Thunder in the East - Soviet team

[ComradeP]

The Axis team seems to be in favour of not posting progress in an AAR until turn 5, although I'm less convinced of the need for that, but I'll agree not to post screenshots until turn 5 if they insist on the rule.

For the moment, this will be an assembly area for the Soviet players as well as for others who want to chime in. Given the choice between sending dozens of e-mails or PM's, or simply starting a thread, starting a thread seemed like the preferable option.

At this point, I'll take command of STAVKA and associated forces including all support units initially, Reserve Front (at least initially), the VVS as well as strategic movement capacity and AP distribution.

821Bobo will take command of the two northern fronts initially, as well as commanding forces send to him by me over time.

timmyab will take command of Western Front initially, as well as commanding forces send to him by me over time.

Smokindave34 will take command of the two southern fronts initially, as well as commanding forces send to him by me over time.

Hagleboz and OSO are first on the reserve list should a position open up due to front activation, the frontline widening significantly in the south or a player dropping out.

[ComradeP]

OK guys, so as a proposal for how to minimize the difficulties of C&C and "gaps" in the frontline on the boundaries of our respective commands, I propose that the forces on that boundary are STAVKA units which can be assigned to either of the player's command areas they border.

This is a lot easier to do for us than for the Axis, as they usually have few if any OKH units, whilst we'll always have armies assigned to STAVKA because there are not enough fronts around.

I won't be commanding all STAVKA formations, I'll assign some of them to your respective commands even though they'll nominally still be assigned to STAVKA, due to the aforementioned lack of fronts to attach all available armies to.

Thoughts?

[timmyab]

I notice that Stavka units are always struggling for supply which is just what you don't want at the joins between commands.
I'd suggest that you should assign a location for players to place their flank that's achievable for both players.You may even want to give specific instructions, or even make some of the moves yourself in critical situations,(Not too often i hope).This will require sound judgement on your part, but not much more so than single player games and luckily shouldn't be as critical for us as it will be for the German team.It might be an idea to hold back a few Stavka reserves behind the front boundaries so that they can be railed or marched in if needed to cover unexpected gaps.

[Encircled]

Certainly specific STAVKA commands to avoid potentially catastrophic errors have to be used

Mind you, you will have to avoid asking commanders to anchor a line on towns that are 100Km behind German lines!

[ComradeP]

I've never really noticed STAVKA units receiving less supplies, but in 1941 we'll be mostly defending, so the supplies will matter a bit less as combat intensity per unit will probably be fairly low and we're on or very close to a functional rail line at all times.

[timmyab]

Even if supply with Stavka units isn't an issue ,(which I suspect it is to some degree at least), you've still got weakness where you least need it (at front boundaries).I think if there has to be Stavka armies they should be assigned to quiet areas of the front or held in reserve.If you want to reassign armies or corps at front boundaries for any reason you can do so anyway without necessarily needing to spend AP's.You just redesignate the player's OB's.

[CarnageINC]

How do you plan on handling new unit creation and who gets what for these, plus all then new incoming reinforcements?

[randallw]

The first Axis turn tends to scatter Soviet units a bit, especially in the marshes; Kiev MD ( to be SW Front ), Western Front, and Northwest Front units get a little jumbled there.  Will they get marched/railed to their respective areas or will there be command transfers to whoever needs them the most?

[ComradeP]

Overall, the priority as I see it in terms of reinforcements and the need for making progress is:

Northern part of the map from the Finnish no attack line to the Dnepr: low-medium.
South of the Dnepr: high.

I'm not convinced of the need to knock Finland out of the war, for starters. If Finland indeed becomes neutral upon surrender and ownership of Helsinki doesn't change unless it's captured, knocking the Finns out of the war provides little to no benefit as there are no points to be gained I believe and the Finns won't be moving across the no attack line in any case.

Similarly, there are few points to be gained from recapturing the Baltic states and from a strategic perspective I'd be quite happy if the Axis commit significant forces to the area, as they're not going to capture Leningrad if properly defended in 1941 and most certainly not in later years. Without a chance of capturing Leningrad, any Axis division north of Velikie Luki is essentially not contributing much, if anything, to the Axis war effort. I expect many will be set to static, so it makes sense to just outflank them and mostly ignore them.

Reinforcements will either be assigned to STAVKA armies or will be used to restore strength to armies assigned to a front. Where the reinforcements go will naturally depend on the strategic situation. I won't necessarily starve certain areas from reinforcement, but I don't think the front holding the Leningrad area will be getting many reinforcements provided there's still a land supply line to the city.

STAVKA units (both the nominal STAVKA units actually assigned to other players and those I control), being the main reserve will get priority for replacements when offensives are being planned. Refitting frontline units only to send them back into the meatgrinder is sort of a strategic dead end and not something I'm a fan of, to put it mildly.

The first Axis turn tends to scatter Soviet units a bit, especially in the marshes; Kiev MD ( to be SW Front ), Western Front, and Northwest Front units get a little jumbled there. Will they get marched/railed to their respective areas or will there be command transfers to whoever needs them the most?

For the first couple of turns, geographic boundaries for who commands what in the northern and central parts of the front will probably make more sense because of the mob of units that tends to end up in the Pripyat marshes (which has always puzzled me, some of them are hundreds of miles away from their HQ or Front). They'll either be transferred to another command or moved back at some point. The priority for the rail cap on turn 1 is to move troops to the front, on later turns troops can be moved away from the front.

[timmyab]

ORIGINAL: CarnageINC

How do you plan on handling new unit creation and who gets what for these, plus all then new incoming reinforcements?

Stavka job.I guess the front commanders will have a chance to plead their case if they feel they need more reinforcements.

[smokindave34]

Just want to make sure I've got this right - the units on our boundaries will be assigned to STAVKA and ComradeP will be assigning them to us as he sees fit?

Also - I'll probably need some support from cpt flam (reserve) as the southern front widens - I will welcome his help!

[cpt flam]

hope you will not be screwed by my help[:D]

[ComradeP]

Just want to make sure I've got this right - the units on our boundaries will be assigned to STAVKA and ComradeP will be assigning them to us as he sees fit?

I don't really see the weakness in the approach, unlike timmyab. Our main problem in terms of HQ's will be a lack of fronts, so there'll always be STAVKA armies. However, there'll be STAVKA armies I control, and STAVKA armies you control. I'll generally control the "real" reserves, Reserve Front, STAVKA formations in the Reserve Front area as well as STAVKA forces near Moscow should they ever get that far and the frontline commanders will take control of STAVKA formations in their area after I've released them. As soon as the number of fronts as well as their command capacity increases, there'll be fewer STAVKA formations on the frontline.

Also - I'll probably need some support from cpt flam (reserve) as the southern front widens - I will welcome his help!

The southern front will probably widen as soon as the Dnepr is reached or a bit before that. I predict that you'll manage the forces up to Dnepropetrovsk and cpt flam the forces south of that. If you'd have to control both the forces trying to stop the Axis breakout towards Kharkov and the forces trying to stop the Axis from getting to Sevastopol and Rostov, things would probably get too complicated.

-

It will be interesting to see if the Axis are going for the "link up with the Romanians" and "full strength Panzer Army for AGN" options, as that would require that AGC will be (significantly) weakened.

[timmyab]

ORIGINAL: ComradeP
I don't really see the weakness in the approach, unlike timmyab.

I'll bow to your vastly greater experience on this one.
I just think that if the Stavka armies are weaker than those subordinate to fronts, which surely they must be otherwise why bother with C & C at all, then they should be placed at quiet points or in reserve.The quiet points may be at front boundaries or maybe not, the main thing is that you have the strength where you need it most.Don't forget that a lot of the Stavka armies are going to be inherently weak anyway with low morale and experience.Why allow doctrine to dictate that these armies are placed at potentially critical positions at vital moments.

[Flaviusx]

It's a bit more complex than that Timmyab. Generally you do not want to subordinate armies to Fronts if it will overload them, especially if you know that new Fronts will eventually activate and be able to absorb the STAVKA armies. Reserve Front activates on turn 4, and Bryansk on turn 8 or so, for example. If you go ahead and attach the STAVKA armies prematurely you wind up with the worst of both worlds: overloaded fronts, and a lack of armies available for the new fronts. (It takes a ton of APs to reassign armies from one Front to another. You could theoretically strip armies of their assets and assign them to new incoming ones, but this is still less efficient than simply waiting for the Front to activate.)

The real problem is in the south: there you will face a critical shortage of fronts for all of 1941 and even much of 1942. Leningrad also tends to suffer until Volkhov Front activates. (6 armies between Leningrad and NW Fronts isn't gonna do it. You can easily get 9 full armies north of VL and still need more.)

Pieter will have to decide how to handle this shortage in Front capacity at the flanks and how to distribute the reserves in light of that.

[ComradeP]

The only difference between STAVKA armies and non-STAVKA armies I've seen is that they have a greater chance to fail rolls because there's no front that could make their rolls for them, that's about it. In most of my Soviet games, STAVKA armies are usually stronger than other armies because they don't get brutalized at the frontline each turn. STAVKA armies allow for flexibility.

[ComradeP]

Flavio, just so you read this: the Soviets no longer have a comfortable HI surplus, so factories do need to be evacuated now. Even with the Ukraine in Axis hands, resource production and stockpiles will be sufficient to keep the Soviet industry going at full speed until at least 1944.

[Flaviusx]

I saw that, yeah.

[Klydon]

Depending on how well the Germans are doing, you can also "jump the gun" a bit and assign an army to a MD. (I did this with Kharkov, Bryansk, and Moscow). Kharkov goes active when Kiev goes down and I am not sure what activates the Moscow MD, but it has not happen yet in my test game. (Kharkov has not happen either for that matter, but I found the reference that says it goes active when Kiev is captured). 

[821Bobo]

ORIGINAL: ComradeP
Similarly, there are few points to be gained from recapturing the Baltic states and from a strategic perspective I'd be quite happy if the Axis commit significant forces to the area, as they're not going to capture Leningrad if properly defended in 1941 and most certainly not in later years. Without a chance of capturing Leningrad, any Axis division north of Velikie Luki is essentially not contributing much, if anything, to the Axis war effort. I expect many will be set to static, so it makes sense to just outflank them and mostly ignore them.

Wouldn't be so confident. I am new to WITE and they know it + nerfed swamps can give em a chance to capture Leningrad in 41. My assumption is that they will try it.