Two Celts Walk Into a Bar - Tyronec vs RedJohn

[RedJohn]

The screenshots for this AAR will be lifted from Discord. We are currently at turn 10. Laziness + wanting a delay before posting publicly.
House rules we agreed on - plus an additional limitation on airfield bombing after turn 1.




His opener was very strong. Almost to Vitebsk on turn 1, I think the maximum possible extent at this point. The Northern pockets were not breakable, nor was of course Minsk.

For the south we have the classic Rovno opener, plus he went quite a ways further east and also blocked the rail into Lvov. Losses are a cool 340k:

Also strong air losses, I think. 4744 Soviet aircraft los.


For my own airphase, I conducted naval patrol around Osel (to counter his own NP) and also used the remnants of the SW front bombers to conduct GA.




I focused my GA on two hexes that I felt could possibly be shifted. One being the panzer regiment blocking the rail to Lvov, and the other being a vulnerable panzer regiment holding Rovno.


Rokossovsky and Galanin start at Rovno and near the northern Romanian border respectively, making them the ideal candidates to counterattack with. Rokossovsky of course hit Rovno, whilst Galanin hit the panzer regiment blocking the rail. Unfortunately I don't have screenshots of the Galanin attack, but it wasn't a close affair.



As a result, we managed to evacuate a number of units. The highlighted ones were ones I expected to die in the upcoming turn - but I was hoping putting them on rails (and reducing their CV to effectively 0) would cause them to rout if he hit them.



My bold predictions for his turn 2. Nostradamus move over.


At Smolensk, we got a lucky roll for who commands the 28th - sometimes it's the likes of Vatutin, other times it's some nobody Soviet with worse stats than me. In this case it was good old Sokolovsky.


Given his rapid centre advance, I elected a checkerboard formation on the riverline. I usually prefer to stuff the Dnepr turn 1, but in this case I felt the risk was too great for encirclement as I couldn't suitably line it to my liking.

For the south, we run to Kiev with what we can. Unfortunately breaking Rovno would cost me two divisions, but I felt it was worth it to delay him - he would aboslutely commit to surrendering them for the trucks, after all.

For the North, again a fairly speedy advance. I cut off his foremost panzer regiment, and tried to break the Northern pocket - but that pesky panzer was perfectly placed to deny me freedom. One thing to note also is that Tyronec encircled basically ALL of my armies - this was a real bitch to deal with, with how awkward relocating HQs is.

No picture again, but I checked at the start of the turn and we had about 450-500k isolated - giving us a preliminary number of around 1m soviet casualties for the opening phase of the war. Overall it seemed like a very strong turn 1.

[tyronec]

Good to be back playing the game again after a long break.

I have not been taking screenshots or making notes but will add few thoughts from memory.

AGN did the Naval Patrol to seal off Ventspils. I mistakenly put the 88s on rest during my turn along with the rest of my LBs so it didn't run during the Soviet phase, however have now concluded that it is too difficult for Axis to maintain this if the Soviets counter patrol as RedJohn did and as a result much of this pocket is going to escape. I had routed several units into it so annoying that they escaped. In future will revert to taking the port with a motorised brigade.

In the South did the usual sending down one Corps from PG2. Did a misclick with AGS which meant the main pocket was not as strong as it should have been though maybe it would have been broken anyway. I routed away all of the Soviets to the NW of L'Vov (they all routed Southwards) with the hope that they could all be pocket next turn, am not sure if any of these got away. In the past I have always pushed down to the Romanian border on T1 which while it activates Southern Command it speeds up the advance on Odessa. Guess this opening is better overall.

Many patches over the past couple of years, the most significant changes seem to be the reduction in AS ops losses and the modification to Combat Prep. The air war is greatly improved though all of those many irritating unergonomic features of setting up ADs and managing air groups are still there. Feeling pretty rusty with the game and making lots of little mistakes, plus a few big ones but will hopefully get up to speed over time.

My one other observation is that there don't seem to be that many people playing the game. In WITE1 would easily get several responses to an Opponents Wanted in a few days but I couldn't find anyone to play out a scenario and had only two replies for the Campaign. Anyone have any thoughts on this, are players meeting up some other way ? For me this is a better game than WITE1 so why aren't people playing it more ?

[Jango32]

The UI, how little in the game you can trust to be 100% working correctly and just how much on rails it is have all conspired to put a damper on my desire to replay. There's more to it than that, but I don't really feel like playing it anymore.

[EwaldvonKleist]

In WITE1 would easily get several responses to an Opponents Wanted in a few days but I couldn't find anyone to play out a scenario and had only two replies for the Campaign. Anyone have any thoughts on this, are players meeting up some other way ? For me this is a better game than WITE1 so why aren't people playing it more ?

Hi Tyrone,
in what ways do you consider WitE2 better? As in more fun as a game, more realistic, more tense?

To me personally, time and moving interests are the main reason. From a purely gameplay POV, I have often felt that WitE2 is opaque and unbalanced in its attention to detail, while of course still being a masterpiece.

[RedJohn]

I think 2 has made some great steps but also a lot of questionable ones. Not sure which game is better. I think 2 is a more fun Soviet experience, but a less fun Axis one. 1 is a better Axis experience, but a worse Soviet one.


For turn 2 we open with the deaths from pockets. Nobody significant, except Berzarin. Unfortunately he was a casualty when relocating the army out of a pocket.

Kuznetsov also at risk. I elect not to relocate him.


For the North we see a lightning advance - across the river already at Pskov. The port in the Northwest was also taken by a regiment - very little here was able to stop him. We did get one hold at Pskov, but that's it.

Similar at centre. Dnepr breached at Mogilev, and a Panzer at the gates of Smolensk.

An expected shutting of the Axis maws. Suffice to say Lvov was not being broken.

Benefits of putting the units on those rails - we get an AT brigade rout. Unfortunately the tank on rails merely retreated.

More bombers fed into the Luftwaffe Ubermensch pilots.

Believe it or not but one of the less hurtful air phases I've had.


I am happy with the results however. 1600 Germans killed, representing 10% of all German KIA so far. I am extremely liberal with my bombing.


Both spearhead panzers.


For ground moves, we begin with re-opening Rovno thanks to the brave sacrifice of this tank. At this point it's 3 divisions further fed to Tyronec - worth it? I think so, but readers might disagree.



Utilising the 2 of the 3 mobile units starting south-east of Pskov, West of VL, as well as the NKVD division that often gets routed at Riga, I cut off his spearhead in the north.

I also forgot to set supply priority 4 last turn, so that's been adjusted for turn 2 onwards. Supply prio 4 all the way.


OOB.


I am a massive proponent of utilising garbage mobile units to delve deep into the enemy rear. This tactic actually, spoiler, hasn't been as effective as it usually has in my experience given the excellent ZOC management Tyronec has done.


An example unit. Despite having 70 trucks, this unit's MP at the start of the turn was 20 odd I believe.


Losses so far - ouch.


And our isolated. Again forgot to take a screenshot before breaking Rovno, so probably 400k isolated - give or take.

This was a fairly quiet turn in terms of movement, I retreated more or less everywhere, only holding at Smolensk and slightly south of Pskov. Needless to say, STAVKA's mood was pessimistic. All of our reserves were deployed to Leningrad, as I was petrified of losing the city given his pace of advance.

[tyronec]

AGN. I really messed up here. Took the next port along the coast but failed to protect the captured hexes north of Riga so when they were reoccupied by the Soviets it really slows up progress to take the Baltics. Attacked across the river at Pskov but failed. So weak advances on both East and West Baltics neither of which were done well.

AGC. Found a weak point at Mogilev and got across the river, should allow me to strike North or South from there next turn. Otherwise just the standard progress.

AGS. Rovno pocket gets broken, not a big deal as can reseal it without effecting FBD progress. The new pocket to the South of L'Vov is closed OK

[tyronec]

Hi Tyrone,
in what ways do you consider WitE2 better? As in more fun as a game, more realistic, more tense?

To me personally, time and moving interests are the main reason. From a purely gameplay POV, I have often felt that WitE2 is opaque and unbalanced in its attention to detail, while of course still being a masterpiece.

The ground war is improved, more nuanced and I think on the whole more true to history.
Logistic is greatly improved, the only game I know of that has anything like it's realism and and quality.
However the improvements to both the ground war and logistics have come at the cost of more admin which is a serious negative.

IMO the air war is what lets the game down. It is much improved from the early days of testing and at least is workable.
However am not persuaded that the outcome from it is any better than the kind of abstract system of WITE1 and the admin load is excessive especially for the Soviets while the UI is awful and riddled with flaws and bugs.

So overall I think it is a masterpiece and it is an improvement on WITE1, the fun and realism and excitement are all there but at the cost of some playability.

[Jango32]

I haven't played WitE 1 so I am saying this as a relative newcomer to the series. Logistics is just a matter of switching everything to supply priority 4 from turn 1 to the end of the game for one side, and worrying about logistics until April 1942 for the other side. From then on it's supply priority 3 and 4 for them too.

[tyronec]

I haven't played WitE 1 so I am saying this as a relative newcomer to the series. Logistics is just a matter of switching everything to supply priority 4 from turn 1 to the end of the game for one side, and worrying about logistics until April 1942 for the other side. From then on it's supply priority 3 and 4 for them too.

There is a lot more to it than that. Just to consider Axis in this game -
Optimising use of the independent SUs, assign them to HQs and placing them every turn, not flipping rail hexes when you don't need them, sometimes planning ahead to have them switch fronts.
Building depots and assigning construction SUs. Knowing how many to build is an art.
Designing your rail network. This is also a dark art as certainly for me it is not at all clear how interconnected rail networks will work (by this I mean if you have two tracks going East what is the effect of having a connecting line between them).
How to keep your fighters supplied in advanced air bases. In this game many turns the Soviets are bombing my lead units outside of Luftwaffe fighter cover, simply because I am having difficulty getting airbase supply forwards.

I would say there is quite a lot of admin here when you are playing a skilled opponent.

[Jango32]

I typically get around 26k freight delivered to the armies every turn (winter included) while on the advance, with an additional 5k being lost. I really don't think it's that much of a "dark art" or something esoteric. You just need to have as many depots as possible to demand more freight with a usual spread of about 5 hexes, and to stock up in the rear while delivering to the front every turn.

As far as interconnected rails go, it's fairly straightforward. Any freight in excess of ~32k will not be moved via the rail (unless you do super depots), assuming they are double rails. Intersection hexes are, as a rule, the best hexes to place depots on because they can stock up incoming freight from multiple lines. If the rails from Vitebsk and Orsha to Smolensk intersected in Smolensk, Smolensk would be an amazing depot hub. But because they intersect earlier, the intersection hex is a better hub than Smolensk if you park an army/army group HQ there. There's juggling supply priorities too, but I digress - it's also relevant only until April 1942.

This is just for Axis, the only two things the Soviets have to do from turn 1 is set STAVKA to supply priority 4 and build depots closer to the front (and where they intend to retreat to).

[Beethoven1]

Building depots and assigning construction SUs. Knowing how many to build is an art.

If it were an art, I would think there would be some circumstances where fewer depots was preferable to more depots, and you would then have to judge how many to make in an artistic manner. But as far as I am aware, anyway, more depots is always better than fewer depots. Do please correct me if there is something I am missing, but the only reason not to build more depots I can see is the fact that there is an opportunity cost to spending AP on other things like leader changes, constructing fortified zones, and perhaps most importantly of all, disbanding Italian motorized units. But over the course of the game, you get plenty of AP, and depots are very cheap at 1 AP a pop. So is there any reason not to just spam them all over the place?

How to keep your fighters supplied in advanced air bases. In this game many turns the Soviets are bombing my lead units outside of Luftwaffe fighter cover, simply because I am having difficulty getting airbase supply forwards.

Are you right clicking to resupply airbases? I suspect this is also a (temporary) side effect of the fact that you are advancing far faster than historical in at least some parts of the map (predictably, the south).

[tyronec]

The only point I am making is that there is some admin to logistics, and while the supply system is the best I have ever seen in a wargame by some margin it does take time and effort.
Does that put some players off the game, I don't know ?
If not the the admin or the UI then why do we not see a more active player body ?
The game certainly deserves it.

Are you right clicking to resupply airbases?

Yes, but often I have no supply in any depots nearby so it won't do anything. AGC and AGS.

Here is what generally happens.
I have air cover 8 hexes from my most advanced working air base at the start of the turn.
During the turn advance maybe another few hexes and capture another airbase. My lead units are now outside AD range.
I can find no way to get supply to that airbase, have tried air supply but it just goes to a temp dept or land units.
Next turn the Soviets bomb the hell out of those lead units that have no protection.

The next problem is getting supply to that airbase next turn. Because it will only get supply if it has aircraft there.
I have tried bringing aircraft in at the end of the turn just so that some supply will go there for next turn; sometimes that works and sometimes all the planes go to the reserve and it gets none.
And if there is no supply there next turn then it can't be used for AS and the air cover doesn't advance.

Maybe I should be building airbases every 3 or 4 hexes and not advancing faster than that, at least in the areas where there is heavy combat...

[Beethoven1]

The only point I am making is that there is some admin to logistics, and while the supply system is the best I have ever seen in a wargame by some margin it does take time and effort.
Does that put some players off the game, I don't know ?
If not the the admin or the UI then why do we not see a more active player body ?
The game certainly deserves it.

I do agree that although the supply system has problems (mainly from the fact that supply priority results in more or less total amount of freight being received rather than in re-allocating/prioritizing a particular amount of freight between alternative uses), it is nevertheless at least as realistic as anything in other games.

So personally, I do think it makes sense to acknowledge the positive aspects while also discussing how it could be better, so that hopefully a future game at some point will be made even better.

Are you right clicking to resupply airbases?

Yes, but often I have no supply in any depots nearby so it won't do anything. AGC and AGS.

I think that is an issue arising mostly from the fact that you have chosen to advance to advance to Rostov and also to near Voronezh by turn 10 (I am a bit ahead of the AAR on the forum, having seen some screenshots from Bread/Redjohn already from subsequent turns). If you advanced more slowly, your planes would have better supply.

If you want to have better supply for your planes, you could try setting the Luftwaffe HQs on supply priority 4 if you are willing to burn some trucks, but other than that the only thing you can do is send more of your FBDs/RADs to the south and spam more depots, and make sure they are set at the right depot priorities (generally 4 or 3). The problem is really just that you are outrunning your logistics.

Maybe I should be building airbases every 3 or 4 hexes and not advancing faster than that, at least in the areas where there is heavy combat...

I think that would to some extent actually be counterproductive, because constructing airbases consumes some freight from the construction units. Also, it takes at least a turn to construct a (level 1) airbase, and by the time it has been constructed you will have advanced further.

So I think if you want to avoid bombing, all you can really do is try to pace your advance and leapfrog from areas where there are pre-constructed airfields, and try to avoid advancing in areas where airfields are too sparse.

Or you can just house rule against ground attack missions.

[56ajax]

Good to be back playing the game again after a long break.

I have not been taking screenshots or making notes but will add few thoughts from memory.

AGN did the Naval Patrol to seal off Ventspils. I mistakenly put the 88s on rest during my turn along with the rest of my LBs so it didn't run during the Soviet phase, however have now concluded that it is too difficult for Axis to maintain this if the Soviets counter patrol as RedJohn did and as a result much of this pocket is going to escape. I had routed several units into it so annoying that they escaped. In future will revert to taking the port with a motorised brigade.

In the South did the usual sending down one Corps from PG2. Did a misclick with AGS which meant the main pocket was not as strong as it should have been though maybe it would have been broken anyway. I routed away all of the Soviets to the NW of L'Vov (they all routed Southwards) with the hope that they could all be pocket next turn, am not sure if any of these got away. In the past I have always pushed down to the Romanian border on T1 which while it activates Southern Command it speeds up the advance on Odessa. Guess this opening is better overall.

Many patches over the past couple of years, the most significant changes seem to be the reduction in AS ops losses and the modification to Combat Prep. The air war is greatly improved though all of those many irritating unergonomic features of setting up ADs and managing air groups are still there. Feeling pretty rusty with the game and making lots of little mistakes, plus a few big ones but will hopefully get up to speed over time.

My one other observation is that there don't seem to be that many people playing the game. In WITE1 would easily get several responses to an Opponents Wanted in a few days but I couldn't find anyone to play out a scenario and had only two replies for the Campaign. Anyone have any thoughts on this, are players meeting up some other way ? For me this is a better game than WITE1 so why aren't people playing it more ?

Isn't most of the community on Discord?

[tyronec]

If you advanced more slowly, your planes would have better supply.

Fair enough, seems that the engine in general restricts the rate of advance if you want to maintain air cover.

Or you can just house rule against ground attack missions.

Personally I think it would be a better game without NP or GA.
NP makes no sense historically. GA is an invitation to work out some kind of tactical advantage while the historical model could work fine with using only GS.

However people like playing with a powerful tool so you cannot really expect them not to make best use.
Am not really sure about this but it seems like GA is needed by the Soviets in '41 to rebalance the Axis advantage. And if you were to house rule it out then it would be more difficult for the game to progress towards a balanced state. Playing with TB ON/OFF seems to already be splitting the player body.
Also I don't think Soviet players would want to play without it.

[Jango32]

I think a screenshot of the logistics phase every turn would be good to see. But it's a server game so that isn't possible anymore for the previous turns.

[RedJohn]

I'm not totally against banning GA - but I also don't subscribe to it being overpowered or anything. Even with the power of hindsight, I think GA has hardly been decisive one way or the other.

Anyway, turn 3.



This turn was frustrating for me because of that big old pile of isolated units near Pskov. They were all, I believe, minus one, HQs - so they routed from a pocket into a pocket (technically a forming pocket but I digress). Rovno was re-sealed, Tyronec reached the gates of Kiev, and our river line east of Mogilev was smashed.



Not a pretty sight!


Basically nothing happened here, besides Tyronec taking a hex east and north-west of Smolensk.


You can see I deployed basically every single unit to Leningrad, as mentioned last time. I was very, very scared. Can also see the dreadful HQ pocket.


Air wise, we continue our bombings - and continue taking hundreds of losses.

Powerful supply priority 4. A staple for the growing Soviet.


We undertake our first real counterattack of the war - Sokolovsky hits the lone panzer unit with a very good result overall.


A result probably in no small part due to my bombings, half of which got intercepted.

Probably our worst result so far!



At Centre, we cut off the German spearhead thanks to our brave tankers.




While in the north,we attack the 1=1 regiment (and barely win). Pretty awful result, really. 14 guns is nice though.

At Kiev, we also punish another regiment. A far more acceptable result, destroying 22 of its 35 AFVs - and with the added bonus of not putting any units at risk. Regiments are a dangerous game when the Soviets have combat capable units.



Despite our grand counterattack at Smolensk, we abandon it and retreat to a less encirclement-prone location. Smolensk itself is garrisoned by a lone tank that just spawned in, with barely any men or trucks. I think garrisoning cities like this is important not only to damage any railyards, but also to evacuate more manpower from the centres.



Similarly, we retreat here. I hugged his panzers hoping he wouldn't have the fuel to cross the next turn - all of these units were unready, so it was a fairly large risk.



Kiev remained static, besides some shuffling and that counterattack.



In da Norf, our reserves are deployed as such. I would normally deploy more north-easterly, but I've become a subscriber to holding doggedly onto the rough terrain where we can after seeing the annoyance it poses to the Germans in other games.



VL area remains quiet. You can see the air war ongoing at Smolensk in this, too.



Overall losses - 886k permanent, with us just barely climbing over 1m overall. Germans have lost quite a number of AFVs however.



A further 122k isolated, meaning by turn 4 we'll have reached 1m permanently lost. Ouch.



We had a 35 mp tank north-west of Chernovsky, so we sent it on an expedition down the road to liberate Bucovina. The Romanians need to have the fear of God instilled into them. We'll be back.


Finally, the OOB.

[jasonbroomer]

I think 2 has made some great steps but also a lot of questionable ones. Not sure which game is better. I think 2 is a more fun Soviet experience, but a less fun Axis one. 1 is a better Axis experience, but a worse Soviet one.


Benefits of putting the units on those rails - we get an AT brigade rout. Unfortunately the tank on rails merely retreated.

Thanks for the AAR.

One way to extract AT brigades early on is to convert them to an HQ that has high MPs

I think once an Axis has it sussed, logistics is too easy to manipulate and the Germans can advance with only minor problems

[tyronec]

For the second turn I allowed my panzer spearhead to be cut off.
While not devastating this is quite damaging; loss of morale, loss of supply, hexes need to be reflipped...

I think GA has hardly been decisive one way or the other.

I wouldn't say it is decisive however a close game is going to be determined by the cumulative effect of small actions, and the Soviets are killing 1,000-5,000 men a turn with GA plus as reported turning potential lost battles into wins.
And am not at all sure where the balance lies in this game.

[jasonbroomer]

For the second turn I allowed my panzer spearhead to be cut off.
While not devastating this is quite damaging; loss of morale, loss of supply, hexes need to be reflipped...

I think GA has hardly been decisive one way or the other.

I wouldn't say it is decisive however a close game is going to be determined by the cumulative effect of small actions, and the Soviets are killing 1,000-5,000 men a turn with GA plus as reported turning potential lost battles into wins.

While the loss of a few planes by the Soviets doesn't sound a lot, you also lose 10 men per plane (IIRC from the manual). 500 planes lost equals 5000 men, or around 5% of my target manpower kills for the turn when I'm playing Axis...