Matrix Games Forums

Command gets huge update!Order of Battle: Pacific Featured on Weekly Streaming SessionA new fight for Battle Academy!Buzz Aldrin's Space Program Manager is out for Mac!The definitive wargame of the Western Front is out now! War in the West gets teaser trailer and Twitch Stream!New Preview AAR for War in the West!War in the West Manual previewThe fight for Armageddon begins! The Matrix Holiday sales are starting today!
Forums  Register  Login  Photo Gallery  Member List  Search  Calendars  FAQ 

My Profile  Inbox  Address Book  My Subscription  My Forums  Log Out

RE: Pelton vs Kamil

 
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: Pelton vs Kamil Page: <<   < prev  7 8 [9] 10 11   next >   >>
Login
Message << Older Topic   Newer Topic >>
RE: Pelton vs Kamil - 11/19/2011 1:52:20 PM   
BigAnorak


Posts: 4678
Joined: 7/10/2006
From: The Duchy of Cornwall, nr England
Status: offline
Apparently 7 partisan attacks on railroads means the world is coming to an end - see tech support thread - classic Pelton.

(in reply to Kamil)
Post #: 241
RE: Pelton vs Kamil - 11/22/2011 4:06:33 AM   
Kamil

 

Posts: 1930
Joined: 2/5/2011
Status: offline
T88 (Feb '43)

Centre




Attachment (1)

(in reply to BigAnorak)
Post #: 242
RE: Pelton vs Kamil - 11/22/2011 4:07:59 AM   
Kamil

 

Posts: 1930
Joined: 2/5/2011
Status: offline
T88 (Feb '43)

South




Attachment (1)

(in reply to Kamil)
Post #: 243
RE: Pelton vs Kamil - 11/23/2011 3:55:11 AM   
Pelton

 

Posts: 6398
Joined: 4/9/2006
Status: offline
Turn 80 - 90 Trends
88 armaments captured.
93,000 manpower in pool +30,000
214,000 armaments in pool -130,000

Attacks——-Wins—-Losses———Ratio
51—————39———12————— 3.25 to 1

Counter Attacks———Wins—-Losses—–-
———49———————45———4——–—-

Losses from turn 80 to 90
————————-Men————Guns———-Tanks——Planes
GHC—————–251,000————4,752———1,019———480
SHC-—————–424,000———–-7,532———3,563-——2,938

OOB difference from turn 80 to 90.

GHC————–—+77,000———+1000-——— +600———–(-50)
SHC-—————+100,000——–+7,500———+3,500——–+3,000

Ratio of dead is 1.7 to 1
Now that I have allot of data as I do with my game vs Hoooper ( one of the 2 games that helped nerf 1v1=2v1)
The Ratio was 2.9 to 1 when I was in forts and 2.6 to 1 when I was retreating during the blizzard.
So 1.05 increased loses to Germans attacking and defending. End of story the math just don't lie.

http://www.matrixgames.com/forums/tm.asp?m=2847770

I can now say 100% that the ratio was changed during the 1.05 patch for 42 to 43.

BUT having said that, looking at Hooopers game and this game with and open mind. I would have to say the impact of armaments and their production + the removal of the 1v1=2v1 rule is having a big effect unless I am missing something.

Here is Hoooper vs Pelton

Turn 70 - 80
--- Attacks --- Retreats --- Held

SHC ---186--- 160 --- 26
GHC --- 45 --- 40 --- 5

Net Hexes - 78

Losses from turn 70 to 80
------- --- Men --- Guns --- Tanks
GHC --- 330,788 --- 9,960 --- 1,315
SHC --- 964,370 --- 15,638 --- 3,985

OOB difference from turn 70 to 80.

SHC --- + 696,866 --- + 19,957 --- +360 --- +5998
GHC --- -160,288 --- -3,702 ---+120 --- +120

Hoooper attacked 186 times or 18 attacks per turn suffered 964,000 KIA, but increased his OOB by 696,000. Their is a little trick that can be played to get a 500,000 burst (ask Flaviusx), but still and increase of 200,000. I tracked the loses until turn 110 and with loses per turn equalling this 10 turn sample Hoooper's army was slowly growing 200,000 per 10 turns. The German army was shrinking 160,000 every 10 turns

Kamil attacked 51 times, but over 8 turn we had cease fire for 2 to make up for fort decay bug.

So 8 attacks per turn suffered 424,000 and his OOB grew 100,000.
The German OOB also grew 77,000

At the current tempo of attacks it is a stalemate as long as I can stay in level 2 forts or behind rivers once the spring gets here.

I am guessing the impact of Kamil losing 88 armament points coupled with the reduction of output per armament point is why the war atleast at this point in 1943 is a stalemate.
The ratio is 1.7 to 1 so for Kamil to start to get my OOB to go down and not increase he would have had to suffered 131,000 more KIA to get my OOB to zero growth over 10 turns.

So at 1.7 to 1 odds and the current production Kamil would have to lose 31,000 men to get my OOB to brake even at this point during the war.

Now in the area of guns, planes and tanks he is winning slightly IF he increases the tempo of attacks by 2 or 3 per turn and win all 2 or 3.

Now I know some say armament points don't mean much, but I beleive this shows that from 43 to 45 it is a huge factor.

Vs Hoooper I only had 2.7 million men and was losing men, right now vs Kamil I have 3.9 million and I am gaining men every turn.

We were at about turn 30 when we changed over from 1.04 to 1.05 so if anything I would have had more armaments pts in the bank and men, not sure the effects on Kamils army.

< Message edited by Pelton -- 11/23/2011 5:13:32 AM >

(in reply to BigAnorak)
Post #: 244
RE: Pelton vs Kamil - 11/23/2011 5:28:24 AM   
Pelton

 

Posts: 6398
Joined: 4/9/2006
Status: offline
With the size of my army and new panzers arriving a counter attack is not out of the question at all come summer. Kamil looks thin is some areas of the front. Hes got his best units with allot of support in a few areas.

I have a few ideas but I have to see what Kamil gives me come June.

The one good thing is with all the counter attacking I am doing my panzers moral is rising.

Pelton

< Message edited by Pelton -- 11/23/2011 5:29:52 AM >

(in reply to Pelton)
Post #: 245
RE: Pelton vs Kamil - 11/23/2011 11:03:37 AM   
janh

 

Posts: 1227
Joined: 6/12/2007
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: Pelton

Turn 80 - 90 Trends
88 armaments captured.
93,000 manpower in pool +30,000
214,000 armaments in pool -130,000

Attacks——-Wins—-Losses———Ratio
51—————39———12————— 3.25 to 1

Counter Attacks———Wins—-Losses—–-
———49———————45———4——–—-

Losses from turn 80 to 90
————————-Men————Guns———-Tanks——Planes
GHC—————–251,000————4,752———1,019———480
SHC-—————–424,000———–-7,532———3,563-——2,938

OOB difference from turn 80 to 90.

GHC————–—+77,000———+1000-——— +600———–(-50)
SHC-—————+100,000——–+7,500———+3,500——–+3,000

Ratio of dead is 1.7 to 1
Now that I have allot of data as I do with my game vs Hoooper ( one of the 2 games that helped nerf 1v1=2v1)
The Ratio was 2.9 to 1 when I was in forts and 2.6 to 1 when I was retreating during the blizzard.
So 1.05 increased loses to Germans attacking and defending. End of story the math just don't lie.

http://www.matrixgames.com/forums/tm.asp?m=2847770

I can now say 100% that the ratio was changed during the 1.05 patch for 42 to 43.

BUT having said that, looking at Hooopers game and this game with and open mind. I would have to say the impact of armaments and their production + the removal of the 1v1=2v1 rule is having a big effect unless I am missing something.

Here is Hoooper vs Pelton

Turn 70 - 80
--- Attacks --- Retreats --- Held

SHC ---186--- 160 --- 26
GHC --- 45 --- 40 --- 5

Net Hexes - 78

Losses from turn 70 to 80
------- --- Men --- Guns --- Tanks
GHC --- 330,788 --- 9,960 --- 1,315
SHC --- 964,370 --- 15,638 --- 3,985

OOB difference from turn 70 to 80.

SHC --- + 696,866 --- + 19,957 --- +360 --- +5998
GHC --- -160,288 --- -3,702 ---+120 --- +120


Looks like you are doing quite well presently. If you contemplate an attack for summer 1943, putting in your new toys, the thought of the Kursk gamble comes up. So the game balance can't be far off since neither your lines nor the statistics of both sides are far off from any benchmark. Now which factor lead you there is more difficult to discern without more comparable games by you and similar opponents. Destroying armaments surely adds problems to the trouble a Soviet player is already facing in reshaping his wreck of an army in 41 to a juggernaut by summer 43 or 44. Then there is also you opponent's style of play, and the numerical manpower question.

Yet if I take your arguments about break-even points for pure man losses and growth, I think you also did significant damage to both manpower centers (can't find that data in your AAR so quickly, sorry) and you did some damage to the Red Army in the field. With a <=2:1 ratio in losses (or 1.7:1 if you wish), you can see how impactful the Soviet strategy of strength conservation rather than holding pure ground is for the Soviets in 1941 and 1942. Which is actually quite logic, since you will sooner or later be able to train those men up, get them experience and better weapons if they don't fall. That's what everyone would probably naturally always aim for.

This reminds much of how the Soviets "dragged" Napoleon into the depth of Russia and into over-extension instead of fighting for every inch, doesn't it? Also back at that time the Russians didn't falter because of loosing city after city, their European "industry" and manpower etc. I suppose it is among the best things a Soviet player can do as long as his units are rather of poor combat value, and his choice is between loosing territory, and territory and his army as well if he fights too much forward? Same probably will hold true for Axis in later war, though they will have less territory to trade when choosing the ground to make a stand...
On the other hand, this argument about loss and consequently net growth rates of both armies means to me that you have to reduce the Soviet Army as long as it is cheaper than 2:1 in Axis losses, i.e. that playing conservative in 1941 isn't the way to go, but rather be very aggressive at much increased own losses and attempt to attack right into snow and then withdraw slowly instead of stopping early and setting up fortified defenses? It is never as cheap to destroy the Soviets as early war... What do you think presently a German player should attempt given your analysis?

Looking at the above loss numbers for the Soviets, I have one question though: Hoopers losses as Soviets were tremendous, a net 1Mio men! That was with the 2:1 in place? 2:1 favored the Soviet and allowed to push Axis, albeit at a higher cost in losses. Perhaps after all that rule wasn't that bad in the latter regard: Since players have very good intel on the CV of both sides (rather than more pronounced FOW, or intel errors), they can much better pick fights with good success rates, and both sides can play conservative and only execute the low-loss/risk high-gain attacks rather than floundering badly at regular intervals. So was it that Hooper was just so aggressive that he also performed very costly attacks, or was it 2:1 that induced much higher aggressiveness? Should there be more FOW on detected CV, more variance on outcomes? Should there also be some FOW when looking at own unit stats, especially for units that are isolated from HQs/C&C? I would favor the latter, would make this look less gamey.

The highly costly Soviet counterattacks are on thing that for me shapes the early war years of this conflict, much as the desperate forward fighting of Germans and pockets like Stalingrad and Korsun belong to the later war years. However, in most games, neither side seems to push its units as hard to near exhaustion and depletion (neither do I when playing against AI; especially since I at every moment now the moral, strength, capacities of my units accurately, in contrast to a commander and staffs at that time who may have inaccurate or out-dated paper reports, or at times no returns when ordering them around). Part of this may be due to a change in expectation (of players, public, commanders...) today, where a few 10-10 dead in Iraq triggered large responses, while in WW2 that was just a cheap price.

< Message edited by janh -- 11/23/2011 11:12:51 AM >

(in reply to Pelton)
Post #: 246
RE: Pelton vs Kamil - 11/23/2011 2:09:11 PM   
Pelton

 

Posts: 6398
Joined: 4/9/2006
Status: offline
quote:

Yet if I take your arguments about break-even points for pure man losses and growth, I think you also did significant damage to both manpower centers (can't find that data in your AAR so quickly, sorry) and you did some damage to the Red Army in the field. With a <=2:1 ratio in losses (or 1.7:1 if you wish), you can see how impactful the Soviet strategy of strength conservation rather than holding pure ground is for the Soviets in 1941 and 1942. Which is actually quite logic, since you will sooner or later be able to train those men up, get them experience and better weapons if they don't fall. That's what everyone would probably naturally always aim for.


I did take Leningrad, was withen 4 hexes of Moscow and cleared out Rostov to Tula. So manpower hit was good, but would have been better IF I had taken Moscow.
Kamil's KIA was 2.87 million so I did not in anyway really put a hurting on him during 41 summer. My losses were 660,000.

Kamil had a very good Blizzard my losses were 1.1 million and Kamils losses were about 1 million.

We both dug in during summer of 42. I wasted about 600 ap pts tring to redploy all my support units hehehe. Then got nailed by the fort decay bug.

So Kamil was falling back as per evac and with draw tactics.

quote:

This reminds much of how the Soviets "dragged" Napoleon into the depth of Russia and into over-extension instead of fighting for every inch, doesn't it? Also back at that time the Russians didn't falter because of loosing city after city, their European "industry" and manpower etc. I suppose it is among the best things a Soviet player can do as long as his units are rather of poor combat value, and his choice is between loosing territory, and territory and his army as well if he fights too much forward? Same probably will hold true for Axis in later war, though they will have less territory to trade when choosing the ground to make a stand...
On the other hand, this argument about loss and consequently net growth rates of both armies means to me that you have to reduce the Soviet Army as long as it is cheaper than 2:1 in Axis losses, i.e. that playing conservative in 1941 isn't the way to go, but rather be very aggressive at much increased own losses and attempt to attack right into snow and then withdraw slowly instead of stopping early and setting up fortified defenses? It is never as cheap to destroy the Soviets as early war... What do you think presently a German player should attempt given your analysis?


I push very hard during 41, but generally have gone 100% for production.
I have changed up my tactics after 1.05 and am now doing both and have also tweaked my blizzard tactics. I push during the snow turns then with draw after pocketing some of the enemy.

quote:

Looking at the above loss numbers for the Soviets, I have one question though: Hoopers losses as Soviets were tremendous, a net 1Mio men! That was with the 2:1 in place? 2:1 favored the Soviet and allowed to push Axis, albeit at a higher cost in losses. Perhaps after all that rule wasn't that bad in the latter regard: Since players have very good intel on the CV of both sides (rather than more pronounced FOW, or intel errors), they can much better pick fights with good success rates, and both sides can play conservative and only execute the low-loss/risk high-gain attacks rather than floundering badly at regular intervals. So was it that Hooper was just so aggressive that he also performed very costly attacks, or was it 2:1 that induced much higher aggressiveness? Should there be more FOW on detected CV, more variance on outcomes? Should there also be some FOW when looking at own unit stats, especially for units that are isolated from HQs/C&C? I would favor the latter, would make this look less gamey.


Hoooper is very aggresive and follows the ratio/production numbers very closely. He used the 1v1=2v1 to the max as any player should and I would have. He also exploited the airfield rules which helped him have goood intel on cvs ect. The key was that 1v1=2v1 was ale to bleed the German army dry starting in September of 42, which was clearly unhistorical and made winning as Russian very easy in most cases by late 43 to early 44.

Game balance looks very close, but more data from more games would be nice.

Pelton

(in reply to janh)
Post #: 247
RE: Pelton vs Kamil - 11/26/2011 2:27:04 AM   
Kamil

 

Posts: 1930
Joined: 2/5/2011
Status: offline
T93 centre (Mar '43) Last turn of snow




Attachment (1)

(in reply to Pelton)
Post #: 248
RE: Pelton vs Kamil - 11/26/2011 2:28:31 AM   
Kamil

 

Posts: 1930
Joined: 2/5/2011
Status: offline
T93 south (Mar '43)

Small bridgehead across Dnepr - it will be really hard to hold it.




Attachment (1)

(in reply to Kamil)
Post #: 249
RE: Pelton vs Kamil - 11/26/2011 11:39:12 AM   
Pelton

 

Posts: 6398
Joined: 4/9/2006
Status: offline
Turn 94

Kamil stepped up the tempo from 8 attacks per turn to an average of 15 attacks per turn. This has lowered my OOB by 6000 or 1,500 per turn. The key for me is keeping troop strength above 2.5 million. During 44 I will lose troops to the westerh front, but for now its a stalemate.

I have a buffer off 1.4 million men, so to reach turn 225 I can lose on averge 10,769 men per turn and still be above the German army breaking point of 2.5 million men. This does not count replasements.


The next ten turns are mud off and on. This will be a good time for me to findly get troops organized and build up AP pool to 400. I have allot of good leaders in reserve. I have only made 4 command changes so far this hole game. I am guessing I could be winning more battles and taking less losses once I make these much needed changes over the next 10 turns before the summer of 43. Positions for the 43/44 winter and 44 summer lines will begin during the 43 summer

Summer 43 lines are basicly lined up and I be moving into them over the next few turns.
Game is basicly a stalemate and has been form March 42 to present with very little movement allong the front and little fighting.


Turn 90 - 100 Trends so far.

88 armaments captured.

Attacks———Wins—-Losses———Ration
—59—————36———23—————64%

Counter Attacks———Wins—-Losses—–-
——9———————9———0——–—-

---------GHC OOB----------------------SHC

91—3,922,000—+20,000———-8,900,000——-/ -2000
92—3,926,000—+4,000————8,941,000——-/+ 41,000
93—3,915,000—/-11,000———--8,941,000——/00 0
94—3,895,000—/-20,000———--8,944,000——/+3000



< Message edited by Pelton -- 11/26/2011 11:41:47 AM >

(in reply to Kamil)
Post #: 250
RE: Pelton vs Kamil - 12/5/2011 1:46:50 AM   
Pelton

 

Posts: 6398
Joined: 4/9/2006
Status: offline
Turn 90 - 100 Trends
88 armaments captured.
244,000 armaments in pool +30,000

Attacks———Wins—-Losses———Ration
—61—————38———23—————62%

Counter Attacks———Wins—-Losses—–-
——11———————10———1——–—-

Losses from turn 90 to 100
————————-Men————Guns———-Tanks——Planes
GHC—————–227,000————4,361———–729———340
SHC-—————-487,000———–-7,856———2,884-——3,491
Ratio—————2.1 to 1————1.8 to 1———4 to 1—10 to 1
OOB difference from turn 90 to 100.

GHC————–—(-27,000)——(-525)-—— +1070———–(-523)
SHC-————–+183,000——–+8,000———+3,600——–+2,000

Kamil has a small bridgehead over the rivers near D-Town. He was able to get them over the last turn before mud so there is no way I can push them out. I tried last turn with 180 CV stack and did not even reduce fort. I withdrew from east of rivers to west side. I am trying to keep losses at a min and as many units as possible in static mode.

Most of my panzer units have high CV’s so I should be able to counter attack any new bridge heads easily, because they will not be in level 2 forts.

Fort building has been painfully slow because of bad weather.

Troop levels have dropped some because of withdrawals.

The combat tempo is still low 6 attacks per turn. This of course will change come summer.
Most of my tank force is in reserve. I still have 3.86 million men and am far from the breaking point of 2.3 million.

Front has been static from turn 40 t0 100 basicly other then light fighting on the average of 5 attacks per turn if that.




Attachment (1)

_____________________________

GHC WitE 24 - 4 - 8
GHC WitW 0 - 0 - 0

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8DiSQ36zfWk

(in reply to BigAnorak)
Post #: 251
RE: Pelton vs Kamil - 12/5/2011 1:48:02 AM   
Pelton

 

Posts: 6398
Joined: 4/9/2006
Status: offline
AGC




Attachment (1)

_____________________________

GHC WitE 24 - 4 - 8
GHC WitW 0 - 0 - 0

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8DiSQ36zfWk

(in reply to Pelton)
Post #: 252
RE: Pelton vs Kamil - 12/5/2011 1:48:36 AM   
Pelton

 

Posts: 6398
Joined: 4/9/2006
Status: offline
AGS




Attachment (1)

_____________________________

GHC WitE 24 - 4 - 8
GHC WitW 0 - 0 - 0

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8DiSQ36zfWk

(in reply to Pelton)
Post #: 253
RE: Pelton vs Kamil - 12/14/2011 2:29:27 AM   
Pelton

 

Posts: 6398
Joined: 4/9/2006
Status: offline
Turn 101 - 110 Trends
88 armaments captured.
460,000 armaments in pool

Attacks———Wins—-Losses
—18—————11———08

Counter Attacks———Wins—-Losses—–-
——14-———————12———2——–—-

Losses from turn 101 to 110
————————-Men————Guns———-Tanks——Planes
GHC—————–144,000————2,323———–500———204
SHC-—————317,000———–-6,119———1,900-——2,800
Ratio—————2.2 to 1————2.6 to 1———4 to 1—14 to 1
OOB difference from turn 101 to 110.

GHC————–—(-43,000)——(400)-—— +600———–(-54)
SHC-————–+380,000——–+8,000———+700——–+3,500

Nothing really going on lines are basicly static still. I am guessing Kamil is waiting in the winter so rivers have no effect on combat.


_____________________________

GHC WitE 24 - 4 - 8
GHC WitW 0 - 0 - 0

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8DiSQ36zfWk

(in reply to Pelton)
Post #: 254
RE: Pelton vs Kamil - 12/24/2011 2:12:18 PM   
Pelton

 

Posts: 6398
Joined: 4/9/2006
Status: offline
July 1943 to September 1943

Turn 110 - 120 Trends

Tempo 5 attacks per turn.

88 armaments captured.
534,000 armaments in pool
3,718,000 total German manpower. Breaking point of German army 2.3 million.

Attacks———Wins—-Losses
—049————–35———15—

Counter Attacks———Wins—-Losses—–-
——02-———————02———0——–—-

Losses from turn 110 to 120
————————-Men————Guns———-Tanks——Planes
GHC—————–151,000————3,421———–700———413
SHC-—————-328,000———–-5,811———2,000-——2,139
Ratio—————2.2 to 1————1.7 to 1———2.8 to 1—5.2 to 1
OOB difference from turn 110 to 120.

GHC————–—(-103,000)——1,619-—— +361———–+45
SHC-————–+303,000———-1,853——–+402———+1134

As can see seen from data Kamil is stepping up his attacks as he get more an more Infantry corp. I am defending behind the river line as best I can.

I have stopped most counter attacks because the ratio is 1.5 to 1 when I get a retreat, rout or shatter. Which is a joke, but is the design of the game.
Historically during 1943 the ratio was 4 to 1, but 2 by 3 has set ratio's to less then 1/2 of historical. So basicly as German player you can not counter attack at all, because there is no point. One of the many boxes the german side has been put into.

The bad:

My OOB has dropped 100,000 men and Kamils has increased by 303,000.
With no counter attacks my moral is slowly dropping.

The positive:

At this tempo it will take Kamil about 140 turns to break the German army and there are only 105 turns left in game. Kamil will need to atleast double the tempo to 10 attacks per turn. I will not counter attack unless I have to, the effects are only negitive.

Big plus for me is my gun count is going up and so is my armament pts in pool, 544,000. For the next 10 turns I am going to jack up Gun/AT/AA TOE to 100%.

Kamil's gun and tank counts did not increase much even at the slow tempo, hopefully the armament hit will has an effect if the tempo increases.

I am tring for a draw, thats why I moved behind the rivers during summer of 1943 and not try to hold them until summer of 1944. From looking at other games come 1944 the German army is so weak and the russian so strong that the Reds have no issue crossing them.

So basicly I am tring to conserve my manpower for as long as possible. Holding land is not important until 1945. I am tring to keep from getting ground down as long as possible.

I need to use what little space I have to my advantage.

Pelton




_____________________________

GHC WitE 24 - 4 - 8
GHC WitW 0 - 0 - 0

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8DiSQ36zfWk

(in reply to Pelton)
Post #: 255
RE: Pelton vs Kamil - 12/25/2011 10:28:29 PM   
Pelton

 

Posts: 6398
Joined: 4/9/2006
Status: offline
Turn 121

7 more attacks with 3 holds and 4 retreats.

In the far north 2 attacks and I lost 1 hex that was littly defended.

The front has been the sight of hvy fighting the last 7 turns. The 41st PZ corp was rushed to the area to stablize the front.

In the area of D-town the front is being slowly pushed back. 3 hexes were lost.

A shorter defend line is fully done running from Nikolaev to the Dnepr River. I am gueesing once the rivers freeze Kamil will up the tempo, so I will need to make the lines as short as possible.

This turn I am starting work on my 1944 summer lines.




Attachment (1)

_____________________________

GHC WitE 24 - 4 - 8
GHC WitW 0 - 0 - 0

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8DiSQ36zfWk

(in reply to Pelton)
Post #: 256
RE: Pelton vs Kamil - 12/25/2011 10:29:11 PM   
Pelton

 

Posts: 6398
Joined: 4/9/2006
Status: offline
D-Town area




Attachment (1)

_____________________________

GHC WitE 24 - 4 - 8
GHC WitW 0 - 0 - 0

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8DiSQ36zfWk

(in reply to Pelton)
Post #: 257
RE: Pelton vs Kamil - 12/26/2011 2:44:14 AM   
Pelton

 

Posts: 6398
Joined: 4/9/2006
Status: offline
Mud comes just in time in the south.

Its time to shorten the lines and get rdy for the 43/44 winter.

I will take advantge of the mud and pull mech units from the front, shorten lines and regruop.

Pelton




Attachment (1)

_____________________________

GHC WitE 24 - 4 - 8
GHC WitW 0 - 0 - 0

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8DiSQ36zfWk

(in reply to Pelton)
Post #: 258
RE: Pelton vs Kamil - 1/2/2012 12:40:09 AM   
Pelton

 

Posts: 6398
Joined: 4/9/2006
Status: offline
October 1943 to December 1943
Turn 120 - 130 Trends
88 armaments captured.
515,000 armaments in pool -20,000

Attacks———Wins—-Losses
—58—————34———24—

Counter Attacks———Wins—-Losses—–-
——01-———————01———0——–—-

Losses from turn 120 - 130
————————-Men————Guns———-Tanks——Planes
GHC—————–145,000————3,400———–700———167
SHC-—————-357,000———–-6,100———2,520-——2,158
Ratio—————2.5 to 1————1.8 to 1———3.6 to 1— 13 to 1

OOB difference from turn 120 - 130 .

GHC————–— +104,000——1,580-—— +1,670———–+35
SHC-————–+232,000———-4,200——–+1,500———+8


< Message edited by Pelton -- 1/2/2012 8:53:08 AM >


_____________________________

GHC WitE 24 - 4 - 8
GHC WitW 0 - 0 - 0

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8DiSQ36zfWk

(in reply to Pelton)
Post #: 259
RE: Pelton vs Kamil - 1/2/2012 8:22:38 AM   
Pelton

 

Posts: 6398
Joined: 4/9/2006
Status: offline
North




Attachment (1)

< Message edited by Pelton -- 1/2/2012 8:23:23 AM >


_____________________________

GHC WitE 24 - 4 - 8
GHC WitW 0 - 0 - 0

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8DiSQ36zfWk

(in reply to Pelton)
Post #: 260
RE: Pelton vs Kamil - 1/2/2012 8:23:59 AM   
Pelton

 

Posts: 6398
Joined: 4/9/2006
Status: offline
South




Attachment (1)

_____________________________

GHC WitE 24 - 4 - 8
GHC WitW 0 - 0 - 0

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8DiSQ36zfWk

(in reply to Pelton)
Post #: 261
RE: Pelton vs Kamil - 1/2/2012 9:31:18 AM   
Schattensand

 

Posts: 39
Joined: 11/9/2011
Status: offline
How is it possible that your FBD3 and FBD4 make 12, even 14 hexes from turn 1 to turn 2? Since it does not make sense to place them just somewhere in the landscape not having converted the railroad to me it seems to be absolutly impossible to do more than 6 hexes even in the Baltikum, even if the way is totally cleared.
Are you a wizard?
Am I not understanding even the basics of the game?
Please enlighten me, us, how you speed up your repair units to that extend.

(in reply to Kamil)
Post #: 262
RE: Pelton vs Kamil - 1/2/2012 2:54:06 PM   
Pelton

 

Posts: 6398
Joined: 4/9/2006
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Schattensand

How is it possible that your FBD3 and FBD4 make 12, even 14 hexes from turn 1 to turn 2? Since it does not make sense to place them just somewhere in the landscape not having converted the railroad to me it seems to be absolutly impossible to do more than 6 hexes even in the Baltikum, even if the way is totally cleared.
Are you a wizard?
Am I not understanding even the basics of the game?
Please enlighten me, us, how you speed up your repair units to that extend.



This game started before the rail nerf hit. 1.05 was patched in turn 30ish I beleive.

So basicly it is a 1.05 game, none of the 1.04 effects really hurt this game.

Having said that rail repair is still bugged under 1.05, so it is still possible to get more then 4 hexes out of baltic area (5) and more then 6 in baltic area. The extra hexes are really only worth getting on turns 1-3 in north and center and 2-4 in south. After that rail i split rail units.

Your only going to get 2-4 extra hexes, so its not a game changer like under old rules where you could easly get and extra 15 hexes in the center by turn 10 or 10 in the south by turn 10.

Pelton

_____________________________

GHC WitE 24 - 4 - 8
GHC WitW 0 - 0 - 0

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8DiSQ36zfWk

(in reply to Schattensand)
Post #: 263
RE: Pelton vs Kamil - 1/2/2012 3:03:12 PM   
Pelton

 

Posts: 6398
Joined: 4/9/2006
Status: offline
So far from turn 70 to turn 130 I have been able to keep troop levels above 3.8 million men. Most units are at 90+ toe

My armament pool has started dropping, because I wanted to max all9(art,At,aa and spguns) toe levels at atleast 90% before 43/44 winter. All units are out of static as I expect Kamil to start hammering away once all rivers are froozen.

As can be seen I basicly stopped counter attacking because it is simply helping Kamil bring down troop levels. The ratio is so poor I am better off just building forts instead of counter attacking. It paid off as my overall OOB increased by 100,000 men.

I traded some space south of D-Town to shorten my lines so I have several tank corp and infantry corp in reserve now. This lowers the amount of hexes Kamil can easly attack.

Land means nothing to me as I am tring for the draw so at some point I will with draw to my 1944 summer line.This should also give me a few turns to build the line as Kamil RH will be far from front.

At that point I will not retreat any more and start fighting for every hex.

The only thing that matters to me is :

1. Keeping German OOB above 2.3 million
2. Berlin
3. Morale or infantry units.

Pelton

< Message edited by Pelton -- 1/2/2012 3:05:16 PM >


_____________________________

GHC WitE 24 - 4 - 8
GHC WitW 0 - 0 - 0

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8DiSQ36zfWk

(in reply to Pelton)
Post #: 264
RE: Pelton vs Kamil - 1/2/2012 4:21:25 PM   
Q-Ball


Posts: 5588
Joined: 6/25/2002
From: Chicago, Illinois
Status: offline
I would think you have to do some easy attacks with Infantry, just to keep their morale up. I doesn't seem like you are pressed yet in terms of morale, but I think you need to plan easy attacks to build morale.

(in reply to Pelton)
Post #: 265
RE: Pelton vs Kamil - 1/2/2012 4:41:13 PM   
Encircled


Posts: 1044
Joined: 12/30/2010
From: Northern England
Status: offline
Watching this one with interest as I've taken over a game with the Germans on the back foot, and ideas would be greatly appreciated!

Looks like you are doing pretty well though Pelton

(in reply to Q-Ball)
Post #: 266
RE: Pelton vs Kamil - 1/2/2012 5:43:03 PM   
Pelton

 

Posts: 6398
Joined: 4/9/2006
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: Encircled

Watching this one with interest as I've taken over a game with the Germans on the back foot, and ideas would be greatly appreciated!

Looks like you are doing pretty well though Pelton


I have watched Katza's and Tarhunnas's late war games closely to learn what I could as far as troop numbers and trends go.

I also used my exp from my game vs Hoooper.

I am preety much going with the German OOB as the Russian OOB is kinda meaningless at this pt because of the huge manpower buffer they get.

Katza and Tarhunnas are basicly using the reserve strategy. I am going with the as strong as possible front to keep Kamil from having to many easy attacks. This is greatly limiting his attacks to only is very strongest units.
I also retreated behind the rivers during 1943 to again limited his possible attacks.

This has 2 positive effects. and 1 negitive effect.

1. It forses the tempo to be low, 3 attacks per turn for the last 60 turns. He won 66%. This has kept losses LT so my OOB has gone up 100,000 in 60 turns.
2. With Kamil only winning 2 battles a turn on average this has kept my Morale from falling.

The negitive effect is that I can't counter attack hardly at all, because only his very best troops are out of forts in most cases. So I take a hvy hit even if I win the battle.

My #1 job is to keep the tempo low and my troop numbers at 3.7 million for as long as possible. It will take some time to break the German army with these numbers. From my past exp and looking at other AAR's the min time German army's have been broken from 3.3 million was able 40 turns because of mud.
In those cases the German players were counter atacking allot.
So if I only counter attack the min I could string it out to 50 and with the extra troops(3.8) I could possibly go 70 turns. I still have a buffer of land I can trade off and gain some turns. So it looks to be close going 100% by current trends.

I am just not sure, because this defence has neer been done and I do not 100% know the effects of the 88 armament pts I destoryed.

The trend of the last 60 turns will not be a total reflextion of the last 95 I am sure.

I am 100% sure I will get nothing better then a draw.

I made allot of mistakes during 42 and early 43, which would have greatly helped me. But I have learnt allot for this game which will greatly aid me if I ever get another game into late 42 to 43 and put me in a much better position then I am in this game.

Pelton

< Message edited by Pelton -- 1/2/2012 5:45:44 PM >


_____________________________

GHC WitE 24 - 4 - 8
GHC WitW 0 - 0 - 0

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8DiSQ36zfWk

(in reply to Encircled)
Post #: 267
RE: Pelton vs Kamil - 1/2/2012 5:48:20 PM   
Baelfiin

 

Posts: 1405
Joined: 6/7/2006
Status: online
Have you had any success with reserves Pelton?
I know for a fact I gutted myself counterattacking vs Hooper.

_____________________________

"We are going to attack all night, and attack tomorrow morning..... If we are not victorious, let no one come back alive!" -- Patton
WITE-Beta
WITW-Alpha

(in reply to Pelton)
Post #: 268
RE: Pelton vs Kamil - 1/2/2012 5:55:11 PM   
Pelton

 

Posts: 6398
Joined: 4/9/2006
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: Baelfiin

Have you had any success with reserves Pelton?
I know for a fact I gutted myself counterattacking vs Hooper.


No I have not used them at all.

Up until the last turn I had had 70 units in static mode to help conserve losses and with 450 in the bank I could switch them all on in a sigle turn.

I figure he be hitting me as the rivers just frooze over and I do not want to lose a single unit to a pocket..

I have some plans for spring and need all my units out of static. I will have to save up about 200 ap before summer 44 to put at least 60 units in static again.

I am expecting losses to be hvy over the next 20 turn trend.

I agree the loses are just stupid counter attacking. Your better off building 10 forts a turn and setting toe to 50%.
Just let him pound away and save men an armament points for the struggle at the end when counter attacking will mean something.

Pelton


< Message edited by Pelton -- 1/2/2012 6:06:13 PM >


_____________________________

GHC WitE 24 - 4 - 8
GHC WitW 0 - 0 - 0

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8DiSQ36zfWk

(in reply to Baelfiin)
Post #: 269
RE: Pelton vs Kamil - 1/3/2012 4:26:33 AM   
Pelton

 

Posts: 6398
Joined: 4/9/2006
Status: offline
It looks like the Red Steam Roller has begun.

Over the last 2 turns the tempo has picked up with

SHC—-Attacks———Wins—-Losses
———-—27—————15———12—

GHC—-Counter Attacks———Wins—-Losses—–-
——————02-——————---—02———0——–—-

German OOB turn 130: 3,820,000
German OOB: 3,818,000
Trend in German OOB: -4,000

AGN: Loses several hexes in Finland and one hex to east of Leningrad.




Attachment (1)

_____________________________

GHC WitE 24 - 4 - 8
GHC WitW 0 - 0 - 0

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8DiSQ36zfWk

(in reply to Pelton)
Post #: 270
Page:   <<   < prev  7 8 [9] 10 11   next >   >>
All Forums >> [New Releases from Matrix Games] >> Gary Grigsby's War in the East Series >> After Action Reports >> RE: Pelton vs Kamil Page: <<   < prev  7 8 [9] 10 11   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

0.133