RE: Extra grain for the horse = HQB?

Matrix Games Forums

Join the Matrix Team at Historicon!

Recruiting Privates for Germany at War: Barbarossa 1941!

Ageod takes you back to the Civil War

Battle Academy iPad and PC 50 per cent off!

Close Combat Last Stand Arnhem v5.60.53 update

Allied Corps Walkthrough playlist and AAR

Conflict of Heroes: Ghost Divisions Released!

Pandora Beta Playthrough Videos

Germany at War: Barbarossa 1941 Announced!

Great Battles Medieval coming to your tablet with a 50 per cent off launch sale!

Forums Register Login Photo Gallery Member List Search Calendars FAQ

My Profile Inbox Address Book My Subscription My Forums Log Out

RE: Extra grain for the horse = HQB?

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: Extra grain for the horse = HQB?

Page: << < prev 3 4 5 6 [7]

Message

<< Older Topic Newer Topic >>

RE: Extra grain for the horse = HQB? - 11/11/2012 1:38:47 PM

Pelton

Posts: 4379
Joined: 4/9/2006
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Walloc

This is at essence of my point. If u would want the german overall CV to fall. Moral and exp is not necesarrily the only key. Not thats they dont per above doesnt figur into the equation. Simple math. A 70/70 div is 0.49 effecient. 0.7*0.7. A 80/80 is 64% effecient. 0.8*0.8 = 0.64.
So even tho its only 10 better its in fact. 64/49*100 = approx 130% better if exactly same number and type of devices. All that doesnt change the fact that number of devices in the unit alters its CV too.
By halfing number of devices u half the CV of the unit.

That sounds nice but doesn't work in game vs a GHC that knows what hes doing.

1. Static mode. -15,000 losses per turn.
2. Reserver mode defences.

In most games if the games close to even the GHC stays on the offensive until late 42 or mid 42. GHC stops advancing and diggs in. After 1.05 we see this happening more and it works, because of lower manpower outputs. SHC OOB is between 6 to 7 million in these cases and GHC is at about 3.2 to 3.6 million.

SHC is not powerfull enough to attack in more then a few spots and GHC #s increase by atleast 10,000 per turn, so plus + 250,000 men, 100's of forts and 1000's of tanks by January 43 when SHC can convert fully to Red 2.0. Still SHC will be hard pressed to get the min 12 to 15 retreats needed to keep the GHC OOB from being static during 43 as seen in allot of gaames.

At this point GHC start getting allot more new units because of the build up to Kursk. So GHC numbers grow quickly to 4 million.

The key being morale again.

If the GHC was unable to mount an attack during 42 because of the blizzard losses and over all dropping morale then SHC could start attacking and lower or at least keep static the GHC OOB during 42-early.

Again morale the key factor, the rest of stats matter but not as much to GHC.

If you want to know your chances of winnng as GHC just track your infantry morale.

_____________________________

GHC
15 - 3 - 7

10 games ended in 41 (10-0-0)
4 games ended in 42 (4-0-2)
3 games ended in 43 (1-2-3)
1 game ended in 44 (0-1-2)

On leave until 9/13

(in reply to Walloc)

Post #: 181

RE: Extra grain for the horse = HQB? - 11/11/2012 1:59:00 PM

Pelton

Posts: 4379
Joined: 4/9/2006
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: randallw

There's a vague rumor that the Soviets were the eventual victor on the Eastern Front...obviously propaganda....how could it happen with the Germans having magical Stuka bombs, and most Soviet soldiers being untrained, armed with half a clip, and almost no artillery ammunition to support them?

Generally I read historly books to figure that out. You could start there.

Air War:

1.Basicly western allies were bombing the crap out of Germany so allot of German fighters had to be moved to homeland defence.
2. SHC air units gained exp very slowly and they out numbered German plans by allot.
3. Slowly over time mid-43 the SHC was able to take control of the air space over 95% of the front. GHC was still able to contest air control in small areas when needed.
4. Stuka's I am guessing you dont know were dive bombers and did poorly vs even russian fighters.
5. So Germanys tactical air support was taken out of the picture on Eastern and Western fronts, greatly redusing Germanys advantage.

I have already explained how the ground war was won but I do it again.

With the wall coming down in 91 the records have been open and its clear that Russia was running out of men by late 44. They were as Germany was pressing 15+ yr olds, 50+ yr olds and millions of women into service.

The russians simply did the WW1 thing.

SHC need to take town x guarded by 1 regiment.

1. Bomb town.
2. 1st rifle division attacks and loses.
3. Bomb town.
4. 2nd rifle division attacks and loses.
5. Bomb town.
6. 3rd rifle division attacks and loses.
7. Bomb town.
8. 4th rifle division attacks and loses.
9. Bomb town.
10. 5th rifle division attacks and loses.
11. Bomb town.
12. 6th rifle division attacks and wins woot! We are amazing Generals!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

This attack happens over 3 or 4 days. The Germans had no or little reserves, they just get tired and be forsed to retreat because of the rRed armys amazing tactics.

I have to add the Germans had to pull close to 100 divisions to defend the Southern and Western Fronts in late 43 and early 44.
So an advance in 43-44 would have been much much more costly if even possible for Russia, because Germans would still have had control of the air and had another million plus men on the eastern front.

This pipe dream of Russia being able to solo Germany is just that a pipe dream when one removes politics and simply looks at the numbers of German planes and men not even on the eastern front from late 42 - 44.

< Message edited by Pelton -- 11/11/2012 2:00:20 PM >

_____________________________

GHC
15 - 3 - 7

10 games ended in 41 (10-0-0)
4 games ended in 42 (4-0-2)
3 games ended in 43 (1-2-3)
1 game ended in 44 (0-1-2)

On leave until 9/13

(in reply to randallw)

Post #: 182

RE: Extra grain for the horse = HQB? - 11/11/2012 3:52:31 PM

Walloc

Posts: 2543
Joined: 10/30/2006
From: Denmark
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Pelton

There you go now add in disruption, wooot we have a winner.

Again your wrong.

I also said 1-5 CV per unit and not 1. Most would start out with 1 or 2. Thats in a clear hex so higher CV is possible defending.

quote:

ORIGINAL: Pelton
The Russian units are simply over rated by a factor of 3x-4X and the combat engine is not even simply realistic. Range/fire control/surpression fire and radio contact between small units/single tanks is not factored into the comat engine at all.

If ur changing position thats great. I have no problem with ppl comming to more informed opinions. If any thing it a thing to be appriciated.
Now changing 1-5 CV can mean alot with out being more specific its impossible to judge the impact of that. Realities of cutting down the CV with 400 % would be that an russian late 41 inf div at full ToE and 50/50 moral/exp would be CV 1'ish, this apartfrom a fee cav corps would be the highesr possible CV per unit. General lower, but this is what would be possible under peferct conditions.

What do u mean by "I also said 1-5 CV per unit and not 1." in pratical terms then?

quote:

ORIGINAL: Pelton

I also said 1-5 CV per unit and not 1.
Also they have these things called Sappers that can take a fort from 1 to 0, 2 to 0 and even 3 to 0 in a single combat.

Exactly and it goes both ways. Where as SHC cant directly attach sapper units, to units in 42 apart from the few corps they will make during 42. GHC side can. So all things given GHC has more control over where u get them used, where as SHC relies on rolls. That might or might not succede. By 43 is this changing as one would expect the rusisan being able to build more corps.

So how much do u wana reduce the CV of an late 41 ToE moral/exp 50/50 russian div with?
That way its easier to compute so sorta numbers giving an understanding of its effect.

quote:

So I am 100% right if the historical CV values were used then the 200 missing Rifle units could be put in game and make for a much more historical game

Answer to this depence on if that is only messure taken or not. If u look in my OP i toke it as a given that tying the russian down in some fashion to avoid the running. If u add more troops/manpower but lower their CV yes u can get an effect of gettign closer to historic losses and thats fine. That doesnt per say solve the problem of the fact that the german army was stopped. If u lower SHC max CV per hex, again depending on by how much. Keeping Axis CV the same. The logic is only as follows that it be even harder to stop the GHC side than now.

Then u have an effect that fatigue plays which is very real, but it has a max, simply how the engine works. If u reduce the CV that SHC is able to project out of a hex, there will be a breaking point. Where that gets so low that no matter giving GHC units max 1/3 reducting in CV, that u by simpel math cant take any hex. Or at leased so hard that the idea that u have that the extra russians divs will be able to attack time after time and be succesfull cuz of teh faitgue effect, simply doest add up mathematicly or so rarely that it wont have teh effect u imagien. Recuding as per first suggestion of a factor 3-4x willl be far beyond that breaking point.

quote:

ORIGINAL: Pelton
There is for some reason allot of restance withen 2by3 to keep Russian Corp CV 3x higher then German Infantry CV. More to do with politics then history.

When clearly a full toe good morale german regiment should have same CV as a rifle Corp.

Right, that would mean a full strength german div would have the same CV as 3 russian corps, well presumably a bit more from teh divisional assets not the in the regiment but lets let that pass. So if 6 corps attacks from 2 hexes u can make it a 2-1 just. Nothing counting in any defensive modifiers. Lets put in a river. Then the attack is down 1-1 and added in that german divs has max 99 fatigue from how ever many soak up attacks and the russians are 100% fresh. Then u land at approx 1.3- 1 attack. So u w would hafta reduce the german div by disruption and fire power by at leased another 40% ish to get to 2-1. Is that impossible with art, and GS, no tis not. But this is again assuming not a single fort lvl, that its a clear hex, no reserve commiment or any thing else and u can only under the best cuircumstances barely get a 2-1.
Now imagien build a lvl 3/4 or fort line behind a riverline, but more than 1 div in the clear hexes and using terrain in hexes where it is to have just 1 div. U would never be able to crack such a line and if u did they would be thrown back since they would have next to no strength left after entering the hex along with ur reduced CV by a automatic german pz/mot counter assault. Then u just put 2 mot/pz divs in that hex and its inconqueble until forts a build back up. Replace with inf div.
Rinse and repreat. No reason to play the game.

quote:

ORIGINAL: Pelton

quote:

ORIGINAL: Walloc

This is at essence of my point. If u would want the german overall CV to fall. Moral and exp is not necesarrily the only key. Not thats they dont per above doesnt figur into the equation. Simple math. A 70/70 div is 0.49 effecient. 0.7*0.7. A 80/80 is 64% effecient. 0.8*0.8 = 0.64.
So even tho its only 10 better its in fact. 64/49*100 = approx 130% better if exactly same number and type of devices. All that doesnt change the fact that number of devices in the unit alters its CV too.
By halfing number of devices u half the CV of the unit.

That sounds nice but doesn't work in game vs a GHC that knows what hes doing.

Its exactly how the math works. Point to any flaw and ill happily concede it.

quote:

ORIGINAL: Pelton
In most games if the games close to even the GHC stays on the offensive until late 42 or mid 42. GHC stops advancing and diggs in. After 1.05 we see this happening more and it works, because of lower manpower outputs. SHC OOB is between 6 to 7 million in these cases and GHC is at about 3.2 to 3.6 million.

SHC is not powerfull enough to attack in more then a few spots and GHC #s increase by atleast 10,000 per turn, so plus + 250,000 men, 100's of forts and 1000's of tanks by January 43 when SHC can convert fully to Red 2.0. Still SHC will be hard pressed to get the min 12 to 15 retreats needed to keep the GHC OOB from being static during 43 as seen in allot of gaames.

At this point GHC start getting allot more new units because of the build up to Kursk. So GHC numbers grow quickly to 4 million.

The key being morale again.

If the GHC was unable to mount an attack during 42 because of the blizzard losses and over all dropping morale then SHC could start attacking and lower or at least keep static the GHC OOB during 42-early.

Again morale the key factor, the rest of stats matter but not as much to GHC.

If you want to know your chances of winnng as GHC just track your infantry morale.

Exactly and what is the common point in all of this. a Germn OOB that is continusly over inflated. Now i have no problem if ur doing better that would be able to get much higher manpower lvl, but when its in effect hard coded as of now. It isnt a question of doing better its how it is per default.
Is it better to have 1 mio man more with 80+ moral dvis than 1 mio more with 60+ moral divs ofc, logic for babies. Like wise it is logic that having a 4 mio man army of moral 80+ is better then having a 3 mio man 80+ moral army. U get 1/3 more overall CV for the army as an entirety. This ofc reflects in the game. So moral matters, but so does numbers.
So its simple that u here have a factor apart from moral where u can adjuest the game either way.

quote:

ORIGINAL: Pelton

I have already explained how the ground war was won but I do it again.

With the wall coming down in 91 the records have been open and its clear that Russia was running out of men by late 44. They were as Germany was pressing 15+ yr olds, 50+ yr olds and millions of women into service.

Lets look at how the game handles this. In 45 the manpower multiplier is 15 assuming u have liberated all of Russia by then and deducing teh manpower that has been permantly destroyed during the war u might have some thing along the lines of 3500-3600 ish in manpower. Plus some would prolly still be damaged but lets discount that.
15*3600= U get 54.000 man as replacement. Thats about the same a a 7m man army take in attrition. U then get kicks back from disabled. That is �% of ur disabled. That needs to cover all combat losses in ur turn and in the german turn or ur army is shrinking. So the game alrdy ably reflects that the russian are running out of manpower by then. If u were to take any where near historic losses u army would shrink considerably.

As a note on historic vs game. Historicly the russians mobilized 29.575.000 man. In a game following the historic time lines u in game would get some where between 15m to 17m man. Depending on how much damage the manpower center are judged to have taken. This isnt to say that the game as is should change that, but adds an element to a puzzle if one was to possible rebalance WiTE 1.0

So the germans recieve plenty more manpower than historic and russian far few. Most be another of those polices 2by3 games have.........

Kind regards,

Rasmus

< Message edited by Walloc -- 11/12/2012 11:37:39 AM >

(in reply to Pelton)

Post #: 183

RE: Extra grain for the horse = HQB? - 11/11/2012 7:48:52 PM

randallw

Posts: 1931
Joined: 9/2/2010
Status: offline

The Germans had a very modest number of Stukas deployed for the invasion ( around 500-600 ) yet they were the reason why the Germans did so well in the first two years?

(in reply to Walloc)

Post #: 184

RE: Extra grain for the horse = HQB? - 11/12/2012 7:47:16 AM

Karri

Posts: 722
Joined: 5/24/2006
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: randallw

The Germans had a very modest number of Stukas deployed for the invasion ( around 500-600 ) yet they were the reason why the Germans did so well in the first two years?

Pelton does not know much about history.

(in reply to randallw)

Post #: 185

RE: Extra grain for the horse = HQB? - 11/12/2012 10:09:00 AM

janh

Posts: 1150
Joined: 6/12/2007
Status: offline

Walloc, some very good points you have made on the last two pages. Tullius as well.

It all is mingled, low 41 German losses of course have much and everything to do with either weak Russian CV and their small reinforcement contingents (counters), and hence their less (largely un-) aggressive forward stance compared to history.

Give the Russians either stronger units (up morale, not element exp), and/or more units (ideally comparable to historical reinforcement schedules), and together with an unaltered combat engine it will allow more resistance and inflict a worthy number of casualties on the Germans, giving it more sense not to withdraw everywhere, even from poor defensive terrain, but counterattack, reopen more pockets and slow overall op-tempo etc.

Alternatively, leave morale alone, and readjust the combat engine (which truly is the same, as one is tuned to the other), so that morale-effects become less pronounced and even a fight of 45,000 morale 40 Russians against 15,000 morale 80 Germans will cause the Germans more attrition. No longer a 8,000 to 100 loss ratio and such events you'd think to be rare erring of the dice, but that appear to come out oft.

With stauncher Russians/more German attrition, you might come closer to the low-ToE divisions, more needs for refit breaks, more emptier pools, lower tempo and so on. You'll likely also see more Russians building morale beyond 50 that together with heavier German attrition and more ample Russians reinforcements will spiral the process into one direction. A positive feedback loop, kind of. One of the many in this game. Surely the blizzard penalties would have to be relieved largely in this case, maybe except for December when they truly had made their best gains. Whatever would suggest to do to get away from Russian and Axis withdrawal strategies, it will be hard to balance -- Pelton is right about that. Give them 200 extra divisions, and being as strong as they are now, it may already throw the balance in the opposite direction.

Available manpower and replacements blows up the Wehrmacht, that's right. There has been no AAR since the initial blizzard rules were phased out more than a year ago, in which an Axis player ended up with a force that is anywhere near as weak as the one depicted in the 42 GC start. Yet as a German player I'd allow my guys to be gutted for 3 blizzard months by holding forward hard, then 1M extra manpower may be a fair deal to make an interesting continuation of the game after winter. They are good for game balance and to reduce a bit the hindsight-related consequences, but in any wider sense, 1M extra are otherwise closer to Pelton's middle earth.

< Message edited by janh -- 11/12/2012 10:10:57 AM >

(in reply to Walloc)

Post #: 186

RE: Extra grain for the horse = HQB? - 11/12/2012 12:23:42 PM

mevstedt

Posts: 51
Joined: 9/12/2012
Status: offline

You make some valid points and while I would like to post a more extensive reply in regards to the exp/morale part I need to sort of shift through my thoughts on the subject before making such a post.

I'll reply to this part however.

quote:

ORIGINAL: janh
Available manpower and replacements blows up the Wehrmacht, that's right. There has been no AAR since the initial blizzard rules were phased out more than a year ago, in which an Axis player ended up with a force that is anywhere near as weak as the one depicted in the 42 GC start. Yet as a German player I'd allow my guys to be gutted for 3 blizzard months by holding forward hard, then 1M extra manpower may be a fair deal to make an interesting continuation of the game after winter. They are good for game balance and to reduce a bit the hindsight-related consequences, but in any wider sense, 1M extra are otherwise closer to Pelton's middle earth.

From my point of view the reason for keeping soviet replacements low as well as not providing the missing counters is likely because if what was historically present were put in the game, then the soviet red army would become a behemoth by -42 and you end up with an ahistorical result where "Case Blue" could never even be considered much less reach as far as it did. While I can see that as a valid reason I do not agree with it, I would prefer if the soviet army was in fact more on par with its historical counterpart and see that the above scenario is countered in other ways.

Now, the reason I bring this up is because it is exactly the same thing that happens in the wehrmacht of 41/42 only the other way around. The germans don't get as much losses going in to the blizzard as they did historically and the blizzard rule is meant to make it happen. However, since the blizzard rule is so severe that it practically impairs the axis to such an extent that they can't cope with it, rather than to look at the root cause and attempt to tweak that, the germans are given ahistorical replacements numbers to cover their losses. That is the same problem I described above although this one exists while the other is hypothetical. If you run as the germans you still get the inflated replacements leaving you with a wehrmacht that is considerably stronger than your historical counterpart which in turn leads to a harder road for the soviets once the tide is supposed to turn.

That is the basic problem of the game tbh, if you increase the strength of something without there being any kind of incentive to actually hold ground then both sides will just take what is given and run away, ending with armies that are much stronger than they were historically.

In my opinion, once the blizzard season begins, all cities and terrain lose any real value as by the time initiative shifts back to the germans, all [valuable] industry will have been railed out (exception being manpower). This puts the game in a state where the only real strategic option are the destruction of your opponents forces, there is no strategic value from a german point of view in holding cities like Kharkov or Kiev, as once conquered all industry has been destroyed and the only value it gives the soviets is a trickle of extra manpower once recovered. Thus the game turns into a state where it is about conquering territory that holds no other value than to slow your opponent down and drain his manpower once initiative changes.

(in reply to janh)

Post #: 187

RE: Extra grain for the horse = HQB? - 11/12/2012 1:50:59 PM

Pelton

Posts: 4379
Joined: 4/9/2006
Status: offline

Turn 42 VP: 200

Russian losses this turn: 20,000 Total dead: 4,042,000
Russian OOB: 6,426,000
SHC net OOB change: + 91,000
Russian units currently in a pocket:
Destroyed Units:
Corp: 1
Divisions: 12
Brigades: 8
SU:
AP total: 190

GHC OOB: 3,359,000
GHC net OOB change: -36 ,000
German loses this turn: 14,000 Total Dead: 1,564,000

Last snow turn before mud season. OOB is good and I am working on pulling low moral units from the front during mud.

Allot of my front looks very defendable with 3 to 5 layers of forts an much of it behind rivers. Tula north is very solid with reserves and 3 defensive lines.
The first line is 3+ deep, the 2nd is 2 deep and the 3rd around Moscow is basicly the same fort belt from 41.

The south has some weak spots, but not bad over all. I expect to get kicked around down if GHC attacks in the right spots.

My first 41 summer and Blizzard went good. I think I have the upper hand, but GHC can still turn thinks around if I screw up.

_____________________________

GHC
15 - 3 - 7

10 games ended in 41 (10-0-0)
4 games ended in 42 (4-0-2)
3 games ended in 43 (1-2-3)
1 game ended in 44 (0-1-2)

On leave until 9/13

(in reply to TulliusDetritus)

Post #: 188

RE: Extra grain for the horse = HQB? - 11/12/2012 1:54:39 PM

Pelton

Posts: 4379
Joined: 4/9/2006
Status: offline

Guys german loses are lower because the red army runs on 2/3 of the map DoH!

If all the extra units were added in AND russian units cv was historically reflexed the game would be just as it is now.

Russian units CV is 3x what it should be.

< Message edited by Pelton -- 11/12/2012 2:05:17 PM >

_____________________________

GHC
15 - 3 - 7

10 games ended in 41 (10-0-0)
4 games ended in 42 (4-0-2)
3 games ended in 43 (1-2-3)
1 game ended in 44 (0-1-2)

On leave until 9/13

(in reply to Pelton)

Post #: 189

RE: Extra grain for the horse = HQB? - 11/12/2012 2:21:54 PM

mevstedt

Posts: 51
Joined: 9/12/2012
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Pelton
Guys german loses are lower because the red army runs on 2/3 of the map DoH!

I agree completely.

quote:

ORIGINAL: Pelton
If all the extra units were added in AND russian units cv was historically reflexed the game would be just as it is now.

I agree on this point as well (ie: "the game would be just as it is now..." Meaning the red army runs away

). I don't want them to run away to conserve manpower and combat strength, I personally want them to be able to fight so that they can inflict similar to historical losses on the german army removing the need for a silly token passing rule like the blizzard rule.

(in reply to Pelton)

Post #: 190

RE: Extra grain for the horse = HQB? - 11/12/2012 3:01:13 PM

Pelton

Posts: 4379
Joined: 4/9/2006
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: mevstedt

quote:

ORIGINAL: Pelton
Guys german loses are lower because the red army runs on 2/3 of the map DoH!

I agree completely.

quote:

ORIGINAL: Pelton
If all the extra units were added in AND russian units cv was historically reflexed the game would be just as it is now.

I agree on this point as well (ie: "the game would be just as it is now..." Meaning the red army runs away ). I don't want them to run away to conserve manpower and combat strength, I personally want them to be able to fight so that they can inflict similar to historical losses on the german army removing the need for a silly token passing rule like the blizzard rule.

They can have the 200 1 cv divisions and we need a VP system.

We will not see it is just the way it is.

Everyone is basicly waiting to see if witw is any better.

_____________________________

GHC
15 - 3 - 7

10 games ended in 41 (10-0-0)
4 games ended in 42 (4-0-2)
3 games ended in 43 (1-2-3)
1 game ended in 44 (0-1-2)

On leave until 9/13

(in reply to mevstedt)

Post #: 191

Red Blob - 12/10/2012 12:52:39 PM

Pelton

Posts: 4379
Joined: 4/9/2006
Status: offline

Turn 53

Russian losses this turn: ,000 Total dead: 4,810,000
Russian OOB: 6,786,000
SHC net OOB change: 0,000
Russian units currently in a pocket: 2

GHC OOB: 3,618,000
GHC net OOB change: 0,000
German loses this turn: 0,000 Total Dead: 1,810,000

The start of Summer.

Been building 5 rifle divisions per turn for the last few turns. Heavy defenses from north to south. I disbanded 1/2 of all art su's units so that starting on Jan 43 I can fully out fit several art divisions and Infantry Corp asap and start pounding.

GHC has basically 3 groups of panzers with largest near Tula. Both OOB�s have been basically static during spring with GHC getting several small pockets.

SHC is basicly going to try and

1. Hold Moscow 5 to 7 belts of lvl 3 forts. Room for more if needed. Fort belts to north and southeast also. I will have 2/3's or more of SHC north of Tomboy
2. Keep OOB above 6.5 million
3. Basic blob defence, fort belt layer with strong counter attack forses in 3rd and 4th lines.
4. I will have 2/3's or more of SHC north of Tomboy, with drawing in south as area has little worth fighting over. I just see zero reason to waste troops in the area fighting over nothing.
5. Put together 4 strong shock armies by turn 60 for counter attacks.
6. Air war:
A. Pound GHC panzers every turn.
B. Building exp and lower pz MP's-bomb
C. Bomb air ports

Attachment (1)

< Message edited by Pelton -- 12/10/2012 12:53:00 PM >

_____________________________

GHC
15 - 3 - 7

10 games ended in 41 (10-0-0)
4 games ended in 42 (4-0-2)
3 games ended in 43 (1-2-3)
1 game ended in 44 (0-1-2)

On leave until 9/13

(in reply to Pelton)

Post #: 192

RE: Red Blob - 12/10/2012 12:56:03 PM

Pelton

Posts: 4379
Joined: 4/9/2006
Status: offline

Not sure what this means but posting it as per requests

Attachment (1)

_____________________________

GHC
15 - 3 - 7

10 games ended in 41 (10-0-0)
4 games ended in 42 (4-0-2)
3 games ended in 43 (1-2-3)
1 game ended in 44 (0-1-2)

On leave until 9/13

(in reply to Pelton)

Post #: 193

RE: Red Blob - 12/21/2012 10:31:41 PM

Pelton

Posts: 4379
Joined: 4/9/2006
Status: offline

Turn 61�� VP: 234

Just figured I up-date this game as I have been basicly flipping turns and not saving much.

OOB has really changed very little. GHC has a few less men and tanks and SHC has a few more.

Attachment (1)

_____________________________

GHC
15 - 3 - 7

10 games ended in 41 (10-0-0)
4 games ended in 42 (4-0-2)
3 games ended in 43 (1-2-3)
1 game ended in 44 (0-1-2)

On leave until 9/13

(in reply to Pelton)

Post #: 194

RE: Red Blob - 12/21/2012 10:43:07 PM

Pelton

Posts: 4379
Joined: 4/9/2006
Status: offline

AGN: zip static.

AGS: I basicly just ran, let GHC have Rostov and Stalingrad. Zero point in fighting over nothing.

AGC: I basicly retreated below the Oka to Para river where I had been building a fort carpet down to the Tsna to Tomboy to Bityug ect.

North of Oka is basicly a carpet of 2-3 forts to Moscow. East of Moscow is a carpet of forts.

I have been able to build up 4 Strong Shock armies. I have had to commit 2.

1 when GHC got a foot hold over Oka south of Moscow on turn 57. I have been unable to push them back, but GHC has been unable to expand bridgehead. GHC cleared a 2nd hex, but I have been able to easly retake it every turn with a single assault.

Attachment (1)

_____________________________

GHC
15 - 3 - 7

10 games ended in 41 (10-0-0)
4 games ended in 42 (4-0-2)
3 games ended in 43 (1-2-3)
1 game ended in 44 (0-1-2)

On leave until 9/13

(in reply to Pelton)

Post #: 195

RE: Red Blob - 12/21/2012 10:57:01 PM

Pelton

Posts: 4379
Joined: 4/9/2006
Status: offline

The other area is south east of RZHEV.

Over the last 3 turn strong GHC infantry and panzer units have pushed a buldge 30 miles wide and 30 miles deep. A shock army has arrived and there are several hexes with +80 def cv and tank Corp in secound line in reserve mode. A 2nd army is arriving. A carpet from 4 to 12 deep is around the GHC attack.

I have also started attacking allong the front where I can. Tring to start to beat down GHC OOB.

I need to do some MAJOR over haul of armies ect. I have made a few rifle Corp where needed, but over then next 10 or so turns I will pump out 50 or so rifle divisions with draw shock armies retool and then start pushing(hopefully). No real rush.

Attachment (1)

_____________________________

GHC
15 - 3 - 7

10 games ended in 41 (10-0-0)
4 games ended in 42 (4-0-2)
3 games ended in 43 (1-2-3)
1 game ended in 44 (0-1-2)

On leave until 9/13

(in reply to Pelton)

Post #: 196

RE: Red Blob - 1/3/2013 2:08:05 AM

Pelton

Posts: 4379
Joined: 4/9/2006
Status: offline

Fall 1942.

Front lines in north.

Basicly building up fronts. Just finished rebuilding western Front.

4 Armys- 3 rifle corp and 1 art division per army. 1 rifle/1 cav/1 tank corp and arty div under Front HQ. 4 Sappers/2 art and 1 rr under each army. 8 airbases under 2 air HQ's under the front HQ.

The 4 shock army's are done. 3 under a single front.

I probably start attacking once rivers freeze over.

I will use the 9 turns until then rebuilding another front.

Attachment (1)

_____________________________

GHC
15 - 3 - 7

10 games ended in 41 (10-0-0)
4 games ended in 42 (4-0-2)
3 games ended in 43 (1-2-3)
1 game ended in 44 (0-1-2)

On leave until 9/13

(in reply to Pelton)

Post #: 197

RE: Red Blob - 1/3/2013 2:11:26 AM

Pelton

Posts: 4379
Joined: 4/9/2006
Status: offline

OOB

I have not really disided where to hit, but I will pick an area where I have allot of flank support.

Also going to start organizing 2 tank/cav armys to keep in reserve on rails near front.

Troops are finally starting to pile up.

I have about 20 divisions that have low moral that have been piled off line.

Attachment (1)

_____________________________

GHC
15 - 3 - 7

10 games ended in 41 (10-0-0)
4 games ended in 42 (4-0-2)
3 games ended in 43 (1-2-3)
1 game ended in 44 (0-1-2)

On leave until 9/13

(in reply to Pelton)

Post #: 198

RE: Extra grain for the horse = HQB? - 1/3/2013 3:05:48 AM

Aurelian

Posts: 1445
Joined: 2/26/2007
Status: online

quote:

ORIGINAL: randallw

There's a vague rumor that the Soviets were the eventual victor on the Eastern Front...obviously propaganda....how could it happen with the Germans having magical Stuka bombs, and most Soviet soldiers being untrained, armed with half a clip, and almost no artillery ammunition to support them?

I remember reading that some where. Glantz I think. Dang Sov fanboi....

_____________________________

(in reply to randallw)

Post #: 199

Page: << < prev 3 4 5 6 [7]

All Forums >> [New Releases from Matrix Games] >> Gary Grigsby's War in the East Series >> After Action Reports >> RE: Extra grain for the horse = HQB?

Page: << < prev 3 4 5 6 [7]

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

0.094