Surrounded units are too weak-seems ahistorical

[Great_Ajax]

I agree with you. I was just citing some examples when the Germans were able to break out but on the whole, they were the exception rather than the rule. As I posted earlier, I recall no signicant pocket during Bagration that lasted more than a week. I'll have to check my resources but that sounds right to me.

As another example in my 'Decision in the Ukraine' scenario, I had a lone German isloated division that withstood about 6 separate attacks before it finally gave in. The AI chased that lone bugger for six hasty attacks and the German division just keept retreating one hex.

Trey

ORIGINAL: Flaviusx

Trey, on the whole, the Germans were crushed utterly. Two dozen divisions wiped out. An entire army group gone, more or less. 450,000 lost by mid July and about 100,000 more in the following weeks.

The exploits of any single division need to be kept in perspective here. Same logic applies to various future offensives, particularly Vistula Oder where a great deal has been made about a few German remnants that managed to get out and somehow the larger picture gets lost.

This is not any more significant than, say, Boldin's escapades in 1941.

[glvaca]

ORIGINAL: amatteucci

In my current game I experienced very different behaviour of pocketed German units.
In summer turns, when reducing unentrenched units I experienced no difficulty whatsoever in pushing aside enemy divisions and have them surrender when unable to retreat. This even when attacking a Panzerdivision with a single Rifle Division.

Now it's October '42 and am trying to reduce a pocket near the Peipus lake. The pocket is smaller than the ones I eliminated during the summer and the unit it contains are not crack or élite.
Well, it's three turns that I'm trying to eliminate the pocket but, with the exception of a single stack, the defenders are holding their ground! The most obvious difference (apart from the mud) is that they have level 3 or 4 entrenchments. It seems that heavily entrenched isolated unit are able to routinely repel deliberate assaults that had no problem in tearing up unentrenched isolated defenders.

Did someone experience similar results?

Yes, in Leningrad while completely isolated. And with deliberate attacks by elite infantry divisions (6+ at a time)

[Great_Ajax]

Having a functioning port in the pocket keeps them resupplied enough.

Trey

ORIGINAL: glvaca

ORIGINAL: amatteucci

In my current game I experienced very different behaviour of pocketed German units.
In summer turns, when reducing unentrenched units I experienced no difficulty whatsoever in pushing aside enemy divisions and have them surrender when unable to retreat. This even when attacking a Panzerdivision with a single Rifle Division.

Now it's October '42 and am trying to reduce a pocket near the Peipus lake. The pocket is smaller than the ones I eliminated during the summer and the unit it contains are not crack or élite.
Well, it's three turns that I'm trying to eliminate the pocket but, with the exception of a single stack, the defenders are holding their ground! The most obvious difference (apart from the mud) is that they have level 3 or 4 entrenchments. It seems that heavily entrenched isolated unit are able to routinely repel deliberate assaults that had no problem in tearing up unentrenched isolated defenders.

Did someone experience similar results?

Yes, in Leningrad while completely isolated. And with deliberate attacks by elite infantry divisions (6+ at a time)

[vinnie71]

Yes and with the Russians. I also have to point out that terrain is another factor. A pocket that includes forest, hills and swamp seems to help trapped troops survive.

Something else that has influence upon the speed with which a pocket is destroyed is the quality and fatigue levels of the follow up infantry. Initially in Barbarossa, one can just 'harvest' Russian divisions, but by the time one reaches Smolensk, if they have space, Russian divisions will withraw within the pocket.

[glvaca]

ORIGINAL: Flaviusx

The Germans were famed for fighting their way out of Soviet pockets?

If anything it was the other way around. German pockets tended to leak more than Soviet ones. (Mostly due to their perennial shortage of infantry.)

The few instances where German pockets did hold out for some time are due to certain exceptional circumstances that had nothing to do with their alleged ability to fight their way out. Certainly we didn't see any great mass of Germans escaping from Stalingrad.

How about 1st Panzer army in 1944 West of Kiev? Thruth be told, I don't see this happening in the game.
And I agree with OP, the Germans were very good at breaking out of pockets.
Bagration and later is as bad a benchmark for the Germans as 1941 for the Russians.
Question: which Coprs or multi Corps pockets did the Russians form and eliminate between 1941 and end of 1943? Stalingrad is the only one [:'(]
What I see (but it's very early for me to comment) is that well entrenched and supplied defenders and in good terrain can hold out for multiple turns.
What I don't see them do is break out against even light resistence.
Bad or good, difficult to say as we are playing 1 week turns AND you cannot ZOC kill an non-isolated unit like a lot of games allow. Hmmm...

[glvaca]

No ports left m8...

ORIGINAL: el hefe

Having a functioning port in the pocket keeps them resupplied enough.

Trey

ORIGINAL: glvaca

ORIGINAL: amatteucci

In my current game I experienced very different behaviour of pocketed German units.
In summer turns, when reducing unentrenched units I experienced no difficulty whatsoever in pushing aside enemy divisions and have them surrender when unable to retreat. This even when attacking a Panzerdivision with a single Rifle Division.

Now it's October '42 and am trying to reduce a pocket near the Peipus lake. The pocket is smaller than the ones I eliminated during the summer and the unit it contains are not crack or élite.
Well, it's three turns that I'm trying to eliminate the pocket but, with the exception of a single stack, the defenders are holding their ground! The most obvious difference (apart from the mud) is that they have level 3 or 4 entrenchments. It seems that heavily entrenched isolated unit are able to routinely repel deliberate assaults that had no problem in tearing up unentrenched isolated defenders.

Did someone experience similar results?

Yes, in Leningrad while completely isolated. And with deliberate attacks by elite infantry divisions (6+ at a time)

[Flaviusx]

I don't see any reason why the 1944 breakout by 1. Panzer Army can't be duplicated here. So long as you have a fresh SS panzer corps standing nearby outside the pocket, you should be good to go. This wasn't an example of some kind of legendary German ability to migrate out of pockets; rather, it was an example of a successful rescue attempt by forces outside the pocket.

In fact, I think the game will make it very hard to pull off the pocket in the first place due to mud. Very doubtful the Soviets will have the kind of mobility in game they managed to have in real life. (And to be fair, this was the first and only time they managed to do this during a rasputitsa.)

[Great_Ajax]

I am working on that very scenario right now and I can tell you that the Panzer Divisions and SS Panzer Divisions are true fire brigades. Mobility is the key to breaking out of pockets. Without strong mobile forces, you just aren't going to do it.

This thread is an excellent AAR read on Flavio's and Bob's PBEM game on a trapped German pocket breaking out. It is possible.

tm.asp?m=2605136&mpage=2&key=

Trey

ORIGINAL: glvaca

ORIGINAL: Flaviusx

The Germans were famed for fighting their way out of Soviet pockets?

If anything it was the other way around. German pockets tended to leak more than Soviet ones. (Mostly due to their perennial shortage of infantry.)

The few instances where German pockets did hold out for some time are due to certain exceptional circumstances that had nothing to do with their alleged ability to fight their way out. Certainly we didn't see any great mass of Germans escaping from Stalingrad.

How about 1st Panzer army in 1944 West of Kiev? Thruth be told, I don't see this happening in the game.
And I agree with OP, the Germans were very good at breaking out of pockets.
Bagration and later is as bad a benchmark for the Germans as 1941 for the Russians.
Question: which Coprs or multi Corps pockets did the Russians form and eliminate between 1941 and end of 1943? Stalingrad is the only one [:'(]
What I see (but it's very early for me to comment) is that well entrenched and supplied defenders and in good terrain can hold out for multiple turns.
What I don't see them do is break out against even light resistence.
Bad or good, difficult to say as we are playing 1 week turns AND you cannot ZOC kill an non-isolated unit like a lot of games allow. Hmmm...

[Flaviusx]

Yeah, that's right. Bob rescued a trapped panzer army in that game. Was a pretty dramatic moment, if he hadn't pulled that off, it would've been a first class disaster.

[FM WarB]

So which is it?

Some threads complain about pocketed units beaming out of there too fast. This thread complains about pocketed units being eliminated too fast.

More gameplay is required before extensive changes are made, it seems.

As for Germans breaking out of pockets, historically Fuerer Befehls insisting the ground be held to the last man had an inhibiting effect. It has been argued that such orders are what saved the German army in 1941.

[Redmarkus5]

ORIGINAL: FM WarB

So which is it?

Some threads complain about pocketed units beaming out of there too fast. This thread complains about pocketed units being eliminated too fast.

More gameplay is required before extensive changes are made, it seems.

As for Germans breaking out of pockets, historically Fuerer Befehls insisting the ground be held to the last man had an inhibiting effect. It has been argued that such orders are what saved the German army in 1941.

The 'beaming out' issue has been confirmed as a bug by Gary that he's working on fixing.

There is no conflict between the two points you've summarised above. We don't want units to 'warp' to a distant hex, but nor do we want them to drop to 10% combat value in a week, except where this makes sense in '41 for the Soviets and maybe in '44 and '45 for non-elite Axis units.

[Wild]

ORIGINAL: redmarkus4

ORIGINAL: Wild

I agree with comradeP on this.
I have not noticed anything seriously amiss. Of course there might be the odd anomaly as no system is perfect. I think it is way too early to start changing fundamental mechanics of the game, that can't be properly judged until more people have made it into '43 and '44 and report their findings.

We are not asking for a change of the "fundamental mechanics" of the game - just a sensible discussion about why elite units have a CV drop of 90% in a week, when historically the Germans were famed for being to fight their way out of Soviet pockets.

We discuss, we think about ways to improve an already great game, we share those thoughts with the devs. They decide what to do in response to this customer feedback.

For that process to work, however, we need to be able to accept that things are not yet perfect. They will in future be if we keep making our points.

I agree there is nothing wrong with having a sensible discussion about the game. In fact i am very encouraged by all the great input from everyone. However, i don't think we have enough data yet to say for sure if the ground mechanic is off. I submit that a prudent strategy might be to wait until after the next patch and after more player's have got farther into the game and then evaluate things.

[Redmarkus5]

Point taken. However, I am on turn 80 and the CV drop is really bugging me.

As the Soviet player vs. the Axis AI, I have already driven the Axis out of most of Russia, back into Belorus and Ukraine by January '43. The dramatic CV drop is a major factor behind this success/failure and it's less than satisfying.

[Redmarkus5]

I have destroyed 56 Axis divisions as against 96 of mine being destroyed. This is a pretty a-historical outcome IMO.

[randallw]

I believe the Reds lost more than a hundred-ish divisions by Jan 1943;  it may have been about 150+ just going into the 1941 winter.

[vinnie71]

Make it double that by November '41. I believe that Halder during a conference indicated as such. Its the same conference that many historians use to base their assessment of Soviet losses, especially since the Wehrmacht was meticulous in keeping tally counts.