To Saratov! (And back?): A beginner AAR (Stamb vs Lovenought)

[Lovenought]

Hello. I've been playing a 41 Campaign (No Early End) vs someone called Stamb. Since we are both new to WITE2, I thought it would be interesting to record what happens. Show what it's like with two rookies, not super-genius WITE-1 veterans. We have already reached the Winter Offensive, so it feels like a good time to start writing (since anything from before Winter has little relevance to the current situation).

Note: since i'm writing with a delay, I don't mind if my opponent reads this. I think having the perspective of two new players might generate some really useful insights into how we think.

Also since i'm recapping a few months of game time, I'll present the progress in the Army Group North/Centre/South sectors in turn, rather than bouncing back and forth constantly. (I actually do my turns South to North, because i'm a lunatic. So i'll start with Ukraine.)

(Also, PS: I'm not sure what to do about image sizes. Are these all too large? I could go back and try to re-size things if people think it looks bad. Feel free to give feedback on the formatting of everything)

UKRAINE

Herr Stamb opens with a pretty standard, professionally executed 1st Turn. Enormous VVS losses and equally enormous pockets. The only fumble at start was the obligatory heavy casualties to some unescorted deep penetration raids, and losses to some naval bombers. I believe he was following that 1st turn bombing guide someone made. Nearly 4,000 aircraft destroyed on the ground!




However, if I remember correctly, I still had a fair scattering of completely intact squadrons, because their turn to be hammered never arrived due to some German squadrons getting shredded over Kiev and such before they could do their missions closer to the front. All intact squadrons were moved back. At this stage I was really confused about best practice with decimated squadrons. Some were moved to the reserve, some were just shuffled vaguely into the interior.

Over the next few turns, I am able to withdraw and consolidate most of Southwestern Front's powerful assets in good order. A powerful grouping of forces was left positioned forwards, hoping to delay and counter-attack, while I tried to rebuild the frontline around Kiev. However, this grouping was nearly encircled, and barely escaped. They managed to run for their lives and regroup around Kiev, which now had a pretty decent amount of forces defending it. By this time (Turn 3), the Germans were also starting to menace the northern flank of Kiev, but I was cautiously optimistic about my chances holding up there. I was intending to establish a defence in depth along these multiple river lines.



My optimism was instantly proven wrong as the Germans busted through and nearly encircled Kiev by Turn 5, helped along by a supply crisis as I had not yet figured out the logistical system. (and by "figured out", I mean "just put everything near the front on 4, that works well enough I guess").



Luckily, I my opponent didn't cut the rail lines, so I was able to rail out the units with low movement speed, and have faster units just run for their lives. Kiev was mostly abandoned, due to the fact it had almost no supplies in it's depot and so couldn't be held for a siege. I also launched suicidal frontal attacks against the pincers of the pocket. They were never intended to win, I simply wanted to decrease their movement potential next turn so they couldn't chase down fleeing units. I'm not really sure how well that worked, maybe my opponent can say if he remembers. At this point I wasn't aware that you needed to have certain Final Odds to a battle to take off enemy CPP and movement points and such, so a lot of these attacks were probably a pointless waste of human life.

But that's historical! So it's all good.

Meanwhile, in the south, I retreated with little firm resistance (especially since the northern flank of Southern Front kept getting vaporised as SouthWestern Front fought for it's life). Odessa was mostly abandoned except for one or two units. This was not, in fact, an attempt to be gamey, since I wasn't even aware at this time that a Ukraine Minimal strategy was the meta. Rather, it was an attempt by me to be clever.

You see, my thinking was: "Well, Odessa is mostly useful as a port, right? And the only Axis export port on the Black Sea is Constanta. So what if I just...blew up....Constanta.". Therefore, Odessa is worthless! Heavy Bombers would simply be stockpiled in Crimea until the Axis fighters advance forwards enough out of Romania. Then, boom!

See, this is why I was picked for STAVKA. My Proletarian, everyman pragmatism is something you would never find in any academy. (Spoilers: This plan did not work at all)

As a consequence of all this, by turn 6 the Germans and their comic relief were well on their way to Crimea. However, Southern Front had been able to build a strong defensive line in Central Ukraine, linking up with the reformed SouthWestern Front in Northern Ukraine. I tried to send them some reinforcements here and there, but Ukraine by this point was getting a relatively low priority for reinforcements, due to the threat I felt around Moscow and Leningrad at the time. I was determined to dig in and fight for Kharkov as long as I could, however, given it's huge tank factories. So that bumped up the priority of the entire Ukrainian theatre, and attracted more armoured forces especially.





On Turn 6, my masterful bombing offensive against Constanta finally launched. Hundreds of bombers took off, and after a few days for the Luftwaffe to wake up...they basically all died! Literally 100% of the aircraft in this raid for instance! So the less said about this all the better.



Moving on, the defences in Ukraine held steady for a number of turns. The Axis forced a crossing in Southern Ukraine, but I retreated in good order to new positions, and also began fortifying Crimea:



Things only really exploded on Turn 11, when a major offensive by Army Group South shattered my defences again. Kharkov and the unspellable Ukrainian river cities were placed under seige, and I retreated towards Rostov (with a delaying action around Stalino). Some forces escaped the pockets, many did not. Supply problems meant that most of these cities had very low supplies. (I turned everything on the front to refit one turn before the Axis attacked, and drained everything. Woops!)




I retreated to new positions a little further back. Stalino was cut off and sieged, but the Axis didn't pursue me into Rostov. Meanwhile, Crimea stood firm, and the Germans never made it past the chokepoints. The final Axis offensive of the year in Ukraine began on October 5th (Turn 16), as mud was setting in across the map. However, I had a gut feeling he was about to attack, so I deformed my forces into a sort of defensive hedgehog one turn before. As a consequence, when the Axis offensive hit, he didn't find a contigous front line to encircle, and I was able to retreat to the Rostov river line with only moderate losses. I had to stay behind the south near Taganrog however, because there was a large aircraft factory that was about to be evacuated, and it would save a lot of production if they didn't evacuate early. I was able to hold out in the area long enough, but then these divisions were obliterated the second the factories had safely left on schedule. Heroic!





The last weeks of the year before Heavy Mud shut everything down were a series of back and forth skirmishes above Rostov. Exhausted German units were vulnerable to counter-attack, but my own units were vulnerable to counter-counter-attacks in turn. The two weak sides battled back and forth half-heartedly until Mud stopped everything, and we both started preparing for the winter battles. Rostov was never seriously threatened, despite how close he was.

CONCLUSIONS

So, as a beginner, here are my thoughts on the whole topic of Ukraine. (Don't take this as authoritative at all, just my thoughts)

1. I genuinely did try to defend Ukraine. Despite that, I got vaporised over and over again. I have a suspicion that the ever increasing time gap between Army Group South offensives was more due to their logistical problems than my own resistance. I was very lucky Stamb had trouble closing all these pockets completely. Even with so many men escaping, I still had to send new reinforcements down constantly to help rebuild solid defensive lines.

2. However, I did give the South the lowest priority of any of the 3 sectors. This was before I even read any of the stuff on these forums about that, so it was entirely my own thought processes. My basic thinking was: "wow, the situation is terrible. I am being destroyed everywhere. I need to think what is really important, and focus on those first.". So I decided that the Moscow NSS was the most critical point on the map, since without it, any offensives in 1943-44-45 would be extremely difficult, because all the supply would be coming from Tatarstan and the Urals. And then Leningrad, because it was doing extremely poorly and was about to fall.

3. Could I have kept Ukraine? I feel like the answer is "maybe". My defence was so brittle and got smashed over and over because I wasn't able to build a true defence in depth due to lack of units. It was only one or two lines deep in most places most of the time. As I demonstrated in other places (like the plains near Moscow, which you'll see in a bit), the Red Army in 1941 is actually capable of blunting Axis offensives on clear ground, then punching back. They just need a huge number of divisions to do it.
Would I ever decide to dump the majority of my armoured forces in Ukraine, so I can have an epic battle of destiny with Army Group South?

No. I don't think so. Then they would break through in the flat terrain near Moscow, which is infinitely more important than Ukraine.

4. Hitler my dude, you do not need to worry about Romania or Ploesti. The unsinkable aircraft carrier that will destroy all your oil if not taken is a myth!
Crimea has held out completely, but isn't actually that useful, given that any raids into Romania will be completely and totally exterminated to the last plane by a few German squadrons. I've spent the last few months (even before winter) just launching human wave attacks to try and push back out of the peninsula, while the Axis just holds me back like a flailing child. Embarassing!

But the victory points are nice to have, and it gives me a high-supply area in Ukraine to launch attacks and burn up the precious Axis supply that would otherwise go forwards to Rostov (I assume that's what's happening, anyway! Hopefully!)

So, in conclusion: I feel like the average Newbie who doesn't "learn the meta" is still likely to fall into a South Last strategy, even if they don't abandon it. Just because it feels rational. But by defending half-way instead of abandoning it, they will still lose a lot of men, especially if their enemy can seal up encirclements. And then end up at Rostov at the end of the year anyway. But if you do defend the south, Southern Front should eventually get fat enough that it can actually hold Crimea once it retreats into it. (Especially if you have built a few Fortified Zones well ahead of time, like I did.)

Although perhaps my opponent simply chose to ignore Crimea to focus on a lunge for Rostov, and he could have taken it if he wanted to. I'm not sure on that part, hopefully he can answer.

Next up: The Moscow campaign, and then Leningrad (which I actually lost this game! Spoilers!)

[Lovenought]

MOSCOW

The Army Group Center offensive is devastating as usual. Giant pockets, oh no Minsk, and so on and so on. It always happens the same, so i'll just fast forward and merely mention that I did manage to break the pocket in a few places, but very few men escaped.

I mustered my defence of Smolensk and the other adjacent regions, and turned the city into a City Fort. It is here that I ran into one of my more serious failures of this campaign: I did not know how to prioritise the wilderness areas between major locations, like the woods around Velikye Luki. I feel like I made a major mistake, trying to keep a solid frontline across most of the map, rather than focusing my forces in a few critical sectors. This may have contributed to how far I had to retreat.



The Axis swiftly advanced, threatening to encircle the city. My intention was to hold on as long as I could, then retreat. Most forces would retreat, while those closest to the city would fold inside to defend it. A brave man called Vladimir Lvov was voluntarily forced to take command of Fortress Smolensk before it was cut off. His sacrifice will never be forgotten! (Don't worry, he died in 1942 anyway IRL. His headquarters got bombed in Crimea)


You can really feel the expression of heroic resolution in this guy's face. Or...maybe that's crushing resignation


His deputy looks similarly happy to be here:

And speaking of Generals, it was about this time that I realised Dimitry Pavlov was still alive, despite his 1 Political Score and the obliteration of Western Front. I kept an eye on him every turn after that, and a few weeks later Stalin just shot him for no reason at all. I find this really funny for some reason. There wasn't even a single battle under his command that turn!

But anyway, back to the war: Smolensk was abandoned on Turn 4, and taken by storm on Turn 6. I had no idea what to expect from a City Fort, and I think my opponent didn't either. I was hoping it would hold out longer. But at least we killed a lot of Germans!



Meanwhile, my own focus turned to the defence of Moscow itself. Apart from a few successful counter-attacks on exposed Axis units, things calmed down for a while in the Moscow region, as my opponent prepared for his offensive on Moscow itself. His forces moved up carefully, and I started to get a hunch that he would try flanking the city in some kind of pincer. At first this was a pure gut feeling, since it is what I would do, so I started gradually weakening the central front to divert forces to the flanks, as well as reinforcing the flanks of Moscow as a higher priority. But then I got ever increasing confirmation via recon and other signs, so the reinforcing of wings of Moscow became my primary focus for the entire eastern front, especially the plains below Tula (although disasters in the south and north did force me to divert troops away from this buildup).



Huge armoured forces kept constantly flowing into this region, and I was able to gradually build a defence in depth to absorb the enemy attack, Eventually, the enemy did attack, with very powerful thrusts blasting their way towards the plains under Tula, and up through the forests towards Rhzev.




Over the course of a few turns, however, both of these pincers were exhausted. The northern thrust was stopped by sheer weight of bodies before Rhzev, and the eastern thrust was exhausted by a slow defensive battle, as I alternated between a pure defence in depth, and slowly giving ground. My units were getting vaporised on the open plains, but they exhausted the Germans, and bought time for more and more reinforcements to reach the area.




After a few turns of this defending, the battle degenerated into a brutal slugging match as I launched counter-attacks. Well rested units that had been ignored on the central front were able to break through and sally into the axis rear, while powerful armoured and infantry concentrations that had arrived over the pst few turns were able to heavily hit Axis armoured units, which were totally exhausted and had very low CPP. After this, the next few turns were enormous back-and-forth battles between the exhausted Axis and my un-skilled groupings. I would deform back into a defensive and dispersed posture after each attack, to try and minimise the damage from enemy counter-counter-attacks and encirclments. Many thousands of tanks were lost, but the momentum on his side was almost totally lost at this point. His units had been simply pushed too far, I think. Panzers can't blast through row after row of enemy units and still be in fighting shape. Multiple axis units were routed, although none were held long enough to surrender. The same thing happened beneath Rzhev: The Germans reached the outskirts of the city, but were totally exhausted and vulnerable to counter-attack by my powerful groupings.




Also, for reference, this was all happening at the same time as I was losing the last of central Ukraine to the Axis. It goes back to what I said at the end of my first post: I could have made Ukraine a lot stronger, but it seems really silly to consider doing that while these Epic Battles of Destiny are happening around Leningrad and Moscow. Dne-something and Zap-something are just not that important. Even Kharkov is less important. The mobile reserves and extra infantry needed to create a solidly deep defence just were not available down there, because of what I needed up here.



Positional fighting continued on the Moscow front for a few more weeks before everything settled down. Under Tula, we eventually both withdrew in fear of the other. I was still afraid of a renewed push, so kept very powerful forces in the second rank, and began partially building and manning the final defensive line outside the city. I pulled back a little west of Vyazma because I was worried that the Germans would strike south from Rhzev and encircle my forward positions. However, the Axis then managed to make Vyazma untenable, so I left the city to be besieged and withdrew to shorten my lines. The Axis never attacked in the center or flanks again after this, and everything basically settled down to wait for winter. I launched periodic raids on his front-line units with my own fully rested ones, periodically pushing them back. But nothing serious happened.



Here is the global situation on October 5th (turn 16), after the Battle of Tula had concluded, and he had pulled back to prepare for winter. You can clearly see the enormous weight Moscow (and more importantly, it's critical NSS) had taken in the war.



And yes, you see that right. Leningrad is just gone! By October! I'll get to that master stroke next time.

[Lovenought]

Leningrad

The German offensive on our integral and entirely loyal Baltic comrades began like a hammer blow, as always. The Germans took a beachhead over the Dauguva and Dvina, and cut off our ports by air. This was the only bright spot in the north on turn one, as the Germans took relatively heavy losses. I think this was due to a bug where naval strike missions always take place first, so it messed with my opponent's careful air plans.




I was able to break open the pockets here as well, although most units were eventually destroyed over the next few turns anyway. The axis rushed forwards with incredible speed, while I mustered a weak defence of Pskov. However, consistent pressure and fear of destruction meant I was forced to withdraw in good order to new defences by turn 4, keeping all my units intact.




I continued to reinforce, hoping to hold here for a time. I felt like I had an increasingly strong defence, but the supply situation was extremely bad due to me not knowing how to work the system properly, so when the Axis attacked, my units were weaker than they should have been. (Although he probably could have smashed me up anyway, I think). On turn 5 the enemy smashed through, and I was forced to begin a panicked retreat to save my forces from destruction.



Thankfully, a great number of forces were able to rail or run away to safety, although many were also destroyed. Over the ensuing turns, I panicked and dumped enormous forces into the area in a desperate attempt to slow the enemy down, which further sapped strength that would have gone to Ukraine. Units were deployed from the reserve at 50% strength purely so they would burn axis CPP and delay them for even a single turn, which would allow new units to deploy and sacrifice themselves in turn. For reference, Turn 5 is also when the Kiev Pocket was nearly formed, and South-Western Front had to sprint for it's life.

Sidenote, but I actually thought of abandoning Leningrad on Turn 5, so few reinforcements were sent during this critical turn. When I noticed how slowly the axis had advanced the next turn, I realised there was still time to muster a defence of Lake Ladoga, so I started throwing everything I had up here to drag out the death of the city as long as I could.

The Axis methodically blasted their way to the Ladoga ports, mincing up my formations hastily thrown in their way. The air war for the lake was over before it truly began, as I had not made the enormous preparations which would have been necessary to redeploy the entire VVS up north to contest the skies. I managed to get a fair few kills though, and keep it open for one or two turns here and there. I experimented a lot with air superiority ambushes from a higher altitude. Apparently my opponent suffered a lot here, although I don't remember the air war being that intense. By turn 10 the final land access to the city had been cut. This was bad, since my depo in Leningrad only had 36% supply, with 15% in Osinovets. As I was unable to keep open the sea-lanes, the city began to go into isolation. I would be able to break the Isolation with air supply a few times once the new patch came out to make them interceptable, but I was never able to correct the rapid and catastrophic drop of supplies turn by turn.





The lower two Ladoga ports fell by turn 11, but the Axis never bothered capturing the final port. It was cut off from the rail network anyway, and the Soviets had clearly lost the battle for air superiority over Lake Ladoga. Any air missions would have to be flown from the anemic air bases around Tihkvin, or else burn up precious supplies inside the city. Neither were viable. Instead, the Axis rested a bit, then began to blast their way into the city, while I tried to run air supply from the Valdai region. On turn 14, the German infantry got across the Neva, and resistance within the city began to rapidly disintegrate due to a lack of supply and units reaching a critically low strength due to attrition, defeats, and a lack of replacements. Leningrad at this point had 1% freight, or 892 tons. The Leningrad Front was obliterated two weeks later, with Nikolai Vatutin being flown out just in time. About 100k men were lost in the final surrender, although many more had been killed or captured before then. After this, not much happened in the north before mud stalled everything, and then winter came.




And now we have reached the end, for now. Everything froze for a month or so, before winter began and I launched my counter-offensive in late November. But since that phase of the war is still ongoing, I will recap the Winter Offensive once it has been completed.

[Lovenought]

oh, and because I forgot: Here are the air and land casualties on November 2nd (Turn 20), right as we transitioned into the winter phase:




OOB screen from November 9th (Turn 21):

[Stamb]

Someone called Stamb here [:D]

I would like to add few comments to this well written AAR.

House rules: (they were modified as patches fix/break game mechanics, we were updating to the latest beta all of the time)
No Merging in Pockets
No air supply during night (there was no air supply to a pockets before, as at was not intercepted at all, it helped me with a Leningrad for a couple of turns, later air supply was fixed and Leningrad was supplied via air)
No motorization.
No paratrooper drops.
No ground attack because auto-intercept is broken. Bomb City is fine since auto-intercept works for that.

I am new to a war in the west/east/all other series. I played one game vs Soviet AI at 100% to a mid `42 and I was doing pretty well mostly due to an arty patches and very passive AI.
And I decided to accept a challenge from Lovenought, who was looking for a an Axis player.

We started our game with 1.02.11, if I recall correctly, and it was a cold shower for me in comparison to a previous patches. (IMHO it was overreaction to an arty patches, and only few patches later things were corrected to a more reasonable state).

Now I will leave few comments to what Lovenought wrote:

My optimism was instantly proven wrong as the Germans busted through and nearly encircled Kiev by Turn 5, helped along by a supply crisis as I had not yet figured out the logistical system. (and by "figured out", I mean "just put everything near the front on 4, that works well enough I guess").

I can not believe this every time I read it in multiple AARs. All of you are liars . It can not be supply heaven for a Soviets, so unhistorical...

I also launched suicidal frontal attacks against the pincers of the pocket. They were never intended to win, I simply wanted to decrease their movement potential next turn so they couldn't chase down fleeing units. I'm not really sure how well that worked, maybe my opponent can say if he remembers.

If I remember it - you actually won one or two battles against pazners. And if panzer divisions has to retreat - it never ends good for them

This was not, in fact, an attempt to be gamey, since I wasn't even aware at this time that a Ukraine Minimal strategy was the meta. Rather, it was an attempt by me to be clever.

At that moment there was no AAR from RedJohn about this strategy. Well played by figuring this out by yourself Especially as it is your first pvp game in war in the east 2. Well done.

Rostov was never seriously threatened, despite how close he was.

At some point I thought that I might go for Rostov, but knowing that there is a bug with an urban combat I decided that it is not worth to risk with brave German soldiers and exhaust them even more, especially before a harsh winter

Although perhaps my opponent simply chose to ignore Crimea to focus on a lunge for Rostov, and he could have taken it if he wanted to. I'm not sure on that part, hopefully he can answer.

I was not expecting lvl 3 fortifications zones in a hexes that can be attacked from 1 side from a ground or from multiple sides but via major rivers. You played like a pro and not like a wite 2 newbie

It is not shown on a screenshots but there was Amphibious HQ in Crimea for additional assistance for a ground forces. I had to open manual and read, wtf is that HQ in a water. Well played with it and fortified zones, I never saw this in any other AARs!

As a result I was not ready for this, I was expecting that I have enough forces to go into Crimea.

---------------------------------

South is covered very good, nothing to add.

In a Center I was chasing Soviets too much and as a result when I actually face them - I could not push them. I think patch .11 played a huge role there. After battle for Smolensk I had lot of divisions with low TOE, so I refit them for couple of turns and restore CPP up to a maximum. Still, when I face my opponent with fully rested ID with 100% CPP and battle ends with 1:X hold - there is not much I can do about. That is why I was not trying to push heavily towards Rzev/Kalinin. There was no sense at it. Soviets were able to stop me where they want.

Near Tula I made few mistakes, once again, chasing Soviets, and as a result my divisions were isolated and 1 or 2 divisions routed.

I was surprised that my panzers are actually so bad. Even when they are rested - they take tremendous losses. If only I can swap them for motorized one. Even 3 panzer for 2 motorized is fine.

In the North I was lucky enough to break through Stara Russa at turn 5 or 6, otherwise I would stuck in the mud for ever. Fall of Leningrad really helps, as I could move some of my infantry divisions to other parts of a front, and Panzers went to a France, which allowed me to pull few ID ahead of time. We are playing with unlocked TBs.


Right now we are in the middle/end of December.
Still waiting for a Finns! Game please, I need them!
Things are going even better that I thought. For now.
Hopefully I will survive this winter without a need of saying Hitler kaput!

[Stamb]

Ah, forgot to add.

Lovenought is defending very well. He is using terrain in such a manner that I have a doubts if it is not m60, having fun of beating a newbies
I was not expecting this from a player that plays wite 2 for the first time.

[Lovenought]

ORIGINAL: Stamb

Ah, forgot to add.

Lovenought is defending very well. He is using terrain in such a manner that I have a doubts if it is not m60, having fun of beating a newbies
I was not expecting this from a player that plays wite 2 for the first time.

It's funny you say that, because I actually was very uncertain about terrain for the first half of the game. Like I mentioned for example, after the Leningrad breakthrough I despaired and thought you would be able to rush for Ladoga in one or two turns while I still had nothing to put ahead of you. I was really surprised how much the terrible terrain can slow down the Germans even without Soviet resistance. And I expected you to advance much quicker in the gaps between important locations, like the Velikye Luki region or the southern swamps. So I had forces sitting there for many turns just waiting for you to arrive, while critical battles were happening elsewhere.

[Beethoven1]

Nice AAR. Your experience and conclusions seem similar to my own. In my first game as Soviets, I tried to defend the south. However, I did give it less priority than the north/center, but I was nevertheless genuinely trying to defend it as well as I could, and I had a continuous line on the Dnieper, deployed all the turn 4 reserves to the south, etc. However, it didn't take long before I started to realize that was a mistake, at least in terms of the game mechanics and player incentives.

ORIGINAL: Lovenought

The Axis swiftly advanced, threatening to encircle the city. My intention was to hold on as long as I could, then retreat. Most forces would retreat, while those closest to the city would fold inside to defend it. A brave man called Vladimir Lvov was voluntarily forced to take command of Fortress Smolensk before it was cut off. His sacrifice will never be forgotten! (Don't worry, he died in 1942 anyway IRL. His headquarters got bombed in Crimea)


You can really feel the expression of heroic resolution in this guy's face. Or...maybe that's crushing resignation


His deputy looks similarly happy to be here:

I LOLed. Well done.

[tm1]

Leningrad captured in Oct !!!!!.


I made a surprise capture of the city in my second game in Nov I think, but that was just a fluke.

[loki100]

Nice overview and very useful summary of the game, do hope it carries on (can't see any reason for the axis player to bail out given they have Leningrad)

[Stamb]

It reminds me your game vs Steve. Exception is that I have Leningrad.
More info will come in the following days.

[Stamb]

I wanted Lovenought to post his thoughts first and then to make my post, but he can not do it at the moment. So i will start.

I survived first winter. Some hexes were lost to a Soviets. But nothing critical. No cities lost. Enemies were not close to a Kursk and Orel which I was expecting to lose in the winter.
Before a winter I did my best to refit units and it played a crucial role, alongside with bugged air transport that was not suffering ops losses when flying in a bad weather (but it was suffering interception far from a front, which equalizes things a bit). I had 60-70+ TOE ID to the start of harsh winter. And in the north they were at 90-100% TOE. Also I was able to rotate and refit beaten units during a winter.
Only to the end of the winter there was a breakthrough near Staraya Russa, but it is under control with 3 ID blocking any further advance.
To my surprise I did not see any guard division from a Soviet side.

But despite very good winter, for the Axis, I decided that there is no sense to continue this game and there are a couple of reasons/game issues for that.

1. Huge Soviet OOB. They have 2-3 units in every hex that I might be interested in. Plus multiple units in reserve mode in the back.

They can afford to retreat from the south without any consequences for them, as loss of a cities with VPs, even with a time bonus, is affordable for them. Especially when they can reinforce center/north with divisions from a south.

Armament/heavy industry/resources factories? Pff. None of that is relevant for a Soviets. They will produce the same amount of armaments no matter what, as they have huge stocks of needed armament points/HI/resources in a pool.

2. 50% CPP lose in any attack.

3. Insane supply capabilities that allow Soviets to use supply priority 4 from a start of the game without any major or even minor strain for a trucks. As a result their CV is higher.
It is absolutely ahistorical that they have excess of ammo/supply. I could understand if they have few armies at supply priority 3 or 4 when they prepare for the winter offensive, but I can not understand how they can have all armies at 4 for the entire `41 and `42. It's a joke.

4. Absolutely useless Axis allies (except of Finns, and few units with non 45 base morale). Even when attacking weak Soviets units, like cavalry divisions they take horrendous losses and disruption.

In defense they are also useless, same as in attack. Easy farm for a guard status if axis player is not hiding them somewhere in a back.

Examples https://www.matrixgames.com/forums/view ... 7#p4958697 and on the next page in same topic.
This is a second topic about useless allies in additional to another one with multiple pages.

5. I was not affected by it, but if I continue a game - I would. Combat in urban hexes.
https://www.matrixgames.com/forums/view ... 7#p4940007

I can understand that from a game engine point of view it is fine. But from a player's perspective it is absolutely unacceptable. Especially when most of a VPs are located in such hexes.
Battles in heavy urban, which is double dense, while urban is just dense, produces expected results. I think it should be №1 priority for a fix, as it is critical issue when you lose VPs while you would hold them with ease, if the system works correctly.

---------------------------------------------------------

Now there are some minor issues with a game:
1. Lack of control over freight distribution.
1.1 No way to keep stockpiled freight in depots that are on a front AND which are < supply priority 4.
Explained here:
https://www.matrixgames.com/forums/view ... 9&t=379557
1.2 No control (without losing super depot status and as a result - valuable freight) of freight distribution between super depots. Explained here:
https://www.matrixgames.com/forums/view ... 9&t=379558


2. Inability to understand what happened with CV values. Is it failed rolls/bug/bad random?
For example 2.3k CV in defense can drop to 119.
https://imgur.com/dZ5vh1X
City fort with fortifications played a big role in it and probably Soviets failed a couple of rolls. Or not couple? Nobody knows.
Same applies for an attack. You can not know what to expect from your units.
Did you miss few rolls? Which one? Initiative? Morale? Mech? Infantry? Was it bad luck?
If it was, then maybe in the next attack your units will perform better.
But as a player I have no idea why my CV dropped. Or increased. And I do not know if I have to look for a new leader or this one is fine, just random was not on my side.
Suggestion for leader rolls:
https://www.matrixgames.com/forums/view ... 9&t=380200

Also it would be nice to know how much, to CV, fortifications were contributing, as units that are forced to retreat from fortifications lose most of their CV and who knows which comes from a failed rolls and which from the fortifications.

3. Air war.
From patch to patch it goes back and forth. From no interception of air transport to interceptions back in 10-15 hexes behind a frontline. From useless GS, to too overpowered for VVS?

Some may say that stick to one patch and play it. But the thing is that each patch contains different fixes. And I can not select which fixes to apply and which not. And it is obvious that as a player I want to play with all of the fixes.

4. VP system that forces Axis NOT to take cities that can be lost in counter attacks as that will give maximum time bonus for a Soviet player. It was suggested by somebody that VP bonus should be allocated to a side that has initiative.


This minor issues did not play a big role in my decision to call Axis kaputt.

------------------------------------------

But a major one did.

Point 1. Huge Soviet OOB
(Also it is worth adding that my opponent decided to come close to my divisions even before harsh winter with heavy snow and as a result his units, and especially armored one, took pretty big losses.
Otherwise his OOB would be even bigger.)
(In addition it was suggested somewhere to set AI morale at 120 when it is on the offensive, to compensate lack of a pockets. The funny thing is that Soviet player can retreat and lose only few units in a pockets or even avoid pockets at all, exception to this are pockets that were formed at turn 1, which already indicates that there should be pockets to have any chances of a balanced game later on)

and point 2. (50% CPP lose in any attack)
leads to the situation that even when I match Soviet men number in a battle - I am not guaranteed to push them out of clear hexes with fortifications lvl 2 + multiple reserve activations.

Even if I win that battles - Soviets retreat to a positions with another fortifications that were made by a units in a back in reserve mode. So I have to push them again.
But because of 50% CPP loses my units are almost useless. And it would be only half of a problem. The main problem is that I pushed only 1 hex. And I had to bring multiple divisions to do this. And this is only for 1 battle.

I still have same stacks of a Soviets to the left and to the right that creates huge ZOC. I also need to push them. But my units already participated in a battle. Their CPP is divided by 2 alongside with their CV. I can not attack with the same units as they have no any meaningful CV. And obviously I can not match Soviet men quantity in each battle as I don't have enough divisions for that. Add to this absolutely useless Axis allies from point 4.



All of this leads to a no point that there is no sense of trying to do summer offensive. At all. In a best case I could hope to take 3-4 hexes closer to a Moscow and that is it.

And if I would like to play for a victory then it would be the best to push enemy for a few hexes out a Vyazma and stop. Just to preserve my manpower.

The only area where I would focus really hard is Crimea. Still not sure if I would be able to pass via that hexes that can be attacked from 1 side of the land. Or in a best case via 1 hex from the land and a major river. Maybe with SS divisions and best SUs I could.
But that is. Crimea and front in the same position where I am. After that clicking next next next turn until initiative switches and Soviets start their road to Berlin.

It is not only ahistrocial but most importantly not fun at all. Maybe I could win with my HWM which is 612 without Sevastopol.
But it would be super boring. Thus I decided to give up than suffer this.

---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

This is my first experience playing vs human.

Did I enjoy this game? Yes and no.
I enjoy playing vs human. It is completely other game in comparison to an AI. And it is very interesting to play vs human when you know that your opponent is also trying to do his best in order to stop you. And has his own short and long term plans.

Did I enjoy playing as an Axis? Absolutely not.
Once I saw that I am not going to inflict any serious damage to OOB - I was ready to stop this game. I think it was turn 10-12. I have that chat somewhere in a discord. It was obvious that with only ~2.5 mil Soviet losses until first winter, there will be nothing good for me in the winter and in the next year. Moreover. In `42 manpower multiplayer only goes up for a Soviets. So their army will grow even faster than in `41.
And the only reason for me to not give up then, at turn 10-12, was curiosity, how it feels to play vs human in the first winter.

No surprise that so many Axis players give up in the early game. As it is crystal clear that if Axis did not achieve any meaningful results in the first 10-15 turns - they are doomed. They can forget about grand scale offense in `42 and Soviets in `42 will be at the power level of `43.



Developers and especially Joel, are giving answers in tech support area pretty quickly, but it looks to me that issues that players describe in their AARs are ignored. As what I described above (and especially first 4 issues) were raised in different posts and threads by different players long time ago. And this issues are still present and are exactly the same.
Or maybe it is not an issues and all of this is WAD? Well, in that case I am not seeing myself playing GC as an Axis vs human, for sure.



Also I want to say thanks to a Lovenought!
It was a pleasure to play against you.
I hope we will meet on a virtual battlefield again, in a future.

[tm1]

@ stamb

You had Leningrad that would have free up 1 Armee for the south or at the very for a attack against Moscow in 1942.

There was still a chance of destroying the Russian Army.

Anyway hope you have luck next game.

regards

[loki100]

Really this is the problem of the win in T17 or give up mindset. You are in an excellent position, yes 1942 is a slog but you can turn that significantly to your advantage. The urban hex issue is solved.

and by the way, here's what the Axis can do to the Soviets in 1944:





Every problem you are currently complaining about can tbe turned to your advantage later on.

As a reminder, as it seems this still needs to be said, the Germans were on the offensive for about 10 months of a 4 year war. So German players need to learn how to manage the defensive phase - or give up the idea you are playing a 200+ turn grand campaign and just want to play June-November 1941?

[Stamb]

The only thing that would maybe help me - arty patch. Even ~8 panzer divisions that are waiting for a TOE upgrade in reserve/west are not enough to change a situation as they become useless after 50% CCP loss. And while I would restore CPP - Soviets would restore their forces and build fortifications. I don't have a turn but there are so many of them. I think they are at ~5.4mil + on map!
While in your game vs AI you have 3.7mil Soviets. It is ridiculous.
And as I wrote - my opponent decided to come closer to my units before a winter, as he said that it is not historical at all that he is sitting back with so many forces, and Stalin would shoot such commander/commanders.
Otherwise Soviets OOB would be even bigger.

P. S

This post is an answer for tm1

[Stamb]

answer for a loki100

I have no problems playing on the defense. As it is much easier to defend, because of a 50% CPP loss which also affects Soviets.
I have problems playing against ahistrionically huge and well supplied (even over supplied) Soviet forces.

The thing is that Soviet player already from `41 can dictate where Axis can go, and where they can not.
While I expect that in `41 and partially `42 is a time for the Axis to choose where they want to advance.

[loki100]

You've got a spare army as a result of taking Leningrad. Your opponent is going to be plagued by low NM all the way to October. A bad retreat will escalate to a rout, he'll have shatters in normal combat, hit a stack twice and it will collapse.

Yes, you need to pace yourself, yes it can start slow, worth remembering that historically May 42 started with a huge Soviet offensive.

if he fights you on the front line, just do small encirclements, even a stack here and there -add that to the shatters, to his lack of Gds and by late July/August you'll get a lot of operational freedom. Just need to work for it.

and then come 1943, all your current disadvantages become advantages

[Stamb]

You've got a spare army as a result of taking Leningrad.

That army is already in use. It helps to hold Vyazma and sector near Orel.

Your opponent is going to be plagued by low NM all the way to October. A bad retreat will escalate to a rout, he'll have shatters in normal combat, hit a stack twice and it will collapse.

I described this situation in few posts above. Even for the first attack I have to bring multiple divisions, like 3 or 4 to match Soviets. During an attack, successful or not i lose 50% CPP. My units have no attack capability any more.
If that attack turns into hold - I have to bring another 3-4 divisions. Axis do not have so many units to do so. But even If i go full yolo and leave my flanks unprotected and bring more divisions to make a second attack and i succeed - still it is only one hex that i was able to push Soviets from and I had to use 6-8 divisions for it. There are still Soviets in the adjusted hexes to the left and to the right. This is the end.

Yes, you need to pace yourself, yes it can start slow, worth remembering that historically May 42 started with a huge Soviet offensive.

If only Soviets are forced to to fight upfront and suffer historical 5-6mil instead of a 2.5iml in `41 ...

if he fights you on the front line, just do small encirclements, even a stack here and there -add that to the shatters, to his lack of Gds and by late July/August you'll get a lot of operational freedom. Just need to work for it.

I told that this game is similar to yours vs Steve. Where was your summer offensive? If i remember it correctly - front line barely changed from a winter `41 to a winter `42.

In my case it would be the same. There would be no pockets. Not even a single one.

[Jango32]

Developers and especially Joel, are giving answers in tech support area pretty quickly, but it looks to me that issues that players describe in their AARs are ignored.

Joel has mentioned before that he reads AARs and sometimes he posts in the respective thread. They're probably not ignored and are added to the back burner list of #TODO (probably) even if nothing is posted in the thread about it. Having only two programmers likely contributes to big gameplay changes coming out relatively slowly.

[Speedysteve]

The last part is untrue of our game. Yes the frontline didn't vary a lot but, ironically, Loki's 1942 performance was very successful at wearing me down me without any territorial gain. I suffered over 2.3M casualties (IIRC) in 1942 alone, Loki's lines didn't move much (small pockets of a few units here and there through the year) which meant he was not over stretched, well supplied and fortified going into 1943. His 1942 performance is the foundation for his success and play through 1943 and 1944. I now deem (based on version from 1.00 to date) a successful 1942 offensive (if an outright win is off the table) is what Loki did. Players need to stop thinking if the Axis don't go for broke and start marching to Saratov it's a failure. The game can be won in 1942 but it can be won by outperforming the Soviets in 1943-1945 when on the defensive. To be honest I don't think many people are seeing or understanding the reality of what it's like 1943-1945 (from a GC41 start. StB is irrelevant by the way since the Axis are exposed and over stretched etc = the keys to their failure)

This coupled with some immensely positive Axis (yup you heard it here folks) macro game factors mean they have substantial bonuses 1943-1945 that didn't exist historically. By that I mean Fuel and Oil have ZERO affect in game. Loki will never run out of them and that means his Panzers can stomp around at will with high MP. In addition to this the LW is consequently un-affected and can continue to mass planes and fly 100's in sorties without any cost to them. I'm now finding this in our game and it's basically making it impossible for me to advance as I should be able to (based on historical 1944) and the VVS is a skeleton crew and will always be so now. The second massive bonus for the Axis that people seem to ignore/don't know is the major TB events (that should be negative for them) substantially benefit them - The surrender of Italy, France and Finland all release many units to the Axis to freely use on the Eastern Front.

To be honest to readers I'm debating whether to surrender in our game as it's just not possible to gain the advantage and advance as you should be able to as Soviets in 1944. I couldn't even isolate and keep a single Infantry Division locked up using 1/3 of my entire Armoured force.....enough said.

Anyhow. Apologies for hijacking this specific AAR with view on Loki/my game but they're relevant to Axis players quitting so early without seeing the bigger picture (IMO).