Matrix Games Forums

Command Ops gets a Massive Update!Lost Battles AAR: Smolensk 41War in the East: Lost Battles is here!Conflict of Heroes: Awakening the Bear! Let's Play videoLost Battles Scenario Manual excerpts available!A sneak peek from Allied Corps!Harpoon 3 ANWs Free Ultimate Update!All good Deals always come in threesDistant Worlds: Shadows Approaches!Lost Battles AAR: Moscow 41		 Forums  Register  Login  Photo Gallery  Member List  Search  Calendars  FAQ 

My Profile  Inbox  Address Book  My Subscription  My Forums  Log Out

Soviet Command and Control Question

 
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 >> Soviet Command and Control Question Page: [1]
Login
Message << Older Topic   Newer Topic >>
Soviet Command and Control Question - 9/1/2012 3:59:13 AM   
IdahoNYer


Posts: 991
Joined: 9/6/2009
From: NYer living in Boise, ID
Status: offline 		Biggest challenge I find playing the Soviets is organizing the force. Blessed with plenty of units, but never enough headquarters - especially Front HQs.

So which is better - Keeing armies attached directly to STAVKA, or overloading the Front HQs? Advantages/disadvantages to either?
Post #: 1
RE: Soviet Command and Control Question - 9/1/2012 4:32:57 AM   
hfarrish

 

Posts: 522
Joined: 1/3/2011
Status: offline
Personally, at least in '41, I ignore C&C except for my reserve lines around Moscow and elsewhere where I want to dig (so you want units attached to Army HQs with sappers, et al). If you keep everything that isn't on the front line attached to STAVKA (as well as some quiet sectors) you shouldn't have an issue. Once reserves start pouring in that pretty much becomes impossible even with a lot of stuff attached to STAVKA...I think Sov Front overload is just something we have to accept.

I guess one management mechanism is to try and minimize it in the most critical sectors...

_____________________________

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=R5q8iMgkg9c&feature=results_video&playnext=1&list=PLD1013999DE2B66AD



(in reply to IdahoNYer)
Post #: 2
RE: Soviet Command and Control Question - 9/1/2012 9:35:18 AM   
Schmart

 

Posts: 552
Joined: 9/13/2010
From: Canada
Status: offline 		Yeah, it's kinda the nature of the beast. I also relatively ignore C&C in 1941. I figure it's also more historical that way... I wait until the first blizzard to tighten things up a bit. I leave extra armies with Stavka. My favourite turn when playing the Russians is always when Voronezh Front arrives! That's the point when things start getting better C&C wise...

(in reply to hfarrish)
Post #: 3
RE: Soviet Command and Control Question - 9/11/2012 7:52:41 PM   
Sorta

 

Posts: 120
Joined: 11/30/2009
Status: offline 		What are people's thought on where to attach the Shock armies? If they are attached to STAVKA or a MD so they can move around the whole front what are the downsides?

Losing the MD command role so what really?

(in reply to Schmart)
Post #: 4
RE: Soviet Command and Control Question - 9/11/2012 9:10:07 PM   
turtlefang

 

Posts: 226
Joined: 7/18/2012
Status: offline 		Front HQ remains a major problem for a while. I usually try to keep them within the command limits and overload STAVKA so I can maintain some flexibility as the situation improves later in the game.

Typically in 41 I try to organize each front with 4 armies each with 8 infantry divisions and two infantry bgs. I will then have one army with whatever mountain divisions I can save and a few cavalry division under STAVKA, and three or four CAV armies - ideally shock - with 9 cav divisions that will convert to 3 corps + 1 more in December - these remain under STAVKA.

All my arm bgs stay usually go under one of my MDs just to relieve pressure on STAVKA. I disband all the AT regiments if they haven't already died. Any "extra" troops go under MD districts - usually Moscow or Karkov - until I'm ready to transfer them to the fight.

Any armies under STAVKA I try to keep in quiet areas and out of the axis main drive. The exception are the CAV armies and the lone mountain/cav army - in many cases, I will "commit" STAVKA to acting as a front during the blizzard to keep these moving forward.

As other have said, its a mess in 41/early 42. You do the best you can. This format keeps me somewhat organized but it doesn't allow much customization. But then again, I get overwhelmed if I try too much customizing and forget what's where.




(in reply to Sorta)
Post #: 5
RE: Soviet Command and Control Question - 9/13/2012 6:22:33 PM   
IdahoNYer


Posts: 991
Joined: 9/6/2009
From: NYer living in Boise, ID
Status: offline 		Well, as my PBEM moves into Blizzard, I've found that keeping the Fronts with 3-4 armies works pretty well in maintaining CC. STAVKA controlled armies one the fanks of the Fronts also seems to work well - and allows maximum flexibility to shift a large force rapidly without expending a prohibitive amount of points in shifting an army from one Front to another.

These armies are then the usual suspects to attach to newly created Fronts - already seasoned a bit in combat and perhaps victories.

Units behind the lines digging forts remain a question - I usually don't attach them to an army, and they remain attached directly to either a MD or STAVKA. This helps in moving one or two divisions into the line when they are full strength and at 40 or so experience, rather than waiting for an entire army to shift.

(in reply to turtlefang)
Post #: 6
RE: Soviet Command and Control Question - 9/13/2012 10:27:14 PM   
hfarrish

 

Posts: 522
Joined: 1/3/2011
Status: offline
Related question for the board - does the Soviet player need to create armies to keep up with demand, or should enough be coming through in the reinforce process? I seem to be getting a bit thin on Army HQs but the create cost is not ideal.

_____________________________

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=R5q8iMgkg9c&feature=results_video&playnext=1&list=PLD1013999DE2B66AD



(in reply to IdahoNYer)
Post #: 7
RE: Soviet Command and Control Question - 9/13/2012 10:50:28 PM   
Flaviusx


Posts: 5743
Joined: 9/9/2009
Status: offline 		I'm having to make up to 3-5 extra armies over what the reinforcement schedule provides.



_____________________________

WitE Alpha Tester

(in reply to hfarrish)
Post #: 8
RE: Soviet Command and Control Question - 9/13/2012 11:20:37 PM   
Schmart

 

Posts: 552
Joined: 9/13/2010
From: Canada
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: hfarrish


Related question for the board - does the Soviet player need to create armies to keep up with demand, or should enough be coming through in the reinforce process? I seem to be getting a bit thin on Army HQs but the create cost is not ideal.


To match historical numbers, you will need to create 5 Tank Armies from Jul 42 to Jan 43 and a 6th Tank Army in Jan 44. WitE is short about 10-15 Army HQs in 42-43 (not including Tank Armies), however historically roughly the same number of HQs were withdrawn or disbanded later in the war. In other words, there is an expansion of Army HQs in the middle period of the war and then a contraction in the later part, but the game will provide you with the right number of Army HQs that you will finish the war with (excepting Tank Armies). Unfortunately in it's current state, building the historical number of Army HQs in WitE is an excessive cost to the Russian player. Like Flavius points out, a few extras will definitely help. The best time to build them would probably be in the first half of 1943 when APs become less of a crunch.

< Message edited by Schmart -- 9/13/2012 11:23:48 PM >

(in reply to hfarrish)
Post #: 9
RE: Soviet Command and Control Question - 9/14/2012 12:17:55 AM   
turtlefang

 

Posts: 226
Joined: 7/18/2012
Status: offline 		I fall into Flav's camp - I end up making 3 to 5 combine arms armies over what given in the game plus however many tank armies I end up with - usually six to eight. And it usually does happen sometime in 43 when I'm in the process of converting infantry divisions to infantry corps.

While I understand the historical issue, my force creation doesn't follow the Soviet historical force build. I target 450 infantry divisions (150 infantry corp), 24 to 30 tank corps, 12 to 15 mech corps, and 30 to 40 artillery divisions plus a few mountain divisions (however many I can save) and 45+ cav divisions (15+ corps) - I usually don't replace any cav division that get killed as you get more than enough. So I need the command structure to support that force level.

If you target a different force level - and I'm not proposing mine as right - then you need to plan your command structure around what you are planning. So decide what you think your long term force structure will be, and then build your command structure toward that end.

(in reply to Schmart)
Post #: 10
RE: Soviet Command and Control Question - 9/14/2012 12:24:23 AM   
Schmart

 

Posts: 552
Joined: 9/13/2010
From: Canada
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: turtlefang
...my force creation doesn't follow the Soviet historical force build. I target 450 infantry divisions (150 infantry corp), 24 to 30 tank corps, 12 to 15 mech corps, and 30 to 40 artillery divisions plus a few mountain divisions (however many I can save) and 45+ cav divisions (15+ corps)...


Erm...that pretty much is the historical force structure!

(in reply to turtlefang)
Post #: 11
RE: Soviet Command and Control Question - 9/14/2012 2:42:32 AM   
Flaviusx


Posts: 5743
Joined: 9/9/2009
Status: offline 		The annoying thing is that once you finally get the Romanian and Polish armies you'll have too many and can then disband some. If you're willing to wait long enough for those, you could probably skip the extra HQ builds, but that's a long time coming. You eventually reach a point where every Front can control 5 armies and the reinforcement schedule doesn't quite fill that out until those conditional HQs arrive.

_____________________________

WitE Alpha Tester

(in reply to Schmart)
Post #: 12
RE: Soviet Command and Control Question - 9/14/2012 3:34:06 AM   
turtlefang

 

Posts: 226
Joined: 7/18/2012
Status: offline 		It's similar to the Soviet forces in 1945 but actually less. Going from memory, as I don't have my books with me right now, the Soviets:

- Fielded about 70 to 80 independent tank BGs
- Approximately 30 to 40 mech and motorize infantry BG
- Close to 250 art BG/Mtr BG/AT BGs
- About 60 more infantry divisions
- And fewer tank corps (if I remember right, the Soviets built 24 tank and 13 mech corps)
- 2 Tank divisions that were maintained under the 39/40 TOE and never reorganized; continued to be equiped with BT5/BT7s stationed in the Far East

While some of the forces were deployed in the Far East, the one's deployed in the Far East were more than made up by the "Allies" recruited from the Poles, Rums and others after they surrendered and then supported the Soviets.

I've just never found anything below the division worth building as far "map" units go - SUs are a different item.

If you actually had to build all these units AND put them under army command, it would require a massive increase in the number of armies that you need (if you actually had the admin points to create them, which I don't know if you do as I haven't tried building them).

In any case, it just shows the scale of Soviet effort - and the fact that it really would extremely difficult to stop once it got rolling.

(in reply to Schmart)
Post #: 13
RE: Soviet Command and Control Question - 9/14/2012 9:13:09 AM   
randallw

 

Posts: 1926
Joined: 9/2/2010
Status: offline 		Under the original HQ capacity rules there wasn't a huge HQ crunch, but with the 18 CP setup i've ordered 14 combined arms ones and 13 tank army ones to handle my early 1943 army.

(in reply to turtlefang)
Post #: 14
RE: Soviet Command and Control Question - 9/14/2012 11:00:07 PM   
Sorta

 

Posts: 120
Joined: 11/30/2009
Status: offline 		I'd like to unleash my inner accountant. Is there some way to put numbers to the hunches re 4 Shock armies being attached to a non-Front?

Assume 4 Shock armies with the same leader in the Shocks and the Front/MD:

Scenario 1 - attached to a Front only
Scenario 2- attached to a very distant MD
Sceanrio 3 - attached STAVKA

What would be the effects?

(in reply to randallw)
Post #: 15
Page:   [1]
All Forums >> [New Releases from Matrix Games] >> Gary Grigsby's War in the East Series >> Soviet Command and Control Question Page: [1]
Jump to:





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


Forum Software © ASPPlayground.NET Advanced Edition 2.4.5 ANSI

0.156