Based on some of the feedback I have had, I just want to explain to readers of this AAR why I play the game the way I do.
Firstly, I am interested in the
history, not the
game as such. Styles of playing that improve my chances of winning, but which have no historical basis, are of zero interest to me. I would rather play historically and lose than play a-historically and win.
So, I will never:
- Defend in depth with a checker board layout.
- Use the linebacker defence.
- Pull my army 500 miles back to Poland avoid the winter effects, if playing as the Axis.
- Etc.
I will:
- Allow my units to be pocketed in June and July '41 to reflect loss of communications and the doctrine of the offensive.
- Build successive defence lines when I want to defend in depth.
- Defend my cities to the death after '41, when I have the troops to do so.
- Attack head on with wave after wave of low quality Soviet infantry.
- Push my cavalry through gaps but fail to follow-up with infantry.
I will do these things knowing that they are considered dumb by other players because I want to see how well the game models the war if the Soviets fight in a fairly historical way. I
want to lose 2.5m men and still have the combat potential to launch a counter offensive in the winter.
Things may change, but so far my army is standing on a roughly historical line, my losses are pretty much on track with history and so are my current plans. I am happy with that, but I'll let you know if that changes.
TURN 21
I have continued to dig in and move up reserves. Extensive recon can find only the following:
- Three apparent concentrations of enemy armour, suggesting a plan to attack Novgorod and another to execute a pincer movement around Kursk.
- An extensive checker board defence of forts through the whole AGS area, indicating a possible intent to pull back in the south after the Kursk pincer attack/pocket has been executed.
My conclusions are that the enemy intends to launch a limited offensive on Turn 22 with the intention of seizing Novgorod north and inflicting sufficient losses in the south around Kursk to prevent me from launching my counter thrust. The enemy's time lines are tight (3 weeks?) and to succeed at Kursk he must do the following:
1. Breakthrough and seal the pocket in Turn 22.
2. Eliminate the pocket in Turn 23.
3. Pull back to his planned winter line in Turn 24.
To defeat this attack I must disrupt the enemy's time lines, as I cannot expect to stop it otherwise. My intended response is to hold Novgorod as long as possible (probably not very long) while pulling back the bulk of my forces in the south to my reserve line in turn on Turn 21, before the offensive starts. Hopefully, this will throw him off as he will now have to launch a two-stage breakthough.
During Turn 22 I will do my best to minimise my losses against AGS and simultaneously pull the enemy as far east as I can, this being the strategy that gives me the best hope of inflicting some damage when the blizzard comes. I hope to make Carnage choose between inflicting the losses he seeks and pulling back to his winter line in time.
