Lenningrad, the true center

[pat.casey]

I can't claim to have a lot of pbem experience, but my AI experience is leading me to believe that Lenningrad in 1941 is by far the most useful Axis objective (far more important than moscow or anything in the ukraine. My reasoning is:

A) Lenningrad frees the fins
B) Lenningrad shortens your line
C) A + B (above) makes blizzard survival *much* easier
D) Moscow is vulnerable in '42 to a northern thrust based out of a secure Lenningrad salient

I've tried various approaches to taking it early, from bulling through with a mass of infantry (not recommended, those swamps hurt), to hooking around to the east of the city to link the fins (works great against the AI, I suspect a human could stop).

Both approaches have pros and cons, but the key thing is that they're doable, you just have to commit to the north and be willing to accept that southern and central front advances will slow as a result.

What do other folks think?

[PeeDeeAitch]

Well, I think Leningrad is easier to isolate and take now - it may get tougher as swamps may well get nerfed again (they may well be a bit too easy now). Leningrad is one of those PBEM objectives that can be both a wonder to get or a trap (insert Admiral Akhbar image here). I think as of now it might well be doable, but if your opponant decides to really defend it that simply means there are less, well relatively - there are always too many, defenders elsewhere.

[Q-Ball]

I've said that several times. It's #1, for the reasons you listed.

[squatter]

No other single objective will have such an impact on the rest of the game. Not even taking Moscow (presuming all factories get vacated).
 
Therefore it should be the prime objective for Axis in 41, I agree.

[timmyab]

I think that Leningrad first makes good sense - IF you can take it.That's a big if, and against a competent opponent it's going to be much easier said than done.Thrust too hard at Pskov and there's no prizes for guessing where most of the Soviet reinforcements are going, and as you know it's very good defensive terrain.If it's doable against a good opponent though the benifits are huge.
The Valdai hills and the swamps to the west of them are beautifully placed strategically for the Soviets.Without them there a good strategy would be to place 3 panzer armies about there and threaten both Leningrad and Moscow simultaneously, splitting the Soviet defences.

[Commanderski]

In Glantz's latest book it was said the even as early as mid july '41 that Hitler wished he had sent Hoth North to help take Lennigrad.

[Balou]

Is there an AAR where a decent soviet player has lost Leningrad in 1941 ? Defending the city against both a frontal assault or the hook is quite easy since it takes time for the Axis to bring up it's infantry, panzers alone won't do the job. That leaves a soviet player with 8-10 weeks to prepare his defences ( terrain bonus etc) and that's an awful lot of time.

[Jajusha]

Short AAR here

Emir(Axis) vs Oleg(Soviet)

Turn 8 Emir is at the doors to Leningrad
Turn 13 he has leningrad fully encircled, look here

[Oleg Mastruko]

ORIGINAL: Jajusha

Short AAR here

Emir(Axis) vs Oleg(Soviet)

Turn 8 Emir is at the doors to Leningrad
Turn 13 he has leningrad fully encircled, look here

After that I did the same to my next human opponent. I wait to see how that game will go any may write an AAR later.

Timmy is pretty much on the mark when he says: "a good strategy would be to place 3 panzer armies about there and threaten both Leningrad and Moscow simultaneously, splitting the Soviet defences."

[Jajusha]

ORIGINAL: Oleg Mastruko

ORIGINAL: Jajusha

Short AAR here

Emir(Axis) vs Oleg(Soviet)

Turn 8 Emir is at the doors to Leningrad
Turn 13 he has leningrad fully encircled, look here

After that I did the same to my next human opponent. I wait to see how that game will go any may write an AAR later.

Timmy is pretty much on the mark when he says: "a good strategy would be to place 3 panzer armies about there and threaten both Leningrad and Moscow simultaneously, splitting the Soviet defences."

Well, all i can say is that i eagerly await for that AAR.

[PeeDeeAitch]

Q-Ball took Leningrad vs Von Beanie. Another example of a good Soviet player losing Leningrad.

The cries about "the game is broken, against a decent human XXXX (insert whatever issue one speaks of) can't happen!" seems perhaps to be a bit premature. The German side is the tougher side, and all of the players of the Germans need to learn a lot to be able to even do as well in 1941. A month and a half ago Leningrad was always untakable, now it can happen (and it might again in Charon Jr's AAR), by adroit German strategy.

[Q-Ball]

I took it vs. Von Beanie, you can read the AAR for details. He's a good Soviet player, because he's killing me in the Blizzard right now.

Could the Germans have taken it historically, if they had put proper emphasis on it? Certainly, AGN was the red-headed step child of AGC and AGS when it came to allocation of resources. I tend to think the Germans could have taken it if they had put an earlier emphasis on it, but I would like to hear what others think on that.

[IdahoNYer]

I took it PBEM against Scar; about to face the blizzard! For me, the key was committing to it as the primary objective from the start, and committing the forces necessary. For the details, check the AAR, but taking the city involved 16th, 18th and 9th Armies, as well as 4th and 3rd Panzer Groups with an indirect approach to isolate the city by linking with the Finns. This was at the expense of forces in the Ukraine.

[Aussiematto]

Taking Leningrad works for me: there's actually just a distance / troops logic to it. You can hold so much more of the front with the Finns that the extra infantry will defend in bliz. and be the backbone of a drive around Moscow in 42. In a way, you almost want the defences to be committed there since it gives you a ready made pocket ... I can imagine, against a real and good opponent, the whole orientation of the game shifting from west - east to north - south (or, south to north, then BACk again, once Leningrad gone).


 A key to getting leningrad is to get the panzers there fast enough to stop the defences from getting to far out from the city -- you don't use the to attack it, but they stop the formation of a large buffer around the city which squeezes you between the river and that defence. Against the AI, I commit almost all the reinforcement infantry, 2nd Army for C&C, transfer pioneers (lots) and stugs from 16th Army. You could just shunt 16th up there and use the 2nd Army to hold to the south of course.

Another tip -- I move as much Finnish force as I can around to the eastern border with USSR - you don't need it to take Leningrad and, if it is in Leningrad when the winter comes, you can't get it to the east fast enough.

[timmyab]

ORIGINAL: majeloz
In a way, you almost want the defences to be committed there since it gives you a ready made pocket

Don't forget though that against a good human opponent a lot of the forces committed are going to be specifically tasked with preventing a pocket from forming in the first place.The more panzers you send up there, the more Soviets you're going to find sitting in swamps with a big grin on their face just waiting for them.The Soviet rail capacity is huge so there's no shortage of mobility to allow this.

[ComradeP]

Swamps are no longer effectively natural level 4 forts, but only level 2 forts, so 2 guys and a horse can no longer stop an entire Panzer corps.

If you really want it, you should be able to capture it now, but at what cost?

Also: if you don't go for Leningrad, but dig in at a line where the Germans start in the 1944 campaign, your line will still be shorter than when you would capture Leningrad and move east, even with Finnish help as many Finnish forces withdraw and you need a pretty impressive garrison for all the Leningrad hexes too.

[Klydon]

I have always been a "Leningrad first" person because I think it disengages the German left and makes it easier to come crashing down on Moscow as the next objective. Getting the Finns into the war and having them take over part of the front is extremely helpful as well.

However, I also think any good east front game is sort of a guessing game for the Russians. It helps them if they can identify the German main effort and while they may not be able to stop the Germans, they can make it a lot tougher in terms of time taken, casualties inflicted, etc. Along with that, an overcommitment by the Germans to a certain sector means they will be weak in others and potentially open to counter measures. The other side of the coin is if the Russian over commits to an all out defense of Leningrad, they can leave themselves very vulnerable in other areas. They also leave themselves in position that if the Germans can pull the "big hook", that is a tremendous amount of Russians that are likely going to get nailed and it would be extremely difficult to recover from.

[Skanvak]

I beg to differ. Lenningrad is not a railroad network, not a politcal center and a smaller insdustrial center than Moscow. A simple siege should be enough if you manage to take Moscow as it will crippled the railroad capacity of soviet Union (well at least in reality, I don't know in the game, and actual first winter rule make it a bit difficult).

I wonder (never tried) if going south (ignore north in this case) is a viable solution to try to get at the Caucasus soon. Seem too far for me but I have never tried in any wargame.

[Klydon]

The issue I have with just doing a siege on Leningrad is it provides an anchor for the Russian defense and commits the Germans to positional warfare on at least part of the front, which is not their forte. The Leningrad area is the second largest population center in Russia and does have propaganda value.

As far as a drive in the south, it would be interesting to see someone use this as their main objective. I think Rostov is about as far as the Axis are going to get due more to logistics than anything else in 1941. Obviously capturing the Crimea and getting a bridge head across would also be on the list of things to be done by the Axis. Going south would be more of setting the table for 1942. Going south would traditionally be for economic reasons, but there is some question of what effects specifically would happen if say the oil centers are captured would have on both the German and Russian economy.

[raizer]

can anyone take it in the road to lenningrad scenario against a person?