Lvov Pocket exploit - Q for developers

[Peltonx]

Interesting idea.

Might want to consider a thread just on this thought.

Pelton

[EisenHammer]

ORIGINAL: Pelton

Interesting idea.

Might want to consider a thread just on this thought.

Pelton

Thanks.
But hopefully this thread would be good enough.

Lvov pocket is BS.

[BletchleyGeek]

ORIGINAL: EisenHammer
Time and space will tell you that this is not possible with all the firepower the SW front had at the time for them to be overtaken that fast. Just read about the first ten days of AG South and you read about the biggest tank battle in history until Kursk.

According to this guy

http://books.google.com/books/about/Dem ... OPSQAACAAJ

the Dubno-Brody battles in August 1941 were the biggest tank battle in history. Kursk was overrated by both sides for similar reasons

[*Lava*]

ORIGINAL: EisenHammer
Time and space will tell you that this is not possible with all the firepower the SW front had at the time for them to be overtaken that fast. Just read about the first ten days of AG South and you read about the biggest tank battle in history until Kursk.

If the Axis player advances AGC in a plunge directly towards Kiev, he will run into some very nasty Soviet Armored units that will give him a bloody nose if the Axis player attacks them.

I do believe Soviet doctrine called for their armored reserves to blunt/halt any penetration of their front line.

Wasn't the first time this happened to the Axis army... happened in France as well. The difference wasn't tank quality (both France and Russia had better tanks), it was doctrine. The Axis combined mobile warfare with close air support. And each time they ran into superior forces on the ground, the air arm would be called in to eliminate them.

This doesn't work so good in the game though... [:)]

[BletchleyGeek]

ORIGINAL: Lava
This doesn't work so good in the game though... [:)]

Prove that. One counterexample to your assertion:

[center][/center]

that's October 1941, near Stalino.

I can produce many more, especially for earlier dates. No handwaving, please.

[Q-Ball]

Question on this. What was the historical advance of AGS on Turn 1?

If the Germans can make that rail junction 2 hexes south of Tarnopol, then the net effect will be almost the same; the soviets shouldbe able to escape from Stanislav area on-foot, but the guys right by the frontier are probably doomed.

If there is no Lvov pocket, you can still bag the Mech Corps around Kovel, and a number of units closer to Lvov.

[Klydon]

ORIGINAL: EisenHammer

I think the Lvov pocket is BS and would never happen without an panzer corps attach to the 11th army. A one arm encirclement of this size would have failed with too many gaps in the line even if there was a breakthrough and they made it to Romania.

Time and space will tell you that this is not possible with all the firepower the SW front had at the time for them to be overtaken that fast. Just read about the first ten days of AG South and you read about the biggest tank battle in history until Kursk. Something needs to be fixed about this, maybe the SW front is too weak or maybe reserves should be counter attacking in battles. But whatever is happening would not be happening in reality and or history.

And if you did bring a panzer corps down from AGC it would take days for it to redeployed, get in line and attack, thus again time and space would be against this.

In your opinion.

The fact is you don't know for sure what would have happen. No one does.

[asdicus]

Glad to see my original question on the validity of the Lvov pocket move has generated a good debate. I will be buying this game but not yet see my comments below. At the moment I do not think that the 1941 campaign is true to history - sure players can make different strategic decisions but the laws of supply etc should still apply. I do think the IGOYGO system has problems with 1 week turns - witness the Lvov pocket - but I do understand this cannot be changed.

I am really surprised to see how many german players believe the Lvov pocket is fine because it is their only chance of winning the game. Sorry but the russian german contest was not a equal match. The germans should be able to win on victory points but it should be very unlikely for the russians to be forced to surrender. Once the russian people figured out that the only options were total victory or death(by violence or starvation etc) the germans could never win. I do think the victory points system may need changing to give the german players a realistic goal to attain.

At the moment as an undecided game purchaser I see the Lvov pocket move as a sympton of a greater problem - allowing the germans to move too fast too soon everywhere at once. The standard german game start is destroying all the main russian frontier armies north centre and south in 2 turns(weeks). No wonder all the russian players can do then is run away for the next 4 months. A very fine aar Bletchley Geek/Q Ball between 2 very skilled players shows a typical game now. Russians are nearly totally destroyed on the frontiers in 2 weeks and then all they can do is run away if they stand and fight they get surrounded and die. The germans spearheads are allowed to move far too far too fast with no issues of supply. Kiev is falling within a month thanks to loss of south west front. Moscow Leningrad and Rostov are being threatened within 2 months. I don't own the game so I don't understand all the supply stuff but something needs to slow the germans down.

On the Lvov pocket the developers need to come up with something to stop this move. Perhaps changing the dispositions of south west front ? Altering the first turn german move advantages ? There is a group of vocal german players who will complain vigorously at any proposed change to 'nerf the germans'. It is not about 'nerfing' any one side it is about making the game realistic to history. If you are going to model every gun/plane/man etc you need to get the supply and strategic restrictions right as well. If not you could end up with issues which plagued the early witp releases ( japan overrunning australia and india and outproducing the usa in planes because supply and shipping restrictions were not in place). witp ae has now been sorted and balanced thanks to the efforts of the dedicated development team and I am sure the wite team will be able to match their efforts. During this process it is a times necessary to ignore the loudest and most vocal players complaining about their own pet game likes/dislikes.

[BletchleyGeek]

ORIGINAL: Q-Ball
Question on this. What was the historical advance of AGS on Turn 1?

PzGruppe 1 III PzKorps and XLVIII PzKorps were engaged from 23rd June to 30th June in a series of linked engagements with the Mech Corps of Southwestern Front 5th and 6th Armies, which took place west of the Rovno - Tarnopol line, in what is referred to as well as the "Bloody Triangle":

The Bloody Triangle: The Defeat of Soviet Armor in the Ukraine, June 1941
V. Kamenir

Those probably were the biggest tank battles of the war, if one is to believe the Zamulin guy I mentioned above.

Tarnopol was in German hands by July 2nd 1941:

Situation map Tarnopol, 1-2 July 1941

[Klydon]

ORIGINAL: asdicus

On the Lvov pocket the developers need to come up with something to stop this move. Perhaps changing the dispositions of south west front ? Altering the first turn german move advantages ? There is a group of vocal german players who will complain vigorously at any proposed change to 'nerf the germans'. It is not about 'nerfing' any one side it is about making the game realistic to history. If you are going to model every gun/plane/man etc you need to get the supply and strategic restrictions right as well. If not you could end up with issues which plagued the early witp releases ( japan overrunning australia and india and outproducing the usa in planes because supply and shipping restrictions were not in place). witp ae has now been sorted and balanced thanks to the efforts of the dedicated development team and I am sure the wite team will be able to match their efforts. During this process it is a times necessary to ignore the loudest and most vocal players complaining about their own pet game likes/dislikes.

I am not a German player shill by any means.

My comment is this:

Try attacking in the south with just the forces available and you likely get close to what happens historically if not a bit better German performance in part due to better weather in game than what happen historically. Toss in a mud turn on say turn 3, then you get closer to what actually happen and I doubt the game would deviate much from that.

Now, try the same thing with a reenforced AGS and with most players not playing random weather, those two factors make absolutely a huge difference, yet we have Russian fan boys who want to absolutely ignore the fact the advance to the Rumanian border is a SHORTER distance over EASIER terrain compared to AGC's drive on Minsk and they also want to absolutely ignore the fact that reenforcing AGS with extra panzer units available from turn 1 and not playing historical weather doesn't make that much of a difference. Sorry, but it makes all the difference in the world.

Two other observations: First, I am glad you decided to purchase the game. I don't think you will be sorry you did.

Second, there is plenty of evidence that even with the "Lvov pocket" manuver, there are still very, very few outright German wins (which is the way it should be). In short, while it makes it easier on the Germans in 1941, it is not in and of itself a game winner. There is simply way too much that takes place after that in terms of fighting, etc.

[BletchleyGeek]

ORIGINAL: Klydon
Now, try the same thing with a reenforced AGS and with most players not playing random weather, those two factors make absolutely a huge difference, yet we have Russian fan boys who want to absolutely ignore the fact the advance to the Rumanian border is a SHORTER distance over EASIER terrain compared to AGC's drive on Minsk and they also want to absolutely ignore the fact that reenforcing AGS with extra panzer units available from turn 1 and not playing historical weather doesn't make that much of a difference. Sorry, but it makes all the difference in the world.

Klydon, mate, easy, this discussion isn't about fanboyism. See the reference I provided just above.

[wosung]

ORIGINAL: Klydon
yet we have Russian fan boys who want to absolutely ignore the fact the advance to the Rumanian border is a SHORTER distance over EASIER terrain compared to AGC's drive on Minsk.

IRL considering traffic and logistics the drive in Minsk was much more easy than the one along the Black Sea because of the density of roads and railroads. Sure, for combat the South was easier because of its lack of dense forests. But not for movement. Some summer rain and the Southern black earth soil turned into mud.

German Barbarossa planning and force allocation reflected this. Arguably the game in this respect is lacking.

Edit: See Van Crefeld, Supplying War.

[*Lava*]

ORIGINAL: Bletchley_Geek

Prove that. One counterexample to your assertion:

[center][/center]

So are you saying that 29 bombers caused 116 AFV loses here? [8|]

How do you explain this?

[EisenHammer]

This is a map of AGS from July 7 to July 14 after the battles around Lutsk, Dubno, and Brody that slowed down the German advance. As you can tell there are still some very heavy Russian counter-attacks going on, even one that surrounds the 11pz Div. And The Germans would not form a pocket in the South until August at Uman. I think the SW Front is way to weak in the game.

[BletchleyGeek]

ORIGINAL: Lava

So are you saying that 29 bombers caused 116 AFV loses here? [8|]

No, I'm saying that 29 bombers operating in support of motorized divisions, with high morale , experience and good leadership destroyed 116 AFVs.

ORIGINAL: lava
How do you explain this?

Where are your ground forces? Ground Attack alone has never caused much damaged to anything, barring Support, Vehicle and the odd artillery piece or infantry squad. That's a very ineffective use of the Luftwaffe in WitE.

EDIT:

Hint #1: Check the Show Details for the combat and see how many damaged and disrupted ground elements you got with that attack.

Hint #2: did you read my comment to Herwin before? Units on the map aren't really entirely there for some purposes, especially for air action. Only when battle is joined they get pinned to a discrete place in the map and hence the effectiveness of air action.

[Wild]

"I am really surprised to see how many german players believe the Lvov pocket is fine because it is their only chance of winning the game. Sorry but the russian german contest was not a equal match."

[Quote] Asdicus



German players do not believe that the Lvov Pocket is fine because it is their only chance to win. They believe it is fine because it is a plausible alternative strategy the Germans could have used, especially with the application of additional forces.


Also Klydon, i agree with you completely. It's just a shame that some of the soviet players will not bother to read what you are saying and basically would just like to accuse the Germans of cheating.

[*Lava*]

ORIGINAL: Bletchley_Geek

Only when battle is joined they get pinned to a discrete place in the map and hence the effectiveness of air action.

Totally agree. [:)]

Nevertheless... even after specifically flying recon on the unit and then attacking it, it certainly leaves me wondering just how many losses are attributed to aerial attack during combined operations.

Would this be in the detailed battle report... or some such?

[KenchiSulla]

In game terms, the only reason to ground attack is to cause disruption (it is carrying over) prior to a supported ground assault... It works quite well..

[BletchleyGeek]

ORIGINAL: Lava

ORIGINAL: Bletchley_Geek

Only when battle is joined they get pinned to a discrete place in the map and hence the effectiveness of air action.

Totally agree. [:)]

Nevertheless... even after specifically flying recon on the unit and then attacking it, it certainly leaves me wondering just how many losses are attributed to aerial attack during combined operations.

Would this be in the detailed battle report... or some such?

Yes, in the detailed Battle detail you can check the number of ground elements destroyed/damaged/disrupted depending due to ground action, air action or during retreat.

In any case, as Cannonfodder, says, Ground Attack alone is above all useful to cause disruption (i.e. increase ground element fatigue). So in some occasions it pays off to "soften" up a stoutly defended hex, more so when the defenders already have high fatigue (you can't get this from the soft factors display, but low supply level usually goes together with high fatigue level).

Another use of Ground Attack, I think perhaps the most useful indeed, is to bomb the daylights out of HQ's. You'll have to fight some thick AAA but destroying or damaging Support squads and supply dumps in a regular basis isn't going to be good for the health of your opponent forces. Some people use this same thing to "hunt" for enemy commanders, but I think that's a lottery. The support and supply are prime targets for your air forces.

[heliodorus04]

I'm starting a new GC'41 versus Cannonfodder (a highly recommended opponent, btw), and I practice a ton of ways to try to do Lvov, and attached is a simple screenshot of one try.

I'm not sure what is "customary" but I bring down 46 Panzer Corps (because XXXXVI is simply ridiculous to type), which is how I learned the maneuver.

The problem with Lvov is not that Germany can re-allocate the Corps: these are the kinds of freedoms both players benefit from, and they are fun freedoms. I'd hope we can prevent the discussion from becoming one in which we simply restrict players from freely moving their units as they desire.

The problem is made up of 2 parts:
First, Turn 1 freedoms allow the German player to effectively operate certain units in a time-warp, others to operate in a different time-warp, and constrains the Soviet to yet a third time warp.

Second, the Soviet simply can't react while Germans strain the limits of the physical universe.

See the attached Screen Shot: