Advice on preparing for your first winter.

[vinnie71]

Problem is that some terrain is extremely important. Ex I consider the Kharkow/Belgorod area extremely important because it is the springboard for offensives in any direction. What I find incredible is that by January most forces are decimated and you'll end up waiting for the mud!
 
Frankly it should be noted that the Soviets suffered losses similar to the Germans during the period as well. Which is why they were so weak as to have their spring offensive turned into a rout by the Germans. The Siberians and new formations were relatively speaking, burnt out by spring with large gaps in their TO&Es. That is not represented in the game since thee bulk of Russian formations are at full strength in spring.
 
Also their supply seems to be on the plus side too. After all the worst enemy for the Soviets was a rather cumbersome and limited supply system. They aslo seem to defy logistics, ex up north near the hilly terrain you can get soviet formations with a CV of 6 or 8 in broken terrain, during a blizzard and far away from any HQ. How's it possible?

[CarnageINC]

ORIGINAL: Offworlder

Problem is that some terrain is extremely important. Ex I consider the Kharkow/Belgorod area extremely important because it is the springboard for offensives in any direction. What I find incredible is that by January most forces are decimated and you'll end up waiting for the mud!

Frankly it should be noted that the Soviets suffered losses similar to the Germans during the period as well. Which is why they were so weak as to have their spring offensive turned into a rout by the Germans. The Siberians and new formations were relatively speaking, burnt out by spring with large gaps in their TO&Es. That is not represented in the game since thee bulk of Russian formations are at full strength in spring.

Also their supply seems to be on the plus side too. After all the worst enemy for the Soviets was a rather cumbersome and limited supply system. They aslo seem to defy logistics, ex up north near the hilly terrain you can get soviet formations with a CV of 6 or 8 in broken terrain, during a blizzard and far away from any HQ. How's it possible?

Implementing these topics would go a far ways into evening out the game IMO. I haven't yet got through my first blizzard...3 turns to go thank god...but the Soviets are just getting stronger and stronger it seems. I always thought they go burnt out too. Cutting back on their crummy supply system would really help equal the field, it should matter to much because they always will have rails right behind them.

[vinnie71]

Fact is that in reality the Red Army suffered enourmous casualties in the process. I guess its very hard to simulate but for example I had an attack on Kharkov by 4 Red Infantry Divisions defended by a Panzer Division and a Motorised division. They only took some 4000 casualties. It is normal that even hasty attacks, the Soviets only suffer 10% tops casualties of forces committed, even against deeply entrenched (level 4) elite units with 90% of their TO&E. In summer, with 3 elite infantry units, aided by the Karl Gustavs took me 2 weeks and an average of 20% casualties to remove the Russian units in front of Sevastapol.
 
Therefore a tweak to their supply system and an increase in attrition on the Soviet side should be implemented to reflect reality. If I remember well, the Soviets suffered close to a million casualties in winter '41 and the bulk of them weren't due to combat but rather to frostbite and unsanitary practices.

[ComradeP]

The Soviet army and its leaders in 1941 are indeed much more efficient in the game than they were in real life. Whether you think that's ahistorical or not depends on what you think of the capabilities of the Soviets compared to the limitations imposed on them by flawed C&C, poor training and poor logistics.

In the current state of the game, with several kinds of terrain providing significant bonuses for the defender and with enormous quantities of replacements for the Soviets, they'll always be in a good shape in both winter and spring 1942. There's very little the Axis can do about that. You can't touch the Soviets in the mud, only partially in the snow and more or less not at all in the blizzard.

Casualties were recently increased, but can still be on the low side for some battles.

Of course, the advantages of terrain types with significant bonuses for the defender as well as the checkerboard defence also apply to the Axis when they're defending, but the Soviets have artillery as a force multiplier. The Axis don't really have any comparable thing. I also still feel that taking the experience and morale of Axis units into account, the casualties they take in battles against much less experienced formations can still be too high, but in the end many of the quirks will be evened out probably.

Based on both my own experiences as the Soviets, and my thus far brief experience in the game with notenome, I can only conclude that the Soviets can be much more capable in 1941 than they ever were in real life, whilst the Axis have limitations imposed on them in some ways: logistics start breaking down after 2 turns and with around 30 MP's you're not going to get through a checkerboard, swamps are also too effective against mobile forces currently, but hopefully the Soviets will be hindered by that too when they're attacking.

[dwesolick]

Yeah, the Soviet ground forces do seem to be a bit ahistorically strong in my game as well. I've also noticed that the Red Air Force seems to have reached roughly mid-1944 capabilities already as well. I'm in Feb 42 (thank God, only a few blizzard turns left...hopefully) and I routinely see swarms of Soviet aircraft (600-900 fighters and 200+ bombers) per attack in certain sectors (my front around Velikiye Luki is turning to dust). Even when engaged by 70-90 of my fighters they only suffer minimal losses.
I did, mirabile dictu, have one snow turn on 1 Jan (playing with random weather), so I decided to hit their airfields repeatedly with basically no results. Killed a few ground personnel and shot down a few interceptors but didn't manage to destroy any ac on the ground (that I could tell), even after several attacks with 80-120 bombers. Is this WAD I wonder? Perhaps just a function of the uber-blizzard effect and everything will return to normal in spring?

[Arstavidios]

I tried to set up reserves but didn't get any results apparently.
Digging in helped resisting a few turns the units just faded away with blizzard anyway, So I went into general retrat to limit the losses as there  were some some costly turns with 200 000 + casualties - with russian settings at 110. I think the main point is how to preserve the army rather than how to hold ground, so that when the weather turns in 1942 you are in a  condition to go to the offensive again in 1942 and retake some of this ground. digging in and trying to hold seems likely to result in the axis armies taking huge casualties and eventually breaking at some point, which is what happenend in my campaign against the AI.
 
I don't know if wintering some units in Germany or Rumania will save them from the effects of the blizzard. It might be an idea to take back some forces like panzer divisionsall the way back to Germany to keep up up your tank strength.

[Zort]

I was wondering on ComradeP's comment on the soviets being more capable, could one impact be that there is more being produced then historically? Reason I ask is in the manual is says the soviet player has to get 1/2 his factories evacuated to be historical and it seems from what I have read in the forums most factories are being moved and there is little impact on production. Haven't played the soviets so not sure if this a viable reason or not.

[vinnie71]

ORIGINAL: Arstavidios

I tried to set up reserves but didn't get any results apparently.
Digging in helped resisting a few turns the units just faded away with blizzard anyway, So I went into general retrat to limit the losses as there  were some some costly turns with 200 000 + casualties - with russian settings at 110. I think the main point is how to preserve the army rather than how to hold ground, so that when the weather turns in 1942 you are in a  condition to go to the offensive again in 1942 and retake some of this ground. digging in and trying to hold seems likely to result in the axis armies taking huge casualties and eventually breaking at some point, which is what happenend in my campaign against the AI.

I don't know if wintering some units in Germany or Rumania will save them from the effects of the blizzard. It might be an idea to take back some forces like panzer divisionsall the way back to Germany to keep up up your tank strength.

In blizzard turns, reserves seem not to work. Personally I withraw several Panzer Corps to Kiev and Poland in anticipation of Spring while the Romanians are sent to cities as well, except for the excellent mountain corps which is highly effective

[Kel]

The Red Army is annoyingly too strong in the first winter.

I had a look at what the AI is allowed to do after several blizzard turns : supplying whole armies 12 hexes deep behind the german frontline in 1941, using a hodge podge of intermixed divisions as an effective combat force, able to sustain intense winter offensive operations in forest terrain north of Velikye Luki, for several consecutive turns - this is actually a supernatural performance, and something they were still not able to do in the 1944-1945 winter.
Ok for counterattacks, ok for local encirclements, ok for winter attrition, but what I observed is actually a bit too much.
Such amazing performance are a bit ruining the interest of the game ; maybe this could be tweaked in an upcoming patch?

[karonagames]

The Red Army is annoyingly too strong in the first winter.

What settings are you playing on? If higher than "normal" I would suggest adjusting the settings back to normal for the blizzard turns.

Everyone's first blizzard experience is tough, and you will lose ground, but in March, when snow returns, there is an opportunity to recover a lot of lost ground - check out my Field Marshal Noob AAR, for a few hints on surviving the first winter.

[ComradeP]

I was wondering on ComradeP's comment on the soviets being more capable, could one impact be that there is more being produced then historically? Reason I ask is in the manual is says the soviet player has to get 1/2 his factories evacuated to be historical and it seems from what I have read in the forums most factories are being moved and there is little impact on production. Haven't played the soviets so not sure if this a viable reason or not.

The main problem with factories is that their production isn't scaled to the damage, but instead there is a die roll, with about a 1 in 2 chance of success after the move if an entire factory is moved (50% damage>47% damage next turn so it can theoretically produce again). Depending on the rolls of your Soviet opponent, it's thus quite possible that factory output for a certain period is higher than historical. Overall, Soviet production shouldn't be much higher and a large part of the equipment that is produced will also be lost soon due to the inexperience of the units using them. To me, the capabilities of the Soviets to resist in a somewhat ahistorical fashion has at this point more to do with the effectiveness of some kinds of defensive terrain, the initial high quality of a number of Soviet leaders, which in turn leads to very impressive CV modifiers in combat, which the Axis can't really compensate with force multipliers of their own.

The Soviets will lack real mobility until late 1942/early 1943, so Soviet advances are not going to be too impressive even during the winter, but with a somewhat sensible defensive plan and saving up AP's to create corps, the 1942 summer campaign season can already be a nightmare for the Axis. At this point, a Rifle corps in a swamp hex is probably essentially an unmovable stack if it can only be attacked from one or two hexsides.

When I'm playing as the Soviets, I don't worry about losing, I worry about when I'm going to win, as you do have to push the Axis all the way back to their home countries. When the Axis are defending, they enjoy many of the advantages the Soviets have in 1941.

[heliodorus04]

ORIGINAL: ComradeP

You can expect Rifle divisions to have a CV of about 3 or 4 by spring and around 4 or 5 by summer.

I'd suggest not building fortified zones, they'll fold when attacked. Save the AP's for assigning/reassigning leaders.

You could try not holding a line, but instead forming sort of a checkerboard hedgehog.

A=Axis, -=empty hex, S=Soviets

A-S
--S
A-S

or one with two hexes in between your stacks.

With two or three divisions in a hex with level 4 or 5 forts, the Soviets would have to concentrate more manpower to be able to force you out.

Keep in mind that a leader's wins/losses are based on battles, they're not cumulative for the wins/losses of the unit. So if you stack units and those are attacked, the result is one battle and 1 win/loss. If you spread two or three divisions out, they'll be attacked in two or three battles and as such your leader has a better chance of being sacked. Minimizing the amount of leaders being dismissed is important for maintaining the C&C you want.

I wanted to ask about that last part, because I'm a rank newb who has finished the tutorial from what's his name, the intro to operational warfare. I'm also not very experienced with operational games. Anyhow, I'm trying to understand your last paragraph, and this is how I understand it:

Given that the Axis is going to be very weak in the first winter, the axis player can expect a LOT of lost battles, especially and more so if you create weaker, smaller stacks and defend many hexes. They will be easier to be beaten, and their commanders will get blame for more lost battles.
Conversely, defending strong in fewer hexes will likely create harder won victories for the soviets, possibly fewer losses to the Axis, and thus, your good leaders don't get sacked (by some game mechanic I'm not yet familiar with, apparently).

Given what little I know about zones of control, it would seem the 2-hex gap you give as an alternative would be dangerous for me, because you can't count on much attack CV out of your Axis if you let ANY soviets start to weave through your somewhat porous hex control.

Does that sound accurate?

[ComradeP]

Conversely, defending strong in fewer hexes will likely create harder won victories for the soviets, possibly fewer losses to the Axis, and thus, your good leaders don't get sacked (by some game mechanic I'm not yet familiar with, apparently).

Axis leaders, possibly only German leaders (I'm waiting on a clarification of that on the tester forum) have a 10% win count prior to the winter, so that means that if they 10 victories and 2 defeats, they have a negative ratio for the non-adjusted wins/losses. Political rating gives the commander additional wins it seems as far as dismissals and promotions are concerned, but you should try to keep the wins as high as possible. If you start losing lots of battles, your leaders will get sacked. If you lose just a few battles, hardly anything will happen to your leaders.

Given what little I know about zones of control, it would seem the 2-hex gap you give as an alternative would be dangerous for me, because you can't count on much attack CV out of your Axis if you let ANY soviets start to weave through your somewhat porous hex control.

You do need to try and maintain ZOC over the hexes the Soviets can move to. Soviet morale will be between 50 and 60 by that time, so most of their units will need 3 or 4 additional MP's for entering enemy hexes, and they're probably not going to be able to move from ZOC to ZOC.

[heliodorus04]

I don't understand what you mean by a 10 percent win count.  You use 10 victories and 2 defeats as 'bad' so it sounds to me like you mean that they need a 10 to 1 W/L ratio, but I've no real idea.  Could you clarify a bit?

[ComradeP]

A 10:1 Win/Loss ratio is needed in order not to have an (unadjusted) negative ratio. The ratio is adjusted a bit by the political rating, but 10:1 is safe. The required ratio will improve as the war progresses. The Soviet situation is the reverse of the Axis one: early losses don't matter much whilst early victories weigh heavily, and as the war progresses that gap will diminish until losses are counted at the same ratio as wins (I guess, I'm not entirely sure if the end result is 1:1 or whether it will turn negative for the Soviets too).

[bwheatley]

ORIGINAL: ComradeP
swamps are also too effective against mobile forces currently, but hopefully the Soviets will be hindered by that too when they're attacking.

Swamps should be effective against mobile units. Going mudding out in the everglades proved that to me.
Fyi don't take takes through a swamp..you'll be sorry.

[ComradeP]

Of course you shouldn't be storming through swamps with Panzers, but if you significantly outnumber your opponent and have a really powerful stack, I don't see why you shouldn't be able to make an attack with mobile units in a swamp. Swamps are equally effective against infantry most of the time.

Part of the problem is that the terrain type's bonus is not always correctly indicated on the counter currently. A Rifle division in a swamp that appears like 1=1 will defend more like 1=30.