German PP

[Kel]

I've been discovering the german GC for some server games and was wondering : what is the best practice for spending PP during the crucial 6 or so first turns.

Personally, here is what I do.

t1 : Kluge to the OKH, SU allocated to PzD & MotDiv (SPFlak coys, Stug bns and Pzjag bns)
t2 : HQ buildup for 1 PzK, remaining construction bns sent up to OKH
t3-t5 : some leader changes (Model in, 11 Army chief out, Inf Corps 4 out, better mech rating leader for one or two PzK), PzK Buildup, Rumanian Armies to Rumanian High Command

Any comments or advice? Thank you

[Nix77]

I've done exactly the same moves in my game. After T3 I've spent as much as I can to build-ups. Not sure how useful the Romanian transition was, should they rather just be preserved in AGS for the Army Group split? Overloading the Army Group by 40+ points basically halves the Army Group leader effectivenenss, so that's a tough decision.

I've also been pondering if I should balance the command points for AGC and AGN by moving one army up to AGN? I figured this kind of moves could be done during the mud turns when there's no build-ups to be done, but then I'm missing the balancing effect for the whole summer of '41...

Tough decisions! You're on the right track for sure, build-ups should be #1 on the list I guess.

[Telemecus]

The eternal question..

Over subsequent games I have come to the view though that nothing should be done which means you cannot do an HQBU you want to do later.

ORIGINAL: Nix77

I've also been pondering if I should balance the command points for AGC and AGN by moving one army up to AGN? I figured this kind of moves could be done during the mud turns when there's no build-ups to be done, but then I'm missing the balancing effect for the whole summer of '41...

There is an alternative of moving 2 Army very early i.e before you attached other divisions\corps to it- as that will be the cheapest PP cost ever of moving an army.

In my first games I used to spend a lot on making the army group commands effective. Now I see it as less urgent as I no longer bring them close to the front to save on vehicles and to make sure their attached construction units repair as much rail as possible. With range modifiers coming at distance the benefits of offloading units to reduce the command penalty are much lower. The cost of making AGS effective is so high, compared to nothing when it splits, that I write off any leadership effect before then and see it as only a rail repair command.

Personally I would make sure all corps\armies are free of command penalties, and any units in combat are not directly attached to an army group or OKH, before worrying about leaders.

[Kel]

Thank you for these hindsights. Very informative. I think I will put priority on HQBU and cleaning the most blatant discrepancies at divs/corps level rather than messing with costly AG imbalances.

[Nix77]

ORIGINAL: Telemecus

The eternal question..

Over subsequent games I have come to the view though that nothing should be done which means you cannot do an HQBU you want to do later.

ORIGINAL: Nix77

I've also been pondering if I should balance the command points for AGC and AGN by moving one army up to AGN? I figured this kind of moves could be done during the mud turns when there's no build-ups to be done, but then I'm missing the balancing effect for the whole summer of '41...

There is an alternative of moving 2 Army very early i.e before you attached other divisions\corps to it- as that will be the cheapest PP cost ever of moving an army.

In my first games I used to spend a lot on making the army group commands effective. Now I see it as less urgent as I no longer bring them close to the front to save on vehicles and to make sure their attached construction units repair as much rail as possible. With range modifiers coming at distance the benefits of offloading units to reduce the command penalty are much lower. The cost of making AGS effective is so high, compared to nothing when it splits, that I write off any leadership effect before then and see it as only a rail repair command.

Personally I would make sure all corps\armies are free of command penalties, and any units in combat are not directly attached to an army group or OKH, before worrying about leaders.

Weird thing is that armies cost the same amount move between Army Groups, no matter how many corps or units they have. This was at least the case recently, haven't actually checked it with the last few versions (1.09+).

I did the Romanian army move by overloading the 4th Rum Army, then moving it to Romanian High Command. The cost was exactly the same as it would have been before overloading.

[Telemecus]

Interesting , at least in my version it is a lot cheaper to take all but 1 division out first. Note I almost always move to OKH, or a high command, first; and then move for free from high command. If you still have Halder with his high admin score at Okh that seems to reduce cost. Have you compared transfering 2 army? I think the way it works for you would be more logical, so it may have been changed that way between my version ans yours?

[Nix77]

I haven't checked the costs in a couple of versions, I think I made that Romanian transfer example in 1.08.09, it has probably changed (for the better) after that


EDIT:

Tried this on 1.09.02: at least on Army level, German side, it does not matter what the army contains. The AP cost is only affected by political ratings, so it costs the same to move an empty Army or an overloaded Army.

[Jayhawk301]

I just tried a new way on PP for me. I only changed the OKH leader and did nothing else on first turn. Then I kept all the same on 2nd turn and after that used PP for build ups on selected Panzers. I continued this practice thru the summer of 1942 and now I'm into the mud of 42. I would almost always have some Panzers on build up every turn.I'm now going to change leaders as I'm getting ready for mostly defense from now on. I did use PP for switching some Panzer corps to another armies as I used a different way for me on armor usage. It appeared to work ok even with some poor leaders for a while,as it seems to me the build up over came poor leaders on most occasions. Not sure this would work against a person, but against the AI it seemed to as I took all the victory point cities except in the south Baku and Sevastopol.

[EwaldvonKleist]

Do you not kill your truck fleet with all those HQ build uns?

[Nix77]

ORIGINAL: EwaldvonKleist

Do you not kill your truck fleet with all those HQ build uns?

Well, it's my first real game against human opponent, so the answer is "I have no clue, probably yes?"

I'd be interested to hear how many HQ buildups in 1941 the German motor pool can sustain?

[EwaldvonKleist]

I am a little bit confused Nix77: I replied to Jayhawk, is this a second account of you?

I have not much play experience either, so it was just a "I guess it must be like this" question. IMO you hardly have enough admin points to kill your motor pool with HQ buildups in 1941 (if you dont do all of them in mud )
But if you continue to do a lot of them in the winter of 1941 and all the time in 1942, you will run short of trucks. Have you checked the motor pool in your game?

[A game]

As others have said you should keep almost all your points for HQ buildup, its the most critical mechanic the Germans have to win, and the only thing that really matters in 41. I only ever use some extra points on changing a few important leaders, eg. Mr Model to I Corp etc.

Once you hit winter you can start spending it all on leaders and forts and whatever else.

[Telemecus]

Also if you take all the long run effects on the truck fleet does it really reduce it? If the alternative to a panzer corps build up is your infantry slugging it through enemy controlled hexes fighting non-isolated soviets with all the supply that takes, well executed buildups are probably a truck saver.

[Nix77]

ORIGINAL: EwaldvonKleist

I am a little bit confused Nix77: I replied to Jayhawk, is this a second account of you?

I have not much play experience either, so it was just a "I guess it must be like this" question. IMO you hardly have enough admin points to kill your motor pool with HQ buildups in 1941 (if you dont do all of them in mud )
But if you continue to do a lot of them in the winter of 1941 and all the time in 1942, you will run short of trucks. Have you checked the motor pool in your game?

Just managed to miss Jayhawk's post, no need to get confused

I thought your post was directed to me since I said I'm using as many APs as possible to HQBUs after T3.

I've been trying to figure out a way to keep the panzers fueled up without HQBUs efficiently, but I don't think there's a reasonable way to do that. Axis rail supply modifier keeps the amount of received fuel down even if you're really close to the railhead. Unless you spare fuel from previous turn, the best you can get is 30-35MPs without buildups. Even transports have a limited effect, and I usually use them in tandem with buildups to really leverage the momentum.

[Jayhawk301]

To clear up my post I only use HQBU's on clear and snow turns not on mud or blizzard turns. Also I would use BU sometimes for half the units in the corp and use half to make headway or complete an encirclement. People are asking about the motor pool in Dec of 1942 I have 123k of vehicles my need is 164k for full supply. Not sure what kind of vehicle numbers are normal for Dec 42 if not using BU. I think it works well to use BU as I have almost taken Gorky and have all the VP cities except Baku and Sevastopol. I have most of the Volga as a buffer around Moscow.