Matrix Games Forums

Command Rommels Panzers in Battle Academy!Servers UpdateThe Deal goes Fourth!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!		 Forums  Register  Login  Photo Gallery  Member List  Search  Calendars  FAQ 

My Profile  Inbox  Address Book  My Subscription  My Forums  Log Out

RE: Caspian Crusade (no M60A3TTS please)

 
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: Caspian Crusade (no M60A3TTS please) Page: <<   < prev  1 [2] 3 4 5   next >   >>
Login
Message << Older Topic   Newer Topic >>
RE: Caspian Crusade (no M60A3TTS please) - 2/28/2013 9:07:08 PM   
Michael T


Posts: 1542
Joined: 10/22/2006
From: Queensland, Australia.
Status: offline 		AC settings are 5%. With an eye to very efficient mech movement, concentration of air refueling and what remains of HQBU you can manage a warp drive here and there. All one need do is apply brain. Nothing more than that

I have just received M60's T5. He broke the Rzhev pocket and is defending the Dneipr line in the south.

_____________________________

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

(in reply to Balou)
Post #: 31
RE: Caspian Crusade (no M60A3TTS please) - 3/1/2013 2:52:43 AM   
Scook_99

 

Posts: 256
Joined: 6/20/2007
Status: offline 		Success breeds success. The turn 5 you see is made possible by the extra encirclement on turn 3. MT is following the "path of least resistance", but with the situation, I would put most of my troops in a direct path to Moscow, but that forces a northern pincer around Moscow and makes MT only to have to 'force' a southern pincer. Good luck to Russia, he's going to need it.

Edit: And I am stealing some of this in my game. Turn 2 you only need to advance to keep the Landers rolling. North If Vitebsk is usually weak like this on turn 3, even if covered with airborne troopers.

< Message edited by Scook_99 -- 3/1/2013 2:58:31 AM >

(in reply to Balou)
Post #: 32
RE: Caspian Crusade (no M60A3TTS please) - 3/1/2013 8:38:19 AM   
janh

 

Posts: 1140
Joined: 6/12/2007
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: Michael T
AC settings are 5%.


Have you turned off interdiction and are you providing bombing/support a lot? Or using the bombers more for air supply?

(in reply to Michael T)
Post #: 33
RE: Caspian Crusade (no M60A3TTS please) - 3/1/2013 12:52:00 PM   
Michael T


Posts: 1542
Joined: 10/22/2006
From: Queensland, Australia.
Status: offline 		Pretty much just Air Supply and ground support very spareingly. Interdiction is on.

_____________________________

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

(in reply to janh)
Post #: 34
RE: Caspian Crusade (no M60A3TTS please) - 3/1/2013 3:32:28 PM   
wac29

 

Posts: 202
Joined: 1/13/2011
Status: offline 		It's funny how many axis players have gone almost full circle back to keeping panzer group 2 fully north of the Pripyat marsh. The panzer ball strategy of 1942 has moved into 1941 now with PG2 not even attempting to cross the Dnepr south of Mogilev but joining PG3 straight towards Moscow. PG4 even is in on it sometimes too.

(in reply to Michael T)
Post #: 35
RE: Caspian Crusade (no M60A3TTS please) - 3/1/2013 3:40:30 PM   
Ketza


Posts: 2016
Joined: 1/14/2007
From: Columbia, Maryland
Status: offline 		I had a player recently Panzerball me in 1941 with groups 3,2 and 4 all driving for Moscow.

I stopped him cold and held Moscow and Leningrad. One Axis of approach is not a good idea.

(in reply to wac29)
Post #: 36
RE: Caspian Crusade (no M60A3TTS please) - 3/1/2013 3:58:14 PM   
Flaviusx


Posts: 5746
Joined: 9/9/2009
Status: online 		You need to at least threaten Leningrad and force the Soviet to commit lots of troops there, imo. Ideally you take the place and then switch PG4 to advance to Moscow. The advance in the center tends to stall much past Smolensk for a bit until rail lines catch up. MT is operating at the outer limits of his logistical capabilities now I suspect, air supply notwithstanding. But he's thrashed the Soviets in doing so, is well positioned to take Leningrad, and then go for the blow in the center.

The only question in my mind at this point is if he can take Rostov before the year is out. But if he cripples the Red Army further north he can deliver the coup de grace in 42. This game is already starting to snowball.





_____________________________

WitE Alpha Tester

(in reply to Ketza)
Post #: 37
RE: Caspian Crusade (no M60A3TTS please) - 3/1/2013 4:19:08 PM   
vandev

 

Posts: 129
Joined: 9/14/2011
Status: offline 		My take on the axis in 41 is that you need a good mix of panzer thrusting for pockets and infantry grinding to produce casualties. The soviet's have alot of men to lose and alot of units to play with. There is a fine line to having enough of an army to solve problems and not having quite enough.

If you concentrate your axis armor too much in one place, defending against an all infantry attack elsewhere becomes much easier. The infantry grind creates opportunities for panzer punctures and the threat of panzer punctures across a broad front makes more targets for the infantry grind. Too much axis concentration in 41 is not a good strategy.

vandev

(in reply to Flaviusx)
Post #: 38
RE: Caspian Crusade (no M60A3TTS please) - 3/1/2013 9:32:59 PM   
Pelton


Posts: 4355
Joined: 4/9/2006
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: wac29

It's funny how many axis players have gone almost full circle back to keeping panzer group 2 fully north of the Pripyat marsh. The panzer ball strategy of 1942 has moved into 1941 now with PG2 not even attempting to cross the Dnepr south of Mogilev but joining PG3 straight towards Moscow. PG4 even is in on it sometimes too.


Bomazz did the panzer ball and was stopped cold short of Moscow.

Its a short minded gamble that will always fail vs a good SHC player.

There is 2x as many manpower centers in south. If MT fails to take Moscow hes done, but in this case because of M60's poor use of the 20-30 extra units in the south hes toast.

As Katza pointed out stopping this move is easy.

MT really needs to go vs Katza, Flaviusx or Bomass.



_____________________________

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)

(in reply to wac29)
Post #: 39
RE: Caspian Crusade (no M60A3TTS please) - 3/1/2013 9:35:40 PM   
Pelton


Posts: 4355
Joined: 4/9/2006
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: Flaviusx

You need to at least threaten Leningrad and force the Soviet to commit lots of troops there, imo. Ideally you take the place and then switch PG4 to advance to Moscow. The advance in the center tends to stall much past Smolensk for a bit until rail lines catch up. MT is operating at the outer limits of his logistical capabilities now I suspect, air supply notwithstanding. But he's thrashed the Soviets in doing so, is well positioned to take Leningrad, and then go for the blow in the center.

The only question in my mind at this point is if he can take Rostov before the year is out. But if he cripples the Red Army further north he can deliver the coup de grace in 42. This game is already starting to snowball.






Its a copy of another game M60 has played

No real surpises other then the fact hes falling for the same moves.


_____________________________

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)

(in reply to Flaviusx)
Post #: 40
RE: Caspian Crusade (no M60A3TTS please) - 3/2/2013 3:21:58 AM   
Marquo


Posts: 1095
Joined: 9/26/2000
Status: offline 		Maybe MT will now turn tail and head to the Polish border to save Berlin...


(in reply to Pelton)
Post #: 41
RE: Caspian Crusade (no M60A3TTS please) - 3/2/2013 4:55:30 AM   
Michael T


Posts: 1542
Joined: 10/22/2006
From: Queensland, Australia.
Status: offline 		End Axis T6 (24th July 1941) Clear.

AGN: The direct path to Leningrad is taken as the grind begins. There is no line at Lake Janis.

AGC: 2nd PzGp continues north east and moves in to Torzhok and Kalinin. 3rd PzGp swings south east and pockets Vyzama. The two PzGps have now split to lengthen the Soviet lines.

AGS: A great victory beckons as most of the Soviet troops defending the Dneipr are surrounded. The smaller of the two pockets will get broken but the large Kiev pocket should hold. This is a disaster for the Soviet south. Only a lack of fuel will slow the Axis armies in the south for the next few turns. Overall around 30 plus divisions are trapped in this operation.





Attachment (1)

_____________________________

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

(in reply to Marquo)
Post #: 42
RE: Caspian Crusade (no M60A3TTS please) - 3/2/2013 5:08:41 AM   
Flaviusx


Posts: 5746
Joined: 9/9/2009
Status: online 		Not sure why he was holding on to the Dnepr line in the south to begin with. Rostov may be doable after all in 41.

_____________________________

WitE Alpha Tester

(in reply to Michael T)
Post #: 43
RE: Caspian Crusade (no M60A3TTS please) - 3/6/2013 10:08:38 PM   
Michael T


Posts: 1542
Joined: 10/22/2006
From: Queensland, Australia.
Status: offline 		Quick T7 update. To my surprise M60 broke the main Kiev pocket as well as the smaller one and the Vyzma pocket in the centre. Things have gone crazy in the south as now the Axis have encircled even more Soviets but the pockets are loose so they will get broken again. But I have lots of INF on the way so ultimately all those Soviets will be POW's. But it does delay the advance.

In the North we edged closer to Leningrad and M60 isolated my Pz XX in Kalinin. We rescued them. Supply is the problem now. Probably two more turns before we can get moving again.

Full map and update at end T8.



_____________________________

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

(in reply to Flaviusx)
Post #: 44
RE: Caspian Crusade (no M60A3TTS please) - 3/6/2013 10:45:09 PM   
STEF78

 

Posts: 98
Joined: 2/19/2012
From: Versailles, France
Status: offline 		I feel like an absolute beginner when I look at your maps on turn 5 then on turn 6 in the south.

How are you able to keep such a mobility (MP) in your pzd/mot at this stage of the game?

(in reply to Michael T)
Post #: 45
RE: Caspian Crusade (no M60A3TTS please) - 3/7/2013 12:25:55 AM   
Michael T


Posts: 1542
Joined: 10/22/2006
From: Queensland, Australia.
Status: offline 		I devote a lot of time and effort in figuring how to get from A to B for the least cost. Plus maximising the flow of fuel to the front, whether it be HQBU, Air Supply or the rail net.

_____________________________

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

(in reply to STEF78)
Post #: 46
RE: Caspian Crusade (no M60A3TTS please) - 3/7/2013 3:06:09 PM   
rrbill


Posts: 249
Joined: 10/5/2009
Status: offline 		First part I get and can do, but have no clue about maximizing (except air supply) "flow of fuel." Thought HQBU too expensive and, yes, I keep HQs near or on RR tracks. But I never get the penetrations that I see in your games. Or, in those of others.

Would you elucidate or give a thread reference that might help me?

(in reply to Michael T)
Post #: 47
RE: Caspian Crusade (no M60A3TTS please) - 3/7/2013 10:33:53 PM   
Michael T


Posts: 1542
Joined: 10/22/2006
From: Queensland, Australia.
Status: offline 		There is no simple explanation guys. In the early days we had unlimited HQBU, muling and a much more liberal Air Supply function. So deep penetrations back then were relatively easy to maintain. The game has now reined in HQBU, muling and Air Supply so its very difficult to do now. The latest patch put a range limit on the distance an AB can be from a railhead and still do air supply. This was a real blow to what I and others could do previously. So every game started since 1.06.27 is new territory as far as the Axis 1941 summer is concerned. Forget about all those games you saw previously or started before 1.06.27, you can no longer replicate those results in the current game state. Period.

However if you are very focused on your logistical network you can devise a system that will allow some deep moves if your opponent has a weakness in his lines. There is no single rule to follow. Each situation requires its own solution. Only study, practice and game experience will give you the tools to develop the right plan. But there is enough 'juice' left in the system to get a single Pz Group deep in to Russia, if your opponent leaves a door open for you.

I could put forward several examples but I am reticent because you will always get a section who will say its gamey, abusive etc etc and should be rubbed out. Sorry, but there is so little left in the game now for Germany in 1941 that I dare not risk what is left. Anyone who has read my posts will know that I have exposed at least two major logistical loopholes that I considered legitimate and obvious bugs. So I am not talking about that kind of thing.

I am talking about a lot of little things here and there that together add up to the whole being greater than the sum of its parts.

_____________________________

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

(in reply to rrbill)
Post #: 48
RE: Caspian Crusade (no M60A3TTS please) - 3/7/2013 11:15:19 PM   
Flaviusx


Posts: 5746
Joined: 9/9/2009
Status: online 		You seem to be doing just fine with these alleged scraps, MT.

I find these advances quite unrealistic; I find some of the recent blizzard porn shown elsewhere equally problematic. Late war Soviet scenarios as well.

In real life these advances would have been impossible to sustain at the speeds the game allows and with the lack of losses for the attacker. The game is severely biased in favor of the offense for those who have mastered the details. You ought to be troubled by this. It's not just a 1941 Barbarossa problem.





_____________________________

WitE Alpha Tester

(in reply to Michael T)
Post #: 49
RE: Caspian Crusade (no M60A3TTS please) - 3/7/2013 11:35:46 PM   
Michael T


Posts: 1542
Joined: 10/22/2006
From: Queensland, Australia.
Status: offline 		I play the game for what it is, a game. Its the best around on the subject matter. I am happy to play either side. I am an offensive orientated player so its all fine by me. To my thinking you won't be happy until we have two immovable objects facing each other with neither side having any chance to dislodge the other. Sounds like WWI to me. I am not in to that and if that is where the game ends up I will move on. I enjoy games that allow some movement. Not trench warfare. That equals boring for me.

_____________________________

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

(in reply to Flaviusx)
Post #: 50
RE: Caspian Crusade (no M60A3TTS please) - 3/7/2013 11:47:36 PM   
Flaviusx


Posts: 5746
Joined: 9/9/2009
Status: online 		It's the best around, sure, but there's enormous room for improvement. We'll see how WITW shakes out.

I'm not looking for WWI here. I'm looking for WW2. This warp speed combat model is a bit much. Everything is just tremendously accelerated.



_____________________________

WitE Alpha Tester

(in reply to Michael T)
Post #: 51
RE: Caspian Crusade (no M60A3TTS please) - 3/8/2013 12:15:08 AM   
Michael T


Posts: 1542
Joined: 10/22/2006
From: Queensland, Australia.
Status: offline 		The defence offered by the enemy plays no small part in it all. You can't outlaw a bad defence and a bad defence should be punished.

_____________________________

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

(in reply to Flaviusx)
Post #: 52
RE: Caspian Crusade (no M60A3TTS please) - 3/8/2013 12:18:50 AM   
Michael T


Posts: 1542
Joined: 10/22/2006
From: Queensland, Australia.
Status: offline 		I should qualify that statement. Not saying M60's defence is bad. But if a weakness is found it should be able to be taken advantage of, thats all.

_____________________________

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

(in reply to Michael T)
Post #: 53
RE: Caspian Crusade (no M60A3TTS please) - 3/8/2013 12:38:38 AM   
Michael T


Posts: 1542
Joined: 10/22/2006
From: Queensland, Australia.
Status: offline 		I really don't see what is wrong in this game so far.

On T3 I took advantage of a weakness north of Vitebsk. This snowballed all the way to Kallinin by T6 (could have been T5 but for one very stubborn defender) because I chose to funnel all the fuel I could to the units in that sector. Simply reinforcing a success.

In the south I ever so slowly crept up to the Dneipr with fuel tanks nearly full just waiting to strike as soon as he stopped running. He chose to defend the Dneipr with what I consider very weak units. Obviously he had all his best guys around Moscow. Anyway I was waiting and hoping for such a mistake on his part.

So I really don't see a problem here. I might add M60 has done a fine job in closing all this down now and I am really struggling with supply as my advance has taken me beyond re-supply range for the moment. His OOB is rising and in some area's his lines are very solid and getting stronger.

_____________________________

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

(in reply to Michael T)
Post #: 54
RE: Caspian Crusade (no M60A3TTS please) - 3/8/2013 1:01:18 AM   
rrbill


Posts: 249
Joined: 10/5/2009
Status: offline 		Appreciate your thoughtful response to my questions.

Hmmm...sounds like I have to work hard and depend on brains to do it. This means I'm lost!

Will be following these AARs, though.

(in reply to Michael T)
Post #: 55
RE: Caspian Crusade (no M60A3TTS please) - 3/8/2013 2:46:26 AM   
Ketza


Posts: 2016
Joined: 1/14/2007
From: Columbia, Maryland
Status: offline 		I concur that it seems that there were some glaring mistakes that were taken advantage of and the Axis advance appears somewhat reasonable because of it.

(in reply to rrbill)
Post #: 56
RE: Caspian Crusade (no M60A3TTS please) - 3/8/2013 2:57:03 AM   
Flaviusx


Posts: 5746
Joined: 9/9/2009
Status: online 		Oh, no doubt M60 has made errors, but even taken those into consideration, the advance is remarkable. I do not think panzers should be zipping about the map with 50 movement points on turns 4-5 from a position on or about the Dnepr, period. This is incredibly generous logistics. It shouldn't even be possible to do this, physically. It wasn't in reality, not even close.

Let's put this in a WITW context. After Falaise the German resistance more or less collapsed and the Allies surged forward. Yet within a few weeks they were literally running out of gas and could not bounce the Rhine even against sketchy German resistance. These are distances well short of what we are seeing here. Without some changes to the game, I'm not seeing how this can be recreated. Am very curious to see how WITW will adress this. Otherwise it's going to be a quick trip to Berlin.



< Message edited by Flaviusx -- 3/8/2013 3:14:12 AM >

_____________________________

WitE Alpha Tester

(in reply to Ketza)
Post #: 57
RE: Caspian Crusade (no M60A3TTS please) - 3/8/2013 4:01:45 AM   
Michael T


Posts: 1542
Joined: 10/22/2006
From: Queensland, Australia.
Status: offline 		Look at North Africa in 41/42. The Germans were able to advance many 100's Km with a very lame logistical system. Sure it was only one Corp but look at the system it was relying on. No rail at all, purely trucks and air supply.

_____________________________

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

(in reply to Flaviusx)
Post #: 58
RE: Caspian Crusade (no M60A3TTS please) - 3/8/2013 4:14:35 AM   
Flaviusx


Posts: 5746
Joined: 9/9/2009
Status: online 		Ah but even Rommel ran out of luck and gas after Gazala. (And this despite capturing supplies in Tobruk.)

Earlier attempts at getting far into Egypt stumbled for logistical reasons as well when the British retained Tobruk. He was sent packing during the Crusader counteroffensive. But the British themselves overreached, Rommel got some convoys through, and that set up the stage for the Gazala battles in 42.

It all came down to logistics in NA in the end, for both sides.

Libya was a poor base for logistics. No rail net, very limited port capacity, extremely long overland supply lines that beyond a certain point snapped. It naturally tended to devolve into a battle for control of the various ports along the way, primarily Benghazi and Tobruk, with a good deal of give and take and change of fortunes. The issue was only definitively settled at Alamein with the DAK in an untenable position logistically and the Commonwealth benefiting from a massive buildup near its own base of supply.

Hopefully WITW will be a testbed for game systems that can recreate this ebb and flow. Vanilla WITE won't do it.



_____________________________

WitE Alpha Tester

(in reply to Michael T)
Post #: 59
RE: Caspian Crusade (no M60A3TTS please) - 3/8/2013 4:39:50 AM   
Michael T


Posts: 1542
Joined: 10/22/2006
From: Queensland, Australia.
Status: offline 		Flavius the only point I am trying to make is that against no resistance, i.e. a simple charge across the plain, that mech units can range quite far, even when tied to a very thin supply link. Its only when real resistance is encountered that 'supply issues' arise. My ascertion is that these advances depend very much on the 'resistance' offered by the defender.

Resistance gives the friction that eats up the fuel. Simply driving from A to B without firing a shot should and is much cheaper in fuel.

_____________________________

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

(in reply to Flaviusx)
Post #: 60
Page:   <<   < prev  1 [2] 3 4 5   next >   >>
All Forums >> [New Releases from Matrix Games] >> Gary Grigsby's War in the East Series >> After Action Reports >> RE: Caspian Crusade (no M60A3TTS please) Page: <<   < prev  1 [2] 3 4 5   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

0.396