RE: Week 78

RE: Week 78 (Full Version)

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

Message

Flaviusx -> RE: Week 78 (2/12/2012 3:53:18 PM)
It's pretty much like Q-ball says, M60. You have to meet the panzer ball with your rifle swarm. And throw in your mobile units into the fray as well -- a few rifle divisions stiffened by cavalry or tank corps can easily counterattack single German divisions out in the open. But they must end their turn well behind the screen of rifle units. This allows you to settle into a pattern of counterattacking and dispersion, with generous use of the reserve stance as the bulk of your army won't end their turn in contact with the enemy. Just enough up front to maintain contact and ZOC everything, with the rest behind them. He'll have drop units off in any breakthrough to keep those in ZOC in order to lock them down and remove their ability to react while in reserve mode.

kevini1000 -> RE: Fast Forward (2/12/2012 4:29:29 PM)
what do you mean next patch. explain more please quote: ORIGINAL: Ron quote: ORIGINAL: M60A3TTS A further air recon shows all those unaccounted divisions in the same breakthrough area. [:(] I don't know that there's an answer for this. Handling 25-30 mobile divisions seems downright impossible. If anyone has any suggestions, now would be a good time to raise them. TIC - Don't sweat it. That capability for the German will be negated in the next patch so the Soviet Steamroller Story can be properly told.

wadortch -> RE: Fast Forward (2/12/2012 4:50:21 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Ron quote: ORIGINAL: M60A3TTS A further air recon shows all those unaccounted divisions in the same breakthrough area. [:(] I don't know that there's an answer for this. Handling 25-30 mobile divisions seems downright impossible. If anyone has any suggestions, now would be a good time to raise them. TIC - Don't sweat it. That capability for the German will be negated in the next patch so the Soviet Steamroller Story can be properly told Sigh. I surely hope you are wrong about yet another patch fix to solve Soviet defensive dilemmas. [:-]

M60A3TTS -> RE: Fast Forward (2/12/2012 5:04:45 PM)
Yes, like all Soviet players, I have my secret login to the WiTE developers patch requests. In the next release, all of Pelton's panzers will "upgrade" to the Panzer I. [;)]

Flaviusx -> RE: Fast Forward (2/12/2012 6:08:49 PM)
Some people are letting their persecution complex get out of hand... Anyways, there's nothing here that requires patching. It's just a question of learning how to build and handle the Red Army from 42 on, a process which many people are still undergoing as game experience in this period is to date somewhat limited.

Farfarer61 -> RE: Fast Forward (2/12/2012 6:34:57 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Flaviusx It's just a question of learning how to build and handle the Red Army from 42 on, a process which many people are still undergoing as game experience in this period is to date somewhat limited. Losing several Guards Tank Armies to my opponent through hubris and incompetence had a salutory effect :)

randallw -> RE: Fast Forward (2/12/2012 8:10:08 PM)
With all that German armor concentrated shouldn't there be some opportunities to attack German infantry somewhere else on the front line?

M60A3TTS -> RE: Fast Forward (2/12/2012 8:26:34 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: randallw With all that German armor concentrated shouldn't there be some opportunities to attack German infantry somewhere else on the front line? North of the Oka, he's dug in with mostly wooded terrain so the front is very stable, meaning any attack would require a lot of forces and casualties for not much ground. In the far south, he is also fortified but there are some opportunities in a few spots. It's a matter of how much I can afford to commit away from the main action. At this stage, that isn't much. Also, a lot of my rifle corps are suffering high fatigue, so they're barely able to move three friendly hexes out of an enemy ZOC, let alone move and launch deliberate attacks. I'm not sure if that is a function of supply shortages or blizzard conditions. There haven't been a large # of battles with them the last two weeks, but they move very slowly while Pelton keeps delivering fuel by air to keep a certain level of mobility for his panzer and motor infantry divisions.

wadortch -> RE: Fast Forward (2/13/2012 1:25:07 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Flaviusx Some people are letting their persecution complex get out of hand... Anyways, there's nothing here that requires patching. It's just a question of learning how to build and handle the Red Army from 42 on, a process which many people are still undergoing as game experience in this period is to date somewhat limited. Ah, but apparently enough experience to warrant the big patch "correcting" March Madness eh Flaviusx? In any case, good to read you are not ready to lead or support another patch charge in the name of simulation purity and the Soviet Steamroller!

wadortch -> RE: Fast Forward (2/13/2012 1:39:12 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: M60A3TTS Yes, like all Soviet players, I have my secret login to the WiTE developers patch requests. In the next release, all of Pelton's panzers will "upgrade" to the Panzer I. [;)] Yes, with smaller fuel tanks and more attrition when they move more than 1 hex!

Flaviusx -> RE: Fast Forward (2/13/2012 1:39:41 AM)
March madness was deeply silly and ahistorical. The solution we came up with it was something of a kludge but I'm still fairly flabbergasted at the number of people who think March Madness was totally cool, as if all Germany had to do was hide a few divisions from the blizzard and all their logistical problems would go away. Seriously wondering how many people here even understand what a shambles the whole logistical apparatus was at this point. The rail lines were operating at a fraction of their capacity (never high to begin with,) something like 3/4 of Axis trucks were broken downs, hundreds of thousands of horses were dead, etc. Players who are congratulating themselves on hiding a score of divisions in cities just don't seem to get this. That hardly addresses the real issue. Even by summer of 1942 the German only found it possible to mount Fall Blau by stripping 2/3 of the front of their transport to give AGS the necessary mobility. The logistical system in the game wasn't properly accounting for this. Mostly because the entire way blizzard has been dealt with is a kludge to begin with that doesn't seriously grapple with this breakdown. So when those blizzard effects get removed, it of course led to an abrupt shift.

KamilS -> RE: Fast Forward (2/13/2012 1:41:51 AM)
quote: Flaviusx March madness was deeply silly and ahistorical. The solution we came up with it was something of a kludge but I'm still fairly flabbergasted at the number of people who think March Madness was totally cool, as if all Germany had to do was hide a few divisions from the blizzard and all their logistical problems would go away. Seriously wondering how many people here even understand what a shambles the whole logistical apparatus was at this point. The rail lines were operating at a fraction of their capacity (never high to begin with,) something like 3/4 of Axis trucks were broken downs, hundreds of thousands of horses were dead, etc. Problem is, that this game is surprisingly ahistorical, that is why so called "March madness" fitted well. [;)]

M60A3TTS -> RE: Fast Forward (2/13/2012 2:15:34 AM)
In any case, I'm not looking for patches to solve the riddle of the panzersturm. A simple counter strategy will be just fine. Nor have I even asked for that AP hotfix to get back some that I had to spend re-arranging my fronts to get them to the proper command limits. To date the armies of the Volkhov Front are still overloaded each with 6 corps and maybe that's causing supply problems and more fatigue to the rifle units. I'm still mulling the rifle corps thing and probably will for a while. The biggest mistake may have been committing the Volkhov Front into the line and not holding it back as the strategic reserve. The next time I get a chance to do it, I may limit the rifle corps to an even dozen.

wadortch -> RE: Fast Forward (2/13/2012 2:42:19 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Kamil quote: Flaviusx March madness was deeply silly and ahistorical. The solution we came up with it was something of a kludge but I'm still fairly flabbergasted at the number of people who think March Madness was totally cool, as if all Germany had to do was hide a few divisions from the blizzard and all their logistical problems would go away. Seriously wondering how many people here even understand what a shambles the whole logistical apparatus was at this point. The rail lines were operating at a fraction of their capacity (never high to begin with,) something like 3/4 of Axis trucks were broken downs, hundreds of thousands of horses were dead, etc. [/quote Problem is, that this game is surprisingly ahistorical, that is why so called "March madness" fitted well. [;)] Germany hides a few divisions and all their logistical problems go away? Give it up Flavio. Do some Kludge east of the front lines for a change. Rein in the ability of the Soviets to run a tip to toe blizzard offensive that pumps em up to overextend and get thumped by rested Germans. Or maybe an option for the Germans to send some winter clothes up front. Your premise that the Germans have to leave everybody up front and get creamed by an over downed Soviet steamroller is SLUDGE.

wadortch -> RE: Fast Forward (2/13/2012 2:46:39 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: M60A3TTS In any case, I'm not looking for patches to solve the riddle of the panzersturm. A simple counter strategy will be just fine. Nor have I even asked for that AP hotfix to get back some that I had to spend re-arranging my fronts to get them to the proper command limits. To date the armies of the Volkhov Front are still overloaded each with 6 corps and maybe that's causing supply problems and more fatigue to the rifle units. I'm still mulling the rifle corps thing and probably will for a while. The biggest mistake may have been committing the Volkhov Front into the line and not holding it back as the strategic reserve. The next time I get a chance to do it, I may limit the rifle corps to an even dozen. Right on and fight on!

Michael T -> RE: Fast Forward (2/13/2012 4:01:51 AM)
The problem with almost all of your arguments Flav is that you are always happy to restrict German players to the historical limits/situation. There is no room for improvement in your take. Whatever the Germans achieved that should be the high water mark no matter what, whether in ground taken, logistics, C&C, OOB etc etc. You consistently refuse to accept that with better decision making/planning on the German side things could have been better or improved. Yet you have no qualms in allowing for any kind of improvement on the Soviet side. It's one rule for the Germans and quite a different rule for the Soviets. The bias is endemic and obvious to all bar the perpetrators. I am beginning to wonder why we even have a map that goes beyond the line Leningrad/Moscow/Stalingrad. Many people play these games with an idea to see how they could have done better by trying different strategies or allocating more or less resources to different aspects of the war (myself included). But the German side is consistently forced in to an ever decreasing sand box to play in. While uncle Joe's boys have the entire field.

Seminole -> RE: Fast Forward (2/13/2012 4:11:54 AM)
quote: Many people play these games with an idea to see how they could have done better by trying different strategies or allocating more or less resources to different aspects of the war (myself included). But the German side is consistently forced in to an ever decreasing sand box to play in. While uncle Joe's boys have the entire field. I think it would be nice to see more things as optional (like the weather). That way folks who wanted to try and fight it out with the historical OOB could, while folks who wanted to try different things had their chance. Problem with trying to play balance a wide open sand box is that people seek to min/max the bell curve of the game engine instead of wield a historically realistic force.

Flaviusx -> RE: Fast Forward (2/13/2012 4:22:46 AM)
Micheal T, that's a gross simplification. I supported the fort change. I supported, with certain reservations, the recent C&C changes to the Sovs (the tank HQs especially needed to happen.) I have serious doubts about the combat engine in the late war and believe it is causing too high retreat losses, which is resulting in the Axis burning out too quickly and also possibly causing armament point issues. Nobody ever gives me credit for these things. Because, ultimately, I do not subscribe to the view that many people have that an outright victory over the Soviet Union is in the cards given equal players, not in the sense of overruning the place. (I think minor victories are possible within the context of the GC's victory objectives. But that's not really what you're looking for is it?) And this is really our basic and fundamental disagreement. We will never change each other's mind on it. My own view Micheal is that you and a lot of folks around here are very old school and haven't kept up with the scholarship of the last twenty years or so.

Michael T -> RE: Fast Forward (2/13/2012 5:08:12 AM)
Flav what you fail to appreciate is this, in order for these modernist historical experts to sell their books they need to present new theories and ideas. They won't make any money rehashing old material. For me personal accounts and histories written much closer to the war hold just as much weight if not more than some modernist take that has a vested interest in presenting so called 'previoulsy unseen' material. Personally I find Glantz's material wishy washy and not worth the bother. Although I only read one of his books, 'Barbarossa to Stalingrad'. Perhaps he has improved since then.

AFV -> RE: Fast Forward (2/13/2012 7:58:38 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Flaviusx Micheal T, that's a gross simplification. I supported the fort change. I supported, with certain reservations, the recent C&C changes to the Sovs (the tank HQs especially needed to happen.) I have serious doubts about the combat engine in the late war and believe it is causing too high retreat losses, which is resulting in the Axis burning out too quickly and also possibly causing armament point issues. Nobody ever gives me credit for these things. Because, ultimately, I do not subscribe to the view that many people have that an outright victory over the Soviet Union is in the cards given equal players, not in the sense of overruning the place. (I think minor victories are possible within the context of the GC's victory objectives. But that's not really what you're looking for is it?) And this is really our basic and fundamental disagreement. We will never change each other's mind on it. My own view Micheal is that you and a lot of folks around here are very old school and haven't kept up with the scholarship of the last twenty years or so. Flaviusx You need to clarify this: (I think minor victories are possible within the context of the GC's victory objectives. But that's not really what you're looking for is it?) Are you saying its possible the German might get a minor victory? No offense, but a good balanced game should allow for either side to get anything from a minor victory to a draw to a decisive victory. If what your saying is that you believe the German should only be able, at best, to achieve a minor victory then your bias is really showing. If I misinterpret that, please clarify.

Encircled -> RE: Fast Forward (2/13/2012 8:23:43 AM)
This is a good AAR Can all those who had Panzer wallpaper and bed sheets when they were children please take it to the correct forum! [;)]

Seminole -> RE: Fast Forward (2/13/2012 2:59:11 PM)
quote: No offense, but a good balanced game should allow for either side to get anything from a minor victory to a draw to a decisive victory. Is it not possible that the Eastern Front isn't the setting for a 'good balanced game'? Did the Russians ultimately win because it was unbalanced, or because Hitler didn't know the secret of HQ buildup?

wadortch -> RE: Fast Forward (2/13/2012 6:12:39 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Encircled This is a good AAR Can all those who had Panzer wallpaper and bed sheets when they were children please take it to the correct forum! [;)] Good point. A thread on this topic has now been started (Is WITE Balanced) and that's a good place to take this discussion. I am taking my wall paper and sheets there, bring your red banners, too! [:)]

randallw -> RE: Fast Forward (2/13/2012 6:53:47 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Seminole Is it not possible that the Eastern Front isn't the setting for a 'good balanced game'? Did the Russians ultimately win because it was unbalanced, or because Hitler didn't know the secret of HQ buildup? It was the Soviet carebears and their nerf bats.

governato -> Build a reserve (2/13/2012 7:09:32 PM)
My reccomendation is to trade space for time and slowly build a strong strategic reserve over Winter. Not an handful of divisions, possibly an entire front. Let him overextend himself for the next (few?) turns. Yes, deal with the frontline crisis, but make sure that every turn you build a couple of infantry division for your reserve and assign good leaders to it. I bet you will be tempted to commit those units piecemeal, but don't. Decide what cities you can afford to lose and stick to those decisions, even if it is painful. Make sure you have cheap support units (sappers are always good, I did tests with AT guns but they do not seem to be worth much, artyllery if you can afford it) attached to your Armies. Do not worry much about Corps, they are expensive and ..well have they worked for you so far? Stick to simple and cheap. Also, morale is important, but only counterattack when a really good opportunity presents itself, not because 'you have to'. I probably sound like your financial investor, but playing the Red Army requires patience and small steps. Let the Whermacht take chances and overextend itself, your time will hopefully come.

M60A3TTS -> Week 79 (2/14/2012 5:30:25 AM)
Week 79- 24.12.42 The German forces continue to push forward in all directions. Local counterattacks north and south knock a handful of divisions back. Fatigue in the rifle units and supply shortages in general are the major problems in making any significant headway against the fascists. The Bryansk and Western Fronts are sliding south so that the Bryansk Front will be operating south of the Oka in a week. The battles in the blizzard conditions are generating less casualties for both sides in a number of cases. [image]http://img443.imageshack.us/img443/4530/peltont79bigpic.jpg[/image] [image]http://img689.imageshack.us/img689/6578/t79fatigue.jpg[/image]

AFV -> RE: Week 79 (2/14/2012 7:22:31 AM)
This is a very interesting point! I think governato is right though, you will need to trade some space here.

M60A3TTS -> Week 80- Closing in (2/15/2012 2:53:34 AM)
Week 80- 24.12.42 The Axis blizzard offensive continues in the week before Christmas, 1942. Pelton has slowed the advance against the Volkhov Front in the north, and works on pocketing the Voronezh Front to the south. Hungarian, Slovakian and Italian armored and mechanized troops supporting the German 3rd Mountain Division position themselves across from the Causasus Front and prepare to attempt a link up with the mobile formations making a flanking maneuver from the northeast. The German 3rd Motorized Division cuts across the last remaining rail line that supplies the Voronezh Front, along with the bulk of the Red Army's armor and cavalry corps. Now northwest of Mikhailovska, they are 120 miles from their comrades to the southwest. If they and the panzers behind them can push their way to a link-up with the southern pincer, Mother Russia is doomed. [image]http://img813.imageshack.us/img813/5539/peltont80start.jpg[/image]

randallw -> RE: Week 80- Closing in (2/15/2012 3:16:03 AM)
Is the rail line running through Saratov still linked up? If so you can still reinforce the area, at least to try to keep a linked line of hexes into the pocket.

vicberg -> RE: Fast Forward (2/15/2012 5:18:41 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Flaviusx Because, ultimately, I do not subscribe to the view that many people have that an outright victory over the Soviet Union is in the cards given equal players, not in the sense of overruning the place. (I think minor victories are possible within the context of the GC's victory objectives. But that's not really what you're looking for is it?) Why not? This game is going the route of WITPAE. Same arguments. It's a game. Period. If you want something historically accurate, then limit the game to 1941 and see how the Germans compare to history to determine victory and then stop playing. Why bother? So this debate goes back and forth and the Soviets can claim victory without even clicking button, unfortunately, there won't be anyone to play the Germans. Quite frankly, I hope they swing it, like they did the Japanese in WITPAE, so that the Germans are competitive until 1944 (hardly realistic, but who cares and who wants a clickfest where the outcome is known years earlier). It will be more fun for all involved if they do so. Create a "historical" game and you'll be playing the AI.

Page: << < prev 8 9 [10] 11 12 next > >>

Forum Software © ASPPlayground.NET Advanced Edition 2.4.5 ANSI

1.21875