Moderators: Joel Billings, Sabre21
ORIGINAL: caliJP
I don't think JC was very much outclassed, but there are a few thing he did that may have contributed to the situation, or at least they are things I do differently playing as German:
1. JC chose to defend during blizzard (we are using mild rule). The benefit to him is that between the mild blizzard rule, my slow start in December due to a weak / disorganized red army, and having his Pz & Motorized units stacked at the front line and well entrenched, it was very hard for me to push him back. So he lost very little ground and almost no major city during my blizzard offensive. The flip side is that he started the 1942 offensive with only 1500-1600 ready tanks. I go the other way, I winter all my Pz and Mot units, and am prepared to lose more ground. But I start 1942 with over 3000 Pz. This is my preference as I favor destroying the Red Army first in 1942, and scoring VPs second. So he started 1942 with a Pz force which was half of what it could be, meaning it ran out of steam quickly. It also made it easier for me to counterattack his weaker Pz units and damage them further. I would guess their morale may have been lower due to Blizzard exposure also.
2. JC did not look for a weak point in my frontline and concentrate his Pz there. He also did not surprise me with his attack. He had a major Pz ball in south, and more around Moscow, and then some more spread in between. They stayed there all winter, so I knew where they were, and so I piled up most of my strong units there to defend. And he attacked right there in my strongest defenses. For most military strategists, success requires concentration of forces where you want to break through, finding a weak spot if possible, and an element of surprise. There JC did not meet any one of those guidelines. I tend to follow more the strategists in 1942:
- Pick good terrain: no Pz north of Kaluga, it's useless Tank terrain. Instead all my Pz are between Kaluga and the Black Sea, which is almost all good Pz terrain.
- Find weak spots in russian front line.
- Keep Pz in the rear and fairly spread out, and concentrate them heavily at the last minute before attacking, to prevent the russians to adjust their defense much.
This usually enables me to make a nice pocket the first turn of my attack. Then it kind of snowballs: the russians have to bring troops from other sectors to plug the gap. But they don't have time to dig in, so I can re-attack immediately those new troops in open terrain and pocket more. And then the cycle continues. Eventually other sectors of the front get depleted as the russians peel off troops to plug the gaps I make, creating new weak spots for attacks. Eventually the russian army is in tatters, and then I switch to strategic goals and look to conquer VPs. But my initial attack focus on weak spots and completely ignores where the VPs are. I feel you can't get to enough VPs anyway if you don't destroy a good chunk of the Red Army, so that is the top priority.
And then I think like others have pointed out before, this game can sometimes diverge and snowball based on small deviations. Like in this case, JC's strategy did not put me on my back foot in 1942, and enabled me to counterattack heavily. And turn after turn, the effect of this quickly grew, worst for him, and better for me. I am not sure that it's a problem with the game though. Wars often turn one way or another because of small decisions with big consequences. I find actually it's a good thing that the game allows the outcome to vary widely based on decisions made by players.
