Of Course Not, The Entire Game Is An Anti-German Design [8D] - Bread (Axis) vs Beethoven (Soviet)

[Beethoven1]

One common comment regarding Soviets abandoning the south is, "oh, well then don't let Soviets transfer units to the reserve!"

However, that would not particularly change very much, and would not really prevent Soviets from abandoning the south. In order to try to demonstrate this, I am basically not using the reserve, other than for a small number of units. Instead, basically all of the troops in the Southwestern and Southern fronts are abandoning the south by using rail transport, rather than using the reserve functionality:



I am sending some low morale tank divisions to the Transcaucasus. Once they arrive, I will pull strong Mountaineer and Infantry divisions with higher morale to the map to replace them.

However, the low morale tank divisions I am sending to the Transcaucasus include at least as many low morale tank divisions escaped from the Western Front (and also from other places in the map like the Caucasus). Insofar as I am sending tanks from the south there, it is actually mostly ones from the Southern front, not the Southwestern front, because most of the Southwestern Front tanks have decent morale (and experience). So I want them on the map, and they are being railed to safety rather than using the reserve mechanic.

Here are the tank divisions that are headed to the Transcaucasus:

[AlbertN]

Won't the TB prioritization system get these divisions in TransCaucasus filled up as priority or so and pretty much drain your tank production for a while?

[Beethoven1]

ORIGINAL: AlbertN

Won't the TB prioritization system get these divisions in TransCaucasus filled up as priority or so and pretty much drain your tank production for a while?

It will, but:

1) T-26s and BTs are not being produced right now, those are most of what will end up in the tank divisions. The only AFVs that are being produced at the moment are T-34s and KV-1s, along with a handful of T-40s and T-50s.

2) There are other tank divisions in other theater boxes already such as the Far East, which will already be sucking up basically all the T-34s and KV-1s, so that hardly any of those will get onto the map early on regardless of whether I send extra tank divisions to the Transcaucasus.

3) In the AFV column of the screenshot, you can see that at least half or so of the tank divisions being sent to the Transcaucasus have a good # of AFVs in them already. They are not necessarily low TOE, just low morale and low experience.

[Beethoven1]

On turn 1, the Soviets get 25 AP. I spent it as follows:

A) Make Leningrad an assault front - 20 AP
B) 3 depots scattered in the north/center - 3 AP
C) 1 fort in Kerch - 2 AP

There are a lot of additional depots and forts I would have liked to have built, so it was a tough call making an assault front the first turn. However, this will help my best units to gain CPP more quickly. I can build more forts and depots next turn. I would also like a 2nd assault front soon, however.

Why make the Leningrad front be the first assault front? Because it is the only front that doesn't start off with a lot of units pocketed, so it has more available capacity. Although actually, I suppose I could have done the same for the Southern front, since it was unlocked.

The 3 depots I built are circled in blue here:



The yellow highlighted hexes are some other good places to build depots, I may build them at a good # of those next turn.

Why the fort in Kerch? Because I am planning to city fort it and shove 10 strong divisions in there. Kerch is normally very important because as long as Soviets control it, it can block the Axis from sending supply through the Strait of Kerch to the other ports on the northern side of the Sea of Azov. Those ports can help Axis supply a lot around Stalino and Rostov. So this is especially important given that I am for the most part abandoning the south, and consequently I want the fort to get up and running as quickly as possible (and I would like to get it up to level 4 ideally by the time the Germans arrive). There are other places where I want forts as well, but in particular because they don't need to get up to level 4 as quickly, they are less important to start on turn 1.

[shermanny]

If the game is going to be historically accurate, there can hardly be any way for the German player to win early.

Historically, Stalin "played" badly for the first year, but the Soviet Union won anyhow. Players will not make so many mistakes, not with hindsight being 20-20 and all that.

[Beethoven1]

End of Soviet Turn 1

In the north, I cut off a Panzer division. Many very low quality NKVD and Airborne units were railed in to the north to try to get in the way and slow down the advance here. Is this the first ever 3 deep Ventspils defense? (3 deep pure NKVD border guards on the most direct path!). I would like for lots of trashy units to get in the way of things in the Baltic, so that there is less free rail repair there than normal, ideally.



On the land bridge, I put up a 4 deep pile of garbage units. The only non-garbage units are circled in blue. The tank, for example, is not a good tank division, it is a 4800 man, 48 AFV Western Front tank division that could not retreat to anywhere safe. The infantry divisions are 5-7k men or so each, so althouggh I will probably lose some (and certainly some will be routed), the losses will hopefuly not be too horrendous. And this should give me time to get a good Smolensk defense set up using with all the units that are on trains from the south. Along the Dnieper, I am relying on ZOC to raise the movement cost to cross the river. Hopefully he won't have enough MP to cross.



And around Gomel, here are a lot of those units that are headed to the north/center. Depending on where and how Bread advances, with so many units on rails, I should have a lot of options to plonk down units all over the place as they disembark from their trains. That is, as long as they are not routed this turn before they get off the trains.



And here is the south, pretty much abandoned. I am refitting a lot of the higher morale/experience tank/mech units in various cities/depots (assigned to the Leningrad assault front). After they are refit and gain some CPP for another turn or two, they will be ready to strike at any German Panzers that try to advance too quickly. This and small numbers of screening units like cavalry/NKVD/airborne are pretty much all I will have in the south for a while.

[Beethoven1]

And in looking at this screenshot, I noticed one tank division (circled) which I had accidentally forgotten to move. So then I moved it (railed it out far away to safety):



There are 2 or 3 other units left behind, but those were all ones that did not have MP to escape, this one had full MP and could have reached safety in any of 3 ways - by rail, by transfer to reserve or theater box, or by regular movement.

[Stamb]

And here is the south, pretty much abandoned. I am refitting a lot of the higher morale/experience tank/mech units in various cities/depots (assigned to the Leningrad assault front).

Are this unit out of range? If so - they should not get any CPP bonuses.

[Beethoven1]

ORIGINAL: Stamb

And here is the south, pretty much abandoned. I am refitting a lot of the higher morale/experience tank/mech units in various cities/depots (assigned to the Leningrad assault front).

Are this unit out of range? If so - they should not get any CPP bonuses.

Right now (at end of Soviet turn 1) they are out of range, but all the units have 0 MP or close to 0 anyway at the end of this turn, and you don't get assault front bonuses until units have been on an assault front (and assigned to the front) for at least one turn anyway, so I have a turn to get them in range. The Leningrad Front HQ already started moving southwards last turn.

Also I thought you did gain CPP while out of range - at least I remember gaining it before. Maybe it was changed in a patch or something.

[Stamb]

All the units that report (directly and indirectly) to an
Assault HQs are affected by the following changes:
§ Double the rate of gaining Combat Preparation Points
compared to other units (23.2).
§ An increased chance to pass all relevant support checks.
§ Soviet artillery gain 50% extra ammunition (before
1944) compared to the normal rules.
§ Units may not build fortifications beyond level1.

These advantages do not accrue if:
§ The unit itself or its HQ has just been attached to the

relevant Axis Army or Soviet Front this turn.
§ If either the Assault HQ or any other HQ in the

command chain is overloaded in terms of Command
Points (21.11.6).

§ If any HQ in the command chain is outside the command

range for the Assault HQ (21.11.4).
I am talking about CPP bonuses, not base value, they should still get base value, I think

[Beethoven1]

Soviet Turn 2

In the north, Bread routed pretty much all of my low quality screen units, and he busted through my 3 deep Parnu defense (actually 4 deep if you count that first line, I guess). However, my losses were not that bad, despite all the units being directly under STAVKA command with no generals/HQs to lead them. This tank division for example (which was unready) only lost half of its AFVs and less than 600 men. The losses were probably low due to hasty attacks, I guess. Bread did not get across the river to Pskov due to fear of being cut off by pesky NKVD/airborne etc that had been railed north.



Not much advance in the center, other than advancing up to the river. My 4 deep wall of trashy units on the land bridge was too intimidating.



Advance to the river near Gomel, but not across the river:



The south:

[Beethoven1]

My manpower pool actually increased this turn. You don't see that everyday, normally it plummets on turn 2, due to units reinforcing. However, all the extra manpower from disbanding artillery/HQs/air force means it actually increased.



Supply is ok so far despite the fact that the entire southern half of my army is on trains heading north and also despite only building 3 depots on turn 1.



Bread killed more Soviet leaders in the Bialystok pocket, including good ones like Sokolovsky.

Good thing that I am not using generals/HQs this game, or I would be pissed!

[DeletedUser1769703214]

ORIGINAL: Beethoven1

Bread killed more Soviet leaders in the Bialystok pocket, including good ones like Sokolovsky.

Good thing that I am not using generals/HQs this game, or I would be pissed!

Ya, Joel Billings said that the numbers are what he expects for leader kills. I am totally ok with that. But for killing of good leaders for the Soviets up front the first few turns, I call it "Bullshit" in my own opinion. You have to play to "save" good leaders with the Soviets now. It is a perfect strategy for Germany to pursue & I am sure it will be going forward. I know I will the next time I take up Germany. As for the Soviets you might as well "relocate" your HQ's out of the pocket & try to save them. BUT you have to relocate them during the Air phase, if you do it in the Ground phase they love to relocate back towards the enemy!!!!!! A few of mine did!

[jubjub]

Ya, Joel Billings said that the numbers are what he expects for leader kills. I am totally ok with that. But for killing of good leaders for the Soviets up front the first few turns, I call it "Bullshit" in my own opinion. You have to play to "save" good leaders with the Soviets now. It is a perfect strategy for Germany to pursue & I am sure it will be going forward. I know I will the next time I take up Germany. As for the Soviets you might as well "relocate" your HQ's out of the pocket & try to save them. BUT you have to relocate them during the Air phase, if you do it in the Ground phase they love to relocate back towards the enemy!!!!!! A few of mine did!

I'm still not convinced that the 15% rate is being applied to HQ's that displaced out of a pocket earlier in the turn. I have had too many occasions where the same HQ's keep losing leaders at a very high rate after they've been displaced from a pocket.

Does anyone have a save they are using to test this stuff?

[curricular1]

ORIGINAL: carlkay58


Odessa falls quickly because the Soviets MUST counter the Axis naval interdiction. Even if the Axis player is able to intercept and cause the VVS casualties in the counter interdiction, the Soviets have the forces early in the war to counter despite the losses. Without this counter, the Axis Naval Interdiction will starve Odessa out quickly. And it will starve out quickly. See any of my AARs as I can do that against either the AI or Soviet players that do not contest it. This is the game system showing what could easily have happened historically given the same responses.

i have to say, there's zero need for the german to try and starve out odessa. just bump it with a handful of german IDs with a few SUs and it'll fall in a single battle.

[DeletedUser1769703214]

ORIGINAL: jubjub

Ya, Joel Billings said that the numbers are what he expects for leader kills. I am totally ok with that. But for killing of good leaders for the Soviets up front the first few turns, I call it "Bullshit" in my own opinion. You have to play to "save" good leaders with the Soviets now. It is a perfect strategy for Germany to pursue & I am sure it will be going forward. I know I will the next time I take up Germany. As for the Soviets you might as well "relocate" your HQ's out of the pocket & try to save them. BUT you have to relocate them during the Air phase, if you do it in the Ground phase they love to relocate back towards the enemy!!!!!! A few of mine did!

I'm still not convinced that the 15% rate is being applied to HQ's that displaced out of a pocket earlier in the turn. I have had too many occasions where the same HQ's keep losing leaders at a very high rate after they've been displaced from a pocket.

Does anyone have a save they are using to test this stuff?

I am ok with the killing of leaders but the rate is not 15%, it is higher. The problem is tied to the "pseudo random number" I bet. In theory if 100 HQ's are displaced then 15 of them should have a leader casualty. We aren't having that since K62 in our game did not displace 100 HQ's. He maybe displaced maybe up to 25ish and some a couple of times. The simple math dictates that that is not 15%. It seems on the first turn that when a German completes a pocket it treats it as surrounded and could be applying the 50% kill rate. Guess on my part but seems likely.

[DeletedUser1769703214]

ORIGINAL: HardLuckYetAgain

ORIGINAL: jubjub

Ya, Joel Billings said that the numbers are what he expects for leader kills. I am totally ok with that. But for killing of good leaders for the Soviets up front the first few turns, I call it "Bullshit" in my own opinion. You have to play to "save" good leaders with the Soviets now. It is a perfect strategy for Germany to pursue & I am sure it will be going forward. I know I will the next time I take up Germany. As for the Soviets you might as well "relocate" your HQ's out of the pocket & try to save them. BUT you have to relocate them during the Air phase, if you do it in the Ground phase they love to relocate back towards the enemy!!!!!! A few of mine did!

I'm still not convinced that the 15% rate is being applied to HQ's that displaced out of a pocket earlier in the turn. I have had too many occasions where the same HQ's keep losing leaders at a very high rate after they've been displaced from a pocket.

Does anyone have a save they are using to test this stuff?

I am ok with the killing of leaders but the rate is not 15%, it is higher. The problem is tied to the "pseudo random number" I bet. In theory if 100 HQ's are displaced then 15 of them should have a leader casualty. We aren't having that since K62 in our game did not displace 100 HQ's. He maybe displaced maybe up to 25ish and some a couple of times. The simple math dictates that that is not 15%. It seems on the first turn that when a German completes a pocket it treats it as surrounded and could be applying the 50% kill rate. Guess on my part but seems likely.

Moving this to the HQ kill thread. Moved to post 60 here https://www.matrixgames.com/forums/tm.a ... =&#5144166

[Beethoven1]

Soviet Turn 2

I pulled back in Estonia I have a pretty strong defense in Tallinn, and also have various units strewn around to try and cut off the Germans and/or mess up some of the free rail conversion if they advance too wildly.



I put a LOT of paratroopers and other assorted low quality units in front of Pskov to hopefully absorb German MP and help bog down their advance early.



I evacuated the land bridge and concentrated on defending the Dnieper. Normally I would probably keep contesting the land bridge more, but in this game I am aiming to show that abandoning the south and retreating/defending good terrain is a good strategy which quickly leads to a large OOB, so I want to limit needless casualties somewhat.

Although they can probably cross the river if they really want, hopefully the ZOC and river crossing cost are enough to stop them from getting more than a small bridgehead. If he can manage to do anything serious, I have a lot of strong units which can hopefully counterattack.



This is, I dare say, a stronger than usual Gomel defense. Thanks to the south for providing the extra troops for it. Due to all the swamps and the big river etc hopefully their Panzers will get stalled.



The south is at this point pretty much abandoned, with the exception of quite sparse screening units and high morale tanks/mech which are refitting and gaining CPP. Hopefully by the time the Germans get in range we will be at 100 CPP. Most of them gained TOE nicely last turn while refitting on depots.



I only have a couple of HQs left now, other than a few left in the Bialystok pocket, a few that I could not get to a rail hex > 8 hexes from an enemy to disband yet. But soon they will be gone and we will be rid of these cursed generals. Instead, our leaders will be political commissars with no military experience or knowledge whatsoever, who will unquestioningly follow centralized direction from STAVKA.

[Lovenought]

Speaking of STAVKA, where is Kulik?!? Are German diversionist squads getting him lost on the road from Leningrad or something?

[RedJohn]

For my part there is little to report on, besides the fact we broke both river defences at the Dnepr and whatever the pskov river is called. Odessa also fell this turn to a lone panzer regiment, and we reach the outskirts of kiev.

I was considering not breaching either and waiting a turn, but the Soviets will soon release the hordes of men saved in the south and could make breaching either extremely difficult with the reinforcements.

All of my AP is going towards building depots. Some may say too much - to them, I whisper politely "carlkay". We shall see how this holds up. I am repairing 4 out of the 5 (I think?) dual track railways into the USSR, which will hopefully be good for my supply.