Grunhilde gets antsy - 1941 GC

[loki100]

He's built the Tank Corps with mot brigade attachments and I think that is giving them some more defensive solidity. Hard to judge as that was one of the first times I've had a relatively free hit but my feeling is they are still too low on the NM-exp scale to be that robust. So in a conventional defeat (ie just a retreat) they prob lose 33-50% of their tank strength, if its a rout then this goes up over 75%, they certainly are still too low on exp to come out of that in a structured way.

But I guess they are sitting on 5+ wins and few defeats given the hit and run usage, so they will have experience in the 50-55 range at best (they don't get the motorised +5 till Sept.

[Stamb]

thanks for the answer
would be nice to see how new AFVs changes affect late game

maybe you can show a couple of battles with them in the next posts?

[loki100]

broadly at this stage the Soviets have technological superiority but still lag in doctrine/training. In a fair fight a T34-42 will beat a Pzr III (which is still the norm for my Pzr divisions), but, the fights are rarely fair. 1943 is invariably horrible for the Soviets, for all its merits the T34-43 is horribly overmatched by that generation of Pzr IV, and this gets worse as the Panthers come on line (and the KV is well out of date) as well as the mid-war German tank destroyers.

1944 sees a radical shift, in part the Soviet armour has decent experience and better balanced TOE but also from say May the T34/44 ends the superiority of the Pzr IV and the IS-2 is probably the best tank on the battlefield.

edit - actually looking at the detailed reports, each was a complete disaster for the Soviets - I think those units had attacked in their turn, certainly had moved a lot (so should have had damaged/fatigued elements) but ...

[Stamb]

thanks for sharing this

this is what i was talking about with ~70-100% AFV losses
looks like Soviets AFVs need some love from a devs

[Stamb]

also its strange that higher CV tank corps routes (cuz it losses most of its elements)
while ~4 cv rifle division just retreats

it reminds me urban combat before a fix
maybe it would be worth decreasing intensity with AFVs battles? (i think jubjub was proposing the same)

[loki100]

possibly, as may have been clear I just noted at the time that I'd wrecked the equivalent of a Soviet tank army and didn't really pay much more attention. Generally Soviet light tanks at this stage just get trashed so at a casual glance seeing high tank losses off a defeat is no real surprise - but that indicates the T34s went the same way.

I suspect its keying off the exp/firing change, I think that is what the tables show, in essence the Soviet armour is only getting to fire at close range. By that stage i'd suspect most were already disrupted by my longer range fire. The rout I assume was in turn related to that - crudely that unit has no combat elements left so is depleted, the rifle division was prob 'unready'.

Joel said they wouldn't change the tank combat system till they had a lot of data - both micro and broadly across the game. But thats not to say its closed or this is how it will be for ever - but they want to keep big system changes relatively rare as there is always the risk that one blows up the wider game.

My view:

a) as maybe clear, I think axis tank losses are now too low, I am still sitting on 5 repl battalions at this stage - so crudely I can have a complete disaster and the Pzr divisions will be fully functional the turn after
b) this maybe a bit like the urban combat routine, every sub-step is either WAD or explicable, but in combination it gets to the wrong outcome

[Stamb]

agree with your post

especially with low overall Axis tank losses

and because of new exp accounting mechanic? even if they route or retreat they suffer basically the same losses which looks strange
also displacing them leads to a loss of vehicles only and a couple of tanks might get damaged which does not make sense for me

[loki100]

T59 – 2 August 1942

The VVS seems to be beaten at the moment, apart from the endless U2 raids it is not even contesting GS missions. My opponent confirmed this is simply due to a lack of fighters, with losses far too high to even sustain a training programme.

So given I want to clear Tula, I am afraid that an attempt to encircle will fail due to counter-attacks, try something different with the LW. Allocate all the heavy bombers (with big bombs) to see if I can take out the railyard. If I can trust the reports, that is a lot of bombers lost to flak but the railyard is knocked out – may help if I can then isolate the place. Essentially I can't risk a long siege so need to isolate and clear as rapidly as possible.




That may have been well timed as finally actually managed to break the Soviet lines and exploit. 2 Army launched a sustained offensive SW of Tula and broke the Soviet line over a 30km stretch. At the same time 3 Panzer's freshly arrived infantry made gains to the SE. With the Soviets stretched and their reserves committed XXXIX Mot Corps almost encircled the city from the north and cut the final rail link.

The only cost to this concentration was that 2 Panzer had to redirect its own offensive and free up infantry to secure the now exposed flank of 3 Panzer.

[

In consequence, 4 Army eliminated the pocket formed last week and 2 Panzer had to limit its efforts to extending its control NE of Lipetsk.

In the Caucasus, the Soviets pulled back again. Krasnodar was captured without a fight but Maikop was too strongly defended to be taken by a hasty attack. 4 Ru Army crossed the Kerch straights with no opposition.

German motorised divisions overran weak cavalry and brigade screens trying to cut off the retreat of the bulk of the Soviet forces while the infantry followed up steadily.



Rostov is now set up as a super-depot, still no actual storage as everything that arrives is immediately sent out but should help keep the southern offensive going.

17A and 1 PzrA have redeployed and will attack along the southern line of the Don next week. Not so much aiming at Stalingrad as to disrupt what is clearly a large build up on that sector.

Loss ratio a lot better. Still have 5 Pzr Repl battalions to deploy.



Soviets not really building up – they also seem to not be creating many tank formations.





Also keeping their reserve manpower from building up.

Rumanian manpower never seems to have recovered from the disastrous battles in the Crimea. Able to replace Hungarian and Italian losses as needed.



VP at 677. Krasnodar was worth 14 so better than I expected. Maikop at best 13 if I take it next turn.

No expectation of any of the other historical captures. At least not before their time bonus expires.

Realistically (or delusionally), the goals are the 3 of Tula, Ryazan and Tambov. If I take them all, plus say 13 for Maikop then that is 677+49 = 728. So 22 short of an auto-win.

On the other hand, the Axis player starts StB with 674 so I am already 3 up on that. Even Maikop and Tula put me 32 up on the historical HWM. If I do reach 728 then I have +54 on the historical baseline.



Last week was a useful warning of the increasing Soviet capacity to do real damage where my front is stretched out (and this describes a lot of sectors). That threat is only going to become more real.

[jasonbroomer]

Great AAR, thanks Loki.

How much of a threat are guards rifle corps at this stage of the game? How many corps do you estimate that he has?

[loki100]

Thanks, I know he has at least 6 going by unit designations I've encountered and I think he has 8-10 normal Rifle Corps. I suspect there may be more in the rear as he is very cautious at letting me even have a chance to encircle them.

My best guess is he has the full set of 14 Cavalry Corps (no reason not to) and I'd say at least 12 Tank Corps - these are steadily building wins via their hit and run attacks but can't convert to Gds to November or December (I forget the exact date).

I don't have good recon on what he has around Stalingrad but I suspect a build up from my information and I'd suspect that includes some more Corps than the ones I've actually encountered (or at least thats what I do with the Soviets as its feasible for the axis to badly over-extend and they can make a real mess of any units pushed too far).

The Gds Rifle Corps completely change the sector they are on. They are the only thing that can stand and hold if I attack in force, if they retreat they do so without excessive additional losses, so in effect they lose at 1-1 losses. As an offensive force, he needs to combine them to have any chance of dislodging a well dug in Infantry Division but they have done a lot of damage to my Panzers where they have caught me off balance.

So I regard an unstacked normal rifle division as something I can push around with ease, even a pair just require a bit more attention - and when I win, the losses can easily escalated to say 4-1 in my favour. But where he deploys these things, I have to go around them and he sets them up as a solid belt so there is no chance of breaking weaker units beside them and then encircling.

Or ... I already hate them and I'm painfully aware they are only going to become more of a threat as their base morale and TOE improves.

At the moment, he's struggling for Gds from comments, not least as its very hard for him to win offensive victories with non-Gds formations and I tend to win if I attack non-Gds. That will change as we go towards 1943 ...

[loki100]

T60 – 9 August 1942

Finally generating some stocks behind AGS. While Rostov is now behind the lines, I can use the air transport assets to push that forward.



Sometimes attacking with limited recon can produce a real shock. Yes I won, just, but, best avoided if I can. There aren't many (at the moment) but these Gds Rifle Corps terrify me.



The Soviets remain very combat-phobic in the south. Hand over Maikop without a fight while the motorised elements of 4 PzrA carry on trying to outflank them.

Grozny is actually showing on the operational map and would be a very nice additional gain – and I think implausible. For the moment my supply here is surprisingly good, now improved by the massive airlift from Rostov.



1 PzrA has completed its redeployment and together with 17A will attack towards Stalingrad next week. No expectation of taking the city but recon suggests a large Soviet build up. So I'd rather fight it when it suits me rather than when suits them.

As to be expected main action was around Tula. The feared Soviet response was far more limited than I anticipated.



Soviets pulled back south of Kaluga with 9A following up. 2A managed to renew last week's offensive pushing to the line of the Oka. While elements of 3 PzrA almost encircled the city.

Which will not be easy to take.



To the east, 2 PzrA cut the main line from Ryazan to Tambov, effectively making the Soviets rely on the line of the Volga for N-S communications.



Losses, seems I can no longer reach the desired 100k Soviet losses a turn





HWM now at 690 (610 city points). I have 85/108 bonus points (for the cities I've taken). So my guess is if I can swap that back at no worse a rate of exchange the Soviets have to over-achieve by January 1945.

[Stamb]

Soviets gave up at contesting for a skies?

[loki100]

yes a few turns back I shot down so many fighters he's run out of I-series junk for training purposes never mind front line figthers.

so if he tries anything (other than the endless U2 raids), I can easily clear out his escorts and the bombers just die. As he has a lot of Il2s there are the occasional GA based raid by them without escorts but I mostly catch them with auto-intercept (the only difference for the VVS is these are losses he can readily replace).

From a discussion, he's basically gone turtle in the air to let production and natural training rebuild his fighter assets to the point where they have any chance. At this stage, given the experience gap, if the Soviets have < fighters than the Gemans they get wiped out. Ideally they need substantial numerical superiority for enough pilots to survive that they slowly start to gain combat based experience

ahistorical but a function of the game engine. I think its a sensible choice, if he kept on trying his figher deficit would just worsen, so better to let me have uncontested control and try to rebuild

[Beethoven1]

yes a few turns back I shot down so many fighters he's run out of I-series junk for training purposes never mind front line figthers.

so if he tries anything (other than the endless U2 raids), I can easily clear out his escorts and the bombers just die. As he has a lot of Il2s there are the occasional GA based raid by them without escorts but I mostly catch them with auto-intercept (the only difference for the VVS is these are losses he can readily replace).

From a discussion, he's basically gone turtle in the air to let production and natural training rebuild his fighter assets to the point where they have any chance. At this stage, given the experience gap, if the Soviets have < fighters than the Gemans they get wiped out. Ideally they need substantial numerical superiority for enough pilots to survive that they slowly start to gain combat based experience

ahistorical but a function of the game engine. I think its a sensible choice, if he kept on trying his figher deficit would just worsen, so better to let me have uncontested control and try to rebuild

Do you think this would be a problem for games where both players are using AI air assist, or not, since the German player would presumably be less effective at killing the Soviet fighters in that case?

[loki100]

really not sure, my focus with the LW is location of the assets, I then rely a lot on GS/auto-intercept and so on for the mechanics. Really with both sides, I take time over deployment but not really over mission (unless i am running something specialist) design, in theory the AI-assist should be a good proxy using the settings. In practice I'm not sure as I don't use for my main games (as you may have seen I do a lot in test games mainly for the speed and convenience). So I don't think I'm doing anything that stands out or pushes the game model so while I think (would certainly like to think) I outperform the AI assist its really a better way to set up what it actually delivers.

Again, there isn't a huge evidence base around but I've seen others (Gamer8 who I know from AGEOD, SpeedySteve) reporting that you just can't get any traction with the VVS at this stage or even into 1943. its not just lose, its lose so badly that losses outstrip production to the extent that you can't even train up (if your airforce is depleted then pilots don't get allocated so can't even gain experience off map). The design logic is essentially the VVS did take horrific losses, even over say Kursk, that the slow accretion of NM+Gds starts to generate formations with say 60 skill, at that stage they shouldn't get wiped out as the LW is declining.

What I think is the LW doesn't decline, you rarely take consistent losses, you can offset the lowering NM simply by wins.

On the other hand, the one game where I lost the LW by early 1944 was my vs AI game. Here by mid-44 I couldn't operate as I lost all my experienced pilots and basically had to cluster what I had left on a small sector. Thats informative for 2 reasons, first the AI is much more Stalinist than most players in its usage of its assets but also once I lost the initiative the AI was on 120 morale so by mid-43 that bumped the VVS' effective morale to 60.

So that maybe too much the other way but does suggest its not an AI/human dynamic but a NM one, I'd advocate bumping up the VVS by 5 NM as a baseline or allowing train in the reserve to push experience up more. At the moment the routines tend to stall this at the NM, maybe kick in this constraint at NM+5 (so there is a need to earn the better cadre but in the end rear area training can become a potent tool).

The other oddity is the Soviet player doesn't take the historical losses in say the Il-2s simply as they lack the escorts to make them useable. So you end up with 1000s of them in the pool when in reality Soviet production was so high simply to offset plane losses

[loki100]

T61 – 16 August 1942

Soviets mostly passive at the moment, given they have Gds formations in the front lines my, optimistic, reading is they are struggling to contain my recent gains. My pessismistic one is they are ready to go over to the offensive.

Freight situation on both key sectors now improving, this is why, sometimes, the super-depot concept is just what you need to set up.



Despite them generally pulling back, still able to launch counter-strokes.



Fortunately not followed up but that is one Pzr division having a break in my turn.

Nothing much happened at Tula except I managed to complete the encirclement. This has basically locked 3 Pzr into place (I have one corps pulled off the line as a reserve or to refit) as I need huge stacks to deal with any attempts to regain a link. How quickly this resolves (if it does) I think is going to determine the success of my entire summer campaign.

2 Pzr and 4A made more gains near Tambov but its clear the Soviets have been reinforcing. Not sure the pocket will hold but the fresh Soviet units certainly rout more readily than those that have built up experience.



Limited offensive south of the Don, No long term goals but want to disrupt the Soviets and secure the flank of 4 Pzr A. Motorised units pushing into the Kalmyk Steppe, the unlikely prize is the Baku-Astrakhan rail line, more feasibly it stops Soviet infiltration.



In the Caucasus, seems as if 4 PzrA has finally reached the Soviet defensive line. Tuapse appears to be set up to block any gains along the Black Sea littoral, there are mountain divisions protecting the road that runs to Sukhumi and they have finally stopped retreating about 100km west of Grozny.

I actually have a good flow of supply to here so its going to be interesting to see if I can put them under real pressure. Grozny would be a huge prize if it fell.



Managing to bring > 1,000 tons of supply to the front from Rostov



For minimal transport plane losses.



More generally the VVS has abandoned operations for the last few weeks apart from the incessent U2 bombing campaign.

Ground losses, relatively bad week for the Pzrs but I still have 2 replacement battalions to allocate when needed.



Guess at some stage they had to reach 6m on map.



Truck data.About 93% of unit/need but in turn over 20% drawn back into the freight system.



Army freight table is improving, given its location 4 PzrA is doing remarkably well.



And e-Adolf is being annoyingly busy again.

[loki100]

T62 – 23 August 1942

Situation in Western Europe becomes a concern – at least to E-Adolf. That is quite a jump in requirement but I've been sendng SU for a while now (mainly AA as they are very useful in Western Europe as they count for ground and air and go some way to mitigate the impact of Allied bombing).



Does leave me vulnerable to lose VP over the next few turns but I have nothing to spare (ie the permanent loss of a division) to help address that, so will have to wait for the scripted transfers and reinforcements.



The battle for Tula saw possibly some of the heaviest fighting of the war. The week opened with a large scale Soviet offensive trying to break the German lines on the east side.

However, for once, even their best formations took heavy losses as the German lines mostly held.



The result was to divert 2 PzrA from its attack towards Tambov as it struck northwards to try and relieve the mounting pressure. For the moment, completing the capture of Tula is the main focus of both AGC and AGA.

To assist this, the heavy bombers hit the defenders and their supply depots.

On the west flank, 9 and 2 Army made gains to deepen the isolation of Tula with elements of 2A forcing the Oka and creating a bridgehead on the north bank.



However, 4A was able to take advantage of the deployment of fresh Soviet formations to make substantial gains. Despite this the Soviets had managed to break the pocket formed last week and pull those formations back to refit.



In the south, 1 PzrA and 17A made some gains along the Don, steadily driving back the Soviets while both sides skirmished along the Kalmyuk Steppes.

4 PzrA prepared to assault the new Soviet defensive line while mountain divisions of both sides screened the main Caucasus range.

Comination of the escalation in the fighting and a few small pockets pushed Soviet losses up to almost 100k.

Substantial tank losses for both sides.



For the first time in a few weeks, the VVS was committed to supporting Soviet operations. Two massive air supply operations continue with relatively limited German losses and almost 2,000 tons of freight brought up to the front in the Caucasus and near Lipetsk.



Realise last week had a truck report but want to test out some ideas. Also at the moment I am keeping a very close eye on this as I am badly over-extended and when the weather worsens really need to think about what I can sustain.



Truck/unit ratio is no worse and allocation to freight reduced. This might reflect the air supply or the impact of the 2 super-depots.

I think damaged trucks are important so this turn I lost 2,744 destroyed. Repair pool has gone up 1,300 (105,137 to 106,382) while 6,032 were repaired, So that suggests 7,230 damaged – so very roughly for every destroyed truck, 2.5 were damaged.

Given most of the long traces are in the Caucasus, there is no Soviet interdiction affecting either number.

Supply traces in the south – very vulnerable when the weather changes but while Rostov solved the wider problem, I now need to push that freight up so next turn I'll dismantle the super-depot and reset priority etc.

[loki100]

T63 – 30 August 1942

Start to feel the basic nature of the war shifting, a lot more Soviet attacks and they are not always pulling back afterwards.

I altered some of my air tactics in turn, back to more GA-unit on juicy front line targets, another raid on Tula and placed an AS over the city to deter Soviet air transport.

Actually paid off.

Raid on Tula was really designed to use the defender's ammunition:



Stukas did the business, also the interdiction will keep that Rifle Corps from moving too much next turn.



Me 110/210 mix was less useful.



Overall, quite an escalation of the air war on this sector.



Yelets now properly functioning as the core supply hub for the Tula-Ryazan-Tambov operations (but still no build up as it's all going straight out), as intended Rostov has shed most of its stocks. I'll now reset to pri4 (so as to sustain the air supply operation) but not as a super-depot. Recreate one in the Caucasus to support the Grozny operation.



So Tula has now been isolated for 3 turns, the screen is getting battered but holding so decided it was time to take a risk. This used almost all of 3 Pzr A.

At least this offers some hope, that allows a decent refit and I can pull back a little where I'm exposed, intention now is to use the Oka as a flank support while I push on Ryazan.



That more than compensates for some heavy defeats as the Soviets tried to relieve the city. Disengage 2 PzrA to allow it to recover, 4A makes limited progress towards Tambov (which is now very well defended), but I can now redeploy to take either that or Ryazan as the next main target. Also allows me to fill out my flanks which will limit Soviet options.



A combination of strong resistance and some counter-attacks meant I abandoned the attacks towards Stalingrad. Realistically the city is out of reach, its worth attacking if I can force more to refit than I shed CPP, but clearly its not feasible. Have a fresh corps arriving which may create some options.

However, 4 Pzr A was able to commence its offensive, with Heinrici's 43 Corps destroying the Soviet 44A around Prokladny while 56 Pzr tried to turn their flanks.



Losses reflect the mixed nature of that turn. Soviet losses pushed up by losing 6 divisions at Tula, German tank losses become a real source of concern (really want the 1943 models which gives me a clear technological advantage).



Looks like the Red Army has stopped growing.



Their manpower pool remains static. On my side, the Rumanians have not recovered from the Crimean battles.



And VP chart. In one sense an auto-win for say Jan 43 looks feasible, I only need +44.

But, the last 2 turns for AGC/B have been brutal, suggesting that the Soviets will contest any move on Tambov or Ryazan – to the extent that I fail to make any real gains. If I take them both, then that is +32. Oddly I think Grozny is more feasible, its hard for them to reinforce (except via the reserve) and I've set up a good supply situation there. Grozny plus the other 2 is +48.

Even Grozny and one of Tambov or Ryazan is 640 base city points. That is over the value (630) that matches the Soviet city gains for December 44. So basically, they now need to either capture more than they had at that stage or do so more quickly than I've managed..



If we ignore off map gains/losses (which so far is +7 to me) then its feasible its the exchange rate on city bonus points that becomes important. Again assuming Grozny + one other, I will have 103/136 so a ratio of roughly 70%. The Soviets already have 12 (early retakes of Orel and Rzhev), will gain another +12 on initiative change (unless I actually take Stalingrad and Kalinin – practically, if I do I win in any case). So that is 24/144 (up to December 44). So to balance out my small base city gain, the Soviets need to claim 79/120 currently available. That is about 67% so at the moment, they match the HWM if they more or less match my rate of conquest.

As an aside, this time I could theoretically defend Helsinki, it can't surrender if I retain Leningrad. Not sure about this, but seems a better use of a stay behind force than trying to cling to Sevastopol.

Or in other words, at this stage, its too well balanced to offer any long term predictions but it looks like the HWM test is going to be important.

[M60A3TTS]

T63 – 30 August 1942

Compared to historical around this time, your manpower numbers look very good. The Red Army is slightly above historical where you are well above. Even if you can't make the 1942-Jan 43 victory conditions, from a manpower perspective you have a real chance of winning at the end of 1944 which some Axis players seem reluctant to play through.

[loki100]

aye, agree, we've actually started the turn that maps onto StB.

If you take out the 200k that will be lost with 6A I'm close enough to 1m+ compared



And then the 'Stalingrad' boost to come - without the losses.

What it does mean is that I almost always have strong infantry divisions, even if they lose their offensive capacity with NM and TOE changes they are a formidable obstacle when they have TOE around 70%