Barbarossa to the Volga or Berlin? ComradeP vs notenome

[Klydon]

Upon face value, I think most Axis players look to score the decisive Axis victory conditions (control 290 points worth of cities). The Soviets have a totally different set of conditions in that they have to force the Germans to surrender, but it still entails taking much of the map in cities. The Germans can win a draw simply by avoiding surrender.

As a Axis player bent on going for the decisive victory, you have to plan and figure out where your 290 points are coming from. This makes places like Leningrad and Moscow particularly attractive due to their high point value in such a small space. It also makes the south more attractive because there are so many pop centers down there.

Another (far less clear) strategy the Axis can try to employ is one of economics. This would involve trying to cut the Russian army down by economic means. The clearest way to do that is to capture Russian oil and cripple their mechanized forces.

[ComradeP]

In my opinion, the vast majority of the ground isn't important or strategically significant. To me, aside from the Ukraine the territory I capture is mostly a buffer between Germany and the Red tide trying to get there as well as putting a dent in Soviet manpower. You're not going to capture heavy industry or armament factories unless your opponent's either not paying attention or has to evacuate too many cities in one turn. Some cities, like Tula, have a lot of factories and are costly to evacuate, but as I see it the Soviets are not really under any real stress when it comes to factory evacuations.

You can't stop them from evacuating factories and they have plenty of rail capacity. It's actually beneficial to them that their units come back/arrive as shells mostly, as their load cost for strategic movement is minimal. That's the main reason why I don't bother with trying to get to places like Tula. When I get there, the factories will generally be gone and I'm just overstretching myself.

Resource production can't be evacuated, which makes going for the Ukraine both logical and obvious. If you capture the resource production up to and including Voroshilovgrad, you remove over 1/6 of Soviet resource production and add over 1/6 to your own compared to what you start with. The more resources you control, the better the shape the Axis war economy will be in.

Soviet losses won't really hurt much in 1941 and 1942 in terms of manpower as the losses you can inflict can be compensated for by the high manpower output. However, if you capture about 1000 manpower centres, the Soviets get about 150.000 men each turn in 1942, instead of 200.000, and that decreases further as the war drags on. The actual manpower multiplier is only 5 less in 1942 than in 1941, but you notice the effect more due to the manpower production you're occupying.

In my opinion, I'd say it's nearly impossible to really bleed the Soviets to death until 1943. You can kill units, which cost him AP's to reform after November 1941 and which might lower his overall experience levels if you kill good ones. I'd rather try a "destroy some units" than "damage plenty of units" strategy, as the attrition the latter strategy causes will be felt more by the Axis than the Soviets.

One key thing to keep in mind is that the Axis need to fight an economical war from the start. For the Soviets, their losses won't really hurt all that much until mid to late war. If you kill/capture 2-3 million men in 1941, that's less of a problem than in 1942, when you're probably occupying significant territory and thus manpower centres, but especially less of a problem then in 1943, 1944 or 1945.

Even losses are confusing. Losing Panzer Is and BT-5s has no effect on the battles of 1942, but losing other types does.

In a way, both sides are fortunate that the types they start the war with will be obsolete in a year.

The discussion on the Crimea was interesting, in that it correctly asks: What is really there for the Axis? Not much, apparently.

There's indeed not much unless you can capture it in its entirety. It's easy to hold and easy to contain the Soviets from breaking out, but it's difficult to take if your opponent knows what he's doing. The amphibious threat is fairly substantial I'd say, but a landing by itself would be pretty suicidal unless the Soviets are already attacking in the area.

[CarnageINC]

Thanks for doing this AAR and giving us in depth opinions you have.  Its very insightful once you ponder upon an idea whether its really worth some objectives.  Ive always tried doing as much with the Germans 'on the cheap' end of things trying to minimize casualties.  With out this AAR, it might take an Axis player a while to figure out the real value of what he's fight for.

[ComradeP]

Turn 8 AGN: Pskov and Velikie Luki are isolated for the moment. The mobile forces swing south, largely unopposed for the moment. Let's see if notenome overreacts to this flanking move or not. If he does, it will save me a lot of time.

The Narva front isn't on the screenshot, but nothing interesting is happening there. There's a unit in Narva that will take some time to dislodge, and a unit in the swamps two hexes south of it.

[ComradeP]

In the AGC area, another bridgehead is established and the bridgehead made last turn is widened. Again, I expect at least a counterattack against the stack with a motorized division, Lehr and GD, but I'm not sure when notenome will start to attack.

A hasty attack on the stack with a cavalry division on top on the northern bridgehead failed, the only lost attack this turn. 400 planes supporting the attack couldn't turn the tide. Maybe an additional attack could've done it, but it was too risky in my opinion. I didn't expect the attack to work, but was expecting a better result. Even though 2 good divisions were attacking as well as 200 bombers, the Soviets only suffered around 600 losses. 200 IL-2's alone would probably cause higher losses.

The infantry should be able to get across in the Gomel area next turn.

[ComradeP]

In the AGS area, forces are shuffled a bit so 6th Army can start to move south. There's a huge concentration of Soviet forces in the Kiev are, but unit density further down the line is minimal. I hope to get across the Dnepr on turn 9.

[ComradeP]

In the Romanian/southern tip of AGS sector, notenome was the victim of what I was described in another thread: cavalry divisions can't defend. A cavalry army was badly mauled and good progress was made.

I'm hoping I can storm Odessa next turn, but that might be too optimistic.

A FBD unit should reach Kirovograd in about 3 turns.

[ComradeP]

I'm about 1 turn ahead with losses, mostly due to attacks in swamps causing high losses early on.

I've disbanded some more air bases, as well as some Italian and Finnish support units.



The main problem is that notenome's Sir Robin causes the loss ratio to be only 4:1 in my favour, which by default means his army will soon be huge without anything I can do about it. The blizzard will also chop about 750.000-1 million men off my OOB, also without too much I can do about it aside from withdrawing some units to villages, cities or the non-blizzard zone.

At this rate, the 1942 summer campaign will be a nightmare. My forces will be understrength, and he'll have dozens of full strength Rifle corps.

[ComradeP]

No counterattacks. Perhaps he's planning some huge operation that requires all of his men, but I'm clueless as to why he doesn't try to attack, might be inexperience. He also pulled back a bit between Vitebsk and Velikie Luki as well as along the Dnepr, a partial overreaction I'd say.

C. Hansen seems to be lucky. He's now a Generaloberst and he had a skill increase last turn. He has a 15 wins and no losses, but my Panzer corps commanders have more victories.

[Flaviusx]

Pieter, most of the Soviet players I've seen thus far are rather cautious in terms of counterattacks.

It takes some practice to get a feel for what you can get away with in terms of counterattacking in 1941 with the Red Army.

[jjdenver]

It looks overall like your progress is slow on almost all fronts so he has no reason or incentive to counterattack that I can see. You mentioned I think that he might want to improve his morale or experience levels but I guess he'll plan to do that during the winter when it's safer to attack.

[kfmiller41]

As a soviet player I would say that in my next game I will probably play more aggressively early on, knowing what is coming and wanting to see if you play more like Stalin was in charge (IE taking large losses for holding ground), you can still hold Leningrad/Moscow against a good german opponent. It is very hard to attack as soviet units just lack hitting power unless they get in large groups, which is just asking for trouble against the mobile german army in 41.

[CharonJr]

Yes, from what I have seen in those player vs. player AARs it looks like the Soviet side needs some additional incentive to stand and fight if the situation is supposed to be closer to history.

At the moment the best strategy seems to be to delay and preserve forces and attack during the winter with a very large Red Army - which is smart, but not historical.

CharonJr

[randallw]

I'm not quite sure if the experience ratings for the respective armies, in 1941, are really accurate, or just so-so accurate.  Basically the German divisions are slightly more than twice as good as Soviet divisions.

[TulliusDetritus]

ORIGINAL: miller41

As a soviet player I would say that in my next game I will probably play more aggressively early on, knowing what is coming and wanting to see if you play more like Stalin was in charge (IE taking large losses for holding ground), you can still hold Leningrad/Moscow against a good german opponent. It is very hard to attack as soviet units just lack hitting power unless they get in large groups, which is just asking for trouble against the mobile german army in 41.

I'm a Soviet player as well and I have not been an exception. I haven't attacked. Well, just one time. But I didn't pay attention to the CVs. The testers must know better than us, we should agree on this one.

So if I well understood, I could try to attack these German units (this is a screenshot from my PBEM).

I want the GUARD units! [8D]

EDITED: I know the numbers are NOT 100% trustful.

[IdahoNYer]

Comrade P - remarkable how similar our campaigns have progressed by comparing AARs - roughly the same casualities as well as same depth of penetrations. As if we were fighting the same opponent! Like yours, my Soviet counterpart has hardly counter-attacked. One successful counter attack to throw back a bridgehead across the Dniper.

And like your opponent, mine has also strung up a nice fortified Dniepr line to negotiate - I'll be following with interest how you breach it.

[randallw]

The stack of security regiments are definitely to consider as targets.

[ComradeP]

Pieter, most of the Soviet players I've seen thus far are rather cautious in terms of counterattacks.

It takes some practice to get a feel for what you can get away with in terms of counterattacking in 1941 with the Red Army.

Certainly, I was just surprised that my stacks that could be attacked from 3 or 4 sides were not attacked. It's for those attacks that the +1 odds bonus comes in handy, as he only needs to roughly equal my CV to remove me from the hex. If he bumps me across the Dnepr, that hurts, at least for the AFV's.

-

It seems that a number of Soviet players are not fully aware of the advantages of counterattacking, which is why they might think there's no incentive to do so.

1) Soviets wins will never count as much towards their win ratio (which is one of the things that determines skill upgrades and promotions) as pre-winter 1941.
2) A ~50 morale and ~50 experience army isn't good. Yes, it's a lot better than what you start with, but it's still mediocre. If you really want to put the hurt on the Axis, you need units with high morale and experience. As I've said in other threads: a 15 CV Rifle corps isn't much of a problem, 20 CV+ Rifle corps are a problem. You're never going to get a 20+ CV Rifle corps with ~50 morale and ~50 experience units.
3) Axis mobile units will rarely be more exposed than now, or potentially in the 1942 summer campaign. They'll mostly disappear from the frontlines in winter to go to winter quarters in cities or outside the blizzard zone.
4) You're not going to get "early" (pre-winter) Guards at this rate. I'd estimate the best unit notenome has might have 3 wins or so, but even that's doubtful as not a lot of units that were not pocketed have held an attack.
5) If you don't attack, and are content with just slowing down the Axis, Axis losses will be quite a bit lower than they would normally be. The AFV losses in 1941 won't really be felt later on by either side as their 1941 AFV's are generally obsolete within a year, but in 1942 it can hurt as the AFV's in use then will be used for most of the war. However, any damage to mobile units will be felt.
6) In the winter, the Axis can do the exact same thing most of the Soviet players are doing now: they can trade land for time and can make big stacks to avoid being attacked by anything less than concentrated amounts of units. Keep in mind that, as I also described earlier, a successful attack against a stack with 3 units results in 1 victory, whilst successful attack against 3 individual units results in 3 victories. As such, the Axis can greatly limit the Soviet amount of victories (and thus the number of Guards, leader quality and unit quality) by not trying to hold the entire frontline.

-

TulliusDetritus, keep in mind that attacks across minor rivers roughly reduce CV by half, so some unexpected Luftwaffe support or some good German support units could mean you lose the attack against the security units. I'd advise bringing a bit more firepower to the party against that infantry division too. There is no real reason not to engage an Axis unit with as many units as possible, provided it doesn't threaten the integrity of your defences. Each participating unit will get a victory (or loss). Economy of force doesn't really apply to the 1941 Soviets.

[Flaviusx]

Hey, I'm trying to rouse some offensive spirit in our newbie Sovs here, but they just want to run away like little girls.

[heliodorus04]

I'd like to know more about Soviet offensive options in 41, but I don't want good info to get buried, so I'm going to start a thread in the War Room, maybe you guys could provide some feedback on.  I can't start it now, but will later.

Love this thread.