Matrix Games Forums

War in the West gets its first update!Flashpoint Campaigns: Red Storm version 2.08 is now available!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 preview
Forums  Register  Login  Photo Gallery  Member List  Search  Calendars  FAQ 

My Profile  Inbox  Address Book  My Subscription  My Forums  Log Out

RE: Razing the Reich (No Pelton)

 
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: Razing the Reich (No Pelton) Page: <<   < prev  11 12 [13] 14 15   next >   >>
Login
Message << Older Topic   Newer Topic >>
RE: Razing the Reich (No Pelton) - 11/27/2012 9:20:44 PM   
Michael T


Posts: 2411
Joined: 10/22/2006
From: Queensland, Australia.
Status: offline
Half way thru my T55, finished my attacks. 35K of hun sent to the dead pile for 70K of Sov's. Excellent. Boy I am loving these INF Corp. 3 Sapper Reg each they eat krauts and their forts. The pattern is 3 or 4 waves of 6 X Divisional attacks, then hit em with the big boys.

_____________________________

'Deus le Volt!'
------------------

(in reply to Michael T)
Post #: 361
RE: Razing the Reich (No Pelton) - 11/28/2012 9:03:50 AM   
randallw

 

Posts: 1981
Joined: 9/2/2010
Status: offline
Hooray for Middle Earth guys.

(in reply to Michael T)
Post #: 362
RE: Razing the Reich (No Pelton) - 11/28/2012 11:47:37 AM   
morvael


Posts: 5051
Joined: 9/8/2006
From: Poland
Status: offline
Stalin might be Sauron, but Hitler doesn't look like Frodo.

(in reply to randallw)
Post #: 363
RE: Razing the Reich (No Pelton) - 11/28/2012 1:08:40 PM   
horza66

 

Posts: 136
Joined: 2/1/2011
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: Michael T
Half way thru my T55, finished my attacks. 35K of hun sent to the dead pile for 70K of Sov's. Excellent. Boy I am loving these INF Corp. 3 Sapper Reg each they eat krauts and their forts. The pattern is 3 or 4 waves of 6 X Divisional attacks, then hit em with the big boys.


I assume you're seeing a lot of reserve activations on the initial waves? Are these all exhausted by the time you commit your corps in the final attack?

I'd like to think that distributing the panzers across the front is not a viable strategy. Makes for a more interesting game if they're better deployed in force.

How are your armament points holding up? Is it perhaps worth you adding some Gun Brigades to your front to maximize German casualties?

(in reply to Michael T)
Post #: 364
RE: Razing the Reich (No Pelton) - 11/28/2012 9:10:31 PM   
Michael T


Posts: 2411
Joined: 10/22/2006
From: Queensland, Australia.
Status: offline
Yes lots of reserves. But they eventually stop, or the defenders are so exhausted the reserves don't make any difference when the main attack begins.

You will see from my last report I had 600K of arms saved up. But they got devoured by the so called 'Rifle Squad Upgrade' where you lose 2 men per squad and its costs you ~800K-900K in Arm points. It sucked the 600K up so probably 3 more weeks wasted on that before I can start building some more Artillery. But I will be banking most for a massive buildfest of ART XX come October 42. I won't be wasting my time or AP with brigades. Just extra regs for HQ's untill the Arty XX become available.

With Pelton's defensive stance I don't have to build any defensive support units at all. It's all out offensive gear only, just my style :)

If Pelton thinks 42 is bad wait till he gets some 43 action. There is going to be 100 turns of pent up frustration unleashed on his sorry arse....

< Message edited by Michael T -- 11/28/2012 9:13:04 PM >


_____________________________

'Deus le Volt!'
------------------

(in reply to horza66)
Post #: 365
RE: Razing the Reich (No Pelton) - 11/28/2012 11:59:32 PM   
Bletchley_Geek


Posts: 3070
Joined: 11/26/2009
From: Living in the fair city of Melbourne, Australia
Status: offline
I don't want to litter Michael's thread, though,

quote:

ORIGINAL: carlkay58

I tried a game with Logistics set to 50% and it does not do what you would think it does. From the manual:

quote:

Logistics Level: Impacts the formulas that determine the amount of supply and replacements a unit receives based on its supply trace, the amount of attrition a unit suffers due to movement, the amount of fatigue added or removed from a unit during a turn, and the amount of fuel expended by generic vehicles. This level also affects the ability of leaders to conduct successful admin checks.


We were looking to test something with lower supply production and the Logistics setting changed much more than that. Also note that if you reduce the supply production, it shorts the production side of the equation before the combat units see less supply. So we were unable to find a way to reduce the amount of supplies going to the troops without decimating the production system.



Well, that sorts of is at odds with what I'm seeing - and my opponent is telling me about. He's having trouble to keep the Panzers at top MP's, either because they're out of fuel or leaders are failing admin checks. As the Soviet I'm seeing that replacements take a longer time to reach front units not sitting on top of a railroad, and mauled Soviet formations aren't 'insta re-filled', it is now necessary to take them well to the rear in order to rebuild them. This makes operations in theaters such as the Valdai Hills region quite challenging. I'm also seeing ammunition shortages all across the board, something that was quite rare to happen.

Maybe we were expecting different things from this, but what we're getting is that supply takes time to reach the front units, so there's an ebb and flow of activity in the front. This hasn't hurted much my opponent: the battle lines are now very much they were historically in September 1941. He didn't play the Lvov gambit, but still managed to basically destroy the Western Front in a series of linked encirclement battles on the road from Smolensk to Moscow.

I look forward to the Blizzard: maybe I'll be able to wreck the Red Army by going on the offensive for too long

(in reply to carlkay58)
Post #: 366
RE: Razing the Reich (No Pelton) - 11/29/2012 11:27:49 AM   
carlkay58

 

Posts: 2407
Joined: 7/25/2010
Status: offline
Thanks BG - I looked it up and our game was under 1.04 rules - many changes since then are probably the difference that you are seeing. I may have to go back and revisit that concept.

(in reply to Bletchley_Geek)
Post #: 367
RE: Razing the Reich (No Pelton) - 12/2/2012 2:42:19 AM   
Michael T


Posts: 2411
Joined: 10/22/2006
From: Queensland, Australia.
Status: offline
I am opening this up to Pelton. It no longer matters what he sees here now as the updates will be delayed and to be honest I am so far in front it is of no consequence.

_____________________________

'Deus le Volt!'
------------------

(in reply to carlkay58)
Post #: 368
RE: Razing the Reich (No Pelton) - 12/2/2012 6:22:51 AM   
Pelton

 

Posts: 6398
Joined: 4/9/2006
Status: offline
13 pages and 19k views for our boring game?

The way the combat ratio was nerfed many moons ago you dont need to build a single SU of anything really. I beleive the first turn u started attacking you went 5 wins and 25 loses and my OOB dropped 40,000 in a single turn. Some of the battles I "won" I lost more men and equipement then you did. You can exploit the off ratio as you have by attacking the same hex 3 to 6 times. Several hexs I won all 4 or 5 battles, but suffered 4 to 6 k in losses. So as SHC you only need to attack, winning is not nessasary.

If you did not build another unit the rest of the game and combined units only you can grind down German army because of the lose ratio numbers. Even when your losing your winning. You do not need a single art/tank/at ect ect.

Why 1v1=2v1 had to be nerfed, you could deplete the German OOB by early 43 if you could survive the massive HQB's during 41.

The combat ratio is still way to forgiving of SHC loses in many cases.

With the last Hiwi nerf German OOB's are tanking quickly, even when they win 82% of the time. Your losses were only slightly higher then what you would have been getting if I held most of the normal citys. 100k per turn I am sure they are near 120k now.

if the Germans win 82% of the defensive battles the combat ratio should not be 2.6 to 1. Thats insanely low and not close to the historical average for 1942. Which was atleast 5 to 1 by most historians, that does not include surrenders. I am talking German vs Russian no minor allies.

When you attack and win the GHC loses are higher then SHC loses in many cases? That is simply silly.


_____________________________

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

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

(in reply to Michael T)
Post #: 369
RE: Razing the Reich (No Pelton) - 12/2/2012 6:26:20 AM   
Pelton

 

Posts: 6398
Joined: 4/9/2006
Status: offline
Armaments are never and issue any more only in 42 and only because u moved them.

Its baked into the cake that during 42 SHC will not beable to push much, because of up grades ect. If you dont rail out industry your a moron or made a big mistake.

_____________________________

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

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

(in reply to Pelton)
Post #: 370
RE: Razing the Reich (No Pelton) - 12/2/2012 7:55:28 AM   
Michael T


Posts: 2411
Joined: 10/22/2006
From: Queensland, Australia.
Status: offline
I am bleeding you Pelton because I have the men and Arm to do so. If your 41 campaign had been like it was in your other games and you had fought thru the blizzard there is no way I could be doing what I am now. You gave me initiative and the manpower to do it. Also since there is no AP crunch I can build many Corp.

You can't make a judgement about the games (WITE) state from this game because its so left of centre. But the boring days will be gone come 43, then you will see some real death for Germany

_____________________________

'Deus le Volt!'
------------------

(in reply to Pelton)
Post #: 371
RE: Razing the Reich (No Pelton) - 12/2/2012 10:56:49 AM   
sillyflower


Posts: 1270
Joined: 8/4/2010
From: London
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Pelton


if the Germans win 82% of the defensive battles the combat ratio should not be 2.6 to 1. Thats insanely low and not close to the historical average for 1942. Which was atleast 5 to 1 by most historians, that does not include surrenders. I am talking German vs Russian no minor allies.



You are doubtless right, but we also know that russian manpower reinforcements during the game are millions of men behind historical numbers. If you have your historical losses, there would be no red army at all. Half the reinforcement manpower and half the losses maintains balance - assuming that's what we have.

_____________________________

web exchange

Post: I am always fearful that when I put this game down on the table and people see the box-art they will think I am some kind of neo-Nazi

Reply: They already know you're a gamer. What other shame can possibly compare?

(in reply to Pelton)
Post #: 372
RE: Razing the Reich (No Pelton) - 12/2/2012 10:58:26 AM   
sillyflower


Posts: 1270
Joined: 8/4/2010
From: London
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Michael T

I am opening this up to Pelton. It no longer matters what he sees here now as the updates will be delayed and to be honest I am so far in front it is of no consequence.


Miaow

_____________________________

web exchange

Post: I am always fearful that when I put this game down on the table and people see the box-art they will think I am some kind of neo-Nazi

Reply: They already know you're a gamer. What other shame can possibly compare?

(in reply to Michael T)
Post #: 373
RE: Razing the Reich (No Pelton) - 12/2/2012 11:06:56 AM   
janh

 

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

ORIGINAL: Pelton
The way the combat ratio was nerfed many moons ago you dont need to build a single SU of anything really. I beleive the first turn u started attacking you went 5 wins and 25 loses and my OOB dropped 40,000 in a single turn. Some of the battles I "won" I lost more men and equipement then you did. You can exploit the off ratio as you have by attacking the same hex 3 to 6 times. Several hexs I won all 4 or 5 battles, but suffered 4 to 6 k in losses. So as SHC you only need to attack, winning is not nessasary.


Yes, Pelton, Michael is correct: You shouldn't put much weight in the numbers in this game, your situation and the chance Michael got to gring away like this are home-baked. Had Michael suffered an "average" 1941 defeat, cutting him to 4M to 5M men, and pushing him much further back, he simply couldn't afford this.

This game is just quite far outside the norm and should indeed have ended with major victory in March. At least in the case that one fails to reduce the Soviets by blizzard to that rough number, a withdrawal to Poland will only speed up disaster -- I think that's pretty obvious now.

The grinding with numerous stacks is something you exploit as well, just to note. Everyone needing to open LG's backdoor for example surely has to do it. It is not a specific side's advantage, thought the way and benefits Michael pulls from it sounds like something that should be more typical for 1944. It simply comes down to I-Go-U-Go, this kind of system is not very surprisingly strongly in favor of the one with the initiate/turn, aka the attacker. In reality, if the Germans take a day to switch out assault columns, so the defenders ought to be able to shuffle reinforcements. The reserve mode kind of gets that, but is far to unreliable compared to yourself selecting and moving units.

< Message edited by janh -- 12/2/2012 11:08:29 AM >

(in reply to Pelton)
Post #: 374
RE: Razing the Reich (No Pelton) - 12/2/2012 11:08:03 AM   
Flaviusx


Posts: 6415
Joined: 9/9/2009
From: Southern California
Status: offline
Pelton, the basic problem here is and always has been your strategy. It's a disaster. You made a terrible mistake on staking it all on the right hook when it was clear that Michael knew you were going there and threw everything he had at stopping this. Then you compounded that error by running away to Poland and removing any pressure at all on Michael's replacement situation. Everything that has happened in this game was completely predictable and was in fact predicted.

The real surprise would have been if what you did worked.

_____________________________

WitE Alpha Tester

(in reply to sillyflower)
Post #: 375
RE: Razing the Reich (No Pelton) - 12/2/2012 1:42:41 PM   
Pelton

 

Posts: 6398
Joined: 4/9/2006
Status: offline
Turn 57 GHC armaments: 110,000

Russian losses this turn: ,000 Total dead: 3,636,000
Russian OOB: 6,682,000
A net gain of: 00,000

German losses this turn: ,000 Total dead: 1,592,000
GHC OOB: 3,722,000
A net gain of: 00,000


覧蘭Won覧沫Lost覧由atio
SHC覧7覧覧31蘭覧18%
GHC覧覧覧覧
覧佑ombat losses覧-
SHC覧 114,000
GHC覧 27,000

Casualties losses ratio: 4.1 to 1

That doesn稚 include attrition loses just combat from the 38 battles.

With attrition losses of 20,000? for GHC and 40,000? for SHC you get a 3.2 to 1 ratio.

I will need a few more turns of total dead to track the casualties ratio to include attrition loses.


quote:

ORIGINAL: Michael T

I am bleeding you Pelton because I have the men and Arm to do so. If your 41 campaign had been like it was in your other games and you had fought thru the blizzard there is no way I could be doing what I am now. You gave me initiative and the manpower to do it. Also since there is no AP crunch I can build many Corp.

You can't make a judgement about the games (WITE) state from this game because its so left of centre. But the boring days will be gone come 43, then you will see some real death for Germany


If is not part of the numbers game as you know, feelings don't cause casualties.

1. You would have the armaments no matter what as it is not and has not been an issue for over a yr.
2. The 41 summer was normal for you, as we have talked the deck is stacked towards SHC. I can cut and past your own words if you like, but I don't think you will bother to disagree with yourself. "Winning as russian player is much easyer then german"
3. As you know if I had suck around during blizzard I would be much weaker then now. My morale is much higher then normal and still going up because your losing 80% of the battles the last 4 turns.

The key was your low loses before Dec 2.5 million and which is becoming the norm for SHC if you play your cards right.

If I had fought forward or even with draw a few hexs a turn I would have only saved about 10 hexes over all for a huge price. I would have been far weaker then now and you a little weaker.

I would not have been able to push east.

quote:

If your 41 campaign had been like it was in your other games


I am playing you not other people. My wishfull thinking or yours will not change that.

This is my 27th game and 17th that made it into 1942. Its not to hard to tell for me what would happen if I had stuck around, you would have started grinding in late 1942 once river frooze and be in Berlin in late 44 early 45. Me being 100 miles to east would not have changed anything as you know.

As you know from your past SHC games its about 1941 SHC loses. I beleive you are also right to say that lossing Moscow is not a big deal, if you have only around 2.5 to 2.7 million in losses, because you easly retake it and with a huge army by June 1942 GHC would not be able to push from Tula north.

Lets try and stick to what has happened and what is happening in our game. Which will not be easy for myself.

< Message edited by Pelton -- 12/3/2012 3:38:14 AM >


_____________________________

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

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

(in reply to Flaviusx)
Post #: 376
RE: Razing the Reich (No Pelton) - 12/2/2012 2:03:27 PM   
Pelton

 

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

quote:

ORIGINAL: Flaviusx

Pelton, the basic problem here is and always has been your strategy. It's a disaster. You made a terrible mistake on staking it all on the right hook when it was clear that Michael knew you were going there and threw everything he had at stopping this. Then you compounded that error by running away to Poland and removing any pressure at all on Michael's replacement situation. Everything that has happened in this game was completely predictable and was in fact predicted.

The real surprise would have been if what you did worked.


Leningrad holding is not a surpise in any game now as we all know.

Moscow holding is not a surpise in any game now as we all know.

I agree that now it is predictable that Leningrad and Moscow will be held. The surpise now is when someone takes Leningrad.

I completely disagree and I would think you know better that me sticking around would have done anything other then put SHC in a much better position.

If MT had a gimpy blizzard O he would have lost a 800,000 men tops. I would have only held another 100 to 150 miles to east. Had 10 pts less over all morale.

I would have not been able to push east no matter what in 1942. MT as you stated yourself in this thread amazing had a carpet of level 3 forts done by first clear turn.

The game would have simply played out as Kamils/Hooopers and TDV's had in the past. I have played many games into 43+ and know from exp and not feelings/guessing based on #'s ect ect what the out come would have been. What do you think MT would have a brain fart come 1942 and magicly fall apart?

As I stated months ago Leningrad holding, low SHC losses, Moscow never falling, strong SHC blizzard O and 7 million man SHC carpets by June 1942 would be normal and predictable.

You as MT can wish I had done better, but I have done the same as everyone esle vs MT in 1941 summer.

It is predictable as I have months ago.


_____________________________

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

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

(in reply to Flaviusx)
Post #: 377
RE: Razing the Reich (No Pelton) - 12/2/2012 2:15:01 PM   
Pelton

 

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

ORIGINAL: janh

quote:

ORIGINAL: Pelton
The way the combat ratio was nerfed many moons ago you dont need to build a single SU of anything really. I beleive the first turn u started attacking you went 5 wins and 25 loses and my OOB dropped 40,000 in a single turn. Some of the battles I "won" I lost more men and equipement then you did. You can exploit the off ratio as you have by attacking the same hex 3 to 6 times. Several hexs I won all 4 or 5 battles, but suffered 4 to 6 k in losses. So as SHC you only need to attack, winning is not nessasary.


Yes, Pelton, Michael is correct: You shouldn't put much weight in the numbers in this game, your situation and the chance Michael got to gring away like this are home-baked. Had Michael suffered an "average" 1941 defeat, cutting him to 4M to 5M men, and pushing him much further back, he simply couldn't afford this.

This game is just quite far outside the norm and should indeed have ended with major victory in March. At least in the case that one fails to reduce the Soviets by blizzard to that rough number, a withdrawal to Poland will only speed up disaster -- I think that's pretty obvious now.

The grinding with numerous stacks is something you exploit as well, just to note. Everyone needing to open LG's backdoor for example surely has to do it. It is not a specific side's advantage, thought the way and benefits Michael pulls from it sounds like something that should be more typical for 1944. It simply comes down to I-Go-U-Go, this kind of system is not very surprisingly strongly in favor of the one with the initiate/turn, aka the attacker. In reality, if the Germans take a day to switch out assault columns, so the defenders ought to be able to shuffle reinforcements. The reserve mode kind of gets that, but is far to unreliable compared to yourself selecting and moving units.


1. Cutting SHC to 4 million and pushing him to east more is really not doable vs a good SHC player. The normal game now is 2.5 to 2.75 in losses for SHC before Dec 1941.
A 5 million + SHC army by Dec is normal and a 7 million man army by June normal.

2. The game is really normal as far as numbers go. IF I had stayed to take a beating during Blizzard I would have simply been 100-150 miles to east. Summer of 1942 would have been static other then SHC attacking about 15 times as Hoooper/Kamil and TDV have done in past to keep GHC OOB static.

3. Staying or running to Poland does not change the end date is what I predict to be true. I from exp already know the results of staying. I am not guessing I have far more exp in post 41 games then anyone playing. Its not even close.

I want from playing the game out to know the results based on game play and not guessing/feelings ect ect.





_____________________________

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

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

(in reply to janh)
Post #: 378
RE: Razing the Reich (No Pelton) - 12/2/2012 2:24:45 PM   
Pelton

 

Posts: 6398
Joined: 4/9/2006
Status: offline
Thanks for letting me on thread MT. I read page 13 only as the 12 other pages would be boring at best hehehe

< Message edited by Pelton -- 12/2/2012 2:25:26 PM >


_____________________________

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

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

(in reply to Pelton)
Post #: 379
RE: Razing the Reich (No Pelton) - 12/2/2012 2:33:16 PM   
janh

 

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

ORIGINAL: Pelton
2. The game is really normal as far as numbers go. IF I had stayed to take a beating during Blizzard I would have simply been 100-150 miles to east. Summer of 1942 would have been static other then SHC attacking about 15 times as Hoooper/Kamil and TDV have done in past to keep GHC OOB static.

3. Staying or running to Poland does not change the end date is what I predict to be true. I from exp already know the results of staying. I am not guessing I have far more exp in post 41 games then anyone playing. Its not even close.


Fighting it out for every yard during blizzard probably would have been worse. You are certainly right there. But if you had done the slow 1-2 hex withdrawals per turn of the earlier games, you would have denied Michael a lot of terrain and also manpower centers. I all the time thought this match was very "un-Peltonish", if you understand what I meant -- you kind of bend all the rules you yourself set up earlier, like the importance of manpower centers.

Don't feel attacked, I have no intention so. Sitting outside and watching both sides of the coin, it is easy to say things -- which may be totally off. I wouldn't want to have been in your shoes that moment that our big Panzerfist got stuck in the Valdai hills. It could have worked, and maybe next time it will again. Just an experiment gone wrong. I only don't think you really can draw too many conclusions from this number wise. It is too unusual, and it sure looks more like a 1944 situation with 1942 technology but still poorly experienced Russians than a typical 1942 game.

PS. I am not sure yet that Michaels way into Berlin will be an easy and quick one given your unit morale, and the possibility to disband many LW units, or Security divisions to bump your manpower pools given that you have short lines and nothing much to garrison presently. Might be a long walk into Berlin, evening with successful attrition tactics.

< Message edited by janh -- 12/2/2012 2:41:06 PM >

(in reply to Pelton)
Post #: 380
RE: Razing the Reich (No Pelton) - 12/2/2012 6:15:49 PM   
Pelton

 

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

ORIGINAL: janh

quote:

ORIGINAL: Pelton
2. The game is really normal as far as numbers go. IF I had stayed to take a beating during Blizzard I would have simply been 100-150 miles to east. Summer of 1942 would have been static other then SHC attacking about 15 times as Hoooper/Kamil and TDV have done in past to keep GHC OOB static.

3. Staying or running to Poland does not change the end date is what I predict to be true. I from exp already know the results of staying. I am not guessing I have far more exp in post 41 games then anyone playing. Its not even close.


Fighting it out for every yard during blizzard probably would have been worse. You are certainly right there. But if you had done the slow 1-2 hex withdrawals per turn of the earlier games, you would have denied Michael a lot of terrain and also manpower centers. I all the time thought this match was very "un-Peltonish", if you understand what I meant -- you kind of bend all the rules you yourself set up earlier, like the importance of manpower centers.

Don't feel attacked, I have no intention so. Sitting outside and watching both sides of the coin, it is easy to say things -- which may be totally off. I wouldn't want to have been in your shoes that moment that our big Panzerfist got stuck in the Valdai hills. It could have worked, and maybe next time it will again. Just an experiment gone wrong. I only don't think you really can draw too many conclusions from this number wise. It is too unusual, and it sure looks more like a 1944 situation with 1942 technology but still poorly experienced Russians than a typical 1942 game.

PS. I am not sure yet that Michaels way into Berlin will be an easy and quick one given your unit morale, and the possibility to disband many LW units, or Security divisions to bump your manpower pools given that you have short lines and nothing much to garrison presently. Might be a long walk into Berlin, evening with successful attrition tactics.


I am tring out something totally new as of now as far as defending goes. I am getting about a 4 to 1 ratio now. This new tactic "for me" should get a 5.5/5 to 1 ratio in 1943. So I have no idea what the ratio will jump to in 1942.

Yes I have about 300,000 men I can bleed into manpower pools and I will be starting on my next turn to flip men into the pools.

Yes morale and exp are a huge help. 60% toe units still have 12 CV. The soaking attacks are driving up morale. The handfull of wins were after 3-5 helds. So in many cases the units in question gain 2-3 pts of morale after the wins and retreat.

I am hoping with new tactics that at some point SHC armaments and manpower will start going down. I am sure SHC morale is tanking hard with 25 to 35 loses the last 4 turns.

I do not think that SHC can keep up the loses in equipment/men/armaments and morale for long. As morale drops loses increase. Mybee thats why the ratio is better then I have seen in my games vs Kamil/Hoooper and TDV. In there games the lose ratio in was 2.6/3 to 1 at best. I have never had a ratio of 4.1 to 1.

I am tring something that should get the rate to 5-6 to 1. Time will tell. In 1943 I receive plus 15 divisions or about 225,000 men, should be interesting.

< Message edited by Pelton -- 12/2/2012 6:34:22 PM >


_____________________________

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

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

(in reply to janh)
Post #: 381
RE: Razing the Reich (No Pelton) - 12/2/2012 11:16:07 PM   
sillyflower


Posts: 1270
Joined: 8/4/2010
From: London
Status: offline
Russian morale drop is not a problem as long as you can afford to rotate units to recover. Doesn't help to get guards tho' if you lose 80% of your attacks

_____________________________

web exchange

Post: I am always fearful that when I put this game down on the table and people see the box-art they will think I am some kind of neo-Nazi

Reply: They already know you're a gamer. What other shame can possibly compare?

(in reply to Pelton)
Post #: 382
RE: Razing the Reich (No Pelton) - 12/2/2012 11:34:08 PM   
Pelton

 

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

ORIGINAL: sillyflower

Russian morale drop is not a problem as long as you can afford to rotate units to recover. Doesn't help to get guards tho' if you lose 80% of your attacks


Its been a very high lose ratio from 54-57. Now that I beleive I have a way to get ratio above 4 to 1 that will really cost allot of manpower and armament points.

I am hoping that high of a cost will make rotating units a little more then to hard to keep up a tempo like that. 7 wins to 35 loses.

Only time will tell if new tactic works or I have just been lucky the last 2 turns on rolls for losses. If it does work then my games vs Brian/Hugh and Bobo are atleast draws.


< Message edited by Pelton -- 12/2/2012 11:37:26 PM >


_____________________________

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

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

(in reply to sillyflower)
Post #: 383
RE: Razing the Reich (No Pelton) - 12/3/2012 10:24:49 AM   
Pelton

 

Posts: 6398
Joined: 4/9/2006
Status: offline
Turn 58 GHC armaments: 94,000 Turn 54 GHC OOB: 3,840,000

Russian losses this turn: 87,000 Total dead: 3,723,000
Russian gun losses this turn: 00,000 Total dead: 52,838
Russian afv losses this turn: 00,000 Total dead: 13,210

Russian OOB: 6,674,000
A net gain of: -8,000

German losses this turn: 44,000 Total dead: 1,633,000
GHC OOB: 3,706,000
A net gain of: -16,000


覧蘭Won覧沫Lost覧由atio
SHC覧6覧覧21蘭覧22%
GHC覧覧覧覧
覧佑ombat losses覧-
SHC覧 83,000
GHC覧 35,000

Casualties losses ratio: 2.7 to 1
Going by losses turn to turn ratio: 2 to 1

Looks like armaments will be limiting factor. I am starting the change over this turn so it will be a while before its impact is felt if any.






Attachment (1)

_____________________________

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

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

(in reply to Pelton)
Post #: 384
RE: Razing the Reich (No Pelton) - 12/4/2012 1:00:15 AM   
Michael T


Posts: 2411
Joined: 10/22/2006
From: Queensland, Australia.
Status: offline
This is very simple Pelton. I receive 120,000 plus troops per turn thanks to all the extra Manpower you gave me. I have so many units that I have the equivalent of 2 complete Fronts in reserve. So I simply attack to inflict losses on you. I don't care what happens in relation to whether I win or lose, whether you have reserve commitment of not. All I care is that I kill Axis troops at a ratio of 1:5 or better or you retreat. So far its averaging less than 1:3. Hooray! So you see even if I lost 120,000 men a turn I am happy if I killed 25,000 of the hun. But my worst turn so far was losing 78,000 for 30,000 hun. Still very happy with that.

When a front gets burned out thru morale loss because of defeats I rotate in a new fresh front to keep the grind going. Meanwhile, since there is no pressure on AP I am steadily building INF and ARM Corp. My truck pool is even increasing! If I think a victory in combat is possible I attack with the INF Corp after your troops have been bloodied by the waves of multi divisional attacks I throw at you. So my Corp units are building morale and experience for 43. In 1943 your losses will be horrendous. My replacement rate will fall to around 95,000 but my killing power and battle win to loss ratio will be much higher. You can do nothing to prevent it. You lost the game in 1941. Flavius is correct in that I am learning a great deal about playing the Soviets post blizzard 41/42.

The power that I will be able to wield in 1944 will be just unstoppable. Even if your OOB was hitting 4 million plus it won't help you. You are 3.7 million now and heading south. Your OOB has peaked at 3.8 million. The only way you can increase it again is to retreat. But this would only be a temporary respite and just take me closer to Berlin, again a happy uncle Joe.

You cannot not draw or win. It痴 a futile effort. But somewhat humorous to watch it unfold. My boredom has been due to an unrealized expectation of how the game would progress beyond the summer of 41. But I have to admit that I am beginning to find a perverse pleasure in playing the role of Stalin. Pity Paris is not on the map.

I must admit though, I am now even more fearful of what Russia can do if she survives 1941/42 in any kind of competitive state. My thinking at this point is that the best form of defence is just keep attacking and hold the initiative for as long as you can. As soon as Germany goes turtle she is doomed if its before 1943.

_____________________________

'Deus le Volt!'
------------------

(in reply to Pelton)
Post #: 385
RE: Razing the Reich (No Pelton) - 12/4/2012 1:14:30 AM   
Disgruntled Veteran


Posts: 547
Joined: 2/19/2012
Status: offline
A thorough dressing down and berating of your enemy....NICE!

(in reply to Michael T)
Post #: 386
RE: Razing the Reich (No Pelton) - 12/4/2012 3:30:57 AM   
Pelton

 

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

quote:

ORIGINAL: Michael T

This is very simple Pelton. I receive 120,000 plus troops per turn thanks to all the extra Manpower you gave me. I have so many units that I have the equivalent of 2 complete Fronts in reserve. So I simply attack to inflict losses on you. I don't care what happens in relation to whether I win or lose, whether you have reserve commitment of not. All I care is that I kill Axis troops at a ratio of 1:5 or better or you retreat. So far its averaging less than 1:3. Hooray! So you see even if I lost 120,000 men a turn I am happy if I killed 25,000 of the hun. But my worst turn so far was losing 78,000 for 30,000 hun. Still very happy with that.

When a front gets burned out thru morale loss because of defeats I rotate in a new fresh front to keep the grind going. Meanwhile, since there is no pressure on AP I am steadily building INF and ARM Corp. My truck pool is even increasing! If I think a victory in combat is possible I attack with the INF Corp after your troops have been bloodied by the waves of multi divisional attacks I throw at you. So my Corp units are building morale and experience for 43. In 1943 your losses will be horrendous. My replacement rate will fall to around 95,000 but my killing power and battle win to loss ratio will be much higher. You can do nothing to prevent it. You lost the game in 1941. Flavius is correct in that I am learning a great deal about playing the Soviets post blizzard 41/42.

The power that I will be able to wield in 1944 will be just unstoppable. Even if your OOB was hitting 4 million plus it won't help you. You are 3.7 million now and heading south. Your OOB has peaked at 3.8 million. The only way you can increase it again is to retreat. But this would only be a temporary respite and just take me closer to Berlin, again a happy uncle Joe.

You cannot not draw or win. It痴 a futile effort. But somewhat humorous to watch it unfold. My boredom has been due to an unrealized expectation of how the game would progress beyond the summer of 41. But I have to admit that I am beginning to find a perverse pleasure in playing the role of Stalin. Pity Paris is not on the map.

I must admit though, I am now even more fearful of what Russia can do if she survives 1941/42 in any kind of competitive state. My thinking at this point is that the best form of defence is just keep attacking and hold the initiative for as long as you can. As soon as Germany goes turtle she is doomed if its before 1943.


Sounds nice.

What I am changing over to is a counter to soaking attacks based on the combat engine itself. Not my findings, but someone esles.

Your right about the attacking as long as possible. So far as long as you can keep attacking until Spring 43 when mud hits and have about 3.4 million. You should have no issue holding out, even if SHC holds Moscow. With reserve mode and a few other tricks SHC is not going to push at all, not even on a narrow front. Very easy counter to that.

The amount of AP's lost, manpower ect ect will not let SHC recover to the point it can mount any kind of an offensive during 43. Then its just delay. I think based on what you know now even with a huge army its not easy to push, if your army was 6 to 7 million by March 43. You be very hard pressed to push very hard only recieiving 85k to 95k men per turn.

Lets see how this plays out. I am having fun. I am getting ready to play GHC in witw.

I need to learn how to best counter the allies





Attachment (1)

_____________________________

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

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

(in reply to Michael T)
Post #: 387
RE: Razing the Reich (No Pelton) - 12/4/2012 3:50:46 AM   
Pelton

 

Posts: 6398
Joined: 4/9/2006
Status: offline
Turn 57 you lost 114,000 not counting atrition, if you add up each battle.

Thats why your OOB dropped the following turn. A ratio of better then 4.1 to 1. Not 5 to 1 as I beleive also I need, but close.

If you only lost 83,000 your OOB would have increased by 37,000 and not dropped 6,000. If your recieiving 120,000 per turn as you claim.

The next turn your OOB dropped again.









< Message edited by Pelton -- 12/4/2012 3:53:48 AM >


_____________________________

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

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

(in reply to Pelton)
Post #: 388
RE: Razing the Reich (No Pelton) - 12/4/2012 3:51:08 AM   
Michael T


Posts: 2411
Joined: 10/22/2006
From: Queensland, Australia.
Status: offline
I will be playing WITE for many years to come, unless something better come along.

_____________________________

'Deus le Volt!'
------------------

(in reply to Pelton)
Post #: 389
RE: Razing the Reich (No Pelton) - 12/4/2012 3:53:56 AM   
Michael T


Posts: 2411
Joined: 10/22/2006
From: Queensland, Australia.
Status: offline
Those losses are not permanent. I only count permanent losses. Which you see on the screen that shows the totals, its name eludes me right now.

_____________________________

'Deus le Volt!'
------------------

(in reply to Michael T)
Post #: 390
Page:   <<   < prev  11 12 [13] 14 15   next >   >>
All Forums >> [New Releases from Matrix Games] >> Gary Grigsby's War in the East Series >> After Action Reports >> RE: Razing the Reich (No Pelton) Page: <<   < prev  11 12 [13] 14 15   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

0.122