RE: Pre-Kursk

Matrix Games Forums

Forums Register Login Photo Gallery Member List Search Calendars FAQ

My Profile Inbox Address Book My Subscription My Forums Log Out

RE: Pre-Kursk

View related threads: (in this forum | in all forums)

Logged in as: Guest

Users viewing this topic: none

Printable Version

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

Page: << < prev 12 13 [14] 15 16 next > >>

Message

<< Older Topic Newer Topic >>

RE: Pre-Kursk - 7/14/2011 9:13:54 PM

Flaviusx

Posts: 7750
Joined: 9/9/2009
From: Southern California
Status: offline

You will just encourage him to turtle up if you carpet along the whole front.

Look how well your defense in the center has worked as compared to your carpet in the south. He's attacking the "weak spot." He almost certainly will not attack anywhere if you carpet along the whole front. This in the long run just makes your job harder. There won't be any counterattacking opportunities because there won't be any attacks. He will instead sit tight and wait for you to hurl yourself against his lines, something that will take almost another year for you to be able to do.

You've already done well with a true defense in depth based on reserves rather than just blanketing the whole front with units. Not sure why you would abandon that.

_____________________________

WitE Alpha Tester

(in reply to Q-Ball)

Post #: 391

RE: Pre-Kursk - 7/15/2011 2:45:44 PM

Q-Ball

Posts: 7336
Joined: 6/25/2002
From: Chicago, Illinois
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Flaviusx

You will just encourage him to turtle up if you carpet along the whole front.

Look how well your defense in the center has worked as compared to your carpet in the south. He's attacking the "weak spot." He almost certainly will not attack anywhere if you carpet along the whole front. This in the long run just makes your job harder. There won't be any counterattacking opportunities because there won't be any attacks. He will instead sit tight and wait for you to hurl yourself against his lines, something that will take almost another year for you to be able to do.

You've already done well with a true defense in depth based on reserves rather than just blanketing the whole front with units. Not sure why you would abandon that.

6/25/42: Clear T54:

This appears to be happening; 2 attacks along the entire front, and a pull-back from a couple salients created from the German offensive. Not sure if this is permanent for the Summer or not, but I wonder it if is.

Tarhunnas made some mistakes in the winter and deserves to suffer somewhat, but the Germans should be able to make progress here. But I can see why he is stopping. My infantry looks better than his at this point, and his Panzers are in terrible shape from what I can tell.

I could thin out my defenses and allow him to get some mobility, but that seems fake, like I am "throwing" it, and kind of an insult to Tarhunnas. It shouldn't be, because I got to this exact spot vs. Von Beanie (and my winter was better by comparison), but I thought maybe I was not a good German player.

Maybe the problem is 2 even players = 1942 stalemate.

I think we'll keep going, but I hope this is looked at. It's tough, because 1942 is a snowball; once the Reds are out of their forts, it gets very mobile and very dangerous for them (see Tarhunnas's game vs. Gids), but until that happens, it's a slogging match.

I think part of the problem is that forts are everything. They are. They are the single-most important defensive factor. If you have forts, it's slow-going for the attacker. If not, it's a runaway.

I have no idea if these are the right suggestions, but maybe:

1. Forts should be nerfed further, so that anything over lvl 1 gets tougher to build. Static positions should become lvl 3, but otherwise, tougher to build.
2. EMPTY forts should disappear much faster
3. In return, unis in open terrain should defend a bit better. This might prevent games that are "too offensive" with the fort changes.
4. Units should recover Morale to National Morale very quickly; this would help Germans in 1942. And maybe units should be pulled DOWN to national morale as well. (not sure about this, it would nerf some excellent German units in 1941)

If you have a pull-down on morale, I would adjust national morales a bit for the Axis Allies, as well as give the Soviets a bit more upside

Anyway, this game figures to be WWI for a few months until I can get the Red Army together.

_____________________________

(in reply to Flaviusx)

Post #: 392

RE: Pre-Kursk - 7/15/2011 2:56:02 PM

Flaviusx

Posts: 7750
Joined: 9/9/2009
From: Southern California
Status: offline

I personally think the problem is that deep fortifications across the entire front are a little bit too easily achieved in 1942 and can trigger a premature stalemate.

But I confess I'm at a total loss as to how to address this without causing problems in 41 and in 43+. The testers have been grappling with this problem for months, lots of ideas have been tossed around, but none of them seem quite right. (Including my own ideas.)

_____________________________

WitE Alpha Tester

(in reply to Q-Ball)

Post #: 393

RE: Pre-Kursk - 7/15/2011 3:02:19 PM

Flaviusx

Posts: 7750
Joined: 9/9/2009
From: Southern California
Status: offline

I do like the idea of expedited national morale recover for the Germans in spring of 42, btw. I've suggested it myself in fact.

The game as it stands has a built in asymmetry between the heavy blizzard morale losses and inability to rebound from this quickly enough in spring of 42. We've tweaked the blizzard to make the morale hit less severe for the Germans, but the moral recovery still doesn't seem to be happening quickly enough via normal game mechanics.

_____________________________

WitE Alpha Tester

(in reply to Flaviusx)

Post #: 394

RE: Pre-Kursk - 7/15/2011 3:08:46 PM

Q-Ball

Posts: 7336
Joined: 6/25/2002
From: Chicago, Illinois
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Flaviusx

I do like the idea of expedited national morale recover for the Germans in spring of 42, btw. I've suggested it myself in fact.

The game as it stands has a built in asymmetry between the heavy blizzard morale losses and inability to rebound from this quickly enough in spring of 42. We've tweaked the blizzard to make the morale hit less severe for the Germans, but the moral recovery still doesn't seem to be happening quickly enough via normal game mechanics.

I agree, as the Wehrmacht was back to it's 'ol Wehrmacht self in 1942, singing songs all the way to Stalingrad. It was only after that battle that morale took a permanent hit. IMO morale is more than just morale, it's operational efficiency, and that did take a hit from 41-42, mostly from all the leader losses, but I don't think it was that severe. The Germans were still very very good.

Maybe the Germans could get a one-time morale bonus to all units in April 1942, (with a cap on that of course; no 99 morale divisions). 10 or 15 feels about right.

_____________________________

(in reply to Flaviusx)

Post #: 395

RE: Pre-Kursk - 7/15/2011 3:20:21 PM

Ketza

Posts: 2227
Joined: 1/14/2007
From: Columbia, Maryland
Status: offline

I still like the idea of spending APs for forts over a certain level.

It would give the Soviets a choice in 42. Build a wall of forts or spend APs on their army. Without the ability to do both the front may well become much more fluid.

(in reply to Q-Ball)

Post #: 396

RE: Pre-Kursk - 7/15/2011 3:35:53 PM

Flaviusx

Posts: 7750
Joined: 9/9/2009
From: Southern California
Status: offline

I dislike anything that mixes forts and APs. I think this game relies too much as it is on APs to solve everything, and this just leads to a lot of accounting trickery with APs.

There's got to be a better way than that.

_____________________________

WitE Alpha Tester

(in reply to Ketza)

Post #: 397

RE: Pre-Kursk - 7/15/2011 3:37:14 PM

M60A3TTS

Posts: 4014
Joined: 5/13/2011
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Ketza

I still like the idea of spending APs for forts over a certain level.

It would give the Soviets a choice in 42. Build a wall of forts or spend APs on their army. Without the ability to do both the front may well become much more fluid.

To some extent that happens now in the form of RR Construction Brigades. You spend APs and their high construction value allows for faster fort building. Maybe one answer is tweak the construction value of those units.

(in reply to Ketza)

Post #: 398

RE: Pre-Kursk - 7/15/2011 3:56:09 PM

ComradeP

Posts: 7192
Joined: 9/17/2009
Status: offline

National morale is only part of the issue. With his current likely TOE figures, it wouldn't matter much at all if he had 80 morale/experience German divisions instead of ~70 morale/experience ones. The losses the Germans suffer are just as much part of the problem as reduced national morale, probably even more so.

_____________________________

SSG tester
WitE Alpha tester
Panzer Corps Beta tester
Unity of Command scenario designer

(in reply to M60A3TTS)

Post #: 399

RE: Pre-Kursk - 7/15/2011 3:59:50 PM

Ketza

Posts: 2227
Joined: 1/14/2007
From: Columbia, Maryland
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Flaviusx

I dislike anything that mixes forts and APs. I think this game relies too much as it is on APs to solve everything, and this just leads to a lot of accounting trickery with APs.

There's got to be a better way than that.

I think the AP system has a lot of potential to make the game better.

I look at APs as a sort of national "logistics pool". You could potentially give the players a lot of flexibility by using them for various things to make the game more interesting. You can also utilize them in a system that restricts players from overdoing things that work too well. This is done with HQ buildups and it works fine in its latest variation in my opinion. To me fort construction after level 2 should fall into this category. I think its much more realistic and will make the game more interesting if both sides have to decide where the forts go and how much effort will be put into them. Your not taking them away your just making players invest something into them other then a few brigades out of the line for awhile.

(in reply to Flaviusx)

Post #: 400

RE: Pre-Kursk - 7/15/2011 4:10:17 PM

BletchleyGeek

Posts: 4713
Joined: 11/26/2009
From: Living in the fair city of Melbourne, Australia
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Ketza

quote:

ORIGINAL: Flaviusx
I dislike anything that mixes forts and APs. I think this game relies too much as it is on APs to solve everything, and this just leads to a lot of accounting trickery with APs.

There's got to be a better way than that.

I think the AP system has a lot of potential to make the game better.

I look at APs as a sort of national "logistics pool". You could potentially give the players a lot of flexibility by using them for various things to make the game more interesting. You can also utilize them in a system that restricts players from overdoing things that work too well. This is done with HQ buildups and it works fine in its latest variation in my opinion. To me fort construction after level 2 should fall into this category. I think its much more realistic and will make the game more interesting if both sides have to decide where the forts go and how much effort will be put into them. Your not taking them away your just making players invest something into them other then a few brigades out of the line for awhile.

Rather than AP's, I would set limits to the reachable Fortification level depending on the construction value of the units in the hex. SU's would only speed up the process, but not count towards this limit. Same thing for keeping the forts: you need some minimum level of construction points in the hex to avoid it to decay.

My guess is that someone has already thought of something like this.

_____________________________

(in reply to Ketza)

Post #: 401

RE: Pre-Kursk - 7/15/2011 4:14:12 PM

Flaviusx

Posts: 7750
Joined: 9/9/2009
From: Southern California
Status: offline

I've suggested decay mechanisms, yes. With decay penalties increasing dramatically as you get farther away from the front.

I've even suggested placing hard caps on fort levels, again depending on distance from the front. So you cannot just drop a 4 strength fort line 10 hexes in the rear.

These would be far easier from an adminsitrative standpoint than APs. APs get gamed, and the more duties get offloaded on APs, the more they get gamed.

_____________________________

WitE Alpha Tester

(in reply to BletchleyGeek)

Post #: 402

RE: Pre-Kursk - 7/15/2011 4:38:00 PM

BletchleyGeek

Posts: 4713
Joined: 11/26/2009
From: Living in the fair city of Melbourne, Australia
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Flaviusx
I've suggested decay mechanisms, yes. With decay penalties increasing dramatically as you get farther away from the front.

I've even suggested placing hard caps on fort levels, again depending on distance from the front. So you cannot just drop a 4 strength fort line 10 hexes in the rear.

These would be far easier from an adminsitrative standpoint than APs. APs get gamed, and the more duties get offloaded on APs, the more they get gamed.

Tying fort cap and decay to the number of construction points in hex would account for distance from the front in an indirect way. Say you need to stack the equivalent of 3 rifle divisions to reach level 2. No level 4 lines 10 hexes in the rear, and it wouldn't be very intelligent to pile up 45 divisionsto get a 15-hex line 10 hexes in the rear just for the sake of it - such an amount of force would be possibly be needed at the front, or elsewhere.

However, this would totally gimp Germany in 1943. No forts, no chance of stopping - or at least damaging - the incoming blows. A possible counter for this could be to dramatically increase attacker casualties unless a certain ratio between fort level (defender) and engineer support level (attacker) is met. Something like the "extra free shots on attacking russians" the axis get. Perhaps this is already accounted for in the tactical combat simulation model, I can't say.

A global element is also missing. Hard caps/level decay linked to the amount of construction points in the hex doesn't introduce any kind of global limiting factor. One option would be to impose a "hard" limiting factor, a "build" pool very much like the motor pool is regarding logistics and general combat efficiency, which would influence how fast can forts be improved or improved at all. But this mechanism would probably add a lot of complexity to logistics phase computation and, more grievously, the player wouldn't have control over what hexes get build first (which is of the utmost importance).

An option would be to make FZ's the key for achieving really high fort levels (3, 4, 5). This would require AP expenditure, but one which I don't think it would be easy to game away. These units would tie TOE elements, vehicles and supplies for extended periods of time. If want to build you have to concentrate your forces and/or tie substantial amounts of resources to the land.

_____________________________

(in reply to Flaviusx)

Post #: 403

RE: Pre-Kursk - 7/15/2011 4:48:33 PM

Ketza

Posts: 2227
Joined: 1/14/2007
From: Columbia, Maryland
Status: offline

Bletchley is right on the money.

BTW sorry to hijack the AAR.

(in reply to BletchleyGeek)

Post #: 404

RE: Pre-Kursk - 7/15/2011 4:58:51 PM

BletchleyGeek

Posts: 4713
Joined: 11/26/2009
From: Living in the fair city of Melbourne, Australia
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Ketza

Bletchley is right on the money.

BTW sorry to hijack the AAR.

I think this is the second time I contribute to partially derail a Q-Ball AAR. Sorry Q-Ball

_____________________________

(in reply to Ketza)

Post #: 405

RE: Pre-Kursk - 7/15/2011 5:03:30 PM

Lieste

Posts: 1823
Joined: 11/1/2008
Status: offline

AP getting 'gamed' is a problem where they are used as one time 'build-points' or transfer points (and these have high values).

What happens though if expenditure of AP related more to the administration costs of operating your armies - so there is a cost for recruiting new units, training them, moving them, supporting them with new equipment, ammunition, incorporating them into mission plans, artillery fire plans, providing equipment and supplies for fortification (mines, wire, concrete etc).

So AP expenditures are highest when the army is large, and less are left for building new units or doing interesting things with large fortified zones. OTOH, when the Army is hit hard, the costs of running it are lower, leaving more for new unit creation, or digging complex forts.

(in reply to BletchleyGeek)

Post #: 406

RE: Pre-Kursk - 7/15/2011 6:08:36 PM

Q-Ball

Posts: 7336
Joined: 6/25/2002
From: Chicago, Illinois
Status: offline

Hijack away, it's fine....a good debate.

July, 1942:

Well, if the Germans are going to sit, we will do something, just to make it interesting

Kliment's Revenge:

We are launching a general offensive against the Finnish positions west of Cherepovets. I have transferred 3rd Shock up there, plus Cavalry, Guards, and Tanks, and we are going to make attacks toward the West. I am still transferring forces, but first attacks pushed back 2 hexes.

I don't expect huge progress. I expect to accomplish the following:

1. Bleed the Finns. The Finnish Army gets almost no replacements. I want to bleed them down further.
2. Force the Germans to take over part of that sector, and stretch them out

If Tarhunnas really is done for the Summer, he probably should transfer 2 German Corps up there, and send the Finns back to Finland for the rest of the year. They probably need to recover morale, and stay out of attrition, and they can get some strength back for 43-44, when they will really need it.

Leader Loss: My first significant Leader Loss: Vasilevsky is KIA.

I guess Boris will be on the job at STAVKA for the rest of the war.

_____________________________

(in reply to Lieste)

Post #: 407

RE: Pre-Kursk - 7/15/2011 6:16:23 PM

Klydon

Posts: 2251
Joined: 11/28/2010
Status: offline

I started yet another fort thread in general to sort of try to move the conversation there.

Interesting move Q-Ball as far as against the Finns. I would also think beating the crap out of the other Axis allies would be helpful as well in accomplishing the same thing.

(in reply to Q-Ball)

Post #: 408

RE: Pre-Kursk - 7/15/2011 6:21:31 PM

Q-Ball

Posts: 7336
Joined: 6/25/2002
From: Chicago, Illinois
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Klydon

I started yet another fort thread in general to sort of try to move the conversation there.

Interesting move Q-Ball as far as against the Finns. I would also think beating the crap out of the other Axis allies would be helpful as well in accomplishing the same thing.

Maybe, not sure about the other Allies though.

In some ways, trading blows with Hungarians or Romanians might be doing the Germans a favor, since it saves "Germans" from getting killed. Probably OKH saw it that way! The Italians in particular will withdraw anyway before they run out of Manpower, so they are particularly expendible for the Axis. Plus, depleted R/H/I formations can be used as garrisons and diggers.

The Finns, however, get about 1/4 the replacements either the Romanians or Hungarians get, and are much more important to the German defenses; they are self-sufficient at full strength, unlike the other armies

Plus, R/H/I have some buttons they can push to put rifles back in the line; they seem to have more AIRBASES than they really need, and the Romanians have a couple excess HQs IMO.

The Finns, on the other hand, really have no excess units like that, unless you want to shrink the size of the Finnish Air Force; not a great idea.

< Message edited by Q-Ball -- 7/15/2011 6:23:34 PM >

_____________________________

(in reply to Klydon)

Post #: 409

RE: Pre-Kursk - 7/15/2011 7:12:33 PM

TulliusDetritus

Posts: 5521
Joined: 4/1/2004
From: The Zone�
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Q-Ball

Leader Loss: My first significant Leader Loss: Vasilevsky is KIA. I guess Boris will be on the job at STAVKA for the rest of the war.

Oh well... at least the enemy killed him. And he lasted almost one year. I managed to assassinate him on the very FIRST turn on my other first PBEM game (with the bloody "Relocate HQ" thing from hell)

_____________________________

a nu cheeki breeki iv damke

(in reply to Q-Ball)

Post #: 410

RE: Pre-Kursk - 7/16/2011 3:01:03 AM

wpurdom

Posts: 476
Joined: 10/27/2000
From: Decatur, GA, USA
Status: offline

You know, it seems to me that there are some limits to the amount of concrete that can be transported to off-the-beaten path locations on the Eastern front, particularly for the germans and the soviets before 1943. At what level of entrenchments are you building concrete pill boxes and the like? There should be a numeric limit for the Germans and the early soviets IMHO. After Kursk, Glantz seems to be saying that the Soviets used fortified zones to limit the manpower requirements of the parts of the front they weren't attcking.

(in reply to TulliusDetritus)

Post #: 411

RE: Pre-Kursk - 7/16/2011 5:01:01 AM

Klydon

Posts: 2251
Joined: 11/28/2010
Status: offline

I don't know it for fact, but I don't think the Germans used much concrete on the eastern front simply because they didn't have it to spare and concrete is not exactly something common in European Russia. Germans were to make defensive fortifications out of local materials, so I assume a lot of their stuff was made from earth and wood. I know they also liked to bury captured Russian tanks up to the turret as well for strong points. Even something like rock/gravel is not readily available either, which is one of the reasons the Russian roads were so bad.

(in reply to wpurdom)

Post #: 412

RE: Pre-Kursk - 7/16/2011 5:05:46 AM

Q-Ball

Posts: 7336
Joined: 6/25/2002
From: Chicago, Illinois
Status: offline

7/16/42: Northern Offensive

The Finnish offensive continues; with a few more units available now, we are actually making some headway. Several units were pushed back, and we even routed an infantry division (by defeating units behind it first).

Finnish CVs are very low, so I think Tarhunnas will have to bring some reinforcements. In fact, I see at least 1 German unit behind the front with my recon. Not sure what it is, though.

I am certain that this little offensive will be over as soon as some Panzers show up, but that alone will be a good thing.

Attachment (1)

_____________________________

(in reply to Flaviusx)

Post #: 413

RE: Pre-Kursk - 7/16/2011 11:21:34 AM

Peltonx

Posts: 7250
Joined: 4/9/2006
Status: offline

Once you get to 7 million men simply attack all along the lines and drive him from forts, because of the 1v1 2v1 rule. Right after the 42 fall mud season start attacking he should be close to under 16k rifle squads by turn 90. Once the 43 summer starts finish him off, because he be an amry of ants by September 43.

No hexe with 50 cv defending or less is safe from a retreat, which means he lose allot of guns. He can't replase them. You only need to inflict about 50k a turn on the german army for 30 turns and its broken(less then 16 rifle squads). You will easly get 1 to 2 as a death ratio, because of the 1v1 = 2v1 rule.

Crank up art production, slow down tanks. You need about 100k in guns and 7 mill in men.

The key to the game land wise is the land bridge and rivers. If you can break them before the spring mud season of 43 he will not be able to stop you during the summer of 43.

So try to get his loses per turn over 30k asap.

Pelton

< Message edited by Pelton -- 7/16/2011 11:22:47 AM >

(in reply to Q-Ball)

Post #: 414

RE: Pre-Kursk - 7/16/2011 3:13:27 PM

Q-Ball

Posts: 7336
Joined: 6/25/2002
From: Chicago, Illinois
Status: offline

7/18/42: Clear

PLANS: I do plan to push it. I have my doubts on the long-term viability of the Germans, so if I crush Tarhunnas in 1943, it's not because he sucks (he doesn't, he is a very good player), but because play balance needs tweaking. Part of the reason we are documenting both sides is to provide data for testing.

I was/am a WITP-AE player, and that game took 3-4 years to balance (granted, it is more complex than this one). And there is STILL tweaking on that engine; it's not perfect. I think WITE shouldn't take that long because it's simpler than WITP-AE, but it will take some games to get it right.

So, I'm firing up the Red Army and seeing how close I can get to Berlin.

Kliment's Revenge:

A good turn up north, as we were successful in 6 combats vs. the Finns, for one loss. A Panzer Corps has appeared; one division was committed as a reserve, but we overwhelmed it anyway.

Tarhunnas is probably going to shift even more up there I think, as I have a Shock Army on the scene, plus several Tank Corps and Cav Corps. As soon as he does we should be stopped, but in the meantime the Finns are taking it on the chin. Not sure what the benchmark should be in mid-42, but Finnish OOB is at 225K at this point.

_____________________________

(in reply to Peltonx)

Post #: 415

RE: Pre-Kursk - 7/18/2011 3:58:34 AM

Q-Ball

Posts: 7336
Joined: 6/25/2002
From: Chicago, Illinois
Status: offline

7/25/42:

The Northern Offensive continues. German forces are slowing us down, and we may be close to calling a halt; my forces are getting spent, and the last couple attacks were heavily in the Germans favor in terms of losses (about 3-1). We have advanced about 3-4 hexes, and lengthened the German front a bit.

Otherwise, not alot to report.

Attachment (1)

_____________________________

(in reply to Q-Ball)

Post #: 416

RE: Pre-Kursk - 7/18/2011 4:43:52 AM

Baelfiin

Posts: 2978
Joined: 6/7/2006
Status: offline

Luftwaffe looks like it played a big part in the losses... 140 stukas ouch

(in reply to Q-Ball)

Post #: 417

RE: Pre-Kursk - 7/18/2011 4:49:20 AM

randallw

Posts: 2057
Joined: 9/2/2010
Status: offline

Over 117k men in that attack on the German division; there was more to the attack than the 3 big pieces of the 13th Army, right?

(in reply to Baelfiin)

Post #: 418

RE: Pre-Kursk - 7/18/2011 1:50:24 PM

Klydon

Posts: 2251
Joined: 11/28/2010
Status: offline

Has to be. Looks like a 3 hex attack with the rest being infantry.

(in reply to randallw)

Post #: 419

RE: Pre-Kursk - 7/18/2011 2:52:47 PM

Peltonx

Posts: 7250
Joined: 4/9/2006
Status: offline

Q-ball.

Save your forses until after the mud season. You have close to 8 million with allot more in the bank so to speak. Start attacking all along the line, you be easly able to replase 2 million men in less then 20 turns. Attrition will weaken the fins over the summer and fall season. Your industiral base was hardly touched during the 41 summer so you be able to pump out more then your losing during the winter O. Your best area of attack will be south of Keiv.

Pelton

(in reply to Klydon)

Post #: 420