Ketza (Soviet) vrs Dak41 (Axis)

[Ketza]

I have played DAK41 before. I was surprised that he grabbed the game I had thrown up but knew I would have a timely and enjoyable opponent and hoped he had learned from our last game about a year ago. Although overall his offensive has ground to a halt it is better then the last game we played.

I mainly did an AAR to show what the Soviets are capable of against a seasoned/average opponent who was not a Micheal T or a Pelton who each have an amazing grasp of the logistics of the game. An average Axis player just cannot maintain the tempo that is required to do enough damage.

I am sticking to my early statement that I will only consider this a win If I am in Berlin in 44.

[821Bobo]

Its not only about logistic. He could do better even if he is not MT. DAK41 did to many mistakes and wasted Panzers for totally useless actions.

Btw. why did you run in the south? I am not blaming you. It is just I have heard here to many voices saying that w/o Lvov pocket Soviets will not run but fight.

[Gabriel B.]

Up to september the axis progress was along historical lines, but he failed to get a bridgehead on the dniepr and close the kiev pocket.

and there is Leningrad.

[Ketza]

ORIGINAL: 821Bobo

Its not only about logistic. He could do better even if he is not MT. DAK41 did to many mistakes and wasted Panzers for totally useless actions.

Btw. why did you run in the south? I am not blaming you. It is just I have heard here to many voices saying that w/o Lvov pocket Soviets will not run but fight.

I didn't really run in the south. I concentrated in front of his Panzer balls and he drove forward through the path of least resistance. This was ok by me as he went where I wanted him to go. I have pretty much defended forward the whole game with some local retreats when it looked like a pocket may be forming. I did a lot of attacks and I have a treasure trove of guards units to show for it.

Knowing what the panzers can do I was careful and became more aggressive as his Panzers wore down.

[loki100]

noticed how many Guards you had, I've never managed any before the Winter counterattack. So it underpins the argument that you have put in a lot of combat to bring the Germans to a standstill

[Bozo_the_Clown]

I didn't really run in the south. I concentrated in front of his Panzer balls and he drove forward through the path of least resistance. This was ok by me as he went where I wanted him to go. I have pretty much defended forward the whole game with some local retreats when it looked like a pocket may be forming. I did a lot of attacks and I have a treasure trove of guards units to show for it.

It's another example why the Axis player should always do the Lvov pocket. It doesn't matter what the Soviet player says. It's all about preserving your troops and getting some easy wins against tired and depleted German tank divisions. I've played a number of games now as SHC. It's ridiculous how easy it is to counterattack with superior numbers. I just finished turn 16 in a game. I didn't count but I probably did 10 counterattacks. All successful. I already have four or five guard units and probably some more next turn. Of course the Axis player shouldn't leave tank and mech divisions exposed. But that's easier said then done.

Do the Lvov pocket and at least you have a fighting chance as the Axis. I'm not talking about the extended Lvov pocket. Just the regular one.

[Ketza]

Turn 21 start guards divisions

[Walloc]

ORIGINAL: 821Bobo

Its not only about logistic. He could do better even if he is not MT. DAK41 did to many mistakes and wasted Panzers for totally useless actions.

Btw. why did you run in the south? I am not blaming you. It is just I have heard here to many voices saying that w/o Lvov pocket Soviets will not run but fight.

Then u missing the point. Ketza as he also him self says, didnt just run. He at turn 3 had a line at Vinnetsa, turn 4 Zhitomir, turn 6 still a line well west of the Dneiper, at turn 8 he is still W of the Dneiper and so on. He early recognizes the fallings of his oppenent givent him the incentive not just to run to Stalio right away.

A case of what happen when a good player meets a not so good one. If it had been reverse and Ketza as Germans and Dak as russians trying the same. The end result would have been very different.

Kind regards,

Rasmus

[timmyab]

Actually considering his disastrous early strategic errors, what we have here is close to what I would expect.He must be a reasonably capable tactician I would think.
The Lvov pocket is not optional for the Axis player and the Narva attack is a hopeless dead end.He may have reached an historical type position without those two major mistakes.
1941 without Axis fuel exploits feels more realistic now than it ever has done with a roughly historical type advance or be it with a giant pocket on turn one that never happened and no giant pockets in late Summer that did.Also German stacks are far too vulnerable to counterattacks now, you could possibly even lose the 1:1 rule from the game completely, it's certainly ridiculous during the blizzard.Of course what happens after turn 17 is still pure fairy land.

[Bozo_the_Clown]

Ketza, very impressive list of guard units. The point I'm trying to make is that it seems way to easy to rack up victories as the Soviets. The combat system seems to be in favor of SHC. I'm getting odds way above 4:1 in almost all of my combats.

What are the lessons for the Axis? Pull back your tanks after an attack or only use them for exploitation? Pair them up with infantry? If you leave them exposed in clear terrain they get slaughtered. I've even pushed back stacks of three. It just doesn't seem right.

[SigUp]

The overt focus of the game on retreat losses is really hurting the German side. So therefore the +1 due to the Soviet attack doctrine is pretty heavy to the Germans. It is nice to see historical level advance without fuel exploits, but as it is now, if the German "only" makes it to the historical lines he is getting slaughtered during the blizzard.

[Michael T]

Perhaps there should be a push to remove the 1:1 rule?

[carlkay58]

Bozo,

A majority of Axis players use their Panzers to death - literally. It usually takes Panzer units two to three turns of rest and refit near a railhead to recover from the amount of fatigue of three or four turns of forward moving. When the Axis use their flying fuel tanks they rarely rest the Panzers. This makes them vulnerable IF the Soviets can reach and attack them. Play against an experienced Axis player and you will find that the Panzers are not being used in the front line every turn and they stay much more effective.

[loki100]

ORIGINAL: Michael T

Perhaps there should be a push to remove the 1:1 rule?

I think its useful up to the blizzard in that it allows local and dangerous counterattacks. Once the blizzard starts it just makes the whole thing even more unbalanced. Without it, I think the Soviet counterattack will run out of steam more quickly - or have to be much more concentrated on particular sectors?

So yes, come 1/12 it should be removed

[SigUp]

I think getting rid of it completely is a little bit too much. Soviet units are weak enough as it is and the rule helps keeping German players somewhat in check. But it absolutely has to be ended prior to the blizzard, if there is some kind of restriction on the fuel exploit.

[Ketza]

A lot of the Guards grinding actually came from attacking Axis infantry units in AGS/AGC. I relied heavily on the 2-1 rule. When Axis infantry was in range Soviet infantry with enough movement would pile on then scoot away after the win and be set on refit. I would then flip any remaining hexes with calvary then scoot them away. I also mauled his mountain divisions. Each one has at least 4 losses.

His main mistake to me was the Leningrad push. Although I did send as many divisions into the theatre as I usually do he was bottled up pretty good. By turn 7 or 8 I was moving some of the better units to the center.

The no Lvow pocket opening is one of the reasons that prompted the AAR. It was a mistake on his part but I was able to show what a more active Soviet defense may look like using a lot of counterattacks.

I think the 2-1 rule should go away with the Blizzard. As pointed out with historical Axis progress the Blizzard will produce ahistorical results across the front.

[Peltonx]

ORIGINAL: Michael T

Perhaps there should be a push to remove the 1:1 rule?

That's been Flaviusx gold from before release and mine the day after release.

1v1=2v1 is as historical as fling pigs

Its hard to crush a rule that is GG's pet, but we all got it removed from most of 42 and all of 45.

I have never stopped tring to get it completely removed, you should give us a hand.

[Ketza]

Game is over. My blizzard offensive was ok but I concentrated more on rotating my units on offence to increase overall morale.

I was going to offer him a restart with the new blizzard option but I think I may be taking a break from the game for a bit.