41-45 GC AAR notenome (sov) vs 821Bobo (axis) no 821 past first page.

[Peltonx]

Wow great game. Draw so far with 1942 desiding the war.

2.8 million Germans is average at this time and will very quickly grow over 3 million( 3.3 probably)

You lost allot of manpower centers with Moscow being the mother of all manpower centers. 160 total pts in the area. If he retakes it you will suffer another hit.

I know MT is crowing about citys meaning nothing, but the fact is as Flaviusx has posted in this thread there is a manpower crunch in 1942. Your lose of Moscow will hurt, I beleive you will recieve about 15,000 less men per turn. Over time that huge during 42.

This means he can out grind you in 1942. Without pockets he can out grind you.

Now if you lose allot of manpower centers again in 42 you will be in zero shape to conduct offensive operations in 1943, as again the German army will be able to grind the russian army lossing a few 100,000 men over the summer and fall. Which means the German army will still be sitting at 3.6 million+.

My game vs M60 is the best case in point for German victory 100% based on the manpower crunch and my lose vs Kamil for Russian victory.

The key to the game is manpower centers. Moscow is huge there is over 200 pt just in that local area.

You can keep your army strong and basicly intact, but if you lose to many manpower centers the Red army can be quickly ground down from June to July 42 opening you up to allot of small pockets in August- September. A frontal assault on Moscow in June 42 is 100% doable as it has been done more then once.

MT's exp after 1941 is limited not sure he has any(best 1941 player)

The hang up on arm pts is over blown for sure as has been proven out in many AAR's and Hvy does appear to mean something 43-45. The key being 43.

If you cannot start grinding west in early 1943 your not going to get close to Berlin.

Almost forgot point 2: All that grinding in 42 is upping German infantry morale and the same goes for 1943. Which means a few 100,000 less men does not = less over all German CV. Also with the higher morale it will take longer to trash the German army. The grinding also helps keep Russian morale static over all. Sure there will be some units that gain morale, but as a hole not so much.

In other words push hard around Moscow and start digging asap.

The game is a draw, but I beleive its his to lose.

[notenome]

End of turn screenshot.

[notenome]

There was actually an opportunity to encircle Kaluga, but the very first attack was an absurdly bs hold. Notice Soviet CVs going from 135 to 17. This of course wrecked the cavalry corps, and will probably cripple most of my attacks for the next couple turns. I'm actually proud of myself for not rage quitting.

[Walloc]

Hi Note,

Are 2nd shock army attached directly to STAVKA?

Kind regards,

Rasmus

[notenome]

Walloc- yes, 2nd Shock is directly attached to STAVKA.

[notenome]

Updated Winter Counteroffensive Reference Map.

[notenome]

1942 Planning Map

Strategic Reserves in the South got cut out, but you get the idea

[Walloc]

ORIGINAL: notenome

Walloc- yes, 2nd Shock is directly attached to STAVKA.

Ok. Im gona make some assumptions dispell em if incorrect, please.
First the details of the battles arent open so that would have helped with ruling out other possibilties.

Non teh less since the HQ is directly attached to STAKVA if u fail the leader rolls in 2nd Shock army, u go next since no Front HQ directly to rolling in STAKVA. Well, Type 1 HQ got 4 in range modifier, so if STAKVA is up by Moscow the difficulty of the roll is ofc as it is.
I assume u have no problem with railcap and evacing at this point and that u have rail to spare. So unless u alrdy do it, if so ignore the rest, u really should have STAKVA on rails, moving around to be closest to combats for easing combat rolls. Since there is no downside, no reason not to do it.
From the look of the map i could be wrong it seems u could have halved the distance to STAVKA by having it on "rails".
Im not saying it would necesarrily have made all the difference in this partciular case. Rolls are rolls, but in the cases of "independant" army HQs directly attached to STAKVA lacking the front rolls. Getting STAKVA as close as feasible will overall make a significant difference especially when u are phasing side and can do attacks/moves at any time helping in easing the distance for the rolls.

Hope it helps,

Rasmus

[notenome]

End of January fun with numbers time!

---Total strength---

*Axis*

(December)

German manpower has DECREASED by 419,347 (-13%)
German guns have DECREASED by 3,967 (-12%)
German armor has INCREASED by 181 (13%)
German planes have INCREASED by 225 (7%)

(January)

German manpower has DECREASED by 16,697 (-1%)
German guns has DECREASED by 45 (-.2%)
German armor has INCREASED by 300 (23%)
German planes have INCREASED by 56 (2%)

*Soviet*

(December)

Soviet manpower has INCREASED by 340,956 (8%)
Soviet guns have INCREASED by 12,953 (39%)
Soviet armor has INCREASED by 651 (28%)
Soviet planes have INCREASED by 393 (5%)

(January)

Soviet manpower has INCREASED by 195,025 (4%)
Soviet guns have INCREASED by 6,050 (15%)
Soviet armor has INCREASED by 362 (13%)
Soviet planes have DECREASED by 292 (-3%)

---Readiness---

(December)

German operational manpower has DECREASED by 646,950 (-21%)
German operational guns have DECREASED by 3,037 (-10%)
German operational armor has INCREASED by 371 (43% !!!!)
German operational planes have INCREASED by 225 (10%)

(January)

German operational manpower has DECREASED by 92,203 (-4%)
German operational guns has DECREASED by 722 (-3%)
German operational armor has INCREASED by 470 (62% !!!!)
German operational planes have INCREASED by 233 (9%)

*Soviet*

(December)

Soviet operational manpower has INCREASED by 250,510 (6%)
Soviet operational guns have INCREASED by 10,785 (34%)
Soviet operational armor has INCREASED by 393 (18%)
Soviet operational planes have INCREASED by 259 (3%)

(January)

Soviet operational manpower has INCREASED by 155,206 (4%)
Soviet operational guns have INCREASED by 5,050 (14%)
Soviet operational armor has INCREASED by 297 (13%)
Soviet operational planes have DECREASED by 160 (-2%)

---Loses---

*Axis*

(December)

Total losses since the beginning of Winter Counteroffensives: 540,267
Permanent losses since the beginning of Winter Counteroffensives (KIA + MIA): 83,829
Gun losses: 5,682
AFV losses: 403

(January)

Total losses in January: 274,287
Permanent losses in January (KIA + MIA): 55,294
Gun losses: 3,084
AFV losses: 163


*Soviet*

(December)

Total losses since the beginning of Winter Counteroffensives: 527,068
Permanent losses since the beginning of Winter Counteroffensives (KIA + MIA): 322,036
Gun losses: 6,141
AFV losses: 1,923

(January)

Total losses in January: 305,993
Permanent losses in January (KIA + MIA): 184,061
Gun losses: 3,677
AFV losses: 1,128

---Loss Ratio---

Manpower: 1:1.03 in favor of SOVIET
Guns: 1:1.1 in favor of AXIS
AFV: 1:4.77 in favor of AXIS

---Superiority (inc minors)---

Manpower: Soviets have a 1.1:1 superiority
Guns: Soviets have a 1.07:1 superiority
AFV: Soviets have a 1.54:1 superiority
Aircraft: Soviets have 1.81:1 superiority

---Firepower---

Germany has 1 gun per 94 men
Rumania has 1 gun per 105 men
Hungary has 1 gun per 130 men
Italy has 1 gun per 150 men
Finland has 1 gun per 95 men
Slovakia has 1 gun per 199 men

Soviets have 1 gun per 103 men

[notenome]

Hope you guys like this kind of reference work and derive some use from it (as its a major pain to do).

One thing that stands out is that despite the German OOB not moving all that much in January, this is due to German replacements, as the Red Army caused more losses and more permanent losses to the Axis in January then in December. Also the Red Army's modernization continues, with the ratio of guns to men now below only the Germans and Fins. Axis AFVs have climbed up, but there's nothing I can do. If the Axis garrisons all his armor, then I can't hit it and that's that. The Soviet manpower pool is completely stable at 540,000, so our losses are more or less sustainable.

The AP piggy bank is at 120 APs. The AP budget is 30 APs per turn, saving the rest for the coming corps and division mergers. I'm probably going to need some rifle corps in the Moscow area, as I don't have much wiggle room. But the focus has to be on turning existing soviet assets (brigades) into effective combat units through mergers into brigades and rifle divisions.

Also, if present trends continue, Axis losses for the blizzard should be (by the end of February) 140k permanent losses and 815k total losses.

[notenome]

I got curious about Axis mobility and combat performance in 42, so I fired up the 42-45 grand campaign. I rounded up the mobile divisions and just blew through whatever was in front of me. The screenshot below shows the result. Is it just me or is this just beyond insane? Taking Voronezh and being halfway to Stalingrad in a week. Even better, I only lost 22 AFVs in all according to the losses screen. And this is with a Wehrmacht that is considerably weaker than anything we see by June 42 AARs.

[Farfarer61]

Nope. It's just that your risk/reward calulations are virtual, so unlimited risk is fine.

[Walloc]

ORIGINAL: notenome

I got curious about Axis mobility and combat performance in 42, so I fired up the 42-45 grand campaign. I rounded up the mobile divisions and just blew through whatever was in front of me. The screenshot below shows the result. Is it just me or is this just beyond insane? Taking Voronezh and being halfway to Stalingrad in a week. Even better, I only lost 22 AFVs in all according to the losses screen. And this is with a Wehrmacht that is considerably weaker than anything we see by June 42 AARs.

Well, there are several things that affect that. First Stalins decsision to put most of the russian forces in the Moscow region which means that teh south front was fairly starved of forces. The freedom of the game allows one to make the same decsion or not possibly reinforcing the south. With the understanding more russian forces makes it harder for the german side.

When looking at the german side alone, there are multiple factors, but there are some that under normal curcumstances makes it easier than if u compare to just pre 41 blizzard conditions, as well as some being hardcoded.

1. Axis RR is much more complete(less possiblilty of partisan obstruction) and the raid heads are much closer to frontlines. Making supply, HQBU much easier than in late '41, right of the bat. Ofc the further u advance u run into the same issues as advancing in 41.
2. The modifier on delivered german supply is in july 42 ofc better than end of '41, if in conjunction with above there is a markedly difference in supply aka MP than in late '41
3. State of the axis moterized/pz formations. This one is ofc a huge forcemultiplier either way, depending on the actual state of the force. This is ofc different from game to game.
4. Willingness/ability of player/oppertunity of gathering X amount of the pz/moterized formations in one area of operation for maximum effect.

In short from looking at OOB currently and thinking ahead, u should prolly expect a german pz/mot force with 3000 +/- 500 tanks come july and fairly good moral as it seems a large proportion of the pz/mot forces has been encamped in cities during better part of the blizzard. MPs will be high and HQBU availble. Mobility is no problem in it self. I will refere u too Flav on tactics, but as i understand him and it seems generally agreed up on is that his current tactics in 42 is to make carpets of units where ever the axis pz/mot forces are located. Stripping front where non are for reinforcing the area's with. Generally speaking.
IMO, his problem in this particular game will more be his infantry units, their OOB and moral and how this affects him/his ability/willingness to gather large pz/mot formations vs how strong u will be when he advances.

Kind regards,

Rasmus

[notenome]

Walloc/Farfarer:

All good points, but this is a turn 1 picture of the 42 scenario, meaning an Axis player can be halfway to Stalingrad without the Soviet player being able to do anything (the turn 1 problem again).

Leaving the scenario issues aside (which we don't care 'cause the 42 scenario is rarely played), there really isn't nearly as much ability to trade space for time as far as the Soviets are concerned in 42, that's what worries me.

[Farfarer61]

In the set piece scenario, yes. Pick a name ( Lvov is taken BTW) for your opening The general principle in PBEM is what have have noted - attack where Popov ain't.

the Axis supply comments are spot on. I recommend playing 1943 as Axis and seeing how pathetic your supply truck situation is. After that, you will not be cavalier in 42 about burning up that Opel Gold.

[notenome]

I agree Farfarer, there is a long term cost to HQ build ups but I think that like much in the game, the effect of complex mechanics ends up being digital (to borrow Flav's term). The Axis pay for their cavalier attitudes with a rather shocking shift in 43, but by what I've seen in many other games late 41 and 42 seem to still seem to be fairly breezy. By 42 (hell, even in 41) the Wehrmacht already had a vehicle shortage that would progressively limit their mobility, requiring the stripping of vehicles and other mobile assets from 'quiet' sectors of the front for offensive operations. What we see in the game, for example with Tulius's game and M60's game, on the other hand, is multiple sustained axis of attack which leads to many Soviet players conceding.

What I've begun to argue is that WitE desperately needs a moderating effect in regards to almost all of its systems (logistics, combat results, partisans, air war etc). Partisans are a great example, they can paralyze a whole Army Group in 41 and then they become a nuisance from 42 onwards. What partisans should do (aside from blowing up rails etc) is cause attrition to Axis elements not in units (transit pools, vehicles in repair shops, reinforcements moving up to the front, troops rotating in and out etc).

[Walloc]

ORIGINAL: Farfarer
the Axis supply comments are spot on. I recommend playing 1943 as Axis and seeing how pathetic your supply truck situation is. After that, you will not be cavalier in 42 about burning up that Opel Gold.

U mean like if u make a continious offensive through out the summer of 42 into the winter of 43 with a couple of pz armies through the worst terrain on the map reaching the outskirts of Kazan, that u actually might just get down too 100% of trucks u need for supply purposes. How awefull. Not that it matters if opponent then quits.

Kind regards,

Rasmus

[Flaviusx]

I prefer the term binary to digital, but yeah.

So far as 1942 goes, you should be animated by the same principle that Grant applied to Lee: wherever the panzers go, there you should go. Match the panzer blob with your swarm of reserves, and stifle their mobility by carpets and depth in their zone of operations. You cannot do this along the entire front. Happily, you don't have to, since he cannot run amok with the panzers along the entire front either.

The problem a lot of Soviet players have is a tendency to spread forces evenly along the front which of necessity means they will be weak at the decisive point. Quiet sectors can be stripped to a single line with minimal reserves, with the balance shifted to the active ones.

Mobile units should be held back for sharp counterattacks and breakthrough operations of any kind ought to be avoided until at least 1943. Unlike most players (seemingly) I actually like building lots of tank corps in 1942, despite their fragility. They are fast, and that's the main thing. But I hold them back. They shouldn't end the turn defending on the front line, even if used to attack. So long as they end the turn in the rear, they will be in a position to respond to penetrations and limit any Axis advance. Reserve rifle forces can be moved in to thicken threatened parts of the front and act as a base of maneuver for those mobile reserves. Tank corps do need rifle support to attack efficiently, too, Soviet AFVs tend to get shot to pieces and the tank corps is very brittle early on.

Rifle corps, by and large, should be avoided until 1943. The rifle corps, properly speaking, is not a defensive tool. The 1942 rifle corps is severely underpowered in any case and not cost effective from a defensive standpoint or in terms of APs. A handful of guards rifle corps in 1942 is ok, but anything beyond that, forget it. They are inflexible, difficult to reassign, and poorly suited for reserve activations. The rifle division is the real backbone of the Red Army in this period. Corps should wait until 1943, when their TOE massively improves, the cost to build drops by half, and when they enjoy lavish artillery support from artillery divisions. And you will be attacking with these boys, not defending.

[notenome]

I agree with most of what you say Flav. As aforementioned, aps go to merging brigades and creating some tank corps. I agree tank corps are not all that in 42, but they are more effective than tank brigades, which aren't effective at all.

That said my main concern is that I'm not going to have a lot of space to trade near Moscow, so I might need Guards Rifle Corps there to stiffen the defenses. A stack of 3 guards rifle corps will make me thin somewhere else, but if I need to hold a hex, then they're the best option I have.

[TulliusDetritus]

ORIGINAL: notenome
What we see in the game, for example with Tulius's game and M60's game, on the other hand, is multiple sustained axis of attack which leads to many Soviet players conceding.

Not sure what M60 has to say about it but hmm, in my case maybe the whole catastrophic thing was due to my OWN incompetence. I would not rule this out.

Still, yes, my opponent was able to strike in two places at least (in fact three, given that he was putting pressure on Moscow area).

If I am conceding it's simply because I can't see how I will be upgrading to Red Army 2.0, ergo, advancing towards the general area of Berlin might be a pipe dream (or at snail's pace in any case). Destroyed units => APs needed to rebuild Red Army => I CANNOT get this 2.0 thing => er, I cannot advance [8D]

Regards