FIFTY SHADES OF WiTE: SILLYFLOWER V BRIANG

[EwaldvonKleist]

Is there a possibility to produce a max-outzoomed overview map for propaganda use at the home front while their is the silence before the late winter/spring storm? The Reichsministerium für Volksaufklärung und Propaganda noticed a drop of population morale and wants to restore it by showing eastern front successes [:)]

[sillyflower]

I will try to remember when I get the next turn back (T40)

[Disgruntled Veteran]

I dont understand why axis allies numbers are so super low in this book, around factor 10 smaller for Rumanians.

.

The Rumanians sent 3rd army and some of 4th army home to refit before Summer 42 offensive. Both armies were bled out during Odessa and Ukrainian offensives.

Source: 3 Kings.. the monarchial axis allies. A bit buzzed, cant remember author.

[EwaldvonKleist]

Thx for the explanation Veteran. Odessa was a real bloodbath for both sides. Rumanian starting numbers (june 1941) still are 2 times the one glantz gives. Well, different ways of counting...
Is this sent back for refit of entire rumanian armies reflected in any way in WITE? I mean, if the player does not abuse the Roms in attritional warfare, it should not be necessary?

[chaos45]

the issue is the game doesnt make the Germans with their axis allies really fight for the south. Basically the south falls hard in the game because of Lvov and absolute pathetic soviet first/second turn resistance there.

In real life a rain storm plus a massive Soviet counterattack slowed the initial german attacks. The end result was most of the soviet tanks were destroyed in one of the largest actual tank battles of the war but it slowed the germans in opening days of the campaign in the south. The game doesnt represent these issues to the germans that just blow threw soviet lines with ease encircle and then wipe them out. This in turn leaves a massive whole in the northern part of the soviet southern front which forces all the forces which resisted the Romanians to just turn tail and run or be encircled by the German panzer units. Thus the romanians take almost no losses to get to odessa and past while in real life they had to do alot of fighting.

thats the historical reason the Roms needed to refit. In the game they will never take 100k+ losses in the opening months of the campaign tho thus no need to refit.

[EwaldvonKleist]

Well, i have no detailed knowledge about this period/southern theater, but what i have read and get from ingame placement of forces: The germans did not use all their first days chances. The Lemberg (Lvov) pocket seen in WITE might be a bit unrealistic, but a better opening in the south would have been possible i think. E.g. Glantz states that germans were completely unaware of the mechanized coprs the Sovs had. But i think thei coul have encirled a bit more in the first days.[:)]
Ingame problem is: Is there any chance to get nearly historical results without Lemberg (Lvov, as a german i just prefer Lemberg because it sounds so much better from a phonetic point of view than Lvov, russians for sure think different [:)] ) pocket? I mean, the game was balanced with Lemberg opening i think, so playing withoug needs Kiev-encirclement like cooperation of the soviet side?

[chaos45]

in the current edition of the game the lvov opening is almost required for the Germans to get historical gains.

However based on the history of events in the south, a combination of weather- rain storms- and a massive soviet armored counterattack that took several days to defeat and cost the germans a fair amount of tanks is why the Germans didnt do as well historically as they do in the game. The fighting was actually quite hard for the Germans in the south compared to the north/center, one of the reasons AG Center had to swing south to get the kiev pocket.

You really wont see this requirement in the current game as the soviets in the south dont fight better nor is the early rain there that turned roads to mud and slowed the initial german advances taken into account.

Those who believe the Germans could win in 1941 historically really havent researched the entire situation well. Historically the supply/replacement/exhaustion factors were all very heavily against the Germans by the time winter hit. Winter isnt what stopped/defeat the German army in 1941 soviet resistance and casualties on German formations did. Winter was just the final straw that broke the camels back and caused a very tired and undersupplied german army to begin to break under the strain.

From all the research i have read the German historical advance was really the best case situation for the Axis, and in fact is far better than even German planners estimated their capabilities as being---mainly due to Soviet command incompetence in managing the war during 1941....even going into 1942 only poor soviet leadership really caused the Germans ability to get to and basically destroy stalingrad. Yes German generals made very good use of Soviet incompetence to do what they did, but it was really gross incompetence on the Soviet side in the leadership department that allowed most of it to happen in real life.

So basically if you dont bake stupidity into the game for the Soviets you will never get historical results by the Germans against a competent Soviet commander. Thats just an honest analysis based on all the research thats out there. You can read detailed reports on the crimea theater in late 1941 and into 1942 to get an idea of just how badly managed and led the Soviet army was compared to what competent Soviet high command should have done. Manstein did a masterful job of beating the Soviets there only because the Soviet high command gave ridiculous orders to the field commanders. Is but one example of the total crap leadership that plagued the soviets and basically allowed the Germans to do as well as they did.

The soviets really had all the cards to beat the germans easily and much more quickly than historical if they hadnt basically been commanded by morons that didnt understand military tactics----alot of this caused by Stalins Purges---you cant expect junior officers-promoted way to fast or political appointees to competently command a modern type army on the battlefield which is basically what the soviets had when they war started for them in 1941.

Sorry stepping off the box now lol [:)]

[sillyflower]

I agree with Chaos so maybe Pelton is right to take on all those noobs with his pro-German house rules [;)]. Equally, no G player would ever follow the 'no retreat' restrictions imposed by AH.

This is why WiTE has to be seen as a fantastic game, not a simulation.

[RKhan]

I also agree with Chaos, and especially Silly. It is a game and there are limits to what a game can achieve.

As I said in another post, the closest you can get to "history" is the first couple times you play the game and you have to learn as you go, just like the Soviets and Axis did.

[Michael T]

A point I often get bemused about is the Lvov Pocket whiners. Most players send at least an extra Pz Corp to AGS to achieve it. Who is to say what would have happened if that had occurred historically. It's one of the reasons I play. To see how things may have panned out under different circumstances. People who have no imagination should stick to history books and leave the gamers in peace.

[charlie0311]

Good grief, the sky has fallen, I agree with Mich T??? Lordy, Mikey, better change your mind right quick.

The resident and persistent historical know it alls are really boring, they have to keep up the posting, makes 'em feel smart or some other such insanity.

Naughty, Charlie, that's naughty, you naughty boy, insert spanking icon.

[Aurelian]

So no more calls for Soviet command chaos then?

Can't have that unless you have no imagination and want to stick to the history.

You get to how things may of panned out in different circumstances.

[Michael T]

You want a game with no Soviet C&C chaos, in case you missed it you already have it.

Yeah I think it would be nice to have some *real* C&C chaos. So what?

Did you get bored trolling in your other holes? I thought after your last foot in mouth foul up you would lie low for a bit longer. Well I guess we won't have to wait too long for next one... over to you.

[sillyflower]

Please be nice on this thread everyone

'If you can't say nothing nice, don't say nothing at all' to quote Thumper's mum - and shame on anyone who doesn't know which film this came from [:-]

[EwaldvonKleist]

Thanks for your comment chaos, interesting read.
I disagree that better results would not have been possible in 1941. Late november, things were quite close: Germans at moscow, a HGN pincer threatening Leningrads last supply chain and rostov was taken but lost after counterattack.
But all in all it was a question of 50km at most to capture/isolate the three major cities (i am aware this would not have resulted in immediate victory but have given better winter shelter (moscow, rostow) and maybe blocked some railway/street routes, delaying soviet counterstrike deployment).
It was not impossible to squeeze out these 50 extra cilometres historically i think.
1) Better preparation (especially of logistics and rail repair teams). This means a half-total war from late 1940 on. Of course there were reasons why Hitler did not choose this path.
2) Better reckon. As already mentioned, germans were unaware of soviet Mechanized Corps for example. Maybe arrogance was the reason. Following Glantz, at least Guderian estimated the soviet tank strength correct.
3) Making eastern front Priority Nr. 1 and sending everything available there in 1941. I somewhere read that Hitler wanted to build new Panzerdivisionen instead of giving reserve tanks to frontline units.
4) Squeezing everything out of the first days. I think that some forces where reserves at the first days. Maybe it would have been better to use everything for the first devastating blow.
5) With higher priority for the south and better reckon, Lemberg pocket might have really worked historcally? Or at least a mini version of it?

Then dont forget: If the germans had been more successful in the first encirclements, this would have meant less time to rebuild red army, maybe more new encirclements due to more gaps in line, Sovs thrown in combat even hastier etc., kind of a death circle.
And less fighting because of weaker red army also means that units need less supply, the supply chain can therefore be longer.

I agree many soviet leaders were bad at the beginning, on the other hand Wehrmacht was one of the best armies on tactival/operational level of all time (but failed hard on strategic level) with experienced leaders, self-thinking suboordinates (Auftragstaktik) and units which can suffer many losses because breaking apart (Kampfkraft study Crefeld).
Your example with Trappenjagd on Crimea reflects this: One of the best High commanders of this time (Mannstein) vs. the exactly opposite on soviet side.
Another example is charkow 1942, i dont really understand what sovs were aiming for with a single deep penetration? It was the perfect invitation for a cutoff counter operation.

[chaos45]

I think many misunderstand my comments, I was just trying to explain to someone newer to the game how things are working and the more or less why.

The current game basically gives the Germans a better chance to win than real life because only very poor/real life like Soviet play would otherwise give the Germans a chance to win.

However the Germans chance to win is baked into the game via morale/experience factors that even competent soviet command in the game cant fix, not to mention completely superior german movement and logistics capabilities over historical.

I enjoy the game but if you look at it from historical as I did many times in my AAR its very off in several key areas. This in turn allows the germans to rampage against even good soviet high command much longer than should be possible- As in the game the player is the High commander. Stavka messed up alot and cost the soviets probably millions more troops than otherwise should have been lost over the course of the war, which in turn would lead one to believe that a soviet army not sacrificing millions of men to stupid orders from on high could easily have made it to Berlin before May 1945.

However that aside it makes for an interesting game is all im saying, you just have to take all the unhistorical stuff in stride and realize its a game and not truly representing the actual events. [:)]

[HITMAN202]

This is what makes WITE forum so fun- a three ring circus. 1) Discussing the historical conflict, 2) seeing it replayed twix talented opponents and 3) the inevitable "catfights" that flair up on the forum.

[EwaldvonKleist]

Thx chaos for trying to explain things.
So can we abbreviate your original post to:
Soviets were silly in reality but are not ingame because of bright Soviet players, therefore soviet strength on the command level the player cannot control (division level) is lower than historical. This allows german player historical gains against experienced bright soviet players.

On the other hand, the soviets must be stronger than historical in the last 2 years, because german players dont act like Hitler and are not keen to hold Stalingrad at all cost. But to allow soviets to reach Berlin in May 1945 from Stalingrad Frontline in Dezember 1942, they must be a bit OP.
Agreed chaos???

In addition, german players dont bleed their Panzerdivisionen in Kursk like battles and avoid crimea 1944 and korsun pocket like desasters. IMO, historically a flexible defense strategy with tanks in reserve, in time withdrew from stalingrad and shortened frent lines would have meant that soviets need to conduct WW1 like offensives against well prepared lines all the time without decisive results, only gaining a few dozens of cilometres land in each offensive. And even soviet manpower wasn't endless...

[chaos45]

to an extent i could agree---I suggest you look at my AAR vs Pelton. You can read alot of the back and forth between game play and history in that AAR. Once the Soviet army gets strong enough its very hard for the Germans to prevent well planned soviet offensives from wrecking things...as you can basically turn the panzerball tactic back on the germans by late 1943.

[Ramblinman]

Thanks for this AAR. It has been very instructive.


A question about your FBD use if you don't mind: Did you use something similar to the tactics described in this thread
(http://www.matrixgames.com/forums/tm.asp?m=3918771&mpage=1&key=fbd&#3918955), or did you use two FBD's in the south since you sent so much of AGC to AGS?