Matrix Games Forums

ORIGINAL: BigAnorak
edit: and make sure your elefants, panthers and tigers are in the right places to support the most combats.

How do you do this? Where do you attach them? At corp lvl or army lvl?

And it seems like ComradeP is right about balance from what the guys writing the AAR are saying.

Turn 53. June 26th 1943.

The mud finally clears and the ground dries up. We start with some minor probing attacks, which though generally successful reveal strong enemy reserves behind the front, so further offensive action ís broken off. This is answered by a massive Soviet attack along the whole front south of Kaluga. No big breakthroughs. A couple of divisions encircled here and there, but timely couterattacks by our panzer reserves open a path to freedom for their encircled comrades. What is worryying is that the ratio of casualties are now more equal. We lose almost as many men as the attacking Soviets, while they still lose many more guns and AFVs. This is a worrying trend...

Map of the southern half of the front at start of German turn 53, with Soviet attacks shown.

ORIGINAL: ComradeP

My opinion remains that the 1942 campaign is too easy for the Soviets because they can use their massive rail capacity to rail reinforcements to any breakthrough. It is also currently impossible to cripple the Soviets through regular attacking, you really need encirclements and if you're playing a competent opponent, there won't be many in 1942. Of course, the Soviets will more or less always advance at a snail's pace even in 1945, but they can already become sort of unstoppable in 1942.

Are you talking about the 1942 Campaign Game, or 1942 in a GC in general?

The opening set-up in the '42 Campaign lends itself to breakouts and encirclements.

How do you do this? Where do you attach them? At corp lvl or army lvl?

And it seems like ComradeP is right about balance from what the guys writing the AAR are saying.

Attaching at corps level will probably produce the best results.

I think Pieter should always apply the rider "based on the limited test results we have seen". The 1942 campaign was not tested as much as we would have liked, and we are testing some variants such as increasing Axis APs, and disallowing the movement of static units by rail.

I stand by my original contention that both of the current published AARs could result in Axis minor victories. The soviets are now the ones on the clock, and if they fall behind they will struggle to catch up. The Axis have enough units and enough time to build really strong defences on the Dnepr. Hold the Dnepr through the Winter of 1943 and the Soviets will have to do really well in the summer of 1944, because again the axis has enough time to build defences to protect the VPs needed for a minor victory.

edit: You are building strong defences on the Dnepr aren't you Tarhunnas?

edited edit: Could you post T53 OOB screenshots - thanks.

I think Pieter should always apply the rider "based on the limited test results we have seen". The 1942 campaign was not tested as much as we would have liked

But what is "limited"? In the final ~3 months of testing, I was I believe the tester most involved with testing the 1942 campaign vs. the AI from primarily the Axis perspective, and a number of bugs were discovered. Sure, no full 1942 campaign against a person was tested, but that goes for every campaign because they were all updated shortly before release to the point that they required restarts.

I'm basing it on the results I've had and the results I've seen. You can get a pretty accurate idea of what can happen and what isn't going to happen in the coming turns after even 2 turns, which is also why I said our latest test was pretty much pointless to continue because I could rail reinforcements, including static ones, into the area at a pace that you couldn't match as the Axis.

The significant amount of Soviet active units and generous rail capacity can make the 1942 campaign very difficult for the Axis from the start and the AAR results we've seen, both tester and ones like this one, show that crippling the Soviets through destroying units is pretty unlikely to happen. For example: I'd say Tarhunnas did, for what he wanted to do, a good job with destroying units, but even he's nearly back at his 1942 startline in summer 1943.

You can get a pretty accurate idea of what can happen and what isn't going to happen after even 2 turns, which is also why I said our latest test was pretty much pointless to continue because I could rail reinforcements, including static ones, into the area at a pace that you couldn't match as the Axis.

And I'm playing a game against Don with no railing of static units and extra APs for the Axis, and I am seeing very different results in 2 turns.

I understand 2 people will look at the same set of numbers and come up with 2 completely different interpretations, but there are 2 things I will point to, and I will guess about what the OOB screenshot will show.

Firstly: Where are the Soviet Artillery divisions?
Secondly: because I can't see any Artillery Divisions I will guess that the Soviets will have 90-95k guns, which is 45-50k less than the 1943 campaign starts with.

Would I take 50k less guns firing at me in 1943 - you bet I would.

I promise you the Soviets are already behind the clock.

I'll also point out two things:

1) Where is the Axis strength that they still have at the start of the 1943-1945 campaign? In the winter, the last time a screenshot with visible CV values was posted, the Axis were showing low CV's and manpower was building up in his pool because Tarhunnas didn't have the armament points to equip them.

2) Where are the forts he really needs to hold out, and which form the main reason the Soviets need artillery divisions? He doesn't seem to have fortified most hexes he's holding, and he's being pushed back each turn. With no forts, or with Rifle corps loaded with sapper regiments, the need for artillery divisions decreases substantially. You don't need an artillery division to push a 1-2 CV infantry division out of a level 1 or 2 fort.

For the record: I didn't mean that as criticism of Tarhunnas' playstyle, just as an indication of the problems he faces which can potentially make the game easier for the Soviets than it would be at the start of the 1943 campaign.

ORIGINAL: ComradeP

I'll also point out two things:

1) Where is the Axis strength that they still have at the start of the 1943-1945 campaign? In the winter, the last time a screenshot with visible CV values was posted, the Axis were showing low CV's and manpower was building up in his pool because Tarhunnas didn't have the armament points to equip them.

Yes, low axis strength is a problem.

ORIGINAL: ComradeP
2) Where are the forts he really needs to hold out, and which form the main reason the Soviets need artillery divisions? He doesn't seem to have fortified most hexes he's holding, and he's being pushed back each turn. With no forts, or with Rifle corps loaded with sapper regiments, the need for artillery divisions decreases substantially. You don't need an artillery division to push a 1-2 CV infantry division out of a level 1 or 2 fort.

Most front line hexes are fortified to at least lvl3, I just don't always have forts switched on in the screenshots.

Turn 54. Renewed Soviet attacks in the south. Some penetrations, but in a couple of these it is possible to cut off the spearheads.

Cut off Soviet spearheads east of Kharkov. The encirclements are not strong however, and most will probably be broken by the Soviets next turn. Losses are heavy. SS divisions have gone from average CV 17-18 to the CVs shown in three turns of fighting!

OOB from beginning of turn 55. Rifle squads are down to 11.7k from slightly above 15k when mud ended. This is not looking good!

Not a bad guess on the artillery Big A! However, my problem is German weakness.

Ouch. Got a pile of tanks for the Axis, but not a lot of other stuff. Luftwaffe is hurting and the artillery doesn't look very robust either. 

You've played well, but that lack of armaments is a big concern. You don't deserve really to be close to collapse, but 11K Rifle Squads....that's bad. Those CVs in screenshots seem to confirm that. Your Gun count also seems very low to me.

The SS Divisions are Armament-Hogs, with all the PzG squads. I don't see how you can rebuild them, AND get that overall Rifle squad number up.

It's unfortunate, but you probably found a shortcoming in production that needs fixing, because you are on a trajectory that is going to end this game in a few months

ORIGINAL: Q-Ball

You've played well, but that lack of armaments is a big concern. You don't deserve really to be close to collapse, but 11K Rifle Squads....that's bad. Those CVs in screenshots seem to confirm that. Your Gun count also seems very low to me.

The SS Divisions are Armament-Hogs, with all the PzG squads. I don't see how you can rebuild them, AND get that overall Rifle squad number up.

It's unfortunate, but you probably found a shortcoming in production that needs fixing, because you are on a trajectory that is going to end this game in a few months

Yes, I am afraid it seems it will all fall apart for me in the next few turns! I simply don't have the strength to put up a defence and I don't see how I will be able to stop the Soviets at the Dnepr [:(]

Turn 55. Continuing Soviet attacks all along the southern front. North of Kaluga however, the front is completely quiet. I start to transfer what few reserves I have in the northern sector to the south, knowing I will be extremely weak up there if Ivan launches an attack there too. Not that they will make much difference down south, but one has to try... Two weak panzer divisions and two weak infantry diviions are railed south.

Meanwhile, I continue to cut off the Soviet spearheads, but I lack the strength to make enduring encirclements. When I can, I rout encircled units instead, that will at least inflict heavy casualties and make them unavaliable for a few truns while they lick their wounds.

Shot of area east of Stalino, end of German turn 55. This has been the scene of the most heavy attacks.

Below are losses after German turn 56. Note that I still inflict nearly 2-1 casualties in counterattacks, more in guns and AFVs, but this is not nearly enough.

Casualty ratio, total casualties.

Men: 2.35
Guns: 2.28
AFV: 3.26

Compared with the numbers below, the situation is clearly getting gradually worse!

Loss ratio in march:
Men 2.48
Art 2.39
AFV 3.40

October:
Men 2.64
Guns 4
AFV 2.9

Rifle squads are slightly above 10k, as can be seen in the picture below (I have two types as they are currently switching over to the type with panzerfausts).



On the bright side, the motor pool is 298 (84), so at least there is no shortage of trucks [:)]

Overview of the southern half of the front, start of German turn 56. As can be seen, the entire front south of Kaluga is ablaze! All the little red dots are Soviet attacks! No big breaktroughs, but a steady and relentless pressure along the entire front. Here and there there is a probing finger of Soviet armored penetration, but I manage to rout a couple of Tank Corps and contain or knock back the spearheads.

In the sector of Army Group Center, everything is calm. However, we execute a long planned operation called Mini Büffel and withdraw to prepared positions in the Vyazma area, which frees up some divisions to reinforce the front further south.

And in the south, extremely heavy fighting continue in the area east of Stalino. One German and two Rumanian divisions are caught in a pocket on the Sea of Azov and there are no forces available to free them. Otherwise we are able to rescue several pockets of German divisions and extricate the surrounded troops. We never leave our men in the lurch!