RE: A snapshot AAR (Full Version)

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



Message

821Bobo -> RE: A snapshot AAR (4/23/2014 8:20:50 AM)

I am really curious how will evolve my 42. The carpet is not almighty and 1-2 CV non digged in rifle divisions will not stop Panzers. In 42 Germans will breakthrough any line they choose.
Soviet defense in 42 should be set up in manner that will limit the casualties. Losing 5-10 divisions every 2-3 turns is ok, losing entire Front is disaster.



jwolf -> RE: A snapshot AAR (4/23/2014 1:02:05 PM)

The problem for Tarhunnas is that the Axis is close enough to the VP threshold for total victory that he has to defend forward now, whatever may have happened before.



821Bobo -> RE: A snapshot AAR (4/23/2014 1:24:06 PM)

But he did not start 42 in such bad position(except losing Moscow in 41). He could fight forward without employing the carpet which did cost him tons of units. Around turn 50 he should had retreated behind Don(from the Donbas).



jwolf -> RE: A snapshot AAR (4/23/2014 3:05:39 PM)

Agree on that, but his hand is pretty much forced now.  My naive, inexperienced speculation is that even the very good players need to recalibrate and readjust strategy to the new milder first winter.  Sure you understand intellectually what the new rules are, but until you live through them in a game or two, you don't really understand their implications for S&T.



Flaviusx -> RE: A snapshot AAR (4/23/2014 4:28:42 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: Tarhunnas


quote:

ORIGINAL: M60A3TTS

The Fall rains won't allow the Soviet to recover sufficiently. The Axis will still be able to launch a winter offensive if another city or two is needed.


You are spoiling the suspense! [:(] You sound almost as categorical as Flaviusx [;)]


Pffft.

Nobody does categorical better than me.



hfarrish -> RE: A snapshot AAR (4/23/2014 5:42:44 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: 821Bobo

But he did not start 42 in such bad position(except losing Moscow in 41). He could fight forward without employing the carpet which did cost him tons of units. Around turn 50 he should had retreated behind Don(from the Donbas).


I would take a bit of exception to this - the loss of Leningrad and Moscow should put the Soviet player in a pretty bad position...and I think also in this case (if I read things correctly) Tarhunnas basically pushed all through blizzard South of Moscow, which even under the old rule set would leave your guys dangerously exposed, opening the conditions for the spring/summer of pockets that Timmyab unleashed.

My experience is that things are still manageable as the Russians, but am going to give things another go through shortly to see.



Tarhunnas -> RE: A snapshot AAR (4/23/2014 7:00:32 PM)

I don't agree. There was nothing that prevented me from withdrawing during march and the mud period. I might possibly have defended too far forward in the south, and that might well have been a mistake, but it had nothing to do with the winter offensive.

For that matter, I am not sure withdrawing would have made much of a difference, except for making the German offensive start further to the east. With 260 VP limit, you don't have all that much to give up.

IMHO there is still a problem in that the game mechanics allows the Germans to take Moscow And Leningrad too easily in 1941, Leningrad in Particular.



GamesaurusRex -> RE: A snapshot AAR (4/23/2014 8:50:00 PM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: Tarhunnas

I don't agree. There was nothing that prevented me from withdrawing during march and the mud period. I might possibly have defended too far forward in the south, and that might well have been a mistake, but it had nothing to do with the winter offensive.

For that matter, I am not sure withdrawing would have made much of a difference, except for making the German offensive start further to the east. With 260 VP limit, you don't have all that much to give up.

IMHO there is still a problem in that the game mechanics allows the Germans to take Moscow And Leningrad too easily in 1941, Leningrad in Particular.


Agreed.

The problem with the game in 41 is the Russians don't have:
A) The morale level necessary to even approach German troops in 41.
B) The CV to attack a one-footed blind mouse.
C) The historic replacement rates that would enable the Russians to attack the Germans with "A" and "B", above, while still suffering mass casualties and still maintaining army troop numbers to survive 42.

This prohibits a "forward defence" in order to maintain mass... which then devolves into "WW1-in-the-East".



Michael T -> RE: A snapshot AAR (4/23/2014 9:06:25 PM)

I don't wish to offend anyone. But really, good Soviet players won't lose Leningrad or Moscow or Rostov in 1941.



hfarrish -> RE: A snapshot AAR (4/24/2014 12:01:57 AM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: Michael T

I don't wish to offend anyone. But really, good Soviet players won't lose Leningrad or Moscow or Rostov in 1941.


I don't know about Leningrad...but under the current rule set with air resupply gone I do agree about Moscow and Rostov (and that's with fighting at least reasonably forward, much less the retreat to wall of steel). I'm a red player through and through and simply disagree that the Soviets labor under some kind of intense disadvantage relative to history in 41. With current rules and mild blizzard it's a reasonable balance IMO.



bigbaba -> RE: A snapshot AAR (4/24/2014 5:18:09 AM)

i have 2 games running atm as axis and find not that the red army has any disadvantages in 41. from turn 3 on i find it hard to advance against a russian player with normal skill level.

in my 2 games as red army one of my opponents even gave up capturing leningrad from turn 1 on and sent PG 4 to AGC and was not able to come closer to moscow then 100 km.

russian defensive CV is extremly high in 41 (imho even higher then in summer 42 sometimes) and it is possible for a russian player today to hold leningrad, rostov and moscow.



821Bobo -> RE: A snapshot AAR (4/24/2014 7:14:35 AM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: bigbaba
one of my opponents even gave up capturing leningrad from turn 1 on and sent PG 4 to AGC and was not able to come closer to moscow then 100 km.


In my current game the opposite was true. Axis went all out towards Lenigrad. Logically all my reinforcements went north too. In the end I have lost Leningrad but Moscow has not been threatened at all.
Axis needs to maintain pressure on all fronts. Neglecting one will result in more Soviets reinforcements on the other 2. Thats the only reason why he could not come closer than 100km to Moscow.



Tarhunnas -> RE: A snapshot AAR (4/24/2014 10:00:56 AM)

It might be that I suck as a player, but I really cannot see how Leningrad can be held against a German player determined to take it, provided the Soviet player does an attempt at a reasonably forward defense. With the pull back and the "Iron curtain", yes, but not with a historical defense.



hfarrish -> RE: A snapshot AAR (4/24/2014 11:01:43 AM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: Tarhunnas

It might be that I suck as a player, but I really cannot see how Leningrad can be held against a German player determined to take it, provided the Soviet player does an attempt at a reasonably forward defense. With the pull back and the "Iron curtain", yes, but not with a historical defense.


Ironically the pull back and iron curtain may make things even worse for Leningrad (as opposed to other cities) because then the Germans are at the gates by T4/5, which is hardly enough time to build proper defenses. A robust defense around Pskov is a prerequisite, I think.



Tarhunnas -> RE: A snapshot AAR (4/24/2014 11:42:49 AM)

I must admit to not having practiced an "Iron curtain" myself, but as I have gathered from AAR:s, it includes shifting lots of units northward to the northern front, as that is the one place you actually want to defend reasonably forward, while there is more of a runaway on the central and southern fronts.



Michael T -> RE: A snapshot AAR (4/24/2014 8:46:56 PM)

Outlawing the Iron Wall would naturally change things. But how would you do that?

As it stands the Iron wall has killed the game for quite a few players. Me included.



loki100 -> RE: A snapshot AAR (4/24/2014 9:44:41 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: Michael T

Outlawing the Iron Wall would naturally change things. But how would you do that?

As it stands the Iron wall has killed the game for quite a few players. Me included.


common sense and playing with people who don't min/max every variable. Lets face it, a lot of the problems in this game (for both sides) stem from the mindset of a few players who seek every advantage that is not directly prevented by the rules.

in my current game we agreed that the German player would not do a Lvov and that I wouldn't extract too much from the Ukraine. That meant only being able to redeploy the formations that start along the Dniepr until the Germans were past the Pripyet.

of course, there is no way to police/check such a houserule so its down simply to player trust. But it does make for a much more fun game to play.

Then I'd suggest either reduce the fortification value or Soviet morale a bit. Of course the problem with doing this in PBEM is if you have miscalculated you are both stuck, but again seems worth it for an open balanced game.



Flaviusx -> RE: A snapshot AAR (4/25/2014 3:32:08 AM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: Tarhunnas

I must admit to not having practiced an "Iron curtain" myself, but as I have gathered from AAR:s, it includes shifting lots of units northward to the northern front, as that is the one place you actually want to defend reasonably forward, while there is more of a runaway on the central and southern fronts.


Massively reinforce the north starting from Pskov on downwards to about the Smolensk gap; don't delay here, start from turn 1 and just keep pouring it on. Strip the south to the bone and run; it is indefensible anyways. Make sure the north gets the high morale units. I would also add to this a strong enough commitment in Karelia to bottle up the Finns. (This can be done with around 9 divisions.)

It's pretty hard to beat once you figure out how to execute this properly.



GamesaurusRex -> RE: A snapshot AAR (4/26/2014 12:32:22 AM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: Michael T

I don't wish to offend anyone. But really, good Soviet players won't lose Leningrad or Moscow or Rostov in 1941.


I didn't Lose Moskow in 41... as for Leningrad, I abandonded it without a fight to avoid losses.

Neither one of these facts, changes my opinion that the 41-42 period of the simulation model of this game is seriously flawed. This is not to say the game is unenjoyable or unplayable. With proper initial settings and house rules, it is quite entertaining.



Michael T -> RE: A snapshot AAR (4/26/2014 12:43:56 AM)

quote:

With proper initial settings and house rules, it is quite entertaining.


True enough. But for me there comes a point where the number and complexity of the HR required to make the game work becomes impracticable. I have reached that point.

Meanwhile I am enjoying playing 'The Dark Valley' via vassal for my east front kicks.



HITMAN202 -> RE: A snapshot AAR (4/27/2014 5:26:01 PM)

All need to go back and revisit many of Flaviusx, Michael T., Pelton, THRPROS (and others) comments in regard to WITE-1 as played by the "grandmasters."

The Germans fight against...

1) a Maginot placed to the Russians choosing in AGN and AGC a

2) a powerful counterattacking force that can prevent any German envelopment (see Pelton/Sapper.. I think Sapper had 50 or more successful attacks (and a mere hand full of "HELDS") in the first 15 turns against , IMO, the most experienced German player of WITE, and

3) a Russian steamroller post summer '42 that will take Berlin. Maybe the German can draw. Maybe.

Experienced German players will be mastered by a less skilled Russian opponent.

The game still is challenging and (in MT's opinion) the best war game around, but needs tweaking in the areas already much discussed.

The ongoing AAR's are great and Tarhunnas's is one of the best around (see the slugfest he had a while back against Q-ball... I hear "he's back"... great poster and teacher) and loki's is a great read.

Though not actively playing, I visit this forum almost daily with great enjoyment and amusement.

I've played this game for hundreds of hours and have mastered little.



Tarhunnas -> RE: A snapshot AAR (5/5/2014 9:01:10 PM)

Sorry for the long pause. Here is a shot from turn 62 after Soviet moves. As you can see, contact has been re-established with the surrounded forces, but the Germans will in all likelihood seal the pocket and it is very probable these units are lost.

[image]local://upfiles/37384/4A7364AD7F8D4716BEA9C00F46ED6F3B.jpg[/image]



Tarhunnas -> RE: A snapshot AAR (5/5/2014 9:03:22 PM)

Counterattacks push back four panzer divisions, and even though the attacks do not seriously threaten the German lines, they do manage to inflict considerable casualties on the German mobile units. Here are losses from the Soviet turn.

[image]local://upfiles/37384/4440CAD09BCD4E89AB5A1A06C72EBEF9.jpg[/image]



bigbaba -> RE: A snapshot AAR (5/5/2014 10:00:12 PM)

arg. you lack some high CV mobile units. otherwise you could re open the pocket again and again and pin him down there. but i share your fear that this units seem to be lost and that's a heavy manpower and AP hit.



timmyab -> RE: A snapshot AAR (5/8/2014 2:46:40 PM)

Turn 63
The Kolomna Gap is closed and 500,000 men are trapped.


[image]local://upfiles/36871/ABF918A5D1564AAD9153005C8B61F99D.jpg[/image]



timmyab -> RE: A snapshot AAR (5/8/2014 3:19:29 PM)

Turn 64
The pocket is cleared in just one week with the assistance of several armored divisions. It netted somewhere in the region of 50 to 60 divisions.
I've now got a major strategic decision to make. I need 6 more VPs for a decisive victory and I need to get them fast because the tide is turning. The losses from all the Summer pockets mean that his remaining units are getting nicely filled out with replacements. By 1943 I wont have the strength to shift them.
In the end I decide that my best bet is a surprise blitzkrieg through the up until now quiet sector to the North East of Moscow. There are 7 VPs which might just be obtainable if I can leverage the advantage of surprise. My only hope is that this area is under-defended because of the good defensive terrain and the strong level 3 fortifications. I don't dare do much recon so have no intelligence about any deep defenses which will scupper the plan.
I station nearly all my 86+ morale armor around Moscow and do my best to make it as inconspicuous as possible. Hienrici's elite 34th corps is also available and the hardly used but capable 9th army is nicely positioned to crack open the front line. All AGC and AGN SUs have been allocated to the participating corps, especially pioneers, stugs and the newly arrived heavy tank battalion with it's brand new Tiger tanks.
I do my best to create an impression that most of my armor is around Tambov and further South (off map)around Buguchar.
The rail junction at Kowrow would be a great prize. If I can knock it out all rail reinforcements from the South will have to go around via the Urals. He can still reinforce from the North but I need to maintain a force advantage in the Ivanovo-Yaroslav area for as long as possible.

Overall I think this plan is highly optimistic and likely to fail. Surprise is it's only hope. Yaroslav in particular will be very tough to take within the four or five weeks of Summer remaining.



[image]local://upfiles/36871/04FB35C937AE4F8C856531F4FDE4F084.jpg[/image]



timmyab -> RE: A snapshot AAR (5/9/2014 10:19:36 AM)

Turn 65.
Well, Operation Knockout succeeded beyond my wildest expectations. So much so that the game is actually over.

This is the position at the start of the turn after the first assault. I was going to do a breakthrough tutorial but decided against it after I pushed a mot division through the gap to find a strong second line of defense.
The second row is the MLR with mainly strong units with CVs in the 20's. I almost gave up at that point but thought I might as well carry on because of not having any alternative plan.


[image]local://upfiles/36871/59808C0395DD47BDAEE14579441466C7.jpg[/image]



timmyab -> RE: A snapshot AAR (5/9/2014 10:54:24 AM)

The third row of defenses turned out to be relatively weak and with the help of some very marginal combat results that went my way I was able to clear a corridor. There were two or three vital combats that were in the 2:1 or 2.2:1 zone. Also the 4=9 rifle corps retreated in a direction that meant I could go around it. There were no deep defenses at all behind row three ( a big mistake imo and somewhere that T could improve his game I think) A particularly good example is the lack of any garrisons in either Ivanovo or Yaroslavl. A single brigade in Yaroslavl for example would still put this game's outcome in doubt. The other two cities are other candidates for deep defenses and also the Nerl river. This is an area where those cheap pesky little brigades really shine.
Again I have luck on my side because the two 'runners' can only get to Yaroslavl and Ivanovo by the skin of their teeth. I always keep these 'runners' in reserve until the end so they can exploit any breakthrough to the max.

[image]local://upfiles/36871/F421C0A101FB473283D2D0F625E19D16.jpg[/image]



timmyab -> RE: A snapshot AAR (5/9/2014 11:14:54 AM)

Here's the final position, full map.
I also took Boguchar with 1st pz army this turn.

[image]local://upfiles/36871/A81A2B28C12949718030FD1B21021B79.jpg[/image]



timmyab -> RE: A snapshot AAR (5/9/2014 11:43:08 AM)

Some stats for the number crunchers


[image]local://upfiles/36871/94AFF5FE36924E17A9E8EA4F9CD33978.jpg[/image]



Page: <<   < prev  5 6 7 [8] 9   next >   >>

Valid CSS!




Forum Software © ASPPlayground.NET Advanced Edition 2.4.5 ANSI
1.15625