A Grey Steppe Eagle (loki100 vs Vigabrand)

Post descriptions of your brilliant victories and unfortunate defeats here.

Moderators: Joel Billings, Sabre21

User avatar
loki100
Posts: 11699
Joined: Sat Oct 20, 2012 12:38 pm
Location: Utlima Thule

RE: T70: 15-21 October 1942

Post by loki100 »

ORIGINAL: Pelton

Its because no Stalingrad.

As I constantly say WitE is not a movie or a book.

No German player is going to throw away 350,000 men.

....

Pelton .. 'Stalingrad' has nothing to do with it, the issue is the impact of fighting in the summer. The reason I fought forward was I assumed (completely incorrectly) that the battering vigabrand's infantry divisions took in the winter would weaken them for the summer. Well it doesn't. This is essentially about the size of manpower reserves and losses.
ORIGINAL: chaos45

Bozo- I dont think its quite that simple...........

I do believe that the German Army is much larger than historical. Even before Stalingrad so the no Stalingrad arguement isnt valid. The entire reason Stalingrad happened was the German Army was very weak/reduced in manpower before the Soviets even attempted the encirclement- something we are not seeing in the game at all.

Now so far me and Peltons game is fairly balanced and has been a tense and IMO a well played match so the game is maybe close to being balanced?? just have to see if the Germans remain to strong or weak 43-45. Again though he still has a way stronger German army than historical despite bitter fighting and counterattacks by my soviet forces.

The issue I have with the game numbers and historical numbers- the game total manpower includes all Airbase, HQ, and in general rear area troops. Im not sure all of the historical totals include some of these manpower sources. Even with the extra men included such as Airbase manpower which Im fairly certain wasnt in the historical numbers you still see a German army probably inflated 500k+ or more over historical levels tho.

As I think all the Luftwaffe HQs = several hundred thousand men...now the massive issue here is the german player can just disband all those luftwaffe HQs and suddenly generate about 2 entire extra armies of trained combat infantrymen over a couple weeks if they want to.......something the German army historical could not.

The main reason you see this IMO is as has been beat to death like a hundred times now........combat losses are to low for both sides. Moraeval has said in the next patch combat losses should increase some for both sides so that should help keep both armies from maintaining 90%+ ToEs.


the idea of converting Luftwaffe bases to combat manpower is really just simple rules abuse. The Germans did some of that and produced a whole load of pretty useless formations. There are accounts of those units deployed as garrisons in Bielorussia doing deals with the local partisans for localised ceasefires (& to warn each other if new formations were moving into the region)
ORIGINAL: morvael

My extensive tests done for 1.08.05 have shown that armies are indeed stronger in 1.08.00-04 because of repairs after movement. I have slightly reduced the effectiveness of these, while at the same time increased the losses from combat (thanks to reworked "too many attackers penalty"), in order to get closer to 1.07.xx-level totals. Because of the smaller airbases and 41a Rifle Divisions it wasn't possible to get above 100% for 1941, because otherwise the losses for later years were way too high. So comparing to 1.07.xx you can expect less disabled in 1.08.05 but more killed and overall losses will be bigger later in the war (when the fort levels are high). Some German manpower was also rescheduled from 1941 to 1943. Will the current level be enough to force operational pauses just because of mounting losses? Only time will tell. A sample from what I got in AIvsAI games for the first 10 turns of each campaign scenario:

1941GC: German level of losses in 1.08.04 compared to 1.07.15: 80%, Soviet: 87% (killed 80% and 144%). In 1.08.05: 95% and 94% (killed 134% and 189%)
1942GC: 60% and 104% (killed 65% and 180%) vs 82% and 130% (killed 100% and 234%)
StoB: 142% and 102% (killed 210% and 185%) vs 154% and 128% (killed 270% and 221%)
1943GC: killed 93% and 214% vs 152% and 258% (disabled are negative in this scenario, so can't calculate totals)
1944GC: 107% and 101% (killed 77% and 180%) vs 95% and 149% (killed 127% and 284%)
VtoB: 46% and 76% (killed 53% and 94%) vs 118% and 136% (killed 166% and 174%)

Bear in mind I should have done more 1.07.15 tests to have average numbers, but I did only one. For 1.08.05 I did more tests, especially in the middle of development, but less at the end. So the % may vary by as much as 20-30% depending on whether the AI is able to pull of Stalingrad or not, manage to force Rumanian surrender or not etc. Some changes are also caused by different TOE and scenario fixes. Also, players do not waste manpower in headon attack as the AI does. But I would expect an increase in losses, that's for sure.

All this sounds great, I think everyone is well aware of the problems in balancing, really across two aspects. First supply is too permissive (and won't change to WiTE2), but second is across the imposed shifts in the game (ie moments when the rules change without player intervention). Both those have the capacity to disrupt any balance.

agree about the AI, oddly it produces a more realistic game than PBEM due to its tendency to attack. Against the AI I find I'm burning off masses of supply as ammunition, in PBEM its not really something I notice
User avatar
VigaBrand
Posts: 303
Joined: Fri Dec 19, 2014 3:51 pm
Location: Germany
Contact:

RE: T70: 15-21 October 1942

Post by VigaBrand »

Hi,
I didn't delete some air bases. I had three empty ones in Poland and every army HQ had its own.
But I agree with Loki, I had nearly 250k manpower reserves in the pool at the start of the summer.
But I had two panzer armies and two infantery armies in Poland during the winter and they didn't loose moral and manpower during the first winter. That was my idea for economy of forces. So they were stronger because every unit in this armies had 85+ moral after the winter.


chaos45
Posts: 1875
Joined: Mon Jan 22, 2001 10:00 am

RE: T70: 15-21 October 1942

Post by chaos45 »

Thats a whole different issue that the Germans can pull an entire Army Group out of the line and still survive the winter with an intact army lol.

All in all I still think this game is headed for an eventual German defeat as the automatic morale changes represent massive shifts in combat power between the two armies. By middle of 1943 when the changes have fully happened its something like a 20% change in total combat power to the benefit of the Soviets.

Loki took some massive losses in 1942 but all in all he will recover over the winter and he still has fairly good starting positions for his eventual march west. Viga inflicted very heavy losses but territory wise hes behind historical. Which means fewer hexes to Berlin once the tide turns.

Will be interesting to see the match continue.
Gabriel B.
Posts: 501
Joined: Mon Jun 24, 2013 9:44 am

RE: Turn 67: 24-30 September 1942

Post by Gabriel B. »

ORIGINAL: loki100



Now for some reason all/most of my images have disappeared. As I'm away from home (in fact out on the western edge of Europe), I can't chase it up but I can't see any images using either firefox or chrome. So while I have an update ready, as a sort of overview of the summer not sure its worth posting. But for now, here's a simple spreadsheet showing how badly the 1942 fighting has hit my army:

Image

You have built at least 100 art reg compared to june 1941.

can we know what kind ?

I aim for

24 Bm how regiments-24 guns
36 152 mm how regiments-24 guns
24 Army art regiments -36 152mm field guns.

that would fill 24 arty divisions by 1943 with the heavy artilery while using the componet regiments
in the mean time.

In early 1942 when the BM reiments dowgrade they get move to stavka reserve,while the army art regiments
start to disband in late 1942. the 152 mm How regiments could be used up to early 1943
User avatar
morvael
Posts: 11763
Joined: Fri Sep 08, 2006 9:19 am
Location: Poland

RE: Turn 67: 24-30 September 1942

Post by morvael »

If you link to some external image hosting sites, you're probably blocked from accessing them from your current location. I have the same problems from my place of work on multiple sites.
chaos45
Posts: 1875
Joined: Mon Jan 22, 2001 10:00 am

RE: Turn 67: 24-30 September 1942

Post by chaos45 »

Honestly why disband the artillery regiments? I found my artillery and rocket divisions filled up just fine when I built them in later 1942.

Also the Soviets have a huge AP crunch to try and convert the Army from hold back/absorb German assaults all of 1942 to counterattack and start pushing west as fast as possible in 1943. So spending AP on disbanding artillery regiments seems a very big waste of resources. I still have some Battalions hanging out just because I would rather use the AP to form new regiments than disbanding sapper BN sitting around some Army HQs.

Maybe with the change back to 45 NM the soviets will lose slightly less units to encirclement destruction in 1942 IDK......but right now it really seems to me the Soviets get to few AP to do near historical performance of unit creation and corps building....especially when you also take into account you need to shift formations between armies/fronts sometimes and you need to change leaders.

I dont think I have reassigned a Soviet leader in over 6 months of game time just because there are so many more important things to spend the AP on than getting a 1-2 bump in stats on a single army/front leader.

Also it appears that the AP loss I took in units after Nov 1941 is pretty standard in all the other current AARs.....Again waiting to save judgement to see how hard/long it takes to start pushing the Germans back and if historical progress for the soviets is possible.

So far I have inflicted the highest German losses of all the AARs and Pelton has about the lowest German OOB- up to FEB 1943 but in game terms it hasnt made one bit of difference the German army is still very strong all along the front and only with massive concentration of force can the smallest bit of headway be made by Soviet Forces. By massive I mean- several Corps backed by several divisions of artillery are needed for almost any progress to be made.

As to Axis weakness- really just isnt any- along the entire line is one weak hex in a quiet out of the way sector of axis allied only forces and it still has almost 20 CV....Most the German line is 30+ CV with most still 40+ CV aside from where I have massive assaults keeping the Germans from getting heavily dug-in and even then since the Germans have the forces to spare I face stacks of 20-30 CV. Now Im making extremely slow progress and should be inflicting more losses than hes replacing per turn...but the ground gains are still minimal. So as we get towards Summer of 1943 will see if the Germans have to start giving ground or not.
User avatar
Peltonx
Posts: 5814
Joined: Sun Apr 09, 2006 2:24 am
Contact:

RE: T70: 15-21 October 1942

Post by Peltonx »


ORIGINAL: loki100

ORIGINAL: Pelton

Its because no Stalingrad.

As I constantly say WitE is not a movie or a book.

No German player is going to throw away 350,000 men.

....

Pelton .. 'Stalingrad' has nothing to do with it, the issue is the impact of fighting in the summer.
The reason I fought forward was I assumed (completely incorrectly) that the battering vigabrand's
infantry divisions took in the winter would weaken them for the summer.
Well it doesn't. This is essentially about the size of manpower reserves and losses.



They are weaker then 41 by allot because general morale is in mid 60's by June 42 and not low 80's as during summer of 41.

The game snow balls so if Germany does good to great during 41, Russian 41/42 offensive will not be that hard hitting which snowballs into Germans being above average going into 42 summer and Russians being below average.

We know what that looks like your game and my game vs 37 other people

BUT

If the german does average and Russian simply does historical or a little less then historical there is a snowball growing for the Russian and not the german in summer of 42- sure the german attacks but runs out of steam early and then its all down hill from there very quickly.

Pelton vs Dave even if the german player does far better then historical in every way possible,
as long as the Russian player holds Moscow ( VP 260) the ruusian player will get a draw at min as taking out Finland is a given and after that you don't even have to get to Poland or Romania and its a draw.

You have a draw if u simply hold Moscow.
Beta Tester WitW & WitE
User avatar
Peltonx
Posts: 5814
Joined: Sun Apr 09, 2006 2:24 am
Contact:

RE: T70: 15-21 October 1942

Post by Peltonx »

ORIGINAL: chaos45


All in all I still think this game is headed for an eventual German defeat as the automatic
morale changes represent massive shifts in combat power between the two armies.
By middle of 1943 when the changes have fully happened its something like a 20%
change in total combat power to the benefit of the Soviets.

Loki took some massive losses in 1942 but all in all
he will recover over the winter and he still has fairly
good starting positions for his eventual march west.
Viga inflicted very heavy losses but territory wise hes
behind historical. Which means fewer hexes to Berlin once the tide turns.

Will be interesting to see the match continue.

Its not all about morale, but it is a big issue as I have pointed out.

I have played allot of game past 43 and generally speaking the lines don't break until rivers freeze in dec 43 and then it takes a while still for Russians to crack the fort lines in the south.

The north always holds because of terrain sure Stavka can take a few hexes a turn but during summer 43 German army has more then enough strength to hold the onlines and dig faster then Stavka can advance.

The key is did the Russian player build the right balance of forces and does the German player know how to defend without get units pocketed?

Some German armys get pocketed during 43 because they have no idea what they are doing and the Russian player does.

Not many people have the exp of playing past 42 much less 43.

Also a Russian play can appear to have and easy win and complete build the wrong stuff and get wiped out in late 43 yup there is one AAR showing this.

The land is not the key its when the lines crack, but more land does help.

Vigabrand has less land but higher morale + if loki screws up his army he will not be able to crack the lines until 44 so the turns/hexes to Berlin ratio is the same.

There are dozens of factors that go into when the lines crack and the hex to turn ratio and the most important for Russian is what they are building, if they screw up you can have a complete truck collapse and your not going anyplace fast or slow for that matter.
Beta Tester WitW & WitE
User avatar
Peltonx
Posts: 5814
Joined: Sun Apr 09, 2006 2:24 am
Contact:

RE: Turn 67: 24-30 September 1942

Post by Peltonx »

ORIGINAL: chaos45

Honestly why disband the artillery regiments? I found my artillery and rocket divisions filled up just fine when I built them in later 1942.

Also the Soviets have a huge AP crunch to try and convert the Army from hold back/absorb German assaults all of 1942 to counterattack and start pushing west as fast as possible in 1943. So spending AP on disbanding artillery regiments seems a very big waste of resources. I still have some Battalions hanging out just because I would rather use the AP to form new regiments than disbanding sapper BN sitting around some Army HQs.

Maybe with the change back to 45 NM the soviets will lose slightly less units to encirclement destruction in 1942 IDK......but right now it really seems to me the Soviets get to few AP to do near historical performance of unit creation and corps building....especially when you also take into account you need to shift formations between armies/fronts sometimes and you need to change leaders.

I dont think I have reassigned a Soviet leader in over 6 months of game time just because there are so many more important things to spend the AP on than getting a 1-2 bump in stats on a single army/front leader.

Also it appears that the AP loss I took in units after Nov 1941 is pretty standard in all the other current AARs.....Again waiting to save judgement to see how hard/long it takes to start pushing the Germans back and if historical progress for the soviets is possible.

So far I have inflicted the highest German losses of all the AARs and Pelton has about the lowest German OOB- up to FEB 1943 but in game terms it hasnt made one bit of difference the German army is still very strong all along the front and only with massive concentration of force can the smallest bit of headway be made by Soviet Forces. By massive I mean- several Corps backed by several divisions of artillery are needed for almost any progress to be made.

As to Axis weakness- really just isnt any- along the entire line is one weak hex in a quiet out of the way sector of axis allied only forces and it still has almost 20 CV....Most the German line is 30+ CV with most still 40+ CV aside from where I have massive assaults keeping the Germans from getting heavily dug-in and even then since the Germans have the forces to spare I face stacks of 20-30 CV. Now Im making extremely slow progress and should be inflicting more losses than hes replacing per turn...but the ground gains are still minimal. So as we get towards Summer of 1943 will see if the Germans have to start giving ground or not.

Historically speaking

What if no Stalingrad and what if no stupid Kursk?

You get just what most games turn into during 43, which was what many German Generals wanted to do during 43.

So again WitE is not a book or a movie, its about what ifs.

Most players choose not to throw out 350,000 troops and not waste manpower in July 43.

Losses are never historical because players choose not to follow history, they try to make history or why bother playing?




Beta Tester WitW & WitE
User avatar
loki100
Posts: 11699
Joined: Sat Oct 20, 2012 12:38 pm
Location: Utlima Thule

RE: T70: 15-21 October 1942

Post by loki100 »

ORIGINAL: VigaBrand

Hi,
I didn't delete some air bases. I had three empty ones in Poland and every army HQ had its own.
But I agree with Loki, I had nearly 250k manpower reserves in the pool at the start of the summer.
But I had two panzer armies and two infantery armies in Poland during the winter and they didn't loose moral and manpower during the first winter. That was my idea for economy of forces. So they were stronger because every unit in this armies had 85+ moral after the winter.

Hi, realise you've not deleted the air bases ... think that trick is extremely gamey.

be interesting to see how the various gambles and mistakes play out over the next phase, think what will be critical is when you feel you have to go over to the operational defense?
ORIGINAL: chaos45

Thats a whole different issue that the Germans can pull an entire Army Group out of the line and still survive the winter with an intact army lol.

All in all I still think this game is headed for an eventual German defeat as the automatic morale changes represent massive shifts in combat power between the two armies. By middle of 1943 when the changes have fully happened its something like a 20% change in total combat power to the benefit of the Soviets.

Loki took some massive losses in 1942 but all in all he will recover over the winter and he still has fairly good starting positions for his eventual march west. Viga inflicted very heavy losses but territory wise hes behind historical. Which means fewer hexes to Berlin once the tide turns.

Will be interesting to see the match continue.

what I have, which I think is very unusual is effectively limitless supply and arms pts. I've not had one turn when my supply flow went negative and have about 1m arms pts. Now that means that the only constraint on my artillery build up is going to be the lack of admin pts, need for corps and to repair the gaps torn in my OOB by the summer battles
ORIGINAL: Gabriel B.
...

You have built at least 100 art reg compared to june 1941.

can we know what kind ?

I aim for

24 Bm how regiments-24 guns
36 152 mm how regiments-24 guns
24 Army art regiments -36 152mm field guns.

that would fill 24 arty divisions by 1943 with the heavy artilery while using the componet regiments
in the mean time.

In early 1942 when the BM reiments dowgrade they get move to stavka reserve,while the army art regiments
start to disband in late 1942. the 152 mm How regiments could be used up to early 1943

I'll dig out a comparison when I'm back home, only have a few recent saves at the moment.

generally my artillery strategy is different. I often scrap the heavy SUs as those guns are used by the 2nd generation artillery divisions and cost a lot of arms pts etc to build. But in this game I have arms pts to burn, and no real supply constraint.

so on that basis I'm keeping everything. Since mid-42 I've built the SUs with the most guns (the corps artillery?) and also those light gun regiments. From observation the 76mm is not much of a killer but it generates a lot of disruption.
ORIGINAL: chaos45

Honestly why disband the artillery regiments? I found my artillery and rocket divisions filled up just fine when I built them in later 1942.

Also the Soviets have a huge AP crunch to try and convert the Army from hold back/absorb German assaults all of 1942 to counterattack and start pushing west as fast as possible in 1943. So spending AP on disbanding artillery regiments seems a very big waste of resources. I still have some Battalions hanging out just because I would rather use the AP to form new regiments than disbanding sapper BN sitting around some Army HQs.

Maybe with the change back to 45 NM the soviets will lose slightly less units to encirclement destruction in 1942 IDK......but right now it really seems to me the Soviets get to few AP to do near historical performance of unit creation and corps building....especially when you also take into account you need to shift formations between armies/fronts sometimes and you need to change leaders.

I dont think I have reassigned a Soviet leader in over 6 months of game time just because there are so many more important things to spend the AP on than getting a 1-2 bump in stats on a single army/front leader.

Also it appears that the AP loss I took in units after Nov 1941 is pretty standard in all the other current AARs.....Again waiting to save judgement to see how hard/long it takes to start pushing the Germans back and if historical progress for the soviets is possible.

So far I have inflicted the highest German losses of all the AARs and Pelton has about the lowest German OOB- up to FEB 1943 but in game terms it hasnt made one bit of difference the German army is still very strong all along the front and only with massive concentration of force can the smallest bit of headway be made by Soviet Forces. By massive I mean- several Corps backed by several divisions of artillery are needed for almost any progress to be made.

As to Axis weakness- really just isnt any- along the entire line is one weak hex in a quiet out of the way sector of axis allied only forces and it still has almost 20 CV....Most the German line is 30+ CV with most still 40+ CV aside from where I have massive assaults keeping the Germans from getting heavily dug-in and even then since the Germans have the forces to spare I face stacks of 20-30 CV. Now Im making extremely slow progress and should be inflicting more losses than hes replacing per turn...but the ground gains are still minimal. So as we get towards Summer of 1943 will see if the Germans have to start giving ground or not.

big question really is when vigabrand stops anything but tactical offensives, we've just had a surreal set of turns for weather which can't have helped him at all ... its eaten a lot of the time he had left till the 50 morale kicks in for 1943. My hope ... as above ... is that artillery will be my key tool in the first phase. Don't really care about gains, its attrition etc I'm out for
ORIGINAL: Pelton


ORIGINAL: loki100

ORIGINAL: Pelton

Its because no Stalingrad.

As I constantly say WitE is not a movie or a book.

No German player is going to throw away 350,000 men.

....

Pelton .. 'Stalingrad' has nothing to do with it, the issue is the impact of fighting in the summer.
The reason I fought forward was I assumed (completely incorrectly) that the battering vigabrand's
infantry divisions took in the winter would weaken them for the summer.
Well it doesn't. This is essentially about the size of manpower reserves and losses.



They are weaker then 41 by allot because general morale is in mid 60's by June 42 and not low 80's as during summer of 41.

The game snow balls so if Germany does good to great during 41, Russian 41/42 offensive will not be that hard hitting which snowballs into Germans being above average going into 42 summer and Russians being below average.

We know what that looks like your game and my game vs 37 other people

BUT

If the german does average and Russian simply does historical or a little less then historical there is a snowball growing for the Russian and not the german in summer of 42- sure the german attacks but runs out of steam early and then its all down hill from there very quickly.

Pelton vs Dave even if the german player does far better then historical in every way possible,
as long as the Russian player holds Moscow ( VP 260) the ruusian player will get a draw at min as taking out Finland is a given and after that you don't even have to get to Poland or Romania and its a draw.

You have a draw if u simply hold Moscow.

I think that balancing out 1942 is going to be the big challenge. Nobody wants a wall of steel or the game may as well end with the start of 1942 mud. Equally no one wants total collapses due to game mechanics.

WiTE 2 will have the huge benefit of WiTW logistics .. that effectively has a powerful 'penalty for doing well' as well as making angles of major operations much more obvious. In combination that will put both sides on a shorter leash than now.
User avatar
loki100
Posts: 11699
Joined: Sat Oct 20, 2012 12:38 pm
Location: Utlima Thule

Turns 71-73: 22 October- 11 November 1942

Post by loki100 »

Turns 71-73: 22 October- 11 November 1942

For both armies, the shifting weather patterns of autumn and early winter 1942 had a major influence on their operations.

The end of October saw bad weather in the north but relatively clear and dry conditions in the south. The result was both armies made limited attacks in the Rostov area in an attempt to improve their positions.

However, Soviet recconnaisance flights had detected a major German build up south of the Oka. The most likely target was Ryazan and then to threaten Moscow from the south.

Stavka, opted to gamble on the weather and ordered Bryansk Front to hold its current positions rather than fall back. If the Soviet withdrawal could be well timed it would leave the German armour lacking infantry support when they hit the main defensive lines. In addition, the armoured formations of Voronezh Front were pulled out of the Rostov sector and redeployed to build up at Ryazan. If the Germans did attack here they would face the rebuilt 4 Shock Army with new artillery formations, all 5 Tank Armies and Malinovsky's 40 Army with its veteran cavalry-armoured units.

The freshly raised Southwestern Front under Georgy Zakharov took control of elite formations released from the Stavka reserve.

Image
[1]

In effect, almost 70% of the armoured forces of the Red Army were moved into this sector (ignoring armour in the various reserve tank brigades).

Image
(elements of 3 Tank Army taking up defensive positions south of the Oka)

In turn the VVS went over onto the offensive. Previously it had pulled back in poor weather to recover and retrain. This time, reinforced by the newly deployed Yak-9s, the Soviets reached deep behind the German lines. Prime targets were the German reconnaisance assets, as Stavka tried to mask its build up.

The first week of November saw winter briefly lift as warm air led to massive rainstorms.

Image

Again the only active operations were in the Rostov-Voroshilovgrad sector where Soviet formations hit Romanian and Hungarian units as they gradually tried to weaken the overall German defensive positions.

Early November again saw rain rather than the expected snow.

Image
[2]

This time, Stavka ordered Bryansk Front to pull back to the prepared Ryazan defensive line. Southwestern Front was in reserve and Voronezh Front was deployed to the south of the expected line of German advance.

Image

The air campaign continued with unrelenting ferocity. In 3 weeks the Soviets lost 500 planes but destroyed 220 Axis planes.

Image
(Yak-9s near Ryazan)

Image

On the night of 11-12 November the temperatures plunged as winter returned. The largest tank battle of the war was about to take place on the frozen steppe to the south of the Oka.

[1] – first of my 'army' commanders who I can promote to a front command for no extra penalty.
[2] This must have been frustrating for vigabrand as it allowed me to pull off a major redeployment as well as bring up the freshly raised artillery divisions. I think that bit of extreme luck may just have saved me.
User avatar
M60A3TTS
Posts: 4495
Joined: Fri May 13, 2011 1:20 am

RE: Turns 71-73: 22 October- 11 November 1942

Post by M60A3TTS »

My preferred arty SUs are:

41 Army Artillery Regiment of 36 152mm Gun-Howitzers
41 Artillery Regiment RVGK of 24 122mm Field Guns and 12 152mm Gun-Howitzers

My Preferred Arty CUs are

Jan-Sep 1942 Light Howitzer Brigade of 60 122mm howitzers
Oct 1942 - end Artillery/Breakthrough Artillery Division
Nov 1942-Aug 44 Guards Heavy Rocket Brigade of 480 BM-30-4 Rocket launchers
chaos45
Posts: 1875
Joined: Mon Jan 22, 2001 10:00 am

RE: Turns 71-73: 22 October- 11 November 1942

Post by chaos45 »

Agree with those M60 my preferred builds as well best bang for the AP buck. Although I have also been building the guard rocket divisions instead of the BDE.
User avatar
M60A3TTS
Posts: 4495
Joined: Fri May 13, 2011 1:20 am

RE: Turns 71-73: 22 October- 11 November 1942

Post by M60A3TTS »

Four reasons I changed from heavy rocket divisions to brigades

1. You get almost 100 more launchers with 2 brigades vs. 1 division and AP spend is the same.
2. Brigades give you more flexibility to move them about.
3. You can start brigades in Nov 43. Divisions come a month later.
4. Both units downgrade in size/effectiveness in 1944 but brigade changes after division does, September vs March. So the brigade stays effective during first half of summer 44.
chaos45
Posts: 1875
Joined: Mon Jan 22, 2001 10:00 am

RE: Turns 71-73: 22 October- 11 November 1942

Post by chaos45 »

good to know will have to add some BDEs maybe...the only issue u have is stacking. As BDEs then take two spots one hex away...I have a tendency to rotate assault units so space behind the lines gets tight.
User avatar
loki100
Posts: 11699
Joined: Sat Oct 20, 2012 12:38 pm
Location: Utlima Thule

RE: Turns 71-73: 22 October- 11 November 1942

Post by loki100 »

think you are both missing the advantage of lighter guns (ie the 76mm). They fire a lot more and take up relatively little supply/ammunition.

going by running attacks very slowly, my instinct is they don't kill much but they do disrupt. Two advantages to this - the obvious is that disrupted units don't fight but also that disrupted units are more likely to flip to damaged/destroyed.

wouldn't want to just rely on the 76mm light gun regiments, but don't overlook them just because you'd rather concentrate on heavy guns
chaos45
Posts: 1875
Joined: Mon Jan 22, 2001 10:00 am

RE: Turns 71-73: 22 October- 11 November 1942

Post by chaos45 »

The divisions have 76mm guns....as well if you look at Soviet Divisions/Corps they have loads of 76mm/122mm but no heavy guns. Thats one reason I figure better to go bigger with the support artillery. The regular artillery divisions once they upgrade are you best bet Im guess....I will say right now tho the rocket divisions add a ton of fire to my assaults...they have 3 CV as an artillery unit lol.
Gabriel B.
Posts: 501
Joined: Mon Jun 24, 2013 9:44 am

RE: Turns 71-73: 22 October- 11 November 1942

Post by Gabriel B. »

ORIGINAL: loki100

think you are both missing the advantage of lighter guns (ie the 76mm). They fire a lot more and take up relatively little supply/ammunition.

going by running attacks very slowly, my instinct is they don't kill much but they do disrupt. Two advantages to this - the obvious is that disrupted units don't fight but also that disrupted units are more likely to flip to damaged/destroyed.

wouldn't want to just rely on the 76mm light gun regiments, but don't overlook them just because you'd rather concentrate on heavy guns

Than build At regiments , they use even less ammo (direct fire) than light gun regiments, and from april 42 they use the same guns and about the same number (20). Prior to that the 85 mm is the best gun in at role the soviets have early on.
User avatar
loki100
Posts: 11699
Joined: Sat Oct 20, 2012 12:38 pm
Location: Utlima Thule

RE: Turns 71-73: 22 October- 11 November 1942

Post by loki100 »

Do hope the 76mm AT gun behaves differently to the 76mm artillery? I actually build both, and the armies likely to be in the Ukraine get at least 2 AT regiments.

For the most part I don't build SUs that replicate the core TOEs. As an eg, there is no point building AT units that use the 45mm. The only reason the Soviets kept that in use was it was cheap, very portable and then had masses. Even by 1942 it was effectively useless.

I do build mortar and light gun SUs as both inflict quite a lot of disruption, are cheap (arms pts) and it does no harm to have more than just the core ToE provides.
Gabriel B.
Posts: 501
Joined: Mon Jun 24, 2013 9:44 am

RE: Turns 71-73: 22 October- 11 November 1942

Post by Gabriel B. »

Wrt 76mm zis
I had used this gun as a training gun during national service , ( as a mountain unit, we had pack howitzers similar to https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/OTO_Melara_Mod_56 ).

I guess it could be uselfull against exposed infantry , but against dug in infantry it does not pack a lot of punch.
Post Reply

Return to “After Action Reports”