Helio's Axis AAR (v Cannonfodder Soviet)

[heliodorus04]

I consolidate to make it as impenetrable as I can. I’m actually afraid CF will have to surrender if this pocket holds, and I can’t see how it won’t hold.

(Editor's note: CF said he doesn't think the loss will cripple him and we should have an interesting 1942...)

[heliodorus04]

Now, a little editorializing for the community’s enjoyment (or maybe just mine). Is this an example of buildup being overpowered? I’m not sure, and I like to be an honest broker considering all perspectives thoughtfully before making up my mind. I have been using at least 1 HQ buildup per Army Group – I haven’t kept a close tally, but the AAR will say every time I’ve used it. I have also documented each time I let a panzer HQ and/or its divisions rest for a turn. Both have been indispensible to getting to this point on the map. And I’ve probably rested a mobile corps the same number of times as I’ve used buildup twice in an army group.

But I see two other reasons why this is a non-exploitive use of buildup. First, I’ve frankly learned how to use it much better. I understand how to read the map while anticipating where my panzers will be relative to railhead 2 or 3 turns down the road. There’s a rhythm and a distance to it, once you get some practice. And in the combat engine, I understand better much force I need to dislodge enemies from positions that facilitate movement, and knowing how to facilitate movement (this is especially true of understanding how to convert terrain for rapid infantry movement) is the key to my success at least.

And the second reason my buildups have been so effective to this point is that I doubled the FBDs onto 1 rail line in the south in the early game, and 2 FBDs also on the AGC line about T9 I think, and that makes a world of difference. Please note, however, that it’s a very large gamble, and last turn I mentioned that I was starting to patrol with regiments the main artery line of AGC and AGS. Check out how close I came to having AGS out of supply…

[BletchleyGeek]

Very well done Helio (applause).

[heliodorus04]

Partisans!

[heliodorus04]

Yeah, my strategy has a very large risk associated with my entire army group going out of supply. On a normal turn, you’re only gaining 1 rail conversion hex a turn. For that, I sacrifice a backup rail line…

So with that operation done for the moment, I’m going to finish the AGC area west of Moscow. I was holding on to 24., 46. & 39.Panzer corps to see if they’d be necessary in the encirclement of SW front. That’s gone well enough that I don’t have to commit them. I’m not sure what to do with them, and the area southwest of Kaluga offers a soft target to a desperate Soviet enemy, so having a little reserve sounds like a good idea.

One of the things I wanted to do was to take Kaluga, and any hex across either the Zhizdra river (the minor south of Kaluga) or the Okay (the major). I strung out a couple of divisions in a pocket there, and they escaped, but their morale should suck, so I’m going to see if I can’t dislodge them with infantry. A miss-click committed 20.Motorized, but I took the hex. Just lost some MPs…

The success at Kaluga inspired me to commit 46.Panzer to both afore-mentioned rivers, and 3-SHAs dislodged both defenders with barely over 2.0 odds (2.7, 2.3): my record-keeping showed me that some of these Rifle divisions had retreated 3-5 times over the last 2 turns. Low morale creates retreats. I’m losing tanks left and right, but tell that to Southwest Front right now… They’d trade their tanks for food… Since CF will have to shift units from Moscow southward, crossing these rivers gives me another chance to split his force in two in the near future.

[heliodorus04]

Moscow operations ended up looking like this:

[heliodorus04]

It’s odd looking at Moscow with the gaps I have between divisions. There’s certainly counter-attack opportunity up there, but I think CF is going to realize the danger he’s in at Kursk, and he might have to abandon Moscow once I break the forts simply to consolidate his line. I could understand a player asking for a restart upon having this number of units isolated, but hopefully CF will want to see where it goes from here. I’m sure Soviet players have survived worse. I mean this good-humoredly: at least he has all of his armaments (smiley)

39.Panzer is using buildup. 2 of the divisions even rested, but I planned the HQ’s move last turn specifically to have this option. I even had some divisions out of command range knowing that they could catch up this turn while the HQ sat idle waiting to spend the AP. I have plenty of APs. I don’t have a specific move in mind for the panzer corps, but I’ve come to learn how to roll HQ buildups so that you always have a corps able to either grind a bunch of attacks against ant-units, or exploit a move. There doesn’t seem to be any more critical imperative to success than properly managing buildup logistics

On to Leningrad, where there’s not much to report except the crossing of the Neva at ‘the corner’. A 3-SHA failed to dislodge the port defenders. The remaining MPs were spent on a 2-SHA, which reduced the fort to 0. It’ll probably be 2 more turns as we wrestle for that port like Ricardo Mantalbahn at the end of Star Trek 2…

[heliodorus04]

Leningrad

[heliodorus04]

Finally, 11.Army has to figure out what it’s going to do.

CF is going to have to abandon a lot of ground to shore up the sector west of Voronezh, and I am half-inclined to recommend he abandon the Crimea. That’s probably too self-serving of me, but I’d love it if he’d leave. The only thing for 11.Army to do is consolidate and keep the pressure on the lower Dnepr, as much as I want to go into the Crimea. Maybe he’ll withdraw independently of my wishes…

Here is how the Sea of Azov looks:

[heliodorus04]

I forgot to make the OOB stats my lead item: this is how things looked at the end of 11

So after last turn’s adjustments to German TOEs, I’ve turned the armaments situation around at least temporarily. For the next turn or 2, armament drain will be less because TOEs are now only set to 80 for infantry. Once most of my infantry hits that number, then armaments will drain again. I might move the TOE values up on certain types of SUs (artillery) or else I’ll just up the TOE for particular corps. I’m trying to organize my army for the next 7 turns (plus a likely winter Typhoon) around key corps driving forward. On the Soviet side, we’ve reached Turn 11, and from what I recall, Turns 11-13 the Soviet won’t receive much in the way of new divisions raised. So the fact that he still increased his OOB by 75K is disheartening (well, during editing, I should shut up about ever being disheartened by the game…), I still have the gun situation in a downward trend. The aircraft situation is worrisome, but CF also said that I’ve destroyed a lot of aircraft on the ground (because he keeps letting me!). I know that the continuous displacement of airbases has cost him a lot of support squads. I’m hoping his turn-over-turn attrition from lack of support will help me out until at least the end of snow. In the air, I have a lot of AGC’s bombers in national reserve since T10 because morale was too low (my cutoffs is around 45: once your morale is lower than Soviet, you’re going to give away kills to the Soviet on morale alone).

[Balou]

1. I see your arms pool climbing, but your right, it’s going to be stressed again. To train myself in WitE logistics, and since I guess you like numbers and stats, I tried to figure out what a TOE reduction for artillery and rocket support units has to offer – a move that has been suggested in some threads.
The build cost for 10% of the hardware + support of all artillery and rocket support units (guns, howitzers, nebelwerfer) equals 21,878 arm points as per TOE of June 22, 1941, Germany alone. Half of these costs come from the very expensive, yet large number of 210mm M18 howitzers (build cost 346! for a single gun). In 41 you start with 31 Hwz Bns, each one equipped with 12 of those 210mm. Reducing their TOE by 10% would save 12,800 arm points.
I hope no one tells me I misunderstood the “production” chapter .

2. Btw, what’s CFs losses (death & captured)? From the map he has a lot of manpower left. Together with all arms factories saved, he still has the main ingredients for a terrific comeback at hand.

[heliodorus04]

ORIGINAL: Balou

1. I see your arms pool climbing, but your right, it’s going to be stressed again. To train myself in WitE logistics, and since I guess you like numbers and stats, I tried to figure out what a TOE reduction for artillery and rocket support units has to offer – a move that has been suggested in some threads.
The build cost for 10% of the hardware + support of all artillery and rocket support units (guns, howitzers, nebelwerfer) equals 21,878 arm points as per TOE of June 22, 1941, Germany alone. Half of these costs come from the very expensive, yet large number of 210mm M18 howitzers (build cost 346! for a single gun). In 41 you start with 31 Hwz Bns, each one equipped with 12 of those 210mm. Reducing their TOE by 10% would save 12,800 arm points.
I hope no one tells me I misunderstood the “production” chapter .

2. Btw, what’s CFs losses (death & captured)? From the map he has a lot of manpower left. Together with all arms factories saved, he still has the main ingredients for a terrific comeback at hand.

THanks very much for those formulas. Where do you find out how much these things cost? I'm not familiar with some of the production screens. The start of the turn's pool and loss numbers for T12 (which I have, but have not played) are as follows:

[heliodorus04]

He lost men, and we can expect the shortfall is going to grow in the next several turns.  He finally went down in total aircraft.  I’m running out of tanks to kill, I think.  The gun situation is also going to get huge in my favor.  On the German side, good manpower, almost doubled my Armaments over last turn, and vehicles are at a point where I am concerned with what I want to do between now and Blizzard.
Sorry about the spreadsheet scale.

[Balou]

Where do you find out how much these things cost? I'm not familiar with some of the production screens

Neither was I until last weekend, when I had a closer look at the production screen.
I thinks its very easy to get these numbers:

1. Go to production screen
2. find eg 210mm Howitzer
a) hit "210mm Howitzer" (in blue), and you get a new screen, telling you the "build cost" in armament points per piece.
b) go back to production screen and hit (again in blue) the row indicating the number of units that are equipped with that stuff. Now appears...
3) a list of all units that have this specific weapon and ...
4) the number of guns (highlighted in red) just beneath the number of units...
5) finally: Build cost x number of guns = overall costs in armament points.
At least that's how I did it. Hopefully right...

Thanks for the losses tables. Doesn't look very comforting, knowing he has 4,6 mio troops, 4k tanks, and all his arms factories evac.

[heliodorus04]

ORIGINAL: Balou

Where do you find out how much these things cost? I'm not familiar with some of the production screens

Neither was I until last weekend, when I had a closer look at the production screen.
I thinks its very easy to get these numbers:

1. Go to production screen
2. find eg 210mm Howitzer
a) hit "210mm Howitzer" (in blue), and you get a new screen, telling you the "build cost" in armament points per piece.
b) go back to production screen and hit (again in blue) the row indicating the number of units that are equipped with that stuff. Now appears...
3) a list of all units that have this specific weapon and ...
4) the number of guns (highlighted in red) just beneath the number of units...
5) finally: Build cost x number of guns = overall costs in armament points.
At least that's how I did it. Hopefully right...

Thanks for the losses tables. Doesn't look very comforting, knowing he has 4,6 mio troops, 4k tanks, and all his arms factories evac.

CF said he thinks there's 1 million in that pocket. That's pretty comforting, actually...

[Balou]

My apologies for bad predictions....

That's going to change the picture. And there is no Leningrad included yet, or did I miss it?.

[heliodorus04]

I had only crossed the Neva last turn at Leningrad.  But the POW count won't be too high, I don't think.  He was pretty economical about getting units out in time.

[Balou]

... as much as I want to go into the Crimea. Maybe he’ll withdraw independently of my wishes…

I still wonder why people go for the Crimea instead of sealing it off and digging in at the chokepoints. It is certainly easier to seal it at Kerch, but that requires Sevastopol surrounded/taken, hence a lot of troops that may be used elsewhere.

[heliodorus04]

The problem with sealing it off, at least as I see it, is that if I'm incorrect about whether it IS in fact 'sealed' I could lose all of my army group south.  Now, I've not fought successfully through a blizzard yet, so this is theory-craft on my part.

I also think on a Net-Present-Value perspective, 41 is the best time to do it.  The winter of 41 is the prime motivator: if you lose the chokepoints with units exposed to supply problems at Stalino, you could have Stalingrad 41.  And I also think  in 41, the opportunity is there to do it as cheaply as you're ever going to do it.

I will look and see what he does with the defenders down there, but if they remain in force, I'm afraid that 1 corps of 11.Army will be going down there with the Romanians to slug it out all winter to Sevastapol and to Kerch.  Kerch has armament I want to be sure he loses anyway.

[heliodorus04]

Here are the OOB and Loss stats