8MP Team Game - The Axis team

[EwaldvonKleist]

ORIGINAL: Armatrading

I have followed this for so long it is perhaps better called an epic saga than an AAR. I am going to be a bit tearful when there is no new development in 8MP to pick up on when I visit in future. Congrats!

Very true, and thanks to Crackaces and M60 for continuing the show&the AAR a bit longer!

This one is probably the best documented game that went beyond late 1941 so far...

[EwaldvonKleist]

To my dear former colleagues of 1st Panzer Army

Have you seen this man? EwaldvonKleist (AKA "The Other One") was last reported as having been reassigned to a penal company in Stalingrad which on turn 63 you have surrounded. He is wanted for copyright fraud, improper use of my image and impugning the honour of a German officer.

There are different stories circulating regarding the whereabouts of EwaldvonKleist. Some reported him killed or missed in action during the fighting in Stalingrad, others rumour there was a last minute escape with an U2 at night, or that he used a turncoat uniform to blend with the Wehrmacht and now commands some formation of Army Group B.

Maybe the NKVD archives will later reveal what truly happened?

And I do feel a bit sorry for the Axis EvK being demoted to corps commander...

[Telemecus]

ORIGINAL: EwaldvonKleist
There are different stories circulating regarding the whereabouts of EwaldvonKleist. Some reported him killed or missed in action during the fighting in Stalingrad, others rumour there was a last minute escape with an U2 at night, or that he used a turncoat uniform to blend with the Wehrmacht and now commands some formation of Army Group B.

Maybe the NKVD archives will later reveal what truly happened?

[center][/center]

By 1960 the world was stunned to see television footage of EwaldvonKleist appear on trial in Helsinki. EwaldvonKleist had escaped to Mexico and been given refuge by the left wing government there. An eight man squad of some very angry Finns kidnapped him and secretly flew him back to Finland still wearing his disguise as a Mexican peasant. Convicted of the war crime of bombing the then neutral Finland he was condemned to forced labour restoring the houses he had bombed 19 years before. He remained in obscurity as a painter and decorator in the village of Lappeenranta in Finland.

reference post 5 here tm.asp?m=4260347&mpage=1

[Telemecus]

ORIGINAL: EwaldvonKleist
And I do feel a bit sorry for the Axis EvK being demoted to corps commander...

Still on a full Generaloberst salary and with much less work and responsibility but more glory. I do not think he is feeling too sorry ....

[Crackaces]

Turn 64 03-September-1942 Economic - a post written in memory of earlier posts of this AAR!

And so the evacuation of Soviet fighter bomber factories to escape our strategic bombing campaign continues!


At Gorky... Curiously only 17 points of the 18 point factory were evacuated - did they run out of rail cap?

This factory faced no prospects whatsoever of being overun by ground forces in the near future - its evacuation is solely down to the LW extending power into the battle space.

M60A3TTS
The La-GG3 by now is approaching the end of its production run and its successor is one of the most important developments in the air war.

The Soviet side certainly considers the fighter-bomber produced by this factory to be worthy. This factory could produce 18 La-5s per week from July to November 1942 after which it upgrades to a factory producing the La-5F and expands to produce 36 a week. If left unhindered the factory would produce 396 La-5s. The bombing damage together with its evacuation means the Germans can expect the factory now to produce 171. This is a net loss of 225 La-5s. In addition the damage to the factory will not be fully repaired by the time it upgrades to the La-5F. And expansion of La-5F capacity is starting from the slightly lower base due to its slight reduction during the evacuation, and repair will continue to be impeded by ongoing damage. 23 La-5F are expected to not be produced as a result. This is a net loss of 248 fighters due to the LW strategic bombing campaign.

The evacuation of this factory actually increased it's damage levels. If there had been no more bombing and no evacuation we expect the factory would have produced 205 La-5s, a net loss of 191 La-5s plus an expected further loss of 16 La-5Fs - or 207 in total. This is 41 less than will be the case. Implicitly the Soviets have told the Germans they think our continued bombing would have destroyed 42 or more extra fighters.

Unlike the 1941 strategic bombing campaign previously ran by Telemecus, this came at a greater cost of blood. The factory was bombed eight times (twice per turn for four turns). Turn 57, one week after the factory upgraded to La-5 production, was unopposed by fighters. However 33 bombers were still lost on the bombing raids that turn. The Soviet side has revealed they have several on map flak brigades at Gorky. As the one hex on the map where they consistently knew several hundred German bombers would turn up on frequently this was the very most effective place to put them. On the next turn however the Soviet air force was out to defend Gorky in force. And the new 109G2 fighters, unlike the 109F4s, were one hex too short in range to reach Gorky. The Germans had to wait for the ground war to move that hex for 4 weeks before being able to be sure of sufficient weight of fighters to attack again. The bombing of Gorky over turns 61, 62 and 63 saw the Axis lose 21 fighters and 110 bombers with the Soviet side losing 65 fighters - in these turns a great proportion of the losses has to be put down to the flak still. Nor can the battles for this hex be considered in isolation from the fighter sweeps and air base bombings of the hexes nearby. The bombing of Gorky in some turns were the bait for the air war nearby, and in other turns the air war had to precede the bombing of Gorky to make it possible at all. So some reallocation of losses from both sides in the air battles to or from the battle for Gorky needs to be made. But nevertheless the big picture remains that a large number of German bombers were traded for a loss of Soviet fighter production. Typically the constraint for the Luftwaffe is single engine fighters - so anything that shifts the burden over to others arms of the Luftwaffe is good. But in terms of victory points or credits to air leaders stats, where bombers are far more valued than fighters, this has not been the case.

[Crackaces]

Soviet Rail:

Besides manpower, one of the Germans main targets was rail. Crackaces suggested that there might be a weakness around turn 53 in the 8MP game, and as the game changed commanders, teh Germans continued to focus on railyard capacity. The LW would target small railyards while the Wehrmacht would capture the big cities having rail yard capacity.

The spreadsheet graph below shows the fruits of this labor. The Germans calculate about a 65K total rail capacity 50,000 available not bombed yet ..

This means less units railing out of the Kessel, or to help out East Stalingrad, of move to or fro the North sectors. With the Soviets having less capacity to shift forces now is the time to put pressure on places they cannot respond ..

[Crackaces]

With rail reduced -- The Soviets are desperate to reorganize the units sitting in a deep cauldron. The LW interdiction is reducing the MP's of the units trying to reach the neck of a soon to be Kessel .. Nothing less than Interdiction He11 ....

In the lower right corner of the screen you can see the results of the Soviet operation "Titan". Soviet armor penetrated through a weak It brigade and caused havoc. Destroying over 150 transports, and wrecking repaired rail. This was combined with an all out Soviet air attack. It has a short term effect on operations -- but also likely shorten the game as these forces would be needed to stop the 1st Panzer army.

[Crackaces]

A look at the map below shows the big picture. !st Panzer army East of Stalingrad has a clear road toward the North threatening to cut off Saratov from the east. 2nd and 3rd Panzer Armies are creating a deep salient From Penza toward critical rail junctions. Thus my comment that yes the Soviets can destroy transports and rail -- but can they hold the 1st Panzer army? Operation Titan might prove to be a last gasp before the total collapse of Soviet forces.

[Elessar2]

I'm a bit confused-is the game over or not? I thought the Soviet side resigned a week ago.

[Telemecus]

ORIGINAL: Elessar2
I'm a bit confused-is the game over or not? I thought the Soviet side resigned a week ago.

Game ended on turn 65. The AAR is still on turn 64 - so hopefully Crackaces will be showing us the the end of turn 64 and turn 65 so we know how it ended?

[Crackaces]

ORIGINAL: Telemecus

ORIGINAL: Elessar2
I'm a bit confused-is the game over or not? I thought the Soviet side resigned a week ago.

Game ended on turn 65. The AAR is still on turn 64 - so hopefully Crackaces will be showing us the the end of turn 64 and turn 65 so we know how it ended?

Yes Game ends turn 65. I work for a living [8D].... right now I am doing my clinical shifts ... 8 days 12 hours a day. So ... it might take a couple of days to get done.

[Beria]

ORIGINAL: EwaldvonKleist

ORIGINAL: Armatrading
I have followed this for so long it is perhaps better called an epic saga than an AAR. I am going to be a bit tearful when there is no new development in 8MP to pick up on when I visit in future. Congrats!

Very true, and thanks to Crackaces and M60 for continuing the show&the AAR a bit longer!
This one is probably the best documented game that went beyond late 1941 so far...

I have to echo this - it has been like an old friend that I have known for a long while. It will be strange to think there is no more 8MP AAR in the future. This has been a goldmine of tips and tactics. Perhaps an index of these can be made so they do not just get lost over time. And also some quite funny gags. I think this is one of the most important AARs ever made of WitE - and perhaps should be one of the ones stickied for this section

[Crackaces]

The Italian are quite weak. In fact I have many instances of the Soviets handling them quite roughly. However .. with I think it is worth pointing out a battle where the Italian's under German leadership and a German SU added stopped the Soviet onslaught as a part of the Soviet operation "Titian" I am not sure how much leadership and SU's are appreciated in this game as opposed to a focus on "CV". Leadership doubled CV and the Soviets took a 25% penalty. One troubling sign is 2 Corps committed into this attack with SU's and only 12,259 men committed to the fray. Some of this is a hasty attack.

[Crackaces]

The beginning of the Soviet Operation Titan starts with routing the poor Italians .. note much different leadership die rolls and lack of SU's ..Katy bar the door ..

[Crackaces]

The Soviets went all out in the air for operation Titan .. in this air battle a little less than 20% of the bombers shot down .. a really good picture of the results of operation Titan is shown clearly ... a hold punched in the lines and disrupted rail ..

[EwaldvonKleist]

After the end of the game, the Axis shared the password for the saves with me, and following a look at some saves these were some impressions regarding the game I sent to Telemecus, who asked to post them here in the thread as well, which I will do.

I had a look over some turns. While playing as the Soviets, I constantly worried about encirclement of different scale, and playing some quick and dirty test runs, feel confirmed now. I think there were quite some opportunities for eincirclement, e.g. snow turns 1941 and the snow turns after the blizzard, to create 3-6 unit pockets, especially along the Moscow-Tula front.
Again I am inclined to think there are considerable differences in doctrine between your Axis team and me along the lines security&own preservation vs. aggressiveness&maximal enemy losses, long term management vs. full focus on operations and their short term needs, air force for many purposes vs. air force for support of operations, focus on penetrations and operations with added strategic goals vs. strong focus on encirclement (Vernichtungsgedanke), tendency to form coherent frontlines vs. liking to strip weak places to the utmost even if risky as Axis. Somewhat exaggerated, as high command I would have fired some people for "lack of aggressive spirit, and attempts to hide the lack of natural initiative behind administrative considerations", while I as a field commander would have been fired for "inability to consider other means to win than ground combat, taking unnecessary gambles, overt rashness under-appreciation of firepower" 😂
I do not claim to have the superior approach (it works better for me, otherwise I would have changed my mind already, but do not claim to be it a better final/general answer than yours), but it is interesting to note the differences.

Looks very much like British military theory/history vs. Prussian/German military theory/history as far as I have read about them so far 😂

I was surprised to see many motorised units on low TOE, especially manpower. Your Army looks very well fine-tuned (withdrawal TOEs, Airforce in general, AP handling, city occupation requirements etc.), but this is a point I would handle very different, details are outlined in the "total war" guide, the key point being to create a small (<10k) surplus of manpower so motorised untis fill up even if not on refit. Saving vehicles is an argument but I would rather send some level bombers to reserve than starve the motorised units for manpower.


It was not very nice to demote Ewald von Kleist to a Corps commander. I hope it was no punishment for a failure. But to be honest I would probably have done the same eventually, best commanders generally are for corps, not armies.

The fortified zones. IMO building forts for blizzard is a waste. They have low construction value, low morale and XP and will as such take huge attrition losses. Their firepower bonus, if existant at all, is neglible IMO. I see the value as an experiment, but not as a measure to win the war.

Manpower management: Generally speaking, a well managed army does not need refit mode to fill up the key units. Refit mode is to send scarce special resources (AFVs) to the very best units.

Not sure if it was for supply-saving reasons, but usage of construction points was not always optimal, especially prior to the blizzard. 55 const. value is the most that can be used per hexagon, if a units has more than that, split it up to cover more hexagons. Especially the Tula area would have benefited of better fortifications in the blizzard.
Regards

[Telemecus]

ORIGINAL: EwaldvonKleist
I would have fired some people for "lack of aggressive spirit, and attempts to hide the lack of natural initiative behind administrative considerations", while I as a field commander would have been fired for "inability to consider other means to win than ground combat, taking unnecessary gambles, overt rashness under-appreciation of firepower"

Sadly the team protocol prohibited my having the other players shot at dawn. A handicap that should be removed in future team games [:)]

ORIGINAL: EwaldvonKleist
Looks very much like British military theory/history vs. Prussian/German military theory/history

Chatting with EvK on this I think early on there was still a separate Polish/French/Canadian military doctrine for the area covered by each commander. Only later, and particularly when the use of Discord started, did some sort of team doctrine emerge. And emerge is the right word, it was not top down and never written down. But as ground commanders felt at ease helping each other in others peoples areas, their own ideas spread. So it was not unusual for timmyab, who was our mud warfare expert to be making suggestions for the whole front during the mud periods. And Crackaces research on message level 7 led to new ideas on how to manage SUs. Neb regiments for example went from SUs anyone could call up anytime, to valued SUs in short supply that had to be managed centrally like super heavy artillery.

ORIGINAL: EwaldvonKleist
Saving vehicles is an argument but I would rather send some level bombers to reserve than starve the motorised units for manpower.

Here though I dsagree, as pretty much the whole airforce was in reserve when there was a vehicle deficit. The air force only came out when we were in vehicle surplus. I assume you mean vehicles here rather than manpower?

ORIGINAL: EwaldvonKleist
The fortified zones. IMO building forts for blizzard is a waste. They have low construction value, low morale and XP and will as such take huge attrition losses. Their firepower bonus, if existant at all, is neglible IMO.

Ironically it was an experiment we never actually got to test. The ones set up to test the special bonus to artillery fire were never attacked!
In some cases there were forts only to preserve a fortificaton and not build on it - so fort is still preferable to using a combat unit.

ORIGINAL: EwaldvonKleist
Not sure if it was for supply-saving reasons, but usage of construction points was not always optimal, especially prior to the blizzard. 55 const. value is the most that can be used per hexagon, if a units has more than that, split it up to cover more hexagons. Especially the Tula area would have benefited of better fortifications in the blizzard.

This one I really beat myself up on as had not given any thought to it during the team game up to turn 54. It is a major blemish on my reputation as a femto-manager [:D]

[Crackaces]

I think it is worth mentioning that the Soviets went all out with air power in their turn. The figure below shows just how effective armor rolling over airbases (transport losses) combined with a strong air commitment. Personally I think the Soviet Air force should be nerfed as it is way too powerful [:'(]

In all seriousness, M60 started using much better tactics and operational control of the air force starting with turn 55.

[Crackaces]

I had a look over some turns. While playing as the Soviets, I constantly worried about encirclement of different scale, and playing some quick and dirty test runs, feel confirmed now. I think there were quite some opportunities for [encirclement], e.g. snow turns 1941 and the snow turns after the blizzard, to create 3-6 unit pockets, especially along the Moscow-Tula front.

PacMan vs deep thrust was a discussion Tele and I would have almost daily during the 8MP turns I played in .. right up to turn 55. On one had we smash units now and bite off the Soviets in chunks. On the other hand you see how the strategy of a constant push toward outrunning the ability of the Soviets to dig. On turn 65 this strategy paid off .. so I did surround units at times when the price was right . like bothersome Cav units ... and turn 63 saw masses of Soviets surrounded .. but in all I stuck to a strategy of punching toward operational and strategic objectives rather than tactical objectives with strategic outcomes.

[Telemecus]

ORIGINAL: Crackaces

I had a look over some turns. While playing as the Soviets, I constantly worried about encirclement of different scale, and playing some quick and dirty test runs, feel confirmed now. I think there were quite some opportunities for [encirclement], e.g. snow turns 1941 and the snow turns after the blizzard, to create 3-6 unit pockets, especially along the Moscow-Tula front.

PacMan vs deep thrust was a discussion Tele and I would have almost daily during the 8MP turns I played in .. right up to turn 55. On one had we smash units now and bite off the Soviets in chunks. On the other hand you see how the strategy of a constant push toward outrunning the ability of the Soviets to dig. On turn 65 this strategy paid off .. so I did surround units at times when the price was right . like bothersome Cav units ... and turn 63 saw masses of Soviets surrounded .. but in all I stuck to a strategy of punching toward operational and strategic objectives rather than tactical objectives with strategic outcomes.

Oh and this brings up a good point. We started the Operation Treppenwitz summer 1942 plan a long time ago - before even the 1941 blizzard had started. And the planning made for the Blizzard by timmyab then started with were we wanted to get to start Operation Treppenwitz in 1942 and so on backwards. The good thing about this was the whole team knew absolutely what we were going to do and how we were going to for many months - and were quite geed up by it. But it does mean at the moment you are missing the picture of the destination. So some moves in isolation will not be as clear as when you see the plan.

I have discussed with Crackaces writing several posts about Operation Treppenwitz. Partly to explain how we made it as a team and why we made the decisions we did as well as show what the finalised plan was. We passed it on to Crackaces from turn 55 for him to use or ignore as he saw fit. I hope Crackaces indeed can give us the feedback on it afterwards. It did mean though we did not present it with the other parts of the team game up to turn 54. But that will be a pleasure for AAR readers coming up!