RE: Collapse (Full Version)

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



Message

M60A3TTS -> RE: Collapse (10/31/2012 6:59:37 PM)

Saper accepted my surrender, so we're done with this one.

I'd really like to see air resupply reworked in a later version of WiTE.  It's oversimplification here that allows air crews to switch from bomb carrier to supply carrier seemlessly.  Reality is very different.  Any air resupply I am aware of involved pretty static ground forces, not those moving a hundred miles a week.   Missions to supply Stalingrad by Luftwaffe bombers were born of a critical situation, and there had to be a lot of work done that most people don't think about.  Bombers were built to carry bombs, not fuel.  The aircraft had to be reconfigured, stripping out bomb racks, recalculating center of gravity so the plane could safely fly, training air and ground crews to handle bulk fuel products, not to mention the loss of combat skills when your airmen are no longer doing the job they were primarily trained for.  Back then they didn't have a palletized system, you were rolling out fuel drums one by one, again at some established airfield.  During Barbarossa, a panzer division didn't just stop on the march while two dozen He-111s landed on some farmers field and chucked cans out the door.



janh -> RE: Collapse (10/31/2012 7:51:57 PM)

Just stumbled into this AAR. First thought was "oh nice, some fighting well past the Volkov and around Moscow. He's even holding LG. Must be spring 42 then." but title says August 41!? [X(]
I am curious as to how he managed that.

quote:

ORIGINAL: M60A3TTS
Any air resupply I am aware of involved pretty static ground forces, not those moving a hundred miles a week.  


I read about Luftwaffe doing air drops during Barbarossa to deliver fuel and supplies. Even tank gun rounds. Essentially using the Tante Ju's, bombers and smaller aircraft. Since part of July 41 saw rains in all three sectors, and road conditions worsening, Luftwaffe had to put up an effort to help out the stuck supply columns. There are stories of Ju-52 landing on grass lands just next to Panzer battalions that were running dry, that were sort of effective to bridge the logistics failure. So in principle the option should be there...

In summer 41, however, even Luftwaffe 2EB can be largely used to supply the PGs. Though they are significantly less effective than the Ju-52s in game, there is little downside diverting them from CAS or bombing roles. The damage they do hitting ground elements is small, and the more critical disruption effect only rarely needed say if you need to break LG's back or breach the landbridge. Otherwise the Wehrmacht CV are so vastly superior to the Reds that I think it is a waste to use them in their original role. Probably that should not be the case in first place since the combined arms doctrine was supposedly also critical for the initial successes of Barbarossa, historians believed.



janh -> RE: Turn 11 (10/31/2012 7:57:39 PM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: Michael T
Under the most up to date version of the game such advances are possible if you throw every LB and Transport at one PzGp (and use them for nothing other than refuelling) and rotate Pz Cp HQ's (a form of chaining, but more involved) in a complex and AP hungry method. But I don't see how it could be maintained for so long on so many axis' of advance. I cannot explain it.

The opening in the south is possible. It is the scaled back version. Albeit an inefficient one.


I have used them even prior to .13 to a large degree, if not entirely as airborne fuel trucks, but I did not use chaining or mulling in conjunction, though. Luftwaffe can do a good job, but I never saw it to be so effective that I could do long without railheads and breaks.

I'd be surprised even you could keep 4 Panzergroups so active to simultaneously reach LG, Moscow and Rostov in 7 to 8 turns purely with a few HQ-build-ups and the Luftwaffel, though. I mean the last HQ-buildups must be 3 or 4 turns past with the railheads still well West of the Djenpr, no? 4 turns on Luftwaffe only??



HITMAN202 -> RE: Turn 11 (10/31/2012 10:30:36 PM)

So what did Saper222 specifically do to run rhodshod over the Soviets ???. M60 is as good as they come for playing the Bear.



Peltonx -> RE: Turn 11 (11/1/2012 12:07:04 AM)

What hes done was only done by a handfull of guys ( 3 ) in a few games vs noobs generally before 1.06.11

I have talked to the other 2 guys and none of us think whats happened here has anything to do with 1.06.13+

We all use planes for dropping fuel, but heheh what to hell he have 10000000000000000000 planes heheh

I consider M60 the victory in this game.

Thats my opinion and I am not changing it.

I am stupid but not that stupid to see whats happened here.

M60 stick to server based games in the future.



M60A3TTS -> RE: Turn 11 (11/1/2012 12:35:11 AM)

Thanks for the kind words, but I'm not that good.

To answer your question, Hitman, I tried to make the Finns fight and defend Leningrad with far more than I have in the past but it wan't enough. What Saper told me was he thought I did not send enough to defend Moscow. The reality is there are only so many divisions to work with even with the free shell replacement divisions. I did what I could to keep him in front of me in the south and got all the industry out that I had intended except for arms at Tula- and those were cut off from his units approaching from the south, not the west. I was largely focused on keeping him contained to the west of Moscow and Tula, but the Rzhev-Kaluga line failed to hold for long.

To my friend Pelton (how did that happen?? [&:]) next game up I believe will be a rematch with Farfarer.



Harrybanana -> RE: Turn 11 (11/1/2012 1:14:03 AM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: Pelton

What hes done was only done by a handfull of guys ( 3 ) in a few games vs noobs generally before 1.06.11

I have talked to the other 2 guys and none of us think whats happened here has anything to do with 1.06.13+

We all use planes for dropping fuel, but heheh what to hell he have 10000000000000000000 planes heheh

I consider M60 the victory in this game.

Thats my opinion and I am not changing it.

I am stupid but not that stupid to see whats happened here.

M60 stick to server based games in the future.



Pelton,

It is not just Saper who was able to do this. Look at forsyth's post above where he had captured Rostov by turn 10.

At a minimum I think it is something that should be looked at by the Developers, especially with WITW coming out. If air supply can be this effective than the Allies, with all those C47s at their disposal, won't need to capture Antwerp.




Baelfiin -> RE: Turn 11 (11/1/2012 1:32:20 AM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: Harrybanana


quote:

ORIGINAL: Pelton

What hes done was only done by a handfull of guys ( 3 ) in a few games vs noobs generally before 1.06.11

I have talked to the other 2 guys and none of us think whats happened here has anything to do with 1.06.13+

We all use planes for dropping fuel, but heheh what to hell he have 10000000000000000000 planes heheh

I consider M60 the victory in this game.

Thats my opinion and I am not changing it.

I am stupid but not that stupid to see whats happened here.

M60 stick to server based games in the future.



Pelton,

It is not just Saper who was able to do this. Look at forsyth's post above where he had captured Rostov by turn 10.

At a minimum I think it is something that should be looked at by the Developers, especially with WITW coming out. If air supply can be this effective than the Allies, with all those C47s at their disposal, won't need to capture Antwerp.



I'm betting you wont have to worry about it in WITW



gingerbread -> RE: Turn 11 (11/1/2012 1:44:22 AM)

So did you have any FB's on intercept in the area? The Air Leaders in the Front HQs are nothing special, but the guy in 4 BAK (starts in Z-town) is as good as they get.



Speedysteve -> RE: Turn 11 (11/1/2012 10:00:46 AM)

Thanks for posting the AAR M60 and condolences for what happened. I can certainly relate to it [;)]

Interesting viewing from my perspective to see a very similar outcome despite you trying a few different things to what I did........

I've been in post WitE PBEM Resurgence Mode.......at least until my home laptop died last week [:(]



janh -> RE: Turn 11 (11/1/2012 10:29:05 AM)

If you are worried about air supply, it should be any easy exercise to estimate what all Ju-52, He-111, Ju-88 etc. can add. If I had my game with me, I could count the planes, and calculate what maximum amount of fuel they could deliver under ideal conditions. Might be that it is enough for one "3 mot. Corps" Panzergroup (I'd no more than 10-12 Panzer and Mot. Inf. divisions at max) to bring it up from <10% to 100. Probably less.

Usually I struggle often to just keep 4-6 Panzer divisions (fully) fueled by the air train, but from what it looks like Sapper brilliantly managed to keep all four of them running at high pace. Impressive result, and it also looks a bit that Sapper even outran M60's reinforcement schedule. It probably couldn't be better, the Russian's coming too late to the party, and too few anyways. Once that off-balance, Sapper probably could even throw a lot of care out of the window. Some of the maps with narrow penetrations and long supply corridors would suggest that -- in many cases it looks like the Panzers would be in dire danger of being isolated.

Btw, M60, these screens are before recon, right? Could you keep good track of his units in the rear? How far back was his infantry most of the time?



timmyab -> RE: Turn 11 (11/1/2012 11:05:20 AM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: janh
Some of the maps with narrow penetrations and long supply corridors would suggest that -- in many cases it looks like the Panzers would be in dire danger of being isolated.

I noticed that as well.Cavalry divisions belong at the shoulders of these penetrations in my opinion.Especially when formed into corps, they have a penetrating power that can't be ignored.They're also usually nimble enough to get away safely when danger threatens.If these long corridors are not properly protected then this tactic alone will be a game changer.



M60A3TTS -> RE: Turn 11 (11/1/2012 11:19:49 AM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: gingerbread

So did you have any FB's on intercept in the area? The Air Leaders in the Front HQs are nothing special, but the guy in 4 BAK (starts in Z-town) is as good as they get.


I am not sure if there is a specific area you are interested in, but I did have FBs deployed for intercept. Between his bombing of my bases and lower effectiveness that comes with 1941 it may have reduced the kills that I could have used.



M60A3TTS -> RE: Turn 11 (11/1/2012 11:23:33 AM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: timmyab


quote:

ORIGINAL: janh
Some of the maps with narrow penetrations and long supply corridors would suggest that -- in many cases it looks like the Panzers would be in dire danger of being isolated.

I noticed that as well.Cavalry divisions belong at the shoulders of these penetrations in my opinion.Especially when formed into corps, they have a penetrating power that can't be ignored.They're also usually nimble enough to get away safely when danger threatens.If these long corridors are not properly protected then this tactic alone will be a game changer.


I was trying to keep a good number of cav divisions in reserve for the upcoming blizzard. At the same time there were some that helped fight at the front. He pocketed some of them at the end by Taganrog Bay. Of course we didn't get far enough along for corps.



M60A3TTS -> RE: Turn 11 (11/1/2012 11:35:14 AM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: janh

If you are worried about air supply, it should be any easy exercise to estimate what all Ju-52, He-111, Ju-88 etc. can add. If I had my game with me, I could count the planes, and calculate what maximum amount of fuel they could deliver under ideal conditions. Might be that it is enough for one "3 mot. Corps" Panzergroup (I'd no more than 10-12 Panzer and Mot. Inf. divisions at max) to bring it up from <10% to 100. Probably less.

Usually I struggle often to just keep 4-6 Panzer divisions (fully) fueled by the air train, but from what it looks like Sapper brilliantly managed to keep all four of them running at high pace. Impressive result, and it also looks a bit that Sapper even outran M60's reinforcement schedule. It probably couldn't be better, the Russian's coming too late to the party, and too few anyways. Once that off-balance, Sapper probably could even throw a lot of care out of the window. Some of the maps with narrow penetrations and long supply corridors would suggest that -- in many cases it looks like the Panzers would be in dire danger of being isolated.

Btw, M60, these screens are before recon, right? Could you keep good track of his units in the rear? How far back was his infantry most of the time?


I moved a few units to see what he had broken through with, not bothering with recon. At that stage I had no plan to continue. There were too many forces by Leningrad that were not going to get out with the rail cut and the same for the troops around Moscow. I don't think spotting his units was an issue. The infantry wasn't too far behind which was surprising given the pace of his advance.

Also, this was the first time I did throw a lot of troops at the defense of Leningrad so it naturally reduced the defense elsewhere and particularly Moscow. Had I played my normal strategy, I might have lost Leningrad earlier but Moscow would have been better off. Clearly MT was able to pull this defense of both major cities off against Pelton. I couldn't achieve near the same results against Saper.



Peltonx -> RE: Collapse (11/1/2012 12:24:07 PM)

I do not see 2by3 wasting any time "fixing" something thats not possible under the current rule set. Anyone can take a few hours and see its simply not possible to fly in enough fuel to 1 full PG's(12 divisions) much less 3 or all 4 PG's.

If we see these results on a server based game then sure 2by3 should put some time into it.








Peltonx -> RE: Collapse (11/1/2012 1:08:36 PM)

Stick to server based games.

I have played allot of PBeM 4 and 2 on going and server based games.

In the server based games win lose ratio for Russians is about 40% to 20% 8 wins to 4 loses ect. Starting on the high side in 41/42 and then dropping over time as the War goes on. There might be a turn in there where its lower, but on average its a static ratio dropping over time. Player skill can effect the ratio but its basicly static +/- 10%

In PBem games the 42 % is magicly 10% to 15%, SHC winning 90% of the time. With most of the wins being 3-2 to 1, like the SHC is putting in just enough men each time to win :)

Its nothing in a PbeM game to see SHC winning in 42 19-0 19-1 turn after turn after turn ect ect.

On a server based game its more like 10 - 4, 9 - 3 ect because SHC can't handle those kind of loses if they are able to attack at all. Most times in a server based game the SHC might attack in one small area building morale late in 42. Three of the better SHC players I played stayed withen these ratio's TDV, Kamil and Hoooper. Turn after turn slowing increasing their ratios and tempo over time and all 3 won easly or would have by late to early 44/45. Then I have other games (on-names) who's combat ratios are 90%+ turn after turn with 2x the tempo.

I am stupid but again not that stupid. Its easy to see whats going on.

I have yet to see a server based game where Stalino falls before turn 10 (I think that low), Moscow has yet to fall in a server based game. Leningrad can fall quickly because the Railheads get north very fast.

Magical things happen in PBeM games that never happen on the server.
Troops seem not to need any supplies and hardly lose a battle. (SHC or GHC)

On the server there seems to be limits on fuel and the combat ratios seem to be X% +/- 10%

Again I do not see 2by3 fixing something that's not broken. ( On the server )








Michael T -> RE: Collapse (11/1/2012 1:18:26 PM)

I never play PBEM anymore (not since I got burned by a cheater at the Blitz). All my WITE games have been, and will be Server. Your stats are very sobering Pelton.



mrchuck -> RE: Collapse (11/1/2012 1:23:32 PM)

This rate of advance by Axis is simply astounding and not in a good way. Obviously something has gotten itself badly broken and Saper has found and gamed it hard. Only...what is the point?
Time to set wite aside I think unless this is fixed. Hard to see what answer the russians could possibly make to max supply axis every turn, and where the skill for the axis comes into it other than using a sploit. No offence Saper, it's not your fault for optimising the game system, you can't 'unsee' a feature once you've spotted it...shame on the people who built and broke it though.



timmyab -> RE: Turn 11 (11/1/2012 3:22:01 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: M60A3TTS
I was trying to keep a good number of cav divisions in reserve for the upcoming blizzard. At the same time there were some that helped fight at the front. He pocketed some of them at the end by Taganrog Bay. Of course we didn't get far enough along for corps.

Yeah, I meant 2 to 4 divisions attached to a cavalry corps HQ.
I think a strategic reserve is a luxury you can't afford in this situation.I don't think it would have made a significant difference though, there are other factors at work here.




76mm -> RE: Turn 11 (11/1/2012 3:43:19 PM)

I too only play server games, but I think that some of the veiled accusations in this thread are a bit harsh--players have found many fuel exploits in this game, and it is possible that saper has found another which others have overlooked--let's give the guy the benefit of the doubt, especially since he is not allowed on this thread!

Pelton's stats are intereesting, but it is still difficult for me to believe that most people would bother to cheat in this game?




Peltonx -> RE: Turn 11 (11/1/2012 4:15:19 PM)

I track allot of stats and post them in threads.

You can check it out as I tread it. In Kamils thread for an example.

http://www.matrixgames.com/forums/tm.asp?m=2851126&mpage=10&key=

Hoooper % was a little better as 1v1=2v1 and TDV % a little worse as he used allot of soaking off attacks.

But that thread is good example.




Harrybanana -> RE: Turn 11 (11/1/2012 4:44:35 PM)

I have to agree with 76mm that it is harsh to attack a player who can not defend himself. As I am just starting a new game with Saper now I certainly hope that the "veiled accusations" are wrong.

I have reviewed this AAR on a turn by turn basis and it is obvious that Saper was not able to keep all of his mechanized units fully fueled each turn by air. Indeed, as Janh pointed out this would not be possible. But I believe he was using air supply extensively to keep certain key units either fully fueled or close thereto; in particular his motorized units. For example, look at the Week 3 dispositions around Smolensk. His panzer units all show red for fuel, but his motorized units show either green or yellow. This pattern is repeated turn after turn. Is it possible that Saper was only air supplying his panzers with enough fuel to give them say 25 to 35 mps per turn, while air supplying enough to select motorized units (partcicularly the SS Motorized in the South) to keep them going at almost full speed? I believe I read on a previous thread somewhere that motorized units require a lot less fuel than panzer divisions. In other words, rather than Saper trying to supply an entire panzer group by air each turn , he is only air supplying a few panzer units in all of his panzer groups, while extensively air supplying all of his motorized units. Would this be possible?



M60A3TTS -> RE: Turn 11 (11/1/2012 4:49:28 PM)

I opened the thread up to Saper so he can view and comment if he chooses.



Peltonx -> RE: Turn 11 (11/1/2012 4:54:26 PM)

My last 2 "draws" I know the guy was not playing fair was I had zero reserve mode reactions for 3 turns.

They were winning 95% of battles turn after turn after turn. Thats the red flag.

Now server based and PbeM games the average should be about 35% GHC and 28%ish SHC as far as reserve reactions go.

Personally even on the server I get a few turns out of 20 that I only get 15%ish but most times it 25% to 40%.

Now if your getting zero reactions for 3 or more turns you know for sure something is wrong and its not the game engine.

I am stupid but not that stupid.

95% or better win% and you get zero reserve mode reactions for 3,4,5,6,7,+ turns.

Hmmm what do you think?



Peltonx -> RE: Turn 11 (11/1/2012 4:57:50 PM)

Until someone can do this ( a few hexes from Rostov turn 8) on the server, I don't think any thing is wrong with the logistics system.

Until someone can attack 20+ times for 3+ turns and the defender gets zero reserve mode reactions there is nothing wrong with the game engine.




Peltonx -> RE: Turn 11 (11/1/2012 5:05:33 PM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: Harrybanana

I have to agree with 76mm that it is harsh to attack a player who can not defend himself. As I am just starting a new game with Saper now I certainly hope that the "veiled accusations" are wrong.

I have reviewed this AAR on a turn by turn basis and it is obvious that Saper was not able to keep all of his mechanized units fully fueled each turn by air. Indeed, as Janh pointed out this would not be possible. But I believe he was using air supply extensively to keep certain key units either fully fueled or close thereto; in particular his motorized units. For example, look at the Week 3 dispositions around Smolensk. His panzer units all show red for fuel, but his motorized units show either green or yellow. This pattern is repeated turn after turn. Is it possible that Saper was only air supplying his panzers with enough fuel to give them say 25 to 35 mps per turn, while air supplying enough to select motorized units (partcicularly the SS Motorized in the South) to keep them going at almost full speed? I believe I read on a previous thread somewhere that motorized units require a lot less fuel than panzer divisions. In other words, rather than Saper trying to supply an entire panzer group by air each turn , he is only air supplying a few panzer units in all of his panzer groups, while extensively air supplying all of his motorized units. Would this be possible?



Yes that would be me saying mech requires less fuel and as far as I have seen I have the records for fastest advances in the south to T4 D-Town and Stalino T7 and T8 Rostov. Someone esle has the Stalingrad record T 10

I beleive MT has most of the Moscow area records, not sure on his best T?

A good number of people have gotten to Leningrad on turn 4 or 5. Again this area is still withen reach vs a weak SHC like myself hehehe

But again all before 1.06.11

I would think if M60 sent in saves to 2by3 they beable to figure out if the numbers add up.

I could be wrong and Sappers found some amazing loop hole ( which needs to be closed ) or *************.





janh -> RE: Turn 11 (11/1/2012 5:12:44 PM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: Harrybanana
Is it possible that Saper was only air supplying his panzers with enough fuel to give them say 25 to 35 mps per turn, while air supplying enough to select motorized units (partcicularly the SS Motorized in the South) to keep them going at almost full speed? I believe I read on a previous thread somewhere that motorized units require a lot less fuel than panzer divisions. In other words, rather than Saper trying to supply an entire panzer group by air each turn , he is only air supplying a few panzer units in all of his panzer groups, while extensively air supplying all of his motorized units. Would this be possible?


Actually a very good thought. Sounds even be force economic to do so. That way you can keep half of each Korps rolling fast, while the fuel-hungry Panzers would remain closer to the life lines. It is not like HQ-building Korps alternatingly, but might effect the same?

Whilst in the thickst of it (usually before the Smolensk and the lower Djenpr are passed and before the race through the vast open to Kharkov, Rostov or Tula starts), Sapper did the usual and cordoned of pockets tightly. Meaning pretty much every hex since M60's Soviets were still close in numbers until like turn 9. After that M60 seemed to have run short of units except in LG and Moscow area, and Sapper started his deep penetrations to the south of that without caring much about flank and rear security (or maybe the inf was already there, or lower MP Panzers?). Maybe he just took the risks and got lucky? Hard to say from the screens without further recon where Sapper's Panzers lagged behind the Mot., though you are right that Mots, esp. the high morale ones, are ones pushed furthest. Maybe he'll let us in on it.



KamilS -> RE: Turn 11 (11/1/2012 5:42:10 PM)

I see, that Saper is being accused of reloading saves. I think he isn't.


To prove it I can upload saved games from summer of '41 so You can check for Yourself.




M60A3TTS -> RE: Turn 11 (11/1/2012 5:58:55 PM)

It wasn't my impression that he did anything other than put a stomping on me. I play for the challenge and prefer to play more skilled players, and don't have a grasp on the logistics capability of the Axis as others do. Quite likely I will do better next time.



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

Valid CSS!




Forum Software © ASPPlayground.NET Advanced Edition 2.4.5 ANSI
1.655273