Thanks for the interesting points. I have not been creating many new units lately, for two reasons--I have had plenty of other uses for my AP (can't even tell you what, but they are down to almost zero every turn), and I am not sure of the wisdom of creating new units when many of my old ones are still at 1 CV.
I am not sure why the CVs are so low...my manpower pool is low, only about 50k (and by the way, my OOB strength is almost 6.9 million, not 6 million). I guess I should look at their manpower and see if that is the reason, and if not, I can go ahead and create some new units? Anybody have any theories about the low CVs and how to fix them?
I guess I'm really trying to figure things out as I go here, I've only played one other GC until this far, and in that one (vs AI) I was halfway to Berlin by now.
Also, someone mentioned evacuating industry. I have been evacuating steadily every turn since last summer, and at this point there is not much left to evacuate. Initially I left everything in Moscow but after he knocked me back near Kharkov I decided that wasn't necessarily safe either, so resumed evacs. I have left some key factories in Moscow and Stalingrad, just because I don't want their production interrupted, but think that I will have enough notice to pull them out (at least two turns).
The fact that I will have fewer evacs means that I'll be able to do some MASSSIVE rail transfers of armies in 1942, if necessary. One of the last things I did last turn was pull several of my reserve armies from entrenching duty and put them on standby on rails, so they'll be able to move to threatened sectors immediately.
GC 76mm (Sov) vs Ketza (Ketza Welcome)
Moderators: Joel Billings, Sabre21
RE: GC 76mm (Sov) vs Ketza (No Ketza)
The downside to building more units when you already have so many is that it spreads your manpower out. With so many units on the map, it is no wonder many of them only have a cv of 1.
RE: GC 76mm (Sov) vs Ketza (No Ketza)
Turn 52 (clear) is almost over. Whenever I get a turn from Ketza, the first thing I do is take a quick look at the "battle reports mode" (or whatever it is called) to see where the action has been. Here is what I saw this turn:
Not a disaster, but not great, either. Too many units pocked, I can't afford that every turn, that's for sure. Not the almost complete lack of Sov interdiction attacks. That's rather frustrating, what is going on?
The next thing I usually do is do some recon, to see what he is up to. I don't see anything north of Moscow at all, but I guess forces could be hidden in the woods, it is not like my recon is very effective. Around Smolensk, as previously, some threat, but not much as far as I can tell:
Bottom line: I'll be pulling troops from the north to reinforce Kharkov.
I also reconned around Kharkov, of course, here is what I found:
As far as I can tell, the panzer count for this turn is approxmately:
KURSK: I'm guessing five panzer divisions in this area, plus a handful of moto units.
KHARKOV: Positive ID on 9 panzer divisions and 8 moto units.
CRIMEA: Two panzers and one moto.
I think this accounts for most of his strength, so I'm going to have to commit my reserves at this point (although the panzers near Kursk are not yet committed and could be shifted pretty easily).
More to follow shortly.
Not a disaster, but not great, either. Too many units pocked, I can't afford that every turn, that's for sure. Not the almost complete lack of Sov interdiction attacks. That's rather frustrating, what is going on?
The next thing I usually do is do some recon, to see what he is up to. I don't see anything north of Moscow at all, but I guess forces could be hidden in the woods, it is not like my recon is very effective. Around Smolensk, as previously, some threat, but not much as far as I can tell:
Bottom line: I'll be pulling troops from the north to reinforce Kharkov.
I also reconned around Kharkov, of course, here is what I found:
As far as I can tell, the panzer count for this turn is approxmately:
KURSK: I'm guessing five panzer divisions in this area, plus a handful of moto units.
KHARKOV: Positive ID on 9 panzer divisions and 8 moto units.
CRIMEA: Two panzers and one moto.
I think this accounts for most of his strength, so I'm going to have to commit my reserves at this point (although the panzers near Kursk are not yet committed and could be shifted pretty easily).
More to follow shortly.
RE: GC 76mm (Sov) vs Ketza (No Ketza)
The bottom line is that he continued to smash my carpet but thus far has not broken through. He pocketed a lot more units than I would have liked this turn, so I need to think about how to fix that. Anyway, here is the situation in the Kharkov area after moving some reserves:
You'll see that I'm still in the process of maneuvering the Shock and Reserve Fronts into position, along with the 30th Army. Other reserves are in motion in various places, while others remain in place for now.
I should point out that one of the reasons the CVs were so low last turn was that it was a mud turn; the CVs here are the higher, normal value but still on the low side IMO.
I also want to show you what is going on in the south:
I don't want to leave my lines too far in front of the bulge forming near Kharkov, so have pulled back a bit and will probably continue to do so.
The good news in all of this is that the Kharkov area is pretty much where I would have wanted him to attack, because I can withdraw for a long way withing losing anything of great importance. The main thing is to avoid encirclements in the meantime, and to try to gradually wear down his troops.
Next turn is mud, so I should have a chance to finish positioning some of the troops around Kharkov.
You'll see that I'm still in the process of maneuvering the Shock and Reserve Fronts into position, along with the 30th Army. Other reserves are in motion in various places, while others remain in place for now.
I should point out that one of the reasons the CVs were so low last turn was that it was a mud turn; the CVs here are the higher, normal value but still on the low side IMO.
I also want to show you what is going on in the south:
I don't want to leave my lines too far in front of the bulge forming near Kharkov, so have pulled back a bit and will probably continue to do so.
The good news in all of this is that the Kharkov area is pretty much where I would have wanted him to attack, because I can withdraw for a long way withing losing anything of great importance. The main thing is to avoid encirclements in the meantime, and to try to gradually wear down his troops.
Next turn is mud, so I should have a chance to finish positioning some of the troops around Kharkov.
RE: GC 76mm (Sov) vs Ketza (No Ketza)
If your ToE's for units in the line (those that have not been fighting) look fairly good in terms of rifle squads etc, then I think its safe to get the unit assembly line going.
Looks like you had 28 units get surrounded. Even if they were all brigades (it looks like about half and half), it will cost 140 CP's to replace them and more importantly, probably 4 turns before the new units are worth a lick.
As far as north of Moscow, I would leave the Finns alone for now and start advancing every where else and find his troops the old fashion way. If he has all his panzers in the south, then he has to be weak someplace. You need to put some pressure on him and make him sweat and divert troops. You can't stand head to head where he decides to attack anyway, so you may as well attack where he isn't. [:D]
Looks like you had 28 units get surrounded. Even if they were all brigades (it looks like about half and half), it will cost 140 CP's to replace them and more importantly, probably 4 turns before the new units are worth a lick.
As far as north of Moscow, I would leave the Finns alone for now and start advancing every where else and find his troops the old fashion way. If he has all his panzers in the south, then he has to be weak someplace. You need to put some pressure on him and make him sweat and divert troops. You can't stand head to head where he decides to attack anyway, so you may as well attack where he isn't. [:D]
-
Arstavidios
- Posts: 782
- Joined: Fri Nov 19, 2004 2:02 pm
RE: GC 76mm (Sov) vs Ketza (No Ketza)
Hi,
I read you want to combine brigades into divisions.
Isn'it better to keep them to create corps with two divisions and one brigade. This way you may save up on divisions.
I read you want to combine brigades into divisions.
Isn'it better to keep them to create corps with two divisions and one brigade. This way you may save up on divisions.
RE: GC 76mm (Sov) vs Ketza (No Ketza)
What I meant was converting brigades into something else...right now I'll probably keep most of them around, will gradually convert into divisions/corps.ORIGINAL: Arstavidios
Hi,
I read you want to combine brigades into divisions.
Isn'it better to keep them to create corps with two divisions and one brigade. This way you may save up on divisions.
RE: GC 76mm (Sov) vs Ketza (No Ketza)
OK, OK, don't remind me that an entire army has been surrounded! It could have been worse!ORIGINAL: Klydon
Looks like you had 28 units get surrounded. Even if they were all brigades (it looks like about half and half), it will cost 140 CP's to replace them and more importantly, probably 4 turns before the new units are worth a lick.
As far as north of Moscow, I would leave the Finns alone for now and start advancing every where else and find his troops the old fashion way. If he has all his panzers in the south, then he has to be weak someplace. You need to put some pressure on him and make him sweat and divert troops. You can't stand head to head where he decides to attack anyway, so you may as well attack where he isn't. [:D]
Seriously, next turn I'll start thinking about how to make this more difficult, but so far I'm really drawing a blank...I can't be strong everywhere, and generally he is good about hitting where I am weak and pocketing the strong units.
Will also look at attacks once this next mud turn is over, there are still a couple panzer divisions missing, and the ones near Kursk are uncommitted, so I want to wait a bit longer to see what is going on...
RE: GC 76mm (Sov) vs Ketza (No Ketza)
Just finished Turn 53 (mud); it should be clear from here on out, so things will pick up.
Because it was a mud turn, I didn't see anything from Ketza on the battle results screen. But once again my partisans have been busy...
Like I said, they've been tearing up the track up north. Just wish they'd do more down south...
First thing I do now after checking the battle report is fix up all of my air units. I go into the commanders report, sort all planes by readiness, send any units with less than 10 planes to the reserve, and replace them. Took me a long time this turn...
I noticed that I'm short on trucks, I'm at 81 (87). I was at parity for a long time, not sure why I'm short now.
I created two rifle corps in the Crimea to defend Kerch, and one more in the Shock Front.
Anyway, here is a macro view of the southern half of the front as we start the 1942 campaign in earnest. It looks like the same old carpet, but its not...I took some zoomed in screenshots showing fort levels and CVs and might post them ater he finishes his turn to see how the new set up fared against his attacks.
I pulled back a hex in some spots in the far south, as previously mentioned I don't want that sticking out too far as he advances near Kharkov.
I think Turn 53 is kind of a milestone turn, so I thought I'd post some of the boring stats that I usually don't bother with. Here are losses:
Note that pre-blizzard, my losses were about 3.9 mln, so I've somehow lost quite a few more over the winter.
Here are my losses in units. This is actually the first time I've seen these numbers, until now I was afraid to look at how many divisions I'd lost:
It's not pretty, but so far I'm still alive.
Finally, here is production. Nothing exciting, but...
Because it was a mud turn, I didn't see anything from Ketza on the battle results screen. But once again my partisans have been busy...
Like I said, they've been tearing up the track up north. Just wish they'd do more down south...
First thing I do now after checking the battle report is fix up all of my air units. I go into the commanders report, sort all planes by readiness, send any units with less than 10 planes to the reserve, and replace them. Took me a long time this turn...
I noticed that I'm short on trucks, I'm at 81 (87). I was at parity for a long time, not sure why I'm short now.
I created two rifle corps in the Crimea to defend Kerch, and one more in the Shock Front.
Anyway, here is a macro view of the southern half of the front as we start the 1942 campaign in earnest. It looks like the same old carpet, but its not...I took some zoomed in screenshots showing fort levels and CVs and might post them ater he finishes his turn to see how the new set up fared against his attacks.
I pulled back a hex in some spots in the far south, as previously mentioned I don't want that sticking out too far as he advances near Kharkov.
I think Turn 53 is kind of a milestone turn, so I thought I'd post some of the boring stats that I usually don't bother with. Here are losses:
Note that pre-blizzard, my losses were about 3.9 mln, so I've somehow lost quite a few more over the winter.
Here are my losses in units. This is actually the first time I've seen these numbers, until now I was afraid to look at how many divisions I'd lost:
It's not pretty, but so far I'm still alive.
Finally, here is production. Nothing exciting, but...
RE: GC 76mm (Sov) vs Ketza (No Ketza)
Turn 54 complete. Once again, I had a nasty shock, Ketz was able to (easily) punch through several fortified hexes and take Stalino. As a result, I had to retreat from lots of territory SW and NW of Stalino, so at least towards Rostov my troops are not entrenched any more. But I'm not sure that it really matters. Anyway, here is the situation near Stalino AFTER my move:
More comments on this later, but for now, another worrying development; the panzer army (I think) that was near Kursk has been moved up to the Smolensk area:
This is not good news, because I've moved a lot of units from the Moscow area down south to counter his moves there. It is even worse news when you realize how easily he slices through my entrenched lines. This area could get ugly very fast.
Nothing exciting, but here is the situation in the Crimea; he seems to have pulled the two panzer divs that were down there and sent them somewhere else, so I'm not sure if much else will happen down here for awhile:
I guess I'll discuss the strategic situation a bit later, but first I thought I'd present some analysis that I did of the combat in this turn. In general, the pattern of his CVs increasing by a lot, and mine falling by a lot, continued, and I really want to find out why. Otherwise, attempting any kind of defense seems rather futile, and I'd be better off checkerboarding back to the Urals.
Anyway, here is a table showing some data from the battles in his main thrust, towards Stalino:
Several general comments here:
1) As you can see,on average, his CVs increased by 59%, while mine decreased by 43%. While this is better than last turn, it still means that a battle which started at 1:1 would end up at 2.8:1, which is not good. It also means that his attacks, which on average had initial odds of 1.6:1, on average achieved 7.9:1 odds. Finally, it means (according to my math) that for one of my stacks to hold (ie, achieve 1.9:1 odds) against a 22 CV German attack (not very strong, but at least an effort), I would need 33 CV in my stack. That is just not achievable except in isolated cases, and currently impossible if not strongly entrenched. Frankly, these results are all rather depressing, but I was hoping that I could at least figure out what was going on.
The first thing I looked at was airpower. When looking at the effect of air power, I decided to look at what happens when a side achieves "air superiority" in a battle, which I defined (on a completely arbitrary basis) as having at least 100 planes more than the other side. In the table, I shaded the battles with German air sup in gray, Sov air sup in purple. The results were interesting: In battles where the Germans had air sup, my CVs were decreased by 72% (instead of the 43% average), but if the Germans did not have air sup, my CVs decreased by only 25%. Meanwhile, in the battles (beware, only two samples) where I had air sup, my CVs INCREASED by 48% on average, vs a 59% decrease if I did not have air sup. These results were interesting, but of dubious relevance given the small sample size, and indeed, analysis of the other battles on this turn did not necessarily show the same pattern.
More analysis in subsequent post; if this stuff is boring I would skip any more posts until you see a screen shot...
More comments on this later, but for now, another worrying development; the panzer army (I think) that was near Kursk has been moved up to the Smolensk area:
This is not good news, because I've moved a lot of units from the Moscow area down south to counter his moves there. It is even worse news when you realize how easily he slices through my entrenched lines. This area could get ugly very fast.
Nothing exciting, but here is the situation in the Crimea; he seems to have pulled the two panzer divs that were down there and sent them somewhere else, so I'm not sure if much else will happen down here for awhile:
I guess I'll discuss the strategic situation a bit later, but first I thought I'd present some analysis that I did of the combat in this turn. In general, the pattern of his CVs increasing by a lot, and mine falling by a lot, continued, and I really want to find out why. Otherwise, attempting any kind of defense seems rather futile, and I'd be better off checkerboarding back to the Urals.
Anyway, here is a table showing some data from the battles in his main thrust, towards Stalino:
Several general comments here:
1) As you can see,on average, his CVs increased by 59%, while mine decreased by 43%. While this is better than last turn, it still means that a battle which started at 1:1 would end up at 2.8:1, which is not good. It also means that his attacks, which on average had initial odds of 1.6:1, on average achieved 7.9:1 odds. Finally, it means (according to my math) that for one of my stacks to hold (ie, achieve 1.9:1 odds) against a 22 CV German attack (not very strong, but at least an effort), I would need 33 CV in my stack. That is just not achievable except in isolated cases, and currently impossible if not strongly entrenched. Frankly, these results are all rather depressing, but I was hoping that I could at least figure out what was going on.
The first thing I looked at was airpower. When looking at the effect of air power, I decided to look at what happens when a side achieves "air superiority" in a battle, which I defined (on a completely arbitrary basis) as having at least 100 planes more than the other side. In the table, I shaded the battles with German air sup in gray, Sov air sup in purple. The results were interesting: In battles where the Germans had air sup, my CVs were decreased by 72% (instead of the 43% average), but if the Germans did not have air sup, my CVs decreased by only 25%. Meanwhile, in the battles (beware, only two samples) where I had air sup, my CVs INCREASED by 48% on average, vs a 59% decrease if I did not have air sup. These results were interesting, but of dubious relevance given the small sample size, and indeed, analysis of the other battles on this turn did not necessarily show the same pattern.
More analysis in subsequent post; if this stuff is boring I would skip any more posts until you see a screen shot...
RE: GC 76mm (Sov) vs Ketza (No Ketza)
Analysis, continued. I also looked at whether the size of the initial CV made a difference. At least in this tiny sample, stacks with CVs of more than 13 fell by 62%, vs only 30% for stacks with CVs of less than 13. We'll see if that pattern persists as well.
I also eyeballed whether the number of support units or fort level might be a factor, but didn't notice any correlation, so didn't do any real analysis.
Before I forget, let me rant about the air model in this game. Air support sure seems important, so it would be nice if it worked better. In this turn, I got hammered in part for a very simple reason: Ketza says he frequently turns is GS on/off during a turn (makes sense), but I of course cannot do so during his turn, so the computer is in charge of deciding where I get defensive GS. To summarize my conclusion, the computer is a moron, and this moron is in charge of a significant part of my combat power. For instance, in this turn, the computer decided it would be a good idea to commit most of my defensive ground support (82%, or 2943 sorties of a total of 3569) to battles that didn't matter at all. That left only 18% for the important area, which Ketza easily overran. Ketza doesn't have this problem of course, because he could turn off GS when he didn't want it.
This needs to be fixed by allowing players to assign GS priority to either individual units or at least HQs. I would think that you could simply give units "GS priority" of 1-9, and the computer would assign GS to the highest priority units (of course players could also simple leave the setting at a default of 4-5 if they don't want to micromanage).
While I'm ranting about the air model, something seems seriuosly whacked with German aircraft casualties, or the lack thereof. Overall, in 2240 sorties, the Germans lost 40 planes, including 17 in one disasterous battle. This is less than 2%, despite the fact that they were heavily outnumbered in many air battles. Note that you need to see the aircraft columns in subsequent tables, rather than the table above, because the table above is where he had GS turn on, and most of my GS had apparently been expended. It is odd that he lost many of his planes (17 of 40) in battles where he greatly outnumbered me or had parity. He lost another 17 in one bad (for him) battle, and otherwise was almost untouched. In another 668 sorties, he lost only 6 planes, less than 1%, despite the fact that I opposed his 668 sorties with 2943 sorties, so outnumbered him almost 5:1! (meanwhile my corresponding losses were 208, or about 7%. I should also point out that somehow, many of my fighter groups have morale and/or experience well in excess of 90 (although I didn't check the particular fighter air groups involved in these battles).
I also eyeballed whether the number of support units or fort level might be a factor, but didn't notice any correlation, so didn't do any real analysis.
Before I forget, let me rant about the air model in this game. Air support sure seems important, so it would be nice if it worked better. In this turn, I got hammered in part for a very simple reason: Ketza says he frequently turns is GS on/off during a turn (makes sense), but I of course cannot do so during his turn, so the computer is in charge of deciding where I get defensive GS. To summarize my conclusion, the computer is a moron, and this moron is in charge of a significant part of my combat power. For instance, in this turn, the computer decided it would be a good idea to commit most of my defensive ground support (82%, or 2943 sorties of a total of 3569) to battles that didn't matter at all. That left only 18% for the important area, which Ketza easily overran. Ketza doesn't have this problem of course, because he could turn off GS when he didn't want it.
This needs to be fixed by allowing players to assign GS priority to either individual units or at least HQs. I would think that you could simply give units "GS priority" of 1-9, and the computer would assign GS to the highest priority units (of course players could also simple leave the setting at a default of 4-5 if they don't want to micromanage).
While I'm ranting about the air model, something seems seriuosly whacked with German aircraft casualties, or the lack thereof. Overall, in 2240 sorties, the Germans lost 40 planes, including 17 in one disasterous battle. This is less than 2%, despite the fact that they were heavily outnumbered in many air battles. Note that you need to see the aircraft columns in subsequent tables, rather than the table above, because the table above is where he had GS turn on, and most of my GS had apparently been expended. It is odd that he lost many of his planes (17 of 40) in battles where he greatly outnumbered me or had parity. He lost another 17 in one bad (for him) battle, and otherwise was almost untouched. In another 668 sorties, he lost only 6 planes, less than 1%, despite the fact that I opposed his 668 sorties with 2943 sorties, so outnumbered him almost 5:1! (meanwhile my corresponding losses were 208, or about 7%. I should also point out that somehow, many of my fighter groups have morale and/or experience well in excess of 90 (although I didn't check the particular fighter air groups involved in these battles).
RE: GC 76mm (Sov) vs Ketza (No Ketza)
Just lost a long post, will try to reconstitute...
The battles shown in the first table were Ketza's main effort, where most of his panzers and air power went. There were another 13 sideshow attacks, where he had 1-2 divisions attack the entrenched brigades which I had generally left next to the Germans. These were battles that he should be expected to win (and did), but I wanted to take a look at them as well:
One big difference is these battles was that the initial odds were much higher (3.4:1), since he was only facing brigades. The CV +/- pattern continued, with his CVs increasing by 49%, mine decreasing by 61%, so that his final average odds were more than 30:1. In these battles having air sup was much less helpful to the Sovs, maybe because they were already hopelessly outclassed. None of these battles had Sov CVs of 13, so I couldn't test the big CV pattern.
The battles shown in the first table were Ketza's main effort, where most of his panzers and air power went. There were another 13 sideshow attacks, where he had 1-2 divisions attack the entrenched brigades which I had generally left next to the Germans. These were battles that he should be expected to win (and did), but I wanted to take a look at them as well:
One big difference is these battles was that the initial odds were much higher (3.4:1), since he was only facing brigades. The CV +/- pattern continued, with his CVs increasing by 49%, mine decreasing by 61%, so that his final average odds were more than 30:1. In these battles having air sup was much less helpful to the Sovs, maybe because they were already hopelessly outclassed. None of these battles had Sov CVs of 13, so I couldn't test the big CV pattern.
RE: GC 76mm (Sov) vs Ketza (No Ketza)
OK, I'm sure you're all a bit tired of these tables, I know I am, but I want to show you one more thing, and it is *#@$! weird...
I also looked at the battles in which he eliminated the pocket that he took last turn. I've pasted the table below, but to my surprise, in these battles, my CVs increased by 27% on average (his also increased, by 77%). I would have thought that the CVs of isolated units would plunge most of all, but that is not the case. Maybe it was partly because of Sov air superiority (as mentioned, the computer wisely dedicated a large part of my GS to these battles), but I don't think so, because the battles in which I had air sup did not seem to enjoy any more CV growth than the other battles. Here is the table:
The results of these battles in the pocket totally confuse me, and I have to say that I am no closer--indeed, probably further--from understanding the combat model in this game. Which I really don't like.
[EDIT] Look at the German air losses in the table above, they look off to me. I vastly outnumbered his aircraft in most of the battles, and yet he lost a grand total of one airplane in all of the battles. And again, many of my fighers have decent--if not good--morale/experience.
I also looked at the battles in which he eliminated the pocket that he took last turn. I've pasted the table below, but to my surprise, in these battles, my CVs increased by 27% on average (his also increased, by 77%). I would have thought that the CVs of isolated units would plunge most of all, but that is not the case. Maybe it was partly because of Sov air superiority (as mentioned, the computer wisely dedicated a large part of my GS to these battles), but I don't think so, because the battles in which I had air sup did not seem to enjoy any more CV growth than the other battles. Here is the table:
The results of these battles in the pocket totally confuse me, and I have to say that I am no closer--indeed, probably further--from understanding the combat model in this game. Which I really don't like.
[EDIT] Look at the German air losses in the table above, they look off to me. I vastly outnumbered his aircraft in most of the battles, and yet he lost a grand total of one airplane in all of the battles. And again, many of my fighers have decent--if not good--morale/experience.
RE: GC 76mm (Sov) vs Ketza (No Ketza)
You might be forgetting the Leader ratings contribution to these battles? Mainly Initiative and Mech/Inf are a big changer to the CV values. As for the air casualties, in 1 year from 42 summer to 43 summer, my oponent air OOB lost 1000 aircraft, surely they are getting shot down. What kind of planes are you still using? Not the terrible biplanes i hope.
Good example here i think, where the soviet must have failed quite a good bit or leader rolls:
Good example here i think, where the soviet must have failed quite a good bit or leader rolls:
RE: GC 76mm (Sov) vs Ketza (No Ketza)
Jajusha, thanks for the comment on the leader roles, I meant to mention those. I recogize that they are important, but I haven't analyzed them because I don't know how...I have no idea which leaders he has where, and also don't know how to determine to what extent leader roles play a role in my battles. I have tried to weed out all of the worst leaders, but as you can probably appreciate this doesn't mean I've get the best commanders for every army.
The thing is that this drop in CVs is almost universal--almost every battle, every army. If it is leader roll-related, I would think that every now and then I would make a roll and my CV would increase instead of plunging. But this almost never happens (except in the pocket, and those units were already out of command range), so I don't know what to think. I would love it if someone could clue me in on how to look at this in more detail.
On aircraft losses; if you look at the "main battles" (ie, the first table), where he had GS turned on, those losses look OK (if not heavy for him). The issue seems to be with fighter intercepts, in which he suffers virtually no losses whatsoever. This is a problem, because he can limit his air casualties by simply using GS only when he turns it on, but I cannot increase his air losses by running more intercept missions or GS missions when he has GS turned off.
For aircraft types, if it flies I use it. Most of my air bases are now stocked with mono-wing fighters of various types, but there are a few airbases which have some, if not predominantly biplanes. I think I stuck most of them up north, where it is quiet, but will try to double-check when I get the turn back. In this southern area, however, I tried to put most of my best planes. Finally, I don't know to what extent he is losing aircraft due to general attrition, etc.
The thing is that this drop in CVs is almost universal--almost every battle, every army. If it is leader roll-related, I would think that every now and then I would make a roll and my CV would increase instead of plunging. But this almost never happens (except in the pocket, and those units were already out of command range), so I don't know what to think. I would love it if someone could clue me in on how to look at this in more detail.
On aircraft losses; if you look at the "main battles" (ie, the first table), where he had GS turned on, those losses look OK (if not heavy for him). The issue seems to be with fighter intercepts, in which he suffers virtually no losses whatsoever. This is a problem, because he can limit his air casualties by simply using GS only when he turns it on, but I cannot increase his air losses by running more intercept missions or GS missions when he has GS turned off.
For aircraft types, if it flies I use it. Most of my air bases are now stocked with mono-wing fighters of various types, but there are a few airbases which have some, if not predominantly biplanes. I think I stuck most of them up north, where it is quiet, but will try to double-check when I get the turn back. In this southern area, however, I tried to put most of my best planes. Finally, I don't know to what extent he is losing aircraft due to general attrition, etc.
RE: GC 76mm (Sov) vs Ketza (No Ketza)
OK, enough of the boring stuff, I though I would give a few comments on my revised plan for 1942. It is only the first real turn of the 1942 campaign, and already my entire 1942 plan is in shreds!
I had planned to hold the south (from Stalino south) strongly, as well as at least the gates of the Crimea, to make it more difficult for him to threaten the south, and to provide a potential launch pad for counter-attacks on the right flank of any attacks he mounted in the center.
So much for that plan, it is pretty much shredded now. At this point it looks like he is making two main thrusts, the one in the south, and one near Smolensk near Moscow. Both of them have serious potential to cause problems; for now I've kept most of my combat power near his southern attack, although I have shifted various units back towards Moscow, and my shift more next turn.
I basically have three objectives at this point, which are contradictory to a certain extent:
1) Keep a few key geographic locations (Moscow, Baku, etc.);
2) Avoid large-scale encirclements; and
3) Pick a spot (soon!) where I can seize the initiative and get him to react. I'm looking at one situation now, but think it is a bit early to do anything, I want him fully committed before I try to do anything.
I thought I'd share one of my more bone-headed decisions in this game. While the results were not catastrophic, they were not good, and probably completely predictable. Anyway, I thought I would start trying to beat up his transports and bomber so that he has less refueling ability if he moves into the steppe. I found one hex with three airbases just stacked with all sorts of aircraft, including bombers and transports. Looked to me like they were parked wingtip-to-wingtip, and I could hardly avoid doing some significant damage. Before ending my turn, I decided to bomb this hex; unfortunately, it was either out of fighter range, or maybe all my fighters had run out of mileage, whatever. So I thought I'd send in the bombers without fighter cover, recognizing and accepting that I'd suffer heavy losses, but figuring that I'd do at least some damage, and he could afford it less than me. Anyway, here were the results:
Ouch! Not pretty at all, but the good news is that this represents less than one week's production of PE-2, so their numbers should bounce back pretty quickly.
That's about it for now, not really looking foward to getting the next turn from Ketza, not sure what he might do.
I had planned to hold the south (from Stalino south) strongly, as well as at least the gates of the Crimea, to make it more difficult for him to threaten the south, and to provide a potential launch pad for counter-attacks on the right flank of any attacks he mounted in the center.
So much for that plan, it is pretty much shredded now. At this point it looks like he is making two main thrusts, the one in the south, and one near Smolensk near Moscow. Both of them have serious potential to cause problems; for now I've kept most of my combat power near his southern attack, although I have shifted various units back towards Moscow, and my shift more next turn.
I basically have three objectives at this point, which are contradictory to a certain extent:
1) Keep a few key geographic locations (Moscow, Baku, etc.);
2) Avoid large-scale encirclements; and
3) Pick a spot (soon!) where I can seize the initiative and get him to react. I'm looking at one situation now, but think it is a bit early to do anything, I want him fully committed before I try to do anything.
I thought I'd share one of my more bone-headed decisions in this game. While the results were not catastrophic, they were not good, and probably completely predictable. Anyway, I thought I would start trying to beat up his transports and bomber so that he has less refueling ability if he moves into the steppe. I found one hex with three airbases just stacked with all sorts of aircraft, including bombers and transports. Looked to me like they were parked wingtip-to-wingtip, and I could hardly avoid doing some significant damage. Before ending my turn, I decided to bomb this hex; unfortunately, it was either out of fighter range, or maybe all my fighters had run out of mileage, whatever. So I thought I'd send in the bombers without fighter cover, recognizing and accepting that I'd suffer heavy losses, but figuring that I'd do at least some damage, and he could afford it less than me. Anyway, here were the results:
Ouch! Not pretty at all, but the good news is that this represents less than one week's production of PE-2, so their numbers should bounce back pretty quickly.
That's about it for now, not really looking foward to getting the next turn from Ketza, not sure what he might do.
RE: GC 76mm (Sov) vs Ketza (No Ketza)
Well, you can see the bright side of it. At least one of them got home to tell the story! I bet he needed some serious counselling with the commisar to go flying again. [:D]
I would recommend a flexible defense, be prepared to give up ground and bide your time. With normal Soviet production you will get tougher and tougher, and come autumn 1942 you can begin to strike back!
Good AAR!
I would recommend a flexible defense, be prepared to give up ground and bide your time. With normal Soviet production you will get tougher and tougher, and come autumn 1942 you can begin to strike back!
Good AAR!
------------------------------
RTW3 Designer
RTW3 Designer
RE: GC 76mm (Sov) vs Ketza (No Ketza)
Interesting combat results - it feels quite similar when you're the Axis in 43, the tables turned. In fact the patterns are very similar.
I find the two above-board factors that matter most in increasing/decreasing CV are artillery, then air.
Seems to me the game takes the initial CVs, then has a portion of each force have a shoot out. Arty and air seem to have a huge say in how this shoot-out goes. The results of the shoot out
Leadership is a mystery. As Axis in 41, I seemed to get nothing but CV inflation. As Axis in 42, I get nothing but CV deflation. The leaders are the same. The amounts of sov artillery and air have drastically changed. And given that the player's ability to affect air numbers on the opposition side, soviet air power just grows and grows and grows. And given the Axis cant concentrate artillery like the Sovs can, and that the Axis retreats increasingly result in high artillery losses, the Axis just get weaker and weaker. Play a waiting game - you'll see!
Regarding artillery, brings me back to an earlier debate where one tester was arguing that Axis divs should be able to attach at least one arty unit directly. Another tester assured him that would skew the balance of the game hugely. That seems to confirm the impact of arty. Next time you put a table of results together, include arty numbers as I bet this will inform the pattern.
I find the two above-board factors that matter most in increasing/decreasing CV are artillery, then air.
Seems to me the game takes the initial CVs, then has a portion of each force have a shoot out. Arty and air seem to have a huge say in how this shoot-out goes. The results of the shoot out
Leadership is a mystery. As Axis in 41, I seemed to get nothing but CV inflation. As Axis in 42, I get nothing but CV deflation. The leaders are the same. The amounts of sov artillery and air have drastically changed. And given that the player's ability to affect air numbers on the opposition side, soviet air power just grows and grows and grows. And given the Axis cant concentrate artillery like the Sovs can, and that the Axis retreats increasingly result in high artillery losses, the Axis just get weaker and weaker. Play a waiting game - you'll see!
Regarding artillery, brings me back to an earlier debate where one tester was arguing that Axis divs should be able to attach at least one arty unit directly. Another tester assured him that would skew the balance of the game hugely. That seems to confirm the impact of arty. Next time you put a table of results together, include arty numbers as I bet this will inform the pattern.
RE: GC 76mm (Sov) vs Ketza (No Ketza)
Squatter, thanks for the comments, very interesting. Next time (if I keep doing it, creating these tables is very tedious) I will replace the SU columns with arty columns--he certainly had a lot of arty units among his SUs.
Regarding attaching arty units to Axis divs--can't they attach arty SU to divisions? Or are you talking about something else?
One thing I didn't mention is that to me the ground casualties don't look bad; while he had a CV advantage, my troops were generally heavily entrenched, so he took some casualties. While my casualties were much higher than his, the odds work in my favor (OK, except for the pocket combat results...). And often the results (ie, retreat) aren't bad. But other times, as when he bashed into the Crimea and the fact that NONE of my bigger entrenched stacks held for even one combat, are kind of troubling. Now that he has pushed my out of my entrenchments in the south, I will be interested to see if my CVs continue to plummet when he attacks me in the open field.
Regarding attaching arty units to Axis divs--can't they attach arty SU to divisions? Or are you talking about something else?
One thing I didn't mention is that to me the ground casualties don't look bad; while he had a CV advantage, my troops were generally heavily entrenched, so he took some casualties. While my casualties were much higher than his, the odds work in my favor (OK, except for the pocket combat results...). And often the results (ie, retreat) aren't bad. But other times, as when he bashed into the Crimea and the fact that NONE of my bigger entrenched stacks held for even one combat, are kind of troubling. Now that he has pushed my out of my entrenchments in the south, I will be interested to see if my CVs continue to plummet when he attacks me in the open field.
RE: GC 76mm (Sov) vs Ketza (No Ketza)
More questions for the Stavka gurus out there:
1) should I be creating the seperate artillery units at this point?
2) How do I use them? I guess in attacks I just stack them one hex back, and can add them to attacks? Can I use them in hasty attacks? Also, how do I use them in defense, do I have to put them on "reserve" status, or do they automagically participate somehow?
3) Which ones should I create/not create?
1) should I be creating the seperate artillery units at this point?
2) How do I use them? I guess in attacks I just stack them one hex back, and can add them to attacks? Can I use them in hasty attacks? Also, how do I use them in defense, do I have to put them on "reserve" status, or do they automagically participate somehow?
3) Which ones should I create/not create?