Barbarossa to the Volga or Berlin? ComradeP vs notenome

[ComradeP]

Indeed, the main problem is that there's no air superiority phase, that air base bombing isn't effect for the Axis after turn 1 and that he can choose to keep his planes out of ground combat. As a result, I lost about 70 planes to about 70 Soviet planes during the turn. I can live with the lack of an air superiority phase for the moment, but being powerless to stop a few dozen Soviet planes from raiding my air bases is silly. Neither my AA or CAP performed anything like I would expect them to, or up to their historical standard. AA units have low experience in general, only about 50, I still have to ask if that's WAD.

[jjdenver]

I wonder if you'd have better luck going for Leningrad if you sent an infantry army from AGC north instead of the Panzer Gruppe?

And a Pz Gruppe or 2 from AGC added to the south would help you quickly grab some resources - Stalino area, Kharkov, and maybe turn the corner at Rostov before winter hits. I have no experience here - just postulating.

Pushing in AGC area doesn't seem too productive at this point due to the terrain in front of Moscow. The South seems more suited to panzer drives. Again - just throwing out ideas that I have no experience to back up.

[jay102]

edited.

[ComradeP]

I think I'll send the Panzer group to AGC and try to get across the Dnepr, although I don't know how likely it is that I can get across it in a timely fashion. AGC would then have about 2 (understrength) Panzer groups and AGS 2 overstrength Panzer groups if the Axis Allies are included.

In order to take Leningrad, you really need to get there before turn 10 as after that the forts are too good and there are too many quality divisions in reserve, at least against a competent player. The reserve divisions are the main reason why simply assaulting it probably won't work. You can bring 6-9 divisions, which would have enough trouble as is with 3 divisions in level 4 forts in city/urban terrain, but the reserve divisions that will join the battle will turn it into a nightmare. After turn 10, you can basically only isolate it, which isn't going to happen due to the terrain and the current effectiveness of swamps in stopping any kind of mobile attack. The Germans also have the problem that they can't commit large quantities of artillery, as they won't generally commit more than 4 battalions at best to a battle.

jay102: you'll get to the outskirts of Leningrad on about turn 10, with the bulk of your forces arriving there on turn 11-12. Depending on the AI defenses, you might need to isolate it before being able to take it, but taking Pushkin and Kolpino should probably be possible. You can then work on planning to take Leningrad in 1942. Soviet resistance will be stiff, but you don't have that many hexes to go to isolate the ports on Lake Ladoga.

With the current problems facing the Germans, your Soviet opponent would have to mess up his defence quite a bit if you are to take Leningrad.

[jay102]

Thanks for your experienced comments, I edited the last post I think it's inappropriate to post screenshots in other people's AAR.

It seems my plan of taking Leningrad before 41 winter failed.

I also faced the powerful swamp defence. Three different german infantry division make three deliberate attack against a Russian division in swamp. All 3 attacks failed! Maybe I should avoid swamps like plague in this game. Leningrad probably impossible to isolate because of the swamp around Ladoga.

[ComradeP]

Limited progress in the AGN area. The defenders in the swamps near Pskov have been encircled. My mobile forces will move south next turn now that the infantry has caught up with them.

[ComradeP]

Limited progress in the AGC area too.

notenome attacked the Panzer division near Vitebsk and routed it on his turn. It was about time he attacked one of my mobile units, this is the first successful attack he has made. He attacked three times, the first two battles were a held result and the last result routed my division as it had no retreat path. Casualties were not too high (1500 men and about 50 AFV's). The main disappointment remains the abysmal performance of the Luftwaffe. I have absolutely no idea how they can perform as poorly as they are performing currently.

The motorized division was isolated, but that's a minor inconvenience at this moment. I'm not going to push east to Smolensk with them at this point.

The move also shows why I prefer my divisions being routed rather than being isolated. Yes, they take more losses, but they rout back onto the supply grid and will have decent MP's next turn, whilst the isolated division will have 9.

Some of notenome's cavalry divisions now have enough morale to move into two enemy hexes in ZOC it seems (the only way he could've isolated the Panzer division).

[ComradeP]

Some progress in the AGS area, the mobile units will swing south now that they've cleared a path for the infantry.

I took the screenshot before I moved a Panzer division to isolate the stack at the southern point of the screenshot properly.

[ComradeP]

Limited progress on the Romanian front.

[ComradeP]

Including the routing of the Panzer division in notenome's part of the turn, I had 2 loss results.

Overall, losses are still OK.

notenome's mostly running east, in sort of a limited Sir Robin/Robinovich defence, which makes it impossible to inflict any kind of meaningful losses on the Soviets, which in turn will make the first winter a nightmare as well as make the future crossing of the Dnepr very tricky (depending on what he has on the river, I have some doubts whether it can be successfully crossed before turn 10).

In a future multiplayer game, I think I'll send the mobile units in the AGN area south after turn 2, as with the super swamps it's somewhat pointless to keep them in AGN.

I'm still not unhappy with my progress thus far, but crossing the Dnepr before turn 10 is something that has to happen.

[BletchleyGeek]

I have a few questions for you ComradeP:

[*] I am surprised to see so many troops of yours - and his - fighting their way across the Pripyat marshes. Was he trying to setup a base on the Pripyat marshes? Such a strategy for the Soviets looks to me as an exercise in wishful thinking: those marshes look to me more like a graveyard than a fortress.

[*] What's the turn number? 5? How do you feel about transferring a PzGrp from AGC to AGS? Do you think it is a good idea? I've always personally considered that the original OKH plan wasn't that bad: investing Moscow approaches from the SW disrupts the Soviet rail network and renders - from a "grand strategy" standpoint - irrelevant the South Western and Southern Fronts. That kind of seemingly "catastrophic" crisis might allow the Axis to lure the Soviets into a major showdown around the Bryansk - Orel - Kharkov area.

[*] I see that the AGS infantry is struggling to keep the pace of the Panzers. Were they spending too much time clearing pockets?

Perhaps it will be more effective to let the infantry invest Kiev and strike SE at Cherkassy along the Zhitomir - Cherkassy railroad. Conducting an elastic defense against an opponent that keeps shifting the axis of advance is hard.

[ComradeP]

I am surprised to see so many troops of yours - and his - fighting their way across the Pripyat marshes. Was he trying to setup a base on the Pripyat marshes? Such a strategy for the Soviets looks to me as an exercise in wishful thinking: those marshes look to me more like a graveyard than a fortress.

After noticing that swamps were amazing defensive terrain against infantry too, I decided to storm through the Pripyat marshes to avoid the problems I'm facing in the AGN area. It will also mean he'll have to hold a longer line along the Dnepr, hopefully allowing me to get across it in force soon.

He hasn't committed many forces to the marshes, the forces in there probably either routed there or could not get out after 1st Cavalry cut the rail line.

What's the turn number? 5? How do you feel about transferring a PzGrp from AGC to AGS? Do you think it is a good idea? I've always personally considered that the original OKH plan wasn't that bad: investing Moscow approaches from the SW disrupts the Soviet rail network and renders - from a "grand strategy" standpoint - irrelevant the South Western and Southern Fronts. That kind of seemingly "catastrophic" crisis might allow the Axis to lure the Soviets into a major showdown around the Bryansk - Orel - Kharkov area.

It's currently turn 6. I thus far like having transferred a large part of a Panzer Group to AGS. My main problem is in the AGN area, where the extra mobile units were essentially wasted due to unforseen difficulty with the terrain (I knew it would be bad, I just didn't expect it to be this bad even for the infantry). AGC's advance is slow, but I can't really call that a problem for the moment as long as I can get across the Dnepr. It will take me a turn or two to relocate the mobile forces from AGN to AGC.

Sadly, the benefit for being closer to a functional rail line I was hoping for didn't really materialize, as units still only had about 50% of their fuel requirements. The main benefit seems to have been the HQ's hoarding dumps.

I see that the AGS infantry is struggling to keep the pace of the Panzers. Were they spending too much time clearing pockets?

The infantry has been able to keep up just fine due to the corridor at Rovno, well, 6th Army in any case. I used 17th Army and minor Axis units to clean up the various pockets. All in all, AGS's infantry support has been good thus far.

Perhaps it will be more effective to let the infantry invest Kiev and strike SE at Cherkassy along the Zhitomir - Cherkassy railroad. Conducting an elastic defense against an opponent that keeps shifting the axis of advance is hard.

The only reason why my mobile forces are currently near Kiev is to make sure my infantry can get close, they'll turn southeast this turn.

I need to average about 5 hexes gained each turn if I want to get anywhere. I had hoped I would be able to storm Leningrad, but the swamps near Pskov made that impossible.

When your opponent pulls back most of his units, like notenome's doing, you're facing the odd reality that 1942 and perhaps even 1943 will be more problematic for the Soviets than 1941. When the 1942 summer offensive starts, my mobile units should be able to pocket substantial enemy forces again, unless he places his units in a checkerboard on the last mud turns (not a bad idea as it would again essentially nullify Axis mobility). He's trading terrain for being able to keep units intact, and as Axis logistics inevitably break down with or without stiff Soviet resistance, the difference in the amount of terrain I can capture between a game where the Soviet player fights or runs away shouldn't be too substantial. The main difference will be much lower Soviet losses when the Soviet player runs away.

[BletchleyGeek]

Thank you for your answers. I've been mainly playing the Soviet side so far, and my questions are motivated out of curiosity. I'm playing a GC against a human player as well and this kind of discussion gives me a hint about how he is seeing things (btw, he's doing similarly as you're doing, with the exception of the center, of course).

After noticing that swamps were amazing defensive terrain against infantry too, I decided to storm through the Pripyat marshes to avoid the problems I'm facing in the AGN area. It will also mean he'll have to hold a longer line along the Dnepr, hopefully allowing me to get across it in force soon.

He hasn't committed many forces to the marshes, the forces in there probably either routed there or could not get out after 1st Cavalry cut the rail line.

In my game I pulled out of the Pripyat marshes as fast as I could. The German cavalry division handles that terrain pretty well I hadn't anything able to counter that. The terrain is very good for defense, but it's rendered irrelevant because of the german advance on both flanks. When it gets isolated, any units you have in there won't get anywhere.

Sadly, the benefit for being closer to a functional rail line I was hoping for didn't really materialize, as units still only had about 50% of their fuel requirements. The main benefit seems to have been the HQ's hoarding dumps.

Are you finding air resupply to be ineffective? My opponent has been so far able to keep panzers in prime operational condition through that - to my dismay. I've been reinforcing IAD squadrons all along the front line to hinder that.

I'm expecting him as well to use the HQ buildup function. I've seen him combine HQ buildup with air resupply on Blau to great effect.

When your opponent pulls back most of his units, like notenome's doing, you're facing the odd reality that 1942 and perhaps even 1943 will be more problematic for the Soviets than 1941. When the 1942 summer offensive starts, my mobile units should be able to pocket substantial enemy forces again, unless he places his units in a checkerboard on the last mud turns (not a bad idea as it would again essentially nullify Axis mobility). He's trading terrain for being able to keep units intact, and as Axis logistics inevitably break down with or without stiff Soviet resistance, the difference in the amount of terrain I can capture between a game where the Soviet player fights or runs away shouldn't be too substantial. The main difference will be much lower Soviet losses when the Soviet player runs away.

Indeed, the goal of the Soviet player in 1941 is to preserve the RKK and the eventual collapse of the Axis supply network is perhaps a fact. But one shouldn't forgo other goals like preserving Soviet industry and rail network integrity or getting enough victories to get some units into Guard status.

As a defender the decision whether to withdraw or to stand and fight relies heavily on the perception of the ratio between opposing forces. If you see a huge panzer phalanx advancing towards a line of 1941 Soviet units you need to be either very ballsy or very silly to think you'll be stopping it cold dead.

Perhaps your moves - once he realized that you had concentrated your mechanized forces on the axis Rovno - Kiev - have become too obvious. Switching the axis of advance unexpectedly might lead him to make the wrong decision between run or fight.

Maybe it's too late to conceal your next move in the South, but in AGN something which might work, could be to pretend that you haven't pulled back the panzers. I think it would make sense to keep a PzDiv and a MotDiv, behind your lines, broken down into regiments, to give him the impression that the panzertruppen are still there, only that waiting for the infantry to achieve a breakthrough...

[ComradeP]

In my game I pulled out of the Pripyat marshes as fast as I could. The German cavalry division handles that terrain pretty well I hadn't anything able to counter that. The terrain is very good for defense, but it's rendered irrelevant because of the german advance on both flanks. When it gets isolated, any units you have in there won't get anywhere.

You can stage cavalry raids from there, but like you say you do have to get out of dodge quickly when the flanks are folding.

Are you finding air resupply to be ineffective? My opponent has been so far able to keep panzers in prime operational condition through that - to my dismay. I've been reinforcing IAD squadrons all along the front line to hinder that.

It's quite effective, but I had expected more from being fairly close to a rail line as well as being resupply by air. Air supply gets me about 50% fuel together with what I get during the logistics phase.

I have little reasons to use HQ buildup at this point. The Axis motorpool is strained enough as is.

Perhaps your moves - once he realized that you had concentrated your mechanized forces on the axis Rovno - Kiev - have become too obvious. Switching the axis of advance unexpectedly might lead him to make the wrong decision between run or fight.

It's difficult to hide your intentions in the 1941 campaign. After all: you're mostly pushing east, with the variable thing being how many troops you commit to a certain area. The other summer campaigns are usually much less predictable.

[BletchleyGeek]

Thank you again for your answers

However, I think that trying to mislead your opponent into thinking he's still facing a PzGrp is worth a shot. If he doesn't identify your move, he will perhaps stay a bit too long on the bridge between the Dvina and the Dnepr. More so if he's feeling a bit confident right now about handling the mechanized forces you have in the area.

Anyways, good luck!

[ComradeP]

Currently playing turn 6.

The most notable event thus far is this attack against an isolated unit. notenome dropped supply on it on his turn which seems to have completely nullified the isolation penalties for the moment.

Note that this is an attack on an isolated unit, normally attacks are even worse in swamps.

[ComradeP]

And another one against a normally supplied unit, with an enormous increase in Soviet CV. The system is doing an excellent job with holding back AGN.

[randallw]

I'm shocked that only one of those I-16s was a casualty.

[ComradeP]

Air to air combat is currently broken and is being worked on. It seems that after the last patch, which was supposed to fix the issue, even more was broken.

[Speedysteve]

Agreed on A2A....the swamps seem to be having too much of an effect on Land combat as well IMO.