Campaign, tyronec (Axis) vs MSAG (Soviet)

[tyronec]

PG1 The Soviets got in some good counter attacks around D’town and around the Crimea, pocketing a few units. In return we make 3 good pockets including herding a few of those horrible Cav divisions.
Have taken two ports in the Crimea and surrounded the Perekop defences, I have no idea what the Sevastapol garrison is and will take a few more turns before am ready to assault.

[MSAG]

TURN 7

There seems to be no end to bad news. Leningrad land bridge is cut off es expected. German mobile forces broke through to Crimea, while defenders of Sevastopol still only gather.
Detailed reports:
- On map strength: 3.2M men, 36K guns, 4700AFVs
- Only 1 leader KIA (total 39s, of which 8 with Inf rating of 6 and more).
- 20K trucks mobilized, Total (units, depots, pool): 275+K trucks (more than 40K in the pool – indicating that the vehicle needs are met).
Axis Vehicles.
3260 lost this turn (14600 total). 16700 soviet trucks captured. Altogether +2100.

situation in the North:

[MSAG]

Fights in the South. I managed to open the pocket around Z-town. D-town is strengthened and preparing for a siege. Tyronec’s posts on this AAR clearly indicate that the main supply line going South is the one through this one. I hope I can stop them here a little bit longer (and vindicate my approach at least a little bit)

Please have a look at the battle result. Loss, for sure. But “only” with 1:4 odds when attacking with single Rifle Division. Moreover – 2 reserve activations were involved (without them I could have succeeded). Fatigue and extended supply lines seem to be felt.

[MSAG]

Leningrad front at the end of the turn.

[tyronec]

T08.
AGN. All the ports taken so Lenningrad is Isolated.

AGC. Vyasma taken and a moderate advance by PG3.
PG2 make a small pocket and continue Eastwards.

AGS. Pocket was broken last turn so reseal it and rout a few units.
Crimea taken apart from Sevastapol.

[MSAG]

TURN 8
I am pretty upset with my performance to-date. The war is not going well for Soviets.
Leningrad is isolated. Crimea gone. Will not be able to disentangle most of the forces in South.
Detailed reports:
(1) On map strength: 3.1M men, 34K guns, 4100AFVs
(2) 3 leaders KIA (total 42s, of which 10 with Inf rating of 6 and more).
(3) Lend-lease started.
(4) 20K trucks mobilized, Total (units, depots, pool): 295+K trucks; needs fully satisfied
Axis Vehicles.
3000 lost this turn (17600 total). 18200 soviet trucks captured. Altogether +600.

My defence line on Ladoga has been breached & all ports are taken. Leningrad is doomed.

[MSAG]

Most of the reinforcements move to Moscow - I do not feel the front is secure here either.

[MSAG]

This is the moment when the first HW crisis hit Soviet forces. Below my pool ('active pool').
Note - no/very few Mortars, Infantry Guns, Light Artillery, Artillery and AT Artillery.
Newly formed units tend to be super short on equipment.

[MSAG]

South

[tyronec]

T09.
AGN. Ready to start assaulting Lenningrad.

AGC.
PG3. Pocket Rzhev and a few units.
PG2. Pocket Kursk.

AGS
PG1. Pocket D’town.



We decided to wind it up at this point. Axis are likely to reach the sudden death threshold either T16 or if not then at the start of '42.
Thanks to MSAG for the game.

[Stamb]

That was super rapid advance from an Axis.
What is your thoughts on temp motorization and its contribution to a current result?

[tyronec]

That was super rapid advance from an Axis.
What is your thoughts on temp motorization and its contribution to a current result?

I only used 2 units of temp mot on T1, so didn't have much effect on the game. My feeling would be to have a house rule against it for any future game.

[Rosencrantus]

I agree, but my own spin on temp motorisation is that it can only be used for movement/attacking from friendly held hexes as I remember that someone once said that the intention of temp mot was to represent kampfgruppe style formations. This way temp mot can be used as a quick form of transportation for admin movement without having to use trains AND to represent emergency troops being formed to rapidly respond to a crisis on the front.

My house rule is to limit this to only one unit per turn however.

I would like to hear people's thought on this as allowing temp motorisation completely is broken while banning it completely also leaves out a useful tool both players cannot use anymore.

[Stamb]

I am playing without temp motorization at all. Infantry, in base case scenario, can move up to 16 hexes without any help.
16 hexes = 160 miles = 257km.
257 km / 7 days (1 turn) = 36.7 km per day
Seems reasonable.

If you want faster transfers use rails.

[RedJohn]

ORIGINAL: Rosencrantus

I agree, but my own spin on temp motorisation is that it can only be used for movement/attacking from friendly held hexes as I remember that someone once said that the intention of temp mot was to represent kampfgruppe style formations. This way temp mot can be used as a quick form of transportation for admin movement without having to use trains AND to represent emergency troops being formed to rapidly respond to a crisis on the front.

My house rule is to limit this to only one unit per turn however.

I would like to hear people's thought on this as allowing temp motorisation completely is broken while banning it completely also leaves out a useful tool both players cannot use anymore.

It's pretty broken for both sides, I think. There's a reason why it got removed for the Soviets in 41. I have never felt the need to use it in 42, but if a Soviet chooses to do so without any houserules on it... That's not pretty.

I houserule it so it can only be used to move into friendly hexes: IE, no flipping hexes. Even then it's extremely strong if an axis player uses it liberally.

A short but good AAR.

[tyronec]

I agree, but my own spin on temp motorisation is that it can only be used for movement/attacking from friendly held hexes as I remember that someone once said that the intention of temp mot was to represent kampfgruppe style formations. This way temp mot can be used as a quick form of transportation for admin movement without having to use trains AND to represent emergency troops being formed to rapidly respond to a crisis on the front.

My house rule is to limit this to only one unit per turn however.

I would like to hear people's thought on this as allowing temp motorisation completely is broken while banning it completely also leaves out a useful tool both players cannot use anymore.

Even limiting it to movement within friendly hexes could have a strong effect in '41 for Axis, they could move quite a few infantry divisions up to the front on T2-3 when generally they are very short of units. Restricting to one unit a turn would probably be OK, but is kind of like saying the rule is broken so you can only use it a little bit and that is not going to unbalance the game too much.

I think it is not a great rule, a bit like para drops and long range amphib. invasions. Most players are not going to use them and so the game is going to be balanced around that. Then someone uses it and gains an advantage and it just sort of slightly spoils the game.

[Rosencrantus]

The offset is the fact that Axis are usually pretty short on APs in 41, and using 3 APs (20% of the turn allotment) just to move infantry up is a cost that I think balances it out pretty well.

[Stamb]

"There is no link between the two rail systems which IMO is what works best in ‘41."

Do you have any games, where you tried to apply such a strategy, that goes into a winter?

[tyronec]

Yes, more than one.

[MSAG]

END OF HOSTILITIES
Tyronec was so kind to offer and I accepted the terms of surrender.
The game undoubtfully moves in the direction of Major Axis Victory on T18.

I would like to thank my Opponent for the game.