Rhine or Ruin (no glvaca)

[Michael T]

I dont beleive I have seen an AAR where Moscow has fallen and the GHC not won.

Well I lost 2/3 of Moscow against Bobo821 and still won. Plus Leningrad and Rostov. And even if I had of lost the last hex of Moscow it would have made no difference. Time will tell. I even have a perverse thought to leave Moscow as an open city to prove the point but I couldn't bring myself to do it

[gingerbread]

I'm quite interested in how you intend to defend in '42, but time will tell.

Also noticed the air bases in the front lines here and there and thought it strange that you'd provide free Pz. fuel, but I now realize that they are empty and are for transport purposes only.

[Michael T]

Just a word on the validity of the Lake Janis stop line for the Finns, not the gamey or not argument. I don't mind a discussion on the validity aspect here at all.

I did a quick comparison of manpower lost versus saved by holding the Finns at the northern edge.

If we assume the normal Svir line until the fall of Leningrad and then the collapse of the Svir line and the loss of most towns and cities in the area Volkov/Svir/Cherepovets/Vishy compared to the loss of Leningrad but the line holding at Lake Janis and the Volkov we get a difference in manpower of around 40 points.

That’s about 80K men in 42. You could argue that I am wasting 80K of troops holding the line with 9 div's but I would argue that you will lose more than 9 div's in the ensuing collapse of the Volkov and Svir lines once Leningrad falls. Plus I get even more manpower back from this area in 43. It's a no brainer for me. This line at Lake Janis is a big plus IMO *if* you can afford the initial investment of troops for the line before the Finns come at you.

[Flaviusx]

A line held east of the Svir will be longer and take about as many units to hold. Moreover, said line isn't secure and can invite all sorts of shenanigans, as shown by Farfarer most recently. And it's that much more real estate that needs to be won back down the line. With all this room to fall back on, Leningrad may never be taken back and Finland will last the entire war, giving the Axis a nice VP cushion. (Assuming the game even lasts that long.)

It really is a no brainer. What amazes me is so many Soviet players even now insist that it's best to let the Finns run wild. I just don't get this.

[hfarrish]

Not to mention the retention of APs you certainly would have used to build forts along the Svir river line, or the reduction of opportunity cost that occurs when the Svir river line is staffed with actual units...

I think the Lake Janis line is a no brainer...

[janh]

ORIGINAL: Michael T
I don't think I am going to strike any problems using this strategy. I have been claiming it’s a no lose risk free victory for the SU if done correctly for a long time now. I see no reason *yet* that will change my view. The proof is in the pudding. If I go down then I will be the first to admit I was wrong. And quite honestly if my strategy fails it would be a good thing as far as the WITE engine goes. But I firmly believe this run and preserve strategy will win me the game. I have confidence in my tactical skill to out manoeuvre any German in 42 as long as I have enough well armed troops. This point of having enough troops seems to be the debatable issue. Lets assume Moscow is worth ~5000 men a turn. But if I lose 500,000 men holding it (or maybe even still lose it) that’s equivalent to two years worth of its manpower production, not to mention the loss of ARM points in equipment.

You are definitely going to "prove" one thing, or another. There are still plenty of bad pitfalls for you as Soviet player, one of them the AP deficit and the problem of building an army that can fight back powerfully. We have seen many AARs where the Russian player had to learn that being allowed to build almost freely doesn't mean he'd end up with something useful. And we have not yet seen one AAR where the Soviet player has built anything as large as the historical Red Army, or anything that could push anywhere near the German paces of 41 and 42. One problem with the size is surely that commonly more manpower centers and cities are lost against an average German in this game.
I am curious to see how you will maneuver that maze.

Just assuming you can built an Army that can advance against the quality German units and their entrenchments at 1/2 of the pace of 41, you will need at least 1 year to make up for the terrain lost in 41, plus more for that lost in 42. Counting the German reserves and reinforcements, I bet a lot more, but you maybe have a different solution to this problem.
A lot will now also depend on the blizzard. If the Germans retire before your thrusts, and don't loose many men, I bet you will be in trouble with your strategy -- the clock is ticking. If you nonetheless manage to show that this is a foolproof strategy for the Soviets -- then VP limits ought to be adjusted to prevent a Soviet Sir Robin, and perhaps a German blizzard withdrawal. But if you fail with what seems to be the hope for a Soviets player... well, that would be "good" in some sense for the WitE engine, but very discouraging for one side as well.

ORIGINAL: Michael T
For me it’s a no brainer, I would much rather keep my 500,000 men to use in the blizzard and beyond. Until they make cities more lucrative to hold or capture I think my idea is valid.

I think Stalin would have agreed very much with you here. I bet up to the point where he would have sacrificed Moscow in winter 41 to save a few precious divisions, even at the risk of having to send more political troops to discourage or bloodily disperse civilian unrests. Well, Stalin was famous for many bad things, that would just have fit him.
But he certainly knew it was his Army he needed, and since time didn't matter that much (as it does with the deadline in game), he could trade ground to a large degree.

In an analogous fashion the German Generals did see the need for preserving forces and a flexible defense more than clinging to every foot conquered. Both during blizzard 41 and the whole later course the often advocated retreats/withdrawals or "corrections of the MBTL", as long as this did not lead to risks like cut off slower units, or other chaos. In that sense I am sure that hindsight would best require both sides to retreat during dire times.

[Peltonx]

ORIGINAL: Michael T

Pelton when my game with Glenn is over I will be happy to take you on with my hordes of Russians.

I think I am ready, figured a way around the latest supply nerf http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Db40S82s ... re=related ( whats this number 4?) and how to grind atleast as good as Jamian.

I will have time in September for a 4th game.

When ever you have the time I am game.

[Michael T]

I haven't heard from glvaca for over a week now. Not sure what the problem is. I hope the game will go on but I am getting worried.

[Peltonx]

ORIGINAL: Michael T

I haven't heard from glvaca for over a week now. Not sure what the problem is. I hope the game will go on but I am getting worried.

It is summer. I have one 4 day and one 10 day vacation next month.

I get totally off the grid when i go.

Mybee hes just chilling.

Bobo was gone for 4 or 5 days last week, but he did tell me.

[Michael T]

I hope its something as simple as that.

Meanwhile I haven't been idle. I am a GIS analyst. I have managed to get the map and a bunch of data in to a GIS format and it has revealed some interesting things [:D]

[Michael T]

Example

[Peltonx]

Nice, lol I have it writen on a piece of note paper about 14 months old heheh

I have a finish line I try to reach in 41 and then 42

[Michael T]

This is not just a map Pelton. I have compiled a database that is spatially referenced to the map. So I can do any kind of analysis I see fit. Its very enlightening. It also debunks some debatable theories on certain areas of the map. But I think I will keep my 'debunking' thoughts to myself in future

[Peltonx]

ORIGINAL: Michael T

This is not just a map Pelton. I have compiled a database that is spatially referenced to the map. So I can do any kind of analysis I see fit. Its very enlightening. It also debunks some debatable theories on certain areas of the map. But I think I will keep my 'debunking' thoughts to myself in future

You are smarter then me, I do it the old way trial and error.

I have figured out a few things about grinding. I saw Jamian doing it and Flaviusx worried about it. I had a nice trail run vs M60 storming Moscow in 42 head on.

Refining it now in my 3 current games so far working better then even I expected. The most amazing thing is my Infantry TOE stays high. In my game vs Bobo out of 103 infantry divisions only 12 are below 90% TOE on turn 14 dispite very hvy fighting.

Still an amazing amount of milk in the cow known as wite.

Bobo is having a good amount of reserve reactions, but I have not lost a single combat in the Moscow area where I am grinding. The only "loses" are the planned ones. Whats that saying everything happens for a reason.

[Michael T]

I have heard from from Glenn. He has been very busy. This game will resume soon

[Peltonx]

Cool. Good to hear everything is ok

[delatbabel]

ORIGINAL: Flaviusx

It really is a no brainer. What amazes me is so many Soviet players even now insist that it's best to let the Finns run wild. I just don't get this.

My first preference is to stop the Finns at Lake Janis, my second preference is the Svir, but it is impossible to hold Leningrad in this game and they will eventually break out.

Against inexperienced players I have let the Finns run wild to some advantage -- there aren't that many of them (men or units) and if they get spread out they can be mopped up quickly using a couple of armies stacked full of rifle brigades, tank brigades, and cav divisions. You just carpet them, surround them and destroy them where they stand, and from there you have an easy walk across the top and into Helsinki. Against an experienced player that won't work so well.

[Michael T]

but it is impossible to hold Leningrad in this game and they will eventually break out.

Maybe the game needs some counters like the NKVD Political troops in FITE/SE. Thats is any unit stacked with them won't retreat unless the units become depleted or some such. A half dozen or so of these units that could be attached to division sized units would make it possible to have Stalingrad like battles evolve when the Soviets decide to fight for a city, eg Leningrad.

[Michael T]

Should add they would only use this 'no retreat' ability in cities or urban hexes.

[Walloc]

ORIGINAL: Michael T

but it is impossible to hold Leningrad in this game and they will eventually break out.

Maybe the game needs some counters like the NKVD Political troops in FITE/SE. Thats is any unit stacked with them won't retreat unless the units become depleted or some such. A half dozen or so of these units that could be attached to division sized units would make it possible to have Stalingrad like battles evolve when the Soviets decide to fight for a city, eg Leningrad.

I kinda like ur idea Michael T. I know it from FiTE too. Personally i'd prefere if the combat system was look at tho. This is more of a stop gap meassure IMO. Not that that cant work at times. While its absolutly a problem for russian side in 41/42/urban settings mostly, the same goes infavor of russian side later on. I mean how often do we see offensives falter in game?
Give me a little leeway in the make up of forces for for example Mars, corps making, putting eng in right places and the such. That offensive cant fail then in game with same forces involved. If u know what ur doing. Same with summer 43 offensive vs AGC, yes i said 43 not 44. It wasnt exactly a stunning succes either.

Look at some of the current AARs, germans making 41 type offensives in 43. As strong as u can be in attacking the germans as weak u can be repulsing counter offensives as russian. I mean how many times did u see german saying ok i want that piece of the front and getting it post 42. Not the same as when russian side cant get overextended, stretched out and running to far from supply lines. Under those cuircumstances they can their front pierced and get surrounded. Or attacks repsulsed with great russian losses, but thats not teh same as they could say now i want to own this realestate surrounding X. With out russian can do much about it. Ill give it doesnt happen much but there are game showing this and i think in many cases its a mental thing. If u now mentally on the defence u dont think in such. So u dont set up the options of doing such. There are games where it wouldnt be possible periode tho but i see possibilities in AARs that isnt "used".

Kind regards,

Rasmus