Matrix Games Forums

Armaments are zero! I know the Hiwis won't help when I have no armaments, but at least it is a psychological boost... But OTOH 139000 Germans are sitting around doing nothing, so I guess the trade unions are up in arms about the Hiwis taking their jobs...[;)]

I am beginng to see this in a game that just hit the end of January 1943. The manpower is creeping up and the armaments are at zero.

ORIGINAL: PeeDeeAitch

I am beginng to see this in a game that just hit the end of January 1943. The manpower is creeping up and the armaments are at zero.

It was even worse before, but they did some tweaking of the armaments in 1.04. In my 1942 GC as the Germans under 1.03 my army fell apart in late 1943. It not as bad now, but it still isn''t good IMHO.

Voronezh is reluctantly given up to avoid encirclement. With the river frozen, that is a real risk.

The German Armament situation needs to be addressed. HIWIS don't do anything at all other than provide chrome, if you have 130,000 Germans sitting in the pool, and climbing.

The Germans should have a Manpower problem, but not a problem of having enough Rifles for everyone.

The last OOB you posted turn 117 had 2.6 mil Germans, which is low. Chances are, you don't have more than that now.

There are 340,000 guys in the German pool between Hiwis and Germans. I don't think it's unreasonable to add that to your 2.6 mil, to make just short of 3 mil.

A German armament shortage in 1941 is reasonable, and reflects supply realities. But the late war Wehrmacht didn't have an armaments problem. It had a manpower problem.

Tuurn 129. December 2 1943. Blizzard.

The Soviets try some attacks up north for a change. Kind of annoying, I kept reserves there for months and nothing happens. Finally, I take the reserves south without replacing them, and wham! I should have expected that! Life is unfair!

The Soviet effort has shifted to the area between Voronezh and Rayzan. Three Soviet tank corps are cut off by counterrattacks, buut I do not expect that to hold.

Soviet losses from counterrattacks are substantial, but I would have like a better ratio that 3-1.

OOB after turn 129.

Notice any effects from the 1-1 rule change?

Gids to me is about a year behind. I don't think he makes Berlin

ORIGINAL: Q-Ball

Notice any effects from the 1-1 rule change?

In the south, I have a feeling the Soviet attacks have changed from wide steamroller over most of the southern front to a more concerted effort in selected areas. From steamroller to jackhammer, you might say.

The two attacks in the north both failed on the first try but succeeded on a second attack. Under 1.04 the first attack would have succeeded due to 1-1. This drove up the Soviet cost of the attacks and precluded any exploitation.

I have a feeling overall Soviet AND German casualties per turn have dropped somewhat, but it might be early to tell. Much of the time since 1.05 has been mud.

In terms of other changes:

-He now hurts from the Armaments Changes, but benefited until now
-The Morale rules will only HELP him, because they help the Reds after late 1943. Sorry about that one!

Overall, he is in better shape than he woudl have been without the rule changes. The fact that he is behind anyway is, IMO, because you way out-played him the first couple years.

Turn 130. December 9 1943. Blizzard.

Soviet attacks seem less heavy now. The Reds just barely manage to open a supply line to their three surrounded tank corps. Their CVs are suddenly not all that horrible. Wonder if that is supply difficulties due to Blizzard?

Those divisions though appear to be in a spot of trouble. In order to take advantage of new supply rules, do you have an airbase counter stacked with those divisions that are most in danger of cut-off?

It seems the Sovs are stacking up on the front opposite the Finns. I suspect some offensive might be in the works here. I should send some reserves this way, but there arent any available...

ORIGINAL: Q-Ball

Those divisions though appear to be in a spot of trouble. In order to take advantage of new supply rules, do you have an airbase counter stacked with those divisions that are most in danger of cut-off?

That is before my moves. It is Ivan who is in trouble...

To answer your question, no, I have never placed airbases in anticipation of having them cut off. I suspect that rule is irrelevant. If I think I am going to be cut off, I do something about it with the aim of not being cut off. I certainly don't go "Ah, look, here is a bunch of divisions that are in danger of being cut off next turn! Let's place an airbase there too!"

Map of the Kursk area after German moves. I couldn't get all the units where I wanted them, but I think I have discomfited the Bear a little...

Production. Unused manpower is now 185k. It's rising fast!

Could it be that the Hiwi's have made manpower in the support squads superfluous? This would show if you checked the transit pool and the active pool.

It looks as if you have ca 153k of Hiwi in units (#built - #pool).

ORIGINAL: gingerbread

Could it be that the Hiwi's have made manpower in the support squads superfluous? This would show if you checked the transit pool and the active pool.

It looks as if you have ca 153k of Hiwi in units (#built - #pool).

The Hiwis might well be a part of it, but the point is, if there is an armaments shortage, then the Hiwis are just window dressing and have no effect.