Clash of Steel: 1941-1945: Q-Ball vs Bletchley_Geek

[BletchleyGeek]

ORIGINAL: M60A3TTS
Although your offensive may not be completely over, I'm curious as to what you think you accomplished in terms of meeting your objectives. What did you gain the most out of and anything you really wanted to accomplish but weren't able to. How does that help going into the Axis 42 Offensive period?

Well, on Turn 23 I delineated the main goals along the following five major strategic axes

Torzhok - Rzhev
Tula - Orel & Tula - Kaluga
Rossoh - Valyuki
Voroshilovgrad - Kramatorskaya
Rostov - Stalino

The first and the second operations met all of their goals, Kaluga already is back in my hands and we're at the doors of Orel. Where I have failed is in the South. I have denied Q-Ball the Mius line and basically pushed him back far enough as to menace (figuratively speaking) Kharkov from the East and Stalino from the North. Getting a wedge north of Stalino and east of Kharkov is an excellent vantage point and something the Germans I think can't ignore. I didn't get the kind of bulge I was pursuing: one that made predictable Axis operations during 1942.

From Day 1 of blizzard my goals were of an operational nature: secure key river lines and railroad junctions and stretch the German line to make Q-Ball difficult to concentrate his infantry without having to rely to the Axis allies to cover the line. I'm not sure whether I've been 100% successful there.

ORIGINAL: M60A3TTS
I'm thinking now that the shock armies are really too little too late in terms of their usefulness in the winter offensive. They have potential to increase morale longer term but by the time the four are actually employed and achieving results, the Axis player is already recovering from winter effects.

3rd and 4th is debatable, about 1st and 2nd I don't agree. 4th Shock came late but I've used to great effect to rip a hole in the German line east of Stalino. I'm sure Q-Ball wasn't amused by that and I forced him to commit troops he was most probably nurturing for March. I disagre about the 1st and 2nd: I had assembled its elements long before they became available, building Arty, Sappers and Tk Bns SU's and handpicking the very best divisions on the RKKA OOB. I think I have been able to use them effectively quickly and with substantial success.

[M60A3TTS]

I didn't make my point clearly on the shock armies, so let me try again. I am talking about the value of a shock army vs any other regular soviet army at this point in time. I'm not questioning the results you achieved with the two shock armies.

The shock army value is to add +5 to national morale which on turn 25 is 43. So that gives you 43+5=48. And that is still below what I call the universal morale level of 50 which Soviet units will get to anyways. If you put your best units in that shock army, I'm guessing they may already be at or above that morale level so in effect that type of army gains you nothing. Later it will be a different story as Soviet national morale increases- thenthe bonus has meaning.

[BletchleyGeek]

ORIGINAL: M60A3TTS

I didn't make my point clearly on the shock armies, so let me try again. I am talking about the value of a shock army vs any other regular soviet army at this point in time. I'm not questioning the results you achieved with the two shock armies.

Ok

ORIGINAL: M60A3TTS
The shock army value is to add +5 to national morale which on turn 25 is 43. So that gives you 43+5=48. And that is still below what I call the universal morale level of 50 which Soviet units will get to anyways. If you put your best units in that shock army, I'm guessing they may already be at or above that morale level so in effect that type of army gains you nothing. Later it will be a different story as Soviet national morale increases- thenthe bonus has meaning.

Hmmm, I don't see why Soviet units get to morale 50 "anyways". Either they had a higher morale than NM because they haven't lost due to combat (which is rare) or they're Guards. I'm missing something perhaps?

In that case, yes, indeed, it's a marginal advantage. Other than to provide a "cushion" for your units, so their morale level doesn't get too low due to combat.

Next turn I'll make a histogram showing Morale level distributions for Soviet Rifle formations. I need to check the numbers, but the morale distribution looks like a bell curve, with the average on the 36 - 42, and the tails being in the low 20's or mid 50's.

[M60A3TTS]

These are the rules under 1.0.5 and refer to the section 9.1.1 in the manual. If you have units at least 10 hexes from the enemy, their morale can go to 50.

19) Changes to Morale Rules

a. The following units receive bonuses to their National Morale: All Cavalry, Mountain Airborne and Air Landing units, and Axis Allied motorized units +5, German Motorized Units +10, Soviet Motorized Units (from Sept 1942-August 1943) +5, Soviet Motorized Units (Sept 1943-end of war) +10.
b. Soviet National Morale has been changed to 50 in June 1941. One point is subtracted each month after this in 1941 (so it is 44 in Dec 41). In 1942 it is set to 40, with one point being added each month starting in September 1942 (so 44 in Dec 42). This continues in 1943 and 1944 until the Soviet National Morale reaches its maximum of 60 in April 1944.
c. Build morale now equals national morale in all cases (there is no separate build morale table anymore.
d. Changed rule so that the morale gain from refit when under 50 morale is only gained when the unit in refit is at least 10 hexes from a supplied enemy unit (similar to the current gain if less than morale 50 and 10 or more hexes from enemy unit).

This is in the manual, which IMO is somewhat murky:
The actual unit morale can be above or below the national morale, but unit morale will tend to gravitate towards the national morale.

My interpretation is it can be the NM level or 50, whichever is higher based on the rules outlined in section 9.1.1. As the Soviet player you have to manage your units to either get morale bumps through combat or keep some units 10 away from the enemy. In some cases, the latter may simply happen by default. And I'd also maintain as a result if you stick these in a shock army, you get no better results as if you stuck them in a plain vanilla army, at least through late '42 when Soviet National Morale starts to rise.

[BletchleyGeek]

ORIGINAL: M60A3TTS

These are the rules under 1.0.5 and refer to the section 9.1.1 in the manual. If you have units at least 10 hexes from the enemy, their morale can go to 50.

19) Changes to Morale Rules

a. The following units receive bonuses to their National Morale: All Cavalry, Mountain Airborne and Air Landing units, and Axis Allied motorized units +5, German Motorized Units +10, Soviet Motorized Units (from Sept 1942-August 1943) +5, Soviet Motorized Units (Sept 1943-end of war) +10.
b. Soviet National Morale has been changed to 50 in June 1941. One point is subtracted each month after this in 1941 (so it is 44 in Dec 41). In 1942 it is set to 40, with one point being added each month starting in September 1942 (so 44 in Dec 42). This continues in 1943 and 1944 until the Soviet National Morale reaches its maximum of 60 in April 1944.
c. Build morale now equals national morale in all cases (there is no separate build morale table anymore.
d. Changed rule so that the morale gain from refit when under 50 morale is only gained when the unit in refit is at least 10 hexes from a supplied enemy unit (similar to the current gain if less than morale 50 and 10 or more hexes from enemy unit).

This is in the manual, which IMO is somewhat murky:
The actual unit morale can be above or below the national morale, but unit morale will tend to gravitate towards the national morale.

My interpretation is it can be the NM level or 50, whichever is higher based on the rules outlined in section 9.1.1. As the Soviet player you have to manage your units to either get morale bumps through combat or keep some units 10 away from the enemy. In some cases, the latter may simply happen by default. And I'd also maintain as a result if you stick these in a shock army, you get no better results as if you stuck them in a plain vanilla army, at least through late '42 when Soviet National Morale starts to rise.

I've been looking closely at those rules, and my interpretation differs slightly from yours. From my point of view, you can have non-motorized, non-cavalry units above NM only in the following circumstances:

• It has Guards status
• It is under command of a Shock Army
• It started with Morale above NM and it hasn't lost it in combat or because of supply penalties
• It has won enough combats in a row and gone through required checks to increase morale

The 10-hex rule distance means, I think, that if you're under 50 you'll increase faster but never above the "glass ceiling" of NM. The statement

The actual unit morale can be above or below the national morale, but unit morale will tend to gravitate towards the national morale.

is indeed murky, but it's consistent with the observations above. If the unit morale is below NM, it will tend to increase towards it. If it's above NM, it might go down because of losing combat and low supply. Perhaps Joel can clarify this.

Hence my worries about 1942: if during March Q-Ball goes berserk and starts attacking my units with overwhelming odds, the little quality won during Winter offensives or conserved by having nurtured units will melt away. Also the ping-pong weather conditions of May and early June are very problematic. He can strike with full strength during clear, and retreat to positions that become natural fortifications the following Mud turn.

I'm really worried about this, guys.

On the topic of Shock Armies. As far as I understand it - perhaps wrongly - the +5 bonus is applied to units current morale level. So if you happen to have a non-Guard 55 morale unit it'll get boosted to 60. This will mean as well that ground elements will get quite experienced and increase the unit combat power significantly.

I can see people using Shock Armies for training rotating membership to get the Morale bump. As long as they don't get into harms way, they'll keep the Morale and train up to almost German standards their ground elements. But I think this is gaming the rules, and is certainly something I won't do.

Thank you for the discussion M60 [:)] And if someone finds that I'm wrong, please do tell me [:)]

[M60A3TTS]

This is why I think what I think. I think. [:D]

Rule 9.2.4

Soviet units that are directly attached to Shock Army headquarters units will receive a five point
bonus to their national morale. This morale bonus exists only as long as the unit is directly
attached to a Shock Army HQ unit.

[BletchleyGeek]

ORIGINAL: M60A3TTS

This is why I think what I think. I think. [:D]

Rule 9.2.4

Soviet units that are directly attached to Shock Army headquarters units will receive a five point
bonus to their national morale. This morale bonus exists only as long as the unit is directly
attached to a Shock Army HQ unit.

Nice one [:)] So no loophole for people to game Shock Armies, and it's not awarded over the current value sported by units, but on the global national morale. So that means an upper bound of 45 to Morale for units in a Shock Army (unless they already had a higher morale than that) until September 1942.

Let's try to wrap up the discussion so far, shall we? [:)]

As to Shock Armies being of "critical" importance for success because of being "too little, too late", yes, you're right. The actual important factor for success is the earmarking and nurturing of good units. The only difference of having those units under a regular Combined Arms Army or a Shock Army is that, even if they lose a lot, they will still be slightly better than "average". Which is not a lot, indeed.

[gingerbread]

Let me just add my .02: Shock Armies do have an extra 100 Support Squads and it's likely that these have more impact than the +5 NM.

Are you planning to harvest the Guards candidates - those that clear the conditions but have not made their die roll yet?

[BletchleyGeek]

ORIGINAL: gingerbread
Let me just add my .02: Shock Armies do have an extra 100 Support Squads and it's likely that these have more impact than the +5 NM.

Very good point, by the way. Too bad that Support Squad production can't be influenced in the same way as other Ground elements. Or it can? I've noticed - if you check the data in the spreadsheet you'll also be able to see it - that Support Squad tends to be zero for a few turns in a row and then suddenly "spikes". Perhaps reducing TOE's for some HQ's will mean than other HQ's - Shock Armies for instance - get replenished more quickly. Let's see if this turn I can try this.

ORIGINAL: gingerbread
Are you planning to harvest the Guards candidates - those that clear the conditions but have not made their die roll yet?

No, not really. I think it's more important to "harvest" the units I might have with Morale higher than NM. This and good victory/defeat ratios tend to go hand by hand.

[gingerbread]

I'm afraid I'll have to pass on the task to divine the workings of Support Squad production. Fresh out of lizzard's gut since I used a lot on the ARM multiplier subject. [;)]

[BletchleyGeek]

ORIGINAL: gingerbread

I'm afraid I'll have to pass on the task to divine the workings of Support Squad production. Fresh out of lizzard's gut since I used a lot on the ARM multiplier subject. [;)]

More than "divining" is more like coming up for the setup of a "randomized experiment" of sorts [:)]

PS: BTW, I'm more into the Roman way of horuspication by gutting chickens [:D]

[randallw]

That last battle report was interesting, showing quite a few 'retreat' losses for the attacking player.  I suppose this happens when the defending side holds the ground and the attacker disengages, trying to head back to their own positions.

[BletchleyGeek]

ORIGINAL: randallw

That last battle report was interesting, showing quite a few 'retreat' losses for the attacking player.  I suppose this happens when the defending side holds the ground and the attacker disengages, trying to head back to their own positions.

Exactly. In my opinion this is often overlooked: the attacker suffers retreat attrition when he's repulsed. Due to the rather low experience and morale, Soviet retreat attrition is quite brutal. Most of the elements are destroyed. I'd bet good money that for the Germans in 1942, retreat attrition consists mostly of damaged rather than destroyed elements. Anybody can confirm this "guess"?

[BletchleyGeek]

Turn 34 – 5 February 1942

We enter the month of February without many news other than the substantial improvement of the Axis army status. Q-Ball has counterattacked the forces I had on the outskirts of Orel, causing substantial losses. The exchange ratio – just by looking at the combat report which includes permanent and non-permanent losses – has been of about 3:1 favoring Q-Ball forces.

This combat is especially interesting

[center][/center]

Note that two thirds of Axis losses are Damaged ground elements – possibly victims of those über SMG squads that ComradeP told to me about – and most interestingly, two thirds of my losses are Retreat Attrition losses.

Logistics & Organization

I'm considering the next February turns as time to recover and reinforce, since offensive operations will be very limited. This turn I manage to put into the rank and file 105,000 new recruits. This is a sharp decrease with respect to the peak we reached in early January, about a 50% less.

Operations

My attention and activities are centered on Orel:

[center][/center]

There are four spots where I can get good odds. Q-Ball spoiling counterattack has really spoilt things for me here. I will direct as much artillery and sappers to the Armies in this sector. However, all this is to no avail. Q-Ball stops my troops dead cold

[center][/center]

This has been a complete disaster. Detection levels were really low and my attacking armies have suffered substantial losses. I have launched 9 attacks – 4 in other sectors were Axis units seemed to me to be asking for a spanking – and I've only obtained 4 victories. Terrible success ratio. The casualty exchange is disastrous: 5,000 Axis permanent losses (2,000 KIA, 3,000 disabled) for 24,000 Soviet permanent losses (21,000 KIA, 3,000 disabled). Almost 5 to 1.

I think I need to brace myself for March. I'm deeply worried, this turn felt like a summer 41 turn and I'm NOT amused by that at all.

I've added to the spreadsheet a table for tracking Rifle Divisions morale (the bulk of the RKKA OOB). For this turn, the morale distributions are:

Morale Level #Units
30 or lower 4
40 or lower 100
50 or lower 251
60 or lower 23

Of the units in the Morale range from 41 to 50, about 50% are in the 41-44 range and another 50% in the range 45-50. This doesn't say many good things of the fighting prowess of the Red Army in the following months.

[BletchleyGeek]

Sorry for the delay updating, I've been terribly busy this week

Turn 35 – 12 February 1941

Q-Ball keeps counterattacking my forces on the Orel – Voronezh sector and Stalino, wherever he can commit overwhelming odds without having to move much. Overall, he's launched 4 attacks, 3 of them successful. Analyzing the losses data, I see that the proportion of Soviet casualties when the Axis is in the attack is like that of the Axis in the defense: 7,000 KIA and 34,000 disabled, which include about 6,000 casualties due to attrition. These attacks are doing substantial damage to key units.

Operational Situation Report

I won't bother this turn updating this since there's nothing to update

Logistics & Organization

Soviet regular units are attaining Guard status, and I'm surprised to see that this turn (1.05.39 logistics phase) two Soviet Cavalry Divisions just became Guards

[center][/center]

which happily happened to be part of the same Cavalry Corps. On the production front something surprising happened this turn. I found over 60,000 ARM points in the pool... something I didn't expect at all. Checking the manpower figures I see that 122,000 men were feeded into the RKKA units, which seem to have used basically to form up 5,600 – that's about 112,000 men - Support squads and other diverse equipment.

I need to get a hold on HQ strength levels I think... but when I check on the CR I see that at some point before blizzard I had setup Army HQ Max TOE to 75%. Many of my armies are up to full strength, and quite a few are well above their prescribed TOE level. I will be keeping an eye on this, and meanwhile, I make sure that every Combined Arms Army has a Max TOE of 75, while I leave the Shock Armies at 100%.

Operations

Seems that I'm not recovering Orel in 1941... better to be safe, as in good trenches, than sorry, as in lamenting by having pushed too far my troops when Q-Ball strikes back in March (and I'm pretty sure he'll).

[center][/center]

I've pulled away from the line 2nd and 1st Shock Army – which sorely need a RnR period, and consolidated my positions. You can see on the picture my operational reserves, 5 armies, two of them in badly need of refit, and other two – the 50th and 43rd – which are really weak and I need to reinforce.

I'm doing this all over the front, though I'm delaying it a bit in the South.

No attacks this turn. The Winter counteroffensives are over.

Turn 36 – 19 February 1942

“All quiet in the Eastern Front” said Q-Ball when he returned to me with his moves. He hasn't counterattacked at all, but there has been some sharp fighting in the skies, where the Luftwaffe has gotten a slightly bloody nose, losing 20 recon and 5 fighter planes due to CAP intercepting recon flights.

Logistics & Organization

Armaments pool keeps rising, it's slightly over 100,000 points this turn. Again, a lot of Support Squads have been built, gobbling about 52,000 out of the 110,000 replacements I've managed to mobilize.

Turn 37 – 26 February 1942

The blizzard is over – and next turn I'm pretty sure that Q-Ball will start causing some trouble, so it's time to make balance of these past 12 turns where I've been awarded the initiative by the First Winter game mechanics.

First, let's take a look at the frontline

[center][/center]

The only major target I've not been able to get is Orel, and I'm really chided about it. Getting Orel would have meant having a very nice bulge on German lines that Q-Ball couldn't ignore. The progress in the south it's not too shabby, but it's more because of Q-Ball trading space for time rather than because of the RKKA crushing the cruel invaders on the steppes. I wouldn't be surprised if I were again thrown against the ropes there before April. Q-Ball line isn't as inefficient as I expected and wanted.

Second, let's see how have we done in the losses department. For the Axis, since turn 25 to turn 37 these are broken down as follow:

KIA: 63,794
POW: 25,726
Disabled: 531,658
Arty: 4,158
AFV: 647

For the Red Army, losses have been:

KIA: 273,977
POW: 6,005
Disabled: 339,861
Arty: 6,434
AFV: 1,951

After 12 weeks of campaigning, the Red Army has managed to inflict on the Axis as much losses as it has received in the infantry department. Here I need to thank, above all, to General Winter, the best Soviet general by far. Artillery losses have been heavy for both sides, but I think both myself and Q-Ball will get over it pretty quickly. Finally, my AFV losses have been quite spectacular, and mostly consisting of T-60 and other light stuff. Out of 2,277 T-60 produced, over 900, have been destroyed or lost due to operational damage.

So I've managed to put a dent into the German Army and, at the same time, get the Red Army to recover from the complete disaster 1941 has been:

[center][/center]

I've 5.5M men on the field, over 65,000 guns and 4,700 AFVs. It's not a humongous Red Army, but one that can put some more fight than the ragged force Q-Ball has been facing from August to November.

Other miscellaneous data can be checked on the spreadsheet. I've not bothered to separate blizzard attrition losses from combat losses for the Axis, since Q-Ball has been pretty active on the counterattack. My estimate is that about 300,000 out of those 530,000 disabled have been blizzard casualties.

This game contrasts starkly with my most recent blizzard. While I've achieved similar territorial gains, I started in this game with a much weaker Red Army. Q-Ball really put the hurt on me, and he was very close of breaking the back of the Red Army. This has been a pretty tense 1941. However, he's perhaps the first of my Axis opponents to have got a hold – in a comprenhensive way – on the First Winter Rules and their meaning for the Axis and the dynamics of the campaign. He's also been able to keep his head cool even in the darkest evenings of early January 1942, when it seemed that the Wehrmacht was collapsing. But rather than that, he's fought an excellent fighting withdrawal, denying me use my armies, especially in the south, to their full potential.

I'm expecting an EXTREMELY interesting 1942.

[BletchleyGeek]

ORIGINAL: Bletchley_Geek
I'm expecting an EXTREMELY interesting 1942.

Just checked Q-Ball's answer to Turn 37... and seems I'm not going to be disappointed

[janh]

Indeed, Q-Ball already posted and it looks, errh, not very good...  The 42 Red Army isn't exactly what you'd wish for, in fact, despite the relatively good shape you preserved it in, I expect you will have a very very tough time. 

On the up-side, the Wehrmacht is at a rather neutral 3.3 Mio, and ok in tank and gun strength.  Neither side has been bled hard as their historical counterparts (I do again recommend to check out Glantz' book on the German defensive doctrine, http://www.cgsc.edu/carl/resources/csi/ ... .asp#orgin -- it describes the mess AGS found itself in during July 41, how dire the defensive battles of AGC during July-August were, and how surprisingly badly the German Infantry was depleted by Russian counteroffensives all summer until February; including numerous divisions being reduced to mere regiments; the book sheds very interesting facts on the numerical strength of Wehrmacht by Typhoon, and the skill of small Soviet units in counterattacking).

One question Q-Ball raised in his AAR was the issue of your blizzard attacks, being comparably few and the greater impact rather small.  No major breakthrus, no pockets or near-encirclements, and besides a few hexes gained, nothing that really would have caused chaos as you'd perhaps hope from a blizzard counteroffensive. Without spoiling secrets, I probably can say that Q-Balls Wehrmacht was not near the breaking point.  Surely all this was in part due to Q-Ball also being conservative on the offensive, gaining a lot without having to risk too much, and without engaging in costly attacks.  Which raises the question why the Axis can push so hard and gain much more than historical against a skilled player, who attempts to fight with the Red Army as much as he can?  That's probably not only a supply issue. 

So Q-Ball apparently entered blizzard with an intact German Army, and even started preparing winter defenses (that the Germans originally prepared much too late, if at all), but in turn he also inflicted lower casualties on you.  During the Winter offensive, you did similarly proceeded quite carefully, performing only the attacks with high-odds that also served a greater strategic goal.  The big question now are: could you have pushed harder at a reasonable cost given that you also had more forces at your disposal than the reference case?  Could you have caused a real break-thru and ensuing crisis?  Or is this all that was really possible?  Perhaps it would also require the Axis to be more reckless in summer and up to the blizzard and commit to more costly head-on attacks, leaving the Axis Army weakened an overexposed?

[BletchleyGeek]

The remark about the "Wehrmacht collapse" was directed at some people who suggested that to me (not on these forums). I never believed that myself.

ORIGINAL: janh
On the up-side, the Wehrmacht is at a rather neutral 3.3 Mio, and ok in tank and gun strength. Neither side has been bled hard as their historical counterparts (I do again recommend to check out Glantz' book on the German defensive doctrine, http://www.cgsc.edu/carl/resources/csi/ ... .asp#orgin -- it describes the mess AGS found itself in during July 41, how dire the defensive battles of AGC during July-August were, and how surprisingly badly the German Infantry was depleted by Russian counteroffensives all summer until February; including numerous divisions being reduced to mere regiments; the book sheds very interesting facts on the numerical strength of Wehrmacht by Typhoon, and the skill of small Soviet units in counterattacking).

Thanks for the reference janh. There are indeed some very depleted German infantry units, but they're in our game around Moscow, where the fighting really "raged".

ORIGINAL: janh
Which raises the question why the Axis can push so hard and gain much more than historical against a skilled player, who attempts to fight with the Red Army as much as he can? That's probably not only a supply issue.

In this game he hasn't gained "that" much than historical, but in north and along the Kursk - Kharkov - Stalino line. In the south it was a supply issue, he overran his railhead and didn't get them into range in time to do anything useful before Mud hit.

It's not only about supply. I'm pretty sure the effect of experience on Tactical combat play a major role in this as well. Germans in 1941 never take much losses either when defeated - a rare thing - or when an attack is repulsed - attackers take retreat attrition when attack fails. This is a major factor, since there a lot of German failed attacks as the season advances. Add to that how easy is for supply to flow around, and damaged elements become easily repaired and Fatigue levels go down also quite efficiently. The tempo of operations in 1941 - and beyond that - is just out of whack.

I've already launched a few counterattacks this turn and I'm noticing that something has changed. On the one hand, there's no more 1:1 -> 1:2 rules, and Soviets suffer less in the attack agaings un-entrenched Germans. And also, German experience seems to be somewhat lower. So perhaps in 1942, keeping the tempo they sustained in 1941 might not be possible.

ORIGINAL: janh
So Q-Ball apparently entered blizzard with an intact German Army, and even started preparing winter defenses (that the Germans originally prepared much too late, if at all), but in turn he also inflicted lower casualties on you. During the Winter offensive, you did similarly proceeded quite carefully, performing only the attacks with high-odds that also served a greater strategic goal. The big question now are: could you have pushed harder at a reasonable cost given that you also had more forces at your disposal than the reference case? Could you have caused a real break-thru and ensuing crisis? Or is this all that was really possible? Perhaps it would also require the Axis to be more reckless in summer and up to the blizzard and commit to more costly head-on attacks, leaving the Axis Army weakened an overexposed?

Well, he almost did to me 4M casualties in 1941, which is not too shabby, considering the ARM crunch and the reduced Manpower compared with previous versions.

To answer your question, the degree of success of the Red Army during blizzard is directly proportional to how pigheaded is the Axis player about keeping a few meaningless hexes. This has been always the key, always. If Q-Ball had just sit on his lines, allowing me to use my armies to full effect rather than having me to burn MP's chasing him, there would have been a breakthrough. But he didn't. As soon as I saw that he was not going to be baited into a "Not a step back" stance, I basically gave up, attacking where I could hurt him without bleeding me white. Also that thing he did of stacking three units and leaving one hex between them was pretty smart. He massed CV and he wasn't exposing any real soft spot for me to strike.

I'm actually happy about Blizzard also in the Guards department. I've got 11 Guards Rifle Divisions, and 1 Cav Guards Corps (waiting for other to become Guards as well now that the issue with promotion has been allegedly fixed in 1.05.40) and more to come if Q-Ball doesn't destroy them in the following 3 turns, of course I've got also about 400 AP's on the pool... but I'm getting ahead of Turn 38 AAR

[janh]

That actually sounds pretty good.  A few posts further up you displayed MP on your unit icons, and they didn't look that low.  But if the opponent performs a slow withdrawal, and your high MP units like cavalry, mech and tanks don't yet pack a big punch, pocketing or causing another crisis will be very hard.  In fact, the winter withdrawals, and also those in later summers, will be the corresponding countermove to the Soviet fighting withdrawal in earlier days.  Perhaps the only thing that would prevent such slow retreats (Sir Robins) would indeed be adding a political component like some Stalin or Hitler orders  (or artificial constraints on industry or manpower production).  Fortunately we don't have those orders, or playing the later war years as a German might turn into a big headache.  Looks like patch 1.05 is really close.  Let's see how other AARs work out.

Best,
Jan

PS. The book ref is good reading, and seems not as biased as some other books, particularly the German literature (of "contemporary" authors).  I guessed that you already read it, but hopefully others will find it interesting and instructive, too.

[BletchleyGeek]

ORIGINAL: janh
A few posts further up you displayed MP on your unit icons, and they didn't look that low. 

I worked on that, attaching RR Bdes to Army HQ's leading the offensives and assigning good Admin/Initiative leaders. The problem wasn't that of MP availability, but how expensive it was to enter a German held hex. For instance, with a 12MP Rifle Division, I usually spent 4 to 6 MP's already depending on the terrain. And that leads us to Morale... a Red Army with worse overall, average morale is an overally, on the average, slower Red Army.

ORIGINAL: janh
But if the opponent performs a slow withdrawal, and your high MP units like cavalry, mech and tanks don't yet pack a big punch, pocketing or causing another crisis will be very hard.  In fact, the winter withdrawals, and also those in later summers, will be the corresponding countermove to the Soviet fighting withdrawal in earlier days.  Perhaps the only thing that would prevent such slow retreats (Sir Robins) would indeed be adding a political component like some Stalin or Hitler orders  (or artificial constraints on industry or manpower production).  Fortunately we don't have those orders, or playing the later war years as a German might turn into a big headache.  Looks like patch 1.05 is really close.  Let's see how other AARs work out.

That was the nice thing about Q-Ball stacks thing. Usually one has the opportunity to crush a slowly moving, severely weakened German unit on the retreat with Tank Brigades and Cav Corps. But with that the divisions in better shape look after their kamerads.

My concerns about WitE at the moment are two: the ubiquitous cornucopia of supply and certain ground elements being übermodeled in the Tactical Combat system. Regarding supply, although I did some work to keep my forces supplied, I think I did too little work for the effect obtained. I was really surprised to see that the Volkhov and Northwestern Front units, even advancing through heavy woods in deep frozen snow, still received substantial supply (but interestingly, no replacements). They should have been starving.

So I'd say that yes, we're about "there".

ORIGINAL: janh
PS. The book ref is good reading, and seems not as biased as some other books, particularly the German literature (of "contemporary" authors).  I guessed that you already read it, but hopefully others will find it interesting and instructive, too.

I think I've read a quite interesting study on that site about German capabilities during blizzard (a paper from 1983 I think). I referenced to it during the First Winter Flame Wars that occurred on the forums back in April or May. Again, thank you for the reference.