Back to playing war in the East, baby!!

[skraft16]

Hi everyone. Long-time player of Matrix games here including both War in the East titles and War in the west, coming back to war in the East 2 after a few years. I only ever play against the AI though. A few comments and observations.

1) First, I would like to thank the many members of this forum who have contributed great threads and advice in the past. It's great having these pinned threads to guide me.

2) I've recently played two campaigns through the first winter now, and both times I was stopped just short of Bryansk and Stalino before the heavy rains came (when I start digging trenches for the winter). I feel I am destroying lots of Soviet units. In my last campaign the Soviets had taken 3.6 million casualties before heavy rain. I had isolated but not taken Leningrad/Orianbaum and Sevastapol, none of which held out through winter. So in some cases better than historical, but I am not getting near Rostov or Kharkov or taking the valuable Don Basin cities or the south-of-Moscow cities like Tula. I am not pushing past Velikie Luki and Smolensk either. Any advice on how I might do better? In general, I prioritize solid pocketing of Soviet units over grabbing ground, often moving mech units right up behind the Soviet line being pocketed to pin them for destruction the next turn.

3) Part of my approach has been to bulk up the 11th army to 13 division, put Model in charge and provide it with extra engineers and arty, then send it along the Black Sea Coast for historically early captures of Odessa and Sevastapol. You have to divert 8 or 9 divisions from the army for the capture of Sevastapol, and you might wait outside the city for 6 or 8 weeks until you get a patch of decent weather for your naval mission to isolate the city so it can be stormed. Any thoughts on this? would I be better off isolating Crimea with some Romanians or Italians and pushing the whole 11th army forward towards Stalino?

4) even with the more lenient activation rules for the Southern Front, against the AI you can still pocket most of the units along the Hungarian border--20-30 divisions and NKVD units in both of my campaigns. You do this by clearing the hills/cutting a key rail line southeast of Lvov on turn 1 instead of driving panzers down the railway to Tarnopol as the AI does in its turn 1. Then you continue southeast for the linkup with the Romanians on turn 2. Its a looser pocket than I like, but it has held up the two times I have done this. Note that I am keeping the AI at 109 morale boost to prevent infinite movement, which I think is just too cheesy. Any thoughts on this versus clearing the railroad to Tarnopol on turn 1??

5) I imagine everyone knows that security/static units get a 2X strength bonus when placed in the Soviet Garrison theater box. They don't get the bonus in the Balkans (the other partisan war TB) or the other boxes. I sent one of the German security divisions from the garrison box to Norway, because the garrison TB didn't need the extra help. The value of that division in Norway--3.80. Identical divisions still in the garrison TB--7.61. Just mentioning this.

6) I haven't played this out fully, but I focus the Italians on North Africa, quickly getting ground/naval/air strength in North Africa at least 20% each over requirements to generate as many extensions of the North African campaign as possible and relieving as many German units in Africa as I can. I would rather have the Italian army and air force destroyed holding out for a bit longer in North Africa than letting the Italian campaign event start and having them surrender en masse when Italy is invaded. I plan an early relief the Italian army facing Russia for them to all be in Africa in time for Operation Torch and Tunisia. This approach also allows me to send most German forces earmarked for Africa to Russia or other TBs. I don't expect that the extensions generated will do more than stretch the African war past June or July 1943, since each extension gets you 3 or 4 days added to the TB timeline, but I have been generating multiples of each axis air, ground and naval extension. Any thoughts on this strategy? (Note also that air and ground extensions generated in Africa push back the timeline on both the Afican and Italian campaigns, but the naval extensions only mention pushing back the Africa timeline. Not quite sure how that works, since the Italian campaign can't start until the Allies finish off Africa.)

7) Difficulty settings for the Soviets: 109% morale, 112% logistics/transport/fortification/administrative

8) Construction engineers. I've heard that having a couple battalions of these attached to each corps significantly speeds up entrenching, even though you can't attach the construction units to divisions/brigades. Any truth to this??

9) One other question--logistics. I know if you bump the setting by, for example, 10% it increases the amount of freight a unit receives by 10%, and that freight can become either supplies/fuel or replacements. But does the logistics setting increase the underlying production too? So if you bump logistics by 10%, and you would normally produce 100 aircraft and 10,000 soldiers per week, after the logistics bump you produce 110 aircraft and 11,000 soldiers?

Thanks!! Advice or comments are appreciated. Thanks again to the many people who have contributed to valuable advice threads in the past.

[Wiedrock]

8) Construction engineers. I've heard that having a couple battalions of these attached to each corps significantly speeds up entrenching, even though you can't attach the construction units to divisions/brigades. Any truth to this??

Imperator Aug in Discord tested this and said it was 1SU per CU to be assigned max.
I personally even failed to understand the basics.
So, ...having some SUs won't hurt. Their assignment is random on top of eventually some already existing randomness in the system.

[AliaksandrM]

Hello,skraft16
Most people play H2H games, I mean, It is very differs from play vs AI.
Also, each player has own manner.
regarding your questions:
'2) I am not pushing past Velikie Luki and Smolensk either. Any advice on how I might do better? " -it depends on you strategy. Usually ( h2h) when German player concentrates on Moscow direction - he could advance far more, but Leningrad must be must be forgotten
and vice versa
3)
German usually used part of 1 tank group under Assault status ( 1 tank corps at least for fast advance, 1-2 infantry corps with MtnDivs for assaults) . Such package needed railway and south RAD corps is moving on Cremea, it means that Stalino could be get a chance remains soviet.
Also I recommend to use 2 free briliant commanders (Rommel+Model) and 2 very good infantry commanders ( Wies+Rendulich) that allowed in 1941 - for corps .
4) "Any thoughts on this versus clearing the railroad to Tarnopol on turn 1??" it is on your matter. ¯\_㋡_/¯ 1941 - is a chain of battles not only once.
8) "Any truth to this??" Wiedrock already told.
Also, I recommend to use support assets carefully on 1941 -because logistic has debuf and every ton of support is a deficit for forward troops. Put you construction btns under OKH while it will be really needed. Use artillery in concentrate role. Catch up level bombers from the map. then there are not really needed (for example against Leningrad or Cremea, for example -airbases near Rga+Tallinn or Odessa could use sea routes). LW AA btns also could be reorganized for TB usage, but take off Marine AA btns and Towers for direct support.
9)"after the logistics bump you produce 110 aircraft and 11,000 soldiers?" I ma not a sure 101% but it seems like only supply picture, produce remains the same at any case.a

[skraft16]

So, ...having some SUs won't hurt. Their assignment is random on top of eventually some already existing randomness in the system.

This is pretty much what I figured. Thank you very much for your reply, and your help!

[skraft16]

Hello,skraft16
Most people play H2H games, I mean, It is very differs from play vs AI.
Also, each player has own manner.
regarding your questions:
'2) Usually ( h2h) when German player concentrates on Moscow direction - he could advance far more, but Leningrad must be must be forgotten
and vice versa
3)
Also I recommend to use 2 free briliant commanders (Rommel+Model) and 2 very good infantry commanders ( Wies+Rendulich) that allowed in 1941 - for corps .

Also, I recommend to use support assets carefully on 1941 -because logistic has debuf and every ton of support is a deficit for forward troops. Put you construction btns under OKH while it will be really needed. Use artillery in concentrate role. Catch up level bombers from the map. then there are not really needed (for example against Leningrad or Cremea, for example -airbases near Rga+Tallinn or Odessa could use sea routes). LW AA btns also could be reorganized for TB usage, but take off Marine AA btns and Towers for direct support.
9)"after the logistics bump you produce 110 aircraft and 11,000 soldiers?" I ma not a sure 101% but it seems like only supply picture, produce remains the same at any case.a

Thank you very much for your reply Aliaksandr. I appreciate it, especially since I am coming back to the game after a few years away and I need to relearn a few things.

A) Thanks for your perspective on advancing more in the South/Center and what that takes. I tend to like taking Leningrad, so I add units like the 90th "Africa, but end up practically in Finland" motorized division and the two RFSS motorized brigades (which are definitely not needed by the Soviet Union garrison TB) to the 4th Pz Army.

-It is the only way to cut TB requirements (a little) to keep more troops on the map and not in the TBs.

-Theoretically, it could keep Finland in the war longer, but I expect that the Russians can retake Leningrad in 1944 anyway and restore the Finnish surrender if they push with any determination. Unless you can find a way to REALLY weaken them in 1942.

-The AI is OK at defense in general, but bad at defending a specific point, for example Leningrad. It most always screws up in some way that leaves a weakness on the Neva river line and you push over the river, take the Lake Ladoga port and isolate 200K or so Soviet troops in Leningrad/Orianbaum/Kronstadt. So a nice pocket on top of the other benefits.

B) Kind of what I figured related to the logistics difficulty setting. It would be nice to have a setting that bumped up the number of available replacements for either side, but the general freight received buff is good.

C) I haven't tried to get Rommel out of Africa previously. Certainly worth it, and I rather expect that his absence makes no difference in the Africa TB. TBs seem to work solely base on the sum of unit value strength present, and not worry if you have great, awful or no commanders in any HQ units in the TB. I tend to put Model in charge of the 11th Army, because it has a lot of strength as I usually play it and it pretty much has to rely on poor Romanian army group and high command leadership, until Army Group B becomes available in mid-1942. There are several very good corps commander upgrades even without Model. And you can consolidate lots of corps that are in the German advance. A maximum strength (non-assault) German army can have just 3 corps of 4 divisions and 1 regiment each with the best available commanders and concentrated support units. Then you leave the corps HQs with the worst commanders to trail behind with no units attached until you need them later.

D) Just to be clear, to conserve supply you are not in favor of attaching many support units in the forward corps, especially as winter approaches? Put things like construction engineers in OKH and the Army Group units where they can provide some construction support (with fewer available leader checks, so not assigned as easily as if these units were in the corps) but from far back where supply is OK? Probably send some of the weaker combat SUs back from the front too?

E) Small question, but what do you think about keeping or relieving Halder in OKH, probably after turn 20 or so. Halder has generally bad stats, but an excellent administrative stat. Worth the change to someone like Blaskowitz, or leave him alone?

[AliaksandrM]

D)
I advice dont's attach constructon btns in any time, but only when there are needed (for example when divisions in some corps stand for quite long defence). For my opinion, it is better to use some constrution btns under Corps and the rest under OKH.
When we need to repair some exact object immidiatly (airbase? Railstation?) - it is better to attach ConstrBtn directly, and to spend AP points ever. But it is rare situatuon.
Logistical impact due 1941 is quite hard.

E)
I advice don't spend AP points to change Halder and other high commanders (exept a few brilliant corps commanders above), and collect points for Forts.

[skraft16]

Thanks for clarifying! I appreciate it.

[Wiedrock]

So, ...having some SUs won't hurt. Their assignment is random on top of eventually some already existing randomness in the system.

This is pretty much what I figured. Thank you very much for your reply, and your help!

Not an answer I like to give but it is all I have, not quantified it to give a proper suggestion.