Matrix Games Forums

Buzz Aldrins Space Program Manager is now available!Space Program Manager gets mini-site and Twitch SessionBuzz Aldrin: Ask Me Anything (AMA) on redditDeal of the week Fantasy Kommander: Eukarion WarsSpace Program Manager Launch Contest Announced!Battle Academy 2 is out now on iPad!A closer look at rockets in Space Program ManagerDeal of the Week - Pride of NationsA new update for Piercing Fortress EuropaNew screenshots for War in the West!
Forums  Register  Login  Photo Gallery  Member List  Search  Calendars  FAQ 

My Profile  Inbox  Address Book  My Subscription  My Forums  Log Out

A Question on Realism of Multi line Fronts

 
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 >> A Question on Realism of Multi line Fronts Page: [1]
Login
Message << Older Topic   Newer Topic >>
A Question on Realism of Multi line Fronts - 6/13/2013 5:12:47 PM   
lparkh


Posts: 327
Joined: 7/25/2004
Status: offline
I would like some insight please on realism in this game. I am very aware that it models in admirable detail the unit compositions and unit elements (vehicles etc). I am aware it is highly realistic on OOB. What concerns me a bit is that from screenshots and some AARs I get the impression that the standard soviet play is enormous defense in depth. Multiple layers of weak units to clog the panzer treads as it were. It is this part that concerns me a bit from a realism standpoint. Did the Soviets really have units behind units behind units? My impression is that they instead had a more conventional front line backed up by reserves.
So my question is is this in fact historical? Or is this a 'gamey' aspect of WITE?
This question matters to me because the appeal of WITE is high due to realism but the time investment is too. So if I'm going to invest the time I want to feel like at the operational line level (rather than unit composition and command level) it is 'realistic.'
Thanks for any input, this is really a question, it is not an 'attack'. I may be offbase and in fact multiple lines are not typical for Soviets in the game or multiple lines were historical (certainly at Kursk for example, but I'm wondering in general).
Post #: 1
RE: A Question on Realism of Multi line Fronts - 6/13/2013 5:18:45 PM   
morvael


Posts: 4554
Joined: 9/8/2006
From: Poland
Status: online
See cpt flam's AAR where I don't use this ahistorical tactics and I'm happy with results.

(in reply to lparkh)
Post #: 2
RE: A Question on Realism of Multi line Fronts - 6/13/2013 7:32:54 PM   
lparkh


Posts: 327
Joined: 7/25/2004
Status: offline
Thanks for replying. Am I correct in thinking the AI uses ahistorical?

(in reply to morvael)
Post #: 3
RE: A Question on Realism of Multi line Fronts - 6/13/2013 7:41:35 PM   
morvael


Posts: 4554
Joined: 9/8/2006
From: Poland
Status: online
To a degree, yes. They have the ability to move (teleport?) so many units that they quickly create tough front lines, also backed by deep lines of ants wherever you will start to breakthrough. This is another kind of ahistorical, different to what a human opponent can do in a PBEM.

(in reply to lparkh)
Post #: 4
RE: A Question on Realism of Multi line Fronts - 6/14/2013 7:52:01 AM   
loki100


Posts: 930
Joined: 10/20/2012
Status: offline
At times, the Soviets did indeed build defense lines at great depth. The best example is the preparation for Kursk where not only the immediate sector was covered with substantive reserves but Stalin kept the equivalent of another Front out of the immediate battle zone simply to cover the road to Moscow in case of a German victory.

But I agree, thats not the endless carpet of weak units that is a frequent approach.

There is a consequence of the retreat/rout mechanics though. If you deploy in a 3-2-1 model (ie 3 units on the front, 2 as an immediate reserve, 1 as a deep reserve) which is a fair reflection of reality then (assuming only one retreat route) if the front breaks, 2 of the units will rout (nowhere to retreat to) and only 1 will retreat normally.

Routs are bad for morale and equipment loss.

In consequence, I've tended to 2-1-1 so if the front units are forced back they retreat normally. A second German victory may trigger routs. But even if you are not simply deploying to cost the Germans MPs, it does tend you to a carpet defense.

(in reply to lparkh)
Post #: 5
RE: A Question on Realism of Multi line Fronts - 6/14/2013 9:07:22 AM   
Mehring

 

Posts: 1548
Joined: 1/25/2007
Status: online

quote:

ORIGINAL: loki100

There is a consequence of the retreat/rout mechanics though. If you deploy in a 3-2-1 model (ie 3 units on the front, 2 as an immediate reserve, 1 as a deep reserve) which is a fair reflection of reality then (assuming only one retreat route) if the front breaks, 2 of the units will rout (nowhere to retreat to) and only 1 will retreat normally.


That's not my understanding or experience. Units with only fully stacked hexes to retreat to will instead retreat 2 or more hexes and take additional retreat attrition.

Might be an idea, though, to reduce morale and/or disrupt troops in retreat/rout path. Nobody likes to see their beaten comrades retreating or routing through their lines.


_____________________________

“The end of democracy and the defeat of the American Revolution will occur when government falls into the hands of lending institutions and moneyed incorporations.”
¯ Thomas Jefferson

(in reply to loki100)
Post #: 6
RE: A Question on Realism of Multi line Fronts - 6/14/2013 11:42:36 AM   
timmyab

 

Posts: 975
Joined: 12/14/2010
From: Bristol, UK
Status: online
Unfortunately, deep defenses are essential because of the combination of weekly turns and high German mobility.The defending side is forced to stand around like statues while the attacking side punches a hole and fans out behind them.
I think half weekly turns would help quite a bit, also more restrictions on moving through enemy held territory.

(in reply to lparkh)
Post #: 7
RE: A Question on Realism of Multi line Fronts - 6/14/2013 12:20:11 PM   
carlkay58

 

Posts: 2269
Joined: 7/25/2010
Status: offline
It is not really that ahistorical. Reserves were commonly kept about 10 to 15 miles back in WWII - so one hex behind the front lines. Units that were rotated out of the front lines for rest and replacements (refit) were typically in the 30 to 40 mile range - so three hexes or so back. During much of the war the Soviets were deployed with about half up front, one third in reserve, and one sixth in refit. The Germans did about the same, but they tended towards regimental level rather than the divisional/corps level of the Soviets.

(in reply to timmyab)
Post #: 8
RE: A Question on Realism of Multi line Fronts - 6/14/2013 12:22:35 PM   
Oberst_Klink

 

Posts: 1322
Joined: 2/10/2008
From: Germany
Status: online

quote:

ORIGINAL: carlkay58

It is not really that ahistorical. Reserves were commonly kept about 10 to 15 miles back in WWII - so one hex behind the front lines. Units that were rotated out of the front lines for rest and replacements (refit) were typically in the 30 to 40 mile range - so three hexes or so back. During much of the war the Soviets were deployed with about half up front, one third in reserve, and one sixth in refit. The Germans did about the same, but they tended towards regimental level rather than the divisional/corps level of the Soviets.


Hear, hear! I second that; half-week turns would restrict the MP to 50% and give the opponent, especially in a IGOUGO game system a chance to react. A 5mile/hex and half-week game system would make sense for the upcoming WitW, too.

Klink, Oberst

_____________________________

Ceterum censeo Carthaginem esse delendam
(Marcus Porcius Cato Censorius)

Visit the Gefechtsstand!

(in reply to carlkay58)
Post #: 9
RE: A Question on Realism of Multi line Fronts - 6/14/2013 12:24:21 PM   
morvael


Posts: 4554
Joined: 9/8/2006
From: Poland
Status: online
quote:

ORIGINAL: Mehring


quote:

ORIGINAL: loki100

There is a consequence of the retreat/rout mechanics though. If you deploy in a 3-2-1 model (ie 3 units on the front, 2 as an immediate reserve, 1 as a deep reserve) which is a fair reflection of reality then (assuming only one retreat route) if the front breaks, 2 of the units will rout (nowhere to retreat to) and only 1 will retreat normally.


That's not my understanding or experience. Units with only fully stacked hexes to retreat to will instead retreat 2 or more hexes and take additional retreat attrition.



If low morale (Soviet) they usually rout, adding insult to injury as this drops their morale even more. But as most rallied for my turn I still thought it's better to have fully stacked frontline. The Germans had to do a deliberate attacks of 6-9 divisions costing them huge amount of MP to clear a single hex (and due to command penalties for units from different corps, costing them on average 20% of their on-map CV values).

...which means they need more to do less and then you win :)

< Message edited by morvael -- 6/14/2013 12:28:23 PM >

(in reply to Mehring)
Post #: 10
RE: A Question on Realism of Multi line Fronts - 6/14/2013 12:49:27 PM   
Mehring

 

Posts: 1548
Joined: 1/25/2007
Status: online
quote:

ORIGINAL: morvael

quote:

ORIGINAL: Mehring


quote:

ORIGINAL: loki100

There is a consequence of the retreat/rout mechanics though. If you deploy in a 3-2-1 model (ie 3 units on the front, 2 as an immediate reserve, 1 as a deep reserve) which is a fair reflection of reality then (assuming only one retreat route) if the front breaks, 2 of the units will rout (nowhere to retreat to) and only 1 will retreat normally.


That's not my understanding or experience. Units with only fully stacked hexes to retreat to will instead retreat 2 or more hexes and take additional retreat attrition.



If low morale (Soviet) they usually rout, adding insult to injury as this drops their morale even more. But as most rallied for my turn I still thought it's better to have fully stacked frontline. The Germans had to do a deliberate attacks of 6-9 divisions costing them huge amount of MP to clear a single hex (and due to command penalties for units from different corps, costing them on average 20% of their on-map CV values).

...which means they need more to do less and then you win :)

Are there still such things as low morale Soviets?

Probably best to employ various tactics according to circumstances. A thin front allows you to conceal your strength. Three lines of units, be they single units, stacks of small units, strong or weak, is just three lines of units to the other side until they break through the front to see them. By then they're already comitted to the attack. Can work nicely if you have units to burn and space to trade.

Multi-corps/Army combat seems to be beneficial if each HQ brings enough SUs to compensate for an often paltry CV loss. I wonder whether it works as intended.



_____________________________

“The end of democracy and the defeat of the American Revolution will occur when government falls into the hands of lending institutions and moneyed incorporations.”
¯ Thomas Jefferson

(in reply to morvael)
Post #: 11
RE: A Question on Realism of Multi line Fronts - 6/14/2013 1:04:14 PM   
morvael


Posts: 4554
Joined: 9/8/2006
From: Poland
Status: online
-36% from 3 12CV panzer divisions is 9 CV lost. Additional SUs won't give you so much, but of course additional artillery will always help to kill more enemy soldiers. All I know is that by using this tactics I haven't lost a single Soviet unit from December '41 up to July '43 and my army is now 9.2 million strong with 15000 AFVs.

(in reply to Mehring)
Post #: 12
RE: A Question on Realism of Multi line Fronts - 6/14/2013 5:01:43 PM   
lparkh


Posts: 327
Joined: 7/25/2004
Status: offline
Morvael your reference of no Soviet units lost is versus a human right? Impressive.
Overall very interesting discussion. Especially on why the multi line is needed (high German mobility).

(in reply to morvael)
Post #: 13
RE: A Question on Realism of Multi line Fronts - 6/14/2013 8:19:08 PM   
Schmart

 

Posts: 657
Joined: 9/13/2010
From: Canada
Status: offline
Yes, the carpet deployment of Russians is largely unhistorical. Multi line defences were not that uncommon for the Russians from 1942 onwards. The reality of 1941 pockets was somewhat less so about German superiority/mobility than it was about Russian inflexibility and lack of mobility. It wasn't about two armies manoeuvering and the Germans out manoeuvering the Russians. The Germans ran circles around largely static Russian deployments. WitE gives the Germans (actually both sides) a significantly higher capability for supply, logistics, and manoevering. This leads to higher tempo play, and somewhat forces the Russian player to adopt a more indepth (carpet or multi line) defence. For most of 1941, the Russians typically had a strong but thin forward defence line. From 1942 on they had a weaker front line but more in depth.

In some cases though, a carpet defence is what occurred historically, like on the Moscow approaches (from early 1942 into 43) and at Kursk in 43).

For WitE to encourage more historical Russian defences, offensive logistical abilites would have to be tuned downwards.

(in reply to lparkh)
Post #: 14
Page:   [1]
All Forums >> [New Releases from Matrix Games] >> Gary Grigsby's War in the East Series >> A Question on Realism of Multi line Fronts 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

0.082