RE: 1.04.39 KLilly vs Fulkerson T38

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: 1.04.39 KLilly vs Fulkerson T38

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: 1.04.39 KLilly vs Fulkerson T38

Page: << < prev 10 11 [12] 13 14 next > >>

Message

<< Older Topic Newer Topic >>

RE: 1.04.39 KLilly vs Fulkerson T38 - 8/31/2011 4:38:13 PM

larryfulkerson

Posts: 39932
Joined: 4/17/2005
From: Tucson, AZ
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: bigbaba
i realy doubt that you need to build any forts larry. in his state the german can not even start a local attack.you have him on the run so continue attacking! because we want a realistic game act like stalin and order them to attack attack attack.:)

I hope so. I don't want to spend any more AP's on forts than I have to. I'm relying on the RR Construction brigades to help my dudes dig their fortifications and I agree that I shouldn't need any forts, except maybe in those areas where he's parked his tanks or something.

quote:

ORIGINAL: bigbaba
you are doing totaly different then in your first game larry. congratulation on that.

I've been reading AAR's and practicing against the AI, and I think maybe it's helping. But thanks for noticing.

(in reply to bigbaba)

Post #: 331

RE: 1.04.39 KLilly vs Fulkerson T38 - 8/31/2011 7:38:58 PM

wpurdom

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

If memory serves, you're getting close to when you can combine infantry brigades into divisions. Isn't it cheaper to buy brigades and then make divisions in May or whenever?

It's hard for me to judge how much the German army is going to come back during the mud. If you feel an urge to buy forts, you could think about withdrawing brigades from the front and putting them to digging entrenchments, instead. And brigades are cheaper to buy than forts if memory serves, but more versatile after May.

(in reply to larryfulkerson)

Post #: 332

RE: 1.04.39 KLilly vs Fulkerson T38 - 8/31/2011 8:25:28 PM

larryfulkerson

Posts: 39932
Joined: 4/17/2005
From: Tucson, AZ
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: wpurdom
If memory serves, you're getting close to when you can combine infantry brigades into divisions. Isn't it cheaper to buy brigades and then make divisions in May or whenever?

Yeah, the brigades are 5 AP's apiece and the Rifle Division is 20 AP's and three brigades makes a division.......when I'm able to do that......which will be soon now. Good idea. Thanks.

quote:

ORIGINAL: wpurdom
It's hard for me to judge how much the German army is going to come back during the mud. If you feel an urge to buy forts, you could think about withdrawing brigades from the front and putting them to digging entrenchments, instead. And brigades are cheaper to buy than forts if memory serves, but more versatile after May.

Yeah, having brigades digging forts is a good idea. I've got them either in the front lines or building fall-back lines. I am going to start building Rifle Divisions with them sometime in April I think it is. And soon after that I'm gonna build Rifle Corps for selected places in the front line. There's plenty of spots where the Axis is still a viable threat and those spots need buffing up.

(in reply to wpurdom)

Post #: 333

RE: 1.04.39 KLilly vs Fulkerson T38 - 8/31/2011 9:06:15 PM

wpurdom

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

Unless it has been changed in a recent revision, you can make a division out of 2 brigades as well as 3.

Flaviusx recently implied that if you build a corps from 2 divisions and a brigade, the establishment of the corps is permanently less. I've been assuming there's no drawback to 2 brigade divisions, but I could be wrong.

Calling Flaviusx or other playtesters - is there any drawback to using 2 brigades to make a division instead of three?

(in reply to larryfulkerson)

Post #: 334

RE: 1.04.39 KLilly vs Fulkerson T38 - 8/31/2011 9:46:59 PM

larryfulkerson

Posts: 39932
Joined: 4/17/2005
From: Tucson, AZ
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: wpurdom
Unless it has been changed in a recent revision, you can make a division out of 2 brigades as well as 3.

I did not know that. Thanks. But I'm wondering about the "establishment of the Corps" below.

quote:

ORIGINAL: wpurdom
Flaviusx recently implied that if you build a corps from 2 divisions and a brigade, the establishment of the corps is permanently less. I've been assuming there's no drawback to 2 brigade divisions, but I could be wrong.

Just to be clear.....I'm reading your sentence as saying "the max CV of the full-grown Corps is permanently less than it would have been if the Corps were produced in any other way than from 2 divisions and a brigade".

quote:

ORIGINAL: wpurdom
Calling Flaviusx or other playtesters - is there any drawback to using 2 brigades to make a division instead of three?

Note to Developers : I'd like to know the answer to what kinds of drawbacks exist in building Corps in the various ways. Please.

(in reply to wpurdom)

Post #: 335

RE: 1.04.39 KLilly vs Fulkerson T38 - 8/31/2011 10:11:55 PM

wpurdom

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

If you are a good searcher, Flavius did a post where he advised against building a corps out of two divisions and a brigade. I wouldn't know where to find it now. I can't recall anything close to the words he used, but I understood his remark as meaning that a corps created in that manner had a permanently lower establishment than one built with three divisions. I assumed that he had picked up this morsel from the playtester experience and was accurate.

< Message edited by wpurdom -- 8/31/2011 10:12:35 PM >

(in reply to larryfulkerson)

Post #: 336

RE: 1.04.39 KLilly vs Fulkerson T38 - 8/31/2011 11:08:05 PM

Flaviusx

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

No, it is not a permanently lower establishment. But it will take a while for the TOE to adjust.

If you're going to build a corps, use 3 good rifle divisions every time: that way you are guaranteed a strong corps, possibly over TOE. Building weak corps is a false economy. They are supposed to be monsters and there's no point in skimping on them. And pack them with 3 attachments for good measure. The resulting corps will be ready to make an impression in battle immediately. A wimpy rifle corps formed with a brigade will have to take in replacements before it tops off.

And build the guards corps first, all other things being equal.

As for brigades, my philosophy has always been to get rid of them ASAP and replace them with divisions, 2 per. They all go away for me on May of 1942. They are the spawn of the devil.

_____________________________

WitE Alpha Tester

(in reply to wpurdom)

Post #: 337

RE: 1.04.39 KLilly vs Fulkerson T38 - 9/1/2011 12:34:40 AM

larryfulkerson

Posts: 39932
Joined: 4/17/2005
From: Tucson, AZ
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Flaviusx
No, it is not a permanently lower establishment. But it will take a while for the TOE to adjust.

Thank you very much. I'll heed your advice about building Corps too. Game tested advice at last.

EDIT: Here's the T39 ( 12Mar1942 ) front lines with an overlay showing my recon flights

Attachment (1)

< Message edited by larryfulkerson -- 9/1/2011 6:35:19 AM >

(in reply to Flaviusx)

Post #: 338

RE: 1.04.39 KLilly vs Fulkerson T39 - 9/1/2011 6:59:28 AM

larryfulkerson

Posts: 39932
Joined: 4/17/2005
From: Tucson, AZ
Status: offline

Here's the situation NE of Riga. It's like KLilly is daring me to overrun his troops. I've reconed the area and I'm thinking that if he leaves
the area denuded of troops like that I may be able to gain a lot of territory, probably after the mud season. This is the wrong time for this
to happen because he's due to gain back his CV strength really really soon now. I'll be in unfortified terrain for the spring '42 Axis
offensive. Poor timing. If only I could start buildiing Rifle Corps already. But alas, no. The prudent thing to do might be just to be happy
with the status quo and let sleeping dogs lay.

Attachment (1)

(in reply to larryfulkerson)

Post #: 339

RE: 1.04.39 KLilly vs Fulkerson T39 - 9/1/2011 7:49:27 AM

larryfulkerson

Posts: 39932
Joined: 4/17/2005
From: Tucson, AZ
Status: offline

This is a picture of the Gomel area and I'm showing it because it's typical of the situation along a lot of the front lines in that my CV's are too low to make an impact and his CV's haven't re-grown high enough yet to make an impact so we're just staring at each other through the binoculars gathering strength and digging fortifications.

Attachment (1)

(in reply to larryfulkerson)

Post #: 340

RE: 1.04.39 KLilly vs Fulkerson T39 - 9/1/2011 8:13:29 AM

larryfulkerson

Posts: 39932
Joined: 4/17/2005
From: Tucson, AZ
Status: offline

Here's my T39 moves with an overlay showing my selected attacks. I didn't attack all up and down the line this time so as not to abort
any almost-Guards units with a "loss". I've got a lot of pending Guards units still.

Attachment (1)

(in reply to larryfulkerson)

Post #: 341

RE: 1.04.39 KLilly vs Fulkerson T39 - 9/1/2011 8:20:26 AM

larryfulkerson

Posts: 39932
Joined: 4/17/2005
From: Tucson, AZ
Status: offline

Here's the OOB, losses, destroyed units, and production for T39:

Attachment (1)

(in reply to larryfulkerson)

Post #: 342

RE: 1.04.39 KLilly vs Fulkerson T40 - 9/3/2011 4:07:21 AM

larryfulkerson

Posts: 39932
Joined: 4/17/2005
From: Tucson, AZ
Status: offline

Here's the T40 front lines before I've moved anything besides the two Armies in northern lapland battling the Finns. Those guys I've
already moved and attacked that Finn division I had isolated from last turn and it surrendered.

Attachment (1)

(in reply to larryfulkerson)

Post #: 343

RE: 1.04.39 KLilly vs Fulkerson T40 - 9/3/2011 4:25:18 AM

larryfulkerson

Posts: 39932
Joined: 4/17/2005
From: Tucson, AZ
Status: offline

Here's a close-up of the battle against that Finn division I isolated last turn. I have no idea why KLilly didn't counterattack to try to free the isolated division. Is it that the Finns CAN'T attack? Surely not. One of life's little mysteries.

Attachment (1)

(in reply to larryfulkerson)

Post #: 344

RE: 1.04.39 KLilly vs Fulkerson T40 - 9/3/2011 4:32:12 AM

larryfulkerson

Posts: 39932
Joined: 4/17/2005
From: Tucson, AZ
Status: offline

Here's what's happening NE of Riga. I'm breaking through because of the sparcity of Axis units and the relative ease with which I can push the Axis units around.

Attachment (1)

(in reply to larryfulkerson)

Post #: 345

RE: 1.04.39 KLilly vs Fulkerson T40 - 9/3/2011 4:56:21 AM

larryfulkerson

Posts: 39932
Joined: 4/17/2005
From: Tucson, AZ
Status: offline

Here's all my moves with an overlay showing my attacks: I expect KLilly to start his spring push any turn now.

Attachment (1)

(in reply to larryfulkerson)

Post #: 346

RE: 1.04.39 KLilly vs Fulkerson T40 - 9/3/2011 5:09:29 AM

larryfulkerson

Posts: 39932
Joined: 4/17/2005
From: Tucson, AZ
Status: offline

Here's the OOB, losses, destroyed units, and production for T40

Attachment (1)

(in reply to larryfulkerson)

Post #: 347

RE: 1.04.39 KLilly vs Fulkerson T40 - 9/3/2011 8:16:15 AM

Flapdrol

Posts: 14
Joined: 8/18/2011
Status: offline

> I expect KLilly to start his spring push any turn now.

To do what?
- All industry west of Vladivostok has been evacuated
- He'll find it hard to pocket many Russians since you can fall back 20 hexes without any problem

All you need to do is avoid a total disaster (like having three fronts pocketed) until the Rifle corps show up. In he meanwhile, amuse yourself by marching to Viborg and Helsinki since he doesn't seem to realize he has a Finnish front.

BTW: It is strange that Lend-Lease doesn't seem to be tied to how the Russian front is actually doing at the moment. At this moment in the war, the Western Allies didn't have a whole lot of tanks to spare. So why they have sent you 1000 tanks (albeit mostly crappy ones), while you have 1200 KV-1s and T34s in your pool, is a complete riddle to me. Surely these would have been put to better use in Egypt/Libya

< Message edited by Flapdrol -- 9/3/2011 8:20:15 AM >

(in reply to larryfulkerson)

Post #: 348

RE: 1.04.39 KLilly vs Fulkerson T40 - 9/3/2011 4:34:27 PM

larryfulkerson

Posts: 39932
Joined: 4/17/2005
From: Tucson, AZ
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Flapdrol
> I expect KLilly to start his spring push any turn now.

To do what?
- All industry west of Vladivostok has been evacuated
- He'll find it hard to pocket many Russians since you can fall back 20 hexes without any problem

I expect him to try to capture Stalino and or Stalingrad

quote:

ORIGINAL: Flapdrol
BTW: It is strange that Lend-Lease doesn't seem to be tied to how the Russian front is actually doing at the moment. At this moment in the war, the Western Allies didn't have a whole lot of tanks to spare. So why they have sent you 1000 tanks (albeit mostly crappy ones), while you have 1200 KV-1s and T34s in your pool, is a complete riddle to me. Surely these would have been put to better use in Egypt/Libya

I agree with you about the tanks. WTF?

(in reply to Flapdrol)

Post #: 349

RE: 1.04.39 KLilly vs Fulkerson T41 - 9/5/2011 4:36:27 PM

larryfulkerson

Posts: 39932
Joined: 4/17/2005
From: Tucson, AZ
Status: offline

Here's the T41 front lines before any Soviet movement:

Attachment (1)

(in reply to larryfulkerson)

Post #: 350

RE: 1.04.39 KLilly vs Fulkerson T41 - 9/5/2011 5:07:34 PM

larryfulkerson

Posts: 39932
Joined: 4/17/2005
From: Tucson, AZ
Status: offline

In the area SW of Leningrad KLilly has pulled back to the south and has left open the road to Tallinin and I'm not all that sure I want to
occupy all that stuff now. The troops on hand are limited...........I railed in the 4th Shock Army and it's going to help somewhat but it's not
nearly enough to form a east-west front line across the area south of Tallinin. I'm thinking maybe I should hold what I have now. I've
moved everybody as far as they would go for this turn but I'm not sure that anything more expansive is advisable. What do you guys
think?

Attachment (1)

< Message edited by larryfulkerson -- 9/5/2011 5:08:02 PM >

(in reply to larryfulkerson)

Post #: 351

RE: 1.04.39 KLilly vs Fulkerson T41 - 9/5/2011 5:17:44 PM

larryfulkerson

Posts: 39932
Joined: 4/17/2005
From: Tucson, AZ
Status: offline

I thought I'd better investigate the terrain and flew some recon out over the area SW of Leningrad and what'd'ya know I found some
Panzers lurking in the cities. Think I'll just hold what I got now.

Attachment (1)

< Message edited by larryfulkerson -- 9/5/2011 5:18:05 PM >

(in reply to larryfulkerson)

Post #: 352

RE: 1.04.39 KLilly vs Fulkerson T41 - 9/5/2011 5:59:26 PM

larryfulkerson

Posts: 39932
Joined: 4/17/2005
From: Tucson, AZ
Status: offline

I went to the Commanders Report and made sure that each Airbase had at least 7 air groups on it ( besides those airbases that are frozen in the mountains near Turkey ).

Attachment (1)

(in reply to larryfulkerson)

Post #: 353

RE: 1.04.39 KLilly vs Fulkerson T41 - 9/5/2011 6:12:30 PM

larryfulkerson

Posts: 39932
Joined: 4/17/2005
From: Tucson, AZ
Status: offline

I discovered that I could turn paratroopers into Guards Rifle Divisions and converted three stacks of three paratroopers and railed them to LapLand so as to help out in the fighting there.

Attachment (1)

(in reply to larryfulkerson)

Post #: 354

RE: 1.04.39 KLilly vs Fulkerson T41 - 9/5/2011 6:20:34 PM

larryfulkerson

Posts: 39932
Joined: 4/17/2005
From: Tucson, AZ
Status: offline

I found some more tanks and troops to rail in to the SW of Leningrad. Now maybe I have enough to stretch all the way over to Talinin.

Attachment (1)

(in reply to larryfulkerson)

Post #: 355

RE: 1.04.39 KLilly vs Fulkerson T41 - 9/5/2011 6:34:45 PM

larryfulkerson

Posts: 39932
Joined: 4/17/2005
From: Tucson, AZ
Status: offline

I built three more Rifle Divisions at Kharkov so as to start building a strategic reserve. I don't have one yet and there's going to be a need soon.

Also, I upgraded all the I-16's to Lagg-3's and Mig-3's and P-40E's.

Attachment (1)

(in reply to larryfulkerson)

Post #: 356

RE: 1.04.39 KLilly vs Fulkerson T41 - 9/5/2011 6:43:04 PM

larryfulkerson

Posts: 39932
Joined: 4/17/2005
From: Tucson, AZ
Status: offline

Here's my moves with an overlay to show my attacks:

Attachment (1)

(in reply to larryfulkerson)

Post #: 357

RE: 1.04.39 KLilly vs Fulkerson T41 - 9/5/2011 6:47:31 PM

larryfulkerson

Posts: 39932
Joined: 4/17/2005
From: Tucson, AZ
Status: offline

Here's the T41 oob, losses, destroyed units, and production:

Attachment (1)

(in reply to larryfulkerson)

Post #: 358

RE: 1.04.39 KLilly vs Fulkerson T41 - 9/5/2011 8:17:32 PM

Flapdrol

Posts: 14
Joined: 8/18/2011
Status: offline

Losses: 75K Soviet vs 7.5K Axis. Methinks the Winter offensive is largely over, though I'm curious as to what he will do around Tallinn.

BTW: Do you know if his Recon losses are hurting him? Have you any idea how much of his recon capacity has been destroyed?

(in reply to larryfulkerson)

Post #: 359

RE: 1.04.39 KLilly vs Fulkerson T41 - 9/5/2011 10:14:57 PM

larryfulkerson

Posts: 39932
Joined: 4/17/2005
From: Tucson, AZ
Status: offline

I just happened to have a game ongoing where I'm the Axis player against the Soviet AI and I've captured a screenshot of the production of recon types and it's not terribly high. Cross-referencing the production of recon planes with the figures of recon losses reveals that the number of recon planes deployed by the Axis now must be approaching non-existant. I'm thinking maybe in the low tens of planes left. Which is a good thing for me if I can move my reserves around without being observed doing so. Also, loss of recon by the Axis might just aid me in my offensive drives too. I for one am glad I still have some recon planes, even if I don't use them an awful lot.

Attachment (1)

(in reply to Flapdrol)

Post #: 360

Page: << < prev 10 11 [12] 13 14 next > >>

All Forums >> [New Releases from Matrix Games] >> Gary Grigsby's War in the East Series >> After Action Reports >> RE: 1.04.39 KLilly vs Fulkerson T38