RE: Mike (Ger) vs Kamil (Sov) - 41 AltCV (Full Version)

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



Message

KamilS -> RE: Mike (Ger) vs Kamil (Sov) - 41 AltCV (12/14/2014 10:54:31 PM)

T9 Voronhez (Soviet)


Thing went out of control here and I can't do anything about it without compromising my defences elsewhere.

[image]local://upfiles/37480/994CC67446F44872B564887523201C26.jpg[/image]



KamilS -> RE: Mike (Ger) vs Kamil (Sov) - 41 AltCV (12/14/2014 10:58:47 PM)

T9 south (Soviet)


First German thrust towards city have been dealt with, but second will be much harder to fend off - numerous enemy units to the north force me to divert troop from Stalino's western approaches.

[image]local://upfiles/37480/735F5F2E1F6C4D9FB47A1F84DA97BEB7.jpg[/image]



morvael -> RE: Mike (Ger) vs Kamil (Sov) - 41 AltCV (12/15/2014 9:57:54 AM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: Kamil
At the beginning I have to say I found new CV very misleading.


It will be, because all that you have "learned" with old CV should be immediately forgotten as it can be harmful in the new system. Unfortunately there is no other way than playing more with the new CV and less with the old CV. After a while you will again have a proper "feeling" about what can be achieved by given combination of CV:CV. Attacking must be done at higher ratios now than before (no longer you can win 90% of the time when attacking with Soviets having 1:1 ratio of on-map CVs, most of the time you can expect your final CV in combat to be lower than starting CV - as it should be with elements properly scored and then dropping from combat due to losses).

All I can say - good luck!



KamilS -> RE: Mike (Ger) vs Kamil (Sov) - 41 AltCV (12/15/2014 11:26:48 PM)

Thank you.

I am trying my best, but Mike is too good and panzers are much stronger now.



M60A3TTS -> RE: Mike (Ger) vs Kamil (Sov) - 41 AltCV (12/15/2014 11:37:07 PM)

What is your strategy for saving industry?



KamilS -> RE: Mike (Ger) vs Kamil (Sov) - 41 AltCV (12/16/2014 12:31:01 AM)

quote:

M60A3TTS

What is your strategy for saving industry?



I was trying to divert panzers from attacking main industrial areas towards less important targets, but Mike persistently pushes towards producion centres. So now I am just postponing inevitable and try to save whatever I can from both Stalino and Tula.



charlie0311 -> RE: Mike (Ger) vs Kamil (Sov) - 41 AltCV (12/16/2014 4:34:27 AM)

Hi guys,

Maybe HQBU now still too strong, Sov morale too low. Ya think, maybe.



morvael -> RE: Mike (Ger) vs Kamil (Sov) - 41 AltCV (12/16/2014 6:05:42 AM)

1.08.01 has weaker HQBU, and 1.08.02 might have it weaker still. Seeing panzers at Voronezh on turn 9 is not the goal :)



Mike29 -> RE: Mike (Ger) vs Kamil (Sov) - 41 AltCV (12/16/2014 12:24:28 PM)

You should have seen what this panzer group have done the turn after Voronezh ))). I agree HQBU, is to strong now.



M60A3TTS -> RE: Mike (Ger) vs Kamil (Sov) - 41 AltCV (12/16/2014 1:42:59 PM)

Giving up the Dnepr line near Kiev was a questionable call. That opened the door to what has happened here. Are there many Soviet units being pocketed? Seems not to be the case, just the Soviet side giving up a lot of ground.



KamilS -> RE: Mike (Ger) vs Kamil (Sov) - 41 AltCV (12/16/2014 7:22:15 PM)

quote:

M60A3TTS


Giving up the Dnepr line near Kiev was a questionable call. That opened the door to what has happened here. Are there many Soviet units being pocketed? Seems not to be the case, just the Soviet side giving up a lot of ground.



I am afraid I disagree.


If you compare advance in the south in all 3 recent Pelton games, you will see, that it was fairly similar until turn 6.

What made the difference was Mike's ability to keep his panzers supplied far beyond my ability to contain them. Repeatedly my positions were flanked, stretched and pierced. There was no stop-gap in German advace, that would have enabled me to consolidate my positions.


If I defended Dnepr with forces at hand I would have lost more units and in the longer run result would be same at best (possibly worse). If I kept more forces in the south, I would greatly limit my chances of success near Leningrad.


I wanted to eventuate industry not only from Kharkov and Stalino but from Zaporozhe and Dnepropetrovsk too while simultaneously successfully fighting in the north. I gambled and lost, thanks to Mike tactical and logistical skill, but I disagree, that abandoning middle Dnepr is in general bad idea.



M60A3TTS -> RE: Mike (Ger) vs Kamil (Sov) - 41 AltCV (12/16/2014 8:00:36 PM)

To clarify, I didn't say it was a bad idea. I said it was questionable. There isn't enough detail in the screenshots or the AAR to make an accurate assessment. It looks like you built a solid defense around the cities you want protected, Stalino/Makeevka/Gorlovka anyways. In doing so, that is going to open up some opportunities for Mike since you can't be strong everywhere.

What are your overall ground losses at this stage? Are you trying to get 100% of the industry out of the Donbas?



KamilS -> RE: Mike (Ger) vs Kamil (Sov) - 41 AltCV (12/16/2014 8:21:43 PM)

Well, I was trying to evacuate all industry but ... Mike comprehensively outplayed me.



Loses were low (around 1.5M), I will try to remember to include casualties in next batch of screenshots.



Page: <<   < prev  1 [2]

Valid CSS!




Forum Software © ASPPlayground.NET Advanced Edition 2.4.5 ANSI
0.625