USSR Strategies for the Middle East

[paulderynck]

In the boardgame - if playing SCS transport - I had considered waiting until MJ40 and putting the Russian CA Voroshilov (which arrives face-up that turn) in the Caspian and having an INF Div in supply and somewhere on the coast of the Caspian. Now with the Euro scale that would certainly put a hatchet into any Persian plans to set up in the mountains to the NE. Land the Div on the surprise impulse in the hex to the northwest of Tehran and the Persian must back up right away. Better yet, ground strike the Persian and one impulse later, walk into Tehran. Conquest achieved with one division in two impulses!

Also works if the Persians deploy to the northwest against a Russian set-up there.

[rkr1958]

All of this great strategy discussion motivated me to do some in-depth analysis of the Soviet invasion impulse of Persia, forgetting the axis response for the moment. This analysis has given me a much deeper understanding of the complexities, subtles and richness of MWiF even though I've been playing this game for almost 3-years. Also all of this has motivated to begin development of an EXCEL based 2D10 CRT calculator tool, outputs of which will be included in the following analysis. I fully expect that the following will be elementary and already known to most of this community, however, I will present them for whatever value and interest they may generate.

So let me start with my "optimized" Soviet setup for the invasion of Persia. Against that setup I see three Persian setups. The following dozen of so posts will detailed my analysis of Soviet strategies against those three setups including "additions" to their "optimized" setup which I see now, after going through my analysis, is not that optimum.

[rkr1958]

So as I discussed previously in this thread, if the axis oblige the Soviets with setup #1 and place the Persian unit in Tehran, the Soviets have a 100% chance of taking Tehran on the invasion impulse.

Include in the screen cap below is the output from my EXCEL 2D10 CRT calculator. Both the tool and output format still under development. The first header/data row pair, rows 1 & 2, show the odds for being able to take the hex (PWIN), for shattering and surviving defending units (SHATTER), the expect number of attackers that will remain organize (Ex Att. Org), the expected number of attacker lost (Ex Att. Lost), the expected number of defenders killed (Ex Def. Kill) and the expected number of defenders that survive and remain organize (Ex Def. Org). The second header/data row pair, rows 3 & 4, show the chance that the attacker will lost 0, 1, 2, 3, 4 and 5 units. If there is interest I can talk more about this tool and make it available when it's ready.

[rkr1958]

So let's look at the second Persian setup. My initial "gut" reaction to this setup as the Soviet player was to attack the Persian cavalry unit with two Soviet ground units supported by 11 factors (the max) of ground support. This leaves the 1-4 available to march into Tehran on the next impulse if both attackers or disorganized or destroyed as long as the 3-4 Persian cavalry unit is destroyed. The odds of the Soviet attack succeeding (i.e., destroying the Persian cavalry unit) is 95%.

[rkr1958]

Then it occurred to me that I wouldn't that the Soviets wouldn't have to risk any land combat attack if they could use their air units in a ground strike to disorganize the Persian cavalry unit. However, if the ground strike failed they would have to attack the unit without any ground support. With my current Soviet deployment, which included only 2 of their 4 air units in theater, this strategy gave me a 90.6% chance of success, which is lower than the 95% chance if I used the two air units for ground support instead of attempting a ground strike.

So, after this analysis I quickly see a deficiency in my Soviet setup. I need all four Soviet air units in theater.

[rkr1958]

I evaluated two air strategies for the Soviets assuming they had all four bombers available. The first used a 3 and 2 bomber for a ground strike and saved two 3 bombers for ground support. The second use all four their bombers for a ground strike.

Now recall, a successful ground strike means that the Soviets capture Tehran on their next impulse, assuming the turn doesn't end, without having to conduct a land combat. While the first air strategy only gives a 68.6% chance of that versus a 92.5% chance for the second, it does save two bombers for ground support if the ground strike fails. However, the odds of the ground strike failing are significantly higher for the first versus second air strategy.

[rkr1958]

Surprisingly the overall odds of success using either air strategy is fairly close. However, the one with the second air strategy (i.e., using all four bombers in the ground strike), requires a land combat attack only 7.5% of the time versus 68.6% for air strategy 1. If you factor this into the odds of (the Soviets) losing 1 or more ground units, the odds for the Soviets losing one or more units with air strategy 2 is 6% versus 19% with air strategy 1.

[rkr1958]

So what happens if the axis makes our life even harder by deploying the Persian cavalry unit in blocking position that forces us into a land combat regardless of whether or not our ground strike is successful.

So my "gut" reaction to the Persian setup 3 was to initially go with air strategy 2 (i.e., use all four bombers for the ground strike), which only gave 75.5% chance of overall success.

[rkr1958]

So on further analysis, I found that air strategy 1 (2 air for ground strike and 2 for ground support) gave me much better odds. Even with setup I was able to get odds above 90%.

Now, is this it? Early feedback did lead to one more refinement to my Soviet setup that increases these odds.

[rkr1958]

And that was to add a heavy cruiser to the mix. Of course, that would have to be done at setup as it would be impossible to move a Soviet cruiser into the Caspian Sea otherwise.

[rkr1958]

With this Soviet deployment against Persian setup 3, I put the heavy cruiser into the 4-box and loaded the Soviet division. During the surprise impulse this division will be able to land unopposed (i.e., automatically) as long as it doesn't try to land adjacent to the Persian cavalry unit. Then, it can march into Tehran on the next Soviet impulse, again assuming the turn doesn't even and assuming the Soviets manage to disorganize or destroy the Persian cavalry unit. The optimum air strategy for this Soviet deployment is air strategy 2, which uses all four bombers for the ground strike.

[rkr1958]

This deployment gives the Soviets better than a 97% chance of taking Tehran on their next impulse, again assuming that the turn doesn't end before then.

[rkr1958]

For those who are interest, I'd though I'd post what the format of my EXCEL based 2D10 CRT calculator looks like. The player enters the number of attackers (Att.), the number of defenders (Def.), the odds and whether or not the attacker may have to take an extra loss applies. Currently, I have only the data for the assault table included but will (should) get the Blitz data and calculations in shortly.

[Centuur]

That's about it, I believe. The only thing which you are forgetting is the Persian setup number 4, and that's to put the CAV in the port of Bandar Shah, if there isn't a cruiser in the Caspian Sea. But the results are somewhat the same as for setup number 3.

Also: you have to take into account what happens if the attacker gets disorganised. Than that pesky MIL arrives in Teheran.
And there still is the possibility of Japanese intervention and a DoW on the USSR by Japan to make sure the precious oil fields remain under Japanese control...

[Orm]

1) I take it that this analysis has the option railway movement. And that makes it tougher to defend Persia since the attackers then can Teheran on the first impulse. I do not think that option is all that common when playing the board game. Not sure how common it is in MWIF.

2) What if the Persian Cavalry is placed in Isfahan to reduce the effect of the surprise ground strike? With the plan to move to Teheran if it does not become disorganized.

[paulderynck]

If Persia has a spot within 4 MP of Tehran that is out of ground strike range, than for sure the Persian should set up there. Which in turn means Russia has to set up to threaten a ground strike on any such set-up hex.

As for the RR movement option, I find it is both abhorrent and ahistoric. My preference is never to play with it.

I was surprised the game let you set up the CA in the Caspian - that should be a bug since the set-up says either Black Sea or Baltic Sea ports for setting up the capital ships. That's why I had suggested attacking in MJ40 when the CA Voroshilov arrives and is under no such restriction.

[Orm]

ORIGINAL: paulderynck

I was surprised the game let you set up the CA in the Caspian - that should be a bug since the set-up says either Black Sea or Baltic Sea ports for setting up the capital ships. That's why I had suggested attacking in MJ40 when the CA Voroshilov arrives and is under no such restriction.

Well spotted. [:)] [&o]

That must indeed be a bug. The cruiser is listed for set up in a Black Sea port.

[rkr1958]

ORIGINAL: Orm

ORIGINAL: paulderynck

I was surprised the game let you set up the CA in the Caspian - that should be a bug since the set-up says either Black Sea or Baltic Sea ports for setting up the capital ships. That's why I had suggested attacking in MJ40 when the CA Voroshilov arrives and is under no such restriction.

Well spotted. [:)] [&o]

That must indeed be a bug. The cruiser is listed for set up in a Black Sea port.

Well, I must confess. I moved the CA to the Caspian by editing the game file so not a bug as far as I know. [:(]

So for the Soviets to make a landing they must wait until they get a cruiser in their reinforcements.

[Orm]

So for the Soviets to make a landing they must wait until they get a cruiser in their reinforcements.

Indeed.

Or you can just outflank the Persian defender?

[rkr1958]

ORIGINAL: paulderynck
That's why I had suggested attacking in MJ40 when the CA Voroshilov arrives and is under no such restriction.

I don't see this, or any other, Soviet cruiser arriving after setup much less in MJ40. In fact, I see no Soviet ships in either the repair or construction pools just in their force pool.

However, I opened the fast setup for the Global War scenario and that heavy cruiser along with a second one for the Soviets is in the arrival pool. However, they're not in a scenario I started. Is this right?