Under the Red Banner: Q-Ball (R) v Baelfiin (Axis)

[Q-Ball]

Baelfiin is already doing an AAR, so I thought I would start one now that I have a little more time, so you guys can see the other side.

It is already T-14, so mostly this will be around the BLIZZARD and beyond. Hopefully it helps!

As you can see, this is a RANDOM WEATHER game, started in last couple weeks (I think 1.0542?).

These shots are all my Turn 13, so next turn for Baelfiin will be TURN 14. All the MUD has happened already, so he has 4 more Clear turns to make some hay.

War So Far:

Baelfiin has a very good tactical grasp, and has really pressed me in terms of losses and territory.

Where I think he is doing well is nailing the Red Army. I have lost 2.4 mil men so far, despite taking all kinds of precautions against pocketing. He has more units this turn "in the bag", so that number figures to climb to 3 million-ish by the end of Summer. That's a pretty solid number for him. Axis losses are not bad; this is mostly because he has really made big massive pockets netting easy surrenders. Some of these pockets, I don't know how he does it. And for the most part, they are unbreakable.

His strategy is an "all-in" on Moscow. My thinking has come around to that this should be the #1 target for the Germans in 1941, so I agree with that. But I think you can do Moscow AND Leningrad, and this is where his strategy might be costing him.

Leningrad has been invested with nothing more than a thin screen. It won't fall, and that means I am prioritizng Leningrad Front, because I plan to keep it through 1942 as well. I think he should have gone for it; you can at least make a decent attempt by using a single Panzer Corps, and 18th Army, sending everyone else to Moscow. Instead, 4th Panzer Army went for Moscow.

The other part is that he is also going "all-in" south of Moscow. This isn't all bad, as I have lost Tula, Orel, and will probably lose Ryazan, big chunks of Manpower. But further south, his advance on Kharkov is suffering, and is non-existant toward the Donbas. With the new RR Rules, the Donbas is probably the limit of German advance now, and it can be taken in 1942, so I think that's a good decision. But I would clear the Crimea more; that figures to be a problem for him in Blizzard.

But this is a game of tradeoffs, and Baelfiin is killing me around Moscow. I have prioritized Moscow for reinforcements, commiting everything, but he keeps destroying formations. It's going to be close whether I hold the place, despite keeping guys digging from Turn 1, and making every preparation I can. He is doing a good job here.

So, I think his overall strategy is good, though I would strengthen the flanks more, go for Leningrad, and at least get to the Perekop to put a bottle on the Crimea.

Partisans:

I thought about Partisans on this one. IMO, Partisans are most critical in 1941, and THIS is when you focus on them. Once the Germans have a redundant railnet, which they will by 1942, they are much less important; just a nuisance, really. In many cases, garrisons can take care of partisans, and a couple Romanian Cav units are enough to fill the slack. They just aren't much of a problem.

But in 1941, they can cripple the German advance. Twice now, I have cost Baelfiin a turn of FBD construction due to RR damage. This is important, as the Germans generally will advance in the south to the limit the RR will support. Attacks in Blizzard can be more critical; hate to think what happens if a whole line goes down in the middle of it.

Starting very early, I stocked all my VVS airbases with IL-4 and TB-3, and set them all on supply. I don't use those planes as bombers, they just drop ammo and Vodka to partisans. I use them manually to drop to Partisans in very key spots; those units are smothered with supplies.

So, Partisans are already having an impact, and I recommend to all Soviet players to focus on Partisans early. After 1942, I wouldn't spend as much time on it.

I also recommend to all German players to garrison every city immediately.....

Industry:

Baelfiin is not a factory-hunter. I have left smaller factories to be overrun, and focused on the larger ones. All Tank and A/C factories that are worth anything are moved to safety. I have lost 18 Armaments, and I don't see losing much more than that.

I am leaving the Vehicle factories; I just don't think they are worth moving. It's Lend Lease that counts for Vehicles.

[ComradeP]

This screenshot shows quite clearly why I personally think a "Moscow or bust" strategy favours the Soviets greatly. This isn't the first AAR with an Axis player trying to go all in for Moscow that shows a lack of progress in the north and south. 1941 is one of the few years where you can afford to make a reasonable push in all sectors as the Axis and you should do so.

Going all in for Moscow allows the Soviets to fight a set piece battle/war of attrition that in the end favours them greatly. Yes, Axis grinding hurts, but it only really hurts if the Axis can keep it up.

Also: there's more manpower between the Dnepr and Rostov in the south than in the Moscow area, and the Moscow area is difficult to hold whereas an advance in the south straightens the lines and creates some space between the Soviets and the minor Axis countries.

[sillyflower]

Hmmm. Whilst I respect Mr B hugely as an opponent ( my current game with him is my longest ever), I share your doubts about a moscow-only strategy. As a Russian I would swap M for L + Donbass any day. He's going to be very stretched come winter with a v. long front, so you should be able to make whoopee in the blizzard. IF you can keep your army intact until then.

I will remember your advice about partisans should Carnage ever get more than a few hexes into Mother Russia.[;)]

[Flaviusx]

You really can't just ignore Leningrad like that. Pressure on Leningrad actually helps the Axis advance on Moscow, as it can suck in many units. The trick is to take it early enough to give you time to switch PG4 to the center. In the meantime, two panzer groups can pound away in the center and create the conditions for taking Moscow when joined by PG 4.

Baelfinn imo messed up the south when he made his Dnepr crossing north of Kiev. That really doesn't lead anywhere. If you want to stress the south, the crossing needs to be made at or south of Cherkassy, from there you can threaten the Dnepr bend, Poltava, Kharkov, and set yourself up for the Donbas. It also tends to dislocate any Soviet line on the lower Dnepr.

[ComradeP]

Well, he did have a fairly early crossing of the Dnepr, and he could have rolled up the line if he had kept his units moving east. As long as the crossing happens west of Dnepropetrovsk, you're not really threatening the part of the line south of Dnepropetrovsk in any case. In fact, a crossing like his might even make an advance easier because he doesn't have to worry about the units behind him, which he would if he'd try a pocket near Cherkassy with a reasonable Kiev defence in place.

[Q-Ball]

He crossed one arm in a swampy area north of Kiev; while undefended, he got bogged down there a couple turns. You really can't send mobile units up in there.

I've tried to set-up defenses that are really strongest 3-4 hexes back out of range of Wehrmacht infantry, but despite that he has pocketed alot of guys.

I still think Moscow first is a good strategy, but maybe not an "all-in". 1941 is pretty much the only time you can take Moscow; the Donbas can be taken in 1942 pretty easily, so being behind in the South isn't that big a deal IMO. He can make it up in 1942.

The key here is Leningrad; holding that is important.

[Klydon]

I don't see him being serious about taking Leningrad at this point. He is going to pay for that most likely when the snow flies. That river line in the south won't hold jack, especially with just Rumanians around.

I would expect some point in the south that he would try to drive to the Sea of Azov for some mega pocket attempt. If not, his line is too long for him to defend properly in the winter, so that means he will have to retreat like a mad man. If he doesn't, this game doesn't have a long shelf life I don't think.

Of course, it could come down to holding Moscow against the all in push to break him too. If you put everything you had into a thrust for Moscow and still didn't get the job done, how would your moral be as a player?

[ComradeP]

You could even land troops in Odessa for some really nice surprises in the blizzard. You can't really supply them on the long term, but it would be a nice initial surprise if he doesn't capture Odessa.

[Q-Ball]

ORIGINAL: ComradeP

You could even land troops in Odessa for some really nice surprises in the blizzard. You can't really supply them on the long term, but it would be a nice initial surprise if he doesn't capture Odessa.

Actually, I tried to Naval Transport troops into Odessa, but I couldn't land them. Maybe because of the multiple ZOCs on the hex, I don't know. But I can't get anyone in.

I can move the unit OUT if I choose, but I don't see ever doing that, unless Sevastopol is about to fall

So, the Rifle unit there is just going to sit there for now. Defensive CV on it is 24; it's a high-quality unit for the Soviets at this stage

[Q-Ball]

ORIGINAL: Klydon

I don't see him being serious about taking Leningrad at this point. He is going to pay for that most likely when the snow flies. That river line in the south won't hold jack, especially with just Rumanians around.

Leningrad is done; it was written-off from turn 1. I didn't realize that until T-3 or 4, but I held Riga until T4, so that was the first indication that he wasn't focusing at all up there.

I would expect some point in the south that he would try to drive to the Sea of Azov for some mega pocket attempt. If not, his line is too long for him to defend properly in the winter, so that means he will have to retreat like a mad man. If he doesn't, this game doesn't have a long shelf life I don't think.

Of course, it could come down to holding Moscow against the all in push to break him too. If you put everything you had into a thrust for Moscow and still didn't get the job done, how would your moral be as a player?

I expect a push against Sea of Azov in 1942. It's very logical place. I will have to have my running shoes on for 1942 down there, but the meantime, we can make hay, particularly if a single Romanian Corps holds 10 hexes like it is now.

Baelfiin is very reliable, and I don't expect him to quit. He has a very good tactical sense, so I expect to sweat in 1942.

[Flaviusx]

Moscow is a perfectly valid target, but the basic problem here is that any strategy that ignores substantial parts of the front will fail. That is to say, any all in won't work. (Doesn't matter where.) An all in done in the south won't work either (see Pelton's game against me for an example of such a failure.)

It makes the Soviet defensive situation far too simple. In order to stretch the Red Army to the breaking point you have to apply pressure across the whole front. To my way of thinking, Leningrad is a necessary and useful preliminary to Moscow.

Just piling on the 3-4 panzer groups in the middle and ignoring the flanks won't do it.

[Q-Ball]

ORIGINAL: Flaviusx

Moscow is a perfectly valid target, but the basic problem here is that any strategy that ignores substantial parts of the front will fail. That is to say, any all in won't work. (Doesn't matter where.) An all in done in the south won't work either (see Pelton's game against me for an example of such a failure.)

It makes the Soviet defensive situation far too simple. In order to stretch the Red Army to the breaking point you have to apply pressure across the whole front. To my way of thinking, Leningrad is a necessary and useful preliminary to Moscow.

Just piling on the 3-4 panzer groups in the middle and ignoring the flanks won't do it.

This is what JAMiAM did against me, and I helped him of course by not committing enough to Leningrad. That was my error. But he focused extra Panzers against Leningrad through T-7 or so, then as soon as it was isolated, turned everyone south toward Moscow. By then, you have the railnet to support a transfer. That's the way to do it.

Unfortunately, JAM has been very busy, so that game really stalled after the first few turns. A shame. I guess it's still going, but it's T-12 or so. I picked up this game, because I want to get to 43/44 as Soviets in less than a calendar year!

For Baelfiin's part, I will say he is further along in front of Moscow than JAM at the same time. It just cost him elsewhere.

[ComradeP]

Actually, I tried to Naval Transport troops into Odessa, but I couldn't land them. Maybe because of the multiple ZOCs on the hex, I don't know. But I can't get anyone in.

Hmm, that might be due to the new rules for landing forces in the Black Sea, but it's a bit weird that you can't ship anything into a friendly hex.

[gingerbread]

I would say that B has done rather well.

2.5+M (adjusting for Hiwis) Soviet losses by turn 13 and 10-ish divisions bagged is good, bordering on very good. He was somewhat unlucky in that the one turn of summer mud in the north zone did not happen before he got there, but the next two turns will be clear. Tula by T13 is not late.

[ComradeP]

Yes, but what passes for his southern flank is hanging in the breeze and he isn't going to capture Leningrad either provided Q-Ball defends it at least somewhat enthusiastically.

[gingerbread]

You don't see a revival of the ole' deep right hook towards Lake Ladoga in the clear turns that are left, then?

One turn to Visny-V, bagging ½ of Northwestern Front while at it and then due north, praying for no more mud while rolling on the September weather column.
I dare say that there is a dearth of Soviet reserves with those losses on the books. It does give up Moscow but Kleist could force Southwestern Front to have to watch their backs.

[ComradeP]

1 turn to Vyshnyvolochek is rather optimistic with there seemingly being no armour north of Rzhev and considering the terrain. A push towards the Svir all the way from where his mobile unit concentrations are now would be the ultimate "everything or nothing" gamble currently as if it fails, it would leave his mobile units very badly exposed with little to no supplies during the mud turns.

I only do such an extreme hook against the AI (well, a bit less extreme one, through Velikie Luki and Torzhok), several turns earlier than this.

[gingerbread]

OK, so the choice is "Moscow or bust" then. [;)]

[Q-Ball]

Baelffin has done well in the loss column. No issues there.

I have been wary of the "turn north" since T-7 or so. I have a unit parked in V-V, as well as dug-in 2 hexes west along that river. That means a Panzer Thrust would have to dislodge that unit, or drive over Rough terrain, both of which would cost too many MPs for a quick move. Another unit is dug-in along the river between V-V and Torzhok to watch that gap. (and, a unit in Torzhok)

The terrain up north there is tough for the Germans, but I have seen in AARs, and been victim to, big runaways throuh that terrain. By leaving units in a few key spots, you can prevent big breakouts.

Up north, this means making sure you garrison as above, plus Kalinin, the Volga canal, a unit or two in that swamp, and even a couple units along the major river west of Yaroslav. In the south, this means a strong line along the OKA.

I have been digging-in along these axises for awhile. I rotate units out to the front once they fill-out, so alot of it is UNREADY, but that's better than nothing.

It's too late for Leningrad for sure. Moscow is probably 50/50. He is now almost to Ryazan, which is hugely far in the center, but that doesn't matter much; he's at the end of his fuel.

[Klydon]

Just looking at the OOB you posted a couple of turns ago, the Luftwaffe and tank strength are also pretty shot for him at this point in the campaign. Have you been bombing the crap out of his bases or what exactly has gone on that he has lost so many planes to?