RE: 1.05.61 Axis AI vs fulkerson

[randallw]

To free up manpower you can disband the security regiments ( yes they'll go on their own anyway ) and corps HQs of Western Front divisions about to die.

[wmcalpine]

Larry,

Good to see you in another AAR. Maybe at various times (after the summer 41 campaign, after blizzard, at 1 year) would you comment in differences that you are seeing between the AI behavior between this version and older ones? That would be very interesting.

Best Regards

Bill

[larryfulkerson]

ORIGINAL: randallw
To free up manpower you can disband the security regiments ( yes they'll go on their own anyway ) and corps HQs of Western Front divisions about to die.

I've been using the security regiments to screen my forward positions. They seem to have more MP's than a "regular" infantry unit and as you've said they are throw-away units so it's not a crisis if they get shattered / route / etc. The Soviet player doesn't have a boat-load of smaller units that can be used in this way if you plan on them surviving the Axis attacks. And in the early turns of a campaign game the ability to screen the Axis units is really important. The later turns of the game usually don't see them used this way and then they can be disbanded without penalty. I also plan on getting rid of the air bases that don't have any planes on them. I need to be careful doing this however because I might just need them after Soviet production catches up with and surpasses the losses. Then I might begin to see some crowded air bases. Your point about disbanding the Corps HQ's is a good one. Thanks.

ORIGINAL: wmcalpine
Larry,
Good to see you in another AAR. Maybe at various times (after the summer 41 campaign, after blizzard, at 1 year) would you comment in differences that you are seeing between the AI behavior between this version and older ones? That would be very interesting.
Best Regards
Bill

Hey Bill...um......the whole point of doing this war again the 1.05.61 version is to see what differences there are between this new version and previous versions. So of course I'll be posting any info relavant to differences. Stay tuned.

So far ( turn 4 ) I'm still holding onto Riga. And the AI can't run any rail through there because of it. I'm hoping to delay as long as possible the supply of the Axis troops near Leningrad so that I can hold onto Leningrad as long as possible. So far so good.

[randallw]

I know that most people encourage the Soviet side to defend as far forward as possible, but it's not that necessary. There's a very limited amount of Soviet industry that the Germans can overrun early on without being in a bad supply situation.

Security regiments don't help that much; you put them in front, they retreat, sometimes rout or shatter, against a hasty attack. They've barely slowed down the Germans while taking casualties in a ratio much worse than what a division would do on defense.

[larryfulkerson]

ORIGINAL: randallw
I know that most people encourage the Soviet side to defend as far forward as possible, but it's not that necessary. There's a very limited amount of Soviet industry that the Germans can overrun early on without being in a bad supply situation.

Playing against the AI is different than playing against a person. People have the ability to create pockets and so far the AI, at least the AI at the 110% setting, doesn't create that many pockets. So defending far forward against the AI becomes possible.

ORIGINAL: randallw
Security regiments don't help that much; you put them in front, they retreat, sometimes rout or shatter, against a hasty attack. They've barely slowed down the Germans while taking casualties in a ratio much worse than what a division would do on defense.

I got the idea from Flaviusx in his game against Pelton. It seemed to work very well. I've played Pelton without using screening tactics and got my ass handed to me. I'm sorta pragmatic in that I like to use what works even if it seems like a gamey tactic.

[randallw]

As far as I know Pelton has lost only once to a human so far, so there may be no magic bullet in beating or losing to him.

[larryfulkerson]

This should be the moves made by the Axis and Soviets in T4:

[larryfulkerson]

Here's the losses from the Axis half of turn 5:

[larryfulkerson]

Here's the Axis moves in T5:

[Seminole]

Security regiments don't help that much; you put them in front, they retreat, sometimes rout or shatter, against a hasty attack.

Yes, they retreat, but closing on them (or going around them) costs MP, attacking them costs MP, and in the first few weeks the Soviet player is desperate for map counters to delay the German advance.
The manpower addition of disbanding security units is outweighed in my opinion by giving the Germans more room to run free.
I just got to December in my current PBEM and have over 700K in manpower reserves.

I'm sorta pragmatic in that I like to use what works even if it seems like a gamey tactic.

It's not gamey, its realistic.  When a unit starts taking fire they don't know if its a couple of stragglers, or a whole division they're bumping up against (S2 doesn't know everything). 
Stopping, deploying, reconning, and assaulting all eat precious time compared to Sunday driving through the countryside.

[Apollo11]

Hi all,

Larry do you see any changes from AI since you last played this same scenario?


Leo "Apollo11"

[randallw]

What's your plan with the clump of items in the marshes? I like to rail out the fighting units and disband the corps HQ with no divisions that will survive. I also get an HQ next to the routed units ( sometimes having to switch the HQ ).

I know some people like to leave stuff inside, to slow down the Axis, but they aren't going to push anything significant through there anyway.

[larryfulkerson]

ORIGINAL: Apollo11
Hi all,
Larry do you see any changes from AI since you last played this same scenario?
Leo "Apollo11"

Um.......yes, it's turn 5 now and I still own Riga. I don't remember that happening last time. Also, the AI seemed to do a better job of liquidating the pockets. I don't have any stragglers to send to Warsaw this time. Other than that I'm not aware of any major differences yet.

ORIGINAL: randallw
What's your plan with the clump of items in the marshes?

I'm planning on getting them out of dodge. They are moving slowly because of the terrain and several of them are Rifle Div. HQ's and they are going to get disbanded by the game engine any turn now. I didn't want to spend any rail cap. on getting them out of danger since they are going away soon.

ORIGINAL: randallw
I like to rail out the fighting units and disband the corps HQ with no divisions that will survive.

I like to wait until turn 5 or 6 with the corps HQ's.........the game engine will disband them eventually and I don't have to spend any AP's on disbanding them. The fighting units however, I DO like to rail them out of danger.

ORIGINAL: randallw
I also get an HQ next to the routed units ( sometimes having to switch the HQ ).

Good idea.

ORIGINAL: randallw
I know some people like to leave stuff inside, to slow down the Axis, but they aren't going to push anything significant through there anyway.

I haven't seen the AI push anything through the swamps in the last couple of games I've played against the AI. He mostly just uses his panzers to drive into the gaps in his front lines on the east side of the swamps.

[larryfulkerson]

This should be the Soviet moves in T5:

[larryfulkerson]

Here's the losses from the Axis half of turn 6:

[larryfulkerson]

This should be the Axis moves in T6:

[randallw]

I hope you don't lose too many non-replaceable units ( airborne brigades and mountain divisions ) while trying to hold a front line so far forward.

[Seminole]

Get thee behind rivers, and in swamps and forests!

The terrain between Novgorod and Smolensk is full of beautiful terrain features for the defender. Sitting in the open is like asking to fight at half strength, or worse.
There is no point in sitting out in the open waiting to get run over by panzers in '41. A 'solid' line isn't as important as depth, and getting the combat multiplier offered by terrain (also, check out the motorized costs for crossing rivers into enemy ZOC) should be the focus in '41.

Check 15.3 and 15.3.1 in the manual.

[larryfulkerson]

I'm concentrating the air bases around Leningrad, Smolensk, and in the south. Also, I've pushed them forward to allow the smaller ranged aircraft to reach the action.

[larryfulkerson]

ORIGINAL: randallw
I hope you don't lose too many non-replaceable units ( airborne brigades and mountain divisions ) while trying to hold a front line so far forward.

So far so good. The AI doesn't seem to form pockets like a human would. Defending this far forward would be a no-no against a human player. I've developing bad habits.

ORIGINAL: Seminole
Get thee behind rivers, and in swamps and forests!

The terrain between Novgorod and Smolensk is full of beautiful terrain features for the defender. Sitting in the open is like asking to fight at half strength, or worse.
There is no point in sitting out in the open waiting to get run over by panzers in '41. A 'solid' line isn't as important as depth, and getting the combat multiplier offered by terrain (also, check out the motorized costs for crossing rivers into enemy ZOC) should be the focus in '41.

Check 15.3 and 15.3.1 in the manual.

Good advice.......thanks.