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: Micheal T (Ger) vs Kamil (Sov)

 
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: Micheal T (Ger) vs Kamil (Sov) Page: <<   < prev  4 5 [6] 7 8   next >   >>
Login
Message << Older Topic   Newer Topic >>
RE: Micheal T (Ger) vs Kamil (Sov) - 6/8/2013 12:34:37 PM   
KamilS

 

Posts: 1827
Joined: 2/5/2011
Status: offline 		T7 south (Soviet)


I bough myself turn of respite here.




Attachment (1)

(in reply to KamilS)
Post #: 151
RE: Micheal T (Ger) vs Kamil (Sov) - 6/8/2013 12:37:19 PM   
KamilS

 

Posts: 1827
Joined: 2/5/2011
Status: offline 		T7 Crimea (Soviet)


I think I am safe here at the moment.




Attachment (1)

(in reply to KamilS)
Post #: 152
RE: Micheal T (Ger) vs Kamil (Sov) - 6/8/2013 12:42:46 PM   
KamilS

 

Posts: 1827
Joined: 2/5/2011
Status: offline 		T7 OOB/casualties (Soviet)


My forces slowly recover from turn 1 onslaught.


If nothing major happens (I doubt that, my position is still critical) in 4-5 turns Red Army will be strong enough to stand its ground,


Generally speaking it was first good turn and German advance lost its momentum from a bit.

Destruction of 300 AFV improved my morale as well.




Attachment (1)

(in reply to KamilS)
Post #: 153
RE: Micheal T (Ger) vs Kamil (Sov) - 6/8/2013 1:03:30 PM   
KamilS

 

Posts: 1827
Joined: 2/5/2011
Status: offline 		T8 north - detailed (German)


Nothing major happened here.

Thing that I need to note is consistently ridiculous defensive performance of armies fighting Finns. It is not the first turns of such heroics.

I find it very wrong. It should not be like that.




Attachment (1)

(in reply to KamilS)
Post #: 154
RE: Micheal T (Ger) vs Kamil (Sov) - 6/8/2013 1:06:09 PM   
KamilS

 

Posts: 1827
Joined: 2/5/2011
Status: offline 		T8 north (German)


It seems that there won't be right hook strategy in this game. We are equally weak south of Ilmen lake.




Attachment (1)

(in reply to KamilS)
Post #: 155
RE: Micheal T (Ger) vs Kamil (Sov) - 6/8/2013 1:09:16 PM   
KamilS

 

Posts: 1827
Joined: 2/5/2011
Status: offline 		T8 centre (German)


Transitory turn.


My flanks well be endangered soon. I will have to address the threat by weakening direct Moscow approaches.




Attachment (1)

(in reply to KamilS)
Post #: 156
RE: Micheal T (Ger) vs Kamil (Sov) - 6/8/2013 1:10:40 PM   
KamilS

 

Posts: 1827
Joined: 2/5/2011
Status: offline 		T8 south (German)


Michael is consolidating his gains before next big push.




Attachment (1)

(in reply to KamilS)
Post #: 157
RE: Micheal T (Ger) vs Kamil (Sov) - 6/8/2013 1:37:30 PM   
KamilS

 

Posts: 1827
Joined: 2/5/2011
Status: offline 		T8 north (Soviet)


Counter-attack against armoured spearhead burned out my tank divisions, but I think it was well worth it.

My line is still cohesive.




Attachment (1)

(in reply to KamilS)
Post #: 158
RE: Micheal T (Ger) vs Kamil (Sov) - 6/8/2013 1:41:39 PM   
KamilS

 

Posts: 1827
Joined: 2/5/2011
Status: offline 		T8 centre (Soviet)


I do not have enough troops to defend Rzhev. On the other hand I don't think (I might be wrong) Micheal has enough panzers in Vyazma area to encircle western part of Reserve front.

Generally speaking my lines do not have depth at all. I play with fire.




Attachment (1)

(in reply to KamilS)
Post #: 159
RE: Micheal T (Ger) vs Kamil (Sov) - 6/8/2013 1:43:48 PM   
KamilS

 

Posts: 1827
Joined: 2/5/2011
Status: offline 		T8 centre/south (Soviet)


It all about petrol here.




Attachment (1)

(in reply to KamilS)
Post #: 160
RE: Micheal T (Ger) vs Kamil (Sov) - 6/8/2013 1:46:36 PM   
KamilS

 

Posts: 1827
Joined: 2/5/2011
Status: offline 		T8 south (Soviet)


Certain fact needs to be said - at the moment I do not aim to win this game, I try not to get humiliated.

That is why another half-justified retreat takes place.




Attachment (1)

(in reply to KamilS)
Post #: 161
RE: Micheal T (Ger) vs Kamil (Sov) - 6/8/2013 2:23:19 PM   
mmarquo


Posts: 1376
Joined: 9/26/2000
Status: offline 		Are you going to build any forts in fromt of Moscow?

(in reply to KamilS)
Post #: 162
RE: Micheal T (Ger) vs Kamil (Sov) - 6/8/2013 2:29:46 PM   
KamilS

 

Posts: 1827
Joined: 2/5/2011
Status: offline
quote:

Marquo

Are you going to build any forts in fromt of Moscow?



Fortification zones?

Unlikely.

(in reply to mmarquo)
Post #: 163
RE: Micheal T (Ger) vs Kamil (Sov) - 6/8/2013 3:29:03 PM   
janh

 

Posts: 1216
Joined: 6/12/2007
Status: offline 		Kamil, good work with the counterattacks around Rshev and Stalino. I was surprised that some of them worked despite the opposition. Michael must be operating a bit beyond the safe margin. How did that modified CV of yours at Leningrad come about?

Also I noted you have pretty much no air support and cover of your own in these battles? Have you pulled all squadrons back? I know they get slaughtered badly but the Luftwaffe, but they sometimes can help to reduce the interdiction and air support efficiency of the latter. I think it is worth keeping some fighters and bombers in the front. Also: do you sometimes try putting some empty airfield with front units that are likely to be isolated the coming turn, and less likely to be retreated?

(in reply to KamilS)
Post #: 164
RE: Micheal T (Ger) vs Kamil (Sov) - 6/8/2013 4:30:02 PM   
bigbaba


Posts: 1238
Joined: 11/3/2006
From: Koblenz, Germany
Status: offline 		omg, you are toast. you are there where i am against ketza but in turn 15.:)

and he still has 9!!! clear turns to play with.

i think one must find the right balance between fighting and running away. against ketza i lost 2.3 mio. men so far (turn 15) but 470k loses resulted from my own overconfidence to try to hold the dnjepr line although he had 3 bridgeheads.:)

you will have a realy hard time to keep your loses under 3 mio. kamil.

@janh:

you are right. until now i pulled back the red air force in reserve but against ketza i put every single plane (except the I-15) into the front line units. and that made the difference in few battles. beside that even russian I-16 can shoot down german transporters and bombers on supply mission. and there are not enough luftwaffe messerschmidts to cover every bomber.

< Message edited by bigbaba -- 6/8/2013 4:33:11 PM >

(in reply to janh)
Post #: 165
RE: Micheal T (Ger) vs Kamil (Sov) - 6/8/2013 4:55:20 PM   
KamilS

 

Posts: 1827
Joined: 2/5/2011
Status: offline
quote:

janh

How did that modified CV of yours at Leningrad come about?



I don't know. I haven't done anything unorthodox with troops fighting Finns.


quote:

janh

Also I noted you have pretty much no air support and cover of your own in these battles? Have you pulled all squadrons back? I know they get slaughtered badly but the Luftwaffe, but they sometimes can help to reduce the interdiction and air support efficiency of the latter. I think it is worth keeping some fighters and bombers in the front. Also: do you sometimes try putting some empty airfield with front units that are likely to be isolated the coming turn, and less likely to be retreated?




By the end of turn 5 whole air-force wss back at the front-line.

I try but I do not have empty airbases left (they were disbanded), so sometimes airbases are too far away front line to provide me with such opportunity.


quote:

bigbaba


omg, you are toast. you are there where i am against ketza but in turn 15.:)

and he still has 9!!! clear turns to play with.



Situation is critical, I agree.

< Message edited by Kamil -- 6/8/2013 4:57:44 PM >

(in reply to bigbaba)
Post #: 166
RE: Micheal T (Ger) vs Kamil (Sov) - 6/9/2013 8:33:34 AM   
mktours

 

Posts: 712
Joined: 5/25/2013
Status: offline 		kamil,
it looks like this fancy opening has a shortcoming that the SU could disband a lot of Lvov unit in T1 to avoid huge POW lose? as the circle didn't form until T2

(in reply to loki100)
Post #: 167
RE: Micheal T (Ger) vs Kamil (Sov) - 6/9/2013 8:58:38 AM   
mktours

 

Posts: 712
Joined: 5/25/2013
Status: offline 		in T2, when you temporarily broke the Lvov mega-pocket, why didn't you disband the units which were doomed?

(in reply to KamilS)
Post #: 168
RE: Micheal T (Ger) vs Kamil (Sov) - 6/9/2013 10:30:25 AM   
timmyab

 

Posts: 2044
Joined: 12/14/2010
From: Bristol, UK
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: mktours

in T2, when you temporarily broke the Lvov mega-pocket, why didn't you disband the units which were doomed?

There are restrictions on disbanding units.Read 18.5.1.

(in reply to mktours)
Post #: 169
RE: Micheal T (Ger) vs Kamil (Sov) - 6/9/2013 10:52:56 AM   
mktours

 

Posts: 712
Joined: 5/25/2013
Status: offline 		then at least SU could disband a handful of units at T1, which is the shortcoming of this opening. thanks for the info you provided
quote:

ORIGINAL: timmyab


quote:

ORIGINAL: mktours

in T2, when you temporarily broke the Lvov mega-pocket, why didn't you disband the units which were doomed?

There are restrictions on disbanding units.Read 18.5.1.


(in reply to timmyab)
Post #: 170
RE: Micheal T (Ger) vs Kamil (Sov) - 6/9/2013 11:02:42 AM   
juret

 

Posts: 198
Joined: 10/17/2011
Status: offline 		fun game this.

i hope the soviet can hold it togheter and make the game a long one.

(in reply to mktours)
Post #: 171
RE: Micheal T (Ger) vs Kamil (Sov) - 6/9/2013 12:51:13 PM   
mktours

 

Posts: 712
Joined: 5/25/2013
Status: offline 		wow, i see it now that those Lvov units didn't have enough mp to go to the railhead to be disbanded, that really distroy the balance in the south, an evil and cheating opening and should be banded.
quote:

ORIGINAL: mktours

then at least SU could disband a handful of units at T1, which is the shortcoming of this opening. thanks for the info you provided
quote:

ORIGINAL: timmyab


quote:

ORIGINAL: mktours

in T2, when you temporarily broke the Lvov mega-pocket, why didn't you disband the units which were doomed?

There are restrictions on disbanding units.Read 18.5.1.




(in reply to mktours)
Post #: 172
RE: Micheal T (Ger) vs Kamil (Sov) - 6/9/2013 2:42:41 PM   
Flaviusx


Posts: 7750
Joined: 9/9/2009
From: Southern California
Status: offline 		Disbanding these units is a bad idea anyways, as it will permanently remove free replacements. That's going to amount to a lot of APs.

Kamil is screwed. I've said this before and I'll stay it again: playing Michael with his preferred house rules and without random weather is for suckers. There's nothing in the world stopping him from doing this opening every time. He is all about leveraging the surprise turn, gaming supply and creating a basically irrecoverable situation in the first dozen or so turns. He wants to end games in 41 or very shortly into 42 and sets things up accordingly. Yet he still finds people willing to play under these conditions. It is amazing to me.



< Message edited by Flaviusx -- 6/9/2013 2:43:35 PM >

_____________________________

WitE Alpha Tester

(in reply to mktours)
Post #: 173
RE: Micheal T (Ger) vs Kamil (Sov) - 6/9/2013 3:15:58 PM   
carlkay58

 

Posts: 8650
Joined: 7/25/2010
Status: offline 		Yep, MT is DEFINITELY guilty of playing the Axis as the Axis wished reality to be!

(in reply to Flaviusx)
Post #: 174
RE: Micheal T (Ger) vs Kamil (Sov) - 6/9/2013 5:16:56 PM   
mktours

 

Posts: 712
Joined: 5/25/2013
Status: offline 		the free replacement is nothing at the early stage since there are too many of them and they drain the replacement and each unit is very low equipped. so if being allowed, i would prefer disbanding the highly equipped units if doom to lose them, that is worth it, just thinking about saving a significant number of would be POW and equipment.

btw, who is the man of your photo?
quote:

ORIGINAL: Flaviusx

Disbanding these units is a bad idea anyways, as it will permanently remove free replacements. That's going to amount to a lot of APs.

Kamil is screwed. I've said this before and I'll stay it again: playing Michael with his preferred house rules and without random weather is for suckers. There's nothing in the world stopping him from doing this opening every time. He is all about leveraging the surprise turn, gaming supply and creating a basically irrecoverable situation in the first dozen or so turns. He wants to end games in 41 or very shortly into 42 and sets things up accordingly. Yet he still finds people willing to play under these conditions. It is amazing to me.



(in reply to Flaviusx)
Post #: 175
RE: Micheal T (Ger) vs Kamil (Sov) - 6/10/2013 9:01:02 AM   
mktours

 

Posts: 712
Joined: 5/25/2013
Status: offline 		i have to say i am a novice here and i am very likely to be wrong
quote:

ORIGINAL: mktours

the free replacement is nothing at the early stage since there are too many of them and they drain the replacement and each unit is very low equipped. so if being allowed, i would prefer disbanding the highly equipped units if doom to lose them, that is worth it, just thinking about saving a significant number of would be POW and equipment.

btw, who is the man of your photo?
quote:

ORIGINAL: Flaviusx

Disbanding these units is a bad idea anyways, as it will permanently remove free replacements. That's going to amount to a lot of APs.

Kamil is screwed. I've said this before and I'll stay it again: playing Michael with his preferred house rules and without random weather is for suckers. There's nothing in the world stopping him from doing this opening every time. He is all about leveraging the surprise turn, gaming supply and creating a basically irrecoverable situation in the first dozen or so turns. He wants to end games in 41 or very shortly into 42 and sets things up accordingly. Yet he still finds people willing to play under these conditions. It is amazing to me.





(in reply to mktours)
Post #: 176
RE: Micheal T (Ger) vs Kamil (Sov) - 6/15/2013 12:19:56 PM   
KamilS

 

Posts: 1827
Joined: 2/5/2011
Status: offline 		T9 north (German)


Intensive fighting continue to take place in Leningrad area.




Attachment (1)

(in reply to mktours)
Post #: 177
RE: Micheal T (Ger) vs Kamil (Sov) - 6/15/2013 12:22:05 PM   
KamilS

 

Posts: 1827
Joined: 2/5/2011
Status: offline 		T9 Moscow (German)


It seems there won't be direct assault on Moscow at the moment.




Attachment (1)

(in reply to KamilS)
Post #: 178
RE: Micheal T (Ger) vs Kamil (Sov) - 6/15/2013 12:23:23 PM   
KamilS

 

Posts: 1827
Joined: 2/5/2011
Status: offline 		T9 centre/south (German)


Crazy situation south of Moscow. To be honest in short therm it suits me.




Attachment (1)

(in reply to KamilS)
Post #: 179
RE: Micheal T (Ger) vs Kamil (Sov) - 6/15/2013 12:25:07 PM   
KamilS

 

Posts: 1827
Joined: 2/5/2011
Status: offline 		T9 south (Germany)


Chances of holding Rostov are very small.




Attachment (1)

(in reply to KamilS)
Post #: 180
Page:   <<   < prev  4 5 [6] 7 8   next >   >>
All Forums >> [New Releases from Matrix Games] >> Gary Grigsby's War in the East Series >> After Action Reports >> RE: Micheal T (Ger) vs Kamil (Sov) Page: <<   < prev  4 5 [6] 7 8   next >   >>
Jump to:





New Messages No New Messages
Hot Topic w/ New Messages Hot Topic w/o New Messages
Locked w/ New Messages Locked w/o New Messages
 Post New Thread
 Reply to Message
 Post New Poll
 Submit Vote
 Delete My Own Post
 Delete My Own Thread
 Rate Posts


Forum Software © ASPPlayground.NET Advanced Edition 2.4.5 ANSI

4.625