Reopening an old topic

[Mynok]

Interesting to see the old 'Mynok gambit' bandied about again. Don't know how it got that moniker. I was hardly the first to try it. It does have some points in its favor which have been delineated here quite adequately.

German strategy seems to concentrate on what to do with the panzers. I'm not totally on board with that. The real key to German success is getting the infantry forward as fast as possible. Railheads too, of course, but there's a symbiotic relationship there. This is why I religiously use the first turn bonus to blow away as much of the Soviet front line as possible on turn 1. Yeah, some will rout out of my intended pockets, but they make space for infantry advance. This should never be underestimated.

I want 6th army pressing the Dnepr by turn 4. 2nd Panzer infantry at Mogilev by turn 3. 9th army at the land bridge near Vitebsk at the same time. You can't get all of any there in those time frames but you can get some. And you need them because panzers are maneuver forces, not bludgeons.

That's Mynok's mantra and it still holds: if your panzers aren't moving they are losing. They shouldn't be assaulting things. That's what infantry is for. If you are busting holes with panzers for panzers you're doing it wrong.

Unbreakable rule? No, of course not. A principle that will serve you well? Yes. Absolutely.

[PeeDeeAitch]

ORIGINAL: Mynok
Interesting to see the old 'Mynok gambit' bandied about again. Don't know how it got that moniker.

Everybody gets their own gambit. Mine is to spike my opponent's tea with whiskey so they play poorly.

[Aurelian]

ORIGINAL: sveint

I'd love to see a "free setup" scenario. The Axis and Soviets each get a turn 0 to set up their units (and unlimited AP). Would make for some interesting games.

IIRC, it was stated that the Soviets would be the one to benefit from that. I think it was Flav, maybe Pavel.

[PeeDeeAitch]

A free setup would be hell for the Germans. Imagine the tons of little roadblocks of NKVD units, etc. and you can imagine what turn 1 would be like...yikes.

[JAMiAM]

ORIGINAL: PeeDeeAitch

ORIGINAL: Mynok
Interesting to see the old 'Mynok gambit' bandied about again. Don't know how it got that moniker.

Everybody gets their own gambit. Mine is to spike my opponent's tea with whiskey so they play poorly.

Thanks, but next time, please, just give me the whiskey straight up. No need to waste it diluting it with tea...[:)]

[marcpennington]

I think a free setup phase would be a bit much--- rather let the scenario designers at it to develop opening variants.

But, as a half measure, I would be a big proponent of the Germans starting with quite a few more AP points "in the bank", (a couple hundred maybe), to allow one to more effectively shake out the initial breakthrough structure of the army into a more exploitation based force (including, and especially, to modify the placement of SUs). Further, this would allow a bit more flexibility in re-allocating troops for changes in approach. I'd argue the same thing even more so for Operation Blue, with its seriously wacky inititial German command structure and the AP headache that ensues over the next several turns.

[Flaviusx]

Yes, a free Soviet setup would be pretty imbalanced. It would be very difficult to not improve on the historical setup. [:)]

[Panama]

Wasn't it Stalin who wanted a strong force in the south because he believed Hitler would attempt to capture the economic targets in the Ukraine first? Maybe an optional setup where the forces north are a bit stronger.

[Flaviusx]

There were three different defense plans for the Sovs. The initial plan, Shaposhnikov's, was just to lightly screen the new frontier and leave the bulk of the forces in place in the old fortifications and depots. This plan wasn't at all to Stalin's taste, but it's just about what I'd do in a free setup.

Later on Shaposhnikov's understudy Vasilevsky came up with a new plan with two options: the first to concentrate heavily north of the pripyet and block an advance to Moscow. The second option switched the focus to the Ukraine. Stalin liked option B, and that's what they went with.

I can't see the Shaposhnikov plan being interesting from a game standpoint -- good luck finding a German willing to play this, leaving aside the political implausibility of it -- but it might be possible to put together an alternate setup with a northern concentration a la Vasilevsky's option A.

[PeeDeeAitch]

Put 95% of the Soviet forces within 5 hexes of Bialystok...that would be a good setup.

[Klydon]

There are other benefits to knocking Russian counters off the table (IE pockets) early, especially in the north; it makes it much harder to checkerboard. If I bulldoze and rout a pile of units in an attempt to get more speed on the first turn, I will face that many more Russian units that manage to rally and unfortunately, they will be the ones the Panzers have to do the heavy lifting on.

I think Mynok is on the mark as far as the German infantry goes. No Russian line is safe against German infantry early in the game and getting it as far forward as quickly as possible is one of the big keys no matter what section of the map you are discussing.

Now, something to consider for that German infantry tactics wise. Is it better to have some German infantry do most of the heavy lifting on turn 1/2 and advance other infantry as far east as possible or should you take a more balanced approach where most of the infantry participates in say an attack or two at most, but you work on trying to advance the mass as a group?

[Mynok]

With the low costs of deliberate attacks on turn one, you can do both. Use most to blow the line and they can move forward a long way. Yes, there's a point to using minimal stacks to make attacks, but don't let that constrain getting all those brown jobs retreating or routing.