Matrix Games Forums

Happy Easter!Battle Academy is now available on SteamPlayers compare Ageods Civil War to Civil War IIDeal of the week - An updated War in the East goes half Price!Sign up for the Qvadriga beta for iPad and Android!Come and say hi at Pax and SaluteLegends of War goes on sale!Piercing Fortress Europa Gets UpdatedBattle Academy Mega Pack is now availableClose Combat: Gateway to Caen Teaser Trailer
Forums  Register  Login  Photo Gallery  Member List  Search  Calendars  FAQ 

My Profile  Inbox  Address Book  My Subscription  My Forums  Log Out

RE: Road to Leningrad AAR (for Beginners)

 
View related threads: (in this forum | in all forums)

Logged in as: Guest
Users viewing this topic: none
  Printable Version
All Forums >> [New Releases from Matrix Games] >> Gary Grigsby's War in the East Series >> After Action Reports >> RE: Road to Leningrad AAR (for Beginners) Page: <<   < prev  1 2 [3] 4 5   next >   >>
Login
Message << Older Topic   Newer Topic >>
RE: Road to Leningrad AAR (for Beginners) - 7/17/2010 10:05:57 AM   
ComradeP

 

Posts: 7166
Joined: 9/17/2009
Status: offline
quote:

In case of 23rd Tank Division 100% of those AFVs were old T-26 and BA cars. German infantry had all means (37mm was more then enough) to destroy them in quantity.


On the defence, certainly, but the key thing to note is that the Germans were attacking.

They had to tow, by truck or by horse, or push those AT guns into range, and the Soviets could see them coming from miles away as it's clear terrain and they would probably be occupying the most advantageous position in that terrain. Non-motorized AT guns make lousy offensive weapons, yet they were devastating in this attack, which is what bothers me. It's as if the Soviet tank crews just waited until the Germans towed their AT guns into range and then sat still whilst their tanks were being taken out.

(in reply to Sabre21)
Post #: 61
RE: Road to Leningrad AAR (for Beginners) - 7/17/2010 11:41:20 AM   
von Jaeger


Posts: 872
Joined: 1/20/2010
From: Lancaster, England
Status: offline
Pieter - your view here is interesting.   I don't know if it is modelled in the game, but the Russians in these early days used their armour pretty recklessly on occasions, in kind of motorised cavalry charges, and used their medium and heavy tanks piecemeal.   Even the 37mm PAK (nick named the 'door knocker') had great success against the light tanks (T26) that were thrown at them.   And the German ID's have a dozen 50mm PAKs too.  I know Helpless will get cross but there was an 'attack doctrine' (or perhaps 'culture' would be a better word for it) in the Red Army, it seems, and very poorly executed it was too, especially in the North and Central sectors.   Attacks going without enough prep or assembly time, poor co-ordination and without supporting arms.    We know what happens when tanks take on infantry without close infantry support.   Just look at the 'kill' stats for early Barbarossa - at Raseiniai, really close to the border battles in my game, the Russians lost over 250 tanks in 4 days.      Very close simulation IMO.

One reason (I refer to another thread) that the Germans did relatively poorly in the South is that the Russians handled their armour better there and used it en masse, in a much more co-ordinated way.

HardSarge: good advice to "use your troops in the rear for the opening attacks, that will allow your front line troops a couple more MP's to spend in moving" - I did use this tactic a fair bit but I was also happy to let a few ID's really go to town in the border areas.   When I try again, I will hold more of the very front line in reserve for secondary exploitation.   My real problem is Command and Control after the first turn!   My discipline has gone to pieces.   I shall try to be good in turn 3!

Trey: thanks for the post and I'm glad I am at least making common mistakes!!!      If it "reminds me of how I would play against the AI when I first started", what do you do now?!   As I said, I enjoyed handling my divisions when they were all properly organised and well supplied in Turn 1!   My Corps and Divisional Commanders are rushing off hither and thither, reacting to opportunites as they arise and I have lost any sense of shape.   How do you keep discipline?   It is incredibly easy to forget the strategic picture, even the operational aspects get lost in the detail of the battlefield.

More questions and comments welcome.   I am happy to be advised about my style, level of detail etc as well as about the game play and technical issues.
Stuart


< Message edited by von Jaeger -- 7/17/2010 11:42:56 AM >

(in reply to ComradeP)
Post #: 62
RE: Road to Leningrad AAR (for Beginners) - 7/17/2010 12:32:16 PM   
ComradeP

 

Posts: 7166
Joined: 9/17/2009
Status: offline
quote:

Pieter - your view here is interesting. I don't know if it is modelled in the game, but the Russians in these early days used their armour pretty recklessly on occasions, in kind of motorised cavalry charges, and used their medium and heavy tanks piecemeal. Even the 37mm PAK (nick named the 'door knocker') had great success against the light tanks (T26) that were thrown at them. And the German ID's have a dozen 50mm PAKs too. I know Helpless will get cross but there was an 'attack doctrine' (or perhaps 'culture' would be a better word for it) in the Red Army, it seems, and very poorly executed it was too, especially in the North and Central sectors. Attacks going without enough prep or assembly time, poor co-ordination and without supporting arms. We know what happens when tanks take on infantry without close infantry support. Just look at the 'kill' stats for early Barbarossa - at Raseiniai, really close to the border battles in my game, the Russians lost over 250 tanks in 4 days. Very close simulation IMO.


The majority of Soviet tank losses came from running into AT units or the Luftwaffe. Losses in direct combat with German armour were less common, aside from mobility kills that could not be recovered.

The problem with 1 week turns, and combat linked to to MP's is that a single battle is all a unit fights during a week, which would also mean the unit is focussed on that battle. However, as the battles rely on an MP system, the battle is not treated as lasting a week, but is just a battle costing a certain amount of MP's.

As such, see-saw battles and counterattacks are all abstracted. In the cases you mention, and in the vast majority of cases where the Soviets lost hundreds of tanks in the early days of Barbarossa, they were attacking gung-ho towards the German lines without much of a plan, aside from instructions to (re)capture a certain location. In such a situation, German AT screens and Luftwaffe ground attack aircraft decimated Soviet tank units.

However, in the case of the battle we're discussing, the Germans were attacking without means to quickly close the gap between the infantry and AT units and the Soviet tanks and would thus, due to lack of Luftwaffe support (I'm guessing most of the artillery involved would either be the AT guns or 75mm/105mm artillery). The Germans liked to bait enemy tank forces into a tank trap, but that would require holding a position to establish such a trap. In this case, the Germans are quite literally walking towards an enemy tank force that can see them coming from miles away, which is why I am of the opinion that the Soviet tank losses were way too high. The combat results assume the Soviets either obliged to fight the Germans on their terms or swarmed towards the Germans as soon as they could be seen. In the latter case, it would still take time to set up AT screens and the clear terrain would not offer much protection.

(in reply to von Jaeger)
Post #: 63
RE: Road to Leningrad AAR (for Beginners) - 7/17/2010 12:48:56 PM   
von Jaeger


Posts: 872
Joined: 1/20/2010
From: Lancaster, England
Status: offline
Pieter - units can fight many more than one battle in the week. Maybe as many as five or six if hasty attacks. Each battle is abstracted and IMO is certain to involve attacks, counters etc (albeit that they are notional).


Well back to battle before walking the dog and earning my pay!

LVI Pz Corps halts for the infantry and 'cleans up' locally - they make 178 AFV kills in these three battles, and rout 1 Mot. and 2 Tank Divs (for 1 AFV casualty!). Not bad for a halt order!





Attachment (1)

< Message edited by von Jaeger -- 7/18/2010 10:23:05 PM >

(in reply to ComradeP)
Post #: 64
RE: Road to Leningrad AAR (for Beginners) - 7/17/2010 1:00:15 PM   
von Jaeger


Posts: 872
Joined: 1/20/2010
From: Lancaster, England
Status: offline
...and have a look at the type of tank's knocked out here. (Being able to drill into this level of detail to address your concerns, Pieter, is an absolute joy!)







Attachment (1)

(in reply to von Jaeger)
Post #: 65
RE: Road to Leningrad AAR (for Beginners) - 7/17/2010 1:03:33 PM   
von Jaeger


Posts: 872
Joined: 1/20/2010
From: Lancaster, England
Status: offline
and here's one of those OT 133 flame-throwing tanks:





Attachment (1)

(in reply to von Jaeger)
Post #: 66
RE: Road to Leningrad AAR (for Beginners) - 7/17/2010 1:19:06 PM   
The SNAFU


Posts: 48
Joined: 3/10/2010
Status: offline
von Jaeger, you're putting on a great AAR here. Your style of showing many screenshots of the action and results along with commentary on how and why you do certain things is simply excellent. I've already gotten a much better feel for what we will face when we first get our gritty paws on this awesome game. Thanks!


_____________________________

However beautiful the strategy, you should occasionally look at the results. Winston Churchill

(in reply to von Jaeger)
Post #: 67
RE: Road to Leningrad AAR (for Beginners) - 7/17/2010 1:44:07 PM   
ComradeP

 

Posts: 7166
Joined: 9/17/2009
Status: offline
quote:

Pieter - units can fight many more than one battle in the week. Maybe as many as five or six if hasty attacks. Each battle is abstracted and IMO is certain to involve attacks, counters etc (albeit that they are notional).


I understand that, but as the amount of attacks is linked to MP's, it is theoretically possible that a unit fights a single battle each turn, which could either mean it's a week long battle or that it's a skirmish at the end of a long march but the week long battle would still be abstracted into a single combat result, or that one unit fights a number of battles whilst the majority of the units in an area don't encounter any enemy force (like what you did in your opening moves, using several divisions to mop up the Soviets and seemingly only moving the rest).

(in reply to The SNAFU)
Post #: 68
RE: Road to Leningrad AAR (for Beginners) - 7/17/2010 1:45:45 PM   
von Jaeger


Posts: 872
Joined: 1/20/2010
From: Lancaster, England
Status: offline
Thank, Snaf (if I may call you that - it's quite difficult to know how to judge these things form the inside.

My first defeat of the campaign (rushing - should have waited till next turn and the isolation kicked in: notiice that I have cut off this group with the 9-1 Mot Div up the coast). I was trying to clean up the coast along the Gulf of Riga when I ran into this stalwart defence from the 112th! This despite adding the Pioneers to the already reinforced 32nd.




Attachment (1)

(in reply to The SNAFU)
Post #: 69
RE: Road to Leningrad AAR (for Beginners) - 7/17/2010 1:56:28 PM   
von Jaeger


Posts: 872
Joined: 1/20/2010
From: Lancaster, England
Status: offline
Pieter - I prefer to think of them as action/movement/time points.   So you could use all your action points in a long, vicious battle or series of battles and then spend the next few days sitting around and licking your wounds, whilst your comrades march past to fight ahead of you - followed by the tanks at the gallop.   Or you foot slog it for several days, through scenes of fire and death on the border, and fight a short sharp engagement off the march.   The whole thing is abstracted, so I find it part of the entertainment to imagine what is actually happening on the ground.

I wonder if one of the experienced team members can help here?

(in reply to von Jaeger)
Post #: 70
RE: Road to Leningrad AAR (for Beginners) - 7/17/2010 3:47:38 PM   
wmcalpine

 

Posts: 131
Joined: 8/23/2004
Status: offline
Von Jaeger,

Is the order of battle screen that captures the total number of men, afv's and aircraft available at the scenario level? I am curious to see if the German manpower increased after turn 1 due to the low number of casualties that occurred on the first turn relative to the number of men that were placed into the front line on the logistics screen in the refit and normal replacement phases.

Also, the logistics screen indicated Hungarian, Romanian, and Italian replacements. Could this be caused by the logistics screen reflecting the entire eastern front, rather than the area bounded by Road to Leningrad scenario?

Excellent level of detail in this AAR. It is much appreciated!!

Bill

PS Just checked in the road to Minsk AAR. The order of battle screen is available at the scenario level. Very nice!

< Message edited by wmcalpine -- 7/17/2010 3:51:22 PM >

(in reply to von Jaeger)
Post #: 71
RE: Road to Leningrad AAR (for Beginners) - 7/17/2010 6:27:07 PM   
ComradeP

 

Posts: 7166
Joined: 9/17/2009
Status: offline
It's good to see a Soviet unit holding its ground for once, although it's naturally doomed by next turn due to being isolated.

(in reply to wmcalpine)
Post #: 72
RE: Road to Leningrad AAR (for Beginners) - 7/17/2010 8:57:45 PM   
Flaviusx


Posts: 6239
Joined: 9/9/2009
From: Southern California
Status: offline
Majority of Sov tank losses early on were due to breakdowns and bad logistics generally, actually. Servicability rates were afwul (averaging a bit over 25% at this stage of the war), ammo and fuel were often not available, boneheaded commissars driving tank divisions into swamps, etc. etc. Shambolic doesn't even begin to describe the state of these units, and their nominal TOE strength on paper should be heavily discounted due to the utter chaos in the first month or so of the war.

All this would be properly reflected in the surprise attack rules. I wouldn't worry so much about how badly the Sovs do in the first few turns. But I have seen this sort of thing persist later on in the game, and that is very questionable. By late July/August, Soviet counterattacks should have some bite to them.

(in reply to ComradeP)
Post #: 73
RE: Road to Leningrad AAR (for Beginners) - 7/18/2010 3:39:10 AM   
Joel Billings


Posts: 20484
Joined: 9/20/2000
From: Santa Rosa, CA
Status: offline
Ground elements that are damaged at the start of the battle are listed in the list of men/AFV/guns in the battle, however they don't fight and are often easily destroyed (especially when the unit is forced to retreat). So many of those AFV's could be damaged before the battle even got started (and many are due to the first turn surprise rules).

_____________________________

All understanding comes after the fact.
-- Soren Kierkegaard

(in reply to Flaviusx)
Post #: 74
RE: Road to Leningrad AAR (for Beginners) - 7/18/2010 12:34:02 PM   
ComradeP

 

Posts: 7166
Joined: 9/17/2009
Status: offline
quote:

Majority of Sov tank losses early on were due to breakdowns and bad logistics generally, actually.


I meant: losses in combat.

The breakdown and logistics problems would cause tanks to never participate in combat in the first place, or be knocked out shortly after the start of a battle. Breakdowns wouldn't be much of a problem if the tanks could be recovered, but obviously they could not. The Germans could often recover their tanks, as they often advanced after a battle, whilst the Soviets (or the Western Allies) usually could not until late 1942/1943. Not to mention that the Germans were at the time more or less the only ones with efficient vehicle recovery units that could also, if needed, operate during the battle.

As soon as the tide turned, German tank losses mounted. The most well known example would be the battle for Kursk, where losses due to mobility kills in enemy terrain were higher in the first few days than actual combat losses. Naturally, those tanks could initially be recovered before the Soviets got their counterattack in, but after that the tanks were lost. The same goes for vehicles and heavy equipment during the retreat from Stalingrad or the tanks in the actual pocket that could not be made to run again due to lack of fuel or spare parts.

(in reply to Joel Billings)
Post #: 75
RE: Road to Leningrad AAR (for Beginners) - 7/18/2010 1:44:45 PM   
Flaviusx


Posts: 6239
Joined: 9/9/2009
From: Southern California
Status: offline
ComradeP, my own view is that at this particular level of abstraction, these kind of losses are part of the combat process. They were indeed, forced by combat either directly or indirectly. This isn't a tactical level game, it's an operational one.

Really, don't fret yourself over what happens on a surprise turn. The Sov units are performing wretchedly...as they should. They lost 10,000 tanks in that first month of the war in large part due to German units running circles around them and taking advantage of their horrible command, control and logistics issues. The units pretty much ran themselves into the ground. The force structure itself was flawed and eventually led to the abolition of the divisions in question with tank brigades replacing them as an expedient. Then we get mobile corps of various sorts in 1942, and even those took a year or so of trial and error to arrive at their final wartime organization. (Which was itself imperfect and short of infantry and support elements but good enough to get the job done with the tools in hand.)

I'm a little more concerned seeing high odds Soviet attacks occurring well into the game going nowhere, a problem you yourself identified in Hard Sarge's recent AAR. Sovs are going to have a rather hard time pulling off their impromptu offensives in the mid/late summer period. (And, yes, such offensives did occur and did slow down the Germans in the center and north.)

From a results oriented standpoint, I'm perfectly pleased with how this little AAR is playing out so far.

(in reply to ComradeP)
Post #: 76
RE: Road to Leningrad AAR (for Beginners) - 7/18/2010 2:04:33 PM   
von Jaeger


Posts: 872
Joined: 1/20/2010
From: Lancaster, England
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: wmcalpine

Von Jaeger,

Is the order of battle screen that captures the total number of men, afv's and aircraft available at the scenario level? I am curious to see if the German manpower increased after turn 1 due to the low number of casualties that occurred on the first turn relative to the number of men that were placed into the front line on the logistics screen in the refit and normal replacement phases.




Bill

Here's the scren shot OOB for turn 3 - clearly for this scenario. Only Finns in this scenario - the Southern allies can't cross North a notional line just South of Orel). I took some Rumanian battalion level 'casualties' on turn 1 - someone has already reported this anomaly to the 'gods of war'.





Attachment (1)

(in reply to wmcalpine)
Post #: 77
RE: Road to Leningrad AAR (for Beginners) - 7/18/2010 5:10:04 PM   
ComradeP

 

Posts: 7166
Joined: 9/17/2009
Status: offline
quote:

ComradeP, my own view is that at this particular level of abstraction, these kind of losses are part of the combat process. They were indeed, forced by combat either directly or indirectly. This isn't a tactical level game, it's an operational one.


Judging by what has been said about the combat system thus far, all losses seem to actually occur in the combat action, so all those tanks were taken out by something in the actual battle. Fuel and other logistics are abstracted into the units. I'm sure there's some way the fuel level has an impact on the combat units, but I'm pretty sure we won't find out what that impact is going to be until we get our hands on the final product.

One of the paradoxes of the game, as depicted in the AAR's, is the mix between abstraction and detail. You control air units of various sizes and you can view a blow-by-blow account of a battle, but the battle system is linked to MP's and there doesn't seem to be an indication of time in the battle results screen (how long a battle lasted) as all battles of a certain type seem to use a certain amount of MP's regardless of what happens. The scale and abstraction mean that the historical accuracy will be significant on battles of an operational scale, but lower on battles of a smaller scale.

From what we've seen thus far, it seems quite likely that operations like Uranus/Saturn or the various stages of Fall Blau (to stick with well known examples) will play out like their historical counterparts if the players decide to move units around in a historical fashion. Something like the battle for Soltsy, however, is probably going to be more troublesome. A handful of Rifle divisions supported by elements of around two tank divisions attacking a stack with a Panzer division, a motorised infantry division and a SS regiment will probably result in lots of dead Soviets and few dead Germans, not in the German formations aside from the SS basically being send back to the drawing board until the divisions had some serious R&R.

< Message edited by ComradeP -- 7/18/2010 5:11:10 PM >

(in reply to von Jaeger)
Post #: 78
RE: Road to Leningrad AAR (for Beginners) - 7/18/2010 6:06:23 PM   
PyleDriver


Posts: 5838
Joined: 4/19/2006
From: Occupied Mexico aka Rio Grand Valley, S.Texas
Status: offline
There are losses that occur between turns to reflect breakdowns, sickness and so on...

_____________________________

Jon Pyle
AWD Beta tester
WBTS Alpha tester
WitE Alpha tester
WitW Alpha Tester

(in reply to ComradeP)
Post #: 79
RE: Road to Leningrad AAR (for Beginners) - 7/18/2010 9:56:30 PM   
von Jaeger


Posts: 872
Joined: 1/20/2010
From: Lancaster, England
Status: offline
Sorry no battle posts today - I was doing some testing with a 'what if I do this really gamey thing?' situation. Hope it will help the scenario design.

Anyway what I can show you is this (for me ) fairly fancy footwork. I am able to beg two more ID's from OKH - they arrived, together with a security division, by train from Konigsberg, and debarked in Jelgave town, SW of Riga. (See my red 2 on the map)

I create a new and entirely fresh Infantry Corps (3 Divisions outlined in blue) using the staff of the XXXVIII Corps (outlined in purple), and replace the leader of that Corps with Walter Model (see red 1)! Drool over his statistics for a moment. I also beef up the Corps with a Pioneer battalion, and Heavy Nebelwerfer battalion. More support units as I can find the Admin points for this assault group. Model will lead this fresh Corps in the coming assault on Tallinn, break the Narva defences, and in the end game take part in the siege of Leningrad.

More tomorrow night I hope
S




Attachment (1)

< Message edited by von Jaeger -- 7/18/2010 9:58:50 PM >

(in reply to PyleDriver)
Post #: 80
RE: Road to Leningrad AAR (for Beginners) - 7/18/2010 10:34:10 PM   
von Jaeger


Posts: 872
Joined: 1/20/2010
From: Lancaster, England
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Flaviusx

From a results oriented standpoint, I'm perfectly pleased with how this little AAR is playing out so far.


If not from a staff officer standpoint, eh, Flavius? I look forward to your observations...

One last screen shot before close - this is the overview as I get near the end of Turn 3. I still have Totenkopf to move and some of the air units and HQ's. But for those of you who like to think these things through whilst at work (), here's a picture of my dispositions. (I still intend to follow the main thrusts I indicated earlier but I have used one of the PZ Corps to cut of the blocking units on the Gulf and to secure the gap through the marshes between the lakes - a potential jump off point.

What to with the SS and 8th Pz?




Attachment (1)

(in reply to Flaviusx)
Post #: 81
RE: Road to Leningrad AAR (for Beginners) - 7/18/2010 10:50:07 PM   
von Jaeger


Posts: 872
Joined: 1/20/2010
From: Lancaster, England
Status: offline
...and here's where we're going!






Attachment (1)

(in reply to von Jaeger)
Post #: 82
RE: Road to Leningrad AAR (for Beginners) - 7/19/2010 10:17:59 AM   
ComradeP

 

Posts: 7166
Joined: 9/17/2009
Status: offline
How about cutting the rail junction two hexes south of Lake Ilmen?

Judging by the map posted earlier, if you do that the Soviets will have to take a nice little detour with reinforcements coming in from the south, and it will more or less cut the Soviet front in two as they can't really use interior lines effectively as the next rail junction is 110 miles to the east.

The difficult terrain near the rail junction south of lake Ilmen, as well as the many minor rivers, should limit a Soviet response. You could park one division next to the minor river a hex southwest of Lake Ilmen, and the other on the rail junction proper.

The party might be in Leningrad, but you need to prevent as many Soviets as you can from attending.

I'm not sure whether all or just most of your units are from Army Group North, but it does seem that the Soviets have an advantage in the sense that the lower part of the map is basically part of Army Group Center's terrain, Vitebsk, Velikiye Luki, Rzhev and Torzhok all being in AGC's (projected in the case of Torzhok) zone by the end of the year.

< Message edited by ComradeP -- 7/19/2010 10:45:58 AM >

(in reply to von Jaeger)
Post #: 83
RE: Road to Leningrad AAR (for Beginners) - 7/19/2010 4:21:03 PM   
Sabre21


Posts: 8078
Joined: 4/27/2001
From: on a mountain in Idaho
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: ComradeP

How about cutting the rail junction two hexes south of Lake Ilmen?

Judging by the map posted earlier, if you do that the Soviets will have to take a nice little detour with reinforcements coming in from the south, and it will more or less cut the Soviet front in two as they can't really use interior lines effectively as the next rail junction is 110 miles to the east.

The difficult terrain near the rail junction south of lake Ilmen, as well as the many minor rivers, should limit a Soviet response. You could park one division next to the minor river a hex southwest of Lake Ilmen, and the other on the rail junction proper.

The party might be in Leningrad, but you need to prevent as many Soviets as you can from attending.

I'm not sure whether all or just most of your units are from Army Group North, but it does seem that the Soviets have an advantage in the sense that the lower part of the map is basically part of Army Group Center's terrain, Vitebsk, Velikiye Luki, Rzhev and Torzhok all being in AGC's (projected in the case of Torzhok) zone by the end of the year.



Two things you have to take into consideration here is that FoW is active and you don't see all of the Soviet units. Even by sending air recon out you are likely to miss a good number of units hidden in forests or see all that is going on in Leningrad.

The other major thing you have to remain cognizant of is your own supply lines. If you start sticking your neck out too far too fast you can get into some serious problems. I've played the Soviets enough in early war to know that if the Germans get too cocky they will pay for it. You might not be able to take an SS division head on, but isolate it far enough from its railhead and then its just a matter of time. I have caused plenty of grief to the German player early on, Trey and Rick can vouch for that.

While the Soviets are weak compared to their German foe at this stage of the game doesn't mean they are completely impotent. Leningrad can be successfully defended as can the approaches to the city but it takes a lot of proper planning and preparation and hope that the German player makes more mistakes than you do.

Andy

_____________________________


(in reply to ComradeP)
Post #: 84
RE: Road to Leningrad AAR (for Beginners) - 7/19/2010 4:56:57 PM   
ComradeP

 

Posts: 7166
Joined: 9/17/2009
Status: offline
quote:

Two things you have to take into consideration here is that FoW is active and you don't see all of the Soviet units. Even by sending air recon out you are likely to miss a good number of units hidden in forests or see all that is going on in Leningrad.


There's a swamp to the south of the rail junction, with a single railroad. Should the Soviets rail a substantial amount of units into the swamp, the German motorised infantry or the infantry division closing in on the rail line can cut it their supply line turn. The Soviet units in the swamp will then be without a direct supply line and will basically be in the same situation as Volkhov Front during the first Soviet winter offensive: rotting in a place that's almost impossible to supply.

The minor rivers to the north and east of the rail junction should limit incursions, not to mention that the German divisions are still strong enough to attack the majority of the weakened units that try to cut them off.

The rail junction is actually positioned in a way that makes it far easier to attack and defend for an attacker coming from the west, than from any other direction.

Capturing the rail junction could also be the first step for a wide encirclement of Leningrad, east of lake Ilmen. There's another rail junction west of Vyshnyvolocheck that can supply such an encirclement and, if the city is captured, the terrain is fairly ideal for a defensive posture aimed at stopping an attack from the south.

There's also the question of: why invade Estonia ASAP? An advance on Leningrad from the south is probably easier than one through a 3 hex wide land bridge lined with bogs and minor rivers, especially as (after the capture of Novgorod) there are 4 railroads heading north, whilst there's only one going east from Tallinn. Cutting that railroad will also mean the Soviets will only be supplied by the Baltic Fleet, which would also be needed to evacuate units at the same time.

I don't know what the supply capabilities of the Baltic Fleet are like, but if a number of infantry divisions continue to put pressure on the Soviets, Estonia will be impossible to defend on the long term, which suits the Germans fine as there's no strategic hurry to capture Tallinn, just like there wasn't one in real life. The Estonians regretted that, but sadly it's true. Von Jaeger seems to prepare most of his armour for an advance towards Leningrad from the south, which is the correct choice from a strategic perspective in my opinion.

< Message edited by ComradeP -- 7/19/2010 4:58:57 PM >

(in reply to Sabre21)
Post #: 85
RE: Road to Leningrad AAR (for Beginners) - 7/19/2010 8:36:54 PM   
PyleDriver


Posts: 5838
Joined: 4/19/2006
From: Occupied Mexico aka Rio Grand Valley, S.Texas
Status: offline
Estonia needs a quick sweep. What happens is areas that are controled (frendly ZOC's), in front, will allow units behind the lines to force march... I perfer a fan attack early where your ID's can reach the front and cover your flanks a soon as possiable...

_____________________________

Jon Pyle
AWD Beta tester
WBTS Alpha tester
WitE Alpha tester
WitW Alpha Tester

(in reply to ComradeP)
Post #: 86
RE: Road to Leningrad AAR (for Beginners) - 7/19/2010 8:54:48 PM   
ComradeP

 

Posts: 7166
Joined: 9/17/2009
Status: offline
What does capturing Estonia quickly achieve? Soviet units will withdraw when pressured, Soviet casualties will probably be not all that high (compared to the fighting on other fronts, just like in real life) and the Soviet player knows exactly where you're going: Leningrad. Giving the impression that you're advancing on multiple fronts, without knowing where the blow will fall, might convince the Soviet player to keep some forces in Estonia (inland Estonia that is, not in ports waiting for the Baltic Fleet Taxi Service).

Aside from VP's for Tallinn, the Germans won't gain much if they capture Estonia, say, two turns earlier than in a scenario where the infantry clears the place without tank support.

For the Soviets, it's all about delaying the German arrival at the gates of Leningrad, and they can't really afford to leave approaches unexposed. Attacking slowly also has a psychological effect: many people are reluctant to abandon territory they control, even if it has zero strategic value or holding it actually poses a threat to their own war effort. The Germans have more mobility than the Soviets, and one good way of making use of that is by being everywhere at the same time from the Soviet perspective, whilst in reality they're pushing through a single sector.

If the Soviets are fighting at a place that isn't Leningrad or close to it, and are not inflicting noticeable losses on the Germans in the process, whilst the Germans are advancing elsewhere, the Soviets are doing something wrong.

It will be interesting to see how the AI would respond to a slow and methodical walk through Estonia. Personally, as the Soviets I'd probably strip the Baltic states of anything useful aside from a significant quantity of blocking and delaying units and form a wide layer of rings around Leningrad. In this scenario, Tallinn's VP's might be significant too, so it might be worth forming a ring around Tallinn too (which is easier than it would be for most other cities, as it can only be attacked from four surrounding hexes instead of six).

< Message edited by ComradeP -- 7/19/2010 8:55:48 PM >

(in reply to PyleDriver)
Post #: 87
RE: Road to Leningrad AAR (for Beginners) - 7/19/2010 10:42:14 PM   
Neal_MLC

 

Posts: 180
Joined: 2/2/2010
Status: offline
How many turns do you have to take Leningrad?

_____________________________

no matter where you go, there you are

(in reply to ComradeP)
Post #: 88
RE: Road to Leningrad AAR (for Beginners) - 7/20/2010 12:20:46 AM   
Sabre21


Posts: 8078
Joined: 4/27/2001
From: on a mountain in Idaho
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Neal_MLC

How many turns do you have to take Leningrad?


This scenario is 15 turns long.

_____________________________


(in reply to Neal_MLC)
Post #: 89
RE: Road to Leningrad AAR (for Beginners) - 7/20/2010 12:35:01 AM   
PyleDriver


Posts: 5838
Joined: 4/19/2006
From: Occupied Mexico aka Rio Grand Valley, S.Texas
Status: offline
ComradeP its about your flank. Do sweep some PzD's into Estonia and clear an 120 mile flank and reduce it to 30 miles or leave it open to a Soviet counter while you drive on Leningrad? You can't take Leningrad without your infantry, 4th PzG will become lunch if it goes it alone...Andy spoke above how he's tormented players by doing what youv'e recomended...

_____________________________

Jon Pyle
AWD Beta tester
WBTS Alpha tester
WitE Alpha tester
WitW Alpha Tester

(in reply to Sabre21)
Post #: 90
Page:   <<   < prev  1 2 [3] 4 5   next >   >>
All Forums >> [New Releases from Matrix Games] >> Gary Grigsby's War in the East Series >> After Action Reports >> RE: Road to Leningrad AAR (for Beginners) Page: <<   < prev  1 2 [3] 4 5   next >   >>
Jump to:





New Messages No New Messages
Hot Topic w/ New Messages Hot Topic w/o New Messages
Locked w/ New Messages Locked w/o New Messages
 Post New Thread
 Reply to Message
 Post New Poll
 Submit Vote
 Delete My Own Post
 Delete My Own Thread
 Rate Posts


Forum Software © ASPPlayground.NET Advanced Edition 2.4.5 ANSI

0.117