Matrix Games Forums

Ok. Turn done in the Leningrad and Northwest Fronts. Alea Iacta Est! As you can see, I have brought many hordes to stop or slow down my enenmy. Let's not forget King Leonidas, I am pretty certain he's going to Spartakick someone [&o]

EDIT: and yes, I am throwing overboard Sabre's advice about the two defensive lines. My guts thing. This might be the opportunity I was looking for [:)]

His AGC northern Panzer Army is visiting the Kalinin Front. Ergo, the threat in the Western Front is almost non existent, if I am not mistaken (I mean for the next 2 or maybe 3 turns). The cavalry divisions should be attacking his flanks and cutting off some of his units if he makes (I hope !) some mistakes [8D]

And the Western and Bryansk Fronts. It seems he is ignoring both Vitebsk and Smolensk. I think that might be a mistake. Of course he might want to form a mega pocket, the northern pincer now next to Velikie Luki and the southern pincer near Gomel. Way too separated methinks [&:] I very much doubt that would work (where's the needed infantry?). So overall I think Vitebsk can still resist maybe 2 or 3 turns (and Smolensk 4 or 5), and that should be very BAD news for the Germans! And of course excellent news for me. I know I should be getting some but I will do my best to avoid that [:D]

Not sure why he splits up the tanks.  But then, I am the sledghammer type of guy.

I'm no German player but I guess that has to be a bad choice. I mean, they are more scary when they are concentrated. The Panzers in the north of the screenshot have a low offensive value: 14. The ones in the south are more dangerous though.

There is a psychological value to three stacks of three fully mechanized/motorized divisions - both for the attacker and defender.  They are meant to be used as a mass, not thrown about all nibly bimbly.  There is a threat value to them, and an actual value - one of those times that the fears of the defender are actually justified.

ORIGINAL: PeeDeeAitch
There is a threat value to them, and an actual value - one of those times that the fears of the defender are actually justified.

Yes, and my fears are not justified in the landbridge, I suspect: CV of only 14. In the south that's another story [:)] It's curious that he is avoiding the place that to ME is more important, VITAL: Vitebsk and Smolensk that is. I don't think he can eternally avoid them. If he does, I bet my Buzz Lightyear toy Moscow is 100% safe [8D] As Flavio says: resisting here smells like... V I C T O R Y

Ok, and now ladies and gentlemen, my massacred Front aka the Southwestern thing. Well, I have more or less managed to form a front line here. I am pulling back (waiting now that he has crossed the river is a suicide methinks) but with a checkerboard. I can't allow him to advance that fast.

I have even partially organized the forces there. The armies got sappers + RR Bdes + artillery. Oh, in case I didn't say, I keep all the HQs locked (STAVKA: Level 9 though).

Here he must have the upper hand, this I know very well. But maybe I have good news. IF I manage to more or less contain him in the north (Western, Kalinin, Leningrad, etc.) then I will be doing what Alfonso suggested: more STAVKA strategic reserves would be sent to the South. So let's see what happens on the next 2 or 3 turns [:)]

Oh, the cavalry here is going to be VITAL. I have to threaten him at all cost... He must know I will be trying to cut his panzers off if he advances like a kamikaze. So I have spreaded the cavalry generously and will keep bringing more cavalry divisions for that matter.

And finally the Southern Front, Crimea approaches. I don't have enough hordes to defend the whole place, that's the truth. The 9th and 18th armies are here: they got sappers + RR Bdes + artillery as well [8D]

I think that if in turn 6 you are holding Vitebsk and Mogilev it is beginning to be "mathematically" impossible for the Russians to lose Moscow. He is well behind schedule in the center, and holding Pskov in the North is also promising.

As you probably know, there has been some comments in the forum about how easy is for the Soviets to build "impenetrable 4-hex deep level 4 forts"...what I see in your game is what I see in my games. In turn 4 a lot of forts 1 and some forts 2, and in turn 6 a lot of forts 2 and some forts 3. And that is simply because there are not so many hordes to make 3-unit stacks and dig each hex at maximum speed. At least in my games.

Army HQs can handle 3 engineer/sapper units, not just 2. [:)]

ORIGINAL: PeeDeeAitch

There is a psychological value to three stacks of three fully mechanized/motorized divisions - both for the attacker and defender.  They are meant to be used as a mass, not thrown about all nibly bimbly.  There is a threat value to them, and an actual value - one of those times that the fears of the defender are actually justified.

Feel free to throw them all nibly bimbly. I won't mind.

Just keep them out of the slithy toves.

My panzers go "snicker-snack"

You need to whip out your vorpal blade...erm....uh...or not. [:D]

[center]Turn 7[/center]
[center]31 july 1941[/center]

So far so good [8D] On this turn his main thrust has been made in my Kalinin Front, near Velikie Luki. My forces have more or less resisted although there are some breaches, but believe it or not I don't think they are very dangerous (I might be utterly wrong though [:D]).

And here's the first dilemma... What are these armored forces going to do? They have two choices. A push towards Rzhev or Kalinin is out of question. That would leave two very dangerous flanks (and he simply does not have enough infantry). So either these panzers are going to support the AGN operations (they would go north/northeast) or they will be trying to accomplish their theoric task: the capture of Vitebsk, Smolensk -the collapse of my Western Front that is- and then resume towards Moscow (a southeast direction then). The good thing? Both routes have lots of swamps! I know the last patch changed some things but swamps are STILL better than clear hexes. And still, swamps are not good places for tanks [:)]

On the next turn I will know the answer, I suspect.

And sort of funny... As some of you know, on my other game I managed to annihilate my opponent's AGN Panzers. On this game 2ndACR is er... "collaborating"... [:D] No, he is not going to allow me to destroy any of his panzers (in the north and anywhere)... but these dangerous forces have been neutralized by himself (NOT by me [:)]), because I don't think they'll be going anyhwere in that bottleneck. Soooooo... In the end it's like they were already destroyed... I could be of course totally wrong but now the defensive values of my defending forces there is quite big. I don't know if he will be able to dislodge them now.

[center][/center]

They can re-position very quickly when needed.

Sure they can: but it's one LOST turn. And Germans have to use very wisely the first 17 turns. So he can do that many times for all I care. And if you're thinking about the Panzers in the bottleneck, he would need minimum 2 turns to do that [:)] I mean they don't arrive and wildly charge into the enemy positions.

On my other AAR I used this chess analogy: if you move let's say your horse on turn 6 and then on turn 7 you decide that position is not good enough = you have lost one turn. That's a very dangerous thing to do in chess: you will lose initiative and in chess this means you are possibly 99,87% lost... [:)]

EDIT: in the end he would have lost 2 + 2 = 4 turns! That in my opinion IS a lot and should cost him Leningrad (if only I was a competent player) [:D]

"...And sort of funny... As some of you know, on my other game I managed to annihilate my opponent's AGN Panzers. On this game 2ndACR is er... "collaborating"... [:D] No, he is not going to allow me to destroy any of his panzers (in the north and anywhere)... but these dangerous forces have been neutralized by himself (NOT by me [:)]), because I don't think they'll be going anyhwere in that bottleneck...."
 
Well I've been wondering about that move too. [&:] 
Fast moving heavy hitters... going nowheres [&:] I wonder what Fast Heinz would have to say about that. Oh well, 2ndACR probably has his reasons, we'll see how it plays out.

ORIGINAL: TulliusDetritus

Sure they can: but it's one LOST turn. And Germans have to use very wisely the first 17 turns. So he can do that many times for all I care. And if you're thinking about the Panzers in the bottleneck, he would need minimum 2 turns to do that [:)] I mean they don't arrive and wildly charge into the enemy positions.

On my other AAR I used this chess analogy: if you move let's say your horse on turn 6 and then on turn 7 you decide that position is not good enough = you have lost one turn. That's a very dangerous thing to do in chess: you will lose initiative and in chess this means you are possibly 99,87% lost... [:)]

EDIT: in the end he would have lost 2 + 2 = 4 turns! That in my opinion IS a lot and should cost him Leningrad (if only I was a competent player) [:D]

Not necessarily. The intent may very well have been to draw forces away from the actual point of breakthru. If what appears to be the axis of advance is but a deception and a breakthru of the defender occurs elswhere unexpectedly, then no, a turn has not been lost.

Using your mobile forces in such a manner as to remain flexible and maintain their maneuverability to create rapid changes is an essential strategy of early German success.