1941 as the Germans - creating pockets or not?

Matrix Games Forums

Forums Register Login Photo Gallery Member List Search Calendars FAQ

My Profile Inbox Address Book My Subscription My Forums Log Out

1941 as the Germans - creating pockets or not?

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 >> 1941 as the Germans - creating pockets or not?

Page: [1]

Message

<< Older Topic Newer Topic >>

1941 as the Germans - creating pockets or not? - 8/9/2014 2:13:33 AM

RealChuckB

Posts: 284
Joined: 9/29/2003
Status: offline

After purchasing WitE a while ago, I'm only now really trying to getting into the game.
I'm playing the "Road to Leningrad" scenario as the Germans (so far, on "easy"), read a couple of AARs on this scenario and have the following overall questions:

Several AARs describe how to create pockets during the first turn(s). In my first attempt, I decdided NOT to do that but attack on a broader front and easily overcame the (light) resistance basically across the whole front by doing hasty attacks with my infantry. Overall, this appears to be a non-historical, but workable approach so far.

While I read about creating pockets in the AARs, I have not really found a good description of what people do with these pockets in the following turn(s). It is my understanding that the advantage of pockets is that you are cutting the pocketed units off from supply (lowering their defense when fighting them) and that pocketed units will not simply rout and become displaced but will be completely destroyed.
What are people doing in the turn(s) after creating the pocket? Are they immediately start reducing the pocket by attacking the units within and if so, from both sides of the pocket or is there a different way to do this?

It seems to me that the disadvantage of the pocket approach is that if may be slower, because you have to first create the pocket and then reduce it, but then again, this ultimately may not be a problem, since your Panzers can race ahead only so far, since they will probably be stopped by supply (and support by the infantry) anyway.

I would like to better understand how people are playing the begining of the campaign (probably not too different for the three different opening drives of Barbarossa overall) and why they choose one approach over the other.

Thanks!

< Message edited by Chuck B. -- 8/9/2014 4:13:24 AM >

Post #: 1

RE: 1941 as the Germans - creating pockets or not? - 8/9/2014 5:41:31 AM

cpt flam

Posts: 2352
Joined: 1/16/2011
From: caen - France
Status: offline

for me i will later destroy units inside by troops closest from supply; this way they will continue to advance, otherwise you will have to stop to reduce the pocket.
I'm not the best among germans but it works. Advantage of this, russia must rebuilt units destroyed. Spending men and armament faster than just refitting them.Furthermore they will come with low EXP and moral.
Other way you will not inflict enough losses to pass winter in a cool way.

_____________________________

(in reply to RealChuckB)

Post #: 2

RE: 1941 as the Germans - creating pockets or not? - 8/9/2014 6:32:31 AM

loki100

Posts: 10920
Joined: 10/20/2012
From: Utlima Thule
Status: offline

You need to give the pocket one turn (ie a Soviet player/AI turn) and then start to reduce. The bulk of the losses are then coded as 'prisoners' in the casualty screen and you will see the units as 'destroyed' in that part of the casualty screen.

The trade off between going east and producing and reducing pockets is a bit false. To get the space you need to keep moving, you have to reduce the Red Army, even a battered rifle division has a zone of control and will cost you movement points.

Also units you destroy early game come back, as cpt flam says in a pretty poor state - they also suck up Soviet armament and manpower to replace.

It becomes more obvious in the campaign, but I use the prisoner of war number as a rough and ready estimate for how well a campaign is going. Broadly I'd say, by T24 (ie the start of the Soviet counteroffensive):

<1 million - the Germans are pretty much doomed, not only will they get hammered in the blizzard, the Soviets should be able to stall them easily in 1942 (see Oshawatt vs Stef78 for an eg);
1.3-1.8 million - this is the sort of balance point, the Soviet winter offensive is going to be nasty, but should be relatively easy to hold, the Germans have a good shot at 1942.
> 2 million - the Soviets are in deep trouble, the winter offensive will achieve little and they are very vulnerable in 1942 (see Oshawatt vs Wallas, or Stef78 vs Frogmarc as egs).

I realise that a lot else counts, not least where the front is, Soviet industrial capacity and so on, but to some extent making pockets and forcing surrenders are your main tools to keep the Soviets under control. They will add about 1.2-1.5 million to their OOB in the winter regardless of what you do, if that means by April 1942 they are well over 7 million, you are going to struggle in 1942.

_____________________________

(in reply to cpt flam)

Post #: 3

RE: 1941 as the Germans - creating pockets or not? - 8/9/2014 9:11:58 AM

Lictuel

Posts: 221
Joined: 4/18/2013
Status: offline

Is there a specific reason why you would use the POW number and not the total amount of men lost for that assessment loki?

(in reply to loki100)

Post #: 4

RE: 1941 as the Germans - creating pockets or not? - 8/9/2014 10:07:27 AM

loki100

Posts: 10920
Joined: 10/20/2012
From: Utlima Thule
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Lictuel

Is there a specific reason why you would use the POW number and not the total amount of men lost for that assessment loki?

I guess its because of the knock on effects.

If those PoWs happen before November, then the returning units will put the Soviet industry under a lot of stress - they tend, at least for one turn, to draw down manpower and armaments. Those are the units shown in the Soviet reinf schedule as coming back with a few hundred men but by the time you open the turn are often up around 9-10,000. There's nothing the Soviet player can do about this, so in effect a lot of potentially scarce resources pours into units with morale in the mid/low 30s.

If its after December, the unit is removed from the game and it will cost the Soviets admin points to recreate, as well as the problem above.

On the other hand, a Soviet player can deal with direct combat losses as they need - which units you pull out the line, which you choose for reinforcing and so on.

Also PoWs come back as Hiwis - a huge help to axis manpower come mid-1942.

Finally my feeling is that a Red Army with lots of units can absorb a German offensive in 1942, even if it struggles to mount much of an attack itself. So to create the space needed for the Germans to make progress, you need as small a Red Army as you can. In this respect, small is both in terms of total manpower and counters - the latter is one reason why I (if playing the Soviets) don't convert many brigades-divisions or divisions-corps till I'm pretty sure the Germans have run out of offensive capacity.

But having said all that, its just a simple rule of thumb, and a single number that I feel (from my own games and AARs) seems to provide a strong clue as to relative progress.

_____________________________

(in reply to Lictuel)

Post #: 5

RE: 1941 as the Germans - creating pockets or not? - 8/9/2014 10:42:54 AM

carlkay58

Posts: 8650
Joined: 7/25/2010
Status: offline

With version 1.8, Loki is correct. However, due to the Soviet 9/41 TOE change, the Axis can benefit by NOT destroying Soviet units in the earlier versions. Why? Because the same problem with upgrading that bites the Axis in the rear is collapsing the Soviets in 41. If you do not destroy the Soviet units in 41, they rebuild - spending manpower and, even more importantly, ARM points to re-equip. Then comes the upgrade in 9/41. The current versions have an upgrade occur by 'scrapping' the old TOE and then building the new TOE from scratch. When you scrap a unit, you get 90% of the manpower but only 10% of the ARM points returned to the pool. This was effectively emptying the Soviet ARM pool by mid 9/41 when all of the units were still in play. But, as I said above, this is fixed in 1.8 so the tactic now goes out the window and Loki's strategy is the better way to go. TOE upgrades in 1.8 switch the existing TOE into manpower and ARM pts without penalty and then use them to form the new TOE. MUCH BETTER!

(in reply to loki100)

Post #: 6

RE: 1941 as the Germans - creating pockets or not? - 8/9/2014 11:21:58 AM

Lictuel

Posts: 221
Joined: 4/18/2013
Status: offline

I see so you basically use POW numbers as an indicator of the number of destroyed soviet formations.
I'm mostly interested in this because I'm playing my very first GC41 as the GHC. Turn 30 and the soviets lost ~4m men (2m in POWs) Moscow was taken as was Leningrad both with most of their industry still intact. Also D-town was taken with all arm points in place, but it is also the furthest extend of my expansions in the south.
I find it really hard to judge how much damage all that did to the SHC.

(in reply to carlkay58)

Post #: 7

RE: 1941 as the Germans - creating pockets or not? - 8/9/2014 7:30:46 PM

loki100

Posts: 10920
Joined: 10/20/2012
From: Utlima Thule
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Lictuel

I see so you basically use POW numbers as an indicator of the number of destroyed soviet formations.
I'm mostly interested in this because I'm playing my very first GC41 as the GHC. Turn 30 and the soviets lost ~4m men (2m in POWs) Moscow was taken as was Leningrad both with most of their industry still intact. Also D-town was taken with all arm points in place, but it is also the furthest extend of my expansions in the south.
I find it really hard to judge how much damage all that did to the SHC.

well I was also trying to explain to the OP why pockets are essential - there is no other way that is as efficient at keeping the size of the Read Army down.

As to your game, I'd say you are doing well. The loss of that industry will badly hurt their armaments production (which matters a lot in 42-43) and their heavy industry losses will hit their supply production. This tends to raise its head about mid-43 onwards when the Soviets need to be on the offensive, so even if they survive, they will struggle to sustain their offensive. Probably the only problem is not clearing the Dombas-Kharkov region, but I doubt that will fully compensate?

_____________________________

(in reply to Lictuel)

Post #: 8

RE: 1941 as the Germans - creating pockets or not? - 8/10/2014 1:23:20 PM

STEF78

Posts: 2094
Joined: 2/19/2012
From: Versailles, France
Status: offline

loki100 is right, as german you must focuse on pockets in 1941. Grinding isn't an issue.

Your goal must be >1.5 POW at least.

Try also to destroy industries, it's important on the long term if you cannot achieve a 1942's victory.

Then give ground in the South during the blizzard, unless you have caught more than 2M POW, use cities as anchors and counterattack everywhere you can!

Don't let russians quiet.

(in reply to loki100)

Post #: 9

RE: 1941 as the Germans - creating pockets or not? - 8/10/2014 5:55:04 PM

Lictuel

Posts: 221
Joined: 4/18/2013
Status: offline

I think I good a good portion of his industry and I have more than 2m POWs so I think my situation is pretty solid. The thing is I did not really cross the northern river bank of the Dnjepr. I made at max 30 miles headway to the north from the river. The result is a pretty massive salient that stretches from Karkow to Kiev to Gomel to Kaluga. I have not seen something like that before, its a result of me pouring everything into a drive for Moscow and Leningrad.

Currently we are at turn 33 and he is pushing on the Moscow - Vyazma , Gomel Starushki axis and in the southern Dnjepr bend. I made it my mission to keep more or less all mobile formations out of the fight though. They are sitting in cities and rest. I might start a brief AAR at some point, seeing how me and my opponent are pretty new that might be entertaining.

I did not start the game with a Lvov opening btw. that resulted in my opponent playing a more forward defense in the south which gave rise to a couple of smaller encirclements. I think the destroyed units and POWs from those really did help me survive winter so far.

(in reply to STEF78)

Post #: 10

RE: 1941 as the Germans - creating pockets or not? - 8/11/2014 7:17:48 PM

caliJP

Posts: 320
Joined: 8/5/2013
From: California
Status: offline

Regarding the number of soviet losses and what they mean for your future success as German, I think it there is a lot of variation depending on players and strategy.
For example Loki states that if the soviets suffer more than 2 million casualties they are in deep trouble. In my game against JC (see AAR), I purposely fought forward to keep the game more interesting and lost 3.5 millions as soviet by T17. Yet I was able to stop the German offensive by July 1942 and have been pushing back ever since. I am now in May 1943 with a soviet army of over 9 millions getting ready to put the hammer down.

_____________________________

(in reply to Lictuel)

Post #: 11

RE: 1941 as the Germans - creating pockets or not? - 8/11/2014 9:01:38 PM

loki100

Posts: 10920
Joined: 10/20/2012
From: Utlima Thule
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: caliJP

Regarding the number of soviet losses and what they mean for your future success as German, I think it there is a lot of variation depending on players and strategy.
For example Loki states that if the soviets suffer more than 2 million casualties they are in deep trouble. In my game against JC (see AAR), I purposely fought forward to keep the game more interesting and lost 3.5 millions as soviet by T17. Yet I was able to stop the German offensive by July 1942 and have been pushing back ever since. I am now in May 1943 with a soviet army of over 9 millions getting ready to put the hammer down.

aye, I remembered your AAR after I did the post. I think the basic logic stands, but it is a case of using a single figure to reflect what is quite a dynamic and complex situation.

Certainly around 2m seems to have been the tipping point for the 3 recent AARs that have seen a German player then manage to chew up the Red Army in a series of small pockets till it cracks later in 1942.

I'm fully in favour of fighting forward in 1941 even if its not optimal and most German players then reciprocate by using the mild blizzard to turn the winter into a fun tussle rather than turgid exercise in retreating a set number of hexes per turn.

_____________________________

(in reply to caliJP)

Post #: 12

RE: 1941 as the Germans - creating pockets or not? - 8/13/2014 6:11:17 AM

caliJP

Posts: 320
Joined: 8/5/2013
From: California
Status: offline

Loki yes the outcome can vary a lot based on player skill and strategies.
I think that's a good thing. This is a game, it's nice to be able to play it multiple times with different outcomes.
In the drive to make the game more realistic I hope the diversity of outcomes doesn't get reduced too much or it will become a very boring game.

Regarding losses and outcome, i think how far the Germans go in 1941 is also important. For example in the Stef vs Oshawott game, Oshawott was able to field a huge army in 1942 not just because he had suffered few losses in 1941, but also because he still had many population and industry centers which were intact. This gave Stef no chance to reverse the momentum in 1942. Of course for the Germans to go further east, they typically need to inflict more soviet losses, so those two tend to go hand in hand.

_____________________________

(in reply to loki100)

Post #: 13