RE: Turn 10 opportunity

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: Turn 10 opportunity

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: Turn 10 opportunity

Page: << < prev 4 5 [6] 7 8 next > >>

Message

<< Older Topic Newer Topic >>

RE: Turn 10 opportunity - 11/3/2011 8:04:14 PM

Balou

Posts: 841
Joined: 7/24/2009
Status: offline

heliodorus,

from your Preface..

quote:

...factory raiding is very bad for the flavor of the game, so let this be a test case of not worrying about it and seeing how my outcome differs from others�.

and recently...

quote:

Oh, and speaking of that, isn�t it odd how I�m actually doing interestingly well even though I�ve not captured a single armament point since T1?

Yes, sir. And since you probably won't get any arm points from now on, this could be the ultimate test for an "I totally ignored his armaments, so what" - AAR. It's quite something for a change.

(in reply to heliodorus04)

Post #: 151

RE: AGS T8 - 11/3/2011 8:47:34 PM

Mike13z50

Posts: 344
Joined: 1/29/2007
From: New Orleans
Status: offline

If you pull a dozen or more (as many as you can)construction engineers out of the Corps back to AG and especially OKH you will see a dramatic increase in your non trunk line repair. You won't need them for digging until winter and you can transfer them back in the mud.

quote:

ORIGINAL: heliodorus04

I have had the 11.Army FBD working in concert with the original AGS FBD since Turn 2 (now both at Cherkassy area)- that's why the supply network is so close to the bridgehead.� I'm convinced this is a great idea for AGS.� Now I'm going to try to repeat the advantage in the center.

(in reply to heliodorus04)

Post #: 152

Turn 11: Kursk, 1941 - 11/5/2011 6:14:37 PM

heliodorus04

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

Kursk, 1941�This is where the Iron Crosses grow�
The only thing I was sure about after last turn�s double-pincer move toward Kursk was that it was going to provoke a desperate response from CF. I couldn�t predict from where he would take reinforcements to plug the eastern side, and I had no idea how much supply would be kept within the Kiev pocket area, which would dictate how far the units on the west side of the pincer could move.

As it turns out, it�s a little worse than I thought for me, and CF is in a little bit better shape. Here is an overview map, it�s post-recon (but not all recon) and so I know already that Kursk is occupied.

_____________________________

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 Balou)

Post #: 153

RE: Turn 11: Kursk, 1941 - 11/5/2011 6:16:38 PM

heliodorus04

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

Here�s the start of turn sitrep with rail highlighted

Attachment (1)

_____________________________

(in reply to heliodorus04)

Post #: 154

RE: Turn 11: Kursk, 1941 - 11/5/2011 6:22:25 PM

heliodorus04

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

I�m planning the Kursk operation, and trying to encircle virtually all of Southwestern Front. There�s a lot of meta-game stuff going on here, such as �Can a player who ignores Armament center destruction put up a decent fight through 1942� and whether HQ buildup is over-powered (it is not!), but that�s all ancillary to this Kursk, August-September 1941.

I have a very good chance at closing this pocket, still, but I know right now, even if I close all the points I need to and fully encircle the pocket, making it is one thing: keeping it closed is another. I need to be planning right now for how I support this operation and fully close the pocket on Turn 12.

This isn�t quite �All-in� for Germany, but if I pull it off, I can�t imagine having too hard a winter (but then again I�ve only played into Blizzard once, and it ruined me). Any surrendered units won�t be coming back in time to draw enough reinforcements and participate in the Blizzard (or so I believe). If there was an incentive to take Moscow, I�d love to pursue it. It�s a shame to get this close to Moscow and think �meh, don�t need it.� But from what I know of the game, taking units off the map is the best way to protect yourself for winter, and to set yourself up for a good 1942.

The operation depends on cutting off the rail line at Kursk � that�s the closest railhead to those units caught in last turn�s pincers. While I do that, obviously I can�t let Soviets cut my own supply corridor: all the panzers are headed for Kursk (maybe not all, but that�s what I�m talking out), and CF and I both know the tank numbers are way low. (edit: actually they�re not at all terrible if you look at the AFV numbers I posted to one of these screen shots. I have a few divisions with under 70 tanks, but several with 150).

Security will be provided by infantry wherever possible, but as we get toward the center where the Soviet defenders are in between my north and south pincers, nobody can really make it that far, so the panzers are going to have to hold the center. Edit: what would turn out to be key in the north was that I held the gaps in the river line, and I had a long corridor for the infantry to move across.

Much of the planning, as last turn, will occur on the fly as I move and fight. Held results, bad retreats, and units appearing where I think there are none, can make this turn�s close of the pocket impossible, and if I can�t at least cut the rail around Kursk to keep his supply lines strained, I will have to abandon the effort and try to find less ambitious strategies to turn. For now, though, my recon gives me confidence.

This is the situation at the start of the breakout in the northern half. I�ve conducted 2 attacks to keep the river gap free of enemy ZOCs. By the way, this screenshot missed 24.Panzer which is also near Kaluga.

_____________________________

(in reply to heliodorus04)

Post #: 155

RE: Turn 11: Kursk, 1941 - 11/5/2011 6:22:47 PM

heliodorus04

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

Screenshot

Attachment (1)

_____________________________

(in reply to heliodorus04)

Post #: 156

RE: Turn 11: Kursk, 1941 - 11/5/2011 6:24:19 PM

heliodorus04

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

Next up is opening the corridor from 57.Panzer to Orel. Is Orel garrisoned? Take the quiz!

Attachment (1)

_____________________________

(in reply to heliodorus04)

Post #: 157

RE: Turn 11: Kursk, 1941 - 11/5/2011 6:25:39 PM

heliodorus04

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

And here�s the close-up of the Sumy-Kremenchug axis

Attachment (1)

_____________________________

(in reply to heliodorus04)

Post #: 158

RE: Turn 11: Kursk, 1941 - 11/5/2011 6:26:30 PM

heliodorus04

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

So far so good. The screenshot makes 17.Army look a lot more vulnerable than it is. Near Poltava, I have 2-stacks of 2 infantry, and a stack on the far south end. He did attack me here last turn, and forced retreats, but I don�t think he�ll be inclined to push his luck if the isolation forms. There is a bit of a hollow south of the Dnepr, but 11.Army is very close. I do have to be cautious that he doesn�t unroll the middle there.

I don�t know if I can make the ZOC corridor between north and south. I think I can. But it�s not so much that I can, it�s whether I can do it in such a way that when I open my T12, the isolation is held. Last turn, I made a mistake by not doing a better job blocking the divisions that fled Bryansk, and now they�re preventing me from a more direct route. On his turn, CF took advantage of that mistake, but I think he made a mistake trying to isolate the 1 panzer division, and in isolating it, he left me the backdoor to Kursk�s railhead, if not the keys to the city itself. I have to try to close this thing down in such a way that I can withstand some attacks and some maneuvering by cavalry divisions. I hate those rat-bastards�

Two interdictions cost 14 and 20 MPs respectively on mobile elements of 48.Panzer corps. But ultimately it�s nowhere near enough. A perfect storm of logistics, buildup timing, and terrain enable me to make a pocket.

_____________________________

(in reply to heliodorus04)

Post #: 159

RE: Turn 11: Kursk, 1941 - 11/5/2011 6:27:15 PM

heliodorus04

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

Screenshot

Attachment (1)

_____________________________

(in reply to heliodorus04)

Post #: 160

RE: Turn 11: Kursk, 1941 - 11/5/2011 6:28:40 PM

heliodorus04

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

I consolidate to make it as impenetrable as I can. I�m actually afraid CF will have to surrender if this pocket holds, and I can�t see how it won�t hold.

(Editor's note: CF said he doesn't think the loss will cripple him and we should have an interesting 1942...)

Attachment (1)

_____________________________

(in reply to heliodorus04)

Post #: 161

RE: Turn 11: Kursk, 1941 - 11/5/2011 6:29:13 PM

heliodorus04

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

Now, a little editorializing for the community�s enjoyment (or maybe just mine). Is this an example of buildup being overpowered? I�m not sure, and I like to be an honest broker considering all perspectives thoughtfully before making up my mind. I have been using at least 1 HQ buildup per Army Group � I haven�t kept a close tally, but the AAR will say every time I�ve used it. I have also documented each time I let a panzer HQ and/or its divisions rest for a turn. Both have been indispensible to getting to this point on the map. And I�ve probably rested a mobile corps the same number of times as I�ve used buildup twice in an army group.

But I see two other reasons why this is a non-exploitive use of buildup. First, I�ve frankly learned how to use it much better. I understand how to read the map while anticipating where my panzers will be relative to railhead 2 or 3 turns down the road. There�s a rhythm and a distance to it, once you get some practice. And in the combat engine, I understand better much force I need to dislodge enemies from positions that facilitate movement, and knowing how to facilitate movement (this is especially true of understanding how to convert terrain for rapid infantry movement) is the key to my success at least.

And the second reason my buildups have been so effective to this point is that I doubled the FBDs onto 1 rail line in the south in the early game, and 2 FBDs also on the AGC line about T9 I think, and that makes a world of difference. Please note, however, that it�s a very large gamble, and last turn I mentioned that I was starting to patrol with regiments the main artery line of AGC and AGS. Check out how close I came to having AGS out of supply�

_____________________________

(in reply to heliodorus04)

Post #: 162

RE: Turn 11: Kursk, 1941 - 11/5/2011 6:29:33 PM

BletchleyGeek

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

Very well done Helio (applause).

_____________________________

(in reply to heliodorus04)

Post #: 163

RE: Turn 11: Kursk, 1941 - 11/5/2011 6:29:49 PM

heliodorus04

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

Partisans!

Attachment (1)

_____________________________

(in reply to heliodorus04)

Post #: 164

RE: Turn 11: Kursk, 1941 - 11/5/2011 6:32:24 PM

heliodorus04

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

Yeah, my strategy has a very large risk associated with my entire army group going out of supply. On a normal turn, you�re only gaining 1 rail conversion hex a turn. For that, I sacrifice a backup rail line�

So with that operation done for the moment, I�m going to finish the AGC area west of Moscow. I was holding on to 24., 46. & 39.Panzer corps to see if they�d be necessary in the encirclement of SW front. That�s gone well enough that I don�t have to commit them. I�m not sure what to do with them, and the area southwest of Kaluga offers a soft target to a desperate Soviet enemy, so having a little reserve sounds like a good idea.

One of the things I wanted to do was to take Kaluga, and any hex across either the Zhizdra river (the minor south of Kaluga) or the Okay (the major). I strung out a couple of divisions in a pocket there, and they escaped, but their morale should suck, so I�m going to see if I can�t dislodge them with infantry. A miss-click committed 20.Motorized, but I took the hex. Just lost some MPs�

The success at Kaluga inspired me to commit 46.Panzer to both afore-mentioned rivers, and 3-SHAs dislodged both defenders with barely over 2.0 odds (2.7, 2.3): my record-keeping showed me that some of these Rifle divisions had retreated 3-5 times over the last 2 turns. Low morale creates retreats. I�m losing tanks left and right, but tell that to Southwest Front right now� They�d trade their tanks for food� Since CF will have to shift units from Moscow southward, crossing these rivers gives me another chance to split his force in two in the near future.

_____________________________

(in reply to heliodorus04)

Post #: 165

RE: Turn 11: Kursk, 1941 - 11/5/2011 6:33:48 PM

heliodorus04

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

Moscow operations ended up looking like this:

Attachment (1)

_____________________________

(in reply to heliodorus04)

Post #: 166

RE: Turn 11: Kursk, 1941 - 11/5/2011 6:34:55 PM

heliodorus04

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

It�s odd looking at Moscow with the gaps I have between divisions. There�s certainly counter-attack opportunity up there, but I think CF is going to realize the danger he�s in at Kursk, and he might have to abandon Moscow once I break the forts simply to consolidate his line. I could understand a player asking for a restart upon having this number of units isolated, but hopefully CF will want to see where it goes from here. I�m sure Soviet players have survived worse. I mean this good-humoredly: at least he has all of his armaments (smiley)

39.Panzer is using buildup. 2 of the divisions even rested, but I planned the HQ�s move last turn specifically to have this option. I even had some divisions out of command range knowing that they could catch up this turn while the HQ sat idle waiting to spend the AP. I have plenty of APs. I don�t have a specific move in mind for the panzer corps, but I�ve come to learn how to roll HQ buildups so that you always have a corps able to either grind a bunch of attacks against ant-units, or exploit a move. There doesn�t seem to be any more critical imperative to success than properly managing buildup logistics

On to Leningrad, where there�s not much to report except the crossing of the Neva at �the corner�. A 3-SHA failed to dislodge the port defenders. The remaining MPs were spent on a 2-SHA, which reduced the fort to 0. It�ll probably be 2 more turns as we wrestle for that port like Ricardo Mantalbahn at the end of Star Trek 2�

_____________________________

(in reply to heliodorus04)

Post #: 167

RE: Turn 11: Kursk, 1941 - 11/5/2011 6:35:13 PM

heliodorus04

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

Leningrad

Attachment (1)

_____________________________

(in reply to heliodorus04)

Post #: 168

RE: Turn 11: Kursk, 1941 - 11/5/2011 6:35:45 PM

heliodorus04

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

Finally, 11.Army has to figure out what it�s going to do.

CF is going to have to abandon a lot of ground to shore up the sector west of Voronezh, and I am half-inclined to recommend he abandon the Crimea. That�s probably too self-serving of me, but I�d love it if he�d leave. The only thing for 11.Army to do is consolidate and keep the pressure on the lower Dnepr, as much as I want to go into the Crimea. Maybe he�ll withdraw independently of my wishes�

Here is how the Sea of Azov looks:

Attachment (1)

_____________________________

(in reply to heliodorus04)

Post #: 169

RE: Turn 11: Kursk, 1941 - 11/5/2011 6:37:24 PM

heliodorus04

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

I forgot to make the OOB stats my lead item: this is how things looked at the end of 11

So after last turn�s adjustments to German TOEs, I�ve turned the armaments situation around at least temporarily. For the next turn or 2, armament drain will be less because TOEs are now only set to 80 for infantry. Once most of my infantry hits that number, then armaments will drain again. I might move the TOE values up on certain types of SUs (artillery) or else I�ll just up the TOE for particular corps. I�m trying to organize my army for the next 7 turns (plus a likely winter Typhoon) around key corps driving forward. On the Soviet side, we�ve reached Turn 11, and from what I recall, Turns 11-13 the Soviet won�t receive much in the way of new divisions raised. So the fact that he still increased his OOB by 75K is disheartening (well, during editing, I should shut up about ever being disheartened by the game�), I still have the gun situation in a downward trend. The aircraft situation is worrisome, but CF also said that I�ve destroyed a lot of aircraft on the ground (because he keeps letting me!). I know that the continuous displacement of airbases has cost him a lot of support squads. I�m hoping his turn-over-turn attrition from lack of support will help me out until at least the end of snow. In the air, I have a lot of AGC�s bombers in national reserve since T10 because morale was too low (my cutoffs is around 45: once your morale is lower than Soviet, you�re going to give away kills to the Soviet on morale alone).

Attachment (1)

_____________________________

(in reply to heliodorus04)

Post #: 170

RE: Turn 11: Kursk, 1941 - 11/5/2011 8:50:17 PM

Balou

Posts: 841
Joined: 7/24/2009
Status: offline

1. I see your arms pool climbing, but your right, it�s going to be stressed again. To train myself in WitE logistics, and since I guess you like numbers and stats, I tried to figure out what a TOE reduction for artillery and rocket support units has to offer � a move that has been suggested in some threads.
The build cost for 10% of the hardware + support of all artillery and rocket support units (guns, howitzers, nebelwerfer) equals 21,878 arm points as per TOE of June 22, 1941, Germany alone. Half of these costs come from the very expensive, yet large number of 210mm M18 howitzers (build cost 346! for a single gun). In 41 you start with 31 Hwz Bns, each one equipped with 12 of those 210mm. Reducing their TOE by 10% would save 12,800 arm points.
I hope no one tells me I misunderstood the �production� chapter :) .

2. Btw, what�s CFs losses (death & captured)? From the map he has a lot of manpower left. Together with all arms factories saved, he still has the main ingredients for a terrific comeback at hand.

(in reply to heliodorus04)

Post #: 171

RE: Turn 11: Kursk, 1941 - 11/5/2011 9:13:05 PM

heliodorus04

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

quote:

ORIGINAL: Balou

1. I see your arms pool climbing, but your right, it�s going to be stressed again. To train myself in WitE logistics, and since I guess you like numbers and stats, I tried to figure out what a TOE reduction for artillery and rocket support units has to offer � a move that has been suggested in some threads.
The build cost for 10% of the hardware + support of all artillery and rocket support units (guns, howitzers, nebelwerfer) equals 21,878 arm points as per TOE of June 22, 1941, Germany alone. Half of these costs come from the very expensive, yet large number of 210mm M18 howitzers (build cost 346! for a single gun). In 41 you start with 31 Hwz Bns, each one equipped with 12 of those 210mm. Reducing their TOE by 10% would save 12,800 arm points.
I hope no one tells me I misunderstood the �production� chapter :) .

2. Btw, what�s CFs losses (death & captured)? From the map he has a lot of manpower left. Together with all arms factories saved, he still has the main ingredients for a terrific comeback at hand.

THanks very much for those formulas. Where do you find out how much these things cost? I'm not familiar with some of the production screens. The start of the turn's pool and loss numbers for T12 (which I have, but have not played) are as follows:

Attachment (1)

_____________________________

(in reply to Balou)

Post #: 172

RE: Turn 11: Kursk, 1941 - 11/5/2011 9:13:36 PM

heliodorus04

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

He lost men, and we can expect the shortfall is going to grow in the next several turns. He finally went down in total aircraft. I�m running out of tanks to kill, I think. The gun situation is also going to get huge in my favor. On the German side, good manpower, almost doubled my Armaments over last turn, and vehicles are at a point where I am concerned with what I want to do between now and Blizzard.
Sorry about the spreadsheet scale.

_____________________________

(in reply to heliodorus04)

Post #: 173

RE: Turn 11: Kursk, 1941 - 11/5/2011 9:57:31 PM

Balou

Posts: 841
Joined: 7/24/2009
Status: offline

quote:

Where do you find out how much these things cost? I'm not familiar with some of the production screens

Neither was I until last weekend, when I had a closer look at the production screen.
I thinks its very easy to get these numbers:

1. Go to production screen
2. find eg 210mm Howitzer
a) hit "210mm Howitzer" (in blue), and you get a new screen, telling you the "build cost" in armament points per piece.
b) go back to production screen and hit (again in blue) the row indicating the number of units that are equipped with that stuff. Now appears...
3) a list of all units that have this specific weapon and ...
4) the number of guns (highlighted in red) just beneath the number of units...
5) finally: Build cost x number of guns = overall costs in armament points.
At least that's how I did it. Hopefully right...

Thanks for the losses tables. Doesn't look very comforting, knowing he has 4,6 mio troops, 4k tanks, and all his arms factories evac.

(in reply to heliodorus04)

Post #: 174

RE: Turn 11: Kursk, 1941 - 11/5/2011 10:32:22 PM

heliodorus04

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

quote:

ORIGINAL: Balou

quote:

Where do you find out how much these things cost? I'm not familiar with some of the production screens

Neither was I until last weekend, when I had a closer look at the production screen.
I thinks its very easy to get these numbers:

1. Go to production screen
2. find eg 210mm Howitzer
a) hit "210mm Howitzer" (in blue), and you get a new screen, telling you the "build cost" in armament points per piece.
b) go back to production screen and hit (again in blue) the row indicating the number of units that are equipped with that stuff. Now appears...
3) a list of all units that have this specific weapon and ...
4) the number of guns (highlighted in red) just beneath the number of units...
5) finally: Build cost x number of guns = overall costs in armament points.
At least that's how I did it. Hopefully right...

Thanks for the losses tables. Doesn't look very comforting, knowing he has 4,6 mio troops, 4k tanks, and all his arms factories evac.

CF said he thinks there's 1 million in that pocket. That's pretty comforting, actually...

_____________________________

(in reply to Balou)

Post #: 175

RE: Turn 11: Kursk, 1941 - 11/5/2011 10:48:08 PM

Balou

Posts: 841
Joined: 7/24/2009
Status: offline

My apologies for bad predictions....

That's going to change the picture. And there is no Leningrad included yet, or did I miss it?.

(in reply to heliodorus04)

Post #: 176

RE: Turn 11: Kursk, 1941 - 11/5/2011 11:48:00 PM

heliodorus04

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

I had only crossed the Neva last turn at Leningrad. But the POW count won't be too high, I don't think. He was pretty economical about getting units out in time.

_____________________________

(in reply to Balou)

Post #: 177

RE: Turn 11: Kursk, 1941 - 11/7/2011 9:24:56 PM

Balou

Posts: 841
Joined: 7/24/2009
Status: offline

quote:

... as much as I want to go into the Crimea. Maybe he�ll withdraw independently of my wishes�

I still wonder why people go for the Crimea instead of sealing it off and digging in at the chokepoints. It is certainly easier to seal it at Kerch, but that requires Sevastopol surrounded/taken, hence a lot of troops that may be used elsewhere.

(in reply to heliodorus04)

Post #: 178

RE: Turn 11: Kursk, 1941 - 11/7/2011 10:15:18 PM

heliodorus04

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

The problem with sealing it off, at least as I see it, is that if I'm incorrect about whether it IS in fact 'sealed' I could lose all of my army group south. Now, I've not fought successfully through a blizzard yet, so this is theory-craft on my part.

I also think on a Net-Present-Value perspective, 41 is the best time to do it. The winter of 41 is the prime motivator: if you lose the chokepoints with units exposed to supply problems at Stalino, you could have Stalingrad 41. And I also think in 41, the opportunity is there to do it as cheaply as you're ever going to do it.

I will look and see what he does with the defenders down there, but if they remain in force, I'm afraid that 1 corps of 11.Army will be going down there with the Romanians to slug it out all winter to Sevastapol and to Kerch. Kerch has armament I want to be sure he loses anyway.

_____________________________

(in reply to Balou)

Post #: 179

Start Turn 12 - 11/8/2011 11:04:37 PM

heliodorus04

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

Here are the OOB and Loss stats