Some Soviet questions

[glvaca]

First time as the Soviets and I have a few silly questions.
1. I want to combine 3 Soviet infantry brigades (no naval) into a division. the manual states that they can be combined if in the same hex by pressing b (or corresponding icon). however this does nothing. The date is November 1941. Has anything changed with the patches?
2. Which Soviet Arty SU is the most effective?
a. In the attack?
b. In the defense?
c. Against heavy forts?
3. I'd like to assign Konev to an Army HQ but cannot do so. He starts the game commanding the North-Caucassus MD and historically was transfered to 19th Army in Western Front. But it seems this is not possible in the game. Am I missing something?
4. When do Tank regiments come available as SU?
5. Any use for AA brigades? How to best employ them?
6. what's the current likelyhood (and range) that leaders get killed in action?
a. Does attaching AAA regisments to higher HQ's reduce the chance?
b. Does anything reduce the chance of leaders getting KIA through air?

Some more questions:
7. How effective is bombing ground units by air units? And which air assets are best used in the game? Is it more effective to interdict?

Thanks!

[Klydon]

1: Changed to 1942. I think you need 2 and it is June 42 before you can convert them I believe.

2: The one that has guns in the pool. [;)] I tend towards the 122/152 size guns, but will build some 76 size guns if I have a bunch in the pool. Take a look at each unit and I like picking the ones that have the most. (Some have 24 guns and some have 36 guns for instance). I also like building mortars as well. I think part of the trick is to have a mix so you have something to fight with at various battle ranges. I have not noticed any difference between attack and defense, but then I have not paid that much attention to it. I have a tendency to withdraw all support units early in the game just to try to spare as many as possible during a time period that the Russians won't stop much anyway.

3: Konev is frozen for awhile since the HQ is frozen down there. I am not sure if he becomes available before the HQ unfreezes.

4: You can look at this excellent link Joel posted as a sticky in this forum. tm.asp?m=2882717 In answer to your question, Sept 42.

5: I don't have a current use for them and have a tendency to scrap 85mm AA guns to convert them to AT guns. The air model has issues right now and flak seems to be fireworks at this point.

6: They have been tweaking it. My experience is not as much lately and I don't think attaching flak is going to help with that. I would try to make sure the HQ is back a bit from the front and that it is also around some airbases with plenty of fighters when possible.

7: I don't think it is very effective, although it is hard to tell. I think more is damaged than destroyed, so it would be more effective to bomb something and then attack it to inflict extra retreat losses on them. I think you save your tactical planes for ground support and use your bombers on the ground units if you want to pursue this particular strategy. As far as interdiction goes, I like it a lot because it can cost an enemy unit critical movement points to the point that they may not be able to participate in a planned attack and even if they do, they have more fatigue and damageed elements.

[M60A3TTS]

On Konev, replace him as the North-Caucassus MD commander with someone else.  Then he will become available for another command.

[Flaviusx]

ORIGINAL: M60A3TTS

On Konev, replace him as the North-Caucassus MD commander with someone else.  Then he will become available for another command.

I actually leave him there, myself. Then you are assured of him being in a Front Command at the end of the year.

[glvaca]

ORIGINAL: M60A3TTS

On Konev, replace him as the North-Caucassus MD commander with someone else.  Then he will become available for another command.

Aaah, thanks!

[glvaca]

ORIGINAL: Flaviusx

ORIGINAL: M60A3TTS

On Konev, replace him as the North-Caucassus MD commander with someone else.  Then he will become available for another command.

I actually leave him there, myself. Then you are assured of him being in a Front Command at the end of the year.

Hmmm, is that benificial for a particular reason?

[glvaca]

Thanks for the info, very helpful.

[Flaviusx]

Konev is one of these guys that I want in Front command anyways and would stick in a Front the moment he hits Colonel General. Happily, he already starts on a Front command. So I don't see any good reason to spend APs on shifting him around. I have a short list commanders that I aggressively try to promote to Colonel General to give them front command ASAP -- Konev is near the top of that list. Others include, in no particular order, Tolbukhin, Malinovsky, Bagramyan, Purkhaev, Vatutin, Rokossovsky and Zhakarov. That's your a-list, the 7 point wonders. Zhukov of course can assume front command front the getgo, but I tend to leave him in STAVKA until it overloads.

The b-list includes the 6 pointers like Chernyakovsky, Eremenko, Popov (who, like Konev, is already running a front at game start and ought to be left alone there), etc.

North Caucus activates at the end of 1941, just in time for the blizzard counteroffensive. I slide it right in there just below South Front and let Konev go to town.

[Jakerson]

ORIGINAL: glvaca
5. Any use for AA brigades? How to best employ them?
7. How effective is bombing ground units by air units? And which air assets are best used in the game? Is it more effective to interdict?

Thanks!

7. I think bombing those HQ's that have lots of SU's bring best benefit Sometimes they kill like 40 artillery per bombing run. One good thing in bombing ground units directly is that air units seem to suffer pretty light casulties when doing that compared to ground support. In ground support there is risk of losing a lot of bombers. My best results are that I have been able to kill hundreds of artillery per turn with HQ bombing by just suffering light plane losses.

5. AA SU's are great if your opponent is one of those who like to bomb HQ's a lot in hope of killing artillery a lot directy it is nasty suprice to pump up those HQ he like to bomb full of AA. It very rapidly makes bombing those HQ bad idea as air casulties grow.

[M60A3TTS]

I don't really understand the benefit of strong Front commanders. As long as you have solid army commanders they will have their influence on the battles and commit the requisite support units. If the army commander fails his checks then the front commander gets involved, but how often does that really happen and if there are no SUs in the front command what benefit is there?

ORIGINAL: Flaviusx

Konev is one of these guys that I want in Front command anyways and would stick in a Front the moment he hits Colonel General. Happily, he already starts on a Front command. So I don't see any good reason to spend APs on shifting him around. I have a short list commanders that I aggressively try to promote to Colonel General to give them front command ASAP -- Konev is near the top of that list. Others include, in no particular order, Tolbukhin, Malinovsky, Bagramyan, Purkhaev, Vatutin, Rokossovsky and Zhakarov. That's your a-list, the 7 point wonders. Zhukov of course can assume front command front the getgo, but I tend to leave him in STAVKA until it overloads.

The b-list includes the 6 pointers like Chernyakovsky, Eremenko, Popov (who, like Konev, is already running a front at game start and ought to be left alone there), etc.

North Caucus activates at the end of 1941, just in time for the blizzard counteroffensive. I slide it right in there just below South Front and let Konev go to town.

[glvaca]

I too wonder about Front/Army commander benifits. With the increasing modifier up the chain, they see not really very productive.

[glvaca]

OK, got ya. Thanks!
Still, see question below.

[Flaviusx]

It's all about redundancy and having multiple checks along the command chain. Even a very strong army commander can fail checks. But decent army commander backed up by a strong Front commander can improve on that. Especially on admin checks.

The challenge here is dealing with overloaded Fronts and STAVKA. There comes a point where STAVKA overloads and cannot be brought under command limits. I rather wish STAVKA had a higher command cap, as a matter of fact. Fronts can be managed, but there will be times when there's a critical shortage of command capacity at the Front level.

The Soviet command chain is short as it is compared to the German, and it's dangerous to rely entirely on army commanders to get the job done.

[KenchiSulla]

ORIGINAL: glvaca

I too wonder about Front/Army commander benifits. With the increasing modifier up the chain, they see not really very productive.

It is not about committing support units, They can contribute to CV calculation, movement points, repair of elements etc. etc. Having a bad front commander is that... bad.

[glvaca]

Understood Cannonfodder, still, thier ratings get seriously reduced...

[glvaca]

ORIGINAL: Flaviusx

It's all about redundancy and having multiple checks along the command chain. Even a very strong army commander can fail checks. But decent army commander backed up by a strong Front commander can improve on that. Especially on admin checks.

The challenge here is dealing with overloaded Fronts and STAVKA. There comes a point where STAVKA overloads and cannot be brought under command limits. I rather wish STAVKA had a higher command cap, as a matter of fact. Fronts can be managed, but there will be times when there's a critical shortage of command capacity at the Front level.

The Soviet command chain is short as it is compared to the German, and it's dangerous to rely entirely on army commanders to get the job done.

True, but with the reduced chance of making a check, isn't that excellent leader better used at Army command where he has the best chance of actually using his excellent rating to best effect. It's here I still have doubts.
I will qualify though in that I have no idea if something ahs been changed between all the patches to give front commanders a better chance of making the rolls?

[carlkay58]

Put your best commander in the Front and the good commanders at the Army level. This allows your best commander to affect the most units. The army commanders are pretty good at their level - but if they fail they can depend on the Front commander to have a good chance to do the job.

For example, in 1941 a Soviet Army limit is 24 cps while the Front is 72. The best commander at the Front (rather than Army) level can those affect 3 times as many troops.

[Hermann]

Brigades. It's wasteful to combine them into divisions. Best strategy to employ is to use them to build forts to the rear. as the divisions become damaged pull them back and merge them with the brigades. This also applies to attacks. Use the brigade/merge function to beef up attacking units - also keep a supply of brigs behind contested defense lines. much better to beef up a veteran division than to create a new untried one. when creating defense lines you can use weak divisons and a second line of brigades to fort a second line behind the first. as the enemy approaches move the brigs into the first line and merge then place your reserves in the second line.