Why not the do the von robin during first blizzard.

[Mike13z50]

So why don't the Germans emulate the Russians and just do the big von robin and run away before the first blizzard? Reading the various AAR, after the first winter the Wermacht is toast, but if you prevent the Soviets from gaining experience/morale by pounding you for three months, should have the same basic advantage come supper of 42. Plus no massive manpower losses.

Sure you would loose a bunch of the territory conquered in 41, but land has no value except time.


?

[JAMiAM]

Returning a bunch of manpower centers to the Soviets, so that they are repaired and dumping men into the Soviet force pool ahead of time is a bad idea. Running may 'save' the Wehrmacht in 1941/42, but will not help it long-term.

[BletchleyGeek]

As with many things in WitE, choosing an strategy and taking it to its latest logical consequences usually equates with shooting oneself on the foot.

Extreme Robin, for either side, aren't sound strategies in general. For the Axis, only if the Summer campaign has gone really, really bad. Better to aim at a 1942 Barbarossa restart

[marty_01]

ORIGINAL: Bletchley_Geek

As with many things in WitE, choosing an strategy and taking it to its latest logical consequences usually equates with shooting oneself on the foot.

Extreme Robin, for either side, aren't sound strategies in general. For the Axis, only if the Summer campaign has gone really, really bad. Better to aim at a 1942 Barbarossa restart

+1. Don't get tied down to population centers at the cost of an oozing Red encirclement. I love it when an Axis opponent imposses upon himself a "No Retreat" approach to territory during the 1st winter. Makes my work when playing the Reds so much easier and so much funner.

[Mike13z50]

ORIGINAL: JAMiAM

Returning a bunch of manpower centers to the Soviets, so that they are repaired and dumping men into the Soviet force pool ahead of time is a bad idea. Running may 'save' the Wehrmacht in 1941/42, but will not help it long-term.

So when the Soviets recapture Kiev it starts contributing to their manpower pool again, but for the Germans the high population is a negative, requiring a higher garrison.

Plus, I guess if you've captured actual "resource" points they keep producing, so there is some value to conquered territory for the German.

[Peltonx]

You dont get anything for captured Russian resourses, citys ect ect.

Its all about babysitting the red army if you have not figured it out yet.

Pelton

[Farfarer61]

Try it against the AI on a difficult setting. It actually a pain to get the troops back before the early Blizzard frostbite, so imagine doing it against a human. Something not tried ( by me) is halting end septempber after 2M Sov casualties, and pulling back in good order. 2M vs probaly 200K, and you save 1M winter casualties - tempting. Only problem is now your opponent knows you are going to do that, so he/she will plan accordingly, then you will change your plan...

[randallw]

I think someone tried the runner strategy vs the AI...that was many patches ago.

[76mm]

this discussion seems to be focused on choosing between a "hold fast" strategy and a "run-for-the-hills" strategy. In fact I think the best strategy is to pull back slowly to make it difficult for the Sovs to conduct deliberate attacks without losing too much terrain. If the Sovs keep following they won't be dug in come spring and the germans can regain much of the ground.

[Farfarer61]

Knowing in advance that you can save 1 million casualties by returning to Poland makes one think about options.

[Mehring]

ORIGINAL: 76mm

this discussion seems to be focused on choosing between a "hold fast" strategy and a "run-for-the-hills" strategy. In fact I think the best strategy is to pull back slowly to make it difficult for the Sovs to conduct deliberate attacks without losing too much terrain. If the Sovs keep following they won't be dug in come spring and the germans can regain much of the ground.

Exactly. Going back to Poland and holding fast are identical opposites. Both result in rapid defeat of the Axis, or at least, neither offers the prospect of victory.

[Ketza]

ORIGINAL: 76mm

this discussion seems to be focused on choosing between a "hold fast" strategy and a "run-for-the-hills" strategy. In fact I think the best strategy is to pull back slowly to make it difficult for the Sovs to conduct deliberate attacks without losing too much terrain. If the Sovs keep following they won't be dug in come spring and the germans can regain much of the ground.

76mm speaks the truth.

[vlcz]

ORIGINAL: Mehring
Exactly. Going back to Poland and holding fast are identical opposites. Both result in rapid defeat of the Axis, or at least, neither offers the prospect of victory.

not so sure in game terms, I think it depends on the in-game soviet 1at winter attack posibilities so far from their railheads, if germany can really keep that million men I think they should be capable of regaining the Dnieper line in 42 (if only because given the lack of FBD russians would not have the time to rebuild its logistical structure west of the river)
.. being in the dnieper at winter 42 can be far near germany than historical but having a million extra manpower and a defensible line (no "uranus" here) can be a much better start for a attritional 3 years war.

It surely doesnt allow for a try to "automatic victory" after winter, but if you are really in a position to be capable of that...you don´t really need a winter strategy...

[76mm]

ORIGINAL: Ketza
76mm speaks the truth.

I hope so, I learned it from you!

[Mehring]

ORIGINAL: vlcz

ORIGINAL: Mehring
Exactly. Going back to Poland and holding fast are identical opposites. Both result in rapid defeat of the Axis, or at least, neither offers the prospect of victory.

not so sure in game terms, I think it depends on the in-game soviet 1at winter attack posibilities so far from their railheads, if germany can really keep that million men I think they should be capable of regaining the Dnieper line in 42 (if only because given the lack of FBD russians would not have the time to rebuild its logistical structure west of the river)
.. being in the dnieper at winter 42 can be far near germany than historical but having a million extra manpower and a defensible line (no "uranus" here) can be a much better start for a attritional 3 years war.

It surely doesnt allow for a try to "automatic victory" after winter, but if you are really in a position to be capable of that...you don´t really need a winter strategy...

You may be right in some game terms, terms which change with every patch. However, I strongly doubt the extra million men would make the diference.

The Russians also lose heavily in winter 41-42, that's the nature of their success. I haven't any figures of a winter offensive to hand but I did note a while back that losses could be fairly staggering. So add to the probably many hundreds of thousands extra Russian soldiers, their new rebuilt defences and improved morale/experience from training all winter and thousands of KVs and T-34s and I think I've got more chance of seeing a flying pig than the Axis getting to the Dnepr line in 1942. But hey! I guess it could happen so I'll keep scouring the AAR forum.

[PeeDeeAitch]

There was the "rubber band" defense talked about a long time ago, slow phased withdrawals to limit the amount of losses due to unready squads being forced to retreat. At the time it worked fairly well, but perhaps that poot is moot now as the ability to entrench has been impacted.

I have never been a "hold completely fast" defender, but there are more considerations now in 1.05...Ketza makes a very good point, entrenchments, or lack thereof (for both sides), now play a larger role.

[JAMiAM]

I hope that nobody interpreted my post as advocating a "hold fast" policy. I'm perhaps a bit more "holdy" than most, but if you need to withdraw, then withdraw. Just don't go running for the Polish border at the first snowfall, since that will make the Soviets stronger without first making them pay for it.

[Klydon]

I think as the blizzard has evolved, German tactics need to evolve with it. Obviously the fort building issue is huge as a German in the past could stop early and dig in with double rows of level 3-4 entrenchments that made it rough going for the Russians.

Besides forts changing, the other thing is the nature of the blizzard. German units are not holding anything during December for the most part and will take the most losses during that time. In January, the Axis combat values will have a change for the better and it gets even better in February.

I think the perfect scenario/game plan for the Axis would seem to be follow that they will give ground in December (forts with depleted Germans will not hold against good Russian attacks and suffer bad losses). By January, they will hopefully be on their actual planned fort line where the combination of fort line and improved condition of the troops should go a long way to slowing down the tempo of the Russian attacks. The Germans won't be able to hold everywhere, but for the most part, a lot of the front should settle down in many cases. How February goes will likely be determined on how December and January was managed. If the Axis were getting pounded by a high tempo Russian offensive, the Germans will continue to get pushed. If they were able to dig in and contain the damage, then the Russians should feel it even more difficult to move forward along with preparing for the potential of a German counter offensive during the snow against exposed Russian units.

I also think it is possible for the Germans to lure out the Russians in certain sectors to set them up to be cut off during a snow counter offensive by getting the Russians to over extend themselves.

TLDR version is retreat a fair amount early and slow down the retreating as the months go along during blizzard since you become stronger with each passing month.

[Q-Ball]

I think Klydon is on target here; it's a different ballgame now for the Germans in terms of FORTS for winter. Some German players, hopefully NOT to include myself [:D] are in for a rude shock IMO. There are going to be some brutal winters.

A couple other notes:

1. The New ICE rules do have an impact on the FIRST Blizzard turn; Rivers should be at 7, which makes Rivers actually a really nasty ice-filled barrier. Germans should be able to hold at a River, and crossing rivers into an empty, but enemy controlled hex, will cost most Russian units in excess of 10 MPs for even a minor River. A Major River will probably be one and done.

Of course, turn 2 they are frozen solid, so you only get 1 turn of benefit. But that's 1 more than you did under the old rules!

2. FEBRUARY should be better for the Germans. With the 1-1 rule disappearing in March, the Soviets will not realistically be able to continue a winter offensive into March, as I was able to do in my last PBEM game. In fact, the Soviets have to be more conscious of a "Backhand Blow", as more difficult fort building will mean they are probably out in the open in March, if they haven't prepared.

[Mike13z50]

The reduction in fortification and 42 Soviet morale hit in 1.5 should mean that a strong German army can make a realistic offense in summer 42. Especially if they have avoid giving the Soviets skill ups through easy blizzard victories and as a side benefit this preserves German strength.

Just speculation on my part as I'm only on turn 4 of my first German gc.