The Great Patriotic AAR III (No glvaca please)

[Tarhunnas]

ORIGINAL: governato

Have you tried bombing his rail repair units? I noticed that it is relatively easy to 'kill' 150 men per strike, especially if the FBDs get too close to the front and you can use the Il-2s to strafe them. (T surely know that already, but FBDs are easy to spot..just follow a rail line West and check the pop-up info hex until you find the railhead, then run a recon mission or two just East of there). It's not much, but it will increase the unit fatigue over time and having them fail to repair even just one or two hexes over a few turns will make a difference. A nervous German might decide to protect them with a Security unit. Also, given the low quality of the Red Air Force, this is a simple way to put them bombers to work...

Thanks for the tip, though it would feel a little gamey I think.

[Tarhunnas]

Turn 14. Map before Soviet moves. Not a good turn at all! I thought I had guarded against that, but I seriously underestimated German mobility! Well, the map talks for itself.

I lost 14 ARM in one turn in various smaller cities overrun, and 16 ARM left in Stalino are locked and likley gone as well, and there are 8 left in Moscow. Not good at all! A small consolation is that I think I had evacuated everything else important in Moscow except some veichle plants.

[Tarhunnas]

The Moscow sector after Soviet moves. I did break the pocket, but that will not last [:(]

[governato]

Well, it depends on the house rules. If one does not allow for HQ bombing, then I agree it 'd be gamey. On the other hand strafing of railheads and supply dumps with tactical bombers was quite the norm for both sides. Given that strafing does not seem to kill leaders as it used to (at least in my games)
I 'd think that it 'd be kosher. Given that a) it's really not a game changer and b) protecting the railheads with AA units (through proximity to a high level HQ)
'd make a lot of sense in real life I think it'd add a realistic touch to the game. German players 'd have payback as soon as blizzard comes and the Red Army
will have to rebuild its own rail network.

[TulliusDetritus]

ORIGINAL: Tarhunnas

The Moscow sector after Soviet moves. I did break the pocket, but that will not last [:(]

If he devours this big pocket, you're dead meat, Tarhunnas [8D]

Really, forget this stubborn defence. It does not make any sense. And right, it is NOT your fault [;)]

[Tarhunnas]

ORIGINAL: TulliusDetritus

Really, forget this stubborn defence. It does not make any sense. And right, it is NOT your fault [;)]

Thanks, but of course it is! I can see with hindsight I should have been more careful, but of course that would maybe mean I should have pulled back more. It is really a pity, but it seems a stubborn defense is not viable. And I don't mean stupid mindless stubborn, but just sort of a litle stubborn like the real Soviets.

[hfarrish]

I agree - I feel like we might be in the same place, back when I played a bunch pre-fort nerf a tough fighting defense seemed eminently reasonable; my first round back after that against an excellent player I got completely thrashed. I think it still can work against a lesser calibre German but against the best you are playing with fire.

[notenome]

That last turn really was textbook HQ build up insanity. By nerfing forts and not build ups the game became completely skewed towards the offense. Its gotten to the point that HQ build up needs to be thrown out altogether alongside a nerf to Soviet late game (43 onwards) logistics.

[Peltonx]

ORIGINAL: Tarhunnas

ORIGINAL: TulliusDetritus

Really, forget this stubborn defence. It does not make any sense. And right, it is NOT your fault [;)]

Thanks, but of course it is! I can see with hindsight I should have been more careful, but of course that would maybe mean I should have pulled back more. It is really a pity, but it seems a stubborn defense is not viable. And I don't mean stupid mindless stubborn, but just sort of a litle stubborn like the real Soviets.

Vs a exp GHC player running is not possible. The key to game for GHC is manpower centers.

If the SHC player runs he will lose:

South: The south is lost and is not possible to defend. GHC only has to commit min forses and can still easly over run everything and get a 15 hex winter buffer. This buffer completly nerfs winter O for SHC from Tula south.

North: Leningrad is a given only when it falls is question.

Center: Tarhunnas defence is the only possible play the SHC has. Sure if he ran sooner the defences would be stronger, but so would the size and forse of the GHC forses. All transports can be put in the center so the idea the nerfing muling and HQ build-up will some how limit logistics on the GHC is just a fairytale.

There are still 2 ways to over come the logistics issues for GHC.

Manpower is key, pockets help sure. But once Moscow falls (counting manpower points in area) thats a huge hit.
This hit will greatly cripple SHC for 1942 and snowballs into 43-45
tm.asp?m=2919963

If MT simply finishes off the pockets he has, Tarhunnas forses will recover very slowly and with poor morale even with the current SHC morale exploit.

HVY,ARM ect can be railed out but manpower can't.

Pelton

[Peltonx]

ORIGINAL: notenome

That last turn really was textbook HQ build up insanity. By nerfing forts and not build ups the game became completely skewed towards the offense. Its gotten to the point that HQ build up needs to be thrown out altogether alongside a nerf to Soviet late game (43 onwards) logistics.

If your playing an exp GHC player there are no text book build-up turns.

HQ build-ups are done every turn. Generally starting on turn 4 or 5. 1 in north, 3 in south and 5 to 7 in center. Generally 10 per 1941 summer. I taken Moscow/Leningrad/Stalino using only 5 for the hole 41 summer.

Nerfing HQ-build-ups would simply kill the game all together at this point.

The #1 problem with this game and always has been from beta to date is THERE IS ZERO REASON FOR THE SHC TO FIGHT.

HQ build-up is the counter to SHC running tactics.

The game is basicly broken in its current form. Only allot of bad dice rolls can save SHC.

[Tarhunnas]

Turn 16 before Soviet moves. Comments superflous. Things are going from bad to worse fast!

[gids]

i know how you feel ,seriously messed up situation but i do know you can come back from that :p

[Apollo11]

Hi all,

ORIGINAL: Tarhunnas

Comments superflous. Things are going from bad to worse fast!

What is the OOB for both you and him?

It is looking very grim indeed...


Leo "Apollo11"

[76mm]

This is rather depressing reading...

I'm starting to think that once German players reach a certain skill level, the Sovs can't stop them in 1941.

[Flaviusx]

It's not easy and requires a very different strategy than what Tarhunnas is doing. But even with all that said, I do not believe the 41 scenario is very well balanced right now. Op tempo is simply too high. I've been saying this for months.

[76mm]

I'm waiting for Turn 11 in my current game vs Zonso; I suspect my game might end up looking like this one, but we'll see...

[timmyab]

It can be done, but it's difficult.I think that Soviet defensive techniques are still relatively poorly understood as compared to German offensive techniques which people have perfected to a greater extent.
I believe that Glavca is going to play Axis against MichaelT's Soviet next.I predict that you'll see in that game how it can be done,(assuming there's an AAR).Michael himself confidently proclaims that he can't be beaten playing the Soviet side and I believe him.
The main thing is that you must prevent major pockets from forming.This is particularly vital in the early turns.To do this whilst maintaining a forward stance you need really good defensive technique combined with a feel for when it's time to pull back and how far.This 'feel' is just as important as good technique and comes from good military intelligence combined with knowing more or less what the German mobile units are capable of in a worst case scenario.
If you can prevent major pockets from forming the size of the Soviet army snowballs and it will already start to become a monster by the end of the summer.Obviously this can be achieved by simply running away, but for the win you need to fight as far forward and cause as much damage to the Axis as possible.

[76mm]

ORIGINAL: timmyab
It can be done, but it's difficult.I think that Soviet defensive techniques are still relatively poorly understood as compared to German offensive techniques which people have perfected to a greater extent.
* * *
The main thing is that you must prevent major pockets from forming.This is particularly vital in the early turns.To do this whilst maintaining a forward stance you need really good defensive technique combined with a feel for when it's time to pull back and how far.This 'feel' is just as important as good technique and comes from good military intelligence combined with knowing more or less what the German mobile units are capable of in a worst case scenario.

You might be right, I dunno...I agree that the number of units pocketed in the opening months may be decisive--too many and the Sovs just don't have enough units to form a solid line.

I will certainly watch Michael's game, and will be interested to see if he has honed his Sov techniques as well as his German skills.

[EDIT] Regarding Sov defensive techniques, I agree that they are less advanced, for a couple of reasons: 1) no one really had to worry about it much during earlier versions of the game; and 2) the on-going patches have changed the balance enough that what worked well previously (eg, Tarhunnas' and TD's forward, aggressive defenses) may no longer be effective.

[Peltonx]

ORIGINAL: timmyab

It can be done, but it's difficult.I think that Soviet defensive techniques are still relatively poorly understood as compared to German offensive techniques which people have perfected to a greater extent.
I believe that Glavca is going to play Axis against MichaelT's Soviet next.I predict that you'll see in that game how it can be done,(assuming there's an AAR).Michael himself confidently proclaims that he can't be beaten playing the Soviet side and I believe him.
The main thing is that you must prevent major pockets from forming.This is particularly vital in the early turns.To do this whilst maintaining a forward stance you need really good defensive technique combined with a feel for when it's time to pull back and how far.This 'feel' is just as important as good technique and comes from good military intelligence combined with knowing more or less what the German mobile units are capable of in a worst case scenario.
If you can prevent major pockets from forming the size of the Soviet army snowballs and it will already start to become a monster by the end of the summer.Obviously this can be achieved by simply running away, but for the win you need to fight as far forward and cause as much damage to the Axis as possible.

I think that it is possible for Tarhunnas to recover, but not likely because of a lack of 42-43 exp. Tammyab your point of the GHC having the offensive techniques down is right on. The major problem for the SHC side is its much harder to play german side, so they generally have an easy time winning game after game thinking they know what they are doing. Then they play a good GHC player of which there are few and get spanked. Also as you stated pocketing and manpower centers is the key. With Moscow lost if Tarhunnas does not have a really good blizzard the game is lost because manpower output will be very low during 1942 and Glavca will beable cause more SHC losses during the 42 summer not even counting 42 pockets.

As MT has stated all things being equal the SHC player should win every time with no fighting forward house rules for SHC and then I would still give the upper hand to the SHC player.

There are a few players that have the Soviet defensive techniques just right, TDV/MT/Kamil/Hoooper and Flaviusx that I personally have played against.

[76mm]

ORIGINAL: Pelton
As MT has stated all things being equal the SHC player should win every time with no fighting forward house rules for SHC and then I would still give the upper hand to the SHC player.

There is a huge difference between "fighting forward" and a "run-away", and I think that most Sov players fall somewhere in the middle. I still think that a "run-away" strategy is as big a loser for the Sovs as fighting forward, its just that the loss will come in 1945 instead of 1941. For me it remains to be seen whether the Sovs can hold off a good German player in 1941 playing a strategy which does not involve a run-away.