A Grey Steppe Eagle (loki100 vs Vigabrand)

[mikelisby]

Fantastic AAR, Loki, as always! I particularly love how yours read like history books complete with maps and pictures [:)]

I have a question, though: In all of the AARs I've read (granted, I've far from read all of them yet), the eastern front seems to turn into Verdun and the Somme in 1942. Is this due to the human players not making the same mistakes as their historical counterparts (and there being no way in the game to work around this as, say, the Germans), or is it the same against the AI?

If it is, then it would seem a pity, at least as far as WitE as a simulator of history is concerned.

[loki100]

ORIGINAL: mikelisby

Fantastic AAR, Loki, as always! I particularly love how yours read like history books complete with maps and pictures [:)]

I have a question, though: In all of the AARs I've read (granted, I've far from read all of them yet), the eastern front seems to turn into Verdun and the Somme in 1942. Is this due to the human players not making the same mistakes as their historical counterparts (and there being no way in the game to work around this as, say, the Germans), or is it the same against the AI?

If it is, then it would seem a pity, at least as far as WitE as a simulator of history is concerned.

thank you

I think any decent east front simulation has a spell of attritional stalemate, when effectively the Red Army is strong enough to stop the Germans but not really strong enough to overwhelm them. I'd say in most games this comes up in 1943 ... and is a feasible representation of what might have happened if the Germans opted to defend not attack at Kursk

In game I think both armies tend to be stronger. You don't get the set of Soviet disasters from Kiev-Kharkov that opened the door to the German summer offensive, a German player will better handle their army over the 1941-2 winter and not allow anything like Stalingrad.

In general, this game brutally punished salients, something that when they bring in concepts from WiTW will change. But for the moment, straight lines are the norm.

So yes, it tends to produce a set of bruising battles rather than sweeping movements. I'd say some is the game engine, some is the result of standard PBEM playstyle.

If you give the German AI lots of bonuses and the Soviets some negatives, you can get a situation in the summer of 1942 where average German morale is over 85 and average Soviet morale is 35-38. That does unlock the front in a dramatic way, as the Soviets can't hold anywhere but Moscow and the AI is less obsessed about its flanks.

[mikelisby]

(This forum sure has some quirks when it comes to posting. "No links?" There weren't any, thanks. Oh, and thanks a bundle for deleting everything I'd written when I hit "back", silly software. Edit: deleted all the smileys and I could post again. Apparently smileys are the same as links, phone numbers and email. Go figure. )

Thanks for the reply, Loki!

I see the same as you. '43 seems to be happening in '42 all the time. As you said, probably because human players don't blunder as much as Yosef and Adolf did.

I haven't had a shot at the GC yet as I only got the game a few weeks ago, but I've been playing the "road to..." scenarios quite a bit to learn the ropes. Which has been made easier by my ridiculous amount of time spent with the predecessor, WiR. Of course, that also makes me compare the two quite a bit. WiR, in my recollection, seemed to hit the historical "right note" very well whether one played the Soviet or the German, which is to say full speed ahead in '41, last chance push in '42 and delaying the inevitable '43 to '45. Of course, it's been a long time so I may remember incorrectly.

I guess the only way to test this one would be to play "right hand vs. left hand" while trying to duplicate the historical maneuvers and mistakes to see how it turns out, but that would be quite a project!

Time to jump into the GC myself. I should know enough (thanks to this forum and my playthroughs of the "road to..." scenarios) to avoid at least the most colossally embarrassing blunders. I'm sure I'll come up with some blunders of my own, however

Just one question: Playing as the German against a Soviet AI, would the "normal" settings out of the box be enough for a historical "feel", or are there some additional setting tweaks that you (or anybody else reading this) would recommend?

[governato]

when I was testing WITE (I helped the development team a tiny bit in 2014) I did find that lowering the Fort Level to 65-70 (in the game options) made the game 'more fluid', with 'less straight' frontlines that better followed geographical features like major rivers (as historical).

Fort level Impacts the speed at which fortification levels are built (15.3.2). A lower FL value makes the build up slower. 65-70 makes the time it takes for attacking units to rest/build up supplies shorter than
it takes to the defenders to entrench significantly.

Caveat: I did not get to test this on a full campaign scenario, but if you want to try it, I 'd be curious to see how it goes.

[timmyab]

ORIGINAL: mikelisby
I have a question, though: In all of the AARs I've read (granted, I've far from read all of them yet), the eastern front seems to turn into Verdun and the Somme in 1942. Is this due to the human players not making the same mistakes as their historical counterparts (and there being no way in the game to work around this as, say, the Germans), or is it the same against the AI?

This only happens if The Soviet player has basically won the game in 1941. In an even game the Axis player can launch a powerful offensive in 42.

[loki100]

ORIGINAL: mikelisby

(This forum sure has some quirks when it comes to posting. "No links?" There weren't any, thanks. Oh, and thanks a bundle for deleting everything I'd written when I hit "back", silly software. Edit: deleted all the smileys and I could post again. Apparently smileys are the same as links, phone numbers and email. Go figure. )

Thanks for the reply, Loki!

I see the same as you. '43 seems to be happening in '42 all the time. As you said, probably because human players don't blunder as much as Yosef and Adolf did.

I haven't had a shot at the GC yet as I only got the game a few weeks ago, but I've been playing the "road to..." scenarios quite a bit to learn the ropes. Which has been made easier by my ridiculous amount of time spent with the predecessor, WiR. Of course, that also makes me compare the two quite a bit. WiR, in my recollection, seemed to hit the historical "right note" very well whether one played the Soviet or the German, which is to say full speed ahead in '41, last chance push in '42 and delaying the inevitable '43 to '45. Of course, it's been a long time so I may remember incorrectly.

I guess the only way to test this one would be to play "right hand vs. left hand" while trying to duplicate the historical maneuvers and mistakes to see how it turns out, but that would be quite a project!

Time to jump into the GC myself. I should know enough (thanks to this forum and my playthroughs of the "road to..." scenarios) to avoid at least the most colossally embarrassing blunders. I'm sure I'll come up with some blunders of my own, however

Just one question: Playing as the German against a Soviet AI, would the "normal" settings out of the box be enough for a historical "feel", or are there some additional setting tweaks that you (or anybody else reading this) would recommend?

ah the process of earning the right to include links is one of this forum's quirks. Think you need 10 posts and then you can do as you wish ..

the game is pretty hardwired to produce a German recovery in 1942, with the morale of Soviet rifle divisions heading for 40 (so most will only have 2, some even 1 cv), you simply cannot hold apart from where you really concentrate your best units.

There is a lot to be said for left hand/right hand. Not for a complete game but say the first turns up the autumn mud. You'll probably play one side better than the other but it will teach you a huge amount about the relative strengths and weaknesses of both sides that is obscure vs the AI and even less clear in PBEM

before going for the core scenario, play the winter Moscow scenario, either the short one with the base game or the better and longer one with lost battles. Either will teach you a lot about mud/snow/blizzard and the first winter rules.

For the AI, I think the key is to compensate it for what it does badly. One thing is it doesn't pre-prepare trenches as obsessively as players do (this links to governato's post), so I'd push that right up. You may also want to give it a transport boost as that will help it manage the factory evac process. Good thing in an AI game is you find the settings you are using aren't working they are easy enough to change

ORIGINAL: governato

when I was testing WITE (I helped the development team a tiny bit in 2014) I did find that lowering the Fort Level to 65-70 (in the game options) made the game 'more fluid', with 'less straight' frontlines that better followed geographical features like major rivers (as historical).

Fort level Impacts the speed at which fortification levels are built (15.3.2). A lower FL value makes the build up slower. 65-70 makes the time it takes for attacking units to rest/build up supplies shorter than
it takes to the defenders to entrench significantly.

Caveat: I did not get to test this on a full campaign scenario, but if you want to try it, I 'd be curious to see how it goes.

I think this is good advice, would certainly try it. I think its one reason why vs AI games are much more sweeping as you don't have then endless fort lines that PBEM players produce

ORIGINAL: timmyab

ORIGINAL: mikelisby
I have a question, though: In all of the AARs I've read (granted, I've far from read all of them yet), the eastern front seems to turn into Verdun and the Somme in 1942. Is this due to the human players not making the same mistakes as their historical counterparts (and there being no way in the game to work around this as, say, the Germans), or is it the same against the AI?

This only happens if The Soviet player has basically won the game in 1941. In an even game the Axis player can launch a powerful offensive in 42.

I do wish people wouldn't make the mistake of under-estimating vigabrand. I'd agree that he let the Red Army recover too early and too far in late 1941 (I think a German player should attack for a couple of turns in November), but I know him well from AGEOG PBEM. He has a very definite plan.

A good eg is Terje43's old AAR where he managed a stunning comeback from the dead in 1942

[VigaBrand]

ORIGINAL: loki100
...

I do wish people wouldn't make the mistake of under-estimating vigabrand. I'd agree that he let the Red Army recover too early and too far in late 1941 (I think a German player should attack for a couple of turns in November), but I know him well from AGEOG PBEM. He has a very definite plan.

...

I wish they do [:)]

[timmyab]

I'm not underestimating your opponent, I'm answering someone's question without particular reference to this game. If this game does turn into a 42 Verdun then it would apply here too I guess. At the moment that does look likely it's true but you'll have to remain cautious for another year at least. Overconfidence would be your opponent's best friend in this situation.
In football terms you're 3-0 up after 20 minutes, but that doesn't mean that the game is over yet.

Have you got a link to the Terje43 AAR?

[VigaBrand]

ORIGINAL: timmyab

I'm not underestimating your opponent, I'm answering someone's question without particular reference to this game. If this game does turn into a 42 Verdun then it would apply here too I guess. At the moment that does look likely it's true but you'll have to remain cautious for another year at least. Overconfidence would be your opponent's best friend in this situation.
In football terms you're 3-0 up after 20 minutes, but that doesn't mean that the game is over yet.

Have you got a link to the Terje43 AAR?

Hi,
I think it is not about you, it is more about the general answers, that the game is won by Loki.
The AAR is tm.asp?m=3406754
That is the only AAR I found from this player.
Summary for german newbies:
First turn, don't practise how to pocket the most soviet, think about your rail lines and how to clean your rail lines at first (so that you can repair as fast as possible).
One important idea is, the shortest way in the south starts from romania and not from the Lvov area, so you must made the Lvov Pocket to travel with you fbd to romania in turn 2.
Use your air transport plane to supply one corps which is far away to block some industries.
Think about how to deal with the first winter.
Think about your support units and your air force. I don't use them very well.

I fight for a draw in this game, so the struggle will continue!

[swkuh]

Thanks, Vigabrand, for tips as Axis going to Romania & single corps thrust. That single corps thrust would seem to accomplish something with long term consequences. Will try it.
And fighting to a draw is a success for Axis, IMHO.

Nice AAR, thanks all.

[mikelisby]

Thanks for all of the great tips, and also thanks for letting me "hijack" your AAR. My reasons for doing so were that it's clear that we have two very experienced players here (as well as the audience), so it seemed a great place to get advice for how to jump into the deep end, which I can't wait to do (fond memories of half of my youth "wasted" on WiR come to mind).

I'll definitely try the Winter '41 scenario before the "jump", Loki, sounds like a good idea. And it'll be the long one. I have all of the expansions since I threw my wallet at my monitor so hard it cracked when I saw the subject matter and the name "Gary Grigsby." If wargamers had saints, he'd be one of those to whom we prayed

So I take it that I shouldn't use the "mild blizzard" option for my first game as Axis against the AI? That was one of my questions, since there seems to be quite a bit of controversy about the "normal" version being vastly OP and doing nothing but ensuring that the Axis plays on the defense from January '42 until the end of the war, which would hardly be historical. I don't want to nerf the Soviets so much it's not a challenge, but I also don't want the game to be ahistorical. How about the Soviet +1? Should that one stay against the AI?

Again, my goal is to have a challenge, it wouldn't be fun to just stomp all over the AI Soviets in my first game, but I also don't want a hard coded slap in the face.

And thanks for the pointer to Terje's AAR (you're talking about this one against Oloren, right?). That one was awesome and very, very tense and it proved to me that it IS indeed possible for a human vs. human game to NOT have Verdun on the Don every single time. The one VigaBrand linked to I read also (first, since it's the only one that showed up initially) and it made me appreciate the second even more, since it showed how much Terje had learned from the first one. Consider my fears that it isn't possible for the Axis to retain offensive capabilities past '41 buried

Anyway. Again. Thanks for letting me blather on in your AAR. I'm looking forward to the next installment since it makes for awesome reading.

[loki100]

ORIGINAL: timmyab

I'm not underestimating your opponent, I'm answering someone's question without particular reference to this game. If this game does turn into a 42 Verdun then it would apply here too I guess. At the moment that does look likely it's true but you'll have to remain cautious for another year at least. Overconfidence would be your opponent's best friend in this situation.
In football terms you're 3-0 up after 20 minutes, but that doesn't mean that the game is over yet.

Have you got a link to the Terje43 AAR?

I think this is right, the norm is trading space for units, I can, up to a point, trade units for space. But too much of that and my relative advantage can erode. I'd tend to think of this as 3-1 up after the home leg in cup match (with away goals counting double), so I have a substantial safety margin but not a massive one.

The Terje43 AAR I was thinking of is laugh n 1/2. He really turned it around in 1942 and without the 1.08 mechanism of the low Soviet morale

ORIGINAL: VigaBrand


...
Hi,
...
Summary for german newbies:
First turn, don't practise how to pocket the most soviet, think about your rail lines and how to clean your rail lines at first (so that you can repair as fast as possible).
One important idea is, the shortest way in the south starts from romania and not from the Lvov area, so you must made the Lvov Pocket to travel with you fbd to romania in turn 2.
Use your air transport plane to supply one corps which is far away to block some industries.
Think about how to deal with the first winter.
Think about your support units and your air force. I don't use them very well.

I fight for a draw in this game, so the struggle will continue!

I'd also suggest anyone looking to play the Germans to look at Pelton's AARs. Some of what he does is a bit rule abusive but the key bit is he acknowledges he plays 'on the edge', risks holds etc because if he gets an unexpected positive result it can really unhinge a Soviet line. And of course the risk of losing a critical sector affects how the Soviet player plays the game etc ... its one reason I am rubbish playing the Germans, I lack that mindset and ability to evaluate the risks.

ORIGINAL: rrbill

Thanks, Vigabrand, for tips as Axis going to Romania & single corps thrust. That single corps thrust would seem to accomplish something with long term consequences. Will try it.
And fighting to a draw is a success for Axis, IMHO.

Nice AAR, thanks all.

Its a fun game, quite a challenge as I seem to spend most of each turn thinking about what to do, actually moving the units and so on is the easy bit [;)]

ORIGINAL: mikelisby

Thanks for all of the great tips, and also thanks for letting me "hijack" your AAR. My reasons for doing so were that it's clear that we have two very experienced players here (as well as the audience), so it seemed a great place to get advice for how to jump into the deep end, which I can't wait to do (fond memories of half of my youth "wasted" on WiR come to mind).

I'll definitely try the Winter '41 scenario before the "jump", Loki, sounds like a good idea. And it'll be the long one. I have all of the expansions since I threw my wallet at my monitor so hard it cracked when I saw the subject matter and the name "Gary Grigsby." If wargamers had saints, he'd be one of those to whom we prayed

So I take it that I shouldn't use the "mild blizzard" option for my first game as Axis against the AI? That was one of my questions, since there seems to be quite a bit of controversy about the "normal" version being vastly OP and doing nothing but ensuring that the Axis plays on the defense from January '42 until the end of the war, which would hardly be historical. I don't want to nerf the Soviets so much it's not a challenge, but I also don't want the game to be ahistorical. How about the Soviet +1? Should that one stay against the AI?

Again, my goal is to have a challenge, it wouldn't be fun to just stomp all over the AI Soviets in my first game, but I also don't want a hard coded slap in the face.

And thanks for the pointer to Terje's AAR (you're talking about this one against Oloren, right?). That one was awesome and very, very tense and it proved to me that it IS indeed possible for a human vs. human game to NOT have Verdun on the Don every single time. The one VigaBrand linked to I read also (first, since it's the only one that showed up initially) and it made me appreciate the second even more, since it showed how much Terje had learned from the first one. Consider my fears that it isn't possible for the Axis to retain offensive capabilities past '41 buried

Anyway. Again. Thanks for letting me blather on in your AAR. I'm looking forward to the next installment since it makes for awesome reading.

I think you do have to go through this more than once to be honest, AI games help a lot in practicing techniques and trying to understand the overall dynamics of the game (I now know from an AI game that my supply is going to worsen over this year ... so I can plan on that and not panic at the first sight of over-use). Equally my PBEM with SigUp taught me a huge amount which I've been applying in this game.

I believe the scenarios are balanced on the harsh winter rules. I'd let the AI have that to be honest, not sure how much it would recover with the mild set. Same with the +1. The AI tends to retreat when over-matched (basically sensible), while a player will try to catch you out if the Germans are over-confident. The +1 rule probably gives the AI that bit of capacity, especially if you are over-extended in late summer 1941.

For PBEM, I like the mild set. You get more fighting rather than the rather tedious 'retreat two hexes a turn' response to the old rules. The payback in terms of a lower Gds creation threshold is a pretty good trade off.

edit link to the Terje AAR I meant, but he did seem to have a habit of recovering indifferent 1941s with some excellent 1942s

[loki100]

Turn 54: 25 June – 1 July 1942

The main fighting was in the northern Ukraine. This time the massive German Panzer force swung south, cutting off the bulk of 6 Army east of Sumy. At the same time, a smaller offensive re-imposed their pocket on the Soviet units defending the Vorskla to the north of Poltava.


(position at the start of Soviet turn, shows pattern of German attacks)

However, again the Red Army struck back as Stavka was concerned to retain Kharkov and Stalino as long as possible [1]

The opening blows were by the mobile formations of Crimean Front which inflicted heavy losses on the German 14 Panzer and 52 Infantry Corps south of Kharkov.




(elements of 37 Army in action)

To the north, 12 Army punched through the German defensive screen allowing units trapped on the Vorskla to escape and retreat westwards.



Around Kursk, Stavka allowed Bryansk Front to pull its main defensive line back to the Svapa. Although it was suspected that the Germans were now committed to taking Kharkov, an offensive NE towards Tula was Stavka's real concern. Such an attack would threaten Moscow and undermine Kalinin Front's successful defense of Smolensk.

In an attempt to disrupt the German preparations. Elements of 40 Army struck deep into the German rear cutting the Sumy-Kiev rail line at Burin and over-running a number of Luftwaffe bases.



At Smolensk, the Germans had attacked again but only managed limited gains for heavy losses. In turn, 32 Army struck back forcing them to fall back to their start line




(32 Army counter-attack)


OOB

On map reserves are 1 million men (Urals and Southern Urals MD) and 2,800 tanks. Reserve manpower is limited (91,000 men) but armaments are relatively plentiful (370,000). Truck situation is ok (about 95%), mainly as the majority of the tank brigades are being left at 70% TOE (since I am not using them, see no need to improve this).



Again losses were heavy for both sides. The Germans lost 35,000 men (13,000 killed), 280 tanks (1,210 since 3 June) and 90 planes, Soviet losses were 65,000 men (20,000 killed), 400 tanks (mostly T-60s) and 480 planes [2].



(Shows the shift in the front line for June and the locations of the German Panzer Corps, only 40 Panzer is unknown and there is a cluster of Pzr/Mot divisions near Bryansk)


[1] Before making a single move I spent ages trying to work out what to do. If I carried on fighting I could inflict more losses on the Germans and delay their offensive by bringing the surrounded units back into supply. However, at some stage I know I need to fall back, there is no way can I fight for much longer with the equivalent of 3 Panzer Armies plus infantry support so close to the German rail network.

However, I'm not worried about being able to replace what I lose. Even the Guards formations can be replaced in July as I have a lot of likely conversions when the cap is increased (all those victories for Kalinin Front in June).

[2] This is not as bad as it sounds. The Germans have deployed night fighters to hunt my U-2s, especially on the Volkhov. So something like 80 of my losses were U2 bombers which, to be cynical, I can afford to replace. Still think steadily depleting the Finnish manpower is a good trade off, not so much for 1942 but to weaken them for 1943.

[morvael]

If you want Kulik to be sacked give him some unit to command, put it on the front in dangerous position and accrue losses.

[M60A3TTS]

Kulik's political rating is probably too high that e-Stalin will sack him. At some point you can bite the bullet and spend APs to transfer him.

[loki100]

ORIGINAL: morvael

If you want Kulik to be sacked give him some unit to command, put it on the front in dangerous position and accrue losses.

ORIGINAL: M60A3TTS

Kulik's political rating is probably too high that e-Stalin will sack him. At some point you can bite the bullet and spend APs to transfer him.

glad you both feel my pain on this subject ... [;)]

part of the problem is that for the good wartime generation of Front commanders I'd have to pay promotion costs on top of removal costs (and run the risk of losing expertise). So it may *just* be the case that Kulik is as good as it gets. Its just for various reasons I like to link 3 of the new tank armies to the Voronezh Front and then fill it out with freshly equipped combined arms armies, so it tends not to lose many battles as I can't really risk the tank corps for a while.

Now if those special NKVD car mechanics would turn up .. that would be handy. The ones who have been steadily killing off my 'decent if not brilliant' generals while they have been nowhere near the front.

[morvael]

They roam in close proximity to the front so move him there.

[Gabriel B.]

wrt Kulik, better planing next time.

in 1941 the command structure must be in place and only minor adjustments made in 1942 .


step 1 get rid of the marshals .

Budenny gets a army command.
Timoshenko gets a front command .
Shaposnikov gets a front command .
Kulik and Vorosilov get the urals Md.


step 2 get rid of army generals .

Zhukov-stavka, meretskov and tyuleneev gets a army command.

step 3

the next option for front command is general polkovnik , you do not have many of those to start with, but the better leaders would eventualy make the rank. you know from the reinforcement window when a new front is going to arive .
the turn before, release a good general polkovinik from army command and it will automaticly take command of the new front .

a leader below optimum rank would not be given front command , as long as a general polkovinik is available .

[loki100]

that is incredibly useful advice, thank you

most of that crew of numpties are indeed safely in command of something else but I really wouldn't put Kulik in charge of getting the messages [1] never mind a combat command

[1] in the lowland scots dialect messages has a completely different usage to the rest of the English speaking world [8D]

[schascha]

ORIGINAL: Gabriel B.

wrt Kulik, better planing next time.

in 1941 the command structure must be in place and only minor adjustments made in 1942 .


step 1 get rid of the marshals .

Budenny gets a army command.
Timoshenko gets a front command .
Shaposnikov gets a front command .
Kulik and Vorosilov get the urals Md.


step 2 get rid of army generals .

Zhukov-stavka, meretskov and tyuleneev gets a army command.

step 3

the next option for front command is general polkovnik , you do not have many of those to start with, but the better leaders would eventualy make the rank. you know from the reinforcement window when a new front is going to arive .
the turn before, release a good general polkovinik from army command and it will automaticly take command of the new front .

a leader below optimum rank would not be given front command , as long as a general polkovinik is available .

Very useful thx very much [&o]