The Anti Bolshevik Crusade - Tarhunnas vs Q-Ball (no Q-Ball please)

[Peltonx]

If you observe the data from this AAR and the data from my game vs Hoooper which was started before 1.04.22. He was skillfully able to evec most of his production, but he had to fight to do it. Q-ball has simply retreated and eveced everything an taken min losses. Not to qhestion Q-balls skills at all.

Pelton

[Klydon]

I think you will be ok in the Leningrad area. You got the river line set up to go across if you can get a couple good stacks of infantry there lined up with pioneers and good leadership. The issue in the area is Germans typically don't have enough troops to be working on a reduction of Leningrad and also clean the Russians out west of the Volkhov. I think it is tough, even if you commit every single troop of AGN north of Lake Ilmen and most Germans will have some troops south of Lake Ilmen.

As far as pressuring his industry, this is the inherent issue with a strong drive in the center. There is simply very little short of Moscow that the Russian needs to evacuate, so they can concentrate on cleaning out Leningrad and the South. Since the South doesn't have extra help, its advance is slower and it makes it harder to do the big thrusts you need to get to Russian industry. The written word can suck for intent at times and this is probably one of them as I am not being critical of Tarhunnas, but rather this is just my general observation/opinion. Tarhunnas has been running a excellent campaign against a top notch opponent. Time wise, he is doing ok. It is hard for a German player when you have a Russian that doesn't make much in the way of mistakes and doesn't want to be encircled.

The Russian industry is not out of the woods quite yet. IF Tarhunnas can keep up his momentum in the center towards Moscow, it should create some discomfort for Q-Ball as there is a lot there to deal with, BUT in order to be the most effective with it, a strong drive towards the Stalino area is going to be needed as well. Putting a threat on Kharkov will be beneficial as well. I don't know if AGS is up to the task or not tho. The other issue is at some point, the salient in the middle has to be dealt with. The Nikolaev area looks like it will get dealt with and I doubt Q-Ball has much in there.

[Tarhunnas]

ORIGINAL: Klydon
As far as pressuring his industry, this is the inherent issue with a strong drive in the center. There is simply very little short of Moscow that the Russian needs to evacuate, so they can concentrate on cleaning out Leningrad and the South. Since the South doesn't have extra help, its advance is slower and it makes it harder to do the big thrusts you need to get to Russian industry. The written word can suck for intent at times and this is probably one of them as I am not being critical of Tarhunnas, but rather this is just my general observation/opinion. Tarhunnas has been running a excellent campaign against a top notch opponent. Time wise, he is doing ok. It is hard for a German player when you have a Russian that doesn't make much in the way of mistakes and doesn't want to be encircled.

Comments are welcome, especially those that suggest better or alternative solutions. I don't take it as criticism, it is discussion and something to be learned from.

[76mm]

I believe that the Sovs can maintain historical production levels if they save 50% of factories; from my experience it is pretty difficult to lose more than 50%, although losing the KV factory in Lgrad hurts a bit. So is the focus on capturing factories really a viable strategy?

[Peltonx]

Yes the Rule book states 21.2.1.1 that the Russians were able to evac 1/2 off the prodution in the areas the Germans over ran, I thk that about right.

Also coupled with the fact that most of the Russian forses were cut off in the Marsh, there is clearly a balancing issue with the rail system.

Even before 1.04.22 its was possible to evac most of the troops from the bog an 75% or more of production.

Stalin basicly had a nervous breakdown an was hiding in a hole for over a week.

I would think totaly freezing the rail system for the first turn would be historical. Then mybee only 25% of the system is usable the 2nd turn, 50% the third turn, 75% the 4th turn then 100% after that. or 0% turn one 40% turn 2, 80% turn 3 and full system turn 4.

That might be a little hard on the Russian player, but there should be zero rail on the first turn, nothing moved historicaly for about a week. Then over the next week or 2 the Russians shipped everything forward, they would't even consider railing forses or factories to the back. It would have been bad for morale.

Again after turn 4 the rail system has zero effect on game play, "twicking" the system and making moving factories cost a few more points really does not reflect what was going on historicaly the first month of the campiagn.

Pelton

[Klydon]

Sort of a derail on this fine AAR, but I think there are two basic reasons to put pressure on the industry.

First, there are some critical choke points where the Russians must choose between evacuating industry and moving troops to counter German advances. I agree that it is easy to move the shells around and also the Russian rail seems pretty robust, but that is another matter. This could be a case where the game is generous enough to allow the Russians to "write off" too much industry without having ill effects.

Secondly, putting a dent in Russian production, especially armaments, will delay the Russian "bounce back" where they start getting the upper hand on the Axis. This has the biggest consequences in 1942 where the industry has either been moved (still being repaired) or captured. The longer you can delay the build up of artillery (and the artillery divisions, etc) as the Axis, the better. While the tank and mech corps are dangerous and flashy, it is actually the rifle corps with piles of artillery that will inflict the body blow damage that the Axis can't recover from long term.

I do have to say that it is getting to the point that the question has to be asked.. "umm, why were we invading again?" "Oh yeah, to free up the Finns!". Unfortunately the Germans really stand no chance of knocking the Russians out by doing economic targets and no targets except Leningrad really have any meaningful consequences for the Russians and/or tangible benefits for the Germans.

[Flaviusx]

ORIGINAL: 76mm

I believe that the Sovs can maintain historical production levels if they save 50% of factories; from my experience it is pretty difficult to lose more than 50%, although losing the KV factory in Lgrad hurts a bit. So is the focus on capturing factories really a viable strategy?

In the long run, yes.

The armament factories and tank factories are the most important, and if you lose too many of these, it's going to make a difference for the German player who isn't just looking for a quick knockout blow, but is willing to play the thing out and see if he can get a draw or better by 1945.

That kind of German player, alas, is all too rare.

Tank production in particular is heavily concentrated. These amount to strategic losses if they go down. Particulary the t34 factories in Kharkov and Stalingrad. Over the course of the war, they can produce thousands, maybe tens of thousands, of tanks.

The armament factories will determine how quickly the Soviet can get the God of War on the battlefield. Artillery divisions and rifle corps later on will chew through armament points at a prodigious rate.

[Peltonx]

ORIGINAL: Klydon

I do have to say that it is getting to the point that the question has to be asked.. "umm, why were we invading again?" "Oh yeah, to free up the Finns!". Unfortunately the Germans really stand no chance of knocking the Russians out by doing economic targets and no targets except Leningrad really have any meaningful consequences for the Russians and/or tangible benefits for the Germans.

Very good points the German stand almost no chance of effecting the production, because its way to easly railed out. All cities other then Leningrad are window dressing.

[Flaviusx]

ORIGINAL: Klydon

I do have to say that it is getting to the point that the question has to be asked.. "umm, why were we invading again?" "Oh yeah, to free up the Finns!". Unfortunately the Germans really stand no chance of knocking the Russians out by doing economic targets and no targets except Leningrad really have any meaningful consequences for the Russians and/or tangible benefits for the Germans.

If the German player only is willing to play the game for a decisive victory and accepts no other possible result, then he is wasting his and his opponent's time. And this unfortunately is pretty much the run of the mill German player.

[Peltonx]

Thats not what Klydon is saying, but what you want others to beleive he is saying to try to discredit what he is asking. Its always the answer it seems from the Russians fanboys, "the German just always want to win in 1941 or they quit". Klydon is right the German player has to try an put pressure on the Russian to evac troops or production, but with the total over powered rail sytem and nerfed HQ build-up its just not possible to do any more, per this very AAR.

Tarhunnas is a very good player yet Q-ball has been able to evac almost every single production pt even semi close to the Germans and evac all his forses from the bog. Tarhunnas has not been able to get any large pockets other then the free bes on turn 1. So as Klydon has stated why are we fighting? Hmm the only reward for the German player is Leningrad. There is no down penalty for the Russian player for eveacing troops and production. only rewards.

I am playing my games out to the end.

We are simply asking why is the rail system set-up to evac 100% of the prodution and forses in the marsh, which is not historical, thanks 76mm/Katza
Why is the German production historical and the Russians not?
Why was the HQ build-up nerfed 20 MP's to less then the supply chain 25 hexs.

Pelton

[pompack]

While forcing the factories to move is significant, don't overlook the critical nature of manpower in 41. Sure the Russians have more than they need, at the moment, but manpower is the big crunch from Spring 42 on. Taking away the manpower points is critical, but even if they evacuate the Germans get a plus since the manpower modifier in 41 us 55 while that in 42 is 50 and in 43 is only 40 so even though evacuated manpower will eventually procme productive again, it will be at a lower multiplier.

This same multiplier is significant if you look at the effect of taking the manpower rich areas in 42 instead of 41. And note that most of the manpower points are in the small dots, not in the big cities.

[Tarhunnas]

ORIGINAL: Klydon
I do have to say that it is getting to the point that the question has to be asked.. "umm, why were we invading again?" "Oh yeah, to free up the Finns!". Unfortunately the Germans really stand no chance of knocking the Russians out by doing economic targets and no targets except Leningrad really have any meaningful consequences for the Russians and/or tangible benefits for the Germans.

That was soooo well put! [&o][&o][&o] [:D][:D] There is a problem in that Leningrad is the only worthwile target for the Germans!

[Klydon]

ORIGINAL: Flaviusx

If the German player only is willing to play the game for a decisive victory and accepts no other possible result, then he is wasting his and his opponent's time. And this unfortunately is pretty much the run of the mill German player.

My statement was not for a "quick victory". In that post, I even mentioned delaying the bounce back of the Red Army.

I think the Germans try to do different things at different times over the course of the campaign.

In 1941, they try to seize as much territory as possible, destroy as much industry as possible and also cause as many casualties as possible to the Red army in order to lessen the Red army counter offensive during the winter. Of particular interest is to capture as many motorize/tank units as possible to deny trucks to the Russians later.

In 1942, the Germans should be trying to destroy as many units as possible in order to make the Russians choose between either assembling infantry/tank corps or produce new units to replace losses. When the map is getting populated with a lot of corps, it is a sign the Germans are starting to lose it. Knocking out additional industry would be nice, but most likely can't be counted on since the Russians have had all winter to rail out anything even close to being in danger.

Does this sound like someone who is in "quick win mode only" or is it just a combination of strategy and common sense to help the Germans in their campaign against the Russians?

My point about the "umm.. why are we invading?" statement is in game terms, the Germans don't really gain anything from invading in this game. There are no targets beyond Leningrad that offer any tangible benefit to the Germans for taking it. IMO, the game would be far better for both sides by having the Russians take some penalty for losing Moscow. Give the Germans a big reason to try for it. The game would also be better if the Russians could actually be hurt production wise by the Germans knocking out industry. Right now, outside of Leningrad, the Russians could care less where the Germans go as long as they have time to get their industry out.

For the record, I am not a fan boy of either side. I do play both sides and enjoy playing both sides and to me it is important for the game to be fun for both sides.

My apology to Tarhunnas for the hi-jack.. perhaps we can discuss this some place else.

[Tarhunnas]

Turn 8.

Leningrad. No more pussyfooting around. We blitz the place! An armored spear right through the heart of the bolshevik menace!

[Tarhunnas]

In the center, not much happening worthy of a screenshot. In the south however, strenous efforts by the 1st panzer army pushes a panzer corps to the river bank across the river from Zaporozhye. Loading of industrial machinery at the railway station grinds to a halt as red workers are paralyzed by fear or milling around in panic!

(Tip: For those like me who think that the hex popup can be annoying when it hides things, set popup location to 1,1 in settings)

[Peltonx]

Tarhunnas nice job bagging Leningrad on turn 7. I also liked how you moved a corps from AGC to AGN for a few turns then sent them back to AGC about the time your supply heads got close to the front.

Klydon, Tarhunnas has a very good idea to make citys worth something. A VP system based more on the shorter scenario's. You get x VP's for every turn you hold city y.

1. It makes taking a town worth something.
2. It will be hard to tell even in 43 who is going to win so chances are Russians or German will not quit.

Pelton

P.S yes I am a German fanboy, tring to fight of the horde of Russain fanboys on the forums [:@] hmm just like the game [X(]

Thanks for tip on that window also

[Flaviusx]

Between the stuff caught in Leningrad (8 armamament factories is no joke) and Zaporozhye you are already off to a good start in putting a damper on Soviet production long term.

[Tarhunnas]

ORIGINAL: Pelton

Tarhunnas nice job bagging Leningrad on turn 7. I also liked how you moved a corps from AGC to AGN for a few turns then sent them back to AGC about the time your supply heads got close to the front.

You give me more credit than I deserve. They are still at Staraja Russa. Nice idea though, unfortunately the AGC panzers are still outside buildup range.

[76mm]

ORIGINAL: Pelton
We are simply asking why is the rail system set-up to evac 100% of the prodution and forses in the marsh, which is not historical, thanks 76mm/Katza

hmmm, I don't get the reference...I certainly didn't rail out everything?

[Tarhunnas]

Turn 9.

The North after German moves. Leningrad cleaned out and the Volkhov crossed. Also a promising advance at Staraja Russa.