RE: How the Axis could have won II. Allied AAR

RE: How the Axis could have won II. Allied AAR (Full Version)

All Forums >> [New Releases from Matrix Games] >> Strategic Command Series >> Strategic Command WWII War in Europe >> After Action Reports

Message

Zorch -> RE: How the Axis could have won II. Allied AAR (1/14/2017 11:51:46 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: warspite1 2nd - 9th September 1943 From the efficiency of the Soviet drive west, to the shambles that is my attack on the soft underbelly of Europe [:D] Oh well, at least Athens fell [:)] [image]local://upfiles/28156/247816E61A3E40CFBE9A8C06A53B2D0B.jpg[/image] Churchill would be so proud! Next stop Gallipoli? Oops, wrong war. [;)] [image]local://upfiles/34241/C002F86725874C3690F1CEEC8D05CC84.jpg[/image]

warspite1 -> RE: How the Axis could have won II. Allied AAR (1/14/2017 2:46:41 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: loki100 quote: ORIGINAL: warspite1 ... I assume German forces are on the west bank of the Vistula? in my game, I suddenly found quite a powerful German defense on the Oder. Not sure if this was generated by the AI or by event but it added a bit of spice to the final battles around Berlin. warspite1 That's good news! [:)]

Orm -> RE: How the Axis could have won II. Allied AAR (1/14/2017 6:23:13 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Zorch quote: ORIGINAL: warspite1 2nd - 9th September 1943 From the efficiency of the Soviet drive west, to the shambles that is my attack on the soft underbelly of Europe [:D] Oh well, at least Athens fell [:)] Churchill would be so proud! Next stop Gallipoli? Oops, wrong war. [;)] [image]local://upfiles/34241/C002F86725874C3690F1CEEC8D05CC84.jpg[/image] I think Churchill would have been happy anyway. He would have liked liberating Greece and Yugoslavia.

Zorch -> RE: How the Axis could have won II. Allied AAR (1/14/2017 8:00:07 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Orm quote: ORIGINAL: Zorch quote: ORIGINAL: warspite1 2nd - 9th September 1943 From the efficiency of the Soviet drive west, to the shambles that is my attack on the soft underbelly of Europe [:D] Oh well, at least Athens fell [:)] Churchill would be so proud! Next stop Gallipoli? Oops, wrong war. [;)] [image]local://upfiles/34241/C002F86725874C3690F1CEEC8D05CC84.jpg[/image] I think Churchill would have been happy anyway. He would have liked liberating Greece and Yugoslavia. I understand that Stalin ordered Tito to attack allied troops if they entered Yugoslavia. Whether Tito would have obeyed is anyone's guess.

warspite1 -> RE: How the Axis could have won II. Allied AAR (1/14/2017 8:33:51 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Zorch quote: ORIGINAL: Orm quote: ORIGINAL: Zorch quote: ORIGINAL: warspite1 2nd - 9th September 1943 From the efficiency of the Soviet drive west, to the shambles that is my attack on the soft underbelly of Europe [:D] Oh well, at least Athens fell [:)] Churchill would be so proud! Next stop Gallipoli? Oops, wrong war. [;)] [image]local://upfiles/34241/C002F86725874C3690F1CEEC8D05CC84.jpg[/image] I think Churchill would have been happy anyway. He would have liked liberating Greece and Yugoslavia. I understand that Stalin ordered Tito to attack allied troops if they entered Yugoslavia. Whether Tito would have obeyed is anyone's guess. warspite1 Well he wasn't very nice was he boys and girls?

warspite1 -> RE: How the Axis could have won II. Allied AAR (1/15/2017 11:56:41 AM)
16th - 23rd September 1943 As mentioned previously, I am all over the place with units and HQ, but too late to worry about that now. The Allies expand the beachhead - but as per real life, they are not exactly over endowed with replacement units. Unlike the Eastern Front, the Axis seem to have a goodly number of troops in Northern France. [image]local://upfiles/28156/CE4CFC263BCA464C8012B350681E5B39.jpg[/image]

warspite1 -> RE: How the Axis could have won II. Allied AAR (1/15/2017 12:00:28 PM)
16th - 23rd September 1943 The poor Canadians near Taranto are looking to be on a decidedly sticky wicket. I make the decision to not throw good money after lost causes and concentrate instead on clearing Sicily and then pushing up through Calabria. Hopefully the 'heel' can be held by the Americans - and the two prongs can converge, together, on Axis units in the 'arch' of the foot. [image]local://upfiles/28156/AB42C49FE8944F49A33EB0AFA64D2730.jpg[/image]

warspite1 -> RE: How the Axis could have won II. Allied AAR (1/15/2017 12:05:38 PM)
16th - 23rd September 1943 There really isn't too many words required for the Soviet position, either than north of the Pripyat or indeed to the south.... [image]local://upfiles/28156/21CEC70D12BE430693E5FC7807D840E3.jpg[/image]

warspite1 -> RE: How the Axis could have won II. Allied AAR (1/15/2017 12:08:56 PM)
16th - 23rd September 1943 The German XVIII Infantry Corps feels a tad alone.... [image]local://upfiles/28156/D69BA6E57FBC416BBD862895F97A6EBA.jpg[/image]

warspite1 -> RE: How the Axis could have won II. Allied AAR (1/15/2017 12:23:11 PM)
4th - 15th October 1943 The Allies continue to expand the beachhead and the Cotentin Peninsular is almost in Allied hands (Cherbourg is about to fall) but, matters are not helped when they land the wrong HQ.... [image]local://upfiles/28156/B68EB3AE8C9946339A0298BD0E7B0329.jpg[/image]

warspite1 -> RE: How the Axis could have won II. Allied AAR (1/15/2017 12:27:46 PM)
4th - 15th October 1943 No words required [image]local://upfiles/28156/FCA06468AB114673B516048639F54E76.jpg[/image]

warspite1 -> RE: How the Axis could have won II. Allied AAR (1/15/2017 12:33:33 PM)
4th - 15th October 1943 One garrison in Sicily to go and one city in eastern Greece to liberate... No pictures of the Eastern Front this turn as there has been little movement or enemy action. [image]local://upfiles/28156/DB19F8E2DAA74B76A9597C8088194E21.jpg[/image]

warspite1 -> RE: How the Axis could have won II. Allied AAR (1/15/2017 2:33:31 PM)
Okay. This was all getting a bit samey, and as there were no interesting situations were really developing, I have decided not to post turn by turn. The Allies were gong absolutely nowhere in Italy - they had taken Sicily, but were hemmed in and unable to move on the mainland. The AI then moved the troops away - which would have allowed the Allies to get moving. However, they never got this far - Italy then surrendered in February 1944. It looks like the Germans have two enclaves with their units in... [image]local://upfiles/28156/B9FE81F3BCFA417BAAA3B1A0454CEAE6.jpg[/image]

warspite1 -> RE: How the Axis could have won II. Allied AAR (1/15/2017 3:45:47 PM)
May 1944 Bulgaria joins the Allies. Sofia was about the only part of Bulgaria still in Axis hands so perhaps not surprising. The Danes have taken over Copenhagen. One thing very strange though. The U-boats have just being impregnable and armed with super dooper torpedoes.... [image]local://upfiles/28156/5288C0E13DB44E078F747E5E6735E6F8.jpg[/image]

warspite1 -> RE: How the Axis could have won II. Allied AAR (1/15/2017 4:09:43 PM)
June 1944 Hungary and Romania surrender. The fact that the Germans have jets is irritating - as I forgot sometime ago to continue research. However, as per real life, its a case of too little too late. [image]local://upfiles/28156/3C900BD4C163409887D621EE09020D2B.jpg[/image]

warspite1 -> RE: How the Axis could have won II. Allied AAR (1/15/2017 5:57:10 PM)
August 1944 Berlin falls - The German capital moves to Munich.

Zorch -> RE: How the Axis could have won II. Allied AAR (1/16/2017 4:53:56 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: warspite1 August 1944 Berlin falls - The German capital moves to Munich. How galling for Hitler - he hated Munich from his pre-WWI days there. Or was it Vienna he hated?

warspite1 -> RE: How the Axis could have won II. Allied AAR (1/16/2017 5:03:24 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Zorch quote: ORIGINAL: warspite1 August 1944 Berlin falls - The German capital moves to Munich. How galling for Hitler - he hated Munich from his pre-WWI days there. Or was it Vienna he hated? warspite1 Vienna. I thought he liked Munich - although I can't imagine why? [image]local://upfiles/28156/27B449F6B15A49358FD4825AFD0ACAD1.jpg[/image]

warspite1 -> RE: How the Axis could have won II. Allied AAR (1/16/2017 5:49:18 PM)
26th August 1944 The Allies had just taken Paris and..... [image]local://upfiles/28156/16938742FB984E25A44C3BAD12D2AD89.jpg[/image]

warspite1 -> RE: How the Axis could have won II. Allied AAR (1/16/2017 5:50:57 PM)
26th August 1944 The MPP situation at the end was: UK - 4,436 USA - 5,137 USSR - 21,007 Comfortable position for the Allies. MPP simply wasn't an issue, and that meant transporting air and land units was never an issue.

Kursk1943 -> RE: How the Axis could have won II. Allied AAR (1/16/2017 5:52:11 PM)
So it is over now? Really enjoyed watching it! Will you post something like "lessons learned"?

warspite1 -> RE: How the Axis could have won II. Allied AAR (1/16/2017 6:06:53 PM)
The key for the Allies was weathering the storm - and use of Forts was important - though not vital as the French mucked up their fort program (built 2 at most). The Soviet forts (around Leningrad and Moscow) were never even tested, and indeed in Egypt, only one fort was destroyed during the fighting. Holding a line with the French, and so limiting the number of units that could attack, and falling back in good order was far more important. Not sure if the AI will ever do a Sea Lion, but I guessed not, and so was able to take the mickey with moving units out of the UK and into Egypt. The Germans were not able to muster enough troops almost from the start - both in North Africa and the Soviet Union. This meant that the losses they were able to incur on the enemy was never anywhere near enough to threaten a breakthrough and, particularly on the Russian Front, meant that when the Soviets could counter, the German lines were just too porous and the Soviets could infiltrate and surround with ease. Similarly, ensuring in the first year or so that the Royal Navy was husbanded and not lost piecemeal, meant that the Italians - and ultimately the Germans - ended up throwing their navies away on attacks where the Allies had the advantage. The loss of the Italian Navy in particular was vital as I could take the mickey when invading - no escorts were required for the invading and reinforcing units. [image]local://upfiles/28156/FD9BFBF2D3A144F4ADE764E403EA6B5D.jpg[/image]

warspite1 -> RE: How the Axis could have won II. Allied AAR (1/16/2017 6:17:02 PM)
Research is so important - I was crucified in the first AAR as I did not understand the importance of this - and of ensuring that units were rotated to ensure they were upgraded as quickly as possible. Infantry Weapons is No.1, Advanced Aircraft is No.2 and ASW for the British too. At one point - probably during 1943 - I forgot to research anything for a while but, by then the Germans were pretty much spent. I will post the final research positions of the British, US, USSR, Germans and Italians. United Kingdom [image]local://upfiles/28156/53C77CD5274E46548081E663F9FDE7EB.jpg[/image]

warspite1 -> RE: How the Axis could have won II. Allied AAR (1/16/2017 6:23:28 PM)
The Americans are of course just a powerhouse. Being able to bring their armies into the Western Desert turned a problem situation for the Germans into certain defeat. It was not just units, but also look at the research in the four categories in the bottom right hand corner. United States [image]local://upfiles/28156/EB2718D46DCA49EFBB3CF61C4B74BFF3.jpg[/image]

warspite1 -> RE: How the Axis could have won II. Allied AAR (1/16/2017 6:25:48 PM)
The Soviets are all about Infantry, Tanks, then Aircraft and Anti-Tank. Soviet Union [image]local://upfiles/28156/6F28F33D8B9247F4BE8C92780F62D5CA.jpg[/image]

warspite1 -> RE: How the Axis could have won II. Allied AAR (1/16/2017 6:27:57 PM)
The Germans had Jets and good research in tanks. However, I was able to destroy some tanks easily, suggesting they did not have enough MPP to upgrade them all. Germany [image]local://upfiles/28156/1D425C52637D47D6A22A3C837BAFDBB9.jpg[/image]

warspite1 -> RE: How the Axis could have won II. Allied AAR (1/16/2017 6:30:33 PM)
The Italian position was not as bad as I assumed. Presumably low morale was the issue with their troops? As has been discussed elsewhere, the RM need more destroyers. Italy [image]local://upfiles/28156/5EF83B72A2974BAB9AC20CD16B313C5F.jpg[/image]

loki100 -> RE: How the Axis could have won II. Allied AAR (1/16/2017 6:34:09 PM)
well done another engaging AAR and this time you ended with a clear win. think at the moment its clear the game is skewed towards the allies - I think principally as the axis AI is rubbish at defending. You see all those pockets in Russia that could be easily relieved but the units are lost. Add on I think it needs some units by script to boost it - maybe tied to the Fall of France so it can prepare properly for Russia. I'm trying a new game with some constraints. One is no US units in Egypt and the other is to keep more of the UK forces in the UK. Obv you can substitute US units for these as 1942 goes along but I think in addition to upping the difficulty you have to set some constraints?

warspite1 -> RE: How the Axis could have won II. Allied AAR (1/16/2017 7:09:42 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Peter Zimmermann So it is over now? Really enjoyed watching it! Will you post something like "lessons learned"? warspite1 Yep - I've actually won a computer wargame..... believe me that is a rare event [:D] I've put a few thoughts down re lessons learned. Hope they are useful.

warspite1 -> RE: How the Axis could have won II. Allied AAR (1/16/2017 7:11:49 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: loki100 well done another engaging AAR and this time you ended with a clear win. think at the moment its clear the game is skewed towards the allies - I think principally as the axis AI is rubbish at defending. You see all those pockets in Russia that could be easily relieved but the units are lost. Add on I think it needs some units by script to boost it - maybe tied to the Fall of France so it can prepare properly for Russia. I'm trying a new game with some constraints. One is no US units in Egypt and the other is to keep more of the UK forces in the UK. Obv you can substitute US units for these as 1942 goes along but I think in addition to upping the difficulty you have to set some constraints? warspite1 I agree. When you see the units I didn't use for the Soviets and the MPP I had available, then I think adding some historical constraints makes sense. Or perhaps taking decisions that are bad for the Allies? Please let us know how you get on loki100.

Page: << < prev 21 22 23 [24] 25 next > >>

Forum Software © ASPPlayground.NET Advanced Edition 2.4.5 ANSI

0.640625