Matrix Games Forums

In the games that I have played as the Soviet I never seem to have enough units availiable to me to be able to adopt your tactic. I could transfer divisions from the south but all I would have are divisions sitting entrained on railwaylines anyway I am not particularly worried if Lenningrad falls in fact I prefer that my opponents make it a priority target as it means that they are not putting as much pressure in other areas. However that doesn't mean that my opponent(s) can take it without a fight. As I have said before the first few turns are usually spent reacting to the Axis advance the better their opening moves the more off balance you may become.
Manstein63

ORIGINAL: TulliusDetritus

ORIGINAL: Emir Agic

Experienced German player should never try to go with Pz Divisions in wide frontal assault like this:

Emir, these are the first turns of Barbarossa. Are you telling me that the Germans will stop their panzers or avoid Pskov? [;)] How I drawed the circles can be confusing. Still, the Germans MUST push (they only have 17 turns). Or are they going to wait for infantry (2 turns minimum)? Ok, this means the German advance will never be somewhere deep in the Soviet Union with Leningrad er... 200 miles behind their back... NOT enough time. Tick-tock tick-tock...

First, in your example, position of german aromor is wrong. It is spread too much and need to be more concentrated. I would position it around Riga and in the south (where is a name of Daugava river). Two concentrations, not five as it is on your map. Second, yes, if it is necessary they should stop panzers or try to avoid Pskov.

Here is my example. It was not Pskov but Novogorod (turn 8). I decided to avoid it. Also pay attention on my Pz's south of Novogorod. They are BEHIND infantry waiting for opportunity to go east. After 5 turns Leningrad was isolated. Here is situation on turn 13 (five turns before mud).

Emir, we will have to get rid of the image (as it was a mere example) and simply think about this simple concept: if you don't concentrate forces in the panzers path you will NEVER, repeat, NEVER, slow them down... in such scenario they will be unstoppable Death Stars and will get to the Urals, Irkutsk and why not... Vladivostok... I fully agree.

Again, this has been DONE by various players. The panzers are NOT, repeat, NOT unvulnerable. You cannot kill of definitely stop them (this we DO know)... but you C A N harass and slow them down. That's the simple idea. But to do it you CANNOT hide. You must bring forces. And that's what most of the Soviets are not doing... They are merely playing the German game... And each time they do that, the Panzers seem a little more unvulnerable.

If what you're saying was true I'd be joining the German Supermen Brigade, believe me. Where shall I sign? [:)]

TulliusDetrius we can continue to argue on forum or we can try Road to Leningrad scenario just for a sake of argument (or science if you want). We have two different concepts. I'm not telling that my will work for sure. But we can't know if don't confront them. If you are interested please PM me and we can start during weekend.

Emir, and that single game would prove what exactly?

Yes, we can argue till the cows come home [:)] I am pretty certain some Soviets are going to think twice. Some of them on this same thread said they would be trying this... as opposed to run run... run for your lives... and grab Moscow & Leningrad, my wallet, wife and socks... after all, if this has worked for me and others, maybe it's not that bad...

Planned for in advance, and done correctly one can de-isolate a Panzer group and it has very high MP. Now that is annoying to the enemy. I tend to conserve one corps as the "punch" and drive the other into glorified mech infantry status used for pocketing, rail cutting. This means CV 6 by turn 5.

TD, I generally agree with the tactics you describe, but I think you overstate their effectiveness against a state-of-the-art German opponent. From what I have seen, the fact is that in many, if not most, AARs Lgrad and/or Moscow have been taken.

ORIGINAL: TulliusDetritus

Emir, and that single game would prove what exactly?

Yes, we can argue till the cows come home [:)] I am pretty certain some Soviets are going to think twice. Some of them on this same thread said they would be trying this... as opposed to run run... run for your lives... and grab Moscow & Leningrad, my wallet, wife and socks... after all, if this has worked for me and others, maybe it's not that bad...

My last opponent have interesting theory that if Axis player does almost-perfect insanely aggressive game there is nothing Soviet player can do but watch. You have theory that "acitve defense", as it is described here, is necessary and sufficient tactic to prevent Axis player from taking Leningrad.

Well, maybe our single game will shed some light on this. I'm not 100% sure who is right and think it would be interesting to check this out. Personaly, I am more inclined toward "soviet as watcher" theory. Road to Leningrad is perfect for testing this (and also it is short and shouldn't be a big additional burden if you are already playing GC).

So, are you in or not?

ORIGINAL: Emir Agic

Well, maybe our single game will shed some light on this. I'm not 100% sure who is right and think it would be interesting to check this out. Personaly, I am more inclined toward "soviet as watcher" theory. Road to Leningrad is perfect for testing this (and also it is short and shouldn't be a big additional burden if you are already playing GC).

I am also intrigued by this question, and think that it is difficult to impede the Germans, although I think "Sovs are only watchers" is a bit over-stated. I think a the barbarossa scenario would be better, because each side's force allocations between North, South, and Center are an important part of how well the Germans do.

Am I detecting a pattern in Tulius avoiding matches against capable Axis opponents (and I'm not talking about myself here)? Surely you would like to test your tactics against someone other than a noob? Then at least you can be secure in yourself that they are in fact viable.

"With such movements you are in fact STOPPING the Panzers... for ONE turn" - Maybe not; do not forget that supply state is reevaluated during one's turn such that if a supply path is reestablished then the MPs of the Panzer Units will suddenly become more robust.

ORIGINAL: 76mm

ORIGINAL: Emir Agic

Well, maybe our single game will shed some light on this. I'm not 100% sure who is right and think it would be interesting to check this out. Personaly, I am more inclined toward "soviet as watcher" theory. Road to Leningrad is perfect for testing this (and also it is short and shouldn't be a big additional burden if you are already playing GC).

I am also intrigued by this question, and think that it is difficult to impede the Germans, although I think "Sovs are only watchers" is a bit over-stated. I think a the barbarossa scenario would be better, because each side's force allocations between North, South, and Center are an important part of how well the Germans do.

+1

This is especially big for what TD does (IE, priority to Leningrad/Moscow). The Road to Leningrad is likely not a fair test for the type of defense and strategy that TD proposes from the standpoint that he is unable to draw from other areas for what is a priority theater for him in the whole picture.

ORIGINAL: squatter

Am I detecting a pattern in Tulius avoiding matches against capable Axis opponents (and I'm not talking about myself here)? Surely you would like to test your tactics against someone other than a noob? Then at least you can be secure in yourself that they are in fact viable.

In fairness to TD, he has stated several times that WITE is not his priority game and has only 1 AAR going at a time. While his first opponent may have been a noob, it was also TD's first game as well. 2ndACR is hardly a noob either and has done several AAR's before playing TD.

The guy comes up with some strategies/suggestions for the Russians to help newer players (far more work has been done on the Germans) and now has several people busy challenging him to matches to "prove" he is wrong. Instead of doing that, how about folks contribute in a positive way?

Finally, what is a "capable Axis"? We have had plenty of Germans running over inexperienced Russians. Does that mean they are "capable" or that they trashed a inexperienced Russian and would struggle against a "capable Russian"?

No question Emir is one of the best Axis players the community has seen with repeated outright wins over a lot of Russians and this is not meant as a shot at him. Any Russian player would absolutely have his hands full in a match with Emir.

ORIGINAL: Klydon

Finally, what is a "capable Axis"? We have had plenty of Germans running over inexperienced Russians. Does that mean they are "capable" or that they trashed a inexperienced Russian and would struggle against a "capable Russian"?

That's exactly what we are trying to find out. In my opinion, many of TD's suggestions in this thread (particularly concentrating in front of the panzers) are outright dangerous for Sovs playing against Germans with a certain playing style. Until we see it head-to-head, we wont' be any the wiser.

I doubt that TD will take up the challenge. He himself has said that he only plays for fun & that he doesn't feel the need to prove or to disprove any theory & I can respect that position.  After all he does make exceedingly good AAR's & you can learn a lot by reading through them even if you might not agree with every thing that he does.
Manstein63

I keep my promises. Only a game at a time (I can't afford more, I want to live LOL). And my next game will be vs Ketza (because we were supposed to start a game like 2 weeks ago) [;)] IF he still wants to play that is [:)]

Believe what you want. As long as this has opened some Soviet eyes it should be ok.

I will always concentrate my forces and harass the panzers. Have fun with my mobs... Oh, you will easily destroy them, apparently. On the other hand I have the other OPTION: I should let the panzers maneuver (they're soooo dangerous, stay away!) to FREELY destroy the Red Army. That's a very intelligent strategy [:D] I call it the Perfect German Game. Soviets, just watch how you're destroyed! It's all you can do... apparently...

ORIGINAL: Klydon

No question Emir is one of the best Axis players the community has seen with repeated outright wins over a lot of Russians and this is not meant as a shot at him. Any Russian player would absolutely have his hands full in a match with Emir.

Wow. Thank you Klydon but i need to be honest here. I have never entitled myself as one of the best Axis player because I don't have too many "repeated outright wins over a lot of Russians" as you think.

Right now, after three month pause, I'm starting a GC '41 as Soviet vs Heliodorus04. That is another reason why I challenged TD. If he has right, his tactic would help me in my Soviet game. Unfortunately he refused challenge, and I'm not sure that he was convincing in defending his case here. If anybody else, from his "doctrine camp", would like to test this against me I would gladly accept.

Emir, I defend my case on MY AAR. Now if you all have decided that 2ndACR sucks, what can I say [8|] I too could say Oleg sucked big time on that game vs yourself... Did I say that? NO, that would be an outright lack of respect... And to be honest, from what I saw I didn't like the way he defended: linear defences with 2 or 3 units stacks in the front-line

You see, I cannot forget all this:

1) the game is well designed ergo the Soviets are not doomed (I trust the designers)
2) the testers have said many times the Red Army can do MANY things to slow the Germans down. Ergo, again, the Soviets are not doomed (I trust the testers aka the experts)
3) me AND other players are doing precisely this. Some of this stuff can be seen on the AAR section. Others are doing it without writing an AAR. But we know they exist because their Axis opponent are informing us about this. Somehow all these examples do not count. Ok.

NO game to prove anything, thank you. I avoid like pest these things. I only play for fun. And I mean it [;)] And believe me, I could not care less about who I will be playing: utter noob or expert, all I want is fun. And I will have it since I like this game. In fact, maybe my next opponent will be Ketza, an excellent Axis player...

You might find a Soviet tester (aka expert) interested in this "challenge"...

As Klydon perfectly understood, this was supposed to help Soviet players... Way too many games in which Leningrad and Moscow are in the bag. This should NOT be normal (again, IF the game is well designed). This should be the exception.

Fair winds [:)]

Frankly, I don't understand why you put so much emphasis on the game being "well-designed". While I think it is generally well-designed, there has been an enormous amount of tweaking via patches, so it begs the question of if the game was well-designed before, or is well-designed now? The game that most of the testers are familiar with has been changed rather significantly.

The bottom line is that this game is quite complex, and part of what people are trying to understand is whether the current iteration has got things about right.

And I would say that this quote: "On the other hand I have the other OPTION: I should let the panzers maneuver (they're soooo dangerous, stay away!) to FREELY destroy the Red Army. That's a very intelligent strategy I call it the Perfect German Game. Soviets, just watch how you're destroyed! It's all you can do... apparently... " is rather misleading and a bit patronizing, because no one is advocating that--the question is how to best limit the panzers' mobility.

ORIGINAL: TulliusDetritus

Emir, I defend my case on MY AAR. Now if you all have decided that 2ndACR sucks, what can I say [8|] I too could say Oleg sucked big time on that game vs yourself... Did I say that? NO, that would be an outright lack of respect... And to be honest, from what I saw I didn't like the way he defended: linear defences with 2 or 3 units stacks in the front-line

I haven't used argument that someone suck. I just tried to explain that, possibly, you are building your "active defence" case on wrong assumptions (again, see maps in #post 36). But if you start with "who sucks" argument I can tell you that at the same time while I was beating Oleg, Oleg as Soviet was overrunning 2ndACR German army. Now, you do the math and see if the above quotation is in your favour. [;)]