German supply (Full Version)

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



Message

chuckfourth -> German supply (8/21/2017 1:20:35 AM)

Hi I have been away for a while and have not played since version 1.07.08
I stopped playing because I didn't like the German supplies running out up to the first winter making it impossible to get to Moscow and encouraging the Russians to pull back rather than being forced to try to slow the Germans down.
Is this still the situation?
Thanks in advance Chuck.



Stelteck -> RE: German supply (8/21/2017 7:19:52 AM)

Completely changed. Now the germans have a lots of cards in hand in 1941 and 1942.



chuckfourth -> RE: German supply (8/21/2017 11:17:57 PM)

OK excellent and Thank you.
I will give it a go again



chuckfourth -> RE: German supply (9/3/2017 11:21:18 AM)

Well I am sure no one is interested but I guess I'm going away for a few more years.
By turn 3 I have outrun my fuel same as last time, and there is not enough air transport to really make a lot of difference as far as I can see.
I do not recall hearing about any panzer corps on the way to Moscow sitting around for a week waiting for fuel to arrive.
Does anyone really know, how long it took to get the rail lines working? wouldn't they have used captured soviet rail stock etc etc etc?
And cant the forward units be put in motor driven supply if they can trace 5 hexes to the corps and if the corps can trace 15 hexes to the panzer group and panzer group can trace 45 hexes to the Army group. They all have their own responsibilities to make supply get forward. They knew what the roads were.
The German general staff had this planned down to the last track link. They didn't run out of Fuel before Moscow they ran out of Oomph.



STEF78 -> RE: German supply (9/3/2017 12:46:55 PM)

The key in 1941 is to use HQBU to keep momentum for german Pzd. You cannot only rely on rail repair



Crackaces -> RE: German supply (9/3/2017 1:55:21 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: STEF78

The key in 1941 is to use HQBU to keep momentum for german Pzd. You cannot only rely on rail repair


There is an AAR in progress in which the Germans are doing a pretty good job with the HQBU purposely not in play. But not past the dreaded turn 7 yet...



darbycmcd -> RE: German supply (9/4/2017 12:56:39 AM)

I suggest you do a bit more reading on the state of supply for the armor spearhead during Barbarossa. They did have very serious supply issues that the game actually diminishes. I get that it is frustrating, but it was way worse for the historical military. (you know they didn't make it to Moscow, right?)

This by the way shows the real incredible prowess of the German military, especially at the operational and tactical level. That they could do what they did, with the limitations they had, is, in my opinion, the greatest display of military art in history. But it wasn't ever going to be enough....



chuckfourth -> RE: German supply (9/4/2017 2:44:48 AM)

Hi darbymcd
I have read quite a bit, paul carell Hitlers war on Russia
Purnells world war 2
John Keegans Barbarossa : invasion of Russia 1941
and many more.
Nowhere have I ever found a reference to serious supply difficulties (a corps stuck for a week) before the first winter. For armoured spearheads or anyone else.
I suggest you tell me where you have read this, page numbers or quotes would be very usefull.

Thanks STEF78 but I am still tied to the railhead, even if at 20 hexes. It just doesn't seem right. I will have to wait another couple of years to see how things turn out.



No idea -> RE: German supply (9/4/2017 8:05:54 AM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: chuckles

Well I am sure no one is interested but I guess I'm going away for a few more years.
By turn 3 I have outrun my fuel same as last time, and there is not enough air transport to really make a lot of difference as far as I can see.
I do not recall hearing about any panzer corps on the way to Moscow sitting around for a week waiting for fuel to arrive.
Does anyone really know, how long it took to get the rail lines working? wouldn't they have used captured soviet rail stock etc etc etc?
And cant the forward units be put in motor driven supply if they can trace 5 hexes to the corps and if the corps can trace 15 hexes to the panzer group and panzer group can trace 45 hexes to the Army group. They all have their own responsibilities to make supply get forward. They knew what the roads were.
The German general staff had this planned down to the last track link. They didn't run out of Fuel before Moscow they ran out of Oomph.



Then you should read better. Just saying.

On any acase your problem is that your panzer units are far, far ahead your infantry and supply head. You cant hope to take your panzers very far ahead of your supply lanes and still have fuel. That is how things worked irl. Offensives petered out when fuel/supply/ammo became low. The they had to wait for them to catch, and keep on going. Granted, some small units still had fuel, but most of the divisions would be stuck for a few days. This games turns are one week. That is the shortest possible amount of time.

Ps. If you want examples, I remeber, just to given an example, about most of Guderians panzergruppe being stuck south of Tula for a whole week due to lack of fuel. That situation started just a few days BEFORE the first snows fell. Making a combat group out of the vehicles that still had fuel (or transferring fuel from vehicle to vehicle) was a very common thing to make the units going forward. But they were small sized units, not whole divisions. The game doesnt get into such little details.



chuckfourth -> RE: German supply (9/4/2017 10:39:59 AM)

Hi No Idea
You might trust your memory but I don't, If you cant supply a reference, then its just a pipedream to me.



Searry -> RE: German supply (9/4/2017 11:03:12 AM)

The game would be unbalanced if not for the supply issue.



No idea -> RE: German supply (9/4/2017 12:22:26 PM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: chuckles

Hi No Idea
You might trust your memory but I don't, If you cant supply a reference, then its just a pipedream to me.

quote:

No idea
Matrix Veteran


 

Posts: 281
Joined: 6/24/2011
Status: online


Robert Forczyk, "Tank warfare on the eastern front. Schwerpunkt. 1941-1942". Kindle edition. Sorry, dont remeber the page of the example I gave you.. I could look into it.



No idea -> RE: German supply (9/4/2017 12:37:41 PM)

On any case, what you should do it use HQ builups (which, trust me, are something much better than what the germans could do irl).

I agree that being stopped a whole week because of lack of fuel was rare, but being stopped for one, two or even three days wasnt. This game only gives us one week turns, and that is why you are stopped for a whole week (one turn). To balance things, think that, once you have made a HQ buldup CORRECTLY, you will have enough fuel for TWO whole weeks of operations. You change one week of being stopped for two weeks of being fully fueled and supplied. That is not realistic either, but one things balances the other (altough I still think the german side wins on that trade).



darbycmcd -> RE: German supply (9/4/2017 1:43:02 PM)

Hey there Chuckles.
I would add a couple reads
Martin van Creveld: Supplying War
It has a good chapter on the logistics of Barbarossa which gives an idea of the challenges.

David Stahel: Operation Barbarossa and Germany's Defeat in the East or Kiev
Both give a great picture of the operational limitations that the logistics tail put on the Germans

David Glantz: Barbarossa Derailed
Ok he is the preeminent western scholar of the Patriotic War right now, but he is a dry dry DRY writer. Still this book also shows impact of logistic constraints.

No Idea is completely right about the way the game has to model these things, we get the overall effect without the specific details. I would add one thing, if your question is 'Why do my panzers run out of gas when historical commanders didn't?'... the answer is sort of in the question. Historical commanders didn't do the things that players are wont to do, like run their panzers as far as they possibly can each turn. So it sort of averages out, on one turn you run way far, and the second turn sit. Historically they would run less far on turn one but further on 2... This difference is exacerbated by the lack of march attrition on vehicles in the game, which was a very significant issue for both sides. This means that in addition to the very generous logistics model that the germans have, they do not have one of the important opportunity costs of rapid and deep penetrations....

In the end, the majority of German players report historical or better rates of advance over all so I don't think it is too big of a problem.



chuckfourth -> RE: German supply (9/4/2017 11:28:47 PM)

Hi Searry
I don't think so, If the armour runs too far forward it is easily isolated as the infantry cant keep up. Or if it does make a playbalance issue then in a complex game like this it is easy to adjust something else to counter it say better Soviet Morale.



chuckfourth -> RE: German supply (9/4/2017 11:34:37 PM)

Well sounds like you guys are bluffing. All that fabulous resources and still no Quote. Get your ""s out and share with all of us where it says German panzer division x was held up for y day(s) because of lack of fuel. Before the first winter.



Sammy5IsAlive -> RE: German supply (9/5/2017 12:37:02 AM)

It is Chapter 4 p141 in Glantz

https://books.google.co.uk/books?isbn=1906033722

"the supply and transportation situation in mid July was sufficient to support operations as far as just east of Smolensk, but no further...In short, given ammunition and fuel requirements and the realities of the railroad and road network, by mid-July it was already evident an advance by Army Group Center to Moscow in the immediate future would be logistically impossible."

This is an interesting read about the point at hand from a WITE standpoint

http://www.quartertothree.com/fp/2011/03/22/war-in-the-east-sid-meiers-heinz-guderians-railroad-tycoon/

If you look at Dinglr's AAR (where his opponent to a large extent abandoned the centre in the first few turns) he has pretty much reached the same point with his infantry on turn 6 which is mid-late July. If he was using Panzers and HQBUs he would have been at Vyazma more than a month ahead of schedule. If you read the AARs over the last year or so my rough estimate is that in at least a third of the games Moscow falls to the Germans

Where are you stuck at on T3?



KenchiSulla -> RE: German supply (9/5/2017 6:47:19 AM)

It is a guy called "chuckles" all.....



No idea -> RE: German supply (9/5/2017 8:35:52 AM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: chuckles

Well sounds like you guys are bluffing. All that fabulous resources and still no Quote. Get your ""s out and share with all of us where it says German panzer division x was held up for y day(s) because of lack of fuel. Before the first winter.



"Chapert 2, position 2875:

"Guderians logistic situation was the most tenuous of any of the three Panzergruppen involved in Thyphoon and he would start the operation with less than two V.S. of fuel on hand, enough for a 200kms advance. Moscow was 550kms from Guderians strtaing position".

"Chapter 2, position 2883:

Thyphoon: Guderians battle, 30 september-16 october

"... yet Guderians euphoric advance was short lived, becuase the XXIV armeekorps (mot.) used all his fuel to get to Orel and had none left. (...) contrary to myth, Guderians spearhead was immobilized four days prior to the first snowfall, due to lack of fuel. (...) von Schweppenburgs was forced to send his supply columns back to the rear for fuel and it would take four days to restock his two panzer divisons with one V.S. each. (...) it was clear that Panzerarmee 2 logistic support was grossly inadequate for a further large scale advance and Guderian was reduced to conducting a "rock soup" style offensive, by robbing fuel and ammunition from some units to give just enough resources to Kampfgruppe Eberbach tp continue advancing toward Tula and Moscow"

From Chapter 2, startin on position 3436:

"Guderian tries for Tula, 22 october-30 november

After two weeks of inactivity at Mtensk, Guderian struggled to get his Panzerarmee 2 back into the the last days of october. Aside from a paucity of fuel and ammunition, he only had two panzer divisions from von Schweppenburgs XXIV Armeekorps (mot.) to continue the advance toward Tula. (...). Kempfs XXXXVIIII Armeekorps (mot.) was advancing due east toward Kursk while Lemelsens XXXXVII Armeekorps (mot.) was immobilized around Bryansk and Orel for lack of fuel. (...). Fuel was a problem for the panzers throughout the offensive and since the normal supply trucks could not cross the muddy terrain around the Zusha river, Eberbach had directed that each panzer regiment would use tank transporters towed by Sd.Kfz.9 semi tracks from its Panzerwerkstattkompanie to carry about 9.000 liters of additional fuel. On the morning of 25 october Eberbach used his remaning fuel to form a Vorausabsteilung from Scheneider-Kotalskis III/Pz. Regt 6, the 1./SR3 and detachments from Panzerjager abteilung 521 and divisional artillery, and sent them up the road to Tula in pursuit.(...)

Continued rain and frost made the german logistic situation in Tula even more precarious in the first week of Novemeber. (...) Guderians nearest railhead was 130kms behind his forward forces and the road from Orel to Tula was a mess, so the supply situation was not going to improve anytime soon."


Now I would like less trolling and some kind of apology




chuckfourth -> RE: German supply (9/6/2017 9:16:41 AM)

So I am out by 4 days, I can live with that.
Anyway before the snow there has been mud? Army group centres supply problems are because of mud? Mud is already factored into the game. Substitute Mud for Winter in my original proposition and you might get my meaning?

Thanks for that post Sammy5isAlive, That is an interesting book and article, in the second link it has Glantz saying this about German supply, " almost contemptuously ignored" It sounds a little to me as though he might have a barrow to push. I guess you can find Authors to promote either view without looking too hard.

In my trial game I have pushed a panzer corps forward to be too far away from the railhead to do HQBU and on turn 3 it is already mostly out of fuel and down to a few MPs which I think is unrealistic, here's why

North Africa

Rommel at Tobruck has 5 mechanised and five infantry divisions, so a bit more than 3 corps. He operated very successfully against the British. He was supplied from Tripoli about 1255 kilometers away along a SINGLE road (NO RAIL AT ALL). He is in the Desert and EVERYTHING has to be brought forward by road. If you apply the Railhead (being Tripoly) rules of this game to Rommels situation he is permanently out of fuel and everything else. He wasn't out of fuel.
The distance from Fortress Brest Litovsk to Moscow is about 1055 kilometres there are many, many roads and a largely functioning Russian rail network for which the Germans have captured rolling stock. The infantry divisions can feed their horses at the side of the road as they move forward. The Russian towns, farms, villages, and cities are FULL of FOOD and WATER and FUEL. Looking at this comparison leads me to believe that the Supply limitation rules are much to harsh.

I think it would be sufficient to simply increase truck attrition the further the units move from the railheads, the more distance they travel the more are destroyed. So limiting supply through truck attrition without recourse to special "rules".

If play balance is too upset then there is another rule I don't like, Surprise.

When you look at this rule the German can make twice as many attacks in the first week as he can in the second, This doesn't make sense in any kind of way. So this should be dropped. If the German has normal movement costs on the first turn his infantry will largely be on the start line at the beginning of turn 2 and if the armour has gone forward as far as it can on turn 1 and again on the latter turns then even though it arrives at Smolensk or wherever it will be so far past the infantry it will be easily encircled itself. Removing the surprise rule will push play balance back towards where it came from.

While Im here I would also remove the German ability to Motorise infantry I doubt this was really even done wouldn't the trucks have had their hands full moving the fuels forward? also it would compensate a bit further for relaxing the supply restrictions.

If you did a beta with these rule changes it would I think be a much more lively game and the Soviet would be encouraged to defend as he really did rather than retreat. The supply "Rules" lock the German too closely into one particular version of history, the Russian too for that matter (Retreat).

Look I really like this game but the supply restrictions and surprise rules don't ring true to me. Airlift, Motorise and HQBU rules seem to be there to compensate for the supply restrictions, Better I think to just bite the bullet loosen up supply a la Rommel, drop HQBU, drop motorise, nice and neat heh?

I see how you got your Legion of Merit now KenchiSulla, maybe go back to the shallow end of the pool now?



KenchiSulla -> RE: German supply (9/6/2017 6:25:33 PM)

I honestly thought you were fooling around a bit, based on your comments. If you are serious then, well, enjoy this thread...




Crackaces -> RE: German supply (9/6/2017 7:06:36 PM)

If One is interested in a detailed read of the German Supply problems and how they affected operations in the first weeks represented by WITE I believe Fugate (1984) is a very good read. (Operation Barbarossa. Strategy And Tactics On The Eastern Front, 1941
Just as a note -- I find the moderators of this forum not to tolerate trolls .. it is one reason I enjoy the interaction as I try and master this very complex game. The good news is it simple to block either arrogant or blissful ignorance.



RedLancer -> RE: German supply (9/6/2017 8:12:44 PM)

Crackaces is correct. Bad behaviour is not tolerated.

Chuckles - Please either apologise or edit your posts. I welcome debate, especially on logistic issues, but there is no need for personal slights.



chuckfourth -> RE: German supply (9/9/2017 7:36:31 AM)

Sure, sure, I apologise, sincerely, wholeheartedly and unconditionally.
Now back to business
It is very simple arithmetic
Rommel supplied 3 corps 65 hexes away from his rail head (Tripoli) along one single road with trucks. How much supply did he lose along the way? nearly none. He could do a HQBU at 65 hexes, three times the current 20.
WITE starts to penalise supply delivery if the unit is 10 hexes from a rail head,(that's 3 hours in a truck) and stops it at 25 hexes.
Clearly the Rommel example shows that the Germans were NOT tied so closely to the rail heads as they are in this game.
It was made very clear in Poland France and Yugoslavia/Greece that the German army and its logistics system was absolutely first class. Both the Ardennes and Yugoslavia had narrow underdeveloped roads, it didn't stop them. Germans staff work was brilliant, the suggestion that they hadn't planned Barbarossa to within an inch of its life is revisionist. They knew how far and how fast the armoured spearheads could go and catered accordingly. They had just had 3 large scale, live fire trial runs, Poland, France and Yugoslavia. In Russia they predicted what the fuel needs would be well before they set foot on Russian soil. As the offensive developed they could see what was running low at get it forward in good time, they had radios.
The weather beat them, not logistical ineptitude.

I guess I am not alone in thinking this and so the HQBU rule has appeared.
This is a case of giving with one hand and taking with the other.
First the supply of the far away units is severely restricted with the supply rules and then completely unrestricted with HQBU.
Clearly the logistics system is trying to get as much supply forward as possible, and in the game if the units are too far away it can't do this fully, but somehow automagically with the pressing of the HQBU button now it can supply them fully. Where do these extra trucks come from?
Why aren't the "extra" HQBU trucks just running supply's to the far away units in the first place?
It seems an unnecessary complication. Easier to do it this way, remove HQBU and use these supply restrictions.
If the units are 5 hexes to the corps and the crops is 15 units to the Panzer Group and the Panzer Group is 45 hexes to the army group then they should be in full supply or nearly so.
Note that this adds up to 65 hexes, Rommel's ability to service his army with trucks.
Note The Food and Water Rommel had to bring forward is available locally in Russia.
OK there are supply glitches, but a whole corps marooned for a week before the Mud arrives?

Supply Build up already happens in the local towns? Maybe change pressing the HQBU button to bringing this supply on line?
Tweak Soviet Morale to adjust play balance, they were rural men with excellent bushcraft, often poorly led and poorly equipped but undoubtedly brave and stubborn.
Remove the Surprise rule.

It would be helpful if the people offering Reading material offered some specific relevant quotes as I don't have these books. Of the 3 quotes supplied so far, one is due to mud the other two probably as well, thought context is missing.

A quote from the American observer William Shirer on the advance into France

"And what a magnificent machine that keeps them running so smoothly. In fact that is the chief impression you get from watching the German army at work. It is a gigantic, impersonal war machine, run as coolly and efficiently, say as our automobile industry in Detroit"

I am happy to help with an AAR?

These changes I think will force the Russian to feed his units into the mincing machine of the German advance in a desperate attempt to slow him down as the Russian builds his strength, as was the historical reality.
Stalin never said everyone pull back, well just let him come up to the gates of Moscow and stop him there because we know he will he out of fuel by then.

Also this quote from Glantz.
http://www.quartertothree.com/fp/2011/03/22/war-in-the-east-sid-meiers-heinz-guderians-railroad-tycoon/

"by 1 July its railroad engineers managed to restore the Brest-Minsk line only as far as Baranovichi, a distance of 300 kilometers, with one track operational on German gauge and the other on wider Russian gauge. Laboring feverishly, the engineers were able to push the latter to Stolbtsy on 3 July and Minsk a day later. "

Thats 16 hexes of German guage in 2 turns way ahead of the games possible 8.
And of course, a single line will have sidings so trains can pass each other.

Just one last point the Baltic rail zone should probably correspond to the state boundaries rather than the current zig zag.

Thanks in advance for your attention.



No idea -> RE: German supply (9/9/2017 8:32:07 AM)

Nobody said the germans were inept at logistics, why have you reached that conclusion?

HQBUs is the way the game has to mimick the hoarding of ammo, supplies and fuel that preceded offensives and long advances. I agree it is not the best solution (WITW depots make more sense) but it isnt nonsense either. You need TIME to hoard resources, especially far from your supply lines. It is not a question of how many trucks you want to use, it is a question of supply througput (the amount of trucks that can pass through a given road/trains that can pass through a given railroad is limited. A given army supply condition wouldnt improve just because you use all the trucks in the werhmatch to supply them if you dont expand or improve transport networks at the same time), something the game doesnt really model well.

If you want some more data, in Glantz I read not long ago that the senior werhmacht logistics officer clearly told that the werhmatch could be supported 500 kms beyond the border more or less. Beyond that serious supply problems would start arising.

On any case, as some others told you, the game mimicks the advance quite well, even if using weird ways and features to mimick it. Simply read any AAR and compare it with the real life german advance and you will see that players tend to keep the same pace or slightly better.




RforRush -> RE: German supply (9/9/2017 8:47:13 AM)

Rommel is very bad example, he lost several times by outrunning his supply lines. This shows that it wasn't possible to adequately supply an army without rail connection.
We don't know yet how supply will look in WitE2 and probably nothing major will change in current game, so it's better to wait for details on next game before running deep into speculations.



No idea -> RE: German supply (9/9/2017 11:47:13 AM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: RforRush

Rommel is very bad example, he lost several times by outrunning his supply lines. This shows that it wasn't possible to adequately supply an army without rail connection.
We don't know yet how supply will look in WitE2 and probably nothing major will change in current game, so it's better to wait for details on next game before running deep into speculations.


Regarding supply I think I read they are going to get rid of HQBUs and give us the same "supply via depots" used in WITW. And they are going to implement some kind of supply throughput with railroads, as there will be simple and double rail lanes (but dont quote me on this, I could have dreamt it)



RedLancer -> RE: German supply (9/9/2017 7:13:56 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: No idea

Regarding supply I think I read they are going to get rid of HQBUs and give us the same "supply via depots" used in WITW. And they are going to implement some kind of supply throughput with railroads, as there will be simple and double rail lanes (but dont quote me on this, I could have dreamt it)



Not dreaming so your sanity is safe. When I get a spare few minutes I'll provide an update in the WitE2 thread.



56ajax -> RE: German supply (9/10/2017 6:21:19 AM)

Just a couple of points here on rail. This game runs on 'averages' and not highs and lows so whilst the line may be almost to Minsk quick smart, the historical average conversion approximates 8 hexes??

The germans expected to capture sufficient locos and rolling stock, and they didn't.

German locos were unsuited to the harsh russian winter; insufficiently insulated so they couldn't retain the heat and thus achieve sufficient pressure to work effectively.



chuckfourth -> RE: German supply (9/10/2017 7:48:45 AM)

My point is that until the mud arrives the remaining Russian rail and road network was sufficient to allow all the throughput required. WITHOUT evidence to the contrary I think this is a safe assumption to make.
A truck can drive 1000 miles as easily as 100. The petrol engine is a very reliable thing.
Don't forget the Germans required a very small logistical tail (they had a high "bayonet strength") Unlike the relatively bloated logistical requiremments of the Western allies who relied much more heavily on HE rather than schwerepunkt and coordination. France is a good example of this, when the Germans went through they caused very little collateral damage, the Allies layed waste to much of the country.
Making specific claims without substantiation might not be dishonest but it is certainly questionable. Who gives the 500k limit and in what context? A quote turns an unsupported claim into something that can be worked with.
I still think Rommel is a good example. Rommel had good supply while Malta was suppressed and bad when it wasn't. His main difficulty was not the via Balba but whole shiploads of equipment and supplies sinking to the bottom of the mare mediterraneo.



Page: [1] 2 3   next >   >>

Valid CSS!




Forum Software © ASPPlayground.NET Advanced Edition 2.4.5 ANSI
2.90625