I Suck... Less. Or: How I Learned to Stop Worrying and Love WitE2.

[neuromancer]

This is my assessment after playing a few scenarios.
I suck at this game.

Leningrad, Minsk, South-West, result is always the same: Soviet Minor Victory.

Conclusion: I suck.

Well, more broadly I suck at most strategy games like this. I like them, but the honest truth is I am not very good at them.

I think part of the problem is that I often overlook something - which in past board gaming my opponent would seem to always spot and exploit - and that frankly my luck sucks (again, from board gaming, if there was a bad result on the table, no matter how low odds, I learned to assume that I had an even chance of rolling it - I freaked a guy out once by being able to call my dice before I rolled them, solely based on how poorly my luck was going that night).

I think this may have resulted in me becoming more than a little over-cautious. I know that historically by the end of '41 both sides had pretty much bled themselves white; the Germans to get as far as they did, the Soviets to prevent the Germans from getting any further. I find myself reluctant to do that, when my units drop below 60% I pull them back to refit. And I find myself hesitant to even put my panzers into battle as even when the odds are good they tend to get the hell kicked out of them, and it takes FOR-FREAKING-EVER for them to receive replacement panzers (German panzer production was never great).

I also don't want to commit to an attack with anything less than a 2 to 1 odds, which is fine a lot of the time but anybody who has forted up gets reported as really high CV ratings (and sometimes they don't until after I tried to attack them). This give me pause quite often... I have occasionally gone for it anyway and found that they didn't put up as good a fight as was suggested. And other times I get my teeth kicked in.

In my current game it is Turn 14 and I still haven't taken Odessa. It is surrounded, I am bombing it (not that it seems to accomplish much, the number of casualties it reports is minuscule), I have naval patrols trying to take out the resupply, but the CV is reporting absurd. I tried a little experiment recently, hit it with everything (a corps of Germans and a bunch of Rumanians) and basically got my ass kicked. I have now put a pioneer with every unit, and damn near every 210mm gun I could find in the hands of the German corps, and am going to give it another kick, but I am not expecting much.

And I keep overlooking things still. Forgot to tell the computer to not fly 500 recon missions so I lost 50 recon planes to operational losses (and yes, that is with manual air control, you still have to really restrict how many missions it flies and the planes it sends or you take crazy ops losses). Forget to turn the GS button on, so didn't have air support. Forget to turn it off, suffer a bunch of air losses. Didn't bring up the corps HQ so the units were attacking without artillery support. Did bring up the HQ, but I couldn't completely seal the front so a unit snuck through and chased it off. And does this corps even HAVE any artillery? That corps over there has an entire army's worth of artillery, but these guys have none - what idiot was in charge of assigning artillery assets anyway? Did they think that only that corps would be doing any fighting so these guys over here didn't need artillery?

Sigh.

Anyway. Just wanted to vent.
I now return you to your regularly scheduled forum.

Edit: Changed title after I learned how to suck less

[Bamilus]

I've learned over a few games if you're playing the AI you have to game them (like anything). The AI, with any morale setting, will try to re-form a line vs getting encircled. You can use this to your advantage although sometimes its disadvantageous when you really want to encircle. You combine this with fact that AI is bad at front line management, in regards to making sure theres no weak points. Every AI front line will have at least one weak point, unless the terrain or forts are just super unfavorable. The key is to find these points, then blast through, preferably 3 hex radius. Then your motorized units can steam through without the EZOC MP penalty. You can then either encircle a ton of AI or at minimum force them to retreat and take a ton of ground for little cost.

There's a few AAR's vs AI that demonstrate this really well.

The AI is definitely trickier in this version, which I think is a good thing.

One last suggestion: definitely don't feel bad in restarting, or reloading a save. A good way I learned is by saving, then trying a bunch of different things. I'd then reload the save and try something different. This allows you to test different attacks and movements. Granted, there's dice rolls in the background that can cause variability, but it gives you some valuable data IMO.

[Sammy5IsAlive]

First things first - practice makes perfect. From your post it is clear that you are learning from your experiences - in particular you've identified one of the fundamental aspects of playing the Axis in the early scenarios which is that you have to avoid being intimidated by the Soviet displayed CV. Unfortunately (or fortunately in terms of the game being interesting to play) the flip side of that coin is that if you automatically assume that every highish CV Soviet unit is going to collapse you will run into some very bloody noses. What comes with practice is a 'feel' for the kinds of situations where you can bully the Soviets and the situations where you have to be more circumspect and respect the displayed CV.

In terms of the Panzers - again you've identified the issue which is that especially in the early campaign turns and RtL/SW Front scenarios if you let them get badly beaten up it takes a long time to bring them back up to strength. So you have to manage the way you use them to try and minimise the kinds of situations where that can happen (eg leaving too many single regiments to be picked off, using them in 'speculative' attacks against high CV stacks, letting them get really low on CPPs).

The City sieges seem to be a bit of an art which I've not yet got the hang of so I'll let others advise on those.

In more general terms I do think that whilst the three 'starter' scenarios make sense in chronological terms and in terms of giving players the opportunity to practice the early turns before starting a full campaign I'm not sure that they are the ideal scenarios for players learning the game. They do not have masses of margin for error to match the historical results and get a draw. My personal view is that the Battle of Smolensk scenario from WITE1 was actually a much more manageable scenario for somebody learning the game and it's a shame it hasn't been included at this point. If you fancy playing the Soviets the Red God of War scenario is perhaps an equivalent? Or if you feel up to dealing with the bad weather the Typhoon scenario?

[Karri]

ORIGINAL: neuromancer

I think this may have resulted in me becoming more than a little over-cautious. I know that historically by the end of '41 both sides had pretty much bled themselves white; the Germans to get as far as they did, the Soviets to prevent the Germans from getting any further. I find myself reluctant to do that, when my units drop below 60% I pull them back to refit. And I find myself hesitant to even put my panzers into battle as even when the odds are good they tend to get the hell kicked out of them, and it takes FOR-FREAKING-EVER for them to receive replacement panzers (German panzer production was never great).

The thing is, you need to play a few games where you go the completely opposite route. Take every risk you can and so on, which how you get the proper feel for the game.

In my current game it is Turn 14 and I still haven't taken Odessa. It is surrounded, I am bombing it (not that it seems to accomplish much, the number of casualties it reports is minuscule), I have naval patrols trying to take out the resupply, but the CV is reporting absurd. I tried a little experiment recently, hit it with everything (a corps of Germans and a bunch of Rumanians) and basically got my ass kicked. I have now put a pioneer with every unit, and damn near every 210mm gun I could find in the hands of the German corps, and am going to give it another kick, but I am not expecting much.

In the current version it seems that you have to attack with overwhelming odds. And if you don't, that means you need to rest up, receive replacements or bring in reinforcements, because another attack with the same units won't succeed that or next turn either. Certainly, attacking with just a few units at a time does nothing.

So for Odessa, or Leningrad, you need to load up the units with pioneers, make sure the command chain is solid, wait until they are at zero fatigue and have full offensive points. Then attack with all of them once, and you're done.

This btw. seems a bit opposite to how things worked out in history...The losses are always very lopsided to whoever ends up losing.

[btd64]

ORIGINAL: neuromancer

This is my assessment after playing a few scenarios.
I suck at this game.

Leningrad, Minsk, South-West, result is always the same: Soviet Minor Victory.

Conclusion: I suck.

Well, more broadly I suck at most strategy games like this. I like them, but the honest truth is I am not very good at them.

I think part of the problem is that I often overlook something - which in past board gaming my opponent would seem to always spot and exploit - and that frankly my luck sucks (again, from board gaming, if there was a bad result on the table, no matter how low odds, I learned to assume that I had an even chance of rolling it - I freaked a guy out once by being able to call my dice before I rolled them, solely based on how poorly my luck was going that night).

I think this may have resulted in me becoming more than a little over-cautious. I know that historically by the end of '41 both sides had pretty much bled themselves white; the Germans to get as far as they did, the Soviets to prevent the Germans from getting any further. I find myself reluctant to do that, when my units drop below 60% I pull them back to refit. And I find myself hesitant to even put my panzers into battle as even when the odds are good they tend to get the hell kicked out of them, and it takes FOR-FREAKING-EVER for them to receive replacement panzers (German panzer production was never great).

I also don't want to commit to an attack with anything less than a 2 to 1 odds, which is fine a lot of the time but anybody who has forted up gets reported as really high CV ratings (and sometimes they don't until after I tried to attack them). This give me pause quite often... I have occasionally gone for it anyway and found that they didn't put up as good a fight as was suggested. And other times I get my teeth kicked in.

In my current game it is Turn 14 and I still haven't taken Odessa. It is surrounded, I am bombing it (not that it seems to accomplish much, the number of casualties it reports is minuscule), I have naval patrols trying to take out the resupply, but the CV is reporting absurd. I tried a little experiment recently, hit it with everything (a corps of Germans and a bunch of Rumanians) and basically got my ass kicked. I have now put a pioneer with every unit, and damn near every 210mm gun I could find in the hands of the German corps, and am going to give it another kick, but I am not expecting much.

And I keep overlooking things still. Forgot to tell the computer to not fly 500 recon missions so I lost 50 recon planes to operational losses (and yes, that is with manual air control, you still have to really restrict how many missions it flies and the planes it sends or you take crazy ops losses). Forget to turn the GS button on, so didn't have air support. Forget to turn it off, suffer a bunch of air losses. Didn't bring up the corps HQ so the units were attacking without artillery support. Did bring up the HQ, but I couldn't completely seal the front so a unit snuck through and chased it off. And does this corps even HAVE any artillery? That corps over there has an entire army's worth of artillery, but these guys have none - what idiot was in charge of assigning artillery assets anyway? Did they think that only that corps would be doing any fighting so these guys over here didn't need artillery?

Sigh.

Anyway. Just wanted to vent.
I now return you to your regularly scheduled forum.

I don't know if you are familiar with War in the Pacific, Admirals Addition. Well when I started that game I started using a notebook to keep track of things. It helped me a lot especially after my concussion. I suggest that you try it. It helps keep track of things that you have to do. With this game I will be using a notebook as well....GP

[56ajax]

Hey thats not fair, thats my title.

[neuromancer]

Thanks for the thoughts folks, I'm a little surprised at the response to my vent/ rant/ whine.

[:)]

ORIGINAL: Bamilus
The AI is definitely trickier in this version, which I think is a good thing.

It is, and it is.
You mentioned that it likes to try to exploit every hole you leave in the line, which can lead to several units more or less putting their heads on the chopping block (randomly took out 3 armour divisions that way). I've been tending to try and encircle and obliterate these units, but I find the time it takes and that this can delay an advance makes me wonder how much of a 'mistake' this is by the AI, and how much it may actually be an effective delaying tactic. A little hard on troops, but from what I've read the Soviets never displayed any particular concern for the welfare of their soldiers (or people for that matter) so is also historically appropriate.

One last suggestion: definitely don't feel bad in restarting, or reloading a save. A good way I learned is by saving, then trying a bunch of different things. I'd then reload the save and try something different. This allows you to test different attacks and movements. Granted, there's dice rolls in the background that can cause variability, but it gives you some valuable data IMO.

I've done this a few times, but generally I do feel bad for it being gamey. Sometimes I do it specifically to experiment (trying out different Air War options for example), but perhaps I shouldn't be as hesitant about it.

ORIGINAL: Sammy5IsAlive
you've identified one of the fundamental aspects of playing the Axis in the early scenarios which is that you have to avoid being intimidated by the Soviet displayed CV. Unfortunately (or fortunately in terms of the game being interesting to play) the flip side of that coin is that if you automatically assume that every highish CV Soviet unit is going to collapse you will run into some very bloody noses. What comes with practice is a 'feel' for the kinds of situations where you can bully the Soviets and the situations where you have to be more circumspect and respect the displayed CV.

Yeah, I haven't quite got the feel for that yet, a few times I've guessed right, but other times wrong. I suppose I should take a closer look at terrain and weather to make a better assessment of how good the defense actually will be.

So you have to manage the way you use them to try and minimise the kinds of situations where that can happen (eg leaving too many single regiments to be picked off, using them in 'speculative' attacks against high CV stacks, letting them get really low on CPPs).

I'm not too bad at allowing units to get picked off, the AI tends to try and encircle anything I let get too far ahead, and so far I've always been able to break them out. I generally don't let anyone get too far ahead of the infantry except on the first turn, and try to either make sure everyone still has a decent CV or is stacked with other units. I *try* to use the motorized infantry as the shock troops most of the time and not use the panzers unless I need to... but then I get lazy and just send the entire stack to attack something.

Need to watch the CPPs a bit more carefully. Now if I can just find where they are displayed... or IF they are displayed...

Edit: FOUND IT!

Or if you feel up to dealing with the bad weather the Typhoon scenario?

Been planning on giving that one a try. Maybe I will do it next.

ORIGINAL: Karri
The thing is, you need to play a few games where you go the completely opposite route. Take every risk you can and so on, which how you get the proper feel for the game.

Hm. Interesting. Hard to break those habits, but an interesting idea to see how things go.

This btw. seems a bit opposite to how things worked out in history...The losses are always very lopsided to whoever ends up losing.

"If we are victorious in one more battle with the Romans, we shall be utterly ruined."

If both sides are determined, urban battles and assaults upon fortified positions tend to be meat grinders. It's why - IIRC - the odds for an assault on a defended position are generally suggested to be a 3 to 1 advantage.

The above quote is particularly applicable to this war because the situation was similar, the Soviets had a deep well of replacements to draw on, men that would just get more and more pissed off as the Germans pushed East. The Germans didn't have the same kind of resources, and after a while (not so much '41) the East Front was seen as where you went to die.

ORIGINAL: btd64
I don't know if you are familiar with War in the Pacific, Admirals Addition. Well when I started that game I started using a notebook to keep track of things. It helped me a lot especially after my concussion. I suggest that you try it. It helps keep track of things that you have to do. With this game I will be using a notebook as well....GP

I am familiar with WitP actually. I really liked Uncommon Valor, and tried to get into WitP but it was just too big and I had a tough time wrapping my head around all of it. I think I remember playing a scenario where I was running around with Dutch subs terrorizing Japanese shipping.

Taking notes may be an idea.

[Rick402]

strategic gaming dojo on Youtube has tutorials f that you have mentioned watch him and youll get tips etc that could possible help you
i to am not very goood just keep playing and before you know it youll get better

[GloriousRuse]

It’s worth remembering there’s really two ways to win a battle. Out CV them, or smash them flat. The latter is particularly important to think about when hitting good defenses. Often getting 1:1 CV against a defender relying on terrain and forts can stomp the defender flat just by virtue of them having no elements left standing. Which makes sense...when you see a regiment get hit with 60k Soviets, you don’t really expect them to stand up no matter what their supposed CV is. And Russian divisions in all but the best terrain usually can’t hang with a two division German attack.

[neuromancer]

I'm following a AAR about jibhung playing the AI in Road to Leningrad, and he was using the panzer group *aggressively*. Not a lot of fighting really, but moving around claiming territory, cutting supply lines, and isolating units. I decided to give the scenario another kick (3rd time is the charm!) and at the end of turn 4 things are definitely looking up! We had a little discussion about it and it sounds like for the first while it would even work against a human opponent, say until August before the supply problems really started to hit the Germans and the Soviets start to get their act together (a little bit, they really didn't start to get their ducks in a row until the Winter). In short, its an active illustration that at least in the beginning, you don't have to be as cautious, this is when you can go (somewhat) nuts, and you should because you want the Soviet lines to firm up as far back as you can possibly make them.

I'm not going to say I no longer suck, but perhaps I suck a little less. [:D]

ORIGINAL: GloriousRuse
It’s worth remembering there’s really two ways to win a battle. Out CV them, or smash them flat. The latter is particularly important to think about when hitting good defenses. Often getting 1:1 CV against a defender relying on terrain and forts can stomp the defender flat just by virtue of them having no elements left standing. Which makes sense...when you see a regiment get hit with 60k Soviets, you don’t really expect them to stand up no matter what their supposed CV is. And Russian divisions in all but the best terrain usually can’t hang with a two division German attack.

This is generally the way that it was done, hit a prepared enemy with everything and the kitchen sink. You may take a lot of casualties, but you have more guys and when they run out they are just done (assuming they can't get reinforced in the middle of it). Essentially a battle of attrition that you should be able to win. But its not something you want to do too much (unless you don't give a damn about your troops... which more than a few armies over the centuries have not).

I was also looking at the CPP rules last night and realized that I was making a significant mistake. I had my units right next to Odessa, but you accumulate CPP very slowly when next to the enemy (probably to represent skirmishes, and having to spend a lot of effort watching the enemy instead of getting ready for an attack). So I should have had them all back one hex, still isolate the city, but not right next to them, that you can prepare, and you should only spend a few CPP making the one hex move to the city (especially if the hex was previously captured). If the enemy comes out to play, well, good for you because those units are no longer dug in and also lose CPP. If absolutely necessary leave a few units next to the city to keep the hexes next to it captured, but they will fall back to be replaced by the troops that had prepared for the assault.

When I realized that was when I realized my assault on Odessa was doomed and I pretty much gave up the scenario at that point.

So, live and learn, and keep practicing.

[loki100]

ORIGINAL: neuromancer

...

I was also looking at the CPP rules last night and realized that I was making a significant mistake. I had my units right next to Odessa, but you accumulate CPP very slowly when next to the enemy (probably to represent skirmishes, and having to spend a lot of effort watching the enemy instead of getting ready for an attack). So I should have had them all back one hex, still isolate the city, but not right next to them, that you can prepare, and you should only spend a few CPP making the one hex move to the city (especially if the hex was previously captured). If the enemy comes out to play, well, good for you because those units are no longer dug in and also lose CPP. If absolutely necessary leave a few units next to the city to keep the hexes next to it captured, but they will fall back to be replaced by the troops that had prepared for the assault.

When I realized that was when I realized my assault on Odessa was doomed and I pretty much gave up the scenario at that point.

So, live and learn, and keep practicing.

yes this is one of those small tactical tweaks that makes a huge diffence, a one hex pull back and you gain say 45 CPP not 16 (asssuming its an assault command).

the other trick, esp with infantry in assault commands is attack & don't move them again. If you can free them of ZoC, then you will gain 24 CPP back (so you should have anything up to 75 next turn). Its more a Soviet mid/late game trick but it really allows you to sustain an offensive.

Occupy the hex with a unit not on assault - so it gains less CPP in any case.

[GloriousRuse]

Re: kitchen sinks and such. In so far as it can be modeled in player actions, the paired German principles of the main effort (schwerpunkt) and “surfaces and gaps” (Flaechen un Leuken) actually play out pretty well for the Germans. So long as you aren’t extravagant on making too many gaps, you should generally be able to create the holes you need at a few key places for low losses, creating the gap you need to unlock the tactical picture on the whole for substantially cheaper than it might look. It’s not a brutal battle of attrition, it’s a hammering blow at the key point that lets you regain mobility.

The Soviets are more brutalist, but the practical application of deep battle often pays off for them (which makes sense really). It might cost you 1500 men to 500 enemy losses to unseat a division, but your next attack on the now disorganized enemy with fresh follow up units will often see the Germans in a painful position while yours is cheap.

[bairdlander2]

ORIGINAL: neuromancer

In my current game it is Turn 14 and I still haven't taken Odessa.

Do not feel bad,I have not surrounded Odessa start of turn 4 and 5 of my Pz divisions are below 50% strength and have to put on refit.

[neuromancer]

ORIGINAL: GloriousRuse
Re: kitchen sinks and such. In so far as it can be modeled in player actions, the paired German principles of the main effort (schwerpunkt) and “surfaces and gaps” (Flaechen un Leuken) actually play out pretty well for the Germans. So long as you aren’t extravagant on making too many gaps, you should generally be able to create the holes you need at a few key places for low losses, creating the gap you need to unlock the tactical picture on the whole for substantially cheaper than it might look. It’s not a brutal battle of attrition, it’s a hammering blow at the key point that lets you regain mobility.

The Soviets are more brutalist, but the practical application of deep battle often pays off for them (which makes sense really). It might cost you 1500 men to 500 enemy losses to unseat a division, but your next attack on the now disorganized enemy with fresh follow up units will often see the Germans in a painful position while yours is cheap.

Now this is an interesting point. I often attack where I can with my infantry all along the front - the brutalistic effort you mention - because the weak spots where you'd like to send the panzers through may be a long way away from where they actually are, or you already have them committed to something, so the infantry still has to carry the offensive many times. BUT, with that said, I could still be concentrating infantry corps to create those gaps that unhinge the Soviet line, if I can send some infantry through said gap - even without any real ability to cause encirclement - the Soviets will most likely pack up and fall back to reform their line and I can gain some territory on the cheap. And like you said before, 3 divisions on 1 dug in division with even CV may still dislodge them at acceptable cost.

Hm, come to think of it, I actually did this a few times without even realizing I was doing it. Will have to give that more thought. Hammering vulnerable units is good in that it causes a lot of casualties to the Soviets, but routing the odd random unit often doesn't actually get me anywhere unless I can dislodge several.

One thing I've been noticing with CPP - now that I found where it is displayed - is that it is REALLY hard to keep it up with your infantry. Although, as Loki suggested, perhaps the units that attacked don't advance, instead someone else moves in to exploit the gap?

Of course you don't have enough units to do all this where you want, although I've been trying breaking down divisions to regiments in the quiet parts of the front (the east flank in Road to Leningrad for example) to just garrison the line and free up some full divisions for attacking.

[carlkay58]

You are beginning to learn how to do this! It takes a different mind set at times to truly master the game.

[MechFO]

ORIGINAL: neuromancer

ORIGINAL: GloriousRuse
Re: kitchen sinks and such. In so far as it can be modeled in player actions, the paired German principles of the main effort (schwerpunkt) and “surfaces and gaps” (Flaechen un Leuken) actually play out pretty well for the Germans. So long as you aren’t extravagant on making too many gaps, you should generally be able to create the holes you need at a few key places for low losses, creating the gap you need to unlock the tactical picture on the whole for substantially cheaper than it might look. It’s not a brutal battle of attrition, it’s a hammering blow at the key point that lets you regain mobility.

The Soviets are more brutalist, but the practical application of deep battle often pays off for them (which makes sense really). It might cost you 1500 men to 500 enemy losses to unseat a division, but your next attack on the now disorganized enemy with fresh follow up units will often see the Germans in a painful position while yours is cheap.

Now this is an interesting point. I often attack where I can with my infantry all along the front - the brutalistic effort you mention - because the weak spots where you'd like to send the panzers through may be a long way away from where they actually are, or you already have them committed to something, so the infantry still has to carry the offensive many times. BUT, with that said, I could still be concentrating infantry corps to create those gaps that unhinge the Soviet line, if I can send some infantry through said gap - even without any real ability to cause encirclement - the Soviets will most likely pack up and fall back to reform their line and I can gain some territory on the cheap. And like you said before, 3 divisions on 1 dug in division with even CV may still dislodge them at acceptable cost.

Hm, come to think of it, I actually did this a few times without even realizing I was doing it. Will have to give that more thought. Hammering vulnerable units is good in that it causes a lot of casualties to the Soviets, but routing the odd random unit often doesn't actually get me anywhere unless I can dislodge several.

One thing I've been noticing with CPP - now that I found where it is displayed - is that it is REALLY hard to keep it up with your infantry. Although, as Loki suggested, perhaps the units that attacked don't advance, instead someone else moves in to exploit the gap?

For pocketing against AI:

CPP is your most important currency.

The CPP generation of your breaktrough infantry determins your rythem just as much as the fuel state of your mobile units.

You need one (in the north 2) Infantry Corps in each Panzer Army that are there to only break through and hold shoulders and to help seal the pocket in the turn after creating it. When you are resting your Panzers these units also rest and rebuild CPP. So keep them in friendly (not freshly captured) territory out of ZOC. If your follow on Infantry has a high cpp unit exchange it with the breakthrough corps.

Your mobile units that didn't fight can stay in enemy ZOC if really necessary, so use them to screen. This may seem a bit counterintuitive at first.

A pocket only has to be reduced in a turn if it's sitting on a railroad you need. Otherwise it can sit there for 2-3 turns. Use security unis, Minor Axis units if possible to attack if a stack seems weak, this saves wear and CPP of your infantry. Use air support of your bombers which you couldn't deploy forward when attacking strong pocketed stacks. Save high CPP infantry units in the follow on forces to attack the stongest pocketed stacks first, for repeated attacks against weak units only use infantry thats already low CPP. Ammo and supplies replenish faster than CPP.

In 41 you are not looking for weakspots, that takes too much time. You choose the objective or pocket and go for it. You have the ability to make holes, use it.

ORIGINAL: neuromancer
Of course you don't have enough units to do all this where you want, although I've been trying breaking down divisions to regiments in the quiet parts of the front (the east flank in Road to Leningrad for example) to just garrison the line and free up some full divisions for attacking.

You don't need a continoues line unless securing a breakthrough, or the enemy is clearly massing in a sensitive area. Take chances and risk gaps, if there is not a lot of enemy cav, several hexes between divisions is ok for a while. If he infiltrates, counterattack. If it's an unimportant area of mostly clear hexes, don't be afraid to lose ground. This is just a future pocket that can be farmed later.

Otherwise you will dissipate your offensive strength too quickly.

[neuromancer]

Good points there MechFD, a lot to try and remember and learn! Keeping my CPP at reasonable levels is likely one of the most important things I need to learn how to do.

I generally space my infantry out with a hex between them, but I suppose a few two hex gaps aren't a big deal, if the Soviets pour into the gap, it's just more for troops to be encircled and captured later. But like you say, keep them away from your active/ repaired rail lines and air bases.

I was also wondering about that with the weak points, and I think you're right, you don't have the time to be too picky in '41.

Probably need to restart the scenario again, improved my panzer and motorized divisions usage, now I have to work on my CPP and regular infantry usage!

[neuromancer]

Welp, 2112 to 2864. Soviet Minor Victory... again.
It was the 800 points (to 50) from cities that got me in the end. Up until then I had been ahead for all the game. The benefits of simply having to hold on, even if it's just by your fingernails.

So, still plenty of room for improvement to get cities away from the Soviets.
Of course if you can take Leningrad, well, that is pretty much guaranteed victory right there. 1000 EG VP all by itself, and 500 from the Soviets.

The casualty numbers are interesting.
Soviet/ Axis
Men - 715,974/ 79,518
Guns - 10,841/ 954
AFV - 2,807 / 197
Aircraft - 3,499 / 618

Points wise I was ahead in everything but aircraft.

Aircraft Losses:
Air Combat Losses - 2,640/ 268
Flak Losses - 65/ 31
Lost on the Ground - 603/ 0
Operational Losses - 285/ 225

Fighter and FB losses were the single biggest category on both sides: 2,506/ 305

But despite a an 8+ to 1 ratio in fighter kills, they still had about 100 left in the air while I was down to 25 whole planes. Yeesh.
It was taking the toll though, they went from 2,506 on map AC to 472 at the end of the game, even with oodles of reinforcements.
I went from 656 to 316, with the turn 8 peak of 845 from the temporary reinforcement.

I really have no idea what to do about the air war. My bombers were doing fine (well, mostly) but it is the fighters that I just cannot keep up with, and I don't like not using them and giving the VVS free reign in the air - because then what is the point, may as well not have them at all.

Edit: Just saw a note that drop tanks may significantly increase Ops Losses on fighters. I had been putting them on to increase range, but if that is causing them to fall out of the sky, then it certainly isn't worth it!

[loki100]

ORIGINAL: neuromancer

...
Edit: Just saw a note that drop tanks may significantly increase Ops Losses on fighters. I had been putting them on to increase range, but if that is causing them to fall out of the sky, then it certainly isn't worth it!

its not the drop tanks as such but that this probably means you are running them at max range (which is unforgiving).

If you have played WiTW then (esp with the Allies) you come to see them as the standard load-out, I'd say in WiTE2 they are very much an occasional choice. In effect ask yourself why you need them and if there are alternatives (incl just not doing that mission).

I think the biggest issue with the air war is psychology. You have this powerful asset, and you want to use it. The key is to accept its also very finite and fragile.

In early testing I used the LW like I would use the allies in WiTW, by about T6 I was down to a few flights of bombers available each turn and was complaining that airpower had no real value. But this was off max range/fuel tank enabled missions run at high intensity. I know keep it for when I need it and am very cautious in my mission design.

The result is I have the LW available all summer for when I really need it (which admittedly is far less than when I would really like to have it available)

[neuromancer]

I'm going to leave my results of the latest attempt at Leningrad here. It's more for my sake as a convenient spot, but also in case anyone is curious how I am progressing as well.

I like this scenario as a training war game because it's big enough to be complicated without being too big, it also has varying weather and terrain to face. I seem to be able to finish a run in 3 or 4 evenings.

So... how did I do? Strictly by VP, I did worse.
1926 to 2840, down 186 for me, and down 24 for the Soviets.

However there is some caveats.
Terrain wise I think I captured similar amounts as last time, but this time focused more towards objectives. I captured two more Soviet cities this time as well.
Where I took a real beating was in my Air Force. I experimented with ground attacks... I won't be doing that again. Lost a pile of planes there for seriously questionable results.
I was also trying to revise my infantry usage, and that didn't turn out quite the way I wanted, but I learned some new things.

I think the casualty numbers explain the differences in VP the most.

Soviet/ Axis (difference S/ A)
Men - 678,107/ 69,462 (-38 K/ -10K)
Guns - 10,341/ 757 (-500/ -200)
AFV - 2,862 / 483 (+60/ +280) [ouch, that is another 140 points for the Soviets with only an increase of 6 for me)
Aircraft - 2,955 / 752 (-540/ +130) [another ouch, another 130 points for the Soviets, and -108 for me)

Those show the difference though. The Soviets lost 200 odd points for losing cities, but made up 210 in combat VP (with the 60 odd points lost from less Axis guns and men lost). U meanwhile didn't gain any points for the two Soviet cities, and lost about 140 points on the casualties side, mostly in less VVS planes shot down.

So... looks like getting a whack load of bombers killed for nothing wasn't a good idea.
Who knew? [:'(]

On the plus side, my fighters did MUCH better this time, I never really had to just turn them off for a few turns. They were still pretty thing by the end, but they were a constant presence throughout.
On the other hand, they may have killed fewer Soviet planes because of not having as much range. Well have to see how that goes next time.

The last thing I'll record this time is the air losses.

Aircraft Losses:
Air Combat Losses - 2,172/ 230 (down from last time for both sides)
Flak Losses - 29/ 262 (this was 230 more than last time, and mostly from the ground attacks... bad, bad, BAD idea. It was also down for the Soviets)
Lost on the Ground - 665/ 0 (a little up from last time)
Operational Losses - 89/ 260 (Up some for the LW, while down almost 200 for the VVS)

Fighter/ FB losses were the single biggest category for the VVS (2,157)
But on the LW side it was actually level bombers that were the biggest group at 279 (with 77 additional tactical bombers), again fitting with The Error.
The LW lost 268 fighters this time, which is down almost 40, and spread out over the entire campaign. Leaving the drop tanks off was definitely the right choice.

Soooo... will have to start again. And not try ground attacks again. Yikes...
Also modify my infantry usage, and ease off on the panzers too, they got their shiny metal butts kicked!