Soviet Defense Principals in 1941: RUN, or FIGHT

[Q-Ball]

I have a PBEM going as the Reds against a good opponent, CarnageInc, who has made good progress in his AARs. I gleaned from the forum some basics to defending the Motherland and frustrating the Germans. I thought about RUNNING, and trading space for time, which seems to be what alot are doing. I know there has been alot of chatter on the "Sir Robin", or "Comrade Robinsky" tactic, but I think now, even though I am just beginning this game, this tactic is bunk.

Before taking on Carnage, I had only played 1 AI game as the Axis, and zero Soviet turns. I really think a tough defense is pretty easy, and not rocket science, if you follow a few basic rules. I am using the following pricipals:

1. Defense in depth; a carpet of weak units is better than a stronger stack only 1 deep. If you don't have enough for two solid lines, form two lines with 1-hex in between, a "Checkerboard". You'll lose some units that way, but not more than a couple at a time.
2. Put a body on EVERY Panzer unit; just get a ZOC on it. Even if that unit is sure to get blown away, you do this.
3. I keep Tanks behind the lines in Reserve, and use them to counterattack any Mobile unit with a defense value of around 9 or under. Alot of attacks fail, some succeed, but sends a message. Carnage stopped using Regts to form pockets after a couple successful counterattacks on them. (BTW, I personally like those Red Tank Divs, though they are kind of one or two shot deals).

I have attacked out of pockets prior to making a counterattack; not sure if this is smart or not. Those attacks are suicidal, but I wonder if they cause the defenders to expend ammo/fuel/fatigue, making it easier. And pocketed units are doomed anyway, so who cares what my losses are. (in fact, if they are DISABLED in that fight instead of SURRENDER later on, I might actually be REDUCING my losses by attacking!)
4. Swamps are your friend
5. I have withdrawn a bit here and there to straighten the line or keep units out of trouble, but I have fought for almost everything.
6. I formed almost 70 Construction Bns around turn 4 (picked up that hint Turn 4), and that makes a big difference in DIGGING.

I haven't built any units at all other than the Construction Bns and a few artillery units to fill-out new HQs.

I try and break most every pocket, not really to save the units inside, but to de-isolate them, so they take longer to eliminate

I don't think I am doing anything special at all other than the list above. I have a reserves in the rear digging additional trenches, but my forward dispositions I don't think that carefully about; I just move units until they are 2 or 3 deep and pretty evenly spaced.

Anyone can do this, which makes me wonder if the Germans need more help, because I think it's pretty simple.

Carnage may testify, but I think he is a good player, and this defense is frustrating him so far. He isn't really close to crossing the Southern Dnepr yet, and I still hold Smolensk (barely, it's about to fall). My tank losses have been large from all the counterattacks, but other than that my losses are light, and I think the MANPOWER means alot more than TANKS, because aside from the 1700 T-34/KVs I have lost, the rest are just garbage anyway.

I worry about where the Germans will be if everyone figures out a better, more active defense, because I think Running is not the way to go. I don't know what I would have done different than Carnage if I faced the same kind of defense, and I intend to play an AXIS PBEM, where I expect at this point to suffer.

Thoughts?

[CarnageINC]

First off let me say this is very....VERY...good info.  He has done major successes with his defense.  The only thing I don't agree with is units that are pocketed attacking.  Its a free kill and is less expenditure of MP's for the Germans next turn.  In fact Q-ball is doing such a great job IMO I'm very tempted to start another AAR just to show what a great defense he has....and to get HELP! [:'(]

I'll post some screens of what he's talking about, it doesn't matter if he sees my units he does a hell of a recon job anyways.

[PeeDeeAitch]

Running just seems wrong to me - and I am not even speaking of the "history" behind this. In simple game terms, running just trades a (very short) time for the chance to set up a defense somewhere that is manned by weak units. The Panzers can move out - clearing vast swaths of territory, and come to grips with the Soviets fast - even the infantry can make good moves as the terrain in front of them is clear and they can do 12-15 hexes a turn.

The GOAL of the Germans is to make the Soviets set up their 2nd defense as far back as they can, in my opinion, this makes it certain that they will not have to slog to get there, denying time to the Men in Brown. Time is what the Germans do not have. Now, admittedly, too far back will mean some supply problems, but this is something I would take as the Axis...

[Canoerebel]

Sounds like defending Russia is easier than defending India.

[:'(]

[Flaviusx]

Q-ball has the right idea here. This is how it is done.

Notenome is also getting it, check out his AAR.

Now, I expect all of this will create a brand new debate on game balance. But at least it will be the correct debate on the actual merits of the game, and not on this phantom runaway nonsense, which is a nonproblem. The real and dangerous and arguably too effective Soviet defense is the exact opposite of a runaway.

[ComradeP]

I remain of the opinion that leaving token forces west of the Dnepr and simply digging in east of the Dnepr is not the right strategy, and for all the merits of my opponent's defensive plan, that is more or less what notenome did.

Personally, I'm generally in favour of truly forward defense, not giving ground until necessary/to avoid encirclement.

Holding a line at the Dnepr currently works because casualties from direct combat and the chance of Soviet units routing from even good attacks are fairly low, limiting the Axis advances more than the actual resistance. As soon as those two things are changed, holding a static line will probably no longer work and invite encirclements. The main reason I have not encircled large amounts of defenders on the Dnepr in my game with notenome is not the defender's quality (which isn't that good as most units only have reasonable defensive CV's due to the forts they're in), but the low CV for mobile unit hasty attacks meaning I need deliberate attacks or full stack hasty attacks to get anywhere. The system is delaying my offensive more in some areas than the defenders.

Holding a line across the entire Dnepr area also means the line has more or less no depth, another problem that would come back to haunt the Soviet defender under other circumstances.

Checkerboarding and fighting is for me the way to go, withdrawing the majority of my forces to the Dnepr and essentially hitting "end turn" until the Germans show up isn't, it gives all the initiative to the Axis, which is not a situation you want to be in.

Put pressure on the Axis from turn 1 onwards, and their timetables and gains will quickly become low to minimal.

[mavraamides]

My strategy as the Russians has been to run back to a defensible line on turn 1 and then simply thicken the line and withdraw whenever encirclement is threatened.

Its now turn 18 and I still hold Novgorod, Lenningrad, Kiev, Odessa, Kursk, Kharkov, Moscow. And I haven't been encircled once since the unavoidable first turn encirclements.

I've been using a sort of reverse checkerboard. Straight lines in front to minimize the German's ability to surround units backed up by checkerboard formations to contain small breakthroughs when they happen. And when they do manage a small penetration, I retreat in good order to preserve a solid line.

Also, getting units to key defensive positions as early as humanly possible in order to maximize fortification when the Germans do arrive. I put an inf on Kiev on turn 1. Now its at level 4 fortification along with surrounding hexes. Almost impossible to defeat from a frontal assault. Ditto Lenningrad, Moscow, Odessa and many key locations behind heavy rivers.

Another tactic that has worked for me is that when I notice an unusually large buildup, I back 1 hex away from the Germans. This causes them to have to re-establish recon on my units and use up some air and movement before launching the attack.

And finally, I like to build forts. And when I retreat from them, the Germans have to waste time taking them out.

So I guess I would say that trading land for time HAS worked. At least for me. And once the mud arrives in the fall, it seems very difficult for the Germans to make any meaningful gains.

Right now my casualties are only at 1.5 million which is pretty low compared to a lot of AAR's Ive seen. I think its mostly because I've yet to really be encircled.

[squatter]

I dont see how a Soviet 41 checkerboard defence in 41 can be beat. Currently trying to get a tester (Axis) to play against me (Sov) to confirm that.

[notenome]

Define what beat means? You can encircle a checkerboard of defenders just like you can any other defense, or you can make it unsustainable. A checkerboard is an economy of force measure, which means the Soviet player can't defend everything as he would like. Find that point and plan around it. That's what Rommel did against the British Checkerboard in Gazala.

[2ndACR]

Well, checkerboard works, and so does a linear defense line. Both of my opponents are using a linear.

Only advantage of a checkerboard is the ZOC eating into my movement which lows me down. Linear forces me to mass troops, blast hole and then shoot thru. If they don't pull back quick, you can bag a bunch. Now you combine a linear defense with a checkerboard behind it 1-2 hexes and you are really getting somewhere, not only do I have to mass to blast a hole but it still eats into my movement and slows me down.

I personally, think the combined is the way to go. Maximum strength to the front with roadblocks behind to limit a breakthru.

[Flaviusx]

Pure checkerboard won't do it, Squatter. It's a fine delaying tactic, but you need actual line somewhere (or a carpet defense in depth) and actually stand and fight. Checkerboard is part of a toolbox, not a universal solution.

[randallw]

The computer does not pull off a crazy massive encirclement on turn 1 anywhere; this allows me to put up a large stout defense in the southwest, preventing it from getting Kiev nor any breakthrough to the Dnepr ( north of the marshes is different ).  Vs a human i'd lose more of the southwest forces on turns 1-3; should I still endeavor to try to bottle up the Axis, or do I trade space vs time at a regular rate?

[Ketza]

Well thought out and defined Soviet strategy. Its working well in both of my current Soviet games.

After playing the Soviet side however it is giving me some more ideas for playing as the Axis.

[CapAndGown]

I have not tried a h2h, and certainly not PBEM, but against the AI what I am finding is that a defense that is 4 or 5 hexes deep is incredibly hard to get through, and making encirclements if you do get through is very hard since you just used all your infantry and tanks from two PzGroups just to blast one hole. And this is by turn 5 or 6. Of course, the AI can't do that everywhere, but around Smolensk and Pskov and in front of Kiev there is this carpet 40 to 50 miles deep of units. If the AI can do that, why can't humans? And couldn't they do it even more effectively?

[Q-Ball]

On my way to collect the Order of Lenin in my game with Carnage, he sent a turn back that I think shows ways to defeat the "Red Carpet". It's still harder to beat than linear, but there are ways.

Single Rifle Divisions cannot stand-up to determined German Infantry attacks, and will Rout or Retreat. Often they are "Unready" the next turn. Do this a few times, and gaping holes start to appear. Send in tanks to widen/deepen the holes on either side of groups of divisions, and the Soviets are going to have to retreat, and might get some units cut-off. This just happened against Carnage, who cut-off 10 Rifle Divisions this turn. They are doomed.

I will post screenies later tonight when I am working on the turn (no time now), but there are ways to defeat it.

No massive 20-division pockets though.

[Klydon]

I have been playing a AI vs Soviet game as a practice game (game settings 110% across the board for Germans, 100% for Soviets). I have been using checkerboards a lot and have forced the Germans down to a miserable crawl. It is almost September and he is now just in sight of Kiev, which has a lot of level 3 and 4 forts there. Odessa is turning into Sevastopol west. I have solid lines up (or close to solid lines) 2 SW of Leningrad, 3 in front of Moscow, heavy line on the Dnepr and starting on lines behind that. The Crimea has fortifications going 2-3 deep at the entrance hexes as well.

One thing I have been doing is continue to use those original forces that the Germans pound on each turn for the checker board (mine is 3-4 units deep in most cases) and the guys that were on the line become the number 3 or 4 guys. I had to finally rail a bunch of them out since they remained routed even on my turn. They went to the rear for ditch digging duty and I moved some newer divisions in.

At any rate, something I am running into is a lack of units to a point. Every turn I lose probably 5-7 units from the front against the AI. My thought is a possible German response to the checker board is to make narrow penetrations and then encircle as many Soviets as they can in order to remove them from the playing field. It is sort of a longer process, but you keep ramping up the unit counter losses, those are guys he never gets back. It also makes a difference in having to reconstitute a division from total scratch or working with a division that may have gotten pounded by the Germans, but still has 5-7k guys left. After a time, that has got to start making itself felt. The German advance would be slower (gonna be slow anyway) but would be removing units vs just pushing them back. 

[Q-Ball]

To me, any German advance has to be making unit destruction a priority. Checkerboards or Lines or Carpets all offer opportunities to destroy Soviet units, just to greater or lesser degrees, or different tactics. I am no expert, just an observation.

Unit destruction, though, strikes me as critical. The Soviets get piles of divisions, but it's not unlimited, and POWs takes guys off the board permanently. The Red Machine has alot of depth, but it's not bottomless.

[Flaviusx]

The carpet can be bludgeoned into submission if it's used passively. The trick is to launch heavy counterattacks en masse with it on the panzer spearheads. Don't just absorb the German attack, punch back, hard, with big deliberate attacks. Notenome has a pretty good demonstration of the technique in his AAR.

As he discorvered, it's the rifle divisions and cavalry which allow this to work; the tank divisions don't have the mobility to do it since 16 mps eats up virtually all their movement budget. A 12 mp rifle division can actually launch an attack with some movement to spare for getting into position for the attack and then moving back into carpet formation. Cavalry obviously has an even easier time doing this.

[mavraamides]

ORIGINAL: squatter

I dont see how a Soviet 41 checkerboard defence in 41 can be beat. Currently trying to get a tester (Axis) to play against me (Sov) to confirm that.

One thing you can do against a checker board is to drive deep and narrow instead of trying a direct encirclement. This will force the defender to backup and yield territory without even being attacked in order to avoid being encircled. Since his defenders are spread out, its very hard for him to close the salient because he doesn't have enough units in the area.

Still, using ZOC's has always been an effective delaying tactic in this and many similar games.

[pat.casey]

ORIGINAL: Q-Ball

To me, any German advance has to be making unit destruction a priority. Checkerboards or Lines or Carpets all offer opportunities to destroy Soviet units, just to greater or lesser degrees, or different tactics. I am no expert, just an observation.

Unit destruction, though, strikes me as critical. The Soviets get piles of divisions, but it's not unlimited, and POWs takes guys off the board permanently. The Red Machine has alot of depth, but it's not bottomless.

Speaking as a non-expert axis player, yes, that's what I've come to shoot for: unit destruction. Just taking territory doesn't do me too much good unless I can win the game in 1941 which is very unlikely.

Trick is to whack the soviet army so hard in 1941 that I can survive the blizzard. Where I am geographically when the blizzard hits is only a small part of it.