Operation Barbarossa - Alpha AAR (3/12/2010 8:41:59 PM)
quote: If both you and the enemy decide not to fight, you will obviously lose less men Smirfy. If the Soviets pull a limited Sir Robin, which the AI in Elmo's game has done, they'll lose less men, but the line will probably straighten about where it is now. Luftwaffe losses are below the historical level thus far, not sure about the Soviet air force. Not to be flippant once more but I think that kickabout in no mans land was Christmas 1914 and on the Western Front. From what I have seen the player has smashed fronts and the AI has reformed them (and done a good job) hence the large salients. I am beginning to wonder whether enemy divisions adjacent each other cause each other attrition? (does this occur?) If casaulties are only caused by deliberate player attacks then sure that goes along way to explain why the belligerents are getting stronger and the Russian front is safer than crossing the road. I have not looked at the historical losses of the Luftwaffe yet but at least they are out stripping production in an idealogical war of annihilation

wiking62 -> RE: Operation Barbarossa - Alpha AAR (3/12/2010 9:08:30 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Smirfy quote: My observation is that Lee has played a more conservative game than others I've seen. The fact that he has over 3.5 million men and the Soviets have over 5 million at this time is an indication of this. I've usually seen higher losses, although as things keep changing with the game, it's hard to say if this is in fact just Lee's style, or the way the game has been moving. The Soviets with over 5 million are going to put the hurt on Lee in winter. I think something aint working properly and needs looked at. I dont want to appear flippant but I have played bloodier games of paintball. By late November 41 the Germans had suffered around 750,000 casaulties which was a 23% of the forces involved. I'm not sure how conservatively you can invade Russia and hope to achieved losses under half that. German AFV and Russian artillery strengths after what has passed dont add up to what one would reasonably expect. On a positive the airforces seem to be suffering Elmo is not playing the game exactly as per the historical course. None of us will. If you repeat the mistakes of the Axis forces in WW2 there is no point in playing the game because the outcome is known before you start. The whole point of these games is to give us armchair generals a chance to change history. Elmo has used his panzer divisions conservatively, so you cannot expect to see the same level of losses as you would historically.

elmo3 -> RE: Operation Barbarossa - Alpha AAR (3/12/2010 9:48:29 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: ComradeP ... Edit after Elmo's last post: I don't like the idea of losing points if I don't use them. The max number of points as of now that you can accumulate in the 41 campaign as the Axis is 500. I could have built some forts sooner so as not to lose the points that were accumulating above that number each turn. I also probably kept a few weak generals who could have been sacked which would have used some more points. One reason for putting a cap on the points is probably to prevent the Axis from doing what I did, to suddenly deploy close to 100 fortified zones in one turn.

ComradeP -> RE: Operation Barbarossa - Alpha AAR (3/12/2010 9:52:44 PM)
I guess a limit would make sense, and I also doubt the average player will get close to the maximum, but having a limit will take some getting used to. In WitP, it's also technically possible to save so many pp's that you can pull a handful of divisions out of, say, Manchuria on short notice, so I do acknowledge the need for a limit to minimize gamey behaviour/abuse of the feature. Can you show an organization screen for one of those fortified units? I see both the Axis and Soviet fortified units start as battalions (or maybe they're split up?). What kind of equipment can a fortified zone use, I'm guessing it's light on men and heavy on equipment like regular fortifications?

Smirfy -> RE: Operation Barbarossa - Alpha AAR (3/12/2010 10:00:53 PM)
quote: Elmo is not playing the game exactly as per the historical course. None of us will. If you repeat the mistakes of the Axis forces in WW2 there is no point in playing the game because the outcome is known before you start. The whole point of these games is to give us armchair generals a chance to change history. Elmo has used his panzer divisions conservatively, so you cannot expect to see the same level of losses as you would historically. I'm not sure I follow. What mistakes did the Germans make in 41 up to the point we have reached in game? I dont think they could have done more to inflict losses on the Russians. They still lost 3/4 of a million men in this period. I think armchair generals deserve to face a Russia that defends with the same fanaticism so we can actually change history and not teleport through it and come out with more men and tanks than we started the campaign with. I do not expect to see exact historical losses but 56 AFV's a week lost along the entire Russian front to get to Lenningrad, and before Moscow I'm not hoping to see miracles either

elmo3 -> RE: Operation Barbarossa - Alpha AAR (3/12/2010 10:24:02 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: ComradeP I guess a limit would make sense, and I also doubt the average player will get close to the maximum, but having a limit will take some getting used to. In WitP, it's also technically possible to save so many pp's that you can pull a handful of divisions out of, say, Manchuria on short notice, so I do acknowledge the need for a limit to minimize gamey behaviour/abuse of the feature. Can you show an organization screen for one of those fortified units? I see both the Axis and Soviet fortified units start as battalions (or maybe they're split up?). What kind of equipment can a fortified zone use, I'm guessing it's light on men and heavy on equipment like regular fortifications? Well I consider myself an average player. However keep two things in mind. This is my first play of the 41 campaign so obviously next time I'll do a lot of things differently. I would certainly be doing better had I micro managed my generals, support units, air recon, and airbase bombing missions. Not building forts and managing generals allowed me to save a lot of points. But I only have so many hours in the day and doing all that would really slow down the AAR. So I sacrificed that to keep this moving for testing purposes and to make it more fun for you guys to read. [image]http://i285.photobucket.com/albums/ll55/Andru_Hammerskjold/fortifiedzone.jpg[/image]

ComradeP -> RE: Operation Barbarossa - Alpha AAR (3/12/2010 10:39:09 PM)
quote: What mistakes did the Germans make in 41 up to the point we have reached in game? Serious overextension in the south for virtually no long term strategic benefit. quote: I dont think they could have done more to inflict losses on the Russians. They still lost 3/4 of a million men in this period. I think armchair generals deserve to face a Russia that defends with the same fanaticism so we can actually change history and not teleport through it and come out with more men and tanks than we started the campaign with. In real life, the Soviets kept making fairly pointless counterattacks that sacrificed a lot of men, but also caused attrition to the Axis. The Axis supply line was also in a much worse shape than Elmo's, as he's had time to move rail conversion units around and isn't pushing on all fronts at once. His southern front is about 200-300 kilometres west of its historical 1941 high water mark. The Leningrad front is about 100 kilometres west of Tikhvin. The front in the Velikiye Luki/Rzhev/Moscow/Kaluga area is about 50-100 kilometres away from the 1941 furthest advance. The central part of the front, around Gomel, is 300 kilometres west of the furthest advance in 1941 and the Axis haven't set a foot on the Crimea either. Naturally, if the Axis are not pushing the Soviets east like the historical Axis did, there will be far less casualties.

elmo3 -> RE: Operation Barbarossa - Alpha AAR (3/12/2010 10:46:44 PM)
One more screen shot and my work is done for today. [8D] Here is the proposed list of hotkeys. The usual disclaimer applies that this list is subject to change so keys you see here may not make it into the launch version and others may be added. [image]http://i285.photobucket.com/albums/ll55/Andru_Hammerskjold/hotkeys3-12-10.jpg[/image]

Smirfy -> RE: Operation Barbarossa - Alpha AAR (3/12/2010 11:16:50 PM)
quote: Serious overextension in the south for virtually no long term strategic benefit. 650,000 men destroyed in Kiev, Donetz Basin, moving the front beyond bomber range of Polesti and Ukrainian Harvest. quote: In real life, the Soviets kept making fairly pointless counterattacks that sacrificed a lot of men, but also caused attrition to the Axis. Does the AI just roll over then and not cause the Axis attrition? Do adjacent units cause each other attrition even if the player does not attack? Does terrain and defence level modify this attrition? quote: The Axis supply line was also in a much worse shape than Elmo's, as he's had time to move rail conversion units around and isn't pushing on all fronts at once. His southern front is about 200-300 kilometres west of its historical 1941 high water mark. The Leningrad front is about 100 kilometres west of Tikhvin. The front in the Velikiye Luki/Rzhev/Moscow/Kaluga area is about 50-100 kilometres away from the 1941 furthest advance. The central part of the front, around Gomel, is 300 kilometres west of the furthest advance in 1941 and the Axis haven't set a foot on the Crimea either. Naturally, if the Axis are not pushing the Soviets east like the historical Axis did, there will be far less casualties. 56 AFV's a week c'mon Pz divisions lost a third of their vechciles in a day and that was in JULY!!!!! Only 300,000 men lost and the games front is longer than the historical ie there is more contact with the enemy.. Explain the Roumanian situation ;) How is 1942 or 43 going to pan out if production continually outstrips losses. ;)

wmcalpine -> RE: Operation Barbarossa - Alpha AAR (3/12/2010 11:46:21 PM)
Elmo3, I am enjoying the AAR. I appreciate the time and effort that you are taking to throw us all some bones on this fine game. I was wondering if it would be possible to post the OOB totals at the start of Barbarossa? Apologies if you had already done that. Bill

elmo3 -> RE: Operation Barbarossa - Alpha AAR (3/12/2010 11:47:20 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Smirfy ... Does the AI just roll over then and not cause the Axis attrition? Do adjacent units cause each other attrition even if the player does not attack? Does terrain and defence level modify this attrition? ... The AI is a work in progress and getting better with each update. In the last couple of turns the Soviet AI has made up to 30 attrition type attacks. This is a recent improvement. There is no attrition just based on being adjacent to enemy units AFAIK.

elmo3 -> RE: Operation Barbarossa - Alpha AAR (3/12/2010 11:51:48 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: wmcalpine Elmo3, I am enjoying the AAR. I appreciate the time and effort that you are taking to throw us all some bones on this fine game. I was wondering if it would be possible to post the OOB totals at the start of Barbarossa? Apologies if you had already done that. Bill Glad you like the AAR. It is a lot of work but a labor of love too. Here is the OOB at the start of the '41 campaign. Note that the next update we get will have some significant changes to that campaign so these numbers will probably change. [image]http://i285.photobucket.com/albums/ll55/Andru_Hammerskjold/41startOOB.jpg[/image]

ComradeP -> RE: Operation Barbarossa - Alpha AAR (3/12/2010 11:52:44 PM)
quote: 650,000 men destroyed in Kiev, Donetz Basin, moving the front beyond bomber range of Polesti and Ukrainian Harvest. Which bombers would bomb the Ukraine? They wouldn't be able to seriously damage Ploesti even if they tried. The whole idea of "WWII VVS strategic bombing missions" is almost a contradiction in terms. What would they bomb with? Unescorted DB-3's/IL-4's manned by poorly trained pilots? As the Il-4 had a range of about 3.800 kilometres, Ploesti would basically always be in range. The Luftwaffe would blow straight through VVS bomber formations. In 1941, shorter fronts really work in favour of the Axis too, as the Soviets don't have the human avalanche mixed with some quality forces they will have starting in late 1943. quote: Does the AI just roll over then and not cause the Axis attrition? The AI, and the Soviet player, doesn't necessarily have to cause the historical level of attrition. I'd say that after the latest patch and subsequent attacks, the AI is more historical. The counterattacks are mostly pointless, but they cause casualties to the Axis. quote: 56 AFV's a week c'mon Pz divisions lost a third of their vechciles in a day and that was in JULY!!!!! The losses displayed are permanent losses, which were really not that high as long as the Germans were not retreating and had time to recover disabled vehicles/won the battles so they could recover their vehicles. We also don't know at what point the losses screenshot was taken: the end of the German turn or the end of the Soviet turn. I'm guessing the end of the German turn, so for the real turn 20 losses, you'd have to take a screenshot prior to the logistics phase of turn 21 I guess. The "1/3 of their vehicles in a day" figure would be possible during intense operations, and the vast majority of those vehicles would be in a workshop somewhere and back with the division after a while. If you read about the casualty figures of Kursk 1943, you'll see they mostly turn ugly when the Germans are withdrawing, because they can no longer recover their vehicles. At the start of Zitadelle, Fourth Panzer Army had 884 operational tanks, at the end of the second day, the operational tank strength was 865 tanks. After that, tank strength fell rapidly to an average of over 500 tanks, with a low of 466, but keep in mind that the battle was being fought in the middle of one big minefield and what was possibly the most fortified point and heavily defended part of the Eastern Front at the time. The final reports suggest that the vast majority of the losses were mobility kills which could not be recovered later on. Of course, for all that to happen, you'd have to fight a battle like Kursk and Elmo didn't. quote: Only 300,000 men lost and the games front is longer than the historical ie there is more contact with the enemy.. Actually, as I pointed out in my previous post, the front is a lot shorter, which doesn't automatically mean more contact, it really depends on what the Soviets are trying to do. As indicated by Elmo, the Soviets have made some counterattacks but the Soviets didn't go all-in, they didn't really try to push Elmo away from a city/an area prior to the latest patch. quote: Explain the Roumanian situation I am unfamiliar with the Romanian side of the war, perhaps they mobilized more men, the developers will have to answer that question.

elmo3 -> RE: Operation Barbarossa - Alpha AAR (3/12/2010 11:58:29 PM)
Only look at the total losses on the reports I post. Current turn and recent battle losses are meaningless due to the point at which I take the screen shot.

Joel Billings -> RE: Operation Barbarossa - Alpha AAR (3/13/2010 12:07:00 AM)
I tried to explain this in an earlier post. You are not seeing casualties. You are seeing Killed, and Captured numbers. You are also seeing a "disabled" number which are not all casualites. 2% of these are sent back to the manpower pool each turn. There are many many more casualties going on in the units. They are the damaged units that are not destroyed. Some amount of these elements remain with their unit as damaged (they don't fight), and some amount are repaired within the unit and put back into action, and some are disbanded and sent back to the manpower pool to be used as general replacements. IIRC, someone posted that Axis losses were around 300k (actually killed) up through November. So the game is not as far off as you think, although as I was saying it does look like lighter losses than history, and I think a big part of that is Lee's play. The fact that he's stopped attacking in October instead of December will reduce losses as well.

Page: << < prev 19 20 [21] 22 23 next > >>

Forum Software © ASPPlayground.NET Advanced Edition 2.4.5 ANSI

1.71875