Matrix Games Forums

 Forums  Register  Login  Photo Gallery  Member List  Search  Calendars  FAQ 

My Profile  Inbox  Address Book  My Subscription  My Forums  Log Out

T54 - Kursk Sector

 
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 >> T54 - Kursk Sector Page: <<   < prev  12 13 [14] 15 16   next >   >>
Login
Message << Older Topic   Newer Topic >>
T54 - Kursk Sector - 6/28/2014 2:04:26 AM   
Oshawott

 

Posts: 1353
Joined: 10/30/2013
Status: offline 		T54 - Kursk Sector

Mud is over and he shifts his Panzer ball further south towards Kursk. The screenshot is before my move.






Attachment (1)

(in reply to Oshawott)
Post #: 391
T54 - Kursk Sector - 6/28/2014 2:09:42 AM   
Oshawott

 

Posts: 1353
Joined: 10/30/2013
Status: offline 		T54 - Kursk Sector

For the next couple of turns I will simply try to hit his Panzer divisions as hard as possible to destroy as many tanks as I can. There are numerous reserve activations this turn. In one battle four of his units get activated but the odds are still 8.9:1.

I have set up my troops so that I can attack the flanks as I expect him to push northeast. I would also like to protect myself in case he pushes south which scares me more.





Attachment (1)

< Message edited by Oshawott -- 6/28/2014 3:17:42 AM >

(in reply to Oshawott)
Post #: 392
T54 - South - 6/28/2014 2:13:33 AM   
Oshawott

 

Posts: 1353
Joined: 10/30/2013
Status: offline 		T54 - South

The south remains interesting. He was trying to encircle Dnepropetrovsk twice during the previous turns (I lost track and don't remember when it happened) but I was always able to break the encirclement. My forces are strong enough now to keep the city open.






Attachment (1)

(in reply to Oshawott)
Post #: 393
T54 - Data - 6/28/2014 11:56:03 PM   
Oshawott

 

Posts: 1353
Joined: 10/30/2013
Status: offline 		T54 - Data

Very active air war this turn so I am displaying air losses as well.






Attachment (1)

(in reply to Oshawott)
Post #: 394
T55 - Kursk Sector - 6/29/2014 12:01:09 AM   
Oshawott

 

Posts: 1353
Joined: 10/30/2013
Status: offline 		T55 - Kursk Sector

Screenshot before my move. Real problems with stacking.






Attachment (1)

< Message edited by Oshawott -- 6/29/2014 1:02:02 AM >

(in reply to Oshawott)
Post #: 395
T55 - Kursk Sector - 6/29/2014 12:04:06 AM   
Oshawott

 

Posts: 1353
Joined: 10/30/2013
Status: offline 		T55 - Kursk Sector

Screenshot after my move. I hit all those stacks with 3 units in front of 3 units causing maximum damage.






Attachment (1)

(in reply to Oshawott)
Post #: 396
T55 - Guards - 6/29/2014 12:06:29 AM   
Oshawott

 

Posts: 1353
Joined: 10/30/2013
Status: offline 		T55 - Guards

It's July now so the maximum number of guard rifle divisions changes from 10% to 17%. Therefore, I get a large number of guard units this turn. So many I can't even display them all. Most of these divisions are below 50 morale so I move them all back for R&R.






Attachment (1)

< Message edited by Oshawott -- 6/30/2014 2:22:10 AM >

(in reply to Oshawott)
Post #: 397
T55 - Data - 6/29/2014 12:08:17 AM   
Oshawott

 

Posts: 1353
Joined: 10/30/2013
Status: offline 		T55 - Data

The screenshot doesn't show it but there were another 250+ tanks destroyed this turn.






Attachment (1)

(in reply to Oshawott)
Post #: 398
T56 - Kursk Sector - 6/30/2014 12:55:20 AM   
Oshawott

 

Posts: 1353
Joined: 10/30/2013
Status: offline 		T56 - Kursk Sector

Screenshot before my move. Stacking is still problematic for the Axis. In addition two Panzer Corps in the second line are protected only by a weak brigade. My goal is to hit as many Panzer and Motorized divisions as possible and to open the pocket again while displacing the two Panzer Corps. I have incredible fire power in this sector now. 14 Tank Corps, 13 Cavalry Corps and numerous Rifle Corps.






Attachment (1)

< Message edited by Oshawott -- 6/30/2014 1:58:45 AM >

(in reply to Oshawott)
Post #: 399
RE: T56 - Kursk Sector - 6/30/2014 1:00:14 AM   
Oshawott

 

Posts: 1353
Joined: 10/30/2013
Status: offline 		T56 - Kursk Sector

Pocket reopened and Panzer Corps displaced. I am even able to route two of his units.






Attachment (1)

(in reply to Oshawott)
Post #: 400
RE: T56 - Kursk Sector - 6/30/2014 1:00:51 AM   
Oshawott

 

Posts: 1353
Joined: 10/30/2013
Status: offline 		T56 - Data






Attachment (1)

(in reply to Oshawott)
Post #: 401
RE: T56 - Kursk Sector - 6/30/2014 2:58:49 AM   
jwolf

 

Posts: 2493
Joined: 12/3/2013
Status: offline 		Kursk sector is well named. You have effectively gained an entire year on the historical Soviet pace. I don't see how the Germans can continue a remotely effective offensive at this point. That is all a tribute to your brilliant strategy and tactics in this game.

(in reply to Oshawott)
Post #: 402
RE: T56 - Kursk Sector - 7/1/2014 7:20:47 PM   
Oshawott

 

Posts: 1353
Joined: 10/30/2013
Status: offline
quote:

I don't see how the Germans can continue a remotely effective offensive at this point.


It has been mentioned before that there are a lot of rich get richer mechanics for both sides in this game. I think this reaches a climax for the Russians in June 42 when they can build Rifle Corps. Because I had a good 41 and the Axis 42 offensive has stalled early there is no need to build anything else but Rifle Corps and SUs.

(in reply to jwolf)
Post #: 403
RE: T56 - Kursk Sector - 7/1/2014 9:37:21 PM   
Flaviusx


Posts: 7750
Joined: 9/9/2009
From: Southern California
Status: offline 		Frankly, I wonder if there should be a hard cap placed on how many corps can be built in 1942. (At least prior to October or so.) This game is plainly a runaway, and APs alone won't be enough of a break on corps production. I could easily see you field 100 corps before mud hits. That is surely way too high for this stage of the war regardless of how well you've stalled the Axis. The Red Army didn't have the chops to do this so early, it was still going through teething problems.

I grow less and less enchanted with APs in general over time. They don't seem to do anything in particular very well and we've tried to make them do many things, often rather badly.

_____________________________

WitE Alpha Tester

(in reply to Oshawott)
Post #: 404
RE: T56 - Kursk Sector - 7/1/2014 11:33:53 PM   
Oshawott

 

Posts: 1353
Joined: 10/30/2013
Status: offline 		I agree. There should be a cap regarding the number of Corps based on year just like there is a cap now for the number of guard divisions you can have.

100 Corps is technically possible if you include tank and cav corps. I am currently at 68 on T61.

(in reply to Flaviusx)
Post #: 405
T57 - Southwest - 7/2/2014 2:07:32 AM   
Oshawott

 

Posts: 1353
Joined: 10/30/2013
Status: offline 		T57 - Southwest

It looks like the Axis offensive has stalled for good. Time to reorganize my army and plan for a counter-offensive.





Attachment (1)

< Message edited by Oshawott -- 7/2/2014 3:07:48 AM >

(in reply to Oshawott)
Post #: 406
T57 - Southwest - 7/2/2014 2:11:04 AM   
Oshawott

 

Posts: 1353
Joined: 10/30/2013
Status: offline 		T57 - Data

The Germans only have 1000 tanks left. Simply not enough for any sustained offensive.






Attachment (1)

(in reply to Oshawott)
Post #: 407
RE: T57 - Southwest - 7/2/2014 3:01:27 AM   
charlie0311

 

Posts: 941
Joined: 12/20/2013
Status: offline 		Hi guys,

Hate to interrupt the big dogs, but looks like a case of mis-matched opponents here so what difference how many corps (sov).

Flav you should take the axis v. osh v.15 and unrestricted Lvov opening, bet the results would be quite different.

My game (.11 me sov) I have the raw material for 150 corp easy, so much I haven't counted it all and I haven't built a single on map unit.

(in reply to Oshawott)
Post #: 408
RE: T57 - Southwest - 7/2/2014 3:20:25 AM   
Oshawott

 

Posts: 1353
Joined: 10/30/2013
Status: offline
quote:

I have the raw material for 150 corp easy, so much I haven't counted it all


Raw materials? What does this mean?

< Message edited by Oshawott -- 7/2/2014 4:36:04 AM >

(in reply to charlie0311)
Post #: 409
RE: T57 - Southwest - 7/2/2014 3:39:18 AM   
jwolf

 

Posts: 2493
Joined: 12/3/2013
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: Oshawott

Raw materials? What does this mean?


I guess he means rifle divisions, tank brigades, and cavalry brigades. But forming all those corps would still take a lot of time even with a full AP bank. Then there is the more significant issue of whether or not the Soviet player can reasonably form a lot of corps and still cover the front with counters, and that depends on the overall strategic situation. That's where you have done a super job and I imagine you will have a ferociously terrible Red Army by the end of 1942. From now until April 1943, with the exception of a small number of mud turns in Fall 1942, you will be able to hammer the Germans turn after turn. It may take most of the summer to loosen his lines but I think Stef is in for a very rough time. It will be awesome and terrifying to watch.

(in reply to Oshawott)
Post #: 410
RE: T57 - Southwest - 7/2/2014 3:52:07 AM   
Flaviusx


Posts: 7750
Joined: 9/9/2009
From: Southern California
Status: offline 		As a practical matter the only limiting factor in forming corps is APs. Not raw numbers of units.

This limiting factor is insufficient and not very realistic. The AP budget has only an extremely abstract relationship to the actual problems in evolving into a corps based Red Army.

My own view is that almost regardless of how well the Soviet player is doing he simply shouldn't be able to create a ton of rifle corps in 1942. This didn't happen because of an AP crunch (which is merely an artificial game mechanic.) It happened because the Red Army lacked the officers and experience to do this is in more than a very limited fashion until 1943. It took time to train up the Red Army.

APs fail to simulate this. The entire game sometimes seems to revolve entirely around AP management -- and the best way for the Axis to crush the Soviets is to overwhelm the AP budget (which prevents them from getting units out of the deadpile, which is the flipside of a runaway such as this game.)

I'm severely skeptical about the value of the AP system in general. It ought to be limited, in my estimation, to command functions only. Not force generation. Not unit upgrades. Not forts. Not changing air frames. Etc. etc. APs can't do all these things at the same time in a reasonable fashion, they simply don't have any clear relation to one another. The whole universal currency idea is a bust imo.

_____________________________

WitE Alpha Tester

(in reply to jwolf)
Post #: 411
RE: T57 - Southwest - 7/2/2014 4:06:14 AM   
Flaviusx


Posts: 7750
Joined: 9/9/2009
From: Southern California
Status: offline 		As an alternative, I would propose the following: starting June of 1942, the Soviets get 1 rifle corps upgrade per turn. No AP cost involved. From Jan 43 on, increase this to 2 per turn and keep it there for the rest of the war. These could be banked. Essentially, provide corps formation its own currency. You could track mobile corps upgrades in a similar fashion. (Perhaps providing up to 3 tracks for cav, tank and mech corps as they are different beasties and really shouldn't be all lumped together.)

This would throttle the process in a more historical fashion.

I would also adopt the German replacement system for non corps units. The limiting factor here ought to be the replacement pool, not APs.



_____________________________

WitE Alpha Tester

(in reply to Flaviusx)
Post #: 412
RE: T57 - Southwest - 7/2/2014 4:27:55 AM   
Oshawott

 

Posts: 1353
Joined: 10/30/2013
Status: offline
quote:

I guess he means rifle divisions, tank brigades, and cavalry brigades.


Yes, I think that is what he means. But as Flaviusx has pointed out it is the AP system that limits the formation of Rifle Corps. 150 Corps x 20 = 3000 APs. And that is on top of all the other stuff you have to build to create a Soviet army that can handle multiple lines of level 3/4 forts.


(in reply to jwolf)
Post #: 413
RE: T57 - Southwest - 7/2/2014 4:31:45 AM   
Oshawott

 

Posts: 1353
Joined: 10/30/2013
Status: offline
quote:

As an alternative, I would propose the following: starting June of 1942, the Soviets get 1 rifle corps upgrade per turn. No AP cost involved. From Jan 43 on, increase this to 2 per turn and keep it there for the rest of the war. These could be banked.


I like the idea. But you would still have an AP system to form brigades, SUs etc. How many APs would you allow for that purpose per turn if Corps were treated as their own currency? Would you leave it at 50?

(in reply to Flaviusx)
Post #: 414
RE: T57 - Southwest - 7/2/2014 6:32:16 AM   
Flaviusx


Posts: 7750
Joined: 9/9/2009
From: Southern California
Status: offline 		Sure, lower to 50 for the Sovs. Maybe even lower (and for both sides) if you restrict APs to command functions only. I could even imagine doing something along the lines of 40 APs for the Axis for the whole war, 20 for the Sovs in 41, 30 in 42, 40 from 43 on or somesuch.

Honestly I'd prefer to completely eliminate APs for use of new unit construction altogether. If not straight up historical orders of battle than a different currency than APs. With APs limited only to unit reassignments and leader changes, you can restrict the budget and use the AP budget to fully reflect Soviet command and control issues. That is not possible right now because APs have to cover a multitude of sins and you can't exercise any major degree of granularity or precision here. This makes it a bit too easy to straighten out Soviet command and control since the budget is very generous when you forego builds and conversions (which mostly aren't even available in 41.)

_____________________________

WitE Alpha Tester

(in reply to Oshawott)
Post #: 415
RE: T57 - Southwest - 7/2/2014 6:54:18 AM   
gradenko2k

 

Posts: 935
Joined: 12/27/2010
Status: offline 		I'd definitely be interested in an alternate campaign where the Soviets have a completely historical OOB. It'd even knock out Sapper spam on Corps units.

(in reply to Flaviusx)
Post #: 416
RE: T57 - Southwest - 7/2/2014 12:58:16 PM   
charlie0311

 

Posts: 941
Joined: 12/20/2013
Status: offline 		so slow a typist and thinker that the browser bails before I get much said.

raw materials is cav, inf, and arm formations

cav corp 5 APs, inf corp 10 APs, arm corp 20 APs,

leaving out all the remarks about soviet capabilities in ww2

(in reply to gradenko2k)
Post #: 417
RE: T57 - Southwest - 7/2/2014 2:11:21 PM   
Oshawott

 

Posts: 1353
Joined: 10/30/2013
Status: offline
quote:

cav corp 5 APs, inf corp 10 APs, arm corp 20 APs,


I think you are using outdated information. Cost of Rifle Corps is 20 AP prior to 1943. Yes, formation of Cavalry Corps only costs 5 AP but that is if you limit yourself to the cavalry divisions you receive as reinforcements. The real cost for a cavalry corps made from scratch is 65 AP. Formation of Tank and Mech Corps is limited anyway because of truck shortages.

(in reply to charlie0311)
Post #: 418
RE: T57 - Southwest - 7/2/2014 3:22:18 PM   
charlie0311

 

Posts: 941
Joined: 12/20/2013
Status: offline 		checked updated manual, 20 APs per rifle corp until '43, as you say.

Looks like, in my case anyway, I will be limited to one or two corp formations per week.

how many tank armies (three corp each) does the truck and production system support

btw, thx for all your help

(in reply to Oshawott)
Post #: 419
RE: T57 - Southwest - 7/2/2014 3:41:06 PM   
Oshawott

 

Posts: 1353
Joined: 10/30/2013
Status: offline
quote:

how many tank armies (three corp each) does the truck and production system support


Hard to give any general advise. It all depends on how the Soviets do in 41. Then it also depends on what you want to do with your Tank Corps. For example you could leave your tank brigades at 50% TOE and then form Tank Corps at 50% TOE using only half the trucks. Then during the course of the war you can slowly increase the TOE settings according to your truck situation.

In this game I build 14 Tank Corps which are all close to 100% TOE.

I think veteran Soviet players like Flavius, gingerbread and Gabriel have a lot more experience and will be able to give you better and more detailed advise.

(in reply to charlie0311)
Post #: 420
Page:   <<   < prev  12 13 [14] 15 16   next >   >>
All Forums >> [New Releases from Matrix Games] >> Gary Grigsby's War in the East Series >> After Action Reports >> T54 - Kursk Sector Page: <<   < prev  12 13 [14] 15 16   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

1.055