41-45GC - A FIGHT FOR SURVIVAL - GLVACA (Sov) v SJ80 (Axis) - NO SJ80

[glvaca]

In the extreme South cut off 9th Army keeps up the fight and binds at least 5 German divisions thus limiting his drive Eastwards substantially. A hasty attack by Wiking on a cav and armoured division fails. Perhaps the 30 T-34 and 20 KV-1's have something to do with it.

All-in-all a reasonably good turn in the South.

[glvaca]

Up North I again patch up my lines a s good and as bad as I can. Again, I am forced to thin my lines elsewhere to achieve a credible defense. This time 11th Army is pillaged of it's best divisions. Hopefully, he will not shift direction yet again!

[sillyflower]

ORIGINAL: glvaca

Ground losses:

I have no idea of these losses are average or else, anyone?

I've seen worse losses. As german I want to keep Russian losses at average of over 200K per turn and you are close to that. Your mistake at mouth of Dnepr won't help. You've also lost a lot of units which is bad - it gets to the point when too few units prevent a proper defence if you are not careful.

On the positive side his AFV losses are very high which will slow him down soon.

[randallw]

Those battle reports you showed are actually more worrisome for the Axis side than the Soviet; a 2:1 ratio for manpower casualties that favors the Axis is bad for them.

[karonagames]

Why is the "back door" hex to Leningrad unfortified? The hex with Pavlovo written across is the key to Leningrad's defense, and should be lvl3 by now with a defensive CV of at least 24-30. If I was axis, I would be in there in the next 2-3 turns.

[Flaviusx]

ORIGINAL: BigAnorak

Why is the "back door" hex to Leningrad unfortified? The hex with Pavlovo written across is the key to Leningrad's defense, and should be lvl3 by now with a defensive CV of at least 24-30. If I was axis, I would be in there in the next 2-3 turns.

I saw lots of other mistakes in the Leningrad defense besides that, but, yeah. Terrain not properly used, the Luga line gets predictable results (it is indefensible, the real line is Leningrad-Novgorod, the western end of the Luga always gets cut off) no use of reserves near as I can tell, etc. Didn't like how Pskov was managed either, for that matter.

But, shrug.

Leningrad was underesourced from the getgo. The only chance to hold it is to go all in with reserve armies from turn 1 on -- and that means forgetting about the Smolensk landbridge.

[karonagames]

I did not intend to be critical, but I would like to gain insight into how different players analyse and then try to solve different problems, especially as holding Leningrad has been a major problem for Soviet players from day1. It is a very tough choice between the Smolensk land bridge and Leningrad, and I know from experience that Moscow can be very exposed if the landbridge is passed by turn 6/7, and the reserves behind it have been moved north to Leningrad or south to the Dneiper.

edit: Personally I think the defence of Leningrad is about tying up as much of the panzer forces for as long as possible and preventing their redeployment to Moscow, so it's loss is inevitable, but losing it on turn 16/17 is much better than losing it on turn 10/11. As the Axis, a well defended back door can take 3-4 turns to crack, and often relies on offensive reserves triggering to tip the balance.

[Flaviusx]

Bob, my own view is that given the present default Axis strategy, where they strip the center of panzers to help AGN and AGS, you have to respond in kind and weaken the center. Otherwise you wind up losing Leningrad too quickly and PG4 ends up going to Moscow anyways with plenty of clear weather. Thus defending Leningrad does much more to help Moscow than defending the landbridge.

[Flaviusx]

Here's what I've managed in my latest PBEM game as a point of comparison. I actually have a chance of holding the city.

[sillyflower]

ORIGINAL: Flaviusx

Here's what I've managed in my latest PBEM game as a point of comparison. I actually have a chance of holding the city.

Is this against Baelfin? Looks like a hold to me too

[glvaca]

ORIGINAL: BigAnorak

I did not intend to be critical, but I would like to gain insight into how different players analyse and then try to solve different problems, especially as holding Leningrad has been a major problem for Soviet players from day1. It is a very tough choice between the Smolensk land bridge and Leningrad, and I know from experience that Moscow can be very exposed if the landbridge is passed by turn 6/7, and the reserves behind it have been moved north to Leningrad or south to the Dneiper.

edit: Personally I think the defence of Leningrad is about tying up as much of the panzer forces for as long as possible and preventing their redeployment to Moscow, so it's loss is inevitable, but losing it on turn 16/17 is much better than losing it on turn 10/11. As the Axis, a well defended back door can take 3-4 turns to crack, and often relies on offensive reserves triggering to tip the balance.

No worries, I don't mind a bit of critisism as long as it is constructive [;)]
You have to remember, he took Pskov on turn 3 and made his breakthrough at the Luga at turn 6. I safeguarded against it by establishing a North South line and basically gambled I could hold that line a turn longer, maybe 2 before I would have to fall back to the North-South line under construction.
As should be evident from this AAR, Sebastian is a master at maneuvre and keeps up tremendous pressure.

I agree with your opinion on Leningrad, I never intended to try and hold it, just delay him enough to prevent him to transfer troops to the Center.

As to the choice between reinforcing Leningrad over the Center, with the Dnepr crossed at turn 2, my hand was forced either way, if I would not have prioritized the Center, he would be in Moscow by now, and Leningrad would in all likelihood still have fallen.

As to not fortifying the mentioned hex, I simply didn't get around to it, I couldn't spare a single division. I started at a certain point, but then had to move the divisions out to patch the front line. The pressure is immense, again, you're only seeing turn 8 now, it's gonna get a lot worse!

[glvaca]

ORIGINAL: Flaviusx

Here's what I've managed in my latest PBEM game as a point of comparison. I actually have a chance of holding the city.

Looks very nice indeed, well done. I'd love to see defensive CV's though, much more informative.
You will have to admit though, that this guy is not really putting in the same resources as SJ80 is, not by a long shot.

[glvaca]

ORIGINAL: Flaviusx

ORIGINAL: BigAnorak

Why is the "back door" hex to Leningrad unfortified? The hex with Pavlovo written across is the key to Leningrad's defense, and should be lvl3 by now with a defensive CV of at least 24-30. If I was axis, I would be in there in the next 2-3 turns.

I saw lots of other mistakes in the Leningrad defense besides that, but, yeah. Terrain not properly used, the Luga line gets predictable results (it is indefensible, the real line is Leningrad-Novgorod, the western end of the Luga always gets cut off) no use of reserves near as I can tell, etc. Didn't like how Pskov was managed either, for that matter.

But, shrug.

Leningrad was underesourced from the getgo. The only chance to hold it is to go all in with reserve armies from turn 1 on -- and that means forgetting about the Smolensk landbridge.

There's no question I have made mistakes and there will be more, but you have to admit I'm not hiding them, in fact I make a point out of showing the whole picture, the good and bad. It's out there in the open. I don't mind critism as long as it is constructive as mentioned before.

We discussed the Moscow versus Leningrad reinforcements before and in the end it is a matter of personal preference. I stand by my decisions and the ultimate judge is the start of mud.

Now I would appreciate if you moderate your tone a bit. Thanks!

[Flaviusx]

It's against Baelfin, yeah. I don't think he has the usual extra panzer corps from Hoth in this game, or not anymore, which does make a difference.

[glvaca]

In the Center I counter attack on my left flank and push back 2 German regiments on shielding duty and retreat back to my lines at the end of the Turn.
His drive in the Center of my line forces me to redeploy troops from the Right and left to create defenses in depth. Since I can't relax the Belyi defenses too much, this leaves the left flank rather weak. Still, if I have to choose between a breakthrough at Belyi, Vyazma or the Yelnya Axis, the latter wins hands down.

In the left hand corner of this screenshot, is a push he made this turn most likely to cut off assumed defenders of VL and West. It strikes empty air but nontheless I am forced to spend precious units to man the the line to counter a drive East from that direction. Units I can hardly miss in the Center. I would not be surprised he made the move to stretch my lines as a secondary objective.

[glvaca]

In the Kharkov / D-Town area, I re-establish my lines as best as I can but my units are definitely losing their edge after several turns of constant combat.
I also attack the Rumanian armoured div. and push it back with the loss of 33 tanks and 1.5k losses for approx. the same losses of my own. As is usual practice, I flip as many hexes back to my controle to eat as much into his movement points as possible.

38th Army (Ermenko), previously attached to Stavka and forming in the Kharkov area, is assigned to Southern Front and railed South to take over the defense between Z-town and 18th Army (now commanded by Bagramyan) which extends to the Black Sea.

[glvaca]

Surprisingly, after 2 turns cut off, 9th Army has still 5 infantry, and 2 Cav Divisions in the field. Again I recapture lost ground to force him to make as many attacks as possible. 5 German divisions are still committed in reducing the pocket.

Recon also discovers that weak Rumanian divisions are employed to cover his left flank, hmmm...

[glvaca]

Overview North & Center after Sov moves

[glvaca]

And South:

[glvaca]

TURN 9

Not a good turn!
North Overview, before Sov moves: