Matrix Games Forums

Characters of World War 1Sign of for the Pike and Shot Beta!More Games are Coming to Steam! Deal of the Week: Combat Command Return to the Moon on October 31st! Commander: The Great War iPad Wallpapers Generals of the Great WarDeal of the Week Panzer CorpsNew Strategy Titles Join the FamilyTablet Version of Qvadriga gets new patch
Forums  Register  Login  Photo Gallery  Member List  Search  Calendars  FAQ 

My Profile  Inbox  Address Book  My Subscription  My Forums  Log Out

Micheal T (Ger) vs Kamil (Sov)

 
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 >> Micheal T (Ger) vs Kamil (Sov) Page: [1] 2 3 4 5   next >   >>
Login
Message << Older Topic   Newer Topic >>
Micheal T (Ger) vs Kamil (Sov) - 4/23/2013 10:58:02 PM   
Kamil

 

Posts: 1860
Joined: 2/5/2011
Status: offline
Our rules

Alt 41CG scenario
Server game
Locked HQ Support Axis/ Unlocked Soviet
Full FOW
Non Random Weather

House Rules

No Para drops to break pockets at anytime in the game. No Para missions at all by the Soviets until the first
Blizzard.

No bombing of air bases more than 3 times a turn (after turn 1).

No bombing of HQ's unless stacked with a ground unit

No attacks on partisans: they are to be reduced buy movement into or within their ZOC

Only 3 air attacks on city/ports per city per turn.


Reserves:
German: Only 4 CP for Corp and 6 CP for Armies/Army Groups can be placed in Reserve

Soviet: Prior to Sept 1941: Only 2 CP for Corp and 4 CP for Armies/Fronts
From Sept 41 on: 6 for Armies/Fronts

Also no units under Stavka or OKH can be placed in reserve.
And all units placed in Reserve must be within 5 hexes of their HQ.


The German player is only allowed to disband 3 Corp HQ at most during the game. Soviet disbandments are not limited.

Any single Leader can only be reassigned manually once per turn.

Additional Auto VC (in place to prevent ludicrous runaways) If the Axis player holds
Leningrad, Moscow, Voronezh and Rostov concurrently at the end of 1941 he wins
an Auto Victory.

If the Soviet player holds Pskov, Smolensk, Bryansk,
Kharkov and Stalino concurrently at anytime in 1942 he wins an Auto Victory

< Message edited by Kamil -- 4/23/2013 11:09:03 PM >
Post #: 1
RE: Micheal T (Ger) vs Kamil (Sov) - 4/23/2013 11:01:43 PM   
Pelton

 

Posts: 5720
Joined: 4/9/2006
Status: offline
Study his past games its always the same MO.

1. Hold Moscow as it is really the only one you can for sure hold.

After that you know what to do.

Thats it good luck.

_____________________________

GHC
22 - 4 - 8

15 games ended in 41 (15-0-0)
7 games ended in 42 (5-0-2)
8 games ended in 43 (2-3-3)
4 games ended in 44 (0-1-3)


General Cheesefinder of WitW

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=afmyypGyfng&list=PLrY4H4gWWBircAjo

(in reply to Kamil)
Post #: 2
RE: Micheal T (Ger) vs Kamil (Sov) - 4/23/2013 11:04:31 PM   
Kamil

 

Posts: 1860
Joined: 2/5/2011
Status: offline
quote:

Pelton

Study his past games its always the same MO.



Well, I did go through turns 1 to 3 in many of AARs, but once initial phase is over former scenarios rarely apply.


quote:

Thats it good luck.



I hope goddess of dice will smile upon me.

< Message edited by Kamil -- 4/23/2013 11:11:30 PM >

(in reply to Pelton)
Post #: 3
RE: Micheal T (Ger) vs Kamil (Sov) - 4/23/2013 11:08:32 PM   
Kamil

 

Posts: 1860
Joined: 2/5/2011
Status: offline
T1 north and centre (German)



In the north Michael went for speed in the centre for size.

Turn number two will tell me more about his intentions ... but I assume they are not good




Attachment (1)

(in reply to Kamil)
Post #: 4
RE: Micheal T (Ger) vs Kamil (Sov) - 4/23/2013 11:12:14 PM   
Kamil

 

Posts: 1860
Joined: 2/5/2011
Status: offline
T1 south (German)


Quality start in the south.




Attachment (1)

(in reply to Kamil)
Post #: 5
RE: Micheal T (Ger) vs Kamil (Sov) - 4/24/2013 12:00:56 AM   
Kamil

 

Posts: 1860
Joined: 2/5/2011
Status: offline
T1 north (Soviet)


I plan to stop withdrawing and fight once favourable ground is reached.




Attachment (1)

< Message edited by Kamil -- 4/24/2013 12:08:54 AM >

(in reply to Kamil)
Post #: 6
RE: Micheal T (Ger) vs Kamil (Sov) - 4/24/2013 12:02:47 AM   
Kamil

 

Posts: 1860
Joined: 2/5/2011
Status: offline
T2 centre (Soviet)


I won't attempt to defend land-bridge.




Attachment (1)

(in reply to Kamil)
Post #: 7
RE: Micheal T (Ger) vs Kamil (Sov) - 4/24/2013 12:05:32 AM   
Kamil

 

Posts: 1860
Joined: 2/5/2011
Status: offline
T2 south (Soviet)


I show no sportsmanship here either.

I run away and accept inevitable losses in armament industry - losing 20 to 30 points should not make big dent in production output.





Attachment (1)

(in reply to Kamil)
Post #: 8
RE: Micheal T (Ger) vs Kamil (Sov) - 4/24/2013 2:49:40 PM   
Manstein63


Posts: 397
Joined: 6/30/2010
Status: offline
Your making it too easy for him by giving up so much ground he will be hitting the Dnepr almost at full strength (almost like a quiet drive in the country side). If you haven't sent the VVS scuttling into reserve change all your I53's I16's and the other obsolete fighter bombers to Bomber mode
& use them to attack his Panzers you won't inflict very much damage but it will cause some disruption.
Manstein63

(in reply to Kamil)
Post #: 9
RE: Micheal T (Ger) vs Kamil (Sov) - 4/24/2013 3:34:20 PM   
HITMAN202


Posts: 537
Joined: 11/10/2011
Status: offline
Seeing how THEPROS played against (and made me nearly impotent), 1) I don't see the same large total number of units on the map as I faced against THEPROS (which is particularly puzzling in AGN since it appears he routed a good number of units outside pockets of isolation), 2) even though you say that you are not going to defend the Smolensk landbridge you have a huge number of units there that need to be north or south, and 3) Manstein IMO is wrong about AGS. ThePROS kept a tight gaggle of units 3-4 hexes in front of my infantry. The infantry were never in position to make effective hasty attacks and the Pz could do little against a packed front cordon

< Message edited by HITMAN202 -- 4/24/2013 3:49:41 PM >


_____________________________

WITE is a good addiction with no cure.

(in reply to Manstein63)
Post #: 10
RE: Micheal T (Ger) vs Kamil (Sov) - 4/24/2013 4:55:03 PM   
Manstein63


Posts: 397
Joined: 6/30/2010
Status: offline

ORIGINAL: HITMAN202


quote:

ThePROS kept a tight gaggle of units 3-4 hexes in front of my infantry. The infantry were never in position to make effective hasty attacks and the Pz could do little against a packed front cordon


If you look at AGS you can see that there is nothing between Michael's Panzers & the River Dnepr apart from FZ's & a stray unit. so all he has to do is head east at 50 MP's per turn & he will be across the river by Turn 3 or 4 he can also spend AP's to motorize his slower infantry units the turn after his tanks have taken the ground & they can follow on at speed as there are no enemy units to impede them. Just to be clear I am not criticizing Kamil's choices (he is playing the game not me) I am just saying that I would be more inclined not to give up as much territory without more of a struggle.
Manstein63

(in reply to HITMAN202)
Post #: 11
RE: Micheal T (Ger) vs Kamil (Sov) - 4/24/2013 5:20:44 PM   
HITMAN202


Posts: 537
Joined: 11/10/2011
Status: offline
I thought the cost of moving infantry with trucks is so ridiculously expensive that it's never on option ???? Also if you move them up, Kamil moves 4 hexes east and deliberate attacks are still a no go. And even if the infantry eventually is able to make deliberate attacks on the 14-17 th turns in front of Voronezh and Rostov, they are out of supply and paper tigers. Am I wrong ???

_____________________________

WITE is a good addiction with no cure.

(in reply to Manstein63)
Post #: 12
RE: Micheal T (Ger) vs Kamil (Sov) - 4/24/2013 5:30:17 PM   
Seminole


Posts: 492
Joined: 7/28/2011
Status: offline
quote:

I thought the cost of moving infantry with trucks is so ridiculously expensive that it's never on option ????


I don't think that is what he means. The infantry will be moving at full speed in the wake of the panzers already converted territory, whilst the panzers will pay no additional MP related to ZOC or hasty/deliberate attacks because the ground has largely been ceded without a fight.

We haven't seen what Kamil is planning on the Luga. The key will be which way MT goes from Pskov (due East, or Northeast?)


< Message edited by Seminole -- 4/24/2013 5:36:20 PM >

(in reply to HITMAN202)
Post #: 13
RE: Micheal T (Ger) vs Kamil (Sov) - 4/24/2013 7:29:04 PM   
Kamil

 

Posts: 1860
Joined: 2/5/2011
Status: offline
quote:

Manstein63

If you look at AGS you can see that there is nothing between Michael's Panzers & the River Dnepr apart from FZ's & a stray unit. so all he has to do is head east at 50 MP's per turn & he will be across the river by Turn 3 or 4 he can also spend AP's to motorize his slower infantry units the turn after his tanks have taken the ground & they can follow on at speed as there are no enemy units to impede them. Just to be clear I am not criticizing Kamil's choices (he is playing the game not me) I am just saying that I would be more inclined not to give up as much territory without more of a struggle.



I don't have enough troops to be able to spare enough units for sensible check-boarding in the south. I still could have risked doing it, but it would have jeopardised my efforts in the centre and north. Moreover defences would not have enough depth to make it possible to front line to fall back to trench lines built by units positioned farther to the west.



(in reply to Seminole)
Post #: 14
RE: Micheal T (Ger) vs Kamil (Sov) - 4/24/2013 7:32:04 PM   
Kamil

 

Posts: 1860
Joined: 2/5/2011
Status: offline
quote:

Seminole

We haven't seen what Kamil is planning on the Luga. The key will be which way MT goes from Pskov (due East, or Northeast?)


I agree. Michael has initiative so I have to react according to his actions.

(in reply to Kamil)
Post #: 15
RE: Micheal T (Ger) vs Kamil (Sov) - 4/25/2013 1:48:47 AM   
Pelton

 

Posts: 5720
Joined: 4/9/2006
Status: offline
You can lose 80 armament points and will see no effect after late 42, both manpower pools and armaments will grow.

Its pointless to defence south, MT only lightly checker boards the south and give up a few arm pts. It so easly to pocket units in the south, even when its defended GHC can cross river by turn 5 easly.

Your simply throwing a way units in south in 41 and 42.

MT almost always thrusts north of the landbridge, then disides where to go. The fastest railheads are just behind his northern landbridge thrust is why he always does it.

The most exploitable hexes are on that line and easyist to convert.

Once he has the ground north of landbridge hes in control IF you do not defend as Flaviusx has pointed out a 100 or so times. Checked board unit 5 to 7 hexes east of Smolensk.

FZ's near Moscow help allot as hexes will be a carpet of 3 lvl forts.

Also with the fixing of ammo bug, GHC national morale bug and the squad converting / arm pt sink, balloning manpower pool/ crashing OOB its going to be allot harder to break GHC lines.

The seeming uber SHC stream roller we have all seen crack GHC lines in early 44 will have to do all the work with out the help of bugs.

So the old running for the hills tactic's employed by everyone playing SHC including myself is going to see a very different out come.

As Flaviusx pointed out a while back GHC choke point should be manpower and not armaments. That is what should be happening once the fix for the 43 bug is in. Before the choke point was arm pts becuase of several bugs.

So now tring to crash GHC OOB by depleting GHC arm pts will be much much harder.

The standard ballooning of GHC manpower pool will be very hard to acheive with out the help of bugs.

< Message edited by Pelton -- 4/25/2013 2:07:04 AM >


_____________________________

GHC
22 - 4 - 8

15 games ended in 41 (15-0-0)
7 games ended in 42 (5-0-2)
8 games ended in 43 (2-3-3)
4 games ended in 44 (0-1-3)


General Cheesefinder of WitW

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=afmyypGyfng&list=PLrY4H4gWWBircAjo

(in reply to Kamil)
Post #: 16
RE: Micheal T (Ger) vs Kamil (Sov) - 4/25/2013 2:28:04 AM   
TulliusDetritus


Posts: 4379
Joined: 4/1/2004
From: Back to Reality :(
Status: offline
Good luck, Kamil! You will certainly need it

_____________________________

"Hang on, is that it...? Are we on the ring...?? Ready???" -- Nürburgring Seven Second Ring King

(in reply to Pelton)
Post #: 17
RE: Micheal T (Ger) vs Kamil (Sov) - 4/25/2013 8:09:26 AM   
sillyflower


Posts: 1257
Joined: 8/4/2010
From: London
Status: offline
I will watch closely as I'm next
and in the hope you can teach me how to stop him..............

< Message edited by sillyflower -- 4/25/2013 8:10:37 AM >


_____________________________

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 TulliusDetritus)
Post #: 18
RE: Micheal T (Ger) vs Kamil (Sov) - 4/26/2013 8:35:53 AM   
randallw

 

Posts: 1972
Joined: 9/2/2010
Status: offline
I suppose Michael may be dropping fuel to his mobile divisions; finding and bombing the German transport planes may be disruptive?

(in reply to sillyflower)
Post #: 19
RE: Micheal T (Ger) vs Kamil (Sov) - 4/26/2013 2:51:04 PM   
Ketza


Posts: 2201
Joined: 1/14/2007
From: Columbia, Maryland
Status: offline
Transport trap - Set up airbases within range of his deep Panzers and give them a decent air leader. Load them with cheap fighters and set your air intercept to 200+ and watch his fuel lorries drop from the air like leaves in fall.

Much more effective then bombing airbases.

(in reply to randallw)
Post #: 20
RE: Micheal T (Ger) vs Kamil (Sov) - 4/26/2013 6:50:43 PM   
Kamil

 

Posts: 1860
Joined: 2/5/2011
Status: offline
quote:

randallw

I suppose Michael may be dropping fuel to his mobile divisions; finding and bombing the German transport planes may be disruptive?


I am in the process of reorganising my air forces, so in turn or two I will be hopefully able to inflict some casualties.

quote:

Ketza

Transport trap - Set up airbases within range of his deep Panzers and give them a decent air leader. Load them with cheap fighters and set your air intercept to 200+ and watch his fuel lorries drop from the air like leaves in fall.

Much more effective then bombing airbases.



Interesting advice. Thank you.

(in reply to Ketza)
Post #: 21
RE: Micheal T (Ger) vs Kamil (Sov) - 4/27/2013 9:27:10 AM   
randallw

 

Posts: 1972
Joined: 9/2/2010
Status: offline
Remember that fighters have fairly limited range; bases will have to be relatively close ( 10-15 hexes? ).

(in reply to Kamil)
Post #: 22
RE: Micheal T (Ger) vs Kamil (Sov) - 4/27/2013 11:01:15 AM   
Kamil

 

Posts: 1860
Joined: 2/5/2011
Status: offline
T2 north & centre (German)


Contrary to my expectations Michael pushed towards Velikie Luki and practically outflanked my positions at land-bridge.

It is not an issue, because I planned to make a stand to the east, near Smolensk.




Attachment (1)

< Message edited by Kamil -- 4/27/2013 11:02:07 AM >

(in reply to randallw)
Post #: 23
RE: Micheal T (Ger) vs Kamil (Sov) - 4/27/2013 11:02:30 AM   
Kamil

 

Posts: 1860
Joined: 2/5/2011
Status: offline
T2 south (German)


Transitory turn in the south.




Attachment (1)

(in reply to Kamil)
Post #: 24
RE: Micheal T (Ger) vs Kamil (Sov) - 4/27/2013 11:08:07 AM   
Kamil

 

Posts: 1860
Joined: 2/5/2011
Status: offline
T2 north & centre (Soviet)


I managed to establish defences strong enough to feel secure until arrival of German infantry. But everything has its price and I think, that soon I might get punished in the south for overcommitment in centre.




Attachment (1)

(in reply to Kamil)
Post #: 25
RE: Micheal T (Ger) vs Kamil (Sov) - 4/27/2013 11:15:36 AM   
Kamil

 

Posts: 1860
Joined: 2/5/2011
Status: offline
T2 south (Soviet)

One more turn and Michael will arrive at the banks of Dnieper. Turn later I will be extremely vulnerable and easy to surround. Hopefully he won't have enough MP to do it.


If everything goes well, at turn 4 I abandon Kiev and Cherkassy and form defence lines just west of Poltava.




Attachment (1)

(in reply to Kamil)
Post #: 26
RE: Micheal T (Ger) vs Kamil (Sov) - 4/29/2013 9:53:44 AM   
Kamil

 

Posts: 1860
Joined: 2/5/2011
Status: offline
T3 north & centre (German)

Michael's rapid advance continues.




Attachment (1)

(in reply to Kamil)
Post #: 27
RE: Micheal T (Ger) vs Kamil (Sov) - 4/29/2013 9:55:01 AM   
Kamil

 

Posts: 1860
Joined: 2/5/2011
Status: offline
T3 south (German)


I think Germans are 1 turn from crossing the river.




Attachment (1)

(in reply to Kamil)
Post #: 28
RE: Micheal T (Ger) vs Kamil (Sov) - 4/29/2013 10:01:37 AM   
Kamil

 

Posts: 1860
Joined: 2/5/2011
Status: offline
T3 north & centre (Soviet)


My lines still lack required density so withdrawals will continue.

I launched two successful attacks on German marauding motorised troops - just to keep Michael more cautious.




Attachment (1)

(in reply to Kamil)
Post #: 29
RE: Micheal T (Ger) vs Kamil (Sov) - 4/29/2013 10:04:16 AM   
Kamil

 

Posts: 1860
Joined: 2/5/2011
Status: offline
T3 south (Soviet)


Dangerous situation, hopefully German panzers are low on fuel.




Attachment (1)

(in reply to Kamil)
Post #: 30
Page:   [1] 2 3 4 5   next >   >>
All Forums >> [New Releases from Matrix Games] >> Gary Grigsby's War in the East Series >> After Action Reports >> Micheal T (Ger) vs Kamil (Sov) Page: [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

0.145