76mm -> RE: GC 76mm (Sov) vs Ketza (No Ketza) (5/14/2011 1:00:26 PM)
|
Turn 54 complete. Once again, I had a nasty shock, Ketz was able to (easily) punch through several fortified hexes and take Stalino. As a result, I had to retreat from lots of territory SW and NW of Stalino, so at least towards Rostov my troops are not entrenched any more. But I'm not sure that it really matters. Anyway, here is the situation near Stalino AFTER my move: [image]http://www.vervecom.net/WITE/54-stalino.jpg[/image] More comments on this later, but for now, another worrying development; the panzer army (I think) that was near Kursk has been moved up to the Smolensk area: [image]http://www.vervecom.net/WITE/54-Smolensk.jpg[/image] This is not good news, because I've moved a lot of units from the Moscow area down south to counter his moves there. It is even worse news when you realize how easily he slices through my entrenched lines. This area could get ugly very fast. Nothing exciting, but here is the situation in the Crimea; he seems to have pulled the two panzer divs that were down there and sent them somewhere else, so I'm not sure if much else will happen down here for awhile: [image]http://www.vervecom.net/WITE/54-crimea.jpg[/image] I guess I'll discuss the strategic situation a bit later, but first I thought I'd present some analysis that I did of the combat in this turn. In general, the pattern of his CVs increasing by a lot, and mine falling by a lot, continued, and I really want to find out why. Otherwise, attempting any kind of defense seems rather futile, and I'd be better off checkerboarding back to the Urals. Anyway, here is a table showing some data from the battles in his main thrust, towards Stalino: [image]http://www.vervecom.net/WITE/54-Main%20battles.jpg[/image] Several general comments here: 1) As you can see,on average, his CVs increased by 59%, while mine decreased by 43%. While this is better than last turn, it still means that a battle which started at 1:1 would end up at 2.8:1, which is not good. It also means that his attacks, which on average had initial odds of 1.6:1, on average achieved 7.9:1 odds. Finally, it means (according to my math) that for one of my stacks to hold (ie, achieve 1.9:1 odds) against a 22 CV German attack (not very strong, but at least an effort), I would need 33 CV in my stack. That is just not achievable except in isolated cases, and currently impossible if not strongly entrenched. Frankly, these results are all rather depressing, but I was hoping that I could at least figure out what was going on. The first thing I looked at was airpower. When looking at the effect of air power, I decided to look at what happens when a side achieves "air superiority" in a battle, which I defined (on a completely arbitrary basis) as having at least 100 planes more than the other side. In the table, I shaded the battles with German air sup in gray, Sov air sup in purple. The results were interesting: In battles where the Germans had air sup, my CVs were decreased by 72% (instead of the 43% average), but if the Germans did not have air sup, my CVs decreased by only 25%. Meanwhile, in the battles (beware, only two samples) where I had air sup, my CVs INCREASED by 48% on average, vs a 59% decrease if I did not have air sup. These results were interesting, but of dubious relevance given the small sample size, and indeed, analysis of the other battles on this turn did not necessarily show the same pattern. More analysis in subsequent post; if this stuff is boring I would skip any more posts until you see a screen shot...
|
|
|
|