Matrix Games Forums

Turn 56.

The Soviets have started a little offenive against the Finns. In my experience, this is typically what the Soviets will do when they have nothing else to do. They take a hex, but it doesnt come cheap. On top of that the Finnish armor division arrive just in time to push them back, inflicting additional damage. I send up a panzer corps just in case. They haven't got much else to do either...

neuromancer, I think Pelton for one has shown that while the Sir Robin strategy may work in some situations, it isn't all it's cracked up to be.  Giving away your railcap in a mad retreat east can quickly reduce your ability to get industry out. 

When making the decision to attack, you should keep in mind that unless you have an enemy surrounded, most of your manpower losses will be killed for the attacker and for the defender will mostly be disabled. I was looking at some of your loss charts posted on the prior page of the thread and it appears that:

T47 - German permanent manpower loss (KIA, POW) = 664,532
T52 - " " " = 744,500
Or a increment of ~80,000 permanent losses in these 5 turns

For the Soviets -
T47 - KIA & POW = 3,175,555
T52 - = 3,279,554
Or an increment of ~104,000 permanent losses in these 5 turns

Thus, the reality is the attacking effort over the month actually resulted in a permanent loss ratio of only 4:5 Axis/Soviet.

I am not sure what manpower replacements are for the Axis in 1942 - but I believe no more than 15,000/turn for Germany. Means a net permanent loss of 5,000.

Reinforcements for German units from T48-T52 show 134,000.

Disablements for Axis show about 55,000 over this 5 turn period.

ORIGINAL: vaned74

When making the decision to attack, you should keep in mind that unless you have an enemy surrounded, most of your manpower losses will be killed for the attacker and for the defender will mostly be disabled. I was looking at some of your loss charts posted on the prior page of the thread and it appears that:

T47 - German permanent manpower loss (KIA, POW) = 664,532
T52 - " " " = 744,500
Or a increment of ~80,000 permanent losses in these 5 turns

For the Soviets -
T47 - KIA & POW = 3,175,555
T52 - = 3,279,554
Or an increment of ~104,000 permanent losses in these 5 turns

Thus, the reality is the attacking effort over the month actually resulted in a permanent loss ratio of only 4:5 Axis/Soviet.

I am not sure what manpower replacements are for the Axis in 1942 - but I believe no more than 15,000/turn for Germany. Means a net permanent loss of 5,000.

Reinforcements for German units from T48-T52 show 134,000.

Disablements for Axis show about 55,000 over this 5 turn period.

Combat losses in most turns will be smaller than attrition, which will typically be 20-30.000 per turn for the Germans. Thus, you are correct in that counting only combat losses can be deceptive. You need a loss rate much better than 3-1 to really hurt the Soviets.

ORIGINAL: M60A3TTS
neuromancer, I think Pelton for one has shown that while the Sir Robin strategy may work in some situations, it isn't all it's cracked up to be.  Giving away your railcap in a mad retreat east can quickly reduce your ability to get industry out. 

As compared to what? Tarhunnas gained a lot of ground quickly, and Q-Ball still lost very little industry. I think something like 15%, instead of the hisotrical 50%! About the only thing he lost much of was some aircraft factories he forgot to move. But with the low impact of air in this game (again contrary to history) he's not really that bothered about it.

The Russians can consistantly move industry out before the Germans get to it. Against the computer in my current game I bagged Minsk, and that's it. One turn I noticed 'hey, city X,Y, and Z still have industry! I had better try for them!" Next turn, all three were completely empty. Which included the big T-34 factories in Kharkov.

Never mind. No point now.

The only way the Germans bag industry currently is one of two ways:
1. A mad dash through a hole in the front with a motorized unit, which will probably result in the motorized unit getting surrounded and killed, and can be ountered by simply leaving some infantry in any city anywhere near the front.
2. The Soviet player screws up.

There has been a statement that 4+ million Soviet casualties is the magic number to survive the winter and have a shot at doing something in '42. But even against the computer, exceeding 3 million is tough! Against a reasonably competent Soviet player, damn near impossible.

ok, so you don't like the game as constituted because the Soviets get the free units (historically they raised close to 500 rifle divisions in '41 so I don't know what's so unfair), it's near impossible to kill over 3+ million Reds compared to the 4.4 mil the Russians actually lost by 12/41, and it's too easy to rail out industry. Guess you'll have to find another game to play.

What a useful and meaningful contribution to the discussion.  Really helps to address the concerns of many players and gives new insight into ways that will serve to address the 1942 stalemate issue the game currently faces.  Thank you so much for that.
 
Or not.  [8|]
 
"Let's see what this so called 'button' does."
 
 
 
Incidentally, I've been looking at one of Pelton's AARs.  That answered my question of "as compared to what?"
 
Okay, that isn't quite what I meant when I was thinking of a 'Sir Robin'.  Although I suppose its a more accurate description.  The Soviet player has to at least make some kind of fighting retreat to give himself a little time to rail industry out, not just a flat out run straight East!
 
I was thinking more of what Q-Ball did, which was fall back quickly, still evacuating industry in front of the Germans (for the most part).
 

And your self-proclaimed rant advanced the '42 stalemate discussion in what way? [&:]

Based on your last comment, perhaps we at least agree that a fighting withdrawal is superior to a wholesale flee for the hills solution. I'll count that as a positive takeaway.

2 to 1 losses are not close to enough. Here is the results from my game with Hoooper and its really all about art not manpower as I see it.

Tarhunnas is 100% right you need to get at least 3 to 1, which can only be done IF you can pocket russian units. beatting your head against a wall will only get you 2 to 1 and going 100% defensive will only get you 2 to 1. From turns 70 to 90 I started out in lvl 3 forts.

From turn 70 to 90 Hooopers manpower has increaed from 7 million to 8 million.

Russian losses the last 20 turn 2,000,000 men, Guns 33000
German Losses the last 20 turns 900,000 men, Guns 28000

Russian OOB changes +900,000 men, Guns +31000
German OOB changes -300,000 men, Guns -7000

So in 20 turns the Russians lost 2,000,000 men and yet the army over all totals are up 900,000 so over 2,900,000 replasements were produced in 20 turns.
German loses were 900,000 and the over all total decreased 300,000 so 600,000 replasedments were produced over 20 turns.

As far as Russian things to do you have to have a fighting withdrawal.

Tarhunnas vs Q-Ball T did not put enough pressure on Q in the south so Q simply withdraw production. If you dont bag atleast 100 arm production you done as the German. This rule of thumb has been 100% right so far for me in 12 campiagns.

Because this game boils down to one thing guns, without them the red army is junk, with them they steamroll over the Germans in 43.

Turn 57. July 16 1942.

The Soviets are making a serious push against the Finns. I guess that makes sense, the Finns are weak from their exertions during blizzard and losing morale from being outside the no attack line.

The north after Axis moves. I intend give ground and pull back to a line north of the Ladoga. There is nothing worth fighting for up there, and I will get a much shorter front further back, and Finnish morale will improve. I have begun some fortifications in preparation. The main drawback is that it will bring the Reds closer to Leningrad, which I guess they might want to recapture.

The fins break easly and in future games I will not be moving them south as much.

Around 16k rifle squads your lines will break. As of right now the best thing Q-ball can do is start attacking.

He should be able to easly get 1 to 2 odds and this really drains the German army very fast during 42. You be very weak by Jan 43 and you be an army of ants by Jun 43.

Hes getting atleast 115k men a month of which he can arm because he took so light a hit in arm production. You get 30k.

If hes attacking along the line where your weak he can suffer 115k in losses and you take atleast 50k. The killer for you is the 1v1 =2v1 rule, because most of your losses in a battle come from when you retreat. Once his attack CV values get to 15 to 25 per stack your lines of lvl 3 forts can easly be wiped because you be forsed to retreat even if your defending cv value is 50. Any forts with less then 50 CV's are retreats for you and that means 1 to 1 in losses.

If you both sit there like me an Hoooper did during the summer of 42, by turn 70 he have close to 7 million men, once the red army hits that number your in trouble.
Pelton

The key for you is holding the landbridge and rivers until spring mud season of 43. If you dont hold it he beable to push you during the 43 summer. hes alrdy got 6.5 million men and if your in a stalemate hes gaining 100k a turn.

That means Q-Ball will have 7.5 million men by turn 70, which is about 500,000 more then Hoooper had in my game. Which is not good.

As you and me are finding out if you can't inflict some losses on the (3 to 1) Red army during the summer of 42 and keep the numbers under 6 million its probably game over.

Our to games (AAR) are a mirror image of each other.

One interesting difference is you took moscow and I did not. I took out more ARM pts (70). Which if you look at the numbers its more important to take out arm pts then manpower centers.

Q-ball will have more men and guns then Hoooper did by turn 70.

One thing I found out the reserver thing is a waste and causes allot more harm then good. You tank numbers and mech unit strength will stay good and recover quickly. If the german player could put all there production into infantry squads it would be a very different game from 42 to 45.

Pelton

Reserves not a good thing?

Ok, I'm looking at it from the perspective of a Soviet player, but the reserves tweak is excellent

It might be worth considering a major pullback to shorten lines. Plus, he can't pursue as quickly as you can retreat, and that will buy you turns free of 'adjacent' attrition to build your TOEs.

Turn 58.

The Soviets are continuing to push the Finns back. I had put Panzer divisions in the second line on reserve, hoping they would upset some of the Soviet attacks, but that didn't work. Three panzer divisions one hex from combat with lots of MPs and none of them intervened. Instead the Finns took more casualties than the attcking Soviets. I am wondering if reserves are worth it? What better reserve could there be than a panzer division standing 16 km from the battle?

Well, at least the panzers did dig some trenches.

This time I am letting the panzers stand in line. Railing some additional German units to the area. Map after Axis moves.

Yep, reserves cannot be relied upon as a reliable strategy for axis defense. As you have noticed, morale, MPs, etc. does not matter, the probability for a reserve to jump in is still very (too) low. Perhaps 30% or so?, but sometimes you get lucky and they do their job. It would seem reasonable for a low figure for the Soviets as their command & communication was not that good but for axis elite reserve units with good leaders and radios in every vehicle, hm well I don't buy it.

At least he has not much arty up there so you should be fine.

Turn 59.

Not much happening worth a screenshot. The Soviet offensive aganist the Finns seems to have wound down for the moment.