RE: Glvaca v Panzerjeager Hortlund (no Hortlund)

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: Glvaca v Panzerjeager Hortlund (no Hortlund)

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: Glvaca v Panzerjeager Hortlund (no Hortlund)

Page: << < prev 2 3 4 [5] 6 next > >>

Message

<< Older Topic Newer Topic >>

RE: Glvaca v Panzerjeager Hortlund (no Hortlund) - 7/16/2017 5:04:14 PM

glvaca

Posts: 1312
Joined: 6/13/2006
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: sillyflower

quote:

ORIGINAL: glvaca

AIR

His base bombing offensive is now in full swing. I lose more than 100 fighters in one turn,

I hope BrianG does not read this AAR. It would do great damage to his self-esteem

It's because of reading your AAR I thought airbase bombing was suicide

(in reply to sillyflower)

Post #: 121

RE: Glvaca v Panzerjeager Hortlund (no Hortlund) - 7/16/2017 5:06:39 PM

glvaca

Posts: 1312
Joined: 6/13/2006
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Telemecus

quote:

ORIGINAL: glvaca
What makes it even more annoying is that the drop was intercepted an NO unit is actually in the hex. Perhaps that should be looked at.

In the destroyed units screen at the beginning of the turn was there a lost airborne unit? My guess is with those kind of losses of transport aircraft the whole unit must have been destroyed in mid-air? If so the missing unit is not a bad thing but a good thing. The question remains though should they have been able to flip a hex control doing that?

quote:

ORIGINAL: glvaca
For the first time I see a strange message in the event log.
Apparently 50K German population is missing?

As the event log says Axis could that be from the Hungarian marauders?

RE flipped hex: exactly.

RE 50K: very good idea, could well be that the marauders left a mark and lived of the those poor 50K Hungarian peasants!

(in reply to Telemecus)

Post #: 122

RE: Glvaca v Panzerjeager Hortlund (no Hortlund) - 7/16/2017 5:21:40 PM

glvaca

Posts: 1312
Joined: 6/13/2006
Status: offline

TURN9 NORTH
The Neva is crossed by a massive assault, armour may look good in combat strength but is very fragile. I cross with 2 top infantry divisions and a motorized division. The concentration of forces at Leningrad leaves me shorthanded in infantry elsewhere but I have been sending reinforcements
to the area mostly from AGS and from new arrivals.
I close some gaps and isolate unit s and start to show interest in the right hook. He counters with only a few units.

Attachment (1)

(in reply to glvaca)

Post #: 123

RE: Glvaca v Panzerjeager Hortlund (no Hortlund) - 7/16/2017 5:21:42 PM

Telemecus

Posts: 4689
Joined: 3/20/2016
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: glvaca

the marauders left a mark and lived of the those poor 50K Hungarian peasants!

Soylent Green Goulash?

(in reply to glvaca)

Post #: 124

RE: Glvaca v Panzerjeager Hortlund (no Hortlund) - 7/16/2017 5:22:49 PM

glvaca

Posts: 1312
Joined: 6/13/2006
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Telemecus

quote:

ORIGINAL: glvaca

the marauders left a mark and lived of the those poor 50K Hungarian peasants!

Soylent Green Goulash?

A conneseur?

(in reply to Telemecus)

Post #: 125

RE: Glvaca v Panzerjeager Hortlund (no Hortlund) - 7/16/2017 5:27:41 PM

EwaldvonKleist

Posts: 2038
Joined: 4/14/2016
From: Berlin, Germany
Status: offline

quote:

His base bombing offensive is now in full swing. I lose more than 100 fighters in one turn,

You need to stop this NOW, or you will be without airforce during the last turns before mud. The snowball must be stopped before it gets too big.

(in reply to glvaca)

Post #: 126

RE: Glvaca v Panzerjeager Hortlund (no Hortlund) - 7/16/2017 5:30:57 PM

glvaca

Posts: 1312
Joined: 6/13/2006
Status: offline

TURN9 CENTRE
Looking at the pics now writing the AAR I see I was an idiot not taking into account the 1Hex move rule and, off course, another para drop.
To my huge satisfaction, the para unit retreats in the pocket

From now on, all para units have a bulls eye on their front, back and centre

Still, once more a turn lost in pushing East. It is clearly visible that the Mud turn has done wonders to his defence for Moscow.

Attachment (1)

< Message edited by glvaca -- 7/16/2017 5:34:15 PM >

(in reply to glvaca)

Post #: 127

RE: Glvaca v Panzerjeager Hortlund (no Hortlund) - 7/16/2017 5:33:19 PM

glvaca

Posts: 1312
Joined: 6/13/2006
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: EwaldvonKleist

quote:

His base bombing offensive is now in full swing. I lose more than 100 fighters in one turn,

You need to stop this NOW, or you will be without airforce during the last turns before mud. The snowball must be stopped before it gets too big.

I know and I can tell I have. I transfer several air groups from the South and experiment with flak in aircorps and air armies. However, see questions on page 4.

(in reply to EwaldvonKleist)

Post #: 128

RE: Glvaca v Panzerjeager Hortlund (no Hortlund) - 7/16/2017 5:38:34 PM

Telemecus

Posts: 4689
Joined: 3/20/2016
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: glvaca
I transfer several air groups from the South and experiment with flak in aircorps and air armies. However, see questions on page 4.

Personally I do not think flak makes too big a difference. It may stop enemy airforces pressing home their attacks (as opposed to destroying the enemy) but is never the same as a good fighter defence.

Have you thought about range? Almost all Soviet fighters are shorter range than yours - so it is possible to keep your bases in range of the front but out of Soviet fighter range? If the base bombing is escorted this is something to consider.

I guess we will have to wait for future turns AAR first though.

< Message edited by Telemecus -- 7/16/2017 5:40:06 PM >

(in reply to glvaca)

Post #: 129

RE: Glvaca v Panzerjeager Hortlund (no Hortlund) - 7/16/2017 5:44:39 PM

glvaca

Posts: 1312
Joined: 6/13/2006
Status: offline

TURN9 CENTRE2

In the meantime 4th Army has been busy, crossing several major rivers, capturing Gomel with its industry and isolating some units.
My guess is he's trying a checker board defence to slow me down, but I don't mind. I have time and airborne brigades are high on my priority list.

Attachment (1)

< Message edited by glvaca -- 7/16/2017 5:47:54 PM >

(in reply to Telemecus)

Post #: 130

RE: Glvaca v Panzerjeager Hortlund (no Hortlund) - 7/16/2017 5:50:58 PM

glvaca

Posts: 1312
Joined: 6/13/2006
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Telemecus

quote:

ORIGINAL: glvaca
I transfer several air groups from the South and experiment with flak in aircorps and air armies. However, see questions on page 4.

Personally I do not think flak makes too big a difference. It may stop enemy airforces pressing home their attacks (as opposed to destroying the enemy) but is never the same as a good fighter defence.

Have you thought about range? Almost all Soviet fighters are shorter range than yours - so it is possible to keep your bases in range of the front but out of Soviet fighter range? If the base bombing is escorted this is something to consider.

I guess we will have to wait for future turns AAR first though.

I have to be honest and admit I haven't paid as much attention to the air war as I should. A lot has changed and I have to catch up.
I do think flak makes a difference but I will need to play more with ranges and putting units on night missions to avoid burning them before his turn. However, at T15 we have about parity in numbers and I'm planning a major reorganization during mud.

(in reply to Telemecus)

Post #: 131

RE: Glvaca v Panzerjeager Hortlund (no Hortlund) - 7/16/2017 5:54:54 PM

EwaldvonKleist

Posts: 2038
Joined: 4/14/2016
From: Berlin, Germany
Status: offline

From my liited exp. the best fighter for airfield bombign is the Mig 3 due to speed and good range. If you threaten Moscow, he has to evacuate and will be short of them. In this case you only need to move your bases a few hexagons back and his bombers are unprotected. Cross cover of the air armies is also a good way to make airfield bombing too costly. Stacking all fighters of an air army on one base should also help.

(in reply to glvaca)

Post #: 132

RE: Glvaca v Panzerjeager Hortlund (no Hortlund) - 7/16/2017 6:25:02 PM

glvaca

Posts: 1312
Joined: 6/13/2006
Status: offline

TURN9 SOUTH
The South becomes a mix between a clean-up, reorganization and a badly executed lunch towards Kharkov. The T34 factory has long since gone.
2 Corps are combined. 2ndPzg Corps to get a HQ buildup on T10 to go back North and the 1stPzG Corps to get a refit turn, and a HQ build-up on T10 for a dash to Stalino.
In the meantime the infantry advances.

Attachment (1)

< Message edited by glvaca -- 7/16/2017 11:15:23 PM >

(in reply to EwaldvonKleist)

Post #: 133

RE: Glvaca v Panzerjeager Hortlund (no Hortlund) - 7/16/2017 6:28:58 PM

glvaca

Posts: 1312
Joined: 6/13/2006
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: EwaldvonKleist

From my liited exp. the best fighter for airfield bombign is the Mig 3 due to speed and good range. If you threaten Moscow, he has to evacuate and will be short of them. In this case you only need to move your bases a few hexagons back and his bombers are unprotected. Cross cover of the air armies is also a good way to make airfield bombing too costly. Stacking all fighters of an air army on one base should also help.

The Mig3 is indeed the best early war fighter the Sovs have. What it also has is good high altitude performance. I don't know if it is used by the engine though. In any case, nothing the Sovs have can beat an bf109 F4 in expert hands. It's probably due to my mishandling of my airforce, but I find the Sovs a bit to good in the air.
There's a lot more to come

Actually, if you want to dive a bit deeper into the historical air battles in the East, try the series by Christer Bergstr�m.
In short: the Russian pilots were so inexperienced they where sent to the front after only 4-5 hours flying time. Compare this to Navy Seals fighting conscripts who haven't fired a shot before being put to the front. Guess who wins

< Message edited by glvaca -- 7/16/2017 6:39:00 PM >

(in reply to EwaldvonKleist)

Post #: 134

RE: Glvaca v Panzerjeager Hortlund (no Hortlund) - 7/16/2017 6:35:03 PM

glvaca

Posts: 1312
Joined: 6/13/2006
Status: offline

OOB

Attachment (1)

(in reply to glvaca)

Post #: 135

RE: Glvaca v Panzerjeager Hortlund (no Hortlund) - 7/16/2017 6:36:01 PM

glvaca

Posts: 1312
Joined: 6/13/2006
Status: offline

AIR
A bit better but not optimal.

Attachment (1)

(in reply to glvaca)

Post #: 136

RE: Glvaca v Panzerjeager Hortlund (no Hortlund) - 7/16/2017 6:36:57 PM

glvaca

Posts: 1312
Joined: 6/13/2006
Status: offline

GROUND

Attachment (1)

(in reply to glvaca)

Post #: 137

RE: Glvaca v Panzerjeager Hortlund (no Hortlund) - 7/16/2017 6:39:54 PM

HardLuckYetAgain

Posts: 6987
Joined: 2/5/2016
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: glvaca

quote:

ORIGINAL: EwaldvonKleist

quote:

His base bombing offensive is now in full swing. I lose more than 100 fighters in one turn,

You need to stop this NOW, or you will be without airforce during the last turns before mud. The snowball must be stopped before it gets too big.

I know and I can tell I have. I transfer several air groups from the South and experiment with flak in aircorps and air armies. However, see questions on page 4.

Flak makes a difference.

But one question and excuse me if you answered before. Are you flying interdiction mission?

_____________________________

(in reply to glvaca)

Post #: 138

RE: Glvaca v Panzerjeager Hortlund (no Hortlund) - 7/16/2017 6:43:47 PM

glvaca

Posts: 1312
Joined: 6/13/2006
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: HardLuckYetAgain

quote:

ORIGINAL: glvaca

quote:

ORIGINAL: EwaldvonKleist

quote:

His base bombing offensive is now in full swing. I lose more than 100 fighters in one turn,

You need to stop this NOW, or you will be without airforce during the last turns before mud. The snowball must be stopped before it gets too big.

I know and I can tell I have. I transfer several air groups from the South and experiment with flak in aircorps and air armies. However, see questions on page 4.

Flak makes a difference.

But one question and excuse me if you answered before. Are you flying interdiction mission?

I did at the start but fairly quickly concluded it's the best way to wreck the German airforce for little return.

what I'm having trouble with is getting flak in Aricorps and air armies to help out when bombed. Sometimes they do help, sometimes they do nothing even when stacked with the airbases.
Do they have to be attached to the Aircorps/Army in order for them to help out?

(in reply to HardLuckYetAgain)

Post #: 139

RE: Glvaca v Panzerjeager Hortlund (no Hortlund) - 7/16/2017 6:49:17 PM

EwaldvonKleist

Posts: 2038
Joined: 4/14/2016
From: Berlin, Germany
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL:The Mig3 is indeed the best early war fighter the Sovs have. What it also has is good high altitude performance. I don't know if it is used by the engine though. In any case, nothing the Sovs have can beat an bf109 F4 in expert hands. It's probably due to my mishandling of my airforce, but I find the Sovs a bit to good in the air.
There's a lot more to come

Actually, if you want to dive a bit deeper into the historical air battles in the East, try the series by Christer Bergstr�m.
In short: the Russian pilots were so inexperienced they where sent to the front after only 4-5 hours flying time. Compare this to Navy Seals fighting conscripts who haven't fired a shot before being put to the front. Guess who wins

I have far less eastern front knowledge than many here. But the air war follows the same pattern as the ground war: Axis players aren't as stupid as Hitler and Soviet players not as stupid as Stalin. The only important thing is that there is no strategy that can't be countered. 5 hours pilots are 30 morale 30 exp guys in WitE. Almost everyone will train them up first, so the results are not as bad as historical.

A test game Dinglir vs. Hardluck would be good to check the balance of the air war :)

(in reply to glvaca)

Post #: 140

RE: Glvaca v Panzerjeager Hortlund (no Hortlund) - 7/16/2017 7:46:50 PM

glvaca

Posts: 1312
Joined: 6/13/2006
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: EwaldvonKleist

quote:

ORIGINAL:The Mig3 is indeed the best early war fighter the Sovs have. What it also has is good high altitude performance. I don't know if it is used by the engine though. In any case, nothing the Sovs have can beat an bf109 F4 in expert hands. It's probably due to my mishandling of my airforce, but I find the Sovs a bit to good in the air.
There's a lot more to come

Actually, if you want to dive a bit deeper into the historical air battles in the East, try the series by Christer Bergstr�m.
In short: the Russian pilots were so inexperienced they where sent to the front after only 4-5 hours flying time. Compare this to Navy Seals fighting conscripts who haven't fired a shot before being put to the front. Guess who wins

I have far less eastern front knowledge than many here. But the air war follows the same pattern as the ground war: Axis players aren't as stupid as Hitler and Soviet players not as stupid as Stalin. The only important thing is that there is no strategy that can't be countered. 5 hours pilots are 30 morale 30 exp guys in WitE. Almost everyone will train them up first, so the results are not as bad as historical.

A test game Dinglir vs. Hardluck would be good to check the balance of the air war :)

Agreed, to a certain degree.
there's more, The Sovs had no radio's except the flight leader and they where of dubious quality. Bad command and control from base. So they had to fly close enough to each other for orders through hand signals or through wing/flap signals.
flying close means you have very limited view on what is going on at your six (rear). Flying within 50m of each other in nice formation is cool but it takes a high degree of your brain power to do so, even more if you're very inexperienced. So it happened frequently that they flew behind each other, tail end Charlie is always the first to go.
In contrast, the Luftwaffe was a superbly oiled machine. Expertly led, in the air and on the ground. Actually, the Ju88 is a dive bomber and in expert hands it could compete with the Ju87 in accuracy. Unfortunately (like other Russian planes) it is a level bomber (which it off course also did).
they had developed the finger 4 formation which the British, USA and Sovs copied at one point or another. With 2 pairs, each plane flying about 400-500m from each other giving perfect view of the rear.
I can go on and on. Point is, experience of the pilots is one thing, tactics and leadership is another and it took until well into 1943 (Kursk) before the Russians came even close.

(in reply to EwaldvonKleist)

Post #: 141

RE: Glvaca v Panzerjeager Hortlund (no Hortlund) - 7/16/2017 7:48:58 PM

glvaca

Posts: 1312
Joined: 6/13/2006
Status: offline

I sent a PM to PH and invited him into the AAR to comment. Haven't received a reply but just so you know should he enter or post in the AAR.

< Message edited by glvaca -- 7/16/2017 7:49:16 PM >

(in reply to glvaca)

Post #: 142

RE: Glvaca v Panzerjeager Hortlund (no Hortlund) - 7/16/2017 7:58:26 PM

Telemecus

Posts: 4689
Joined: 3/20/2016
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: glvaca

I sent a PM to PH and invited him into the AAR to comment. Haven't received a reply but just so you know should he enter or post in the AAR.

I will edit out all those bad names I have been calling PH!

(in reply to glvaca)

Post #: 143

RE: Glvaca v Panzerjeager Hortlund (no Hortlund) - 7/16/2017 8:02:43 PM

glvaca

Posts: 1312
Joined: 6/13/2006
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Telemecus

quote:

ORIGINAL: glvaca

I sent a PM to PH and invited him into the AAR to comment. Haven't received a reply but just so you know should he enter or post in the AAR.

I will edit out all those bad names I have been calling PH!

Do it quickly!

(in reply to Telemecus)

Post #: 144

RE: Glvaca v Panzerjeager Hortlund (no Hortlund) - 7/17/2017 4:09:54 AM

Dinglir

Posts: 620
Joined: 3/10/2016
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: glvaca

quote:

ORIGINAL: EwaldvonKleist
From my liited exp. the best fighter for airfield bombign is the Mig 3 due to speed and good range.

The Mig3 is indeed the best early war fighter the Sovs have.

In my opinion that is not strictly true.

The MiG-3 is the best early war escort fighter the Soviets have - due to it's high speed (compairing to other Soviet fighters) and long range. Unfortunately it is armed with little but the curses of its pilots.
The LaGG-3 is the best interceptor the Soviets have due to its heavy punch (again compairing to other Soviet aircraft). However, in a dogfight with other fighters, it will perform like a flying brick.
The Yak-1 is the best early war dogfighter the Soviets have, due to its combination of speed and firepower.

It all depends on what role you intend the fighter to fullfill.

_____________________________

To be is to do -- Socrates
To do is to be -- Jean-Paul Sartre
Do be do be do -- Frank Sinatra

(in reply to glvaca)

Post #: 145

RE: Glvaca v Panzerjeager Hortlund (no Hortlund) - 7/17/2017 6:00:38 AM

glvaca

Posts: 1312
Joined: 6/13/2006
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Dinglir

quote:

ORIGINAL: glvaca

quote:

ORIGINAL: EwaldvonKleist
From my liited exp. the best fighter for airfield bombign is the Mig 3 due to speed and good range.

The Mig3 is indeed the best early war fighter the Sovs have.

In my opinion that is not strictly true.

The MiG-3 is the best early war escort fighter the Soviets have - due to it's high speed (compairing to other Soviet fighters) and long range. Unfortunately it is armed with little but the curses of its pilots.
The LaGG-3 is the best interceptor the Soviets have due to its heavy punch (again compairing to other Soviet aircraft). However, in a dogfight with other fighters, it will perform like a flying brick.
The Yak-1 is the best early war dogfighter the Soviets have, due to its combination of speed and firepower.

It all depends on what role you intend the fighter to fullfill.

The Yak is not bad. The Yak1B is much better. Both have only one nouse mounted cannon and like 15 sec (if that) of ammo. And the Svhak's but don't have the high altitude performance of the Mig.
The Mig's svhak MG's aren't so bad, they do tend to set things on fire.

The Lagg-3 if a coffin, you need to have altitude on a Bf109 to even have a chance and the F4 climbes like a rocket, is faster, out turns you, out dives you.

But I guess we can keep this up for quite a while

(in reply to Dinglir)

Post #: 146

RE: Glvaca v Panzerjeager Hortlund (no Hortlund) - 7/20/2017 6:45:27 PM

bigbaba

Posts: 1238
Joined: 11/3/2006
From: Koblenz, Germany
Status: offline

glvaca, what fonts do you use for the statistic screens and how do use it? looks very good and easy to read.

(in reply to glvaca)

Post #: 147

RE: Glvaca v Panzerjeager Hortlund (no Hortlund) - 7/21/2017 8:40:59 AM

glvaca

Posts: 1312
Joined: 6/13/2006
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: bigbaba

glvaca, what fonts do you use for the statistic screens and how do use it? looks very good and easy to read.

Hi Bigbaba,

These are the mods I use, I think they also change the fonts.

Attachment (1)

(in reply to bigbaba)

Post #: 148

RE: Glvaca v Panzerjeager Hortlund (no Hortlund) - 7/21/2017 9:56:44 AM

glvaca

Posts: 1312
Joined: 6/13/2006
Status: offline

PH did not respond to my offer to present his views in the AAR so as of now he is no longer allowed to visit this AAR.
I'll continue with the AAR shortly.

(in reply to glvaca)

Post #: 149

RE: Glvaca v Panzerjeager Hortlund (no Hortlund) - 7/21/2017 12:00:02 PM

Telemecus

Posts: 4689
Joined: 3/20/2016
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: glvaca
In contrast, the Luftwaffe was a superbly oiled machine. Expertly led, in the air and on the ground. Actually, the Ju88 is a dive bomber and in expert hands it could compete with the Ju87 in accuracy. Unfortunately (like other Russian planes) it is a level bomber (which it off course also did).

While the point is valid I just wanted to put some of the contrary views. A lot of the historical research I was reading up on actually points to the Nazi period as the most inefficient in German history. There were numerous redundancies on everything as multiple agencies were tasked with the same job and competed more on political rivalries. In a centralised system you could at least claim there is no duplication and clear lines of responsibility, in a decentralised system normally the incentive to compete on results. The Nazi system combined the worst elements of both. It successes were more due to the heroic efforts of those who worked in it than because of it.

Whatever Goerings qualities as a Nazi politician and pilot, as head of the Luftwaffe he was no asset. His deputies like Udet really did the good work - and then they started committing suicide.

Nazi administration grossly inflated equipment requirements and procurement. The dive bombing capability not just of the Ju88 but other "level bombers" was a case in point. Why create a requirement which will then not be used. Whatever the jokes about Soviet equipment it was brutally well procured. Soviet designers had the expected life spans and battle durations of equipment and reduced tolerances and design specifications accordingly. Soviet armaments were production engineer led whereas Germany was design engineer led. Soviet production tended to be on a moving assembly line with hard moulds, fixed jigs etc, German production on a standing assembly line with adjustable moulds and jigs. German procurement specifically required "flexibility" from manufacturers - and used it constantly. There were numerous variations made which were mostly "nice to haves". Nor were they block phased, they were introduced straight away. So typically on a German production line the next to be finished was a different version from the last to be commenced. Although the Tiger tank is not an aircraft, its story is analogous. The manual of the first tiger tanks boasted it took 100,000 man hours to produce, ten times more than the best Soviet tanks. It is a good tank, but not as good as ten of the best Soviet tanks.

Added to this the Luftwaffe had its own doctrinal dead ends. They never had a heavy bomber. And not only was the dive bombing capability of level bombers superfluous, even the Stuka dive bombers became worthless without air superiority. The jet fighter was needlessly delayed by the requirement that it should carry bombs. And so on.

While ultimately the Allies had the industrial might, Germany still was a major modern industrial nation. It simply should not have ceded air superiority in the west as soon as it did.

Rather than seeing the Luftwaffe as a well lead and oiled machine it would be better to see it as the enthusiastic glider pilots who learnt their war time trade fighting as the Condor Legion in Spain. They were effective as they "learnt by doing". As the core was lost and the organisation expanded it lost its edge as the allies learnt faster by doing more.

< Message edited by Telemecus -- 7/21/2017 2:08:06 PM >

(in reply to glvaca)

Post #: 150

Page: << < prev 2 3 4 [5] 6 next > >>

All Forums >> [New Releases from Matrix Games] >> Gary Grigsby's War in the East Series >> After Action Reports >> RE: Glvaca v Panzerjeager Hortlund (no Hortlund)