RE: Blizzard! (Full Version)

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



Message


pompack -> RE: Blizzard! (7/6/2011 4:37:13 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: Pawlock

The only problem I can see with having 2 tank battalions as SU's for tank corps is the fact that they are also vehicle hogs which add up in the big scheme of things.
Personally I go 1 tank,1 sapper and 1 AT . I go the AT route as you normally have shedloads of these and the right TOE 's arnt that much a vehicle hog.

Of course these are all personal prefences.


I seem to remember an earlier thread that stated there were additional trucks required when a non-mobile SU was assigned to a mobile unit. I believe that the extra trucks showed up in the parent unit, not the SU.




ComradeP -> RE: Blizzard! (7/6/2011 5:58:15 PM)

The vehicle requirements only really start to increase when the Tank regiments get some infantry and other support and even then, they're not too high when taking into account what you get in return. The Soviet vehicle situation has been improved somewhat recently, so finding the vehicles shouldn't be too much of a problem. You'd only need about 50 in any case.




Flaviusx -> RE: Blizzard! (7/6/2011 9:04:56 PM)

The real vehicle hogs are the mech corps. You can fit out literally dozens of tank battalions with trucks for the price of a single mech corps. If you want to economize on trucks...don't build many mech corps.





Q-Ball -> RE: Blizzard! (7/6/2011 10:19:50 PM)

It would be helpful if someone put together a table of Vehicle costs for the various units. It would allow you to plan ahead more.

From what I can tell, a full Mech Corps is about 3,500 Vehicles. A Tank Corps after mid-'42 is around 2,000. A Tank Regt. is about 180 or so, after it picks up infantry. I think.

But it would be nice if there was a summary somewhere.




Klydon -> RE: Blizzard! (7/6/2011 10:22:23 PM)

The tank battalions show 76 trucks, which should not be too bad I would think. This is in line with what a tank brigade has ratio wise (3 trucks per tank) and while a tank battalion can be put in a corps, a tank brigade takes a stacking spot. Just took a quick look at tank corps and they run over 4 trucks to 1 tank (nee more for other stuff in the division most likely).

I don't know that I am a big fan of defensive support units (anti-tank units) in with what is considered an offensive unit, but I could see the thought behind it if you thought it would help against panzer counter attacks. I would think AT units (if you used them) would be better off either in infantry corps or mech corps.




Mynok -> RE: Blizzard! (7/6/2011 10:29:27 PM)


Having experienced by tank corps and mech corps in my game with Oleg, the latter are much more to be feared.




Pawlock -> RE: Blizzard! (7/6/2011 10:31:43 PM)

Hmm, I was getting confused between tank battalions and tank regiments. Obviously the regiments come along later and are 200plus vehicles a pop.




ComradeP -> RE: Blizzard! (7/7/2011 12:54:57 PM)

There seems to be a problem with the cavalry corps, as according to the editor they need a lot more vehicles than they get in the game, so their low vehicle requirements might actually be a bug (or there's a glitch in the editor). The other values should be correct.

Note that this is for a "pure" 100% TOE unit of that type, with no attachments (for the combat units):

Support:

41 Separate Tank Battalion: 62 vehicles.
42 Separate Tank Battalion: 103 vehicles.
42 Separate Tank Regiment: 154 vehicles.
43 Separate Tank Regiment: 218 vehicles.
44a Separate Tank Regiment: 193 vehicles.
44b Separate Tank Regiment: 221 vehicles.

42 Heavy Tank Regiment: 124 vehicles.
44 Heavy Tank Regiment: 170 vehicles.

43 Light SU Regiment: 58 vehicles.
44 Light SU Regiment: 71 vehicles.

43 Medium SU Regiment: 109 vehicles.
44 Medium SU Regiment: 98 vehicles.

43 Heavy SU Regiment: 104 vehicles.
44 Heavy SU Regiment: 153 vehicles.

Combat:

41 Cavalry Corps: 1666 vehicles.
42 Cavalry Corps: 1991 vehicles.
43 Cavalry Corps: 2648 vehicles.

41 Guards Cavalry Corps: 1671 vehicles.
42 Guards Cavalry Corps: 2011 vehicles.
43 Guards Cavalry Corps: 2768 vehicles.

42a Tank Corps: 1086 vehicles.
42b Tank Corps: 1526 vehicles.
43a Tank Corps: 1700 vehicles.
43b Tank Corps: 2526 vehicles.
44 Tank Corps: 2636 vehicles.

42a Guards Tank Corps: 1086 vehicles.
42b Guards Tank Corps: 1568 vehicles.
43a Guards Tank Corps: 1932 vehicles.
43b Guards Tank Corps: 2549 vehicles.
44 Guards Tank Corps: 2785 vehicles.

42 Mechanized Corps: 2900 vehicles.
43a Mechanized Corps: 3176 vehicles.
43b Mechanized Corps: 3385 vehicles.
44 Mechanized Corps: 3423 vehicles.

42 Guards Mechanized Corps: 2900 vehicles.
43a Guards Mechanized Corps: 3188 vehicles.
43b Guards Mechanized Corps: 3390 vehicles.
44 Guards Mechanized Corps: 3431 vehicles.




Q-Ball -> RE: Blizzard! (7/7/2011 9:52:28 PM)

3/26/42: Last Snow Turn

Our game is at a bit of a crawl at the moment, mostly because Tarhunnas has some time-off, which is OK. I am off the last two weeks of July, so this AAR is moving SLOOOOW....Summer fun!

Anyway, this turn the Germans did some minor attacking; pushed me back out of Kaluga and Kalinin, which is no big deal. I didn't expect to hold them anyway. Otherwise, very little going on.

I attacked 4-5 targets of opportunity and did fairly well, so this turn is a stalemate.

I will post more information when I have completed the turn, but not much through Sunday.

COMRADE: Thanks for that Vehicle Post. There is something wrong with Cavalry Corps as you say, because they use hardly any Vehicles in practice. In fact, if a Cav Corps uses 1,500 vehicles, it stands to reason that a Cav Division should use at least a couple hundred. But they don't.

I still like Cav Corps, but slightly less now, if they actually consume the Vehicles they are supposed to.




pompack -> RE: Blizzard! (7/7/2011 11:45:29 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: ComradeP

There seems to be a problem with the cavalry corps, as according to the editor they need a lot more vehicles than they get in the game, so their low vehicle requirements might actually be a bug (or there's a glitch in the editor). The other values should be correct.

Note that this is for a "pure" 100% TOE unit of that type, with no attachments (for the combat units):


Combat:

41 Cavalry Corps: 1666 vehicles.
42 Cavalry Corps: 1991 vehicles.
43 Cavalry Corps: 2648 vehicles.

41 Guards Cavalry Corps: 1671 vehicles.
42 Guards Cavalry Corps: 2011 vehicles.
43 Guards Cavalry Corps: 2768 vehicles.



Pieter:
Is this being discussed in the developer forum as yet? Any thoughts from there that can be shared?




ComradeP -> RE: Blizzard! (7/8/2011 2:20:10 AM)

I've asked Joel if he could ask Gary about it.




Mehring -> RE: Blizzard! (7/8/2011 10:59:48 AM)

quote:

I still like Cav Corps, but slightly less now, if they actually consume the Vehicles they are supposed to.

I'm going the opposite way there. If I was always a bit luke warm on them, a look at the wins league table in my pbem of Sept 42 was an eye opener. It shows them to occupy most of the top 10-15 positions in number of wins for all combat units. Put as a percentage of total units, those 10-15 cavalry corps are all I've got. Phenomenal performance and worth every vehicle they need in my view. No wonder they're all Guards. I'll build a whole lot more next game.




Pawlock -> RE: Blizzard! (7/8/2011 1:59:10 PM)

IMO cavalry corps are without equal in 41 early 42 for sure. Add 1 tank,at and a sapper battalion and they sure pack a punch,got extra mobility,  and can hold a pocket closed.

Now, while there may be a bug which means fewer vehicles being used, ComradeP figures if correct seem way too excessive the other way.




ComradeP -> RE: Blizzard! (7/8/2011 3:25:14 PM)

Maybe the editor treats the cavalry squads as motorized squads, that's a possibility, but I'm waiting on the official answer.




Flaviusx -> RE: Blizzard! (7/8/2011 4:03:33 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: Mehring

quote:

I still like Cav Corps, but slightly less now, if they actually consume the Vehicles they are supposed to.

I'm going the opposite way there. If I was always a bit luke warm on them, a look at the wins league table in my pbem of Sept 42 was an eye opener. It shows them to occupy most of the top 10-15 positions in number of wins for all combat units. Put as a percentage of total units, those 10-15 cavalry corps are all I've got. Phenomenal performance and worth every vehicle they need in my view. No wonder they're all Guards. I'll build a whole lot more next game.


Pieter and I have often toyed with the idea of building even more of them, and fewer tank or mech corps. They really are quite amazing units. In practice they tend to be more mobile, as the tank/mech corps rarely get to their 50 mp maximum. Logistically, they are easier to support and can often sustain a drive when the other mobile corps are struggling to hit 20 mps.

With a couple of tank battalions and the later TOE they aren't even very short on AFVs.

The units are possibly a little bit too good.




ComradeP -> RE: Blizzard! (7/8/2011 4:27:56 PM)

One thing to keep in mind is that although they're good units with the 1942 and 1943 TOE's, they do have their limitations in terms of their maximum MP's as even though they are more likely to get close to their maximum MP's than fatigued and low fuel mobile corps, their actual maximum MP's are still 22, so they are suited for a slow, methodical advance but not for deep penetrations. The Axis can prepare for that and will know that there's less danger than the ~once a month 50 MP breakthrough Tank or mechanized corps can pull off.

Personally, I don't see that as a disadvantage as average experience/morale mobile units performing deep penetration as the Soviets have a tendency to get their collective behinds kicked by even mediocre Axis units.

I prefer a slow steamroller with limited breakthroughs and mostly the threat of encirclement to the Axis instead of actual large encirclements. Deep penetrations are a bit too fancy for the average Soviet mobile unit.




Q-Ball -> RE: Blizzard! (7/8/2011 4:58:18 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: ComradeP

Maybe the editor treats the cavalry squads as motorized squads, that's a possibility, but I'm waiting on the official answer.


The current number of Vehicles for seems low for Cavalry, but 1,500 or 2,000 seems high. Even allowing for all non-mounted elements, that leaves alot of Vechicles left over.

If Cav Corps legitimately need that number of vehicles, then it stands to reason too that Cav Divisions would need a few hundred on their own.




Mynok -> RE: Blizzard! (7/8/2011 10:27:26 PM)


quote:

The units are possibly a little bit too good.


Cue a Pelton rant! [:D][:D]




Q-Ball -> RE: Blizzard! (7/9/2011 4:05:59 PM)

3/26/42: Pre-Mud Assessment:

Tarhunnas is somewhere on a boat in the Baltic at the moment, so a couple days break in the action. This AAR will pick up for a few days, before STAVKA HQ relocates to a remote Dacha for summer vacation at the end of the July.

In the meantime, I am putting together my thoughts on Germans plans for the upcoming Summer campaign.

OOB Numbers:
This turn, the Germans sit at 2.76 mil and 781 Tanks; I am at 5.33 mil, and 4,700 tanks.

At the moment, I am growing alot faster than he is, adding 80,000 men since last turn, and I am adding tanks to the front as fast as I can make them, which at the moment is pretty fast (over 500 per turn). I don't have a pool of tank replacements yet, but I think I will come May, even at the rate I am creating Tank Bns (I have built 40 so far, and more to follow).

Next turn, I build Tank Corps, and each will get 2 Sapper Regts right off the bat (STAVKA has almost 40 right now that I have been building in advance). A few will get a Guards Motorcycle Regt instead of one Sapper Regt. Everyone gets a Tank Bn.

The Werhmacht isn't growing at all lately, though I know he gets alot of new Infantry units in the spring, plus all the Hungarians and the Italians.

I don't expect ANY attacks in the mud, as he really needs to take it easy. In fact, I don't expect alot in the clear turns, except to knock a couple of my forts out, or position for the summer.

Wehrmacht Plans:

It doesn't take a genius to figure out where the Wehrmacht will attack in the Summer.

Tarhunnas's priorities have to be killing Reds, impairing my Manpower production, and forming a viable defense line. These objectives are all most easily met in the SOUTH. I know that's what everyone does in 1942, but for good reason.

Around MOSCOW, I think he will sit tight. An offensive here would be doing me a favor, I think; it would only make the line LONGER, and the terrain favors me. Because of this, I plan to draw-down alot of troops from this area for my reserves.

Priority #1 will be an attack out of the Dnepr bridgehead Southeast, to reach the Sea of Azov and push me off the Dnepr. If Tarhunnas accomplishes nothing else this summer, he has to accomplish this.

Then, (or at the same time), I expect encirclement attacks around the Orel-Kursk-Kharkov line, to push me back and maybe re-take these cities. (Actually, Kursk never fell in 1941). There is alot of population up there, and he needs to bring the line straighter with Moscow.

Red Army Plans:

If I am right on Wehrmacht objectives, here is what I am doing about it:

First, I am pulling off all Guards Units, Cav, and Tanks, to refit for the Spring. The Tanks will form Tank Corps and get SUs; hopefully they will be serviceable come May.

SOUTH PREP:
I am digging in depth near the Dnepr bridgehead, including the Mochka river. I need to be very careful not to get units pinned and surrounded againts the Sea of Azov down here, so the best defense is in depth. I plan to deploy at least 5 Guards Cav Corps and Tanks down here, to counterattack the Panzers, and hopefully bleed him.

I expect to lose the fight eventually; diggers are working on backup-lines at the Crimean bottlenecks (including Sevsatopol, Kerch, etc), and also will be in a line on the Donbas cities, using the Rivers on either side (I do have alot of exisiting forts down there from last year's fighting)

CENTER:
In the O-K-K salient, I am digging a line along rivers about 5 hexes back. I may just fall back into it, not sure, but I definitely need to protect the shoulders.

I have a line of infantry (you can see the white units) that are digging along the River in the map below.

RESERVES: I had a small reserve during the SNOW, where I didn't really expect a major breakthrough along the front. This will change for the Summer.

Reserves will consist minimally of 2 Shock Armies and 2 other armies, with lots of Guards Units in the Regular Armies, and lots of Mobile units in the Shock Armies. I plan to pull-off 40 Guards Divisions for reserves, and 10-12 Tanks Corps, plus 6-8 Cav Corps. I also need to pull-off at least 25 decent regular Rifle units.

Generally, I am thinning-out my lines up North, and moving stuff SOUTH. I don't expect massive attacks up there at all, maybe just local stuff, or maybe not even that. He has Moscow fairly secure now, and probably will be content to spend the summer digging up to his eyeballs.

I have alot of depleted/unready "Diggers"; these I can "activate" by hitting REFIT for a turn, and they fill out quickly. At the moment, only GUARDS and MOBILE units are on Refit, as I want to fill those out, but they should be topped-off in just a turn or two, as they are all behind the lines at this point. Then I can work on some regular infantry.

MANPOWER:

My biggest production problem is Manpower.

I am going to get a lift from some Manpower centers that were damaged in 1941, and I figure to hold onto permanently in 1942. This includes Ivanovo, Vladimir, Ryazan, Tula, and all the space around there. That will certainly help. I am already getting a RR lift from these places.

Beyond that, I will probably lose in the Ukriane. Some are not producing anyway (like Kharkov, Orel, too damaged), but once he gets to "Virgin" territory, the losses will cut into meat. Kursk is one of those places, as well as anything beyond the Donbas. My goal is limit his penetration to these areas. If I can end 1942 producing 90K Manpower or so a turn, I should be able to roll the Fascists back to Berlin.

[image]local://upfiles/6931/73F6FBF8E780410A92FE089FBD62F555.jpg[/image]




hfarrish -> RE: Blizzard! (7/10/2011 2:50:37 AM)

Q-Ball -

Why do you expect the push between the Crimea and Stalino? Other than cutting the rail link it really wouldn't accomplish that much since it's not like your Crimean front would be isolated, and then he would have to guard two sides of a narrow line between your forces, which would then become a headache of a potential encirclement.

Granted, I'm more of a Soviet guy but if I were him I would focus everything on that Kursk blow (granted, I can't see your northern front so not sure if there are some opportunities there) rather than risk spreading out for two offensives and failing at both. In fact, more likely is that he'll just pick the weakest spot in your line and try to create an opportunity. He's too savvy to think you won't be prepared for the Kursk assault.





randallw -> RE: Blizzard! (7/10/2011 6:05:55 AM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: Q-Ball

3/26/42: Pre-Mud Assessment:

Tarhunnas is somewhere on a boat in the Baltic at the moment, so a couple days break in the action. This AAR will pick up for a few days, before STAVKA HQ relocates to a remote Dacha for summer vacation at the end of the July.



Perhaps he will be personally leading an amphibious assault! [:D]




Q-Ball -> RE: Blizzard! (7/10/2011 10:16:15 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: hfarrish

Q-Ball -

Why do you expect the push between the Crimea and Stalino? Other than cutting the rail link it really wouldn't accomplish that much since it's not like your Crimean front would be isolated, and then he would have to guard two sides of a narrow line between your forces, which would then become a headache of a potential encirclement.

Granted, I'm more of a Soviet guy but if I were him I would focus everything on that Kursk blow (granted, I can't see your northern front so not sure if there are some opportunities there) rather than risk spreading out for two offensives and failing at both. In fact, more likely is that he'll just pick the weakest spot in your line and try to create an opportunity. He's too savvy to think you won't be prepared for the Kursk assault.





I will prepare for both; the main thing a Crimean push would accomplish for him is to shorten the front. I think he really needs to do that in 1942, and that is the best way to accomplish that objective.

4/2/42: MUD:

Not much going on; Tarhunnas is back from time-off, so hopefully we'll be able to snap off a few turns shortly, since not much is going on.

Tank Corps:
I created 4 Guards and 15 Regular Tank Corps this turn. The AP kitty is empty. They will spend some time building experience and accumulating SU's. I have lots of Sapper Regts already; I am slowly building Tank Bns, now that I am finally beginning to accumulate surplus in the pools.

Refit:
We gained 80,000 this turn, to 5.41 mil. The Germans are still stuck on 2.76 mil. Not sure why. They did jump-up in tanks; they probably received a new Panzer Division.

One thing I have noticed; Rifle Divisions on REFIT flesh out pretty quickly in most things, EXCEPT light mortars and MGs. These take awhile. Why are these seemingly the last to get added? Most of my Guards Rifle units are just waiting for those items to be at 100%.





sillyflower -> RE: Blizzard! (7/10/2011 11:19:32 PM)

23rd Pz div turns up nw

Re MGs and mortars, remember the 5 year plan which set production for these items 3 years ago




Mehring -> RE: Blizzard! (7/10/2011 11:53:40 PM)

quote:

One thing I have noticed; Rifle Divisions on REFIT flesh out pretty quickly in most things, EXCEPT light mortars and MGs. These take awhile. Why are these seemingly the last to get added? Most of my Guards Rifle units are just waiting for those items to be at 100%.

Yes, I noticed the same, also sometimes inf AT. As far as arty goes, the light howitzer brigades in my game filled with 76mm which peeved a bit, even thoug my arms pool is now building. Would like to know why too.




BletchleyGeek -> RE: Blizzard! (7/11/2011 11:20:10 AM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: Q-Ball
One thing I have noticed; Rifle Divisions on REFIT flesh out pretty quickly in most things, EXCEPT light mortars and MGs. These take awhile. Why are these seemingly the last to get added? Most of my Guards Rifle units are just waiting for those items to be at 100%.


These two are probably the two most common element types in your TOE's. Ground elements are produced by requests from units below their prescribed TOEs. Then Armaments and Manpower are allocated to satisfy all "production requests" - so if there are many requests it's all too easy that everyone receives very little. Alternating Refit/Ready modes for units training in your rear should speed up the process. But you have to remember each turn to do that - of course.




Q-Ball -> RE: Blizzard! (7/11/2011 1:05:15 PM)

T-43: 4/16/42

More Mud. There isn't alot to report, except for the Wehrmacht attacks on the line.

I think Tarhunnas's aggressive nature is getting the better of him. I really thinned out my front to limit attrition losses (I had 50,000 this turn, which is the lowest in awhile), and the Germans attacked in several places. For the most part, in sectors where I had backup trenches, and no big deal to fall back a hex.

OOBs:

There is a disturbing trend I see on the OOB numbers. Disturbing for the Wehrmacht, and for the game, because I don't want the game to collapse because the Germans are burned out; at least not in 42-43.

If you compare this OOB to the one I posted for the 2/26 turn (last turn of Blizzard), the Germans have gained only 34,000 troops. All the reinforcements, though, total roughly 100,000 during that time, and the only withdrawls are minor ones. Is this normal? If my math is right, the Germans "core" numbers are in decline, in a period where they should be able to rebuild. This is a problem. He did increase by 500 tanks.

Over the same period, I have gained 380K men, 7,600 guns, and 1,900 tanks.

Otherwise, here are the latest numbers for posterity:

[image]local://upfiles/6931/E0A5826887D84B93B2165D9A18026E3A.jpg[/image]




Q-Ball -> RE: Blizzard! (7/11/2011 4:40:06 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: Bletchley_Geek


quote:

ORIGINAL: Q-Ball
One thing I have noticed; Rifle Divisions on REFIT flesh out pretty quickly in most things, EXCEPT light mortars and MGs. These take awhile. Why are these seemingly the last to get added? Most of my Guards Rifle units are just waiting for those items to be at 100%.


These two are probably the two most common element types in your TOE's. Ground elements are produced by requests from units below their prescribed TOEs. Then Armaments and Manpower are allocated to satisfy all "production requests" - so if there are many requests it's all too easy that everyone receives very little. Alternating Refit/Ready modes for units training in your rear should speed up the process. But you have to remember each turn to do that - of course.



This turn, I purposely left only a handful of units on REFIT, to see if they would flesh out on Light Mortars and MGs. They didn't. During the Normal Replacement Segment, we sent 48,000 guys to units, so during the REFIT segment we were "topped out". Theoretically.

All units on REFIT are 100% in everything except Light Mortars and MGs. They did seem to gain this turn, but most are in the 60% range. Same for ATRs, for the units that have those in the TOE. (Inf AT guns).

To be sure, I just surveyed 20 Guards Rifle Divisions. All of them are off the front, and have been for 2 turns. All are at 100% in every element, EXCEPT MGs and Light Mortars, where they are 60-80%. Same for the 5 Cav Corps I surveyed. All the Tank Corps, though, seem to be at 100% for these elements.



This could be WAD, but I am reporting what I am seeing; these elements do NOT flesh out quickly.




Peltonx -> RE: Blizzard! (7/11/2011 5:16:03 PM)

Yes replasements are very light for Germans now and you get big boosts.

Around turn 70 to 80 you will get about 1.6 million men(Hoooper vs Pelton. But if you are unable to take back any major manpower centers your numbers will be much lower. You need to get back Moscow asap.

Pelton




Klydon -> RE: Blizzard! (7/11/2011 6:16:17 PM)

Interesting on not filling out the ToE. I don't think it is WAD and would say something in the bug forum about it. I think the Germans have gone through the same thing with machine guns as well where units would be at or near ToE, except for machine guns and even with the unit on refit for several turns, they could not get the machine gun number to budge.




Mehring -> RE: Blizzard! (7/11/2011 7:39:08 PM)

Starting to look healthier but the Axis look quite strong nevertheless.

Are armaments factories entirely generic or are they assigned to produce one weapon type or another?




Page: <<   < prev  10 11 [12] 13 14   next >   >>

Valid CSS!




Forum Software © ASPPlayground.NET Advanced Edition 2.4.5 ANSI
0.90625