German 6th Army Campaign

[tweber]

Hi Rufus,
 
Looks like a pretty good kill / loss ratio.  The ratio should improve over time as your army gains experience.  One use of corp units that are low in strength is to add replacements to them at the start of the next scenario.  You do not gain any free experience so this is one way to bring in fresh troops.
 
I also found that sending the tanks too far ahead was risky.  They can get annihilated and you will not be able to take the strong points (like Brussels) until you bring up the artillery.

[Barthheart]

Tom,

Is it possible to play this a human vs human? Seems so from the scenario startup...

Anyone want to try this? I'll even take the good guys! [:D]

[tweber]

Hi Barthheart,
 
It would be possible to play human v human but it is not currently balanced for that.  If two equal players tried the Second Kharkov scenario as written, the Germans would be stopped cold.
 
I initially tried to balance for both human and for AI so the first scenario or two should be fine.  However, I am not sure how many players wanted to play a pbem campaign that lasts for about 150 turns.  I decided that I wanted to get this out since I was delayed for about 8 months for a move so I focussed on just the AI version.
 
Actually, you could even play Allied Player vs German AI.  But, that would need a different balancing.  I did not bother with this since I wanted a campaign where the units were carried all the way through.   
 
Making a campaign is alot of work.  I am hoping a few scenario designers try a few campaigns (Maybe following Guderian, Rommel, Zhukov or either the 'Band of Brothers' or the US 1st Division at a different scale).

[springer]

Just a note to anyone playing these scenarios.
A: When you take your objective, play the victory hand card! If you don't, you won't get your PP.
B: Make sure to read the briefing in the statistics room. It will give you your objectives and let you know if you should be focusing on wiping out enemy units or not.

@Bartheart
The current version of the game is designed against the AI. In the Russia scenarios I'm totally grateful that the AI plays like a Russian commander who survived the purges by careful use of his primary survival talent, tongue polishing the boots of superior commanders. I think that any competent Russian player given the firepower, superior armor, and sheer mass of troops would slaughter the Germans. That said, I think the scenarios could be modified. (I wrote this before I saw Tom's post above).

Though the AI commander loves the "bludgeon maneuver", his higher up in the command structure (the scenario designer who controls deployment and reinforcement) still has some nasty little surprises in store for the unwary player.

@Rufus,
I like your idea of keeping the scouts intact. It seems a creative way to push the offense forward and to keep your armor intact. Mixing in some infantry sounds like a good idea. However, I'm not into stripping the HQs of their mobility and scout cars. Your screenshot has inspired me to do a mini AAR of the first scenario to show the blitzkrieg tactics I learned from the WMWTC (Weber Mobile Warfare Training Center aka. "6th Army campaign school of hard knocks"). Note: that incompetence you will see are totally my responsibility not the training center's. (I probably fell asleep during classroom lectures when a critical point was made.)

[springer]

All right, here's my shot at an AAR.

Turn 1:
This turn doesn't need much of an illustration as it just a move forward.
The key measure is sending the both the VI corp (red) armor units into Eben Emael. They don't attack or do anything else, they just ensure that Eben Emael will not have any chance of falling and are set in a forward position to spring forward. The rest of the VI corps also heads to Eben Emael. Throughout the entire campaign, I found myself using the VI corp (red) as the tip of the schwerpunkt.

The other corps play secondary roles. The IX Corp (Lavender) to clean up the northern flank, and the the XXVII corps (dark blue) and Reserves (Olive Drab) are given the support role of taking Leige. Finally, the IX corps (light green) gets to wipe out any forces south of the Meuse that could flank Liege.

Turn 2:
This is the key turn. VI corp advances three hexes down the road to Brussels. The units in the way are brushed aside by infantry with a combination of air and artillery. (My favorite use for armor is cleaning up wrecked Belgian artillery units). I have one infantry unit take the fort north of Eben Emael (after some artillery softening) and then I have a VI corp armor unit drive into Maasricht and north and then come back toward Brussels. This ensures that the Belgian I corp, which boldly came out to meet the IX corp is trapped in a pocket. Similarly, every detected unit of the Belgian III corps south of the Meuse is pocketed, softened with artillery, and destroyed by concentric attacks by the IX corps. In like fashion, the forces in front of Liege are pocketed and destroyed as well. Here is a screen shot of the end result.

[springer]

Turn 3:

From the previous post, the schwerpunkt is set. Fortunately, the Belgians still think they are fighting WWI, so they don't even see the danger. Even though the Schwerpunkt looks exposed, it's totally safe, the Belgians would have to tackle the whole German VI corps to reduce it. Instead, the Belgians opt to spread out their troops to build a continuous front line that slows down the enemy advance.

Then, the lessons from the WMWTC kick in. The units in front of the schwerpunkt are weak and easily pushed to the side. Most of the VI corp ignores the Belgians and drives fast and furiously towards towards Brussels: The IX and XXVII corps can clean up the rest.

Here is a picture of the exploitation phase of turn 3. Note that only the VI corps and a handful of other units have moved so far. I'll post one more screen of the finished round after this.

As in the first turn, I use the HQ units aggressively. Their mobility and reconaissance capability allow us to create disruption in the enemy rear areas and detect potential problems. For example, the VI corps HQ is pushed up the road to Brussels. If it encounters a small force, planes are used to push them aside. Armor or Infantry can mop up the damage. If the force is big, the unit can retreat until the artillery and infantry can arrive, but at least there's intelligence of the enemies dispositions.

Though it is off the view, the IX corp is pushing toward Huy, and will be taking the rest of the Belgian airforce out. The IX and XXVII will continue to earn iron crosses performing their invaluable mop up duties. It's pretty clear that the pocketed units are done with and primarily serve the important role of giving the German troops the target practice that need to gain invaluable experience for the future campaigns.

[springer]

Turn 3- Final state

For intents and purposes, the battle for Belgium is over: Eben Emael, Maastrict, Liege, and Huy have been taken. Because of Europe's changing economy, the Belgian aircrews are being retrained to fly JU-52s. (We've determined it's best for Belgian aircrews to avoid flying aircraft with bullets)

Sure, there's still some Belgian Don Quixotes out there: Some reserves are still lurking and the elements of the French forces are coming up to offer themselves as more target practice for the Luftwaffe, but these can be handled as side shows. The most important goal is to get the artillery to Brussels as fast as possible and use the HQ carefully to avoid ambushes that could cause unnecessary casualties.

As as side note: I feel that I mishandled the pocket reductions. Because I was too much in a hurry, the mop-up troops (especially the paratroopers) took more casualties than needed. (As someone's grandparent once said: never have an infantryman do something that can be done much better by a artillery, aircraft, or logistic deprivation)

[springer]

Here's the Casualties up to turn 3, which should make up big part of the battle losses. My final tally of losses will probably be similar to Rufus T. Firefly's if I had finished the battle.

A weakness that I notice in my playing is care during the pocket reduction stage. Mop-up stage seems boring and trivial, but demands care and consideration. When done right, the forces involved can be properly husbanded, gaining valuable experience at the cost of very few casualties.

Looking back, I could've spared myself 20-30 of the infantry casualties in this turn with more careful combinations of concentric attacks and artillery, or by just waiting a turn. The XXVII corps has nowhere that it has to go. The rest of the campaign is primarily in the hands of the VI corps with the IX corp grabbing up some left over PP.

The value of each unit and subtype is one of the great things about this scenario. 20-30 is often nothing in a random game. Twenty infantry is the size of a typical infantry unit when I start '42, so this is effectively the loss of one and half units that will not be available for 9 more scenarios. And the loss of any unit is the loss of future tactical options.

[RufusTFirefly]

Hi Springer: Thats a quick advance right through the middle. Impressive attack.

I preferred a different way of advance as you have seen at the screen. Of course sending reinforcements to Eben Emael is essential. But I ignored most of the enemy units at Maatsricht and its fortifications. While one corps was moving along the Albert Canal in the north, another one moves southwest along the Meuse. Both cross the water far behind the center of the enemy defence between Maastricht and Liege and form a large circle with edges heading towards Brussels.

Taking Liege and crossing the Meuse north of it , while northwest of Maastricht another corps crosses the Albert canal creates a second circle, smaller than the first one. The second circle trappes the enemy forces in the area of Maasticht and elimniates them in a series of concentric attacks.

Enemy reinforments moving towards Maastricht in small groups are attacked by the spearheads. In case the enemy units are quite strong, air bombardments perpare the attacks. Btw, I transferred all tactical bombers to two units and left them with small fighter support, while transferring more fighters to the other air units. So I got two air units with fighters, attacking vulnerable targets like artillery, while the bomber units attacked strong infantry units, especially hexes with two infantry units in it. Moving the air units to Liege and Maastricht, enables the German Luftwaffe to attack twice, as often only half of the action points were used due to short distances.

So, different tactics of Springer and me shows, that this scenario can be played in more than one way, making it even more intersting and fun to play! Again: Great work, tweber!

Just a remark for all, who have not yet played the scenario:

You might get the impression, that major work is done after turn 3. Guess Springer´s propaganda minister is shouting too loud. You have to keep in mind that a careless pushing foreward might cost you units that you will need in next scenarios. There is more than a small garisson at Brussels and the enemy is doing counterattacks on the way to your main target.

And although my kill-to-loss-ratio might be good, it took 9 of the 10 turns in second play to get Brussels (in first attempt I managed to take Brussels at turn 10 and had even been afraid of loosing the scenario).

[RufusTFirefly]

Hi tweber,

have played second scenario very quickly and not thought much about tactics. Therefore lost it. End message says that Allies get 100 PP bonus for holding Brussels. Must be Dunkerque.

[springer]

Rufus,

You are right about the next set of turns in my playing of the Belgium scenario: it is far from over at the end of turn 3. There are still substantial forces ahead and my casualty rate would've been similar to the one you showed.

We sent our previous propaganda minister to work as the information reporter for the Slavic branch of "Voice of Germanica" radio (to demoralize the Bolsheviks before the invasion).

A more accurate assessment is that the Belgian/French resistance is more disorganized, but care is needed because the Allied forces can still bite. (Most of the scenario's casualties lie in the next few moves).
But if the focus stays on taking Brussels, it can fall by turn 7 or 8 (which racks up the extra PP).

By the way Rufus, you reorganization looks like interesting strategy. As you move on to the next scenarios, I'd like to hear how successful your strategy of minimizing scout and aircraft casualties remains.

Your post raises another fascinating aspect of the campaign design: The "little" decisions, like where to fight the battles and where to bypass, can wind up having big long-term implications.

For example, when is it worthwhile to take Maastricht? I chose to take it because the Belgian I corps was easy pickings. For the cost of about 20-30 infantry, I could give IX corp a chance to pick up some experience through pocket clean up. If the game went to turn 10, Maastricht would earn 16 PP, which is the cost of an fresh infantry regiment. This regiment would more than replace the losses of taking Maasricht and adds some more specialized units as well.

However, if I were facing the disposition of forces that Rufus had in front of Maastricht, I'd probably bypass it and perhaps send units and artillery in to do a slow, piecemeal reduction of the position (to keep casualties low). A full-scale assault would not be worth the cost.

That's part of the fun: each decision about whether to engage in battle or just bypass a unit has to be a thought-out trade off between casualty rate, experience gain and replacement potential. The ultimate goal is to win each scenario efficiently so that the sixth army has a chance of survival when it arrives in Stalingrad.

[springer]

I hope you plan to keep the action reports coming in, Rufus.
Doesn't the second scenario give you a deep appreciation for military competence of Hermann Goering?[;)]

[RufusTFirefly]

Hi Springer,

you are right to focus on the aspect of getting PP by capuring Maastricht and reinforce or deploy units.

Getting experience is no problem. It doesnt matter if you eliminate the defenders of Maastricht sooner or later. And the armoured spearheads will have to fight even if they manage to pass enemy lines. They got for example the enemy´s artillery as target.

As I wrote I have lost the seond scenario in a first attapt. My attack was to slow. But I should mention as well that I deployed no units after finishing the first sceanario and did not use any PP for buying units. Therefore, just a question: Is there a card for buying new units at the beginning of each scenario? In case that not and I dont use the card for buying reinforcements, can I use this option in the following scenario?

[springer]

Tweber can correct me on this if I get it wrong, but there is no chance of redeployment at the beginning of each scenario.

I see this as one of the challenges of the game. My corps structure starts out all jumbled up and I have to sort it out while still maintaining forward momentum, which must always remain the priority.

(In some scenarios, the AI is so aggressive that I have to engage them immediately with the nearest units at hand, and never have a chance to sort out the command structure properly.)

With respect to replacements, they can be bought with the card on the first turn of each scenario only. And yes, you have the option to buy on the first turn of every scenario. After the first turn, the option disappears for the remainder of that particular scenario.

My own preference was to not purchase the replacements at the beginning of the scenario. I had no problem going forward with units that are understrength in infantry (i.e., around 10 infantry per regiment) because (and I'm probably only saying what most AT vets already knew long before I learned it) understrength units are still incredibly valuable. You only need one decent unit to do the heavy lifting during an attack, but the understrength units are still quite valuable for creating those low-cost concentric attacks that are the hallmark of AT tactics. Understrength units are particularly useful if their artillery support is highly experienced and participation in these concentric attacks will get their experience up to 80 XP plus in no time.

I didn't buy units because I wanted to build up my PP for the refit after the campaign (then I can choose between buying units or buying upgrades.)

I think my strategy might have been mistaken. Buying units on the first turn is smarter and cheaper than waiting for the refit. The reason is that I think the cost of troops is cheaper than during the refit. I think that in scenario 2, you pay 60 PP for two infantry regiments, an armor regiment, and an artillery regiment. During the refit, this would cost 88 PP. So, if you buy at the beginning of the scenario, the armor regiment cost only 30 PP (instead of 34 during the refit) and the artillery regiment is free. (I can imagine Fritz Todt with an American accent: "Buy three regiments now, and we'll throw in some artillery for free. This is a limited offer so don't wait") Also, purchasing units in a scenario gives them more time to build up valuable experience before the refit.

The the only potential limitations I see to buying at the beginning of the scenario is a loss in choice during the refit, the 60 PP wouldn't be available for upgrades and you can't tailor your reinforcements as carefully (e.g., during refit, you may want to buy 4 infantry regiments with the 60 PP instead of the reinforcement "combo platter" that is offered on the first turn of the scenario. Or, you might want to invest in more air power).

By the way in the '42 scenarios, it's probably worthwhile to buy replacements each time, since there is no '43 campaign or refit.

Though I'm jumping ahead, here's another question I'd like to see player's opinion on. What is the optimal refit strategy? I think the upgrade to Fighter II is an essential part of any AT strategy. Beyond that, I'm unsure. Is it better to focus on creating upgraded units or to expand the size of the army? For example, is it better to spend 120 PP turning Infantry I into Infantry II, or is it better to use the PP buying 8 infantry regiments or nearly 3 tank regiments?

[tweber]

I typically upgrade based on the number of power points that gets a boost.  Air is somewhat scaled back in this campaign.  I usually upgrade basic infantry, heavy infantry, etc...

[von altair]

Very good job tweber! I am going to play that campaign through as soon as I have time.

[Jeffrey H.]

ORIGINAL: RufusTFirefly

Hi tweber,

have played second scenario very quickly and not thought much about tactics. Therefore lost it. End message says that Allies get 100 PP bonus for holding Brussels. Must be Dunkerque.

I found this same note after a game I was playing with Bombur. We were playing 2 player and I was able to hold him off Brussels and got the 100pp message. However when we started Dunkerque the Germans had no forces.

[springer]

Jeffrey H.

I had the problem playing solitaire. I think you have to end the game with the card. If you take Brussels and end the turn without playing the victory check card, you may find yourself in trouble.

I do think this game is one of the outstanding AI vs. living opponent games. The solitaire balance is nice. I particularly like how well balanced the armor is. It is fragile and requires finesse and maneuver to be affective.

I think you and Bombur are bold for playing this out. Tweber suggested that it is good for H2H play. But, I would bet on the the allies exausting the Axis by the third scenario. Against a live opponent, as Allies, I'd go out of my way to pound the Axis Armor every time it sticks its nose out of the main force. If the armor is blunted, the Axis will be hard-pressed to maintain their blitzkrieg tactics.

How did the Belgium scenario go? What kind of shape were the Germans in when it ended? (We all know what happens to the Belgians....)

[Jeffrey H.]

Yes, regarding the end of game card, the German player in our game was Bombur and he did mention that he forgot to play the card. He then tried a restart and played the card in the restart, it still failed to properly start up the next game in the series.
 
My strategy for Belgium was to cause maximum attrition. The Belgians are capable of dealing some serious blows in the beginning few turns. The best defensive position in the scenario is the initial one, so I immediately pushed all my forces into the Eastern line, and I do mean all, even the HQ's. The HQ's were in the end used as combat forces themselves and were able to cause some damage.
 
The scenario went very well for the Belgians. I noticed too late that an armored unit had arrived in Mons, not sure which turn it got there but I was able to use the units in that formation to block the final approaches into Brussels, which was by then completely unguarded. The Germans were not able to occupy Brussels in the alottoed time.
 
Unfortunately, the spririt of the game was sort of broken after the failure to extend the results to the next scenario and we dropped the game at this point.
 

[springer]

It's a shame the game didn't work. It'd be fun to hear what would happen within the three scenarios.

I guess the campaign wasn't designed to go beyond 10 turns. It probably would just take the creation of a Belgian victory card. (Or the German's playing a defeat card) to get the game operational again.

I agree with your strategy. The big losses on the Germans will be had while the Belgians have enough mass on their main line to do major damage.