Matrix Games Forums

This is more a question about map design rationale than a bug report, but this has surprised me quite unpleasantly.

We're at turn 10 of Operation Blau v1.01 and I've the following situation developing around Stalingrad (see attached screenshot).

My opponent looked at the map carefully than myself and noticed than the Volga can be crossed... and just crossed it with a whole Panzer Korps. [&o] Amazing feat of arms, indeed, which makes Guderian corps crossing of the Meuse at Sedan look like a quite trivial affair. [:D] Fortunately I was keeping a Tank Army as strategic reserve... (not the 5 TA, they're right now starving in some parallel universe).

Sincerely, I must admit I just assumed the lower Volga wouldn't be fordable at all. That's my fault, no excuses. My opponent actually looked carefully at the map, and used that to his advantage.

While I understand quite well the scale of the game in terms of time, etc. it's not so obvious to me that both the Don and the Volga are classified as the same kind of river. Trying to rationalize this event my guess is that designers hated the idea to introduce a third kind of river - a super river which only can be traversed under certain conditions. Which I think was the right idea.

However, there is the "impassable unless frozen" hex-side types one can see in other parts of the map which, in my opinion, would have made sense to have here as well (See Notes #1 and #2 at p.119 on the printed manual).

What's the reasoning behind the decision of making that part of the Volga as easily fordable as the Don?

Most of the lower Volga is swamp behind major river. This is pretty easy to defend. Not quite impassable, but damn near. A single rifle division should stop the panzers here, and the German is going to have a difficult time mustering enough infantry to force a crossing.

There is a weak spot just south of Stalingrad that should be heavily defended.

Parenthetically, I notice you are not using rifle corps. My own view is the Soviet should try to build one a turn in this scenario, although APs are tight. These make a big difference defending major objectives. Indeed, the rifle corps is arguably the single biggest upgrade available for the Soviet Union taking the long view and I try to stock up on APs going into June of 42 to begin aggressively converting.

Once you get a few such corps into and around Stalingrad, the German is going to have a hell of a time taking the place. They also dig very well and have strong construction values.

I've noticed some other Soviet players ignoring cavalry corps going into the first blizzard. Build these as well.

So far as this particular scenario goes, avoid building tank corps. Not cost effective. You get plenty of these for free as it is, and they are stuck with the understrength 42 TOE. You can get 2 rifle corps for the same price and get much more out of that immediately as their TOEs directly translate unlike tank brigades going into corps.

Volga is not much wider at that place than lower Dnepr which Germans crossed without much of problem.

ORIGINAL: Helpless
Volga is not much wider at that place than lower Dnepr which Germans crossed without much of problem.

Ok, that's a good reason.

The Soviets actually feared the Germans would cross it, btw, and made arrangements to prevent such a crossing. (By garrisoning islands on the river, etc.) It was always theoretically possible to do. The Soviets didn't just leave the east bank of the Volga undefended on the theory that it was uncrossable.

Some other games I suppose have taken a shortcut here and designated the river as unfordable for the sake of simplicity and to avoid special rules.

The Germans just didn't get around to doing it, mostly because they didn't have the troops to spare I suspect. They were stretched thin as it is.

ORIGINAL: Flaviusx

Most of the lower Volga is swamp behind major river. This is pretty easy to defend. Not quite impassable, but damn near. A single rifle division should stop the panzers here, and the German is going to have a difficult time mustering enough infantry to force a crossing.

Yes, you're right - I should have covered that spot. I just assumed the river not to be fordable.

ORIGINAL: Flaviusx
There is a weak spot just south of Stalingrad that should be heavily defended.

Parenthetically, I notice you are not using rifle corps. My own view is the Soviet should try to build one a turn in this scenario, although APs are tight. These make a big difference defending major objectives. Indeed, the rifle corps is arguably the single biggest upgrade available for the Soviet Union taking the long view and I try to stock up on APs going into June of 42 to begin aggressively converting.

Once you get a few such corps into and around Stalingrad, the German is going to have a hell of a time taking the place. They also dig very well and have strong construction values.

I've noticed some other Soviet players ignoring cavalry corps going into the first blizzard. Build these as well.

So far as this particular scenario goes, avoid building tank corps. Not cost effective. You get plenty of these for free as it is, and they are stuck with the understrength 42 TOE. You can get 2 rifle corps for the same price and get much more out of that immediately as their TOEs directly translate unlike tank brigades going into corps.

Thank you for the advice about Tank and Rifle Corps, they're very sturdy formations, which pack quite a punch (for 1942 Soviet infantry). I considered that but I consciously chose not to do it. Let me share with you my view (and assessment) of the situation (perhaps you'll find some flaw here as well).

When I opened the first turn, I found that all the armies west of the Voronezh-Voroshilovgrad-Rostov line were encircled, and very few troops were in a Ready status, which doomed my break-out attempts due to lack of "ooomph". Only one Tank Corps was able to retreat to the east (being encircled and destroyed three weeks later around Boguchar).

On Turn 2, my opponent brushed aside the few troops I had been able to muster to cover the Don section between Voronezh and Boguchar, encircling Voronezh (including the frozen army that starts just north of the city as well as two Guards Rifle divisions), as well as getting another big encirclement around Voroshilovgrad.

This had the side effect - due to a bug on reinforcements entry hexes being occupied by the enemy - of putting out of action the entire 5 Tanks Army (minus the HQ).

By turn 3 I had just one battered and demoralized tank corps and a severe lack of infantry (we've been on infantry parity since then).

So forming Rifle Corps didn't look to me very sensible at all: I had to maximize frontage to avoid further encirclements, I didn't want to risk having one of those expensive Rifle Corps to get pocketed and destroyed.

I tried to keep an active defense, which has successfully prevented my opponent to reach Stalingrad till this turn. Rostov fell this turn as well (no rifle corps there either, kept the guys there supplied by air during two turns).

Besides the lack of infantry, another reason for not building those corps was that I preferred to reorganize my chain of command, which has been thrown into severe disarray several times already.

I have just built one tank corps: I tend to see Soviet corps formations as making sense in the offense, in the defence, I see their use, but I wouldn't say they're a recipe guaranteeing success

Sorry for the long post, but I think the situation deserved an explanation.

Do you have a screenshot of Soviet turn 1? (At the very beginning, preferably, before you have moved anything.) Curious to see this encirclement.

ORIGINAL: Flaviusx
Do you have a screenshot of Soviet turn 1? (At the very beginning, preferably, before you have moved anything.) Curious to see this encirclement.

Nope, we were playing on the server and I didn't take any I suggest to you to PM sitito directly, perhaps he took one. Or better, maybe he's up for a match and can try to replicate it for you [;)]

Sorry didnt take any ss [8|]. Oops it's supposed that I cannot be here

Pity, I would have loved to see that. We've been monkeying around with this scenario to get a better balance. We've made it a bit easier now for the Germans to crack the initial southern defense. I'm just hoping we didn't overshoot the mark.

In my own playtesting I was able to get most Soviet units out of the pockets made on turn 1, but still suffered heavy losses. Losing everying, OTOH, is a bit much.

I haven't played the Blau scenario, but if it has a start like the '42, I think it should start after the second battle of kharkov. It was the Soviets who attacked first, not the Germans. Giving the sovs the first turn would be a bad idea as no sov player would attack, so I think the set up should be after the Izyum pocket had been formed.

ORIGINAL: Flaviusx
Pity, I would have loved to see that. We've been monkeying around with this scenario to get a better balance. We've made it a bit easier now for the Germans to crack the initial southern defense. I'm just hoping we didn't overshoot the mark.

If it wasn't for the North Caucasus Front - Coastal, 44th and 47th armies - which is unfrozen in v 1.01 but I guess it is in 1.02 beta, I wouldn't been able to mount an effective defense at all. sitito managed to destroy a lot with relatively scarce - but very well placed - forces.

ORIGINAL: Flaviusx
In my own playtesting I was able to get most Soviet units out of the pockets made on turn 1, but still suffered heavy losses. Losing everying, OTOH, is a bit much.

An AAR or an strategy guide on that would be most welcome Flaviusx.

I am a bit lost about how to effectively fight out of an encirclement. As I said above, I found most of the troops inside the pockets to be in Unready state - no attack if they move - or with insufficient MPs to concentrate and attack. Soviet second echelon deployment looked to me very historical, but it was completely hopeless with respect to helping effectively encircled forces - again, some key units were in Unready state or too far away to have enough MPs.

My personal recommendation would be to remove the frozen status from the forces around Voronezh (and make sure that the 5 TA will appear in force no matter what).

If you're really looking for balance, if the Soviet player has to live with Frozen units, then perhaps would be wise to add to the game some sort of "GROFAZ approval track" à la Liberty Roads I haven't played it myself, but people I know have enjoyed that a lot.

ORIGINAL: sitito
Sorry didnt take any ss [8|]. Oops it's supposed that I cannot be here

Nah, it's OK mate. I know you wouldn't be able to resist the urge to know my reaction to your bold maneuvers.

Just saw you sent your turn, will take a look at it tomorrow. Let's see if I finally managed to get those panzer march in the direction I want them to

ORIGINAL: Flaviusx
Pity, I would have loved to see that. We've been monkeying around with this scenario to get a better balance. We've made it a bit easier now for the Germans to crack the initial southern defense. I'm just hoping we didn't overshoot the mark.

We've finished this scenario... pheew, one of the most intense PBEM matches I've had in a long time.

My opponent (sitito) and me would like to let you know that we find the scenario to be quite nicely balanced already in (1.00).

sitito (congrats sitito, the show you pulled off was impressive) has achieved a minor victory, with 1.4 times as many VPs as me. The Axis conquered the Caucasus and inflicted 1.5M losses on the Red Army. On the other hand, the Soviet Union held fast around Stalingrad inflicting about 0.6M losses on the Axis powers. If I had managed better the mobile battle in the steppes south of Rostov and a bug hadn't stolen from me the 5 Tanks Army, this would have been a draw.

After seeing the whole of the scenario I'd say it was quite balanced in 1.00. If you have tweaked it to make it easier for the Germans to crack Rostov open in the first three turns, I think I will be fine with that.