RE: Disposition2

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: Disposition2

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: Disposition2

Page: << < prev 13 14 15 [16] 17 next > >>

Message

<< Older Topic Newer Topic >>

RE: Disposition2 - 12/2/2011 6:09:17 PM

Baelfiin

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

Sillyflower asked me to comment on airbase strikes

I limit myself to 3 attacks per hex but I am mainly trying to generate attrition on the luftwaffe wherever I can. My losses as russian are higher now (post patch) but I have lots of planes. Overall I am not able to make as many attacks as before.
I still think there is a problem with the way the luftwaffe is transitioning fighters from F's to G's. It just seems kind of suspect to have a fighter shortage in '42.

@helio hang in there man, dont worry about holding any ground, just keep your army as intact as possible.

_____________________________

"We are going to attack all night, and attack tomorrow morning..... If we are not victorious, let no one come back alive!" -- Patton
WITE-Beta
WITW-Alpha
The Logistics Phase is like Black Magic and Voodoo all rolled into one.

(in reply to Q-Ball)

Post #: 451

RE: Disposition2 - 12/2/2011 6:28:58 PM

gingerbread

Posts: 2994
Joined: 1/4/2007
From: Sweden
Status: offline

"I'm just sending all tactical air to the national reserve until 1942 when it actually can fly missions effectively."

Are there hidden nerfs applied to the Soviet Airforce during '41? How come these are not documented??

(in reply to Q-Ball)

Post #: 452

RE: Disposition2 - 12/2/2011 6:37:28 PM

Flaviusx

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

Gingerbread, I myself am not sure what the deal is here. All I know from trial and error is that ground support missions in 1941 do not show up in numbers regardless of leadership ratings or aircraft availability or settings. You will at most get a dozen or so planes showing up -- not enough to make a lick of difference in the ground combat, and enough to get shot to pieces by the Luftwaffe. Fighters show up just fine if you crank up the settings, but gs planes proper, nope.

Then, sometime in 1942, the VVS wakes up and ground support missions will begin to fly in the numbers you'd expect. Mostly on the attack, though, defensive ground support seems sketchier.

I can only conclude that the code is suppressing their availability in 1941. That being the case, it makes no sense whatsoever to fly the mission. Tac bomber production in 1941 is rather limited and won't keep up with the losses incurred in these missions. Just rest and train the groups and let them reach a critical mass so they can show up and make a difference in the following year.

_____________________________

WitE Alpha Tester

(in reply to gingerbread)

Post #: 453

RE: Disposition2 - 12/2/2011 7:18:13 PM

gingerbread

Posts: 2994
Joined: 1/4/2007
From: Sweden
Status: offline

OK, thanks for the heads up. It's usually only the bonuses that gets documented, like the Zero's initial advantage in WitP. Maluses are left for the players to discover.

(in reply to Flaviusx)

Post #: 454

RE: Disposition2 - 12/2/2011 8:35:15 PM

ComradeP

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

We're not sure either gingerbread, as although we have mentioned it on the tester forum (that there is a hardcoded penalty for the VVS in 1941), there has been no confirmation or denial. Still, the VVS is probably still too good at coordinating strikes in 1942 as it stands.

_____________________________

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

(in reply to gingerbread)

Post #: 455

Turn 22 Stats - 12/3/2011 12:44:15 AM

heliodorus04

Posts: 1647
Joined: 11/1/2008
From: Nashville TN
Status: offline

Turn 22 is here, and none of you really needed to worry about a German winter offensive getting bogged down trying to encircle everything: who could forget that the Red Army can transform into a NATO defense�
We will see that CF withdrew as necessary to shorten HIS line, and ensure a minimum of units could be isolated. I haven�t done full recon yet, and this turn, my plan is to post more, because I need to talk about defense, and my last 3 turns to prepare for it.

First, statistics. I forgot to record end-of-turn data last turn. Oh well. Twice I�ve forgotten end-of-turn data. That�s the data right now I�m more interested in, but given it was mud last turn, it�s no big deal. I enjoyed my stats classes in grad school. I�m trying to see what I can teach myself (more about stats than the game).

_____________________________

Fall 2021-Playing: Stalingrad'42 (GMT); Advanced Squad Leader,
Reading: Masters of the Air (GREAT BOOK!)
Rulebooks: ASL (always ASL), Middle-Earth Strategy Battle Game
Painting: WHFB Lizardmen leaders

(in reply to ComradeP)

Post #: 456

RE: Turn 22 Stats - 12/3/2011 12:44:53 AM

heliodorus04

Posts: 1647
Joined: 11/1/2008
From: Nashville TN
Status: offline

Stats

Attachment (1)

_____________________________

(in reply to heliodorus04)

Post #: 457

Stats Analysis - 12/3/2011 12:45:29 AM

heliodorus04

Posts: 1647
Joined: 11/1/2008
From: Nashville TN
Status: offline

FYI, the airfield attacks stopped this turn, and CF appears to have some solid agreement with the notion that the Soviet air force is capable of too much. On the downside, he�s now bombing units instead of airbases�
I�m not sure what macro-trends look like here. Let�s talk about Germany. Where did 170K manpower go on turns where I�m more or less relaxing? Okay, well, my ready manpower in the field went up only about 60K, and I have a new division this turn. I don�t pay a lot of mind to these data because I don�t know what anything means. So what dat mean?
The tank number is surprisingly hardy.

On the Soviet side, based on trend in the AFV delta, he got a good new tank division last turn. Or a bunch of brigades. Those guys will hit the front right in time for blizzard won�t they. He�ll be just under 5 million at blizzard start, I guess. I can accept, to a point, that my achievements in the summer campaign look to be a more proficient, less reckless drive across the steppe, and that I�m in line to suffer the same fate. What bothers me still is the handicap of Admin. Now, each game I get better on admin efficiency, but that�s not my point. The Germans have to pay far too much in AP for binary army to swap from front to rear, from active to support roles, and to adapt to changing circumstance in terms of Command and Control. The Soviet side gets it for free to build his army the way he likes, and then it is cheaper to keep efficient both by virtue of not having corps to spend AP on, and having divisions that are cheaper to move between armies. Rant ended. Fix it.

The plan now is to break my front down into a series of small pictures that show local forts. Whatever stuff I decide to try with a snow offensive will more or less be secondary to how I arrange my forts. As I understand it, I place a FZ in order to do two things. 1) Hold an existing fort (prevent decay) 2) enable digging past level 2, where possible. I don�t gather they bring much construction value (cv). They need to be taken off refit and set to 50 TOE (I was doing the refit, but they all jump to 87 or so TOE after the 1 turn, so I left them there till this turn, where I�ve turned it down to 50).

_____________________________

(in reply to heliodorus04)

Post #: 458

Finland 1 - 12/3/2011 12:45:50 AM

heliodorus04

Posts: 1647
Joined: 11/1/2008
From: Nashville TN
Status: offline

Starting in the left limit of the Axis line, northeast of Leningrad:

Attachment (1)

_____________________________

(in reply to heliodorus04)

Post #: 459

RE: Finland 1 - 12/3/2011 12:46:23 AM

heliodorus04

Posts: 1647
Joined: 11/1/2008
From: Nashville TN
Status: offline

The three lines go along with this question: How far northwest should Finland withdraw, and when? You�ll note that I have the basic data for Finland in terms of manpower and armaments, plus it�s OOB. If you forget to look at how many bodies the Finns have behind their divisions, you use them too much. One option is to hold a staggered forward line through as much of 1942 as CF will allow me. With preparation beginning on forts whenever AP allow (and that could nigh be never, so hold me to that). But maybe I just go to line 2, or line 3 (yellow) and have as short a line as possible, dig to level 2 and when he comes adjacent, dig to 3 over time. The only reason to hold land is to deny him that rail line. Is that strategically important in 1942? Does it hurt Finland more to hold forward, or the Soviet Union to have to garrison forward? I know Finns can�t go static, so that probably means to back up and fort up over a short front� This is how I think out loud, by the way.

_____________________________

(in reply to heliodorus04)

Post #: 460

RE: Finland 2 - 12/3/2011 12:46:48 AM

heliodorus04

Posts: 1647
Joined: 11/1/2008
From: Nashville TN
Status: offline

On the other side of Ladoga:

Attachment (1)

_____________________________

(in reply to heliodorus04)

Post #: 461

RE: Finland 2 - 12/3/2011 12:47:06 AM

heliodorus04

Posts: 1647
Joined: 11/1/2008
From: Nashville TN
Status: offline

Germans are preparing Finland�s winter line along the Volkhov, and a little bit west, well, because Finland can. This turn, my Finnish Leningrad Garrison will move back to friendly territory to be replaced by the units currently on the demarcation line.

Side note (Rant): Here again, an arbitrary line is drawn such that Axis success is punished. Finland wouldn�t have been willing to occupy Leningrad after it fell? Even if you insisted that the morale-suck-line were at the Neva, you at least obviate some garrison need. ARGH, man� These things individually aren�t always big, but combined, they represent serious handcuffs on what is possible for German play. (Rant over).
For the blizzard, we�ll just take the morale hit. Next picture will hopefully show clearly how I intend to link the Fins with 18.Army, and hopefully 16.Army to 18.Army to 2.Army�

_____________________________

(in reply to heliodorus04)

Post #: 462

AGN - 12/3/2011 12:47:36 AM

heliodorus04

Posts: 1647
Joined: 11/1/2008
From: Nashville TN
Status: offline

A big gap...

Attachment (1)

_____________________________

(in reply to heliodorus04)

Post #: 463

RE: AGN - 12/3/2011 12:48:14 AM

heliodorus04

Posts: 1647
Joined: 11/1/2008
From: Nashville TN
Status: offline

There�s not as much good news as it might look like. Scary, right. See the teeny white line sticking up out of Torzhok? That�s my southern supply line. And if you look a few hexes NE of Novgorod you can see how my supply line goes from the Leningrad area SE to that point. Between there and Vyshyn Volichek is a supply crunch area for the blizzard that leaves Vyshny a relatively easily bypassed �strongpoint.�

I also draw your attention to the Soviet Rail Line (also in white on their side): I don�t know how far the Soviet army can reliably push on offense in blizzard in this terrain (20 MPs? 30? 50?). But this is a post-recon shot, and I think I may try with 16.Army to drive that crossroad north of Vyshny, because it would be a big payoff.

The defense isn�t well connected between Vyshny and Torzhok, nor Vyshny and Lake Ilmen. And my rail situation is not going to get much better over the next three turns. I can see the likelihood of having to evacuate all the way to the Valdai when I have some decent forts forming right now (at least this is where I started them). Will a fort or two (near where those airbases are NE of Ilmen) provide adequate protection?
Oh, and before we continue, am I a fool for thinking I can allow gaps in my line? Maybe I don�t even want to know the answer to that question� I never hear any good news about my prospects.

_____________________________

(in reply to heliodorus04)

Post #: 464

NW Moscow AO - 12/3/2011 12:48:49 AM

heliodorus04

Posts: 1647
Joined: 11/1/2008
From: Nashville TN
Status: offline

The NW Moscow Area

Attachment (1)

_____________________________

(in reply to heliodorus04)

Post #: 465

RE: NW Moscow AO - 12/3/2011 12:49:10 AM

heliodorus04

Posts: 1647
Joined: 11/1/2008
From: Nashville TN
Status: offline

If he were pushing east to west, I�m not in awful shape north of Moscow. My concern is the gap between Torzhok and Vyshny. How many forts are essential in that gap? How many are needed southwest of Kalinin as a secondary line protecting from the NE. At least supply between here and Kaluga is very good, as is the retreat supply path. One of the few places on my line.

I frankly need advice on preparing forts to support Torzhok and Kalinin.

It need not be said that I�m disappointed not to have had any meaningful reason to even push at Moscow. And now I will turn my own defense into a 1986 Nato one. Maybe I�m a romantic, but this anti-climax says a lot to me about the overall design parameters of possible strategies� (Rant over)

_____________________________

(in reply to heliodorus04)

Post #: 466

RE: NW Moscow AO - 12/3/2011 12:50:12 AM

heliodorus04

Posts: 1647
Joined: 11/1/2008
From: Nashville TN
Status: offline

Central Moscow

Attachment (1)

_____________________________

(in reply to heliodorus04)

Post #: 467

RE: NW Moscow AO - 12/3/2011 12:50:33 AM

heliodorus04

Posts: 1647
Joined: 11/1/2008
From: Nashville TN
Status: offline

How many layers of fort do I need? I realize these are too close right now. But I�m also occupying and fortifying the level 3 and 4 towns here, as that makes sense to hold. I don�t think I should give up ground until the last turn of snow.

Looking only at the first two turns of blizzard, my thought is whether to leave the forward forts to a screen, something strong enough to require a deliberate attack. And to start moving further west and digging new forts that are intended more for January. If so, where? And if that�s the case (need more forts further west for fallback in January) that applies all over the line.

_____________________________

(in reply to heliodorus04)

Post #: 468

RE: NW Moscow AO - 12/3/2011 12:51:28 AM

heliodorus04

Posts: 1647
Joined: 11/1/2008
From: Nashville TN
Status: offline

Here is the time-traveling NATO defense west of Voronezh:

Attachment (1)

_____________________________

(in reply to heliodorus04)

Post #: 469

RE: NW Moscow AO - 12/3/2011 12:53:25 AM

heliodorus04

Posts: 1647
Joined: 11/1/2008
From: Nashville TN
Status: offline

To me, I see no reason to do anything other than raid some railroad points, as mentioned last turn. Otherwise, I see a giant opportunity to thicken my defense between Kalinin and Orel.

If anyone thinks I should do something other than that, let me know. I will occupy the terrain in front of me, maybe take some railroad hexes, and otherwise send forces to locations where they will dig.

_____________________________

(in reply to heliodorus04)

Post #: 470

RE: NW Moscow AO - 12/3/2011 12:53:46 AM

heliodorus04

Posts: 1647
Joined: 11/1/2008
From: Nashville TN
Status: offline

East of Kharkov

Attachment (1)

_____________________________

(in reply to heliodorus04)

Post #: 471

Kharkov AO - 12/3/2011 12:54:11 AM

heliodorus04

Posts: 1647
Joined: 11/1/2008
From: Nashville TN
Status: offline

Some of 6.Army will sever the north and south hex along that rail line, maybe more, and call it a year. I will spread forts around. Any advice?

_____________________________

(in reply to heliodorus04)

Post #: 472

RE: Kharkov AO - 12/3/2011 12:54:35 AM

heliodorus04

Posts: 1647
Joined: 11/1/2008
From: Nashville TN
Status: offline

Along the Donbas

Attachment (1)

_____________________________

(in reply to heliodorus04)

Post #: 473

Donbas AO - 12/3/2011 12:55:12 AM

heliodorus04

Posts: 1647
Joined: 11/1/2008
From: Nashville TN
Status: offline

Just as the planned Orel offensive, this enjoyment stealing NATO defense has arisen, and I can skulk back to the places where I plan to build forts. How many layers can I squeeze forward of my current line, or do I plan on giving up D-town and Z-town this winter?

_____________________________

(in reply to heliodorus04)

Post #: 474

Soviet Reserves - 12/3/2011 12:55:41 AM

heliodorus04

Posts: 1647
Joined: 11/1/2008
From: Nashville TN
Status: offline

I did a lot of deep recon this turn, and uncovered only 1 real obvious strategic reserve.

Attachment (1)

_____________________________

(in reply to heliodorus04)

Post #: 475

RE: Soviet Reserves - 12/3/2011 12:56:07 AM

heliodorus04

Posts: 1647
Joined: 11/1/2008
From: Nashville TN
Status: offline

The tanks near Saratov appear to be a group rolling in on rail recently, but you guys tend to know the reinforcement schedule better than I (I occasionally open an old save and look). Also because of the deep recon, I did not get good recon in the Crimea (as in: none); I�ll reassign some recon from reserve down there, and that�ll be fine for this turn. Local Romanian divisions are arriving in force to dig.

Anything else you want on this turn before I start pushing around counters, let me know. I�ve got some plans that will keep me from the game for a while.

_____________________________

(in reply to heliodorus04)

Post #: 476

RE: Soviet Reserves - 12/3/2011 10:16:05 AM

ComradeP

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

That concentration of units could also be his Rifle brigade R&R area until 1942.

The Finns have some units that withdraw, you could use them to hold the frontline at the Svir. You don't really need to hold anything east of Janisjarvi if you want to, but it's a good idea to do so for now because it will give you some room to retreat.

quote:

It need not be said that I�m disappointed not to have had any meaningful reason to even push at Moscow.

That was because it would've been too little, too late, and your dispositions but particularly your supply state were not good enough to warrant the risk of the operation failing.

He's giving you free territory at the moment, so I wouldn't complain if I were you. You get some room between the Soviets and their first likely objectives in the center and south for free.

_____________________________

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

(in reply to heliodorus04)

Post #: 477

RE: Soviet Reserves - 12/3/2011 10:28:20 AM

Encircled

Posts: 2024
Joined: 12/30/2010
From: Northern England
Status: offline

I'm actually salivating as a Russian player at the prospect of the salients Nth and Sth of Moscow not being abandoned by blizzard.

_____________________________

(in reply to ComradeP)

Post #: 478

RE: Soviet Reserves - 12/3/2011 10:33:24 AM

heliodorus04

Posts: 1647
Joined: 11/1/2008
From: Nashville TN
Status: offline

Not complaining, sir!

That free land is what I needed.
I am concerned, particularly west of Moscow where I've already built forts, whether I should plan on those being a first line of defense, or whether on the first turn of Blizzard if I should be further west.

I'm expecting to have to withdraw 1 to 2 hexes per turn, but what about that first turn? should I have more space, since he's going to have a snow turn move before I endure the first blizzard logistics phase?

I started a game as Soviet vs. Sveint, by the way. Offered him 110 admin setting, but he declined. I'll have an AAR up on that as we get settled into a few turns. Already feeling more relaxed... Not sure why.

_____________________________

(in reply to ComradeP)

Post #: 479

RE: Soviet Reserves - 12/3/2011 12:32:34 PM

Encircled

Posts: 2024
Joined: 12/30/2010
From: Northern England
Status: offline

Thats because you are doing well!

Any territory you lose, you can get back from March onwards, so you have lots of territory you can afford to lose.

The south is far from great mind, but if he pushes forward down there, his northern flank is going to be prime counter attack territory

_____________________________

(in reply to heliodorus04)

Post #: 480