1:1 odds, counterattack casualties etc

Gary Grigsby’s War in the East: The German-Soviet War 1941-1945 is a turn-based World War II strategy game stretching across the entire Eastern Front. Gamers can engage in an epic campaign, including division-sized battles with realistic and historical terrain, weather, orders of battle, logistics and combat results.

The critically and fan-acclaimed Eastern Front mega-game Gary Grigsby’s War in the East just got bigger and better with Gary Grigsby’s War in the East: Don to the Danube! This expansion to the award-winning War in the East comes with a wide array of later war scenarios ranging from short but intense 6 turn bouts like the Battle for Kharkov (1942) to immense 37-turn engagements taking place across multiple nations like Drama on the Danube (Summer 1944 – Spring 1945).

Moderators: Joel Billings, Sabre21, elmo3

Smirfy
Posts: 1057
Joined: Fri Jul 16, 2004 8:24 pm

RE: 1:1 odds, counterattack casualties etc

Post by Smirfy »

ORIGINAL: kirkgregerson

ORIGINAL: raizer

the i do this, you need to do that thread

flav says notenome is the first soviet player he has seen on the forums that "gets it" as a soviet pusher...I believe him, and therefore, note is a better player than your competent opponents, its like comparing apples and cashews.


lol, raizer you need to get out more I guess. My sov opponent was able avoid large pocket and leave counter attack pz units with easy in 41 when he decided. He's starting spr 42 with almost 8 million men. When I asked him his secret, he said it was easy .. just have to keep moving troops out of axis inf range, leave some toekn units in good defense terrain to slow axis down, and keep back cav and tank units to counter if axis push armor to far. Not liking that he was not stressed in 41 and won't be again in 42. I agree with comments about it just not feeling right going into 42.

Also, I don't like the insinuation that ComradeP is some novice axis player and doesn't know what he is doing. I think what you need to take away from this is that even a first time sov player like notename is able stay on top of a WitE experience player. I don't think your evaluation of notename being a genius sov player is the right conclusion. Not saying he isn't a smart player... just not what the trend seems to be for what sov players can accomplish in 41-45 scen.

Sorry but that sounds like the ideal tactics that the Russians should have pursued during Barbarossa. The fact we are getting a 42 that does not feel like the historical is down to people as the Russians doing the smart moves and not the historical ones.
raizer
Posts: 276
Joined: Mon Dec 06, 2010 1:30 pm

RE: 1:1 odds, counterattack casualties etc

Post by raizer »

krik I am following comrades aar and rooting for him -how you glean that I couch comrade as novice is puzzling to me to say the least...-I didnt even mention him in the post you replied to.  I simply repeated flavs comments which i believe, note is  a good player and gets it, in spades.  How does that flame comrades skill?


and abul-wheatly played an amazing game against you-i followed the entire aar, he can bring it as the sovs also
User avatar
abulbulian
Posts: 1105
Joined: Thu Mar 31, 2005 5:42 pm

RE: 1:1 odds, counterattack casualties etc

Post by abulbulian »

ORIGINAL: raizer

krik I am following comrades aar and rooting for him -how you glean that I couch comrade as novice is puzzling to me to say the least...-I didnt even mention him in the post you replied to.  I simply repeated flavs comments which i believe, note is  a good player and gets it, in spades.  How does that flame comrades skill?


and abul-wheatly played an amazing game against you-i followed the entire aar, he can bring it as the sovs also

Ok, well I have utmost respect for ComradeP. I think Kirk just jump a little hard on you because he thought you were putting him down. Glad to hear that is not the case. Because I would have to smack you down if it was..hehe.

[8D]
- Beta Tester WitE and ATG
- Alpha/Beta Tester WitW and WitE2

"Invincibility lies in the defence; the possibility of victory in the attack." - Sun Tzu
bwheatley
Posts: 3655
Joined: Mon Dec 13, 2004 4:08 pm
Contact:

RE: 1:1 odds, counterattack casualties etc

Post by bwheatley »

ORIGINAL: Smirfy


Well not being able to assimilate casaulties with zeal in not the greatest foundation to debunk people so work away. Anyway I brought up morale because I actually dont think good units are behaving like good units. I will repeat that it is an oversight that you cannot define the intesity of your defense especially given Stallin and Hitler are your relative CiC's. I think that if we are micromanaging a whole array of features surely we should be able to order troops to hold at all costs or retreat when under pressure.

I agree it would be nice to set a threshold you'd like unit to HOLD UNTIL. 100% (To the death)
then have them stand as long as morale and xp will let them.
-Alpha Tester Carrier Force
-Beta Tester ATG
- Mod Maintainer (past) for ATG's WAW mod
- Mod Maintainer (past) for ATG's GPW mod
-Beta Tester WITE
-Alpha Tester WITW
-Alpha Tester WITE2
-Alpha Tester Wif
-Beta Tester Command
JAMiAM
Posts: 6127
Joined: Sun Feb 08, 2004 6:35 am

RE: 1:1 odds, counterattack casualties etc

Post by JAMiAM »

ORIGINAL: Emir Agic

ORIGINAL: JAMiAM

This game was my first CG, and so I have made a few mistakes along the way, as well. I didn't understand just how important morale is in the game for the first few turns, and didn't maximize morale gain for my units, not morale hits for my opponent. This can have a cascading effect, as the game progresses, and has made me weaker than I could be, and him stronger.

JAMiAM may I ask you to elaborate this thing about units morale in more detail? Or at least to give us link to a thread where this is discussed. Thank you in advance.
Hi,

I probably didn't do a good job of explaining it. Also, I don't know if this has been discussed at length in any particular thread. It's more an observation of a nuance of some game mechanics, that I've gleaned from multiple sources and experience.

Anyhow, morale plays a huge part in this game, and I feel it doesn't get as much attention as it should. Probably because it is always lurking behind so many things, and not at the forefront. For example, morale directly influences effective combat strength, movement rates, attrition rates, retreat results, and 1st Winter effects.

What I didn't realize when I started playing the game was this importance and mistakenly lending greater importance to "spoiling" attacks, trying to wear down defending units. This was a big mistake and caused many of my units to lose morale, while allowing my opponent to have his units gain morale. Essentially, with each failed attack, your opponent becomes stronger - not only relatively, but in real terms. Each failed attack also makes your own forces weaker, not just from the loss of components, but from a loss of morale.

What I meant by the effect cascading is that success breeds success, and failure breeds failure. With the invariable exception to the rule, each attack you make should be with a specific purpose in mind, and you should be at least 90% sure that you will win, because if you don't you are increasing the enemy morale and reducing your own. This makes movement more difficult, and your combat strength lower, creating a spiral of fewer opportunities for you to win battles and continue raising your morale, and your opponent's units getting stronger due to their boosted morale. Once you drop below certain thresholds, your movement is affected and this can have a huge effect on keeping up with a fleeing enemy, or the ability to conduct combinations of movement/attack/etc.

Static conditions due to low mobility almost always favor the strategic defender, which in 1941 is the Soviets. My mistake in not realizing that aspect, or nuance, of the game for the first few turns of the campaign from where the screenshots were taken, has put me in a weaker state than I would like. Still, there are many opportunities to "farm" morale points left before the mud hits, snow falls, and the East freezes solid...[;)]
Jakerson
Posts: 566
Joined: Tue Aug 15, 2006 8:46 am

RE: 1:1 odds, counterattack casualties etc

Post by Jakerson »

ORIGINAL: bwheatley
That is weird. With my game i am having a super easy-ish time of beating back panzer corps with rifle corp & cav corp stacks. Seems almost two easy at times. I wonder if it's just how i played the russians thats different? I cared less about making sure my C&C was right in early 42 and more about getting tank and rifle corps so i horded AP's.

Well it is easy to provide a test soviet 42 attack ability.

Demonstration 8 tank corps and 5 tank brigades (This is something like 20 Tank Divisions) attacking against 2 panzer divisions and 1 motorized division. Soviet have almost 3 times more tanks attacking than Germans have defending. Soviet attacking with 4 full stacks.

German losses 512 men, 16 art, and amazing number of 4 tanks.
Soviet Losses 10592 men, 176 art and amazing number of 448 tanks.

If this is result from 4 full Soviet stacks attacking I would like to know how many full Soviet Stacks I need to beat those German Stacks back easily?


Image
Attachments
test.jpg
test.jpg (336.81 KiB) Viewed 171 times
randallw
Posts: 2060
Joined: Wed Sep 01, 2010 9:28 pm

RE: 1:1 odds, counterattack casualties etc

Post by randallw »

You are taking the term Tank Corps and assuming it's really the size of a corps; the 42a Corps is certainly not even close to it.  It's about 6k men and about 160 tanks, maxed out.  That's not even the size of a full division.  The whole force is about the value of 6-10 tank divisions, not 20.  Also the corps may have absorbed the 25% experience drop from formation; the experience difference between the Germans and Russians may be huge.

I also notice a 70% modifier, apparently from the Russians being from mixed commands.  All this adds up to a slaughter.
Jakerson
Posts: 566
Joined: Tue Aug 15, 2006 8:46 am

RE: 1:1 odds, counterattack casualties etc

Post by Jakerson »

ORIGINAL: randallw

You are taking the term Tank Corps and assuming it's really the size of a corps; the 42a Corps is certainly not even close to it.  It's about 6k men and about 160 tanks, maxed out.  That's not even the size of a full division.  The whole force is about the value of 6-10 tank divisions, not 20.  Also the corps may have absorbed the 25% experience drop from formation; the experience difference between the Germans and Russians may be huge.

I also notice a 70% modifier, apparently from the Russians being from mixed commands.  All this adds up to a slaughter.

In this demo it is 15 Soviet tank corps against 3 German panzer divisions. All soviet troops in same command now. This is deliberate attack of 5 stacks soviet tank corps. Soviet got lucky and was able to destroy 24 German tanks and 1000 men.

I mean this is supposed to be a counter attack of 1600 soviet tanks. Soviet lost third of their assault forces and this is 541 tanks and 15k men. I could keep up attacking 6 full stacks of soviet tank corps but that doesn’t chance result much. In this game 6 full stacks of Soviet tanks corps this is largest force that soviet can use in counter attack even in theory but in practical even 5 full stacks of tank corps in counter attack is maybe too much.

Soviet have zero counter attack ability against these German uber panzer stacks at 1942 it doesn’t matter if Soviet deploy largest number of tank corps that stack rules allow that is 18 tank corps in the counter attack or have that +1 bonus what some people complain.






Image
Attachments
test2.jpg
test2.jpg (372.03 KiB) Viewed 171 times
User avatar
Flaviusx
Posts: 7732
Joined: Wed Sep 09, 2009 3:55 pm
Location: Southern California

RE: 1:1 odds, counterattack casualties etc

Post by Flaviusx »

Jakerson, sending armor against forts is a losing proposition. You really shouldn't be trying to assault a level 4 fort with tank corps in particular; German panzer units at least have more supporting elements and better combined arms as a unit. The nearest equivalent to that on the Soviet side is the mechanized corps.

The tank corps is an exploitation unit -- it gets battered to pieces in heavy assualts. It's moderately effective counterattacking German panzers in the open if those are overextended, but certainly not fresh and heavily dug in German panzers.

Try this with rifle corps. Better yet, rifle corps and artillery divisions. This is the backbone of the Red Army, and your primary tools for heavy deliberate assaults.



WitE Alpha Tester
notenome
Posts: 608
Joined: Sun Dec 27, 2009 11:07 pm

RE: 1:1 odds, counterattack casualties etc

Post by notenome »

Yeah Jackerson, your losses probably have a lot to do with forts, which shouldn't be attacked with tanks, and I'm also not seeing sappers.
 
And Jamiam your spearhead can be isolated by a single counterattack to the Slovakian division, also your supplies are going to have to cross the Dnepr so performance should drop significantly.
 
As for a 2=8 rifle division, let's see. If we're talking early war, óne panzer division can probably muster up 16CV, but that's a risky proposition, latter you'll need two. If the division is in rough or swamp terrain you'll need double that, which can no longer be reliably achieved with a hasty attack. By september a lot of those panzer divisions are gonna have offensive values in the single digits, which get cut down in half on hasty attacks, if they aren't constantly rested (and very few players rest their panzer divisions). As long as the soviets insist on always placing a unit in contact with the panzers, fatigue will remain high, supplies will be low and attrition will take its toll.
Jakerson
Posts: 566
Joined: Tue Aug 15, 2006 8:46 am

RE: 1:1 odds, counterattack casualties etc

Post by Jakerson »

ORIGINAL: Flaviusx

Jakerson, sending armor against forts is a losing proposition. You really shouldn't be trying to assault a level 4 fort with tank corps in particular; German panzer units at least have more supporting elements and better combined arms as a unit. The nearest equivalent to that on the Soviet side is the mechanized corps.

The tank corps is an exploitation unit -- it gets battered to pieces in heavy assualts. It's moderately effective counterattacking German panzers in the open if those are overextended, but certainly not fresh and heavily dug in German panzers.

Try this with rifle corps. Better yet, rifle corps and artillery divisions. This is the backbone of the Red Army, and your primary tools for heavy deliberate assaults.

Here is test run with level 1 fort it is impossible run test run without forts as even if you move German stack to zero lvl fort hex and press end turn when soviet turn start German already sit inside lvl 1 fort. If you attack against German stack of 3 panzer divs they are always at least lvl 1 fort.

Now I'm attacking with 18 Soviet Tank corps that is 6 full stacks largest possible force Soviet could use in counter attack even in theory only result is that Soviet casualties are even higher than when attacking with 5 stacks in the previous test against lvl 4 forts.

In this run Soviet lose 15k men 1000 tanks this is more than when attacking with 5 tank corps stacks against lvl 4 forts.

German lose 1k men and 32tanks.

I have run these test so many times that I could say that Soviet have zero counter attack ability against these stacks at 1942 summer. Even theoretical maximum force dosent do anything else than increse soviet counter attack casulties. No matter what force combination Soviet use result is always same germans lose 30 tanks if Soviet are lucky and soviet near thousands.






Image
Attachments
test3.jpg
test3.jpg (384.99 KiB) Viewed 171 times
User avatar
cookie monster
Posts: 1690
Joined: Sun May 22, 2005 10:09 am
Location: Birmingham,England

RE: 1:1 odds, counterattack casualties etc

Post by cookie monster »

Those tank corps have a very low CV.

Probably low morale.

Plus 15 Tank Corps under one command is 60 Command Points.

At least DOUBLE over what a FRONT can support inside C&C limits.

My tanks generally are used for pouring thru an open line and beating up defenceless units in the way.

In early 42 they may bash back overextended spearheads to get the Guards Status.

Tanks don't assault level 4 forts

Your example is not very good IMHO
User avatar
cookie monster
Posts: 1690
Joined: Sun May 22, 2005 10:09 am
Location: Birmingham,England

RE: 1:1 odds, counterattack casualties etc

Post by cookie monster »

Its not impossible to run a test without forts.

As per the manual

A unit may construct fortifications with left over movement points

Its divided per movement points remaining to get a dig value
User avatar
Flaviusx
Posts: 7732
Joined: Wed Sep 09, 2009 3:55 pm
Location: Southern California

RE: 1:1 odds, counterattack casualties etc

Post by Flaviusx »

Yeah, I'm still not seeing a problem here, Jakerson. Overloaded command, green tank corps, probably 42a tank corps with the garbage TOE, fresh panzers.

The panzers can be mauled under the right conditions, but not these. Wait for them to overextend themselves. Beyond that, these early tank corps are fragile beasts and rightly so. It takes a while for them to get up to speed. Give them some easy wins (Axis minors are great for this), train them up, wait for their TOE to improve. I can get 10+ CV tank corps by autumn of 42 with some careful management. They will not be amazing in June or July, nor should they be. Historically the early tank corps got mauled. The Germans more or less detroyed three tank armies during Fall Blau in this period. (This is setting aside the cock up at Kharkov, mind you.)




WitE Alpha Tester
MechFO
Posts: 858
Joined: Fri Jun 01, 2007 4:06 am

RE: 1:1 odds, counterattack casualties etc

Post by MechFO »

Not referring to Jakerson but in general;

I think that currently deliberate attacks by mobile units give very little bang for their buck, so one tries to avoid them, which IMO relegates them to being only useful for exploitation. Infantry units can often retreat from a deliberate attack with limited losses considering the force/mobility disparity.

Consider, in the best case a mobile unit will have 40-50MP's per turn, so a day represents somewhere around 7-8MP's.

A deliberate attack at 16MP's represents around 2+ days worth of movement and combat. Considering the amount of combat that can take place in 2 days, the results are mostly very tame. At least when facing foot mobile units, the end result of a successful deliberate attack should in most cases be at least a ROUT. Given 2+ days of time, and the mobility mismatch, I seriously doubt any Inf unit can expect to execute a successful delaying action in the case of a RETREAT result (if delaying is covered by RETREAT, in the first place).

Another option would be to lower the MP needed for a deliberate attack down to 8-10. This would represent about a days worth of combat, which seems much more reasonable given the present results. This reduction might give rise to the fear that mobile units will become overpowered, but IMO this is overdone. Ammo usage a fatigue should prevent too many attacks by the same unit during any one turn as they will rapidly lose effectiveness.

User avatar
Flaviusx
Posts: 7732
Joined: Wed Sep 09, 2009 3:55 pm
Location: Southern California

RE: 1:1 odds, counterattack casualties etc

Post by Flaviusx »

I can get good results from both the Germans and Soviets if I include some mobile units in support of an infantry heavy assault. But yeah, deliberate attacks are really infantry work.

I actually include 1 tank corps in my shock armies, and they do very nicely in this role. Mixed in with a number of rifle corps, they give a good account of themselves.
WitE Alpha Tester
User avatar
Mynok
Posts: 12108
Joined: Sat Nov 30, 2002 12:12 am
Contact:

RE: 1:1 odds, counterattack casualties etc

Post by Mynok »

include some mobile units in support of an infantry heavy assault

What do you mean by "in support"? Are you saying reserves will join an assault...on the attack?
"Measure civilization by the ability of citizens to mock government with impunity" -- Unknown
User avatar
cookie monster
Posts: 1690
Joined: Sun May 22, 2005 10:09 am
Location: Birmingham,England

RE: 1:1 odds, counterattack casualties etc

Post by cookie monster »

He means a combined arms attack

Mainly infantry with a tank corps too
JAMiAM
Posts: 6127
Joined: Sun Feb 08, 2004 6:35 am

RE: 1:1 odds, counterattack casualties etc

Post by JAMiAM »

ORIGINAL: notenome

And Jamiam your spearhead can be isolated by a single counterattack to the Slovakian division, also your supplies are going to have to cross the Dnepr so performance should drop significantly.
You need to look again. The Slovakian division is the most exposed unit, but if attacked, will retreat toward the HQ stack 2 hexes ESE. Also, between the other units and their zocs, there is no way that any unit in the area can penetrate enough to deny the three units along the east bank of the Sula River supplies. Again, they will be tracing from the HQ stack which had heavy airdrops of fuel and supplies on my turn.

ORIGINAL: notenome
As for a 2=8 rifle division, let's see. If we're talking early war, óne panzer division can probably muster up 16CV, but that's a risky proposition, latter you'll need two. If the division is in rough or swamp terrain you'll need double that, which can no longer be reliably achieved with a hasty attack. By september a lot of those panzer divisions are gonna have offensive values in the single digits, which get cut down in half on hasty attacks, if they aren't constantly rested (and very few players rest their panzer divisions). As long as the soviets insist on always placing a unit in contact with the panzers, fatigue will remain high, supplies will be low and attrition will take its toll.
I'm not talking one panzer division attacking. Reread my tactics description. I'm talking about entire Pz Korps making attacks, augmented by directly assigned SUs. These stacks generally start out around 40-45 CV at the start of their exploitation attacks, and end up somewhere in the mid 20's by the time they split up and take their defensive positions.

You can tarbaby the outside of my breakthroughs, but what you're missing is that I have substantial reserves inside them, unimpeded by ezoc. Those will be less fatigued, and able to further the exploitation in whatever weak direction will be left. This is where ComradeP and so many other Axis players fail. Their penetrations are too narrow, and/or shallow, to create this operational space for them to be freed up for continuation of the initial breakthrough.
ComradeP
Posts: 6992
Joined: Thu Sep 17, 2009 3:11 pm

RE: 1:1 odds, counterattack casualties etc

Post by ComradeP »

JAMiAM: the main difference is that your opponent has a line with little depth, and notenome has a depth of 3 hexes in many areas.

Those attacks I should be launching according to you all cost MP's. If your opponent's divisions rout after 2 or 3 hasty attacks, good for you, but notenome's divisions generally don't.

What happens when a Rifle division is attacked in a hasty attack is that it loses, if you're lucky, between 750 and 1000 men, and retreats. Even though a Rifle division (and infantry in general) has very little mobility, and would thus would be under very significant pressure to stage an organized withdrawal, there's no bonus or modifier when facing a combined arms or mobile unit attack. It just retreats. notenome's divisions tend to retreat 3 or 4 times before routing, if attacked by hasty attacks. They do mostly rout when attacked with a deliberate attack.

In both of the screenshots you posted, there are no Soviet reserves or any depth in the Soviet line. No wonder you blew through them.

In my game with notenome, that pile of routed units at the end of my turn rallies in his turn, is back in the line by my turn, and is routed again.

No Rifle division has shattered after the opening turn, not a single one. They all retreat orderly or rout, where the odd thing is that the divisions that retreat often take higher losses as they can be attacked more than once.

Mobility might be the Axis' greatest asset, it's also very easy for the Soviets to limit it, primarily because the Axis can't really destroy Soviet divisions without encircling them or keep them routed.

I also still seem to be facing a bug that was supposedly fixed, as my Panzer corps HQ's are still hoarding fuel dumps. As I drop fuel on HQ's instead of divisions in some cases, that means many of my divisions don't have more than 30 MP's even if the dumps are available.

You need to play againt an opponent who knows what a defence in depth is before you can understand why I'm saying attacks like you've been able to make against other opponents are pretty utopian against an opponent who checkerboards or places a carpet of units in your path.

If a penetration is successful, such as in the center, unpredictably successful Soviet counterattacks have cost me two turns of progress in the center. With the ease with which mobile units get pushed around now, the high casualties they're taking, and the fact that any units you rout will just be in the line again next turn, it's extremely difficult to get through a carpet currently.

notenome's casualties from routing do seem to have increased slightly, so maybe some of his divisions have finally had it, after being routed for several turns in a row.
How do you think the routing/recovery rules should be changed?

I'm currently thinking about something like: routed units that are rallied fight as if unready until the next friendly phase, no matter what shape they're really in. So the sequence would be: enemy phase 1#:unit is routed, friendly phase 1#: unit is rallied and fights as if unready, enemy phase 2# the units that were rallied still fight as unready, as opposed to the current situation where they can be combat ready, friendly phase 2#: the unit, if not routed again and if not unready/depleted, returns to full combat readiness.
SSG tester
WitE Alpha tester
Panzer Corps Beta tester
Unity of Command scenario designer
Post Reply

Return to “Gary Grigsby's War in the East Series”