Axis HQ problems in the 1942 S. to B. campaign

[SchDerGrosse]

I have started to play the Stalingrad to Berlin campaign (no early end) against a challanging Soviet AI and after familiriazing myself with the situation I have come to conclusion that the axis forces are sorely lacking higher level HQ units.

1. Army group HQs

At the start, all of the AG HQs are heavily overburdened. This can be mitigated on the short term by assigning units to the newly formed Army Group Don HQ under Manstein.

This is only a temporary solution however due to the fact that Army Group B will leave for Italy on turn 39, which means that after that the problem of HQ overload will come back.

2. Army HQs

The situation is the same with the Army level HQs. Massive overload throughout the entire front.

Due to the course of the campaign Germany receives 0 AG level HQ, and single army level HQ as reinforcement within 100 turns.

The penalties of HQ overload is one thing, my biggest concern however is the assault HQs lose all their benefits if any of the HQs within the chain exceed their maximum capacity.

3. Corps HQ

I have not played enough to make an assessment but I suspect, that the axis will face a similar problem on the corps level as well (i might be wrong though on this one).

Is there a way to solve the above problem? I would really want to refrain from restarting my game with manual theater box management as I like to have units come and go according to their historical schedule.

Bonus question: what on earth does one do with the OKW sitting completely empty and lonely in Berlin under the command of Jodl?

Thanks,

[K62]

The StB campaign effectively portrays the Germans as overstretched, especially in terms of command structure, where many HQs are burdened with more troops than they can efficiently manage.

However, as a strategy game, it offers you the freedom to make strategic choices. It’s unwise to assign poor leaders or overloaded HQs to key areas. Instead, the less capable leaders and overloaded HQs should be in charge of less critical areas. In such areas, you might need to use a less optimal command hierarchy, like having corps report directly to army groups or armies directly to OKH.

To reduce the impact of overloaded HQs you can also consider consolidating regiments back into divisions, setting up assault HQs, merging weaker divisions, or transferring very weak divisions to reserves. Each of these actions comes with its trade-offs and requires deliberate planning. The essence of a strategy game is to navigate these challenges IMO.

[SchDerGrosse]

The StB campaign effectively portrays the Germans as overstretched, especially in terms of command structure, where many HQs are burdened with more troops than they can efficiently manage.

However, as a strategy game, it offers you the freedom to make strategic choices. It’s unwise to assign poor leaders or overloaded HQs to key areas. Instead, the less capable leaders and overloaded HQs should be in charge of less critical areas. In such areas, you might need to use a less optimal command hierarchy, like having corps report directly to army groups or armies directly to OKH.

To reduce the impact of overloaded HQs you can also consider consolidating regiments back into divisions, setting up assault HQs, merging weaker divisions, or transferring very weak divisions to reserves. Each of these actions comes with its trade-offs and requires deliberate planning. The essence of a strategy game is to navigate these challenges IMO.

Thank you for your insights!

I however do not neceseraly share your views that the above mentioned circumstances are the game's way to represent the historical situation the Germans were in late 1942.

I do agree with you that at this point, axis units were overstretched and had logistical difficulties, but to me it feels more like a simple oversight that the game only checks whether a certain HQ was present at the given time and place and ignores the CC limitations (which are aribtrary numbers dependent solely on the developers).

Examples:
- The northern front has 1 (i.e. one) HQ, AG North that has 3x (!) as many units as the command capacity allows effectively neutering the army level support on that part of the front.

- Below that the axis has the 16th army with double the units it can manage

- 9th Army 3x overload

and the list goes on.

Note, that is BEFORE the Stalingrad disaster, there is just no justification for not having enough HQs either for the Germans or for their allies to conduct operations.

If you take a look at the commanders tab, half of the axis leaders are unassigned so if the Germans wanted to, they could easily create new command units.

I believe that the problem is that the game is set up and optimized for the 1941 start and later scenarios (apart from the historical presence or absence of units) are simply not tweaked gameplay wise to reflect the developing situation.

Two quick notes at the end:

- I would assume that if Lindemann, commander of the 18th army in the north complained to the OKH that "guys I am completely useless due to fact of being forced to command WAAAAY more troops than my current staff allows me", he would have just been give more personell to work with

- Also, the fact that assault HQs do not work if ANY of the HQs within the command chain is overloaded is an arbitrary design decision and I highly doubt that this rule was taken into consideration with regards to later scenarios.

[JustinKing]

Thank you so much for the information.

[LucyPerez]

The StB campaign effectively portrays the Germans as overstretched, especially in terms of command structure, where many HQs are burdened with more troops than they can efficiently manage.

However, as a strategy game, it offers you the freedom to make strategic choices. It’s unwise to assign poor leaders or overloaded HQs to key areas. Instead, the less capable leaders and overloaded HQs should be in charge of less critical areas. In such areas, you might need to use a less optimal command hierarchy, like having corps report directly to army groups or armies directly to OKH.
I agree with you. Managing school assignments can be daunting, but there’s support available and this is https://domypaper.com/ your support. I have shared that website with all of you because DoMyPaper specializes in offering writing assistance, from custom essays to research papers. They guarantee high-quality, original content and timely delivery. It’s a perfect solution for students who need help balancing their academic responsibilities with other commitments.
To reduce the impact of overloaded HQs you can also consider consolidating regiments back into divisions, setting up assault HQs, merging weaker divisions, or transferring very weak divisions to reserves. Each of these actions comes with its trade-offs and requires deliberate planning. The essence of a strategy game is to navigate these challenges IMO.

Thank you for your insights!

I however do not neceseraly share your views that the above mentioned circumstances are the game's way to represent the historical situation the Germans were in late 1942.

I do agree with you that at this point, axis units were overstretched and had logistical difficulties, but to me it feels more like a simple oversight that the game only checks whether a certain HQ was present at the given time and place and ignores the CC limitations (which are aribtrary numbers dependent solely on the developers).

Examples:
- The northern front has 1 (i.e. one) HQ, AG North that has 3x (!) as many units as the command capacity allows effectively neutering the army level support on that part of the front.

- Below that the axis has the 16th army with double the units it can manage

- 9th Army 3x overload

and the list goes on.

Note, that is BEFORE the Stalingrad disaster, there is just no justification for not having enough HQs either for the Germans or for their allies to conduct operations.

If you take a look at the commanders tab, half of the axis leaders are unassigned so if the Germans wanted to, they could easily create new command units.

I believe that the problem is that the game is set up and optimized for the 1941 start and later scenarios (apart from the historical presence or absence of units) are simply not tweaked gameplay wise to reflect the developing situation.

Two quick notes at the end:

- I would assume that if Lindemann, commander of the 18th army in the north complained to the OKH that "guys I am completely useless due to fact of being forced to command WAAAAY more troops than my current staff allows me", he would have just been give more personell to work with

- Also, the fact that assault HQs do not work if ANY of the HQs within the command chain is overloaded is an arbitrary design decision and I highly doubt that this rule was taken into consideration with regards to later scenarios.

I agree with you.