Sixth Army Campaign AAR

[springer]

France: The starting position

This is the starting position. Though there is plenty of artillery by the Somme river, it's not used in the initial attacks because of the risk of Bridge destruction. The entire Sixth Army has to get across the Somme and is limited to four established crossings. To preserve the bridges, air power will be used.
The artillery will be used against targets that are deployed away from bridges.

In addition, the engineers are going to build three additional crossing points, which will allow the Germans to quickly flank the initial resistance. The IV Corps will cross the center pontoons and the IX Corps will cross behind the French defending the Eastern Bend near the town of Perrone (it's the northern-most German-occupied town).

The French have been shattered by the offensives in the earlier scenarios, the goal now is to prevent them from reorganizing.

[springer]

France Turn 1: Breaching the Somme and Allied Response

The first goal was to breach the Somme. The attack was relatively violent (about 56 German INF lost to about 350 French INF), but the line was ripped open and the river is no longer an obstacle.

The Allied response was swift.
It was thought that the French were on the run. However, they still have an armored fist left, and it slammed into the German XI corps at at Noyes.

The French counterattack on the eastern half of the Army boundary shook the IX and XI Corps. It destroyed about 30 INF and an infantry gun. Worse yet, the French made the Germans pay for putting their HQs out in the front line: 11 more staff, this time from the XXVII HQ, were destroyed. Over time, such losses to the staff could degrade the entire command structure of the Sixth Army. Yet, this is the trade off, the mobility, reconnaissance power and sturdiness of the HQs tempt such risks.

On the eastern half, the French appear to have only the resources for a small blocking force. This works out for the Germans. If any unit can take damage, it is the XI Corps, which is bearing the brunt of the French armor's counter attack. The IV Corps, which is exhausted, has no determined opposition that it has to overcome.

[springer]

Turn 2: Destruction of the French Armor and Allied Response

German casualties were relatively high (slightly more than a full-strength regiment was lost in the fighting) but the French armor was wrecked. IX and XI Corps (with support from elements of the XXVII Corps) bore the brunt of the battle. Of course, air power played a huge role in breaking up the French counterattack.

On the western flank, IV Corps has no obvious opposition except a poor engineering unit (identifiable by the road it is building). The poor soldiers are obviously victims of a French decision cycle that operates at a snail's pace. They're probably trying to build a third logistical road to the Somme. The silver lining is that the road the French engineers are building may help keep down traffic congestion for all the southerly traffic.

The German High Command seems somewhat disorganized. All the replacements are heaped inside of the Sixth Army where they can do no good at all. Even the poor Foot Panzer regiment (3rd Panzer/2nd Regiment) has not been allotted the resources it needs to be mobile again.

[springer]

Turn 3: Vaulting across the Oise and Allied Response

There are three river lines that must be crossed in this scenario: The Somme, The Oise, and the Aisne (and the Canal off the Aisne on the eastern half of the map). The goal is to get each of these as rapidly as possible and, if possible, to avoid destruction of the bridges across each.

This turn, the Somme is no longer in the picture. The focus was the Oise, which was pierced: The Germans have taken the town of Soissons and breached the southern bank. This leaves only one more water obstacle for the IX and XI Corps, the Aisne.

The German command (particularly the IV Corps) is hoping that the French armor counter attack was the last coherent French force left south of Amiens, but only time will tell.

XXVII Corps is trying to merge in the center and mop up any opposition between the two routes of attack. (Who needs a flanking movement that splits the IV and IX Corps and exposes their flanks at a time like this?) Also, the XXVII Corps needs to unify as supply is starting to become a minor problem.

As can be seen, the Allied response is almost non-existent. Individual units are setting up positions astride major roads in hopes of catching a German unit unawares, but there is no front line to speak of during this turn.

[springer]

Turn 4: The Drive to Chateau Thierry (and the Allied Response)

The German advance continues to move faster than the Allied decision cycle.

The XI Corps HQ continues to play its forward reconnaissance and strategic terrain grabbing role.
As in the previous scenarios, XI Corps continues to play the role of moving quickly on the flank. Unlike the previous scenarios in which XI Corps has had light fighting, XI Corps has had to face the only major opposition in this scenario, the French Armored Counterattack. As can be seen, XI Corps has now made contact with the remnants of the French XVI Corps, which seems to be reduced to a single unit of leaders without any soldiers.

One place where the French have been at least successful with passive resistance is the destruction of the bridge to Sentis in front of the IV Corps. Now, the IV Corps will have to wait until the 1st Pioneer Regiment currently in Clermont comes up to repair the position. The pioneers are close enough to the bridge to get it working within the turn.

The French can not build up a line on the western bank of the Oise since it has already been flanked. The XXVII Corps will make sure that the resistance around Sentis will be pocketed and eliminated.

Like the XI Corps, the IX Corp continues to move forward at all costs. Most units stay focused on forward movement, though a handful of units may peel off to reduce pockets along the way.

At this point, it is not clear if the French will be able to put up any more resistance. Given the allied doctrine in the previous scenarios (Put most forces in the initial line, keep one Corp back as a central reserve), it looks like the French may be spent. However, it is possible that a new line may be forming south of the Aisne.

[springer]

Turn 5: The Aisne is Pierced (and Allied Response)

IX Corps takes Chateau Thierry and it's bridge across the Aisne without a fight. The last natural obstacle between the Seine has been crossed. The Air Squadrons have been moved to Chateau Theirry and the French XVI Corps HQ is being slowly reduced as a target of opportunity for planes and artillery.

IV Corps has taken Sentis and needs to continue the drive south toward the Seine river crossings.

The remnants of the French VII Corps have been pocketed and will be mopped up by the XXVII Corps. Except for the mop up, XXVII Corps is done for this battle.

IX Corps has taken over the center from XXVII Corps and is rapidly moving south trying to grab another Aisne crossing before the French destroy it.

It's clear that the French have not yet been able to put together forces for even a blocking defense.

[springer]

At this point in the game, I could imagine what a human opponent would do. In fact, I think this scenario could make a very good H2H game. However, it would play much differently, of course, as the human player would be far less likely to leave positions like Chateau Thierry undefended.

Yet, the French would be challenged to stop the Germans with the forces at their disposal (taking away the AI reinforcements). (Authors have argued that it was theoretically possible to stop the German attack after Dunkirk, but I'll leave that to the experts to argue.)

Another strength of this campaign is the "feel" of the AI:
What I do like about playing the AI is the feel: The AI feels "demoralized" in this scenario. (In Russian scenarios, it very rarely acts "demoralized"). A good human player managing the French wouldn't have that demoralized feel. The deployment and reinforcement structure feels right to me. And it does seem like the computer personality for the Western Allies is fixated on maintaining a rigid, intact frontline. When that breaks, so goes the entire defense. Again, the Russian strategic feeling: They seem much less committed to the "front lines at all costs" defense. I try to capture a little of the sense of the AI's programmed response in the turn reports.

[Barthheart]

Springer, this is an great AAR and analysis of the game and scenarios.

Would you be interested in playing this campaign against a human? I'd be happy to play the Allies through the campaign to see if it plays very differently.

[springer]

Bartheart,

Thanks for the compliment on the AAR.

To date I've been shy on H2H with AT, but I think I may jump into H2H after I finish the AAR. 

If we do this scenario, we may have to modify some of the reinforcement structures of the scenario.  I think this scenario could be a good case study in  Blitzkrieg vs. Blocking Defense.  I think if the French Armor is well-deployed, it could maim the Sixth Army's schwerpunkt units, If I were the French, I would aim more for "defense in depth" strategy than the AI is predisposed to do. I'm sure you can imagine some interesting alternative strategies as well.  It does sound fun and I bet it would only take a bit of tweaking to make it suitable for H2H.

What I think is interesting is that the "game" would be incredibly fun with another player, but oddly, I think it'd lose some of the historical "feel" that is programmed into the AI's behavior. (I haven't looked into the guts of the programming, but I'm suspecting that AI behavior is primarily determined by the the interaction of the order of battle with reinforcement timing and reinforcement locations.)

[springer]

Turn 6: The Beginning of the End (and Allied Response)

There is still no coherent Allied response. Scattered units are wandering across the country side defending farmhouses and villages, but mechanical problems are more a problem for the German advance than French forces.

XI Corps is now within striking range of the eastern Seine Crossing. IX Corps crossed the Aisne without an incident.

Only the IV Corps is lagging and risks not capturing it's prize, the western Seine crossing.

As a battle update, Student's paratroopers- one of the more colorful units of the campaign- are down to a mere 4 paratroopers with an XP of 59. This hard fighting force may have to be dissolved at the end of this campaign or used as the cadre to seed some magnificent Panzer Grenadier regiment.

[springer]

Turn 7: The Seine is Reached (and Allied Response)

Again, there is little to report. The French have no front line and their scattered forces can't stop the Germans.

The 3rd Panzer/1 Regiment, sister regiment to the Foot Panzers, has taken the western Seine crossing and menaces the center crossing. In a repeat of the Belgian campaign, the French try a "JEB Stuart" type encircling cavalry ride (pathetically executed by artillery). Running around an armor unit, must make the French feel more effective, but it has no long-term effect.

IV Corps had decided it doesn't want to be left in the dust by the XI Corps and has rushed their armored division (The 4th Panzer) toward the western Seine Crossing. (The IV and XI Corps have had a kind of agon going throughout the campaign. The IV Corps has more muscle, but the XI Corps always seems to be moving faster.)

[springer]

Thinking a bit more about H2H. Playing these scenarios as a sequence of H2H battles sounds great. However, it would probably be easiest to have the Allied player who is given fresh forces each time.

This campaign varies from typical AT in that the Germans can't afford a simple battle of attrition. Maneuver is paramount and every unit lost is unit that may not be available for two or three battles down stream.

It'd be interesting to set up an H2H battle in which one player must try to avoid high casualties as well as take objectives.

Also, one thing I'd miss in H2H is the flying HQ units. I think against a human opponent, flying HQs are very risky. But ironically, there is something that "feels" right about it. Not in the sense that a Corp HQ rolls across the country side, but more in the sense that it seems to me that effective operational level leaders tended to get out to the front to find out what was going on (without getting caught up on local firefights, of course).

[springer]

Turn 8: The Last Stand of the French

The XI Corps has taken both eastern crossing and are besieging the central crossing. The French have not all disappeared and are putting up a spirited resistance in their last major bridgehead north of the Seine.

IX Corps will move up to support the IV corp armor and will be finishing off what looks like only token resistance on the western crossing.

[springer]

Turn 9: The Fall of France

The XI Corps got bragging rights on taking two crossings, the IV corps redeemed itself by independently taking the last crossing without the help of the IX Corps

Here is the end position and the casualty totals. Though it didn't feel like it through the campaign,
the Germans were up against considerable forces. (As one can see from the size of forces, French infantry outnumber the German infantry by over a 3 to 2 (approaching 2 to 1) ratio. In tanks they effectively matched the Germans. These are the AI compensation values that would have to be adjusted.)

German casualties were much lighter than in previous games. I really lucked out on air casualties. (Maybe the lack of losses and concentrated interception took it's toll.) In the next campaign, my behavior became a bit superstitious and cautious with the aircraft. Since I had lost none, I started bending my air strategy to keep the streak going. It's an understandable obsession, but an operational error.

The armor casualties are so light (1 scout lost) because I kept the armor out of all the battles except overruns. The Germans have to think of the future. Infantry casualties certainly were nothing like the original attack on Belgium.

Interestingly, the French forces felt like they had a lot of muscle and the casualty lists support this, but the war of movement kept them from using it properly. Their infantry was weaker than the previous games, but their Armor was stronger. They had the same amount of light tanks as Belgium, and they had four medium tanks. The Germans felt this edge of this steel when their flying HQ can hit.

Of course, the most valuable asset for rapid movement and low armor casualties was air supremacy, which was gained early. It doesn't show up on the map snapshots, but air power constantly leads the way to victory in AT. The lion's share of work done by the air squadrons can be seen in the accrued experience: the dive bombers are already at 90+ XP and the fighters are at 70-80 XP. This is a sure sign of hard work.

[tweber]

I think it would be cool to have a head to head campaign.  There is no reason you cannot play this head to head.  However, I think the later scenarios who need quite a bit of balancing.  Against 2 even players, I think the Germans would not have a chance in the Second Kharkov scenario.  The France part of the campaign should not be too bad though.  The other reason I did not worry about head to head was I did not think many people really relish the defense and would want to play the allied side. 

[Barthheart]

Ah.. but I'd really like to take the Allied side in the whole campaign. Sure you get pounded the first few scenarios but ehn you get to do the pounding in teh last few.

So Springer, when you are done with this fine AAR, would you play the Germans through the campaign as I tried to defend as the Allies? Whole campaign, as is.

[springer]

Bartheart,

Let's flip for it when the time comes.  As an H2H newbie, I think I'd feel far more safe doing defense.  (Also, it'd give me a different perspective of the game.)  Alternatively, I'm willing- though hesitant- to fall on my sword of offense. The reason is that I really believe that a human defense would clobber the Germans. 

Also I agree with tweber, some of the  last scenarios will need a bit of balance for H2H. Kharkov 2 is brutal against the Germans even with mere AI  In fact, my strategy in this game (and what I was trying to work out in the Training Camp) is prepping the German OOB so it arrives at the end of  Kharkov 2 in decent enough shape to withstand the pounding.  Otherwise, they'll have no chance in the last scenario.

Anyway, I see Götterdammerung for the Germans near the end.  Against a human, I think that German's could be badly blunted by the end of the first three scenarios. Still, I'm game after I'm done. But as you can see my horizon is still a bit distant (I'm only on scenario 3 in the AAR!) Or if you are really patient, we could play each scenario twice, reversing roles.  That could be totally fun.



By the way, have you played the campaign yet?  If so, what did you think?

[springer]

Here is the fall of France. Against a defeatist AI (i.e., The French politic circa 1940).

(Late note 2/22/10: While updating this gif, I saw that the French recaptured Soissons! I never even realized it during the game.)

[springer]

tweber,

I know you check in once in a while. I have a couple of questions for you.

You, Grymme, Lunaticus and Explorer2 are game designers par excellence. I'm kind of curious: Why is there the river line- the tributary- north of Chateau Thierry? In google maps, I checked it out. It is somewhat hidden in the terrain, but I'm assuming there might be a canal that comes off the Aisne, but it is hidden on Google maps. In terms of game play, I think the choice is brilliant. But what map did you use to make the decision? As a game designer, what were you looking for?

Also, I do get the sense that your original construction had the idea of H2H play. Am I right? I'm glad you didn't. This scenario is an exciting AI vs. Human game. IMHO, it's one of the best without making the AI go AI+. Did you aim for H2H in the game design? The Russian front pieces, which are totally cool, seem to be break down in H2H balance. What led you there?

It leads me to a further question. In WWII, there is no debate (as a brain-washed American) that the Germans were totally brilliant at the operational level. But I have yet to see a game that captures the strategic brilliance of the Soviets, such as can be found in the Belarus offensive. Most AT scenarios seem to compensate the Soviets with mass rather than technique. (To give you credit, I think you do a tremendous job of showing what the Russians are capable of in both the Kiev scenario and Kharkov 2. Also, I really like the final scenario, but what obstacles did you encounter in trying to simulate the Russian execution of operation Uranus?)

[tweber]

The river right next to Chateau Theirry is the Marne.  It is famous for a battle in the opening phase of WWI.  The river a little bit further north is the Ourcq.  I did not get around to labeling these two.  I might not have nailed the geography, but the terrain in this area was described by Marines in WWI as a bit rough.  Actually, one of the challenges with real cities is they almost always straddle a river vs sit on one side of another.
 
The reason I did not focus on balancing for human play is that it takes a long time and I wanted to finish the one sided game.  I also thought that not many folks would want to play the allies as there is a break (when the campaign shifts from West to East) where units are not carried over (which is the primary point of the campaign).  Also, the Soviets in the Kiev pocket and the Brits in Dunkerque are not carried either.  Also, I think it is tougher to be on the defensive constantly.  The person who I was originally testing this with got frustrated half way through the second scenario.
 
That is not to say that you could not balance the campaign to play balance for 2 players or balance for the Soviets, but both would be relatively different.  All you would need to do is to adjust the reinforcements (or lack of them), experience and potentially the R&D levels and then test alot of times.  For a German AI player, you might also want to increase their land movement.  Happy to give guidance to someone who wants to take this up.
 
For the mass vs technique question, I do not think that the AI is capable of the elegance of technique or the creativity that a human player can bring.  So, to simulate the Soviet side, I would take out a lot of mass and run it by a human and you would get the technique.  You can look at the AAR of George vs Seille to see great technique by both sides.
 
To your last question, I just use VP or AIVP to keep the AI on track.  It will generally move towards the VP.  I actually set the AI after the encirclement because I way not sure that the AI would pull it off.