Bleeding the beast to death and the AP crunch explained.

[Peltonx]

I beleive I have covered several other GHC tactics that basicly covered operations in 41. This one is how I try and conduct a winning strategy in 42.

Turn 52 VP Total= 221

Manpower Pts over run during 1942 = 164
Russian Units Destroyed during 1942
Corp:
Divisions: 27
Brigades: 6
SU: 2
AP total: 302
Russian losses this turn: 70,000 Total dead: 3,937,000
Russian OOB: 7,306,000
A net gain of: 38,000 men
Russian units currently in a pocket: 30
GHC OOB: 3,471,000
GHC net OOB change: -30,000



Turn 53 VP Total= 222

Manpower Pts over run during 1942 = 174
Russian Units Destroyed during 1942
Corp:
Divisions: 40
Brigades:11
SU: 2
AP total: 457
Russian losses this turn: 179,000 Total dead: 4,116,000
Russian OOB: 7,206,000
A net gain of: -100,000 men
Russian units currently in a pocket: 12
GHC OOB: 3,471,000
GHC net OOB change: 0,000


Turn 54 VP Total= 225

Manpower Pts over run during 1942 = 209
Russian Units Destroyed during 1942
Corp: 1
Divisions: 50
Brigades:14
SU: 2
AP total: 602
Russian losses this turn: 161,000 Total dead: 4,277,000
Russian OOB: 7,124,000
A net gain of: -84,000 men
Russian units currently in a pocket: 11
GHC OOB: 3,457,000
GHC net OOB change: -14,000 divisions withdraw, I really need to get 2-3 AG’s in static mode as this will keep my OOB growing slightly per turn dispite 20 SHC attacks per turn.



Turn 55 VP Total= 228

Manpower Pts over run during 1942 = 222
Russian Units Destroyed during 1942
Corp: 1
Divisions: 56
Brigades:19
SU: 2
AP total: 685
Russian losses this turn: 122,000 Total dead: 4,399,000
Russian OOB: 7,106,000
A net gain of: -18,000 men
Russian units currently in a pocket: 17
GHC OOB: 3,434,000
GHC net OOB change: -21,000


Turn 56 VP Total= 228

Manpower Pts over run during 1942 = 240
Russian Units Destroyed during 1942
Corp: 1
Divisions: 64
Brigades: 28
SU: 2
AP total: 810
Russian losses this turn: 120,000 Total dead: 4,520,000
Russian OOB: 7,074,000
A net gain of: -32,000 men
Russian units currently in a pocket: 22
GHC OOB: 3,407,000
GHC net OOB change: -27,000

GHC has been able to form larger and larger pockets with each passing turn as over all SHC CV and counter numbers start to drop. Peak SHC OOB was 7,306,000 and in 5 turns GHC has destroyed 508 AP worth of units with another 216 in pockets waiting to get wiped. So even if SHC had 500 saved up, its been wiped out and the crunch has begun.

At this point over all SHC CV will start dropping as replasements will be mainly dumped into the new units( 5 divisions or 10 brigades per turn) being formed and not going to front line units.

Lines have been thinned out and forming new pockets will become easyer with each passing turn as there are less units and over-all units CV is dropping. If the SHC did not have 500 saved up on turn 52 then a AP crunch might be already under way.

At this point GHC should totally ignore panzer tank#s and hammer away until mid 43. MP's stay the same no matter how many tanks are in each division.

As long as GHC can keep forming small pockets of 5 to 10 divisions per turn SHC strength will keep dropping and GHC will be able to stay on the offensive far into 43.

At some point in 43 GHC will have to change over to the defensive, but by then the game should be well in hand.

SHC will have to take another 40 - 50 turns to change over to and offensive Red army, but GHC army will be able to use reserve mode for another 20-30 turns. This will not leave nearly enough time for SHC to get close to a draw.

Large pockets are not needed, just pockets. Ignore land/VP's/tank numbers/ manpower centers ect.

If your able to get the crunch going before August your going to win from my past exp. If you don't then you still have a 50/50 chance at a draw.

Which will depend more on the skill of the SHC then your own as you will not have any options other then being a punching bag for 150 turns.

1942+

5-3-3

5 - 0 when AP crunch starts by August and 3 loses and 3 draws when its doesn't get rolling by August.

[76mm]

Pelton, I think that your strategy is absolutely correct, and very dangerous for Sov players, because generally in 1942 they are not free to repeat the wholesale retreats favored in 1941 (of course they can retreat, but to do so would probably cost them Moscow and put them too far from Berlin to reach it in time for a win.

[Michael T]

It's certainly a viable method. But I don't agree it should be possible to cripple the Sov's through AP shortages. I don't think it should cost the Sov's any AP to build replacement units. Only new formations. It's a hole that should be plugged.

[76mm]

I agree that it should not be possible, but it is...

Also, I actually don't think that this strategy will work in Pelton's game with you, your army is too big and I think you should be able to prevent or break open enough pockets to keep your huge army from getting whittled down much.

But I guess we'll see...

[Peltonx]

ORIGINAL: Michael T

It's certainly a viable method. But I don't agree it should be possible to cripple the Sov's through AP shortages. I don't think it should cost the Sov's any AP to build replacement units. Only new formations. It's a hole that should be plugged.

Units should not be "built" on turn 54 and also be on line fighting turn 55 even "replasement units". It would take months to trian units, even to the crappy russian lvl of "morale/exp".

Having units magicly appear and then on-line fighting the next turn is certianly not a relistic method as you seem to want, thats to Middle Earth and not WW2. It doesn't reflex the historical issues fased by Stalin and his poeple at the time of WW2.

Mybee "building" the unit after its destoried then appearring on the eastern side of map 8 to 12 turns later.

Still its an AP crunch. or more like a build crunch. 2by3's system is much better then your idea.

The current AP method is the one thing 2by3 got 100% right. It reflects the logistical headache of training officers/men and the systems that were used. It reflexs the command and control issues that the Red army was fased with on the eastern front.

I think 2by3's current AP system 100% reflexs the historical problems that would be fased by "players" if they were in charge of the Red Army in WW2. not being able to build/merge units unitil date X and costing Y AP's.

I think before just dumping on the current AP system you might want to have an idea of what to replace it with. I don't think if the SHC losses 30 divisions on turn 54 that it should be able to ask Gandalf to magicly create 30 divisions on turn 55 and have them fighting on turn 56.

This is Earth and not Middle Earth.

Even if you come up with a good idea it will not beable to be put in plase unless the current system is completely over hauled. Which we know will not be for years.

The current system is historical and works very good reflexing the historical issues faced by the Russians.

[Peltonx]

ORIGINAL: 76mm

I agree that it should not be possible, but it is...

Also, I actually don't think that this strategy will work in Pelton's game with you, your army is too big and I think you should be able to prevent or break open enough pockets to keep your huge army from getting whittled down much.

But I guess we'll see...

It should be possible and is historical. As I explianed in the above post. Russian players should not be asking Gandalf to magicly create the 30 divisions destoryed on turn 54 on turn 55 and have them on line turn 56. Its totally unrealistic.

This strategy will work "IF" I can get the ball rolling so to speak in my game vs MT. Thats why the push back from MT he already knows it works vs any size Red Army, IF the GHC is able to start it.

MT I am sure is building units every turn now to expend the AP and not "lose" them. To many units makes forming pockets easy as it waters down the over-all CV strenght per unit.

If and its a big if I am able to start a AP crunch and keep it rolling MT will be losing allot of men per unit as his army will by close to 9 million by summer. Now he might have 1,2 or even 3 million men in the bank, BUT if he loses to many units these men will remain in the bank for most of the war. The key yr of 43 they will simply sit there usless in the manpower pool bleeding out far to slowly to be usefull until late 43, when its TO - LATE.

Why because they will have no plase to go. Thats why I say the size of the SHC OOB doesn't matter to me IF I or anyone esle for that matter gets an AP crunch rolling. It will still take a year to refit the Red Army to beable to start pushing east. If GHC was able to get an AP crunch going that means GHC gained allot of space and the time required for the REd Army to build an offensive army will give the GHC time to get there OOB close to 4 million men. Then it will take another 20+ turns to get past the reserve mode tactics of GHC. By the time the Red machine gets rolling its to late to win and a 50/50 chance at a draw.

An AP crunch will work vs a 6 million or 10 million man SHC army.

Think it though and its easy to see why.

I know I have tested it.

I have been wanting to test out Field Marshalls von Rundstedt plan for the 41/42 winter for a long time vs a skilled player.

Thats why I farmed morale all summer and pulled back as soon as I reached the lvled I beleived I needed.

I already have a larger army then is seen by June 42 with another 30+ new divisions still to arrive.

I have stacked the deck in my favor from the beginning of turn 1 to try and make Field Marshalls von Rundstedt plan work.

Its simply a historically based "what if" for GHC.

As we all know GHC what ifs generally get the nerf bat, but lets keep and open mind and see if an historically based GHC "what if" is treated like SHC what ifs.

Lets hope heliodorus04 is wrong about GHC and SHC what ifs and how 2by3 looks at each sides what "ifs".

[Michael T]

I did not really put any idea forward. Other than I think the current setup is flawed. I would think the same method of replacing destoryed units that is in effect in 1941 would be better. And for the record you cannot build a unit on T55 and have it ready on T56. It takes 3 moves before it can even move, yes its fixed and then another 3 or 4 turns to get morale up to speed. At this point you will have a unit that is full strength, max morale, but zippo experience after about 6 or 7 turns.

Also I don't bring this up in relation to our game. I am not concerned in the slightest about it. I have thought this 'AP crunch thingy' a problem with the game that should be fixed for some time. Like I have said many times. I don't favour either side. I advocate for a better game.

[Peltonx]

This over-all strategy is part of the 41 grind tactics that more and more GHC players are using vs the SHC strategy - southern checker baord/northern over-load we are all seeing more and more post 1.06.13.

Big thanks to Jamian's and Flaviusx's AAR that first showed this grinding tactic.

[&o] King Morale [&o]

[Peltonx]

The game is getting better, but we have to fight based on current rule sets.

This in turn exposes issues that need to be fixed / tweet ect.

Thats why my I am forsed to change tactics from time to time always tring to stay one step ahead of the next nerf or fix depending on your point of veiw.

I am alway conserned about losing, what fun would it be thinking your going to win every game before you even start?

Pride go before the fall.

Your head seems to be the only part of your body that still growing heheh.

[Michael T]

You remind me of Kramer, beating up 5 and 6 years olds. Running for the hills when faced by someone his own size [:D]

[Peltonx]

ORIGINAL: Michael T

You remind me of Kramer, beating up 5 and 6 years olds. Running for the hills when faced by someone his own size [:D]

Heheh no one is your SIZE

[Peltonx]

MT if you live any wheres near Maine I am headed out to stack 6 cord of wood.

I could use the help [:D]

[Michael T]

Don't you have a move to do....

[gingerbread]

ORIGINAL: Michael T

It's certainly a viable method. But I don't agree it should be possible to cripple the Sov's through AP shortages. I don't think it should cost the Sov's any AP to build replacement units. Only new formations. It's a hole that should be plugged.

I have floated an idea that after Oct '41, re-building destroyed, buildable combat units should cost 20% of building a new at the time (RD cost 20 until May '42, so 4 to re-build).
Sadly, the dev's did not bite.

[76mm]

Pelton

I'm not sure why you think it would take 8-12 weeks to create Sov divisions? Training was rudimentary and it is not like they didn't start creating a division until an existing was destroyed.

Here is an interesting chapter on the topic: http://operationbarbarossa.net/OBTCMS/P ... 201941.pdf

It says that between July and December 1941 the Sovs mobilized 278 rifle divisions, and mobilized and deployed 182 of these. Moreover, it only took a month to mobilize and deploy a rifle division. Maybe it seems to Middle Earth to you, but the Sovs did it...

Also, I don't think that the AP crunch will work as well with a big army as a small one, for two reasons: the bigger army means that you will find it harder to create and hold pockets, and he already has enough divisions that the first several dozen that he loses don't make much difference (this also assumes that the Sov player creates a couple rifle divs every turn, before he needs them. I could be wrong, but that's my view.

[Peltonx]

ORIGINAL: 76mm

Pelton

I'm not sure why you think it would take 8-12 weeks to create Sov divisions? Training was rudimentary and it is not like they didn't start creating a division until an existing was destroyed.

Here is an interesting chapter on the topic: http://operationbarbarossa.net/OBTCMS/P ... 201941.pdf

It says that between July and December 1941 the Sovs mobilized 278 rifle divisions, and mobilized and deployed 182 of these. Moreover, it only took a month to mobilize and deploy a rifle division. Maybe it seems to Middle Earth to you, but the Sovs did it...

Also, I don't think that the AP crunch will work as well with a big army as a small one, for two reasons: the bigger army means that you will find it harder to create and hold pockets, and he already has enough divisions that the first several dozen that he loses don't make much difference (this also assumes that the Sov player creates a couple rifle divs every turn, before he needs them. I could be wrong, but that's my view.

The current system already reflexs the issue's in your link. You cant just magicly build 30, 40 or 60 divisions in a single turn. Historically SHC was able to only build x divisions per week. Under the current system with what you can build 180 is not out of reach from June to Dec. So your point has alrdy been historically reflexed by 2by3.

[&o]2by3 is right no target with that your saying alrdy, yes yes they did that right hehehehe [&o]

The issue is 42 and not 41. 41 as we all know has been right now for a yr+.

1941 is not Middle Earth it is 100% a Home Run by 2by3. Bro this is very old news.

Bro we are talking 42+ and not 41.

At some point views hit the real world.

Thats why we play the game.

[Peltonx]

In late 1942 SHC had to draft teenagers, old farts and chicks to fill out support units. Thats historical.

SHC manpower had its limits.

[gingerbread]

They also raised 5M men in July '41 alone; any comparisons with historical numbers and Manpower shortages should take into account that in the game there are 4M-5M men un-raised before the so-called bottom of the barrel becomes visible.

[heliodorus04]

ORIGINAL: Michael T

It's certainly a viable method. But I don't agree it should be possible to cripple the Sov's through AP shortages. I don't think it should cost the Sov's any AP to build replacement units. Only new formations. It's a hole that should be plugged.

Yes, god forbid the German actually have a path to victory...

Pelton, you can't win. If you find a strategy that works against SHC, the Sovie-o-phile fanboi base will promptly ensure it is patched out of existence.

Your AP choke strategy will very soon be patched out of the game by whatever method they can justify (probably doing exactly what Micheal says).

It used to be that they argued that the AP issue that the Soviets face was an intended design challenge, which is how they justified the fact that the Soviet pays 350% less to re-assign units to new HQs. Now, it's 'a hole that needs to be plugged'...

[carlkay58]

Pelton's suggested strategy is a valid one. It is an attritional strategy - which are about the only types of strategy that will really work against either side in WitE. The challenge is on the Soviet's side to avoid Pelton's strategy from working. The Soviets were able to give ground in 42 to prevent the major pockets from forming as they did in 41. Stalin gave orders specifically to save the divisional and army HQ staffs because they were running out of officers trained sufficiently to manage divisions and armies. The grunts were untrained but Stalin (and the USSR overall) could live with that, but without the officer cadre for the divisions the grunts were just large masses of men that had to be moved around, pointed in the correct direction, and then herded there.