heliodorus04 -> RE: Turn 9 AGC (11/2/2011 12:28:16 AM)
|
A few too many Held Results against me, but the ones that most bothered me were my own fault. 57.Panzer’s divisions had enough movement to go out and attack somewhere, but only one or two tries before any such divisions would have to move back to within 5 of the HQ for the end-of-turn buildup. I used one of the panzer divisions to attack a unit outside of command range, and I needed the leadership bonus, but being out of range, both attacks failed. That’s okay, the buildup is worth the trade. I did not plan on that buildup being available, which makes me “Heliodorus: accidental logistical genius” At the macro level, I would have liked to get down to the Oka river, and I could have, but it would have meant leaving a motorized division vulnerable to being surrounded. Being surrounded would have cost me operational tempo as I’m making fantastic speed due east. The lead panzer corps (47.Panzer, the terrors of Lvov on T1 are now 50 miles from Moscow) will have buildup effects for the next turn, joined by 57.Panzer further south. Meanwhile, 46.Panzer HQ, it’s 2 panzer divisions, and Das Reich all sit idle this turn in hopes of gaining supply next. Also, at the start of turn 11, 39.Panzer corps will be in usable position, and on Turn 12, 41.Panzer corps will be. As much as I’m pleased with my speed to the east, I’ve benefitted from mistakes by CF, though I’m not sure which ones. I think he over-committed to the southern end of the Upper Dnepr and didn’t recognize in time the threat I posed through the Smolensk gap. He’s overcommitted to Bryansk given the path of cleared terrain which, I think, clearly shows what my plans for my infantry are. Perhaps, though, this is the difference between how I’ve managed AGS this game versus our last one (this is CF’s second vs.-human game I believe). Last game I was very slow in the center and in Leningrad, and while not much faster in the south, in the last game I bagged a lot more divisions than this game. Well, I’m still hoping that, as I hear Soviet-players say, “It’s not the divisions you lose before turn 10 that hurt you, it’s the ones you lose after… I keep fighting to keep my momentum. The most important thing has been the lane of hexes for infantry to march on. Another thing I’ve been very conscious of was to avoid getting mobile elements isolated. It’s only happened to 1 mobile division, and that was Turn 2 near Pskov. The inability to recover from disruption appears to be a serious hindrance to speedy panzer divisions. Morale hits are always bad. Ask the Soviet… So I’ve definitely been cautious about the supply position of my lead elements every turn. The bright spot of AGC is that 57.Panzer corps is eligible for buildup this turn – rocket-trucks IGNITE! 3 mobile divisions raring to go. And that was a complete accident. Now tell me, Soviet-only players (I wish there were fewer of you, meaning you should all play Germany a time or two – I’ll be your Soviet opponent!), using 1 fewer panzer corps than was historically allotted to AGC (though that will be a wash when the panzer assets from 4.Panzer Group arrive with 39.Panzer around Turn 11), do you think that a German player who isolates or captures Moscow should not get some sort of national morale boost/penalty (I personally favor an increased chance for the German and Axis Minor divisions to GAIN morale upon successful victories – something akin to raising the national morale, but maybe less severe a penalty to the Soviets). In a game where I have captured ZERO armament points and have caused below normal Soviet losses (to date, granted), I should get nothing if I’m in Moscow on Turn 13? Nothing? I think no, that’s not quite right.
|
|
|
|