A snapshot AAR

[Tarhunnas]

According to the event log Timmyab is using .14, I have reminded him to upgrade. I don't know why it says .12 in the window header.

Anyway, if I lose, I now have the perfect excuse [;)]

[timmyab]

It's .14. It doesn't show up on the window header for some reason. I've just updated it to .15.

I wont be able to play any more turns this week so I'll leave you with the latest situation map.

Turn 62
Plan A was to cross the Oka and sever the Rail line at Murom. This would cut the Soviet army in half and threaten the rear of the armies to the East of Moscow.
I'd actually committed to plan A and some of it had already been carried out until a random recon mission spotted that mystery unit behind the Oka. Finding out what that unit is would mean committing to a plan that would probably fail so I switched to plan B which possibly should be plan A anyway?
The confusion weakened plan B slightly, but with 4th army pressing from the NW it's still going to be tough for the Russians to break through the 'Kolomna Gap'. Already there are terrible scenes with Russian soldiers attempting to swim the Oka under a hail of bullets.

[Tarhunnas]

In fact, the mystery unit was a CV 3 cavalry corps. Pity you didn't go for plan A, as it is I am in deep **** after plan B.

[jwolf]

Kudos to both players here; this is very interesting.  Axis needs 7 more points, but can he get them?  Supposing the worst case for the Russians near the Oka, that would be a lot of units captured ... but no major cities (at least, not directly).

Six more turns of summer weather?  I'm very curious to see how this plays out.

[M60A3TTS]

The Fall rains won't allow the Soviet to recover sufficiently. The Axis will still be able to launch a winter offensive if another city or two is needed.

[loki100]

ORIGINAL: M60A3TTS

The Fall rains won't allow the Soviet to recover sufficiently. The Axis will still be able to launch a winter offensive if another city or two is needed.

this is one of those games where the 260 VP is a bit of a problem. Often its a blessed relief to have a cut off point to play for, but here, while it seems as if timmyab has dominated 1942 less sure this is enough to stop some sort of Soviet recovery in 1943

[Tarhunnas]

ORIGINAL: M60A3TTS

The Fall rains won't allow the Soviet to recover sufficiently. The Axis will still be able to launch a winter offensive if another city or two is needed.

You are spoiling the suspense! [:(] You sound almost as categorical as Flaviusx [;)]

[GamesaurusRex]

Well I've held my comment until things developed a bit more, but now I would like to repeat the comment I made just before Tarhunnas insisted I was wrong about it...

TO WHIT:

"ROFLMAO... this is utter rubbish. The Russians barely have sufficient forces to hold a contiguous line in 42, much less assemble a combat capable counter-attack that is anything more than an invitation to be pocketed."[:D]

My work here is done... [8D]

[Tarhunnas]

It might not be the game, a possible explanation might be that my opponent has outplayed me...

[gingerbread]

You're too modest.

He might have outplayed you, but you have greatly influenced the outcome, in particular during '42, with your fight forward doctrine. It's time to finally put it to rest.

[821Bobo]

I am really curious how will evolve my 42. The carpet is not almighty and 1-2 CV non digged in rifle divisions will not stop Panzers. In 42 Germans will breakthrough any line they choose.
Soviet defense in 42 should be set up in manner that will limit the casualties. Losing 5-10 divisions every 2-3 turns is ok, losing entire Front is disaster.

[jwolf]

The problem for Tarhunnas is that the Axis is close enough to the VP threshold for total victory that he has to defend forward now, whatever may have happened before.

[821Bobo]

But he did not start 42 in such bad position(except losing Moscow in 41). He could fight forward without employing the carpet which did cost him tons of units. Around turn 50 he should had retreated behind Don(from the Donbas).

[jwolf]

Agree on that, but his hand is pretty much forced now.  My naive, inexperienced speculation is that even the very good players need to recalibrate and readjust strategy to the new milder first winter.  Sure you understand intellectually what the new rules are, but until you live through them in a game or two, you don't really understand their implications for S&T.

[Flaviusx]

ORIGINAL: Tarhunnas

ORIGINAL: M60A3TTS

The Fall rains won't allow the Soviet to recover sufficiently. The Axis will still be able to launch a winter offensive if another city or two is needed.

You are spoiling the suspense! [:(] You sound almost as categorical as Flaviusx [;)]

Pffft.

Nobody does categorical better than me.

[hfarrish]

ORIGINAL: 821Bobo

But he did not start 42 in such bad position(except losing Moscow in 41). He could fight forward without employing the carpet which did cost him tons of units. Around turn 50 he should had retreated behind Don(from the Donbas).

I would take a bit of exception to this - the loss of Leningrad and Moscow should put the Soviet player in a pretty bad position...and I think also in this case (if I read things correctly) Tarhunnas basically pushed all through blizzard South of Moscow, which even under the old rule set would leave your guys dangerously exposed, opening the conditions for the spring/summer of pockets that Timmyab unleashed.

My experience is that things are still manageable as the Russians, but am going to give things another go through shortly to see.

[Tarhunnas]

I don't agree. There was nothing that prevented me from withdrawing during march and the mud period. I might possibly have defended too far forward in the south, and that might well have been a mistake, but it had nothing to do with the winter offensive.

For that matter, I am not sure withdrawing would have made much of a difference, except for making the German offensive start further to the east. With 260 VP limit, you don't have all that much to give up.

IMHO there is still a problem in that the game mechanics allows the Germans to take Moscow And Leningrad too easily in 1941, Leningrad in Particular.

[GamesaurusRex]

ORIGINAL: Tarhunnas

I don't agree. There was nothing that prevented me from withdrawing during march and the mud period. I might possibly have defended too far forward in the south, and that might well have been a mistake, but it had nothing to do with the winter offensive.

For that matter, I am not sure withdrawing would have made much of a difference, except for making the German offensive start further to the east. With 260 VP limit, you don't have all that much to give up.

IMHO there is still a problem in that the game mechanics allows the Germans to take Moscow And Leningrad too easily in 1941, Leningrad in Particular.

Agreed.

The problem with the game in 41 is the Russians don't have:
A) The morale level necessary to even approach German troops in 41.
B) The CV to attack a one-footed blind mouse.
C) The historic replacement rates that would enable the Russians to attack the Germans with "A" and "B", above, while still suffering mass casualties and still maintaining army troop numbers to survive 42.

This prohibits a "forward defence" in order to maintain mass... which then devolves into "WW1-in-the-East".

[Michael T]

I don't wish to offend anyone. But really, good Soviet players won't lose Leningrad or Moscow or Rostov in 1941.

[hfarrish]

ORIGINAL: Michael T

I don't wish to offend anyone. But really, good Soviet players won't lose Leningrad or Moscow or Rostov in 1941.

I don't know about Leningrad...but under the current rule set with air resupply gone I do agree about Moscow and Rostov (and that's with fighting at least reasonably forward, much less the retreat to wall of steel). I'm a red player through and through and simply disagree that the Soviets labor under some kind of intense disadvantage relative to history in 41. With current rules and mild blizzard it's a reasonable balance IMO.