Soviet def of Leningrad (Full Version)

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



Message

Zort -> Soviet def of Leningrad (1/16/2011 3:44:05 AM)

I have noticed in several 41 GC/Barb scenarios that I have fooled around with that the soviet AI stacks Leningrad full/3 high at the expense of everything else. In one game I stopped at turn 12 because there was a total of 50 non a/c units from just north of moscow to the black sea and 50+ in Leningrad. I saw this also with the defense of Crimea and I think the latest patch said it fixed that.




Pawsy -> RE: Soviet def of Leningrad (1/16/2011 9:49:14 AM)

Seen a similar in Op Blue.

About turn 4 the Soviets had just built units 4 deep across most of the front. I understand when playing PBEM this maybe a tactic but if we go down this route with the AI we will ruin a very good game. Surely the AI should use historical tactics?



alfonso -> RE: Soviet def of Leningrad (1/16/2011 12:26:54 PM)

I don't understand what are you complaining about?. That is it very difficult to take Leningrad or that it is very easy to take the rest of Russia?. And starbuck310, what are the historical tactics? For instance, the Russian defense against operation Zitadelle?



Pawsy -> RE: Soviet def of Leningrad (1/16/2011 4:00:56 PM)

Yes I understand defence in depth but creating endless lines of counters isnt how it was done ;-) Thats the issue when this happens - units become counters and we loose some of the essence of the game? The ZOC tactic is well understood in the PBEM community. Nor is it much fun slugging through endless lines and I cant see that it has tactical or operational reserve grouping of note.

Just a feeling. I played the original on my Amiga 500 [:)]



Zort -> RE: Soviet def of Leningrad (1/16/2011 9:39:33 PM)

What I was trying to say is that against the AI that I have seen is that the defence of leningrad is it's first concern and everything else is not. So in my last game against the AI (at normal) there were no units in front of Moscow and hardly any to the south. This was turn 12. Leningrad was 4 hexes deep, stacked 3 high. Also (unfortunately I deleted that game) as I remember Crimea was 3 deep for several (one or two) hexes. Am playing a co-op game with my brother (helping him learn the game), am seeing the same defense by the AI. Will see what happens as the game goes on.

So I was just stating it seemed to me that the AI was defending hard in just one place.



76mm -> RE: Soviet def of Leningrad (1/16/2011 9:45:09 PM)

Maybe you quit too soon, and it was a cunning ploy by the AI to lure you further into Mother Russia?



Pford -> RE: Soviet def of Leningrad (1/16/2011 10:18:34 PM)

So close. But yet so far:

[image]local://upfiles/22863/A661047A28814C9AA01F42E278BC9C73.jpg[/image]



alfonso -> RE: Soviet def of Leningrad (1/16/2011 10:31:25 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: Zort

What I was trying to say is that against the AI that I have seen is that the defence of leningrad is it's first concern and everything else is not. So in my last game against the AI (at normal) there were no units in front of Moscow and hardly any to the south. This was turn 12. Leningrad was 4 hexes deep, stacked 3 high. Also (unfortunately I deleted that game) as I remember Crimea was 3 deep for several (one or two) hexes. Am playing a co-op game with my brother (helping him learn the game), am seeing the same defense by the AI. Will see what happens as the game goes on.

So I was just stating it seemed to me that the AI was defending hard in just one place.



Did you conquer Moscow?



Avenger -> RE: Soviet def of Leningrad (1/17/2011 1:43:57 AM)

Take these three points and Leningrad will be considered surrounded,

[image]http://i40.photobucket.com/albums/e202/Sultin/turn12AGN.jpg[/image]



Pford -> RE: Soviet def of Leningrad (1/17/2011 2:05:48 AM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: Avenger

Take these three points and Leningrad will be considered surrounded,


Yep. But you have to pass through dreadful terrain to get to those ports. Armoured units in this area are about as useful as snow plows in Miami.

But the direct approach to Leningrad is feckless, true.



Jim D Burns -> RE: Soviet def of Leningrad (1/17/2011 5:54:24 AM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: Zort

What I was trying to say is that against the AI that I have seen is that the defence of leningrad is it's first concern and everything else is not.



I think the AI’s defense of Leningrad is superb. The difference between Leningrad and “everything else” is that the Soviet’s cannot afford to give ground at Leningrad so it defends it as strongly as possible. Everywhere else loss of ground isn’t as critical so a lightly held line that simply serves to slow down the German advance is all that is called for.

The Soviets are doing exactly what is needed to try and hold onto Leningrad and it makes for a tough fight. Any other tactic would make taking the city in 1941 a pushover.

Jim



kfmiller41 -> RE: Soviet def of Leningrad (1/17/2011 6:28:35 AM)

I agree with Jim, I do the same thing, push alot of force around Leningrad figuring that it is the easiest City for the Germans to take. After turn 1-2 there are hardly any units at all between the Baltic and the city, most everything dies near the border[8|] so you almost have to do it anyway.



Fänrik Stål -> RE: Soviet def of Leningrad (1/17/2011 8:54:41 AM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: Avenger

Take these three points and Leningrad will be considered surrounded,

[image]http://i40.photobucket.com/albums/e202/Sultin/turn12AGN.jpg[/image]

The key to taking those is in my experience to take Tikhvin, which cuts off rail supply to all of the Leningrad area. Making Tikhvin the primary objective for AGN, will bag you Leningrad, at least against the AI.



Page: [1]

Valid CSS!




Forum Software © ASPPlayground.NET Advanced Edition 2.4.5 ANSI
1.816406