Do you want total war? An AAR-Guide for Axis player

[56ajax]

ORIGINAL: ledo

I always do find it strange the relative imbalance between discussions of axis and soviet strategy (leaning towards axis generally, aside from some notable exceptions like HLYA's Pskov defence)

Probably because the best Soviet Strategy is restrictive house rules and it is hard to do a sexy AAR on that.

[821Bobo]

Probably because the best Soviet Strategy is restrictive house rules and it is hard to do a sexy AAR on that.

You mean like no para drops on rails?

[56ajax]

well yeah and no super Lvov pocket, kakbuki? dance airbases, no chaining of FBDs etc etc

[Balou]

Extremely useful your guide. In particular your handling of SUs. Thanks

[EwaldvonKleist]

ORIGINAL: ledo

I always do find it strange the relative imbalance between discussions of axis and soviet strategy (leaning towards axis generally, aside from some notable exceptions like HLYA's Pskov defence)

Personally I am more for short, intense action/quick decision so the Axis is the natural side to pick than the attriting Soviets, although I play both sides equally. But I feel not qualified skill/experience wise to write something similiar for the Soviet side and have less original content/ideas to provide.
However, much of what is written here can be useful for the Soviet side as well, like retreat paths, pocket techniques for late war, resource management etc.
HLYA has good AARs with strategic thoughts and general advice for the Soviet side, I also like MichealT's AARs, although they are old now and again more about the Axis.
Make sure to toggle "all posts" on to view all AARs ever written, not just the new ones.

Some thoughts/memorandums from my side can be found here: fb.asp?m=4601993
and here between the front reports: tm.asp?m=4527578

I hope this helps. I also have something about the minimum Soviet industry needs, arguing that 160ish HI and 270ish APs can be enough, but I need to check the calculations again and write it down.

[ledo]

Thanks Ewald. I've tried my hand at Soviets a few times. I don't know if I have the ability to maintain that level of attention to detail with so many units and such a messy OOB. I had one win on the Leningrad scenario (I think my opponent was a bit new), and otherwise my performance has been horrendous. I do prefer the Axis play, generally, but I find the construction of defensive lines and tough choices regarding withdrawals appealing. Still the incremental nature of soviet victories as opposed to massive dopamine rushes when a giant pocket forms or a major city is captured is a lot harder to love.

I love all the particulars and I might try to use them in a new game. I haven't played in a while. From a tactical point of view, I think the most important thing for me is understanding the MP values and the correct way to form pockets, since I tend to have mine broken semi-regularly (although part of that is I am fairly ambitious in my pockets 30-40 divisions in multiple places, all leaking like a rice bag in a granary from a kurosawa film).

From an interest point of view, the strategic layer is my favourite. I tend to count the impact of every loss and try to extrapolate how that might impact soviet industry and frankly I tend to be disappointed when extrapolating losses and accounting for Soviet pools and production. Nothing really seems like it is likely to have a severe impact except manpower. Particularly since I tend to have high casualty games and can recognize that if the soviet army has fewer divisions and a smaller OOB they will need less trucks to supply it and armaments to equip it and will build up stockpiles of trucks/equipment/armaments that will help fill it back up when they start to rebuild. So if you manage to do heavy damage to the Soviet army in terms of manpower, the value of damage in other arenas tends to decrease.

I also seemed to find that while territory matters, looking at recent AARs, the value of territory is directly related to your ability to hold it. With 1:1.5 force ratio each hex is likely to be lets say 1 level of difficulty to recapture for the soviets. But obviously with 1:2 force ratio each hex may be 0.8 etc., and I think this relationship is exponential, with diminishing returns on territory the less damage you achieve against the soviet army. I would argue that severe damage to the soviet army and a static line at let's say Stalino in the South with no major winter offensive by the Soviet army. Is better than getting to Rostov, but with a soviet army that was not severely damaged and is able to beat you back to Stalino instead. I know that is not necessarily the choice, but in my mind, this line of thinking makes me far more concerned with damage to the soviet army rather than territory.

Your (0.66*0.66*0.67) example in terms of soviet degradation resonates with me, and I think the advantage of targeting one aspect is very important. I don't think it is wise to switch objectives. I agree that you need to choose one advantage (whether industry and territory or soviet army) and focus. I made a mistake (one of many, although this one was fairly minor in impact) in a game where the soviet army was taking severe hits and I had just achieved a pocket around Leningrad and Kiev (combined they included 40-50 combat units). With the line becoming dangerously thin for the soviets I made a mad dash for Kharkhov which was about 60-70 miles away from the front. I feel like this is a waste of fuel from my motorized corps, because at this point, with thin soviet lines all fuel should be directed to pressing the advantage. Without enough units to properly defend their flanks the only thing I should have been using precious fuel for is the encirclement and destruction of additional formations to maintain the exponential snowball effect that comes from the 1:1(even 0.9) GHC(not including allies)/SHC Manpower ratio that had already been achieved. By distracting myself from that mission (and the non-static nature of the value of an objective such as Kharkov), I am giving my opponent an opportunity to recover from their greatest weakness (lack of formations and manpower) to chase a prize that has diminished in value (armaments and tank production).

Anyway thanks a lot for your write-up. I will study it carefully.

EDIT: Some softcore pocket porn related to the example I mentioned, for GHC fetishists.

https://imgur.com/a/GJ5DT64

https://imgur.com/a/51Q9Y9G

[EwaldvonKleist]

Hi ledo, agree with your posts. Indeed, while the enemy army is still in good shape, all captured terrain is merely borrowed.

Of course, the "focus on one thing" doctrine also applies reverse for the Soviet vs. Axis side.

Some softcore pocket porn related to the example I mentioned, for GHC fetishists.

Pocket hub, WitE encirclement porn for Axis players since 2010.



Note that a folder with some of my opening practice saves has been uploaded in the opening chapter.

[Telemecus]

ORIGINAL: EwaldvonKleist

Pocket hub, WitE encirclement porn for Axis players since 2010.



Note that a folder with some of my opening practice saves has been uploaded in the opening chapter.

Cautionary advice - German produced material is of a more hardcore nature and EvK's material should not be viewed by those feint of heart.

[SparkleyTits]

ORIGINAL: EwaldvonKleist

Hi ledo, agree with your posts. Indeed, while the enemy army is still in good shape, all captured terrain is merely borrowed.

Of course, the "focus on one thing" doctrine also applies reverse for the Soviet vs. Axis side.

Some softcore pocket porn related to the example I mentioned, for GHC fetishists.

Pocket hub, WitE encirclement porn for Axis players since 2010.



Note that a folder with some of my opening practice saves has been uploaded in the opening chapter.

Hilarity! [:D][&o]

[ledo]

I think this one goes straight to the library of WITE resources.

Edit: I was talking about pocket hub, i mean the strategy can go too obviously, but I think pocket hub is a victory that cannot be forgotten.

[DekeFentle]

Quick thumbs up and thanks for the extensive, well done presentation sir!

Still trying to muddle through figuring out the German air game for the first few turns. Can't seem to get near that 5,000 plus kill on T1. Any recommended reading would be much appreciated.

[EwaldvonKleist]

@Ledo: I did include it
You may also like those lines from this thread: tm.asp?m=2651360

You know when you hooked on WitE

When you only stack 3 plates on top of each other after dinner.

.......When you are afraid of taking two plates off a stack of three because you think the third will fly across the kitchen and smash!

When you wife says you do not provide her any Support and you say that is because her Level is O and she is Locked.

@DekeFentle: Welcome on the forum and thank you

4.6 has a short description of what to do. The AAR on a 8-player game here has many good posts on the air war, make sure to check it out if you have some time: tt.asp?forumid=910

This AAR by HLYA also has fine walkthrough for T1 air field bombing: tm.asp?m=4426690&mpage=1&key=�

The basic idea is to use air transfer to place air groups close to the targets and put Ju87 in a forward position where they can bomb many airfields from, because they are EXTREMELY effective.

I hope that helps.
Regards
EvK

[Cirque_du_Melee]

As a person new to WitE, I appreciate you taking the time to elaborate on your method for achieving an optimal German T1 move. However, your technique does raise some concerns in my mind. Because, if we grant (and of course its debatable) that WitE is a fairly accurate simulation of Barbarossa and the War in the East, then your pocketing of the the Lvov area Soviet forces on the first turn is notable. My understanding is that the whole AGS crew (i.e. Rundstedt, Kleist, Reichenau, and Stulpnagel) found it very tough going in the south from the very beginning. Now, don't get me wrong, if they were incompetent, incapable, or you personally are a genius, then congrats. Otherwise, it seems a bit gamey to me. Or, I should say that I would derive no satisfaction from accomplishing that feat in the game when it would not have been likely to have occured in real.

Not only that but its something your can do every game. Might as well have the first turn start on June 29 with all the pockets in place.

[Crackaces]

ORIGINAL: Cirque_du_Melee

As a person new to WitE, I appreciate you taking the time to elaborate on your method for achieving an optimal German T1 move. However, your technique does raise some concerns in my mind. Because, if we grant (and of course its debatable) that WitE is a fairly accurate simulation of Barbarossa and the War in the East, then your pocketing of the the Lvov area Soviet forces on the first turn is notable. My understanding is that the whole AGS crew (i.e. Rundstedt, Kleist, Reichenau, and Stulpnagel) found it very tough going in the south from the very beginning. Now, don't get me wrong, if they were incompetent, incapable, or you personally are a genius, then congrats. Otherwise, it seems a bit gamey to me. Or, I should say that I would derive no satisfaction from accomplishing that feat in the game when it would not have been likely to have occured in real.

Not only that but its something your can do every game. Might as well have the first turn start on June 29 with all the pockets in place.

First and foremost, I would say WITE is a game and not a simulation. It does an excellent job of giving the player a great feel for the operational flow of Panzer divisions in the Eastern front vs a quantity of forces that multiply into quality. However, as I have stated before … the Battle of Brody is impossible to simulate in this game. Operationally a pure simulation would have statistical probabilities for certain devices to match other devices during combat. (As opposed to a totally random encounter that could match Soviet infantry vs a siege mortar .possible but not as likely). But WITE is fun and provides lot of entertainment -- until in my opinion players start getting wrapped up in the definition of "historical." It is like meeting the soulmate of your life and then focus on a facial mole ..

If you are not reloading .. the Hasty attacks have lots of randomness . thus the opening is not guaranteed. In fact, the deliberate attacks are not guaranteed but with enough thinking one can provide a high degree of certainty. But the IGOYOUGo turn sequence does encourage an optimum opening for sure … not seen as much in a wego system ….

[Cirque_du_Melee]

I see your points and they make sense. Yeah, the Dubno situation was interesting.Not to mention the several early attacks against PG4 in AGN by Soviet armor elements.

I guess a game that allowed a realtime fight (ala the timescale/system on Hearts of Iron 3) might better simulate what was actually possible (though I would imagine the game would be unplayable except for the most dedicated grognards, lolz). I think Nigel Askey's Operationbarbarossa project looks promising (though I don't know much about it or if it will ever come to fruition). They have a Russian front/Barbarossa map at 2.5 kilometers per hex completed or almost (Based on actual period maps that are kept at a university in Texas). You can view the map online at Nigel's website by the way.[/size]

[MattFL]

First, great guide EvK. I just came across this today. Really well done.... where does one find the time.

Ledo - really, the German decision to destroy soviets or press east isn't up to the German player, it's up to the Soviet player. To me, the German priority has to be the destruction of the Soviet army and taking out key industry when you get the opportunity (for example, a dash to Kharkov if the 51 KV factory hasn't been evac'ed at all yet). But if the Russian runs, east it is.

Cirque du Melee - Historically, Army Group South did find it tough sledding. But in this opening AGS is reinforced with about half of another Panzer Group from Army Group Center. Had that been the case historically, perhaps they wouldn't have found it quite as difficult.

Crackaces - yes, hasty attack results are mixed, but for the most part, this opening (or slightly different variants of it) are pretty much guaranteed. Occasionally the single division attack on Riga will fail, but that doesn't really change anything at all....

I think the most fiddly part is being sure there is enough MP's to cut the rail lines just west of Zhitomir on the south side. This is one area where the hasty attacks clearing that route can matter, but even in the worst case you end up cutting the rail 1 hex further west which allows 1 extra stack of Soviets to get away rather than trapping them all. My version of this opening is a bit different in that I don't care as much if the pockets hold so I tend not to break down as many units for securing them. I also try to leave a unit adjacent to Proskurov so the Soviets there can't rail out. And I never attack anything in the big center pocket other than to clear movements lanes preferring instead to move as much infantry as possible east as quickly as possible. I also prioritize taking Kaunus on Turn 1. There are a few other insignificant differences as well, but the overall objective is the same - prevent the escape of as many soviets as possible. It's a devastating open and generally speaking the best soviet response is to run far away and preserve what you have left.

I do need to study the air war part of it though as I typically end up with about 2600-3000 kills but I don't do any of the air transfer stuff. It's a bit cheesy I think and that is probably one house rule i'd agree to as GHC command. Back when I was playing pre-1.07, it was pretty typical to have house rules limiting air base bombing throughout the game other than on turn 1.... I've never paid too much attention to the Air War. Perhaps I should...…

In my current relearning game against the AI using an opening similar to this, it's turn 9, I completely messed up my rail lines and even accidentally transferred all of an entire panzergroup to AGS where poor Rundstedt now has a -83...… And I've pretty much run out of Soviet units to encircle and Moscow should fall next turn or the turn after at most. The Russians just don't seem to have very many units left...…….

[joelmar]

Thank you EvK, I also am new to the game, been playing a couple of scenarios against the AI, but really addicted to it and all the details... I completely relate to Crackaces mention of finding a soulmate a couple of comments earlier. As for that discussion with Cirque_du_melee, I'm a history buff, but don't mind if the playing is not 100% historical. In truth, I believe the Germans in reality didn't handle Barbarossa very well, too much infighting about panzer doctrine and changes of objectives meant that it ended up far from realizing it's potential. If Manstein had been in overall charge, things might have been really different! Manstein, not Guderian! lol! Anyway, the big picture is there, and the game is really educative in many aspects, even against the AI...

I read much of the old stuff in the forum, Pelton, Crackaces, Telemecus, HLYA etc who all gave me really good insights... but I still learned a lot going through your guide, the high point being the understanding of micromanagement of TOE. And that trick of replacing commanders with good ones already on the map is brilliant. I now have Balcke, Weiss and Der Mensch Hube and a couple of low odds commanders out of the way... and for the last 2 they only lost one point of political rating, which is not so bad I think!

I love micromanagement, and mostly, I don't find it that hard to do in WitE once you understand the why's and how's. The exception, are airbases and Airgroups of course, which are horrendous to deal with at best. I really hope they will fix that in the next version of the game. Transfer of units and deployement are much too complicated and nothing in real life warrants that complexity. The transfer only to higher ID's while on the same hex is particularly bad and serves no purpose that I can see. But that's kind of the same problem as not being able to alternate the units stacked on a hex so the we can choose the one that's on top, like in Panthers in the Fog by exemple and I think it's a weird oversight by the programmers... Anyway, that's my opinion.

At the moment, I am at turn 7 of a campaign against the AI, and I am experimenting with the management of supplies and trucks. I find it's quite hard to align statistics to have a good idea of what's going on in those areas. For example, I did a few tests moving airbases. Pelton in his Axis guide mentions to never move airbases in mass, as it's not good for truck management, but doesn't explain exactly why. I didn't question that, even though I tend to not follow his advice too closely. But recent experimentations gave me the impression that what matters is not if airbases are moved or not, but the MP needed to supply them. Also, is it more economical to have trucks move more fuel to airbases, or have planes flying more miles, so consuming more fuel, taking more trucks to supply them next turn. Really not easy questions to answer, or I should say, I still haven't found ways to understand exactly what's going on under the hood.

I think I should start using the editor to create test scenarios.

Anyway, I should try my hand at Multi-player as Axis in a near future and I am looking forward to it. Got to go through blizzard and learn to defend effectively in adverse conditions first...

[EwaldvonKleist]

@Melee: Welcome on the forum!
You are completely right that the T1 is complete fantasy. My original motivation for WitE was the fascination for moving frontlines and a bit historical interest, but then became the appealing intellectual challenge to optimise and analysing WitE and its dynamics, and the challenge to develop and execute war-winning strategies/tactics against an opposing will. The historical immersion is a lower priority and non-existant during play.
Maybe that explains how to draw satisfaction out of this approach
Regarding gameyness, I think I do nothing against the intention expressed in the manual and the patchnotes, aka no outright exploits. That means, placing the HQ in the right distance from the railhead according to the supply system can still cause over-the-top effects, but is according to the rules, as opposed for something like "hit key X and get 100 extra admin points".
Apart from this, I have always stated that I like to minmax and use optimised openings, so it was playing with open cards.

If you want to disable some gamey strategies, it can easily be done by houserules or a gentlemens agreement or by choosing like-minded opponents.

@Crackaces: Agree

@MattFL: Am happy you like the guide as well. Making the T1 well ordered (few isolated spearheads, no broken pockets etc.) simply has good rewards on T2, so I like to invest resources for this, one should also have T2 in mind. This being said, one can of course argue for less tight T1 encirclements and more rail-locks in the Proskurov area, for example. I experimented with this, but was not satisfied with the result. Cutting the rail may be sufficient to deny a rail-out from the Proskurov area, but not necessarily prevent disbanding, so you kill the unit shell, but not the equipment. Maybe one can reshuffle some resource allocations to achieve both, you are invited to post your alternative ideas if you like (all other readers are invited too)!

@joelmar: Welcome to the forum to you as well! Agree about the air war. I would say I have a good overall understanding of it, but only deal with it because it is an important part of the game and necessary to have a chance vs. good opponents, not really because of intrinsic interest.
Where does "THe Mensch" nickname for hube come from?

Regarding supplies management, there are some articles in the library of WitE resources (linked in my signature/pinned in the war room), with different levels of detail.
The point about air base movement is that air bases contain many trucks, and movement attrition is proportional to the number of MPs used and the number of trucks in the unit.
But due to the weird design of the WitE supply system, having more than 100% of the truck requirement in the motor pool has NO effect, so truck saving is not that important in the summer of 1941, only from the blizzard 1941 onwards.

Regarding how to place air bases, make sure to use staging bases so you can have the air bases in the rear and still attack targets far into the enemy land. I however care more about flown miles/aircraft fatigue than about truck attrition in 1941.

From own exp I can only recomment to start playing quickly, it allows you to judge correctly which parts of the game are important, otherwise one can get lost in the vast amount of details.

Regards
EvK

[joelmar]

EwaldvonKleist: I would love to micromanage the air force if the system was easier and more flexible. It's such an important part of warfare, as you say. But this just doesn't make sense and needs too much thinking just to make it work in some orderly fashion, and even that doesn't mean you get it right... anyway. I am better in that than I was and it's already OK.

Hube's nickname came from Adolf Hitler who was his #1 fan. Hube was one of the rare assets Hitler got out of the Stalingrad cauldron in the last weeks before surrender. He didn't want to loose him and it payed off as Hube was the real victor of the Sicilian campaign, not Patton or Monty in their silly race to Messina. Hube was tough, brillant and he had big balls, hence the nickname

For the rest, don't worry, I will get around to playing human opponents soon enough. For now there are too many things in the basics I am still in the process of mastering. Learning is a big part of my pleasure in everything I do and I am now in this process which I don't want to spoil with the pressure I will put on myself when I play a human opponent. And even though the AI does some pretty stupid things sometimes, like leaving Kiev undefended with my panzers not far in the fourth turn, or airbases and headquarters alone defending large areas... lol! I know a human opponent will never do that (well... at least should not!) and so I tend to play like I would do against a good human player, no over the top things and keep everything tidy. My goal is a decisive victory and I play with the +1 CV for the soviets, so it's not that easy and I must not loose time or make big mistakes.

[821Bobo]

joelmar I strongly advice playing Soviet side for your first HvH game. Also +1CV and full Blizzard is real killer. Basically Soviets can hasty attack everything in sight.

Regarding the airwar. WitE2 is using similar system as WitW so it is completely different from WitE.