Tackling the Russian bear II (No MT pls)

[glvaca]

NORTH
Good progress this turn as 18th Army infantry makes its presence felt.
39th Pz. Corps exploits, while 56th Pz. Corps gets a buildup.
The Leningrad strike force is almost completely assembled and concentrated.

[glvaca]

CENTER
The Infantry is now arriving at the front in strength.
Available for the tip of the spear will be PzG 3's V Corps (4 Divs)., PzG 2's XIII Corps (4 strong Divs.), 4th Army's 43rd Corps (4 first class divs).
9th Army (12 divs) will be on the right, protecting the flank and providing linkup with the remainder of 4th Army further South. Still, it will be concentrated East of Smolensk.
2 Pz Corps are taken out of the line for some R&R.
I manage to clear the Belyi coridor, with minimal effort.

[glvaca]

SOUTH
Not much happening. 6th Army infantry crosses the Dnepr and pushes on towards the East & NE.
Panzers keep pushing towards D & Z-town.
Infantry is moving up.
MT keeps falling back when industry is evacuated.

To finish, whole front overview.

[Flaviusx]

For whatever it is worth, I think he is running too fast in the south. IMO, the Soviet can and should hold the Dnepr until turn 6, and then leave behind a screen of pickets to slow down the infantry. This screen will die, but buy time. The danger here is that your infantry will arrive at the Donbas with plenty of clear weather remaining, and if you can threaten that, Tula, and Moscow at the same time, rail cap simply will not keep up. Every one of those takes several turns to evacuate. He's not doing anything to slow the landsers down, and you're absolutely doing the right thing in clearing a broad front for them to advance quickly.

You don't need to save everything. Indeed, it's in the Soviet advantage to get a lot of stuff killed, including the tank divisions. They are armament and vehicle hogs, and I will cheerfully use them to screen the infantry so it can withdraw.

[glvaca]

Agreed, he could have easily held it another turn although it's not unlikely he has moved many divisions North to help out in the Leningrad defense. Not yet clear from the AAR at this point, but he has assembled quite a collection of first class divisions around Leningrad. I'm pushing through, but with difficulty.

IMO he's giving up to much terrain in the Center too. The Belyi-Durovo-Yelna-Bryansk line can be a tough nutt to crack if prepared well. He's basically giving it up without a serious fight...

But we'll see, he could be right afterall. I guess that's the point that will be proved or disproved...

[Flaviusx]

I dunno, I kind of agree with what he's doing the center. My first real MLR in the center nowadays is east of Smolensk (roughly Rzhev-Vyazma-Bryansk.) Since I prioritize Leningrad early on, something has to give, and that's the center. I figure Moscow is safe until mid August, due to supply problems.

But even in the center he could be doing more in terms of throwaway pickets.

[glvaca]

ORIGINAL: Flaviusx

I dunno, I kind of agree with what he's doing the center. My first real MLR in the center nowadays is east of Smolensk (roughly Rzhev-Vyazma-Bryansk.) Since I prioritize Leningrad early on, something has to give, and that's the center. I figure Moscow is safe until mid August, due to supply problems.

But even in the center he could be doing more in terms of throwaway pickets.

That's also a strong position, although it lacks the protection of the upper Dnepr. Anyway, he'll have to start fighting in the Center soon or risk losing Moscow very quickly.

[timmyab]

ORIGINAL: Flaviusx
You don't need to save everything. Indeed, it's in the Soviet advantage to get a lot of stuff killed, including the tank divisions. They are armament and vehicle hogs, and I will cheerfully use them to screen the infantry so it can withdraw.

The weakness of Soviet tanks is a major design flaw of the game in my opinion.Can you imagine Stavka saying "lets get all our tanks killed off as fast as we can".In particular, units with large numbers of T34 and KV1 should be a threat and a worry to the Axis player.Tone up Soviet armor and tone down the cavalry.

[Farfarer61]

I think it is the doctrine and training that was weak, not the AFV. In 1941 one saw 6 tanks, nose to tail like circus elephants watching for signal flags from the lead tank - guess which one the panzerjagers shoot at? Most of the video we see is later offensives in dispersed formations with infantry support.

[timmyab]

They still caused the Germans problems though.They couldn't penetrate the armor with their standard anti tank weapons.The T34 and KV1 developed a fearsome reputation in 1941 and with good reason.Not to represent this in the game is crazy.

[notenome]

Whilst Soviet tanks were a very nasty surprise for the Wehrmacht, Soviet mech corps and divisions were considered an utter failure (so much so that they were aggressively disbanded). As always I'd like to see the Soviet tank units cause more casualties, but they're success rate seems about right to me.

[glvaca]

ORIGINAL: timmyab

They still caused the Germans problems though.They couldn't penetrate the armor with their standard anti tank weapons.The T34 and KV1 developed a fearsome reputation in 1941 and with good reason.Not to represent this in the game is crazy.

That was actually late in 1941 and those were the brigades.
Are those brigades useful in game? Who can tell? We all just do things we think should work or are the right thing to do based on what we know of history. The combat engine is such a mistery nobody knows for real.

What I do agree with is that tanks are generally underpower in this game.

[Apollo11]

Hi all,

What is current situation?


Leo "Apollo11"

[Peltonx]

ORIGINAL: timmyab

ORIGINAL: Flaviusx
You don't need to save everything. Indeed, it's in the Soviet advantage to get a lot of stuff killed, including the tank divisions. They are armament and vehicle hogs, and I will cheerfully use them to screen the infantry so it can withdraw.

The weakness of Soviet tanks is a major design flaw of the game in my opinion.Can you imagine Stavka saying "lets get all our tanks killed off as fast as we can".In particular, units with large numbers of T34 and KV1 should be a threat and a worry to the Axis player.Tone up Soviet armor and tone down the cavalry.

LUFTWAFFE
I actually try something new. In an effort to maximize the efficiency of the Lufwaffe from turn 1, I reorganize the gruppe on the airbases.
As many Stuka gruppe as possible are transfered to fighter bases. All recon and otherwise useless stuff is sent to the reserve. The Army airbases have plenty of recon capability.
This gives me around 3 (or was it 4 airbases?) to distribute bomber gruppe too within support limits.
For each Lufflotte, one base directly attached is used for the Ju52's. This allows me to keep these guys in the rear without having to put other bases out of command range. With this setup, I can push the fighter/Stuka bases pretty close to the action, keeping the bomber bases further back, and finally, the Ju52 bases even further without to much negative effect.

Stavka did throw away 1000's of tanks and 10,000 of men in counter attack after counter attack.

[glvaca]

This game is going to restart shortly. Currently getting my barings in the current version of the game after a few months without play.
My game with Tarhannus ended in surrender in June '42 after I surrounded several Russian fronts. I'll update the AAR for that game when I have the chance.

[Disgruntled Veteran]

Thats good in a sense.

Personally, I wish Michael wouldn't run. I've read the debates on this forum but it makes for a silly game. When my current game with A-Game ends I'm going to play Soviets for the first time and make an AAR about a Russian who stands and fights...not everywhere,but just running away ruins a game IMO.

[Flaviusx]

ORIGINAL: Disgruntled Veteran

Thats good in a sense.

Personally, I wish Michael wouldn't run. I've read the debates on this forum but it makes for a silly game. When my current game with A-Game ends I'm going to play Soviets for the first time and make an AAR about a Russian who stands and fights...not everywhere,but just running away ruins a game IMO.

What's even a sillier game are those where the Soviet stands and gets destroyed and the game ends in 41.

Until and unless a number of things change, running is mostly a good idea. Right now it is more or less impossible to play historically as the Soviet in 41. How about the Axis starts playing historically by not vaporizing SW Front on turn 1? No? Ok, then I'll keep right on running.

Michael goes a bit overboard, but not by much.

[Disgruntled Veteran]

ORIGINAL: Flaviusx

ORIGINAL: Disgruntled Veteran

Thats good in a sense.

Personally, I wish Michael wouldn't run. I've read the debates on this forum but it makes for a silly game. When my current game with A-Game ends I'm going to play Soviets for the first time and make an AAR about a Russian who stands and fights...not everywhere,but just running away ruins a game IMO.

What's even a sillier game are those where the Soviet stands and gets destroyed and the game ends in 41.

Until and unless a number of things change, running is mostly a good idea. Right now it is more or less impossible to play historically as the Soviet in 41. How about the Axis starts playing historically by not vaporizing SW Front on turn 1? No? Ok, then I'll keep right on running.

Michael goes a bit overboard, but not by much.

No I agree. You can't play historical I understand that much. I withdraw a hex or two per turn in my first December as Axis. But flat out running just takes the fun out imo. You can't tell me its a fun game where each side runs back and forth right? I look forward to playing my first game as Soviets soon enough and seeing what is possible.

[Harrybanana]

ORIGINAL: Disgruntled Veteran

No I agree. You can't play historical I understand that much. I withdraw a hex or two per turn in my first December as Axis. But flat out running just takes the fun out imo. You can't tell me its a fun game where each side runs back and forth right? I look forward to playing my first game as Soviets soon enough and seeing what is possible.

I think you'll find that "what is possible" will depend to a large extent on the skill of your opponent. Against many German opponents "flat out running" is not necessary; but against some (MT, Pelton, Saper, Glcava and a few others) it is suicide not to run in the South. By the way I don't think after turn 2 it is ever wise or necessary to "flat out run" in the North, but certainly tactical retreats are required even there from time to time.

[glvaca]

We're picking the game back up at German turn 11.
I'll update the AAR after I fini!sh, still getting back in the game.

On the retreat question, we agreed he was free to do as he sees fit and I have no problem with him running. The only time when a balance can really be made of what was won or lost by either side is after the blizzard.