Building Soviet Army/Front w/18 point cap

[Mike13z50]

I've been away from the game for over a year and am just getting to Apr 42 in my GC.

It used to be easy, three armies per front and the caps expanded together. I've already had to deal with the first downsize from 24 - 20 for army cap, and responded by putting four armies per front.

Now I get downsized to 18 along with the front cap growing to 81 and am puzzling over how to structure the force. 4x18=72 so I could go that route with 9 AB per front. The problem is not only do I not have 90 airbases, at this point I don't have enough trained squadrons of usable planes to fill 9 per front.

So, go to five armies per front. But 5x18=90>81.

Also looking forward to Tank Corps and eventually Rifle Corps. I've come up with force mixtures of 5 army fronts of various combinations using Army structures that have either 12, 15, 16, or 18 CP.

I was wondering how other's have structured their Fronts/Armies since the 18 point cap change.

[morvael]

In '43 I use
Two rifle corps + cav/tank corps + 3 rifle divs
Two rifle corps + 4 rifle divs + 1/2 tank brigades
...I have about 30 armies of each type

In '42, when you have little rifle corps, substitute each corps with 2 rifle divs (I built all my corps using an extra rifle bde).

Those armies are flexible, 3 corps per hex if you assault heavily defended positions (divs/bdes in reserve), 2 hexes default front, 3 in good terrain in passive sectors.

Edit: I went with 5 armies per front, overloading them in the early years, but they did catch up later. I didn't have points for good front leaders, so their roll chances were already low, and overloading didn't change that much.

[Mike13z50]

I guess it makes more sense to have over cap fronts vs under strength armies. Makes a better use of both SU & good army level leadership.

At 81 CP front could go with 4x18 +/- 9 AB/ART bde.

At 90 4x18 +18 in artillery/AB using separate corp/army HQ for artillery. Though 18 is is a lot of artillery and AV for typical front. I figure two fronts containing best of everything (leadership..shock armies..etc.) The others will have to have five armies, I don't like to overload CP.

At 99 can easily go 5x18 + 9 AB and include Art Div inside the army.

Thanks for responding Morvael.

[morvael]

I do not believe in putting arty divs under army HQs. Leader rolls, morale - those things affect CV, and arty divs have none. What is the impact of leader chain on firing elements - this we don't know, but I think it's low. So I keep all my armies for combat units only. Artillery divs are support class units for me. Of course others may have made different observations. Besides, I did not built my artillery arm as combat units were priority and in late '43 I have only 2 breakthrough divs operational and 2 rocket divs are just being formed (though now I see they will be waste, as they will get reduced to 1/3 strength soon).

Edit: purposely I just built 2 elite armies as they were needed in critical points in '42. I don't have APs for reassignments so now guards units are left where they are first created, which means most is in south-center as this is the place where the fighting was the heaviest in my game. I have always liked balanced force approach. I consider only my tank armies elite units and they are purposely equipped with best SUs and leaders (though the corps have to learn battlecraft themselves).

[Flaviusx]

Don't put arty division under either front or army command. Stick them in the airborne HQs and attach those to STAVKA. Or even just attach them to STAVKA. Front and Army command capacity is too tight to fit these in, you need to save that for maneuver formations. Artillery is just a fire support asset. It doesn't need or benefit from an elaborate command structure backing it up.

Since the game severely understates command capacity (especially at the Front level) economies must be made, and these units can be treated as strategic assets under STAVKA direction for all practical purposes. We don't get to make 200 CP Fronts, unlike Konev and Zhukov, with all the trimmings.

[Mike13z50]

I'd read about the idea of using the AB Corps HQ, after I disbanded the original ones. I still have the five from December reinforcements though.

I agree on keeping them out from the Front chain, but won't supply & MP (which = 6 per attack) suffer by leaving them under directly under Stavka?

I also was thinking that the Artillery bombardments would benefit from SU participation, so I loaded up 9 regiments of BM 203 & 280 siege mortars in my first two Arty HQ. Because the whole purpose of the attacks is to lower entrenchment & cause disruption. I'll see how it works out.

[Flaviusx]

This is the only drawback, and it is a minor one. As a practical matter you'll never get to do more than 2 deliberate attacks with an artillery division a turn. Trimming down the command chain makes it less likely they can reach that maximum amount of 16 MPs, but most of the time you'll have at least 12, and with good positioning you can get those two attacks a turn. If they have to move at all, even with full MPs, it's questionable they'll be able to get the 2 attacks regardless of whether or not they are integrated into the formal command structure.

Better to save the command capacity for stuff that occupies and seizes ground.