Matrix Games Forums

 Forums  Register  Login  Photo Gallery  Member List  Search  Calendars  FAQ 

My Profile  Inbox  Address Book  My Subscription  My Forums  Log Out

RE: 1.04.16 Fulkerson vs KLilly T35

 
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: 1.04.16 Fulkerson vs KLilly T35 Page: <<   < prev  6 7 [8] 9 10   next >   >>
Login
Message << Older Topic   Newer Topic >>
RE: 1.04.16 Fulkerson vs KLilly T35 - 5/16/2011 11:51:21 PM   
randallw

 

Posts: 2050
Joined: 9/2/2010
Status: offline 		Larry lost a bit of heavy industry and armaments factories; that can happen when there's so much to juggle.  A checklist, whether physical or mental, can cut down on that.

(in reply to Klydon)
Post #: 211
RE: 1.04.16 Fulkerson vs KLilly T35 - 5/17/2011 2:00:49 AM   
larryfulkerson


Posts: 34422
Joined: 4/17/2005
From: Tucson, AZ
Status: online 		Hey ....... that's a really good idea.  Thanks.

(in reply to randallw)
Post #: 212
RE: 1.04.16 Fulkerson vs KLilly T37 - 5/18/2011 1:17:23 PM   
larryfulkerson


Posts: 34422
Joined: 4/17/2005
From: Tucson, AZ
Status: online 		Here's the T37 front lines before any Soviet movement. Kevin and I are trading the same hexes from one turn to the next. He's gaining
strength in his units again so I guess the main part of the Blizzard is over. I'm going to have to start thinking defensively now again.
In my game with Pelton I've already been rounded up, isolated, and pocketed big time and I expect the same thing to start happening in this game.




Attachment (1)

(in reply to larryfulkerson)
Post #: 213
RE: 1.04.16 Fulkerson vs KLilly T37 - 5/18/2011 1:17:50 PM   
larryfulkerson


Posts: 34422
Joined: 4/17/2005
From: Tucson, AZ
Status: online 		Here's the T37 OOB:




Attachment (1)

(in reply to larryfulkerson)
Post #: 214
RE: 1.04.16 Fulkerson vs KLilly T37 - 5/18/2011 1:18:15 PM   
larryfulkerson


Posts: 34422
Joined: 4/17/2005
From: Tucson, AZ
Status: online 		Here's the T37 ground losses so far:




Attachment (1)

(in reply to larryfulkerson)
Post #: 215
RE: 1.04.16 Fulkerson vs KLilly T37 - 5/18/2011 1:18:44 PM   
larryfulkerson


Posts: 34422
Joined: 4/17/2005
From: Tucson, AZ
Status: online 		And the state of Soviet production as it is now:




Attachment (1)

(in reply to larryfulkerson)
Post #: 216
RE: 1.04.16 Fulkerson vs KLilly T37 - 5/18/2011 3:15:47 PM   
heliodorus04


Posts: 1627
Joined: 11/1/2008
From: Denver Colorado
Status: offline 		I hadn't checked in here in a half dozen turns.  Your counter-offensives with Bryansk and Western fronts are impressive and make me smile.

Any reason you can see why you're generally being a lot more effective in that region?

As you start thinking of defense again, remember to watch where his panzers go toward Spring.  If I were playing Axis, I'd be trying to set you up so I could cut off both Bryansk and Western fronts with a big panzer-pincer from north and south.  To me, that opportunity would be more important than the Crimea, if it was available.


_____________________________

Spring 2018-Playing: Demyansk Shield: Frozen Fortress; Advanced Squad Leader,
Reading: Bonhoeffer
Rulebooks: ASL (always ASL), Holland'44, Demyansk Shield: Frozen Fortress

(in reply to larryfulkerson)
Post #: 217
RE: 1.04.16 Fulkerson vs KLilly T37 - 5/18/2011 10:33:40 PM   
Tarhunnas


Posts: 3161
Joined: 1/27/2011
From: Hex X37, Y15
Status: offline 		Can't see many panzers or motorized divisions in the front. Might they be wintering somewhere cozy? In that case they could deliver an offensive fairly quickly in an unexpected place come spring.

< Message edited by Tarhunnas -- 5/18/2011 10:34:30 PM >

_____________________________

Read my AAR:s ye mighty, and despair!
41Ger
41Sov
41Ger
42Ger
42Sov

(in reply to heliodorus04)
Post #: 218
RE: 1.04.16 Fulkerson vs KLilly T37 - 5/19/2011 12:16:47 AM   
larryfulkerson


Posts: 34422
Joined: 4/17/2005
From: Tucson, AZ
Status: online
quote:

ORIGINAL: heliodorus04

I hadn't checked in here in a half dozen turns.  Your counter-offensives with Bryansk and Western fronts are impressive and make me smile.

Any reason you can see why you're generally being a lot more effective in that region?

Um........for some reason the Axis units facing the Bryansk and Western fronts are weaker than the Axis units in other parts of the front. That's the only thing I can think of to explain the successes in attacking there. Kevin's supply lines must be further away or something to make the units on the line CV=1 and CV=2 in that region. Either that or the places to hide from the effects of winterization must be less or something. I'd have to ask Kevin and / or play the Axis side to know for sure I guess.

(in reply to heliodorus04)
Post #: 219
RE: 1.04.16 Fulkerson vs KLilly T37 - 5/19/2011 9:35:57 AM   
randallw

 

Posts: 2050
Joined: 9/2/2010
Status: offline 		I see a few rifle divisions scattered far behind the front; any plans for them?

(in reply to larryfulkerson)
Post #: 220
RE: 1.04.16 Fulkerson vs KLilly T37 - 5/19/2011 11:35:03 AM   
larryfulkerson


Posts: 34422
Joined: 4/17/2005
From: Tucson, AZ
Status: online
quote:

ORIGINAL: randallw
I see a few rifle divisions scattered far behind the front; any plans for them?

It's past the November '41 cut-off for units to reconstitute after they die so I've been building some Rifle Brigades so as to be able to try to build a line of fortified positions behind the front because pretty soon now Kevin is going to unleash his '42 offensive campaign and I'm pretty sure he's going to build some pockets and destroy a bunch of my folks. The Soviet Winter '41-'42 offensive was relatively mild as far as destroying some Axis units ( I think maybe I killed about 3 or 4 divisions of his ) and Kevin is in pretty good shape so far so I expect a rather bold '42 Axis spring / summer offensive because he's pretty aggressive for his age and temperment.

(in reply to randallw)
Post #: 221
RE: 1.04.22 Fulkerson vs KLilly T39 - 5/21/2011 11:45:05 AM   
larryfulkerson


Posts: 34422
Joined: 4/17/2005
From: Tucson, AZ
Status: online 		Here's the T39 front lines before any Soviet movement:




Attachment (1)

(in reply to larryfulkerson)
Post #: 222
RE: 1.04.22 Fulkerson vs KLilly T39 - 5/21/2011 11:46:02 AM   
larryfulkerson


Posts: 34422
Joined: 4/17/2005
From: Tucson, AZ
Status: online 		And here's the T39 ground losses so far:




Attachment (1)

(in reply to larryfulkerson)
Post #: 223
RE: 1.04.22 Fulkerson vs KLilly T39 - 5/21/2011 11:46:23 AM   
larryfulkerson


Posts: 34422
Joined: 4/17/2005
From: Tucson, AZ
Status: online 		And the OOB:




Attachment (1)

(in reply to larryfulkerson)
Post #: 224
RE: 1.04.22 Fulkerson vs KLilly T39 - 5/21/2011 11:46:46 AM   
larryfulkerson


Posts: 34422
Joined: 4/17/2005
From: Tucson, AZ
Status: online 		And the state of Soviet production:




Attachment (1)

(in reply to larryfulkerson)
Post #: 225
RE: 1.04.22 Fulkerson vs KLilly T39 - 5/21/2011 12:24:19 PM   
larryfulkerson


Posts: 34422
Joined: 4/17/2005
From: Tucson, AZ
Status: online 		I'm preparing for Kevin's onslaught by spreading out in a carpet so as to contain his pushes because I know he's going to start pushing big time soon. 

(in reply to larryfulkerson)
Post #: 226
RE: 1.04.22 Fulkerson vs KLilly T39 - 5/21/2011 2:31:29 PM   
Klydon


Posts: 2292
Joined: 11/28/2010
Status: offline 		Yeah, notice the build up NW of Sumy. The Sumy sailent is an obvious target for him to go for a big encirclement. I don't see his other panzers however. How is your recon going? Need to figure out where they are or you might find out the hard way. 

(in reply to larryfulkerson)
Post #: 227
RE: 1.04.14 Fulkerson vs KLilly T19 - 5/22/2011 11:57:25 PM   
JKLilly

 

Posts: 51
Joined: 8/24/2010
Status: offline 		Hi all -- reporting in.

I've gotten far enough to see the advice up to before the snow. My front was a mess, but am sorting it out. Planning my 42 attacks for late Spring.

My armor is in much better shape than my last game with Larry. I only have a few 85 plus morale units unfortunately. Didn't read the excellent string about keeping those units for exploitation. But I do have a few SS units grouped together.

So, for the 42 campaign, do I attack in the North or do the historical thing and attack South? Since I have both Leningrad and Moscow, I have no historical guide. For now, I've been trying to clear bridgeheads that can be used against me in offensives.

(in reply to heliodorus04)
Post #: 228
RE: 1.04.14 Fulkerson vs KLilly T42 - 5/23/2011 2:52:01 PM   
larryfulkerson


Posts: 34422
Joined: 4/17/2005
From: Tucson, AZ
Status: online 		I for one would like to see an historical drive on Stalingrad in spring / summer of '42. Just a thought.

Here's the front lines in T42 before any Soviet movement.




Attachment (1)

(in reply to JKLilly)
Post #: 229
RE: 1.04.14 Fulkerson vs KLilly T42 - 5/23/2011 2:54:39 PM   
larryfulkerson


Posts: 34422
Joined: 4/17/2005
From: Tucson, AZ
Status: online 		And here's the ground losses so far:





Attachment (1)

(in reply to larryfulkerson)
Post #: 230
RE: 1.04.14 Fulkerson vs KLilly T42 - 5/23/2011 2:55:00 PM   
larryfulkerson


Posts: 34422
Joined: 4/17/2005
From: Tucson, AZ
Status: online 		And here's the OOB:




Attachment (1)

(in reply to larryfulkerson)
Post #: 231
RE: 1.04.14 Fulkerson vs KLilly T42 - 5/23/2011 2:55:27 PM   
larryfulkerson


Posts: 34422
Joined: 4/17/2005
From: Tucson, AZ
Status: online 		And here's the state of Soviet production:




Attachment (1)

(in reply to larryfulkerson)
Post #: 232
RE: 1.04.14 Fulkerson vs KLilly T42 - 5/23/2011 3:01:31 PM   
larryfulkerson


Posts: 34422
Joined: 4/17/2005
From: Tucson, AZ
Status: online 		And to change the subject for a second: I've been letting the AI play against the AI just to see what would happen and so far all the 1.04 games have been a draw.




Attachment (1)

(in reply to larryfulkerson)
Post #: 233
RE: 1.04.14 Fulkerson vs KLilly T43 - 5/24/2011 6:44:31 PM   
larryfulkerson


Posts: 34422
Joined: 4/17/2005
From: Tucson, AZ
Status: online 		KLilly has started his spring/summer '42 offensive. He did some major attacking and made some progress.
I'm going to have to do some re-arrangement of my lines as a result. Here's the front lines in T43 before any Soviet movement:




Attachment (1)

< Message edited by larryfulkerson -- 5/24/2011 6:45:32 PM >

(in reply to larryfulkerson)
Post #: 234
RE: 1.04.14 Fulkerson vs KLilly T43 - 5/24/2011 7:02:18 PM   
76mm


Posts: 3056
Joined: 5/2/2004
From: Moscow, Russia
Status: offline 		If he's doing it right, he's going to be able to blow through your lines pretty easily, actually I find the fact that he only went one hex deep a little odd.

Find where the panzers are, and everywhere else, reduce the carpet and start attacking his front line, if nothing else to keep him a bit off balance, and more importantly, win the battle of attrition.

(in reply to larryfulkerson)
Post #: 235
RE: 1.04.14 Fulkerson vs KLilly T43 - 5/24/2011 10:26:41 PM   
Pawlock

 

Posts: 1041
Joined: 9/18/2002
From: U.K.
Status: offline 		Larry , hope you dont mind me offering some advice for what its worth.
Your front looks very uniform thick carpet, but from what I can tell you have no reserve armies in the rear. If it were me I would peel a layer off the carpet and reduce the strenght of the front where hes weakest and start making 2-3 reserve armies for starters sittiing in rearward strategic locations on a rail line ready to be deployed to trouble spots quickly. Keep these armies attached to Stavka for maximum flexibility.


(in reply to 76mm)
Post #: 236
RE: 1.04.14 Fulkerson vs KLilly T43 - 5/25/2011 4:26:12 AM   
larryfulkerson


Posts: 34422
Joined: 4/17/2005
From: Tucson, AZ
Status: online
quote:

ORIGINAL: Pawlock
Larry , hope you dont mind me offering some advice for what its worth.
Your front looks very uniform thick carpet, but from what I can tell you have no reserve armies in the rear. If it were me I would peel a layer off the carpet and reduce the strenght of the front where hes weakest and start making 2-3 reserve armies for starters sittiing in rearward strategic locations on a rail line ready to be deployed to trouble spots quickly. Keep these armies attached to Stavka for maximum flexibility.

See, this is why I keep loosing at these kinds of games. These good ideas just never occur to me. Of course I'll begin to build some reserve armies right away. Keeping them answerable to Stavka is a good idea too. Thanks.


(in reply to Pawlock)
Post #: 237
RE: 1.04.14 Fulkerson vs KLilly T43 - 5/25/2011 7:13:22 AM   
Commander Cody


Posts: 1450
Joined: 7/4/2003
From: Seoul, Korea
Status: offline 		Excellent AAR. If I could make a wee suggestion: it would be great if you could write the date of the turn, not just the turn number, at least once in a while. I don't have the game but will be buying it eventually.

Thanks,
CC

_____________________________

Beer, because barley makes lousy bread.

(in reply to larryfulkerson)
Post #: 238
RE: 1.04.14 Fulkerson vs KLilly T43 - 5/25/2011 3:36:30 PM   
Pelton


Posts: 9572
Joined: 4/9/2006
Status: offline 		Larry if I was you I only have a carpet 2 deep in the far north. The area is very bad for tanks, there is no industry so if you lose 8-10 hexs in the summer who cares. He would lose allot of men attacking. I would tstring that army south( yellow looking units) to take up positions of the next army to the south of it.

Ok once thats done slide the next army south ( brown units) also, stay 3 deep in that army gruop area.

Then string the purple army south staying 3 to 4 deep into the pink army areas.

This should free up the hole pink army gruop as a BIG reserve. You should be able to do this in 2 turns 3 at tops. All this is done at the same time not one army at a time over 4 turns.

The best thing is its right at his point of attack. Sliding troops is a pain in the butt, but you dont have to rail troops all over the map and all your units are still, digging an holding forts ect.

Also one thing that can really be a pain in the butt for me when I am attacking is when the russian defender puts their med strength units in the front lines, the weakest in the back. His best units and strongest hexs are in the 2 to 3 rows of the carpet or checker board.

The reason why this is done is it is hard to figure out where the enemys weakest points are an make cracking your defence much harder. If your best troops are in the front the GHC can simply wipe out your best troops with infantry, then the panzers have a field day on your weaker units.

Even using the carpet your should checker board your strong points in the middle rows. The weaker units are in the back digging. ALL your tank units should be in back so you can counter attack. You shouldn't have a single tank unit north of Moscow.

Thats my two cents.

Your doing much better in this game. You lost industry, but atleast your tank numbers are climbing in this game. Also your man power seems better and your winter offensive

was better. If you can keep him from bagging large number of troops you be in good shape. The front lines are really long, which is a huge advantage for you after 1942.

Pelton

< Message edited by Pelton -- 5/25/2011 3:46:09 PM >

(in reply to larryfulkerson)
Post #: 239
RE: 1.04.14 Fulkerson vs KLilly T43 - 5/25/2011 6:01:25 PM   
larryfulkerson


Posts: 34422
Joined: 4/17/2005
From: Tucson, AZ
Status: online 		Whoa.  Thanks for all the advice Pelton dude.  Writing AAR's is a good idea if only for all the good advice you get from the experts.

(in reply to Pelton)
Post #: 240
Page:   <<   < prev  6 7 [8] 9 10   next >   >>
All Forums >> [New Releases from Matrix Games] >> Gary Grigsby's War in the East Series >> After Action Reports >> RE: 1.04.16 Fulkerson vs KLilly T35 Page: <<   < prev  6 7 [8] 9 10   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

0.156