SOVIET UNION 1941 EARLY VARIANT AAR

[Curtis Lemay]

The attached file is the movie of the game using the Soviet player-turn saves. So most of the Axis force is usually invisible due to fog-of-war.

[Curtis Lemay]

Similarly, the attached file is the movie of the game using the Axis player-turn saves. So most of the Soviet force is usually invisible due to fog-of-war.

[Curtis Lemay]

As a comparison, here is the Axis movie from the test of the original scenario:

[Curtis Lemay]

And one more comparison: Here is the Axis movie from the Mobile Variant test:

[Curtis Lemay]

Now let’s do some statistical analysis. The attached screenshot charts the loss penalties over the course of the game. The red line is for the Soviets, and the blue line is for the Axis. Remember that replacements reduce the loss penalty, explaining how both lines often decrease, especially the Soviets, due to their huge replacement edge. The biggest losses occurred at the start, but, with only one slack phase, continued till the blizzard phase. This shows the impact of the drive on Moscow and its huge loss rate.

[Curtis Lemay]

The attached screenshot charts squad losses (everything in the equipment list up to machine guns). The gridlines are 50,000 squads. The Axis initial-shock, proficiency, and organizational edges account for their better results here, as in the original.

[Curtis Lemay]

The attached screenshot charts light weapon losses (machine guns, AT guns, light guns, mortars, AAA guns). The gridlines are 20,000 weapons. The chart partly reflects that the Soviets had to defend with much of their rear-area elements out of desperation. But this can also be attributed to the same Axis edges mentioned under the squad loss chart.

[Curtis Lemay]

The attached screenshot charts artillery losses. The gridlines are 5,000 weapons. This chart reflects the fact both that Soviet HQs often came under attack, and that a higher proportion of Soviet artillery was retained in the frontline elements.

[Curtis Lemay]

The attached screenshot charts transport (horse teams, trucks, APCs, ferries) losses. Also, I merged the Scout Car losses with this chart, since the Soviets don’t have any. The gridlines are 10,000 vehicles.

[Curtis Lemay]

The attached screenshot charts AFV (armored cars, SPAT, Tanks) losses. The gridlines are 2,000 vehicles. Among other things, this chart reflects that the Axis losses were focused on their armored elements, by choice, as the attackers.

[Curtis Lemay]

The attached screenshot charts Aircraft losses. The gridlines are 2,000 planes. It’s clear from the chart that, after the initial surprise attack, the Soviets kept their airforce out of action until the air shock penalties were ended (that allowed it to rebuild, too). Then they were thrown back into the fray, with mostly abysmal results.

[Curtis Lemay]

The attached screenshot charts total losses. The gridlines are 100,000 items. Similar to the loss penalty chart, you can see the initial Soviet slaughter during the surprise attack and the flat area over the blizzard phase. The Axis edge in losses slowly degraded, but a significant advantage remained to the end.

[Curtis Lemay]

The attached screenshot charts the victory level. The yellow line is the victory level. Grid lines are 200 VPs. Other lines show how it is formed. Blue lines are Axis; red are Soviets; black dashed lines show the level points. There are three Soviet lines showing awards, loss penalty, and objectives. The three Axis lines show the same things for them. The six level points are at -600, -400, -200, 200, 400, and 600. Note that the two objective lines are mirror images of each other (a gain for the Axis was a loss for the Soviets). The Soviets have a 250 VP award on turn one, while the Axis received VP awards by event for Soviet exercise of factory release TOs, factory destruction, and loss of Stalin. The loss penalties are the same as on the earlier chart.

The victory level began as Soviet Overwhelming, then gradually fell into the German Overwhelming category.

[Curtis Lemay]

The attached screenshot charts Soviet production levels. Red is Manpower and Blue is Factory Output. Manpower production drops all the way to only 48.3% of initial, averaging 68.5% of initial (31.5% less than maximum). Factory Output drops all the way to 55% of initial, averaging 67.5% of initial (32.5% less than maximum). Since the historical average was only 17% less than maximum, you can see that the impact of the faster Axis advance meant far less Soviet squads and weapons than they enjoyed historically. That, in turn, made the Axis advance even easier – a snowballing effect. But note that this was not quite as good as achieved by the Mobile version test. (31.5 vs. 42.3 and 32.5 vs. 41.5).

[Curtis Lemay]

The attached screenshot shows the final statistics for both sides. The Axis losses were about the same as in the original and the mobile version (37.9% vs. 34.6% vs. 31.1%). Soviet losses were significantly higher than the original though not as high as in the mobile (68.14% vs. 50.25% vs. 71.51%). Meanwhile, Soviet production reductions meant that total Soviet forces were significantly smaller than the original though not as small as in the mobile (701,593 vs. 756,802 vs. 662,253) – a 7.9% reduction.

Clearly, the Axis did much better in this version than in the original but not quite as well as in the mobile version. In fact, it now seems clear that the mobile version results were limited by the overextended supply rules in use. While I also have a third hypothetical that combines the mobile and early features, I doubt the extra time would be very beneficial to the mobile Axis – they would still run to the edge of their supply tether and not much further.

I hadn’t expected the early start benefits to be this significant. I expected the Axis might gain a marginal victory at best. It’s hard to know for sure, but I suspect that the factor that tipped the balance was the decision to drive straight for Moscow without a detour. That surprised me in that it actually facilitated the conquest of the Ukraine, by depriving it of reinforcements that had to be sent to the Moscow sector.

[Curtis Lemay]

It was clear that the result of the mobile variant was no fluke. For this version, I’m not so sure. Clearly it’s a benefit, but I don’t know if better play by the Soviet side wouldn’t have avoided such a lopsided result. In fact, I think that more benefit may have accrued from the decision to drive straight on Moscow than from the early start – although the early start facilitated that offensive drive (since it took to turn 19 to capture Moscow – three turns after the end of clear weather in the original).

Also, the Germans are in worse shape vs. the Soviets at the end relative to the mobile version. They clearly have more than just mopping up to do in 1942. Yet it’s still probably pretty unbalanced and only really useful as a simulation to test the effect of an early start.

The game took 26 days to play at a leisurely pace. (Writing this report took another ten days).

Once again, happy operational wargaming!