RE: AGC T4 (Full Version)

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



Message

heliodorus04 -> RE: AGC T4 (10/17/2011 9:33:36 PM)

AGC T4

[image]local://upfiles/30405/F19EF6EC56F14B9090C05146EA0D90CD.jpg[/image]



heliodorus04 -> RE: AGC T4 (10/17/2011 9:34:16 PM)

I don’t think I’ve ever had such mass arrive at both the landbridge, and the Dnepr bend to Mogilev so quickly. Not only did we arrive in mass, we had enough MPs to do 3 hasty attacks. I do actually have enough MPs to do one more, BUT, I have a morale 71 unit in there, and if the hasty attack failed, a loss of morale right now would have an immediate impact next turn when I have to enter enemy hexes. So I held off the attack. Resupply is restricted here next turn due to distance, so saving the MPs now should benefit us next turn with hopefully enough MPs (and morale!) for 2 deliberate attacks (14 MPs?). Plus next turn, hasty attacks can be supported by artillery assets, as the HQs won’t have to move.

I didn’t realize 46 Panzer would arrive so perfectly timed, too. I couldn’t really wish for more! Good argument here for using it in a similar fashion to how I have. By now, CF must know that AGN has an additional panzer corps asset, and he might have thought I kept 46 Panzer down south. Turns out it will be in the thick of the fighting next turn, so effectively, it lost nothing in terms of time on its diversion.



heliodorus04 -> RE: AGS T4 (10/17/2011 9:35:04 PM)

AGS T4 First-half of turn
AGS is where the usual dilemmas are. Recon presented the courses of action I needed to ponder.

[image]local://upfiles/30405/34A4CB31AB58472FAF3F15021D4841B8.jpg[/image]



heliodorus04 -> RE: AGS T4 (10/17/2011 9:36:00 PM)

The first thing I did was determine how far 11.Army elements could get. See that unit near the bottom center with 16 MPs (it’s the one on top)? Guess what his morale is: 85… But for a thwack at an SEC regiment, I might have covered 2 more hexes. But in the end, I looked at what I would get if I decided to connect the two armies, and it was a small number of rifle divisions, and weakened tank divisions. My supply line to Cherkassy was left wide open, and there’s no practical reason for me to go down there. So I drove on toward Kiev…



heliodorus04 -> RE: AGS T4 (10/17/2011 9:36:23 PM)

Post movement AGS picture

[image]local://upfiles/30405/62247B20EC4A4BF1A27E1B87C0D1CFA4.jpg[/image]



heliodorus04 -> RE: AGS T4 (10/17/2011 9:37:12 PM)

One of the reasons I didn’t have enough AP to use buildup in 41 Panzer (of AGN) is that I thought I was being clever last turn attaching 4 divisions directly to 1.PzrGrp HQ. I wasted a lot of AP moving divisions around the last 2 turns to ‘manipulate’ buildup, and I’m not pleased with the effort. Maybe it allowed some of the fuel that helped do the hasty attack across the Dnepr that succeeded. Unfortunately, the hasty attack across the river accomplished little. I hope it had some PsyOps impact: I hasty-attacked across the river, Ivan. I’M COMING! But probably not. It’s not like that gap is going to be hard to plug with units 3-times as strong next turn.

At one point, I actually reconned a pathway across at least one and probably both major rivers north of Kiev. He, I suspect, actually is relying on ZOCs up there and it looked possible to plow a way west of Kiev to a crossing. But I’ve done those gambits before, and you end up in a supply nightmare with panzer divisions moving and attacking in swamp, and it’s a fool’s errand. I don’t know where I’ll cross the Dnepr next turn, or even necessarily that I’ll try. I try particularly hard not to have battles where the Soviet is strongest.

I’m really thankful I’m not keeping track of armament points. It’s a less stressful game. I’m going to leave the production model to others to discuss. I don’t have enough data to have an opinion, and I am trying to fight the war on the backs of dead Russians (and hopefully a lot of Romanians or something).

In Finland, I borrowed a move I saw Bletchley Geek document in one of his AARs (used against him). Trying to isolate 2 divisions of 7 Independent Army so they surrender. It’s not that difficult a move, but I used too much force in one of the attacks, and I think one will get away. Still, it’s the best possible opening for Finland, at least that I’ve seen.

I keep promising OOB values, and I have them, but by the time I reach this point, I’m too tired to do any more screenshots. Well, the main problem is that I’m only now starting to take measurements consistently. So I might wait a few more turns so the recent trend is more intuitively apparent. To date, neither side’s casualty totals are high. The game amounts to Lvov pocket and less than 50 attacks on non-SEC units. Hopefully I’m playing this part of the game optimally. I certainly feel like my plans are still largely intact.

Mostly this turn, I’m disappointed I wasted a decent stockpile of APs, and I missed a buildup that I was eligible for.



heliodorus04 -> RE: AGN T4 (10/17/2011 10:18:16 PM)

Turn 5 has arrived, and I wait until my opponent finishes a turn to post screen shots of it (I'm still paranoid to protect myself from an opponent reading an AAR).

But I can finally show the OOBs and Pools/Losses.

The losses data won't make much sense at first glance. I'll explain it if necessary, but basically numbers recorded on the Soviet line are after the Soviet turn is done, and are recorded at the start of the Axis next turn. Data on an Axis line are recorded at the end of my turn, and represent (to me) the consequences of my offensive action during my turn. Meh, it's going to be somewhat confusing, as I'm trying to figure out what info I want to measure for my purposes.

OOB data are Ready values only.


[image]local://upfiles/30405/0D0DDBE35A384E6EB72C9AB9A4D71BC2.jpg[/image]



Ketza -> RE: AGN T4 (10/17/2011 10:43:58 PM)

I like your move for AGS. Diverting south would have been a distraction.



Peltonx -> RE: AGN T4 (10/18/2011 12:43:11 AM)

Nice job so far.

The HQ thing is tricky. I ironed it out playing vs computer 5 or 6 times, turns 1-7. Before I ever played a human. Every patch that changed HQ build range I again had to do a computer run or 2.

I know your looking to pocket units 3.5 million losses, but with the evac/rail/hvy exploit it can only be done around leningrad and moscow, unless this guy a newbie.

It looks like the balance of armor is about right so you should have a chance.

Pelton



heliodorus04 -> RE: Helio's Axis AAR (v Cannonfodder Soviet) (10/18/2011 3:15:12 PM)

START TURN 5
Kiev FAIL:
I tried to attack the hex I owned on the eastern side of the Dnepr. Remember the one I hasty-attacked and won, but there’s no OVERRUN mechanic in WitE so it was a pointless attack since I couldn’t TAKE the hex I won?
This turn I did 2 ground strikes, a hasty attack by the same 3 panzer divisions as last turn (to inflict disruption prior to the hasty attac), then I hit it with 2 infantry divisions and an armor division using deliberate attack, and all I got for odds was 1:1.2, defender held.

I’m ready to quit WitE. I just lost an entire Army’s worth of movement points, and took heavy casualties, to accomplish nothing. I spent something like 15 AP moving divisions around so the best HQ could conduct the deliberate attack, so engineers would be in place, etc. Nothing.

So this is my word of wisdom: Don’t attack across major rivers ever. It’s pointless. Remember when I said I’m easily discouraged? I’m ready to resign this game. All that efficiency gain from moving well is now lost.

I think this combat engine is the root of the problem with WitE. It's not consistent, it doesn't make sense to the end-user, and I hate it.



BletchleyGeek -> RE: Helio's Axis AAR (v Cannonfodder Soviet) (10/18/2011 4:12:12 PM)

You shouldn't get discouraged at the first failure you have, helio. You've been doing really well.

The problem with the combat engine is it being so much of a black box, there's a lot of guessing but looking close at the rules one can mostly figure out what went wrong. If you post screenshots of those battle reports - the preparatory hasty attack and the follow-up deliberate attack - with the detailed losses information - I gather they were fought over the same hex, right? - I can try to help you to analyze it.

I don't think you'll have much trouble establishing a strong bridgehead across that same river in Mogilev.



Flaviusx -> RE: Helio's Axis AAR (v Cannonfodder Soviet) (10/18/2011 4:17:27 PM)

I've always thought the best place to make a crossing is somewhere near Cherkassy. (A bit south of it, ideally.) Obviously if you can swing a coup de main anywhere, take it, but all other things being equal, Kiev isn't that attractive as a crossing site.

Between Kiev and Cherkassy there's actually quite a bit of nasty terrain on the west bank of the Dnepr that impedes movement.








Ketza -> RE: Helio's Axis AAR (v Cannonfodder Soviet) (10/18/2011 4:46:45 PM)

From your description it sounds like a well planned attack across the river that got some bad dice rolls but from looking at your situation with the previous turn screenshot my guess the attack was a turn premature. Even if you won the hex it does not sound like you would have been able to exploit it to the extent required to hold it.

Its too late now but my advice would have been to wait a turn and bring up more infantry and gas your Panzers. You then would have been able to deliberate attack with a lot of infantry and then exploit with gassed up Panzers. The initial Dnepr crossing is a tricky event if you do it without enough support and ability to widen the crossing the turn you cross its very easy to get thrown back across.



JAMiAM -> RE: Helio's Axis AAR (v Cannonfodder Soviet) (10/18/2011 4:58:25 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: Flaviusx

I've always thought the best place to make a crossing is somewhere near Cherkassy. (A bit south of it, ideally.) Obviously if you can swing a coup de main anywhere, take it, but all other things being equal, Kiev isn't that attractive as a crossing site.

Between Kiev and Cherkassy there's actually quite a bit of nasty terrain on the west bank of the Dnepr that impedes movement.

Agreed. My favorite crossing point is at Kremenchug. You have the Psel and Sula rivers that run to the NE from the Dnepr which can help shield your breakthrough's flanks from Soviet counterattacks. If you keep enough infantry piled up in reserve (which you should have to force the initial crossing of the Dnepr) they can, in turn, help force those minor river lines to swing either northward to encircle Kiev, westward toward Poltava/Kharkov, or to support a deeper drive to the NE, which threatens everything. Depending on your strategic direction, timetable, the distribution of Soviet armies, and unevacuated industry, all three are viable choices.

Crossings at Cherkassy are my second favorite spot, but a strong Soviet presence at Kiev can make things tough if they manage some good counterattacks. However, you have the Sula River to shield the breakthrough's southeastern flank.

At Kanev, going from west to east, you have the problem with channeling of your attacking/exploiting units through the rough terrain that Flavio mentions, along with the proximity to Kiev defenders and no river lines to shield the bridgehead and breakthrough.

Further down the Dnepr, you may get an easier crossing, but the logistics may be a bit dicey depending on how things are going with the Southern Front defenders. If they are clinging to the lower Dnepr and you don't have a good screen there, or are not actively threatening the Crimea, then raiding cavalry can make your rail lines out of Odessa precariously exposed. The problem with these lower Dnepr crossings is that if you can't force, or threaten, the Soviets off of the rail crossings at Kremenchug, Dnepropetrovsk, or Zaporozhye. Against a spirited Soviet defender, this may be difficult if your panzers are running dry from the extended logistical tail.



heliodorus04 -> RE: Helio's Axis AAR (v Cannonfodder Soviet) (10/18/2011 5:33:36 PM)

Well, I had a hissy-fit this morning when the attacks failed, and I went on a dangerous rant in my own AAR.

I warned you I get easily discouraged!

I shut down WitE for the morning and ran my errands and did what I could to re-frame the lost battle for the Dnepr into something less than the Turn 5 Stalingrad that I was making it out to be.

Your encouragement here helps a lot.
I tried a coup de main across a major river and it was a bad idea. I had never tried such a complex attack before, so I thought it might work through the "disruption" mechanism, and it does seem like I disrupted a lot of Soviets. I'll show screenshots later tonight.

Meantime I have to figure out what to do with my 6 Army units, and with 3 divisions out of III Panzer corps that used buildup last turn. Now they don't have a river to cross...



heliodorus04 -> RE: Helio's Axis AAR (v Cannonfodder Soviet) (10/19/2011 5:16:40 AM)

Here are the 2 main battle results for the hex.


[image]local://upfiles/30405/561CB16DE4944D068B300E5D26175C5C.jpg[/image]



heliodorus04 -> AGS_Post_Kiev_FAIL (10/19/2011 5:17:26 AM)

Note that both attacks have 2 more HQs than there SHOULD be (as far as I know; I’ve not paid much attention to this screen before this screenshot, I’m hoping to learn it better). Maybe that’s normal HQ behavior representing Army HQ and AGS or such, I don’t know. Could someone explain why these would be more than 1 (for the hasty) and 2 HQs (for the deliberate)?

It does look like both die rolls failed? Is that right based on my leadership rolls? And the Soviet made his roll for the deliberate attack?



heliodorus04 -> RE: AGS_Post_Kiev_FAIL (10/19/2011 5:17:55 AM)

Here’s the AGS outlook at end of turn:


[image]local://upfiles/30405/76ABCCD0E32546F9986587F306D230DE.jpg[/image]



heliodorus04 -> RE: AGS_Post_Kiev_FAIL (10/19/2011 5:18:24 AM)

After the Dnepr crossing failed, and you guys talked me out of executing all officers from 6Army down to battalion level, I had to salvage the momentum, and do something with III Panzer which had used Buildup last turn.
My rrolling stack-attacks pushed the weak stuff out of the way, and we encircled a small number of very strong divisions therein, and I don’t think they’ll get out. I have noted that SE of my new pocket, lots of motorized elements. This area is ripe for the counter-attack to open this pocket. German motorized are brittle against a high number of Soviet attackers, even if it is SS. So I decided to break down the panzer division and the SS division and intermingle them for added protection of the motorized elements. I expect CF to try to counter here. Maybe he won’t. He’d have a much better shot at forcing a retreat of a lone motorized division than a mixed stack (I predict?).

My AGS moves cost me a fortune in Admin points this turn. I’m going to force between here and Cherkassy or Kremenchug, as necessary. I don’t want to get caught doing the crawl SE along the Dnepr, I want to cross it sooner rather than later.

I swear, there is no point defending west of the Dnepr except where necessary to buy some time (and that is seldom). If it weren’t for the Lvov pocket, EVERY hex of the Dnepr would have 2 to 3 units defending it, and it would be as bad as the Neva at Leningrad. There’s no reason to fight west of it, and it’s the most impressive defensive bonus the Soviets have in 1941. As a Soviet player, I just don’t care what’s west of it. It’s not worth the counters alone, let alone the men in them.



heliodorus04 -> RE: AGS_Post_Kiev_FAIL (10/19/2011 5:18:55 AM)

AGC


[image]local://upfiles/30405/41218F85475040B69E7FD10E50347AA9.jpg[/image]



heliodorus04 -> RE: AGS_Post_Kiev_FAIL (10/19/2011 5:21:30 AM)

47 Panzer and 57 Panzer (PG.2 and PG.3 respectively) follow-on after infantry makes contact and breaks the front line at the land bridge. I battle, and I battle, and I battle, pursuing units that are retreating, and sometimes mixed stacks. I’ll show my Division Tracker spreadsheet at end of SitRep.

46 Panzer sat idle this turn, even though I’m not a fan of it for making up movement points. Their high morale after the smashing of the Lvov pocket on T2 will give me some insight into how important unit morale is in resupplying. But railhead is more than 10 hexes away here right now, and 46 Panzer is also resting to see what CF does near Gomel.

“The war will start from here”
I have committed 9.Army, 4.Army’s main body, and all of 2.PG, and 3.PG (less 39 Panzer in AGN) to the land bridge. My supply distance is going to shorten there considerably in the next 2 turns as the Vitebsk line is converted. In general, I try to find bypasses around the lines that are best defended. I experimented at the lower Dnepr and I’m unhappy with the results (but not terribly unhappy).

I feel that my penetration at the land bridge is ‘better than average’. I feel that slamming the divisions in the bridge multiple times means they’ll be useless next turn at least, and will be evacuated to safer positions. CF will have to fill the gap east of my thrust by bringing the best divisions from the nearest possible spaces, and they will have to cross rivers to get there. They should be relatively tired compared to the resistance I would encounter if I tried to cross the Dnepr proper.

With supply routing through Vitebsk, and with the Dnepr acting as defender of the Axis supply line (it works both ways, Ivan!), I will screen it, and continue to Smolensk. I may not get to cross under circumstances best for me, but I’ll be damned if I cross under circumstances that are optimal for him. Long term, if I can cross near Cherkassy, I need to try to plan a long-term isolation maneuver between AGS and AGC. But first I suppose I’ll have to cross the damn LOWER Dnepr.



heliodorus04 -> RE: AGS_Post_Kiev_FAIL (10/19/2011 5:21:57 AM)

On to AGN, which I save for last because it really is my highest priority.

[image]local://upfiles/30405/9954A7CC385743B5929D6C48F944330C.jpg[/image]



heliodorus04 -> RE: AGN_Post_Kiev_FAIL (10/19/2011 5:22:56 AM)

Leningrad – nothing thus far is out of the ordinary, and I think my advance speed is good. I have crossed the toughest rivers south of the Neva, and I’ve divided the force north and south of Ilmen. I also got a sweet bonus west of Talinn in the form of good routes of the 2 defenders (a division & a brigade). They may get beachhead supply, but are otherwise isolated, and I control Kurassare already (smart move on my part to move the SS in, and to fly it fuel while it was out of HQ range.

I have 39 Panzer here still, and until 18th Army is in full contact with Leningrad, 39 Panzer will remain. When you set out to take Vienna, take Vienna. And I want to demoralize him. I REALLY want to demoralize him somehow. Hopefully 3 corps of slow but methodical panzers bashing a way through the woods will discourage him to just let the fight for Leningrad go.

I need advice on the air war. CF is the best air asset manager I’ve ever seen. I don’t know what I’m doing wrong, but my overall air ratio is under 10:1 already, and my turn ratio is around 3:1. I’m displeased. I’ll do an air asset count on him next turn in the AGN area. I did some fighter sweeps, but casualty levels were not acceptable. I’m turning interdiction off. It’s fully possible for the Soviet to out-spam-move airbases to trigger my interdiction. I don’t know if that’s what he’s doing, but I’m losing aircraft, especially bombers, on my interdictions, and I don’t see it as being that worthwhile an endeavor given the casualties. Other opinions?

I’ve thrown in a shot of the NW Lake Ladoga area – I’ll be bagging 3 heavy rifle divisions there. If I decided to box them in with regiments until some time in October, would that be gamey? They can’t get out. I can just atrit them to death over the winter with brigades, and then they wouldn’t come back for free. I’m considering it…



heliodorus04 -> RE: AGN_Post_Kiev_FAIL (10/19/2011 5:23:31 AM)

Other oddities:
Weird AGAnt. Supply bonus?
So last turn I spent some time talking about my AP wastage. I had moved a division from some BS Romanian corps into Army Group Antonescu (AGAnt, is my favorite abbreviation). Turns out that this turn, that HQ got that low-morale division 16 freakin movement point! There’s something to this over-command limit thing with the armies in AGS and with AGS itself. In some future game, I’m going to try very hard to alleviate that more than I have this game.

Bad MPs even when not moving.
Another problem I found during recon is that my panzer units that did not move last turn did not receive good MPs this turn, and I’m pretty disappointed by that. The book states that if you are within 10 hexes, within 25 MPs, and do not move, you receive a supply bonus for EACH of these. Since last turn these units had 18 to 25 MPs, I was hoping for 35-40 MPs this turn. I basically expect to receive the same supply as last turn, given that my rail head has moved closer, and I am within all of these thresholds for distance.

So I’m going to go out on a limb here and say that this sub-routine for doing what is realistic in terms of how the war was fought turns out to be less impressive than using HQ buildup. And if you want HQ buildup to be less abused, it would be a really nice incentive to treat your tanks realistically if in turn the supply bonuses for sitting still made more sense. For me right now, given what I know about systems, it does not make sense that last turn I received more supply after having moved than I did this turn after not moving at all. Would be helpful to know if others have seen the same occurrences and perhaps feel similarly.

39 Panzer Corps – regiments adjacent = good MPs; tank div adjacent = poor MPs
Looking at 39 Panzer corps (the northern-most units in the Leningrad area) it’s interesting how much more MPs the units next to the SEC brigade received versus those next to the armored division. My units in the south next to armor did not lose much in the way of MPs in the resupply phase, but those divisions have been mauled by moving and some attacks. But that could also be explained by morale differences. The divisions next to the armor had lower morale.



heliodorus04 -> RE: AGN_Post_Kiev_FAIL (10/19/2011 5:23:58 AM)

Finally, more screens of my data tracking:

[image]local://upfiles/30405/5B202DAD5AD8471A8643F30E2C62082F.jpg[/image]

The left-most column got cut off - it has division numbers so I can sort by number or by type of division.



heliodorus04 -> RE: AGN_Post_Kiev_FAIL (10/19/2011 5:29:12 AM)

Last note, my chivalrous opponent Cannonfodder is about to become a dad in the next few hours, so congratulations to him, and his partner.
And as a result, we expect our turn advancement rate to slow.

And as a result, if you're looking for a new Axis opponent for a GC'41, let me know if you'd like to start a game with me.  And if you really want to play me in particular, I could be convinced to play Soviet again.  It's been a while.



BletchleyGeek -> RE: AGN_Post_Kiev_FAIL (10/19/2011 11:33:06 AM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: heliodorus04

Last note, my chivalrous opponent Cannonfodder is about to become a dad in the next few hours, so congratulations to him, and his partner.
And as a result, we expect our turn advancement rate to slow.

And as a result, if you're looking for a new Axis opponent for a GC'41, let me know if you'd like to start a game with me.  And if you really want to play me in particular, I could be convinced to play Soviet again.  It's been a while.



I don't think I'm taking any more GC'41 any time soon as either side, it's just too time consuming. Perhaps we could try one of the scenarios. People have compiled a quite interesting list on the Scenario & Modding sub-forum.



heliodorus04 -> RE: AGN_Post_Kiev_FAIL (10/19/2011 1:06:01 PM)

My first preference is another GC as Axis, but I'll see if anyone takes me up on that, and if not, I'm not opposed to longer scenarios.  I haven't checked any of what's out there.



JAMiAM -> RE: AGN_Post_Kiev_FAIL (10/19/2011 4:41:54 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: heliodorus04

Last note, my chivalrous opponent Cannonfodder is about to become a dad in the next few hours, so congratulations to him, and his partner.
And as a result, we expect our turn advancement rate to slow.

So...does that mean we need to start calling him Cannonfather, instead?[:D]



Richard III -> RE: Helio's Axis AAR (v Cannonfodder Soviet) (10/19/2011 5:44:19 PM)

In your attacks you either got the worst possible die-rolls and/or_ major rivers_ give a much greater defensive bonus then I thought ( from the odds summery ).... it would be nice if any of the play testers gave some enlightenment on what went wrong, usually Axis players B**** Slap the Red Army all the way to Moscow..[:D]

As a follow-up to the PM I sent, I think this game , as well as WITP, really need some well considered House Rules for PBEM to give** both sides** a fun gaming experience as well as a chance to actually win a GC. Joel Billings said the core programming is done, so waiting for the Devs to balance out the Game I doubt is in the cards.


quote:

ORIGINAL: heliodorus04

Well, I had a hissy-fit this morning when the attacks failed, and I went on a dangerous rant in my own AAR.

I warned you I get easily discouraged!

I shut down WitE for the morning and ran my errands and did what I could to re-frame the lost battle for the Dnepr into something less than the Turn 5 Stalingrad that I was making it out to be.

Your encouragement here helps a lot.
I tried a coup de main across a major river and it was a bad idea. I had never tried such a complex attack before, so I thought it might work through the "disruption" mechanism, and it does seem like I disrupted a lot of Soviets. I'll show screenshots later tonight.

Meantime I have to figure out what to do with my 6 Army units, and with 3 divisions out of III Panzer corps that used buildup last turn. Now they don't have a river to cross...




Page: <<   < prev  1 [2] 3 4 5   next >   >>

Valid CSS!




Forum Software © ASPPlayground.NET Advanced Edition 2.4.5 ANSI
6.328125