Persistence is a virtue - Encircled (sov) vs Kamil (Axis)

[KamilS]

GC 41, Encircled (sov) vs Kamil (axis)

Full FOW, random weather


Turn 2 - start

According to common view, to draw without destroying considerable amount of Soviet industry it is necessary to eliminate 4M soldiers.

My approach in that game would opportunistic - straight away, destruction of opposing armies. Attack on his industrial centres will be tool, that will hopefully let me force my opponent to fight battles on my conditions.

My plan is based on one I executed in game against Mehring. I think it was essentially good, problems were my tactical misteakes, that kept me always half a stride behind.

To destroy bulk of his forces as soon as its possible I focused my efforts in areas where Soviets were strongest. All but one mobile divisions of 2nd Pz Group were send south, and 3rd was strengthen by 1 pz corps from AGN.

Start looks good.

My only concern is small amount of destroyed planes - only 3700. Well, I am just poor at that, and I seem not to learn.

[KamilS]

centre

[KamilS]

south

[Q-Ball]

I have a say I'm not a huge fan of your opening.

In AGN, it looks like you're already giving-up on Leningrad. Most of PzGp 4 was sent toward Minsk, and your infantry got off the line very slow. Nothing sent to Riga, and a bunch of infantry is on the Baltic shore just a few hexes north of the border. Why give up on Leningrad?

In AGC, not sure why you blew away the southern part of the Bialystok pocket. They are not really in the way, and once isolated, can be cleaned-up with a small number of units. Part of PzGp3 drove south toward the Pripet marshes, instead of east. You did make it to Minsk, so that helps.

In AGS, that's not bad, you do have a huge Lvov pocket, that will help alot. You committed most of PzGp2, which isn't a bad idea, though with that many guys maybe you could have cleared Rovno. It does look like you rolled the Reds to the East that aren't pocketed; the CVs look low.

Hope that helps, I'm just stating my opinion, might be wrong...

[KamilS]

Q-ball

In AGN, it looks like you're already giving-up on Leningrad. Most of PzGp 4 was sent toward Minsk, and your infantry got off the line very slow. Nothing sent to Riga, and a bunch of infantry is on the Baltic shore just a few hexes north of the border. Why give up on Leningrad?

That is true, my infantry near Baltic shore is pure incompetence.

I didn't want to commit myself to Leningrad operation completely, and without focusing my efforts in AGN area drive to north-east would be loss of time.

I think Germans are not strong enough to advance with all AG simultaneously. I have chosen AGC and AGS.

Q-ball

In AGC, not sure why you blew away the southern part of the Bialystok pocket. They are not really in the way, and once isolated, can be cleaned-up with a small number of units. Part of PzGp3 drove south toward the Pripet marshes, instead of east. You did make it to Minsk, so that helps.

I blew away the part of the Bialystok because I had to reinforce PzGr2. It was seriously weakened by south-first approach.

Q-ball
Hope that helps, I'm just stating my opinion, might be wrong...

... unfortunately for me you might be right

[Ketza]

A lot of starts can be "off". Your choice of sending a PZ division along the coast needs to be revisited in future games. A motorized division will do fine.

[KamilS]

turn 2 - movement

I don't have much to say about situation in the north. I didn't press forward because I somehow managed to use up most of fuel. Not good.

In the centre, Belarusian pocket was destroyed and mobile divisions crossed Berezyna. Infantry followed at leisure pace.

South was the place were I was looking for decisive developments. Heavy fighting took place north of Provskurov and north of Rovno. In the effect I encircled several decent Soviet divisions.

Created pocket won't hold, but I planned to seal it off next turn.

[KamilS]

centre (2 end)

[KamilS]

south (2 end)

[Oleg Mastruko]

Whenever I see light blue units belonging to AGC on an AGS screenshot I find myself shaking head in disbelief. I simply remain unconvinced that this is a good move.

I usually play Russians. (So I don't see the color on the German counters LOL) However, if I'd be able to see German player moving good part of his AGC armor south of Pripyat I'd let out a sigh of relief. That should tell you something...

Plus I agree with Q-Ball, north is simply horrible.

Have to be brutally honest here Kamil, I think this will end in a disaster very soon, however that depends on your opponent too, of course.

[KamilS]

south (2 end fighting)

[KamilS]

Oleg Mastruko
Have to be brutally honest here Kamil, I think this will end in a disaster very soon, however that depends on your opponent too, of course.

At the moment (turn 8) it doesn't look good, but to be honest I was very unlucky, so I am not able to judge if my plan for that campaign was as bad as everyone insists.

[Oleg Mastruko]

I am sure it was bad. I know you may believe that you can't afford a successful attack in all three sectors. You say you consciously "sacrificed" AGN to strengthen AGC with AGN units, then, in turn, AGS with AGC units.

I think this is wrong for two main reasons.

Firstly. You CAN successfully attack in all 3 sectors, it has been proven in many PBEMs.

Secondly, even if you can't attack in all three sectors, you can't allow your opponent to see it. You basically "phoned" him ie advertised your intentions. In the very first turn any Soviet player with half a brain would see you're very weak in the north. Thus, he immediatelly transfers units to other sectors. This sets off a chain reaction of Soviets having stronger then expected defences in other sectors etc.

In my game with Senno he did well in AGN and AGC bud bad in AGS. I imediatelly transferred lots of Kiev MD units to AGC and AGN sectors which, in turn made his job in those sectors much harder.

You simply can't allow the Soviet player to read your intentions and weaknesses as clearly as you did, right in the turn one!

[Oleg Mastruko]

If anything, AGN has to be reinfoirced by some stuff taken from AGC (not a lot but a INF corps or something like that). Taking Leningrad has become a regular feature of all recent AARs and you simply can't afford not to take it.

AGN is weak, if you further take Panzers from it, it becomes completely useless. It can't go for LG, it is just completely wasted, you then might try something even more radical, like transferring even more of AGN units elsewhere, leaving just some SEC regiments [:D]

[KamilS]

At the moment I can sensibly compare that game to other ones until turn 5.

What casualties should I inflict until end of turn 4? to give myself any chance.

[KamilS]

Turn 3 - begining

Soviet turn

AGC - One pz division got isolated
AGS - Weak pocket in Ukraine was breached (on the screen below)

[KamilS]

Turn 3 - my moves

In the north my actions were limited to infantry movement. Mobile units were rested. My goal was establishing corridor to AGC near Vielkie Luki and surrounding Soviet forces in Vitebsk. To make it possible I had to wait for support.

In the centre, 3 Pz Gr faced really stubborn defence, thus progress was really slow. Like in the north presence of infantry will be crucial. If speed of advance in next turn will be the same, from turn 5 mot and pz formations will be used only for exploitation.

In the South strength of reinforced 1 Pz Gr let me advance without infantry support. Two created pockets look quite secure. If they hold, approaching infantry will reduce them, while tanks will resume their drive east.

[KamilS]

centre

[KamilS]

south

[KamilS]

casualties at the end of turn 3