Matrix Games Forums

Forums  Register  Login  Photo Gallery  Member List  Search  Calendars  FAQ 

My Profile  Inbox  Address Book  My Subscription  My Forums  Log Out

Razing the Reich II (no Manstein63)

 
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 >> Razing the Reich II (no Manstein63) Page: [1] 2 3 4 5   next >   >>
Login
Message << Older Topic   Newer Topic >>
Razing the Reich II (no Manstein63) - 6/8/2016 11:17:35 PM   
Michael T


Posts: 3436
Joined: 10/22/2006
From: Queensland, Australia.
Status: offline
My first game as a Soviet since my infamous game with Pelton. So even more rusty with the Red’s than the I was with the Germans. My opponent is Manstein63 (Sean). He is an unknown quantity for me. I know he has been around WITE a long time. So I expect he will be a tough opponent. Sean opted for Random Weather and he also suggested a Finnish Border HR. Which involves having extra troops stationed there. I told him to take his time so it might be a few days before we see any action here. Stay tuned.


-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Game Settings

Sudden Death 41CG scenario
Server game
Full FOW
Random Weather
Standard Blizzard
No +1 to Soviet Combat Odds

------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
House Rules

Finnish border garrison requirements (not exactly sure on the details of this yet, will advise later)
No Para drops at all
No bombing of HQ's unless stacked with a ground unit
No Night Bombing of Airfields

No naval invasions before November 1941, none outside the 1939 Soviet borders before January 1943 In addition if Sevastopol is either isolated, or in German hands, none west of the Crimea, which reflects the scope for air/naval interdiction not really reflected in the game. (This is Pelton’s rule)

Additional Sudden Death rules for 1941. Used to help prevent unrealistic Soviet retreat strategies in summer 1941 and to prevent unrealistic German retreats prior to and during the early blizzard period.

German SD victory check is made at the beginning of the German 4th December 1941 turn. If the German VP total is equal to or greater than 243 VP they win an Auto Victory.
Soviet SD victory check is made at the Beginning of the Soviet 1st January 1942 turn. If the German VP total is equal to or less than 205 VP then the Soviets win an Auto Victory.

----------------------------------------------------------------------------

Here are the Conditions of the Sudden Death scenario (Lost Battles) in case you don’t have them.

Turns: 211
This campaign is a variant of the 1941-45 Campaign - Alt VC260 campaign, with the only change being additional sudden death victory conditions. The victory conditions are the same as that in the Alt VC260 campaign with the addition of three sudden death victory condition checks made during the campaign. The checks are made at the beginning of the first turn of April 1942, April 1943 and April 1944. If during one of these checks, a player is determined to have met their Sudden Death victory conditions, the game will immediately end and declare a Decisive Victory for the winner.

April 1942
German Victory if victory points are >=242 Soviet Victory if victory points are <=191

April 1943
German Victory if victory points are >=255 Soviet Victory if victory points are <=188

April 1944
German Victory if victory points are >=210 Soviet Victory if victory points are <=150

The Alt VC260 campaign victory conditions used in this campaign as well are:
• The Axis Decisive Victory level (Automatic Victory) is 260 instead of 290.
• The Soviet Major Victory timeframe ends on 31 March 1945 (instead of 31 May 1945) and the Soviet Minor Victory timeframe between 1 April 1945 and 30 June 1945.
• A draw occurs if Germany does not surrender by 1 July 1945 and the Axis has less than
142 victory points.
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------


_____________________________

'Deus le Volt!'
------------------
Post #: 1
RE: Razing the Reich II (no Manstein63) - 6/9/2016 1:23:12 AM   
A game


Posts: 102
Joined: 5/9/2012
Status: offline
Awsome, good luck MT and lets hope this is a long one!

(in reply to Michael T)
Post #: 2
RE: Razing the Reich II (no Manstein63) - 6/9/2016 5:34:41 AM   
Icier


Posts: 567
Joined: 7/15/2014
From: a sunny beach nsw
Status: offline
Actually Hardluckyetagain started a new thread called New House Rule Finnish Boarder & being a German player, I completely agreed with him.
The Soviets should be prevented from moving the units that are guarding the Finnish border to other combat areas.Like, I have played against
Soviets that have lined the border with fortifications & not a Soviet fighting formation in sight or line the border with anti tank units!.
I kick myself for not making it one of the "house rules", but good on "hardluck"for bringing it to the fore & Manstein 63 for making it a rule & I will be insisting on it for now on.

(in reply to A game)
Post #: 3
RE: Razing the Reich II (no Manstein63) - 6/9/2016 9:05:59 PM   
HardLuckYetAgain


Posts: 2200
Joined: 2/5/2016
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Ice

Actually Hardluckyetagain started a new thread called New House Rule Finnish Boarder & being a German player, I completely agreed with him.
The Soviets should be prevented from moving the units that are guarding the Finnish border to other combat areas.Like, I have played against
Soviets that have lined the border with fortifications & not a Soviet fighting formation in sight or line the border with anti tank units!.
I kick myself for not making it one of the "house rules", but good on "hardluck"for bringing it to the fore & Manstein 63 for making it a rule & I will be insisting on it for now on.



Yes, I put the question to the community about the Finnish border garrison. Trying to get a feel on what the communities consensus is on this. Normally I play Germans 9 out of 10 games because so few want to play them. Having said that I have played a great many many many games since 2010 when the game first came out where the Soviets does 1 of 2 things. They either defend the river line heavily at the north edge of the map or they pull all of the units out and build forts (old school way of blockers) or now days Soviets put AT brigades (which they get a ton of) as blockers on the "no attack" border. I didn't mind so much back in the day because of the forts cost in AP. Then recently with the current patches the Soviets get many free AT brigades which they now use to man the Finish "no attack" line. I did this in my current Russian game and after doing it has pushed me over the edge to also make a house rule that the Soviets need to garrison that border with Divisions with at least 75% Toe if they are going to defend at all. I would even consider a few hexes of Airborne brigades to be OK too. But no longer will I settle for Forts and/or AT brigades manning the Finish "no attack" line. Just my 2 cents.

(in reply to Icier)
Post #: 4
RE: Razing the Reich II (no Manstein63) - 6/9/2016 10:24:35 PM   
Michael T


Posts: 3436
Joined: 10/22/2006
From: Queensland, Australia.
Status: offline
I think I am going to defend Lake Janis. I did this in my last two games as Soviet. It worked well. But I have to access Sean's opening moves first.

_____________________________

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

(in reply to HardLuckYetAgain)
Post #: 5
RE: Razing the Reich II (no Manstein63) - 6/9/2016 10:35:33 PM   
HardLuckYetAgain


Posts: 2200
Joined: 2/5/2016
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Michael T

I think I am going to defend Lake Janis. I did this in my last two games as Soviet. It worked well. But I have to access Sean's opening moves first.


I concur with you that defending forward around lake Janisjarvi is an excellent solution. Better springboard into Finland for your future offense :)

(in reply to Michael T)
Post #: 6
RE: Razing the Reich II (no Manstein63) - 6/10/2016 1:43:02 AM   
Michael T


Posts: 3436
Joined: 10/22/2006
From: Queensland, Australia.
Status: offline
Bit of a delay on this as Sean has had some Windows 10 issues. I should have his move in a day or so.

_____________________________

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

(in reply to HardLuckYetAgain)
Post #: 7
RE: Razing the Reich II (no Manstein63) - 6/10/2016 2:09:14 PM   
ericv

 

Posts: 305
Joined: 1/21/2012
Status: offline
hope it is going to last a bit longer this time. the much anticipated MT vs silly was a bit of an anticlimax.

(in reply to Michael T)
Post #: 8
RE: Razing the Reich II (no Manstein63) - 6/11/2016 7:05:24 AM   
sillyflower


Posts: 2473
Joined: 8/4/2010
From: Loches France (but properly part of England)
Status: offline
Sorry Eric

_____________________________

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 ericv)
Post #: 9
RE: Razing the Reich II (no Manstein63) - 6/11/2016 7:15:04 AM   
sillyflower


Posts: 2473
Joined: 8/4/2010
From: Loches France (but properly part of England)
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Michael T
My opponent is Manstein63 (Sean). He is an unknown quantity for me. I know he has been around WITE a long time. So I expect he will be a tough opponent.


This is a different Manstein

_____________________________

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 Michael T)
Post #: 10
RE: Razing the Reich II (no Manstein63) - 6/11/2016 7:17:57 AM   
Michael T


Posts: 3436
Joined: 10/22/2006
From: Queensland, Australia.
Status: offline
Anyone with a tag of Manstein must be tough

_____________________________

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

(in reply to sillyflower)
Post #: 11
RE: Razing the Reich II (no Manstein63) - 6/11/2016 7:29:51 AM   
Dinglir


Posts: 484
Joined: 3/10/2016
Status: offline
Der Manstein kommt!

_____________________________

We need only to kick in the door, and the whole rotten structure will come crashing down.

Adolf Hitler, on the eve of Barbarossa.
-----

There are only 10 kinds of people. Those that use binary numbers and those that do not.

Unknown origi

(in reply to Michael T)
Post #: 12
RE: Razing the Reich II (no Manstein63) - 6/13/2016 12:04:42 AM   
Farfarer61

 

Posts: 723
Joined: 7/21/2004
Status: offline
I recently had the privilege of spending a long semi-formal dinner sitting next to a senior serving Finnish general, who turned out to be a WWII history lay expert, and a passing gamer. We talked at length about Finnish WWII decisions, Leningrad, Ladoga-Oneida front, and even whether the no move lines in WITE made sense. ( they sorta kinda do ). The Finns were expert at woodland operations, and achieved 10:1 kill ratios, but self-admittedly had no interest or training in urban warfare. They acknowledged the German superiority in this field ( offensively) and Russian (defensively). If only for purely military casualty ratios for a small country, they were never going to attack Leningrad, and political farsightedness tempered other expeditionary tendencies. As a "what if", once Leningrad had fallen, and the defeat of the USSR probable, then it was a reasonable hypothetical in a game to have the Finns join and behave as they do in WITE. The loss of Finnish morale ( in the game ), once one accepted the hypothetical makes no sense as operations would be seen as payback, euphoria etc. On the other side, Finland did well under Czarist Russia, with significant autonomy save foreign policy. Finally, the Finns acknowledged that the Germans, whom they thought lacked skill in the boreal forest, had become quite adept by 1944-45. By terms of the peace with Stalin, if the Germans did not retreat fast enough out of Finland, the Finns were obliged to attack them, which they did. There were only able to achieve 2:1 kill ratios against the Wehrmacht, and wished the teacher-student relationship had not been so fruitful ;) Although the game is USSR favouring IMHO, the takeaway is I assess Finns should not be able to cross any no move lines until Leningrad falls, meaning no Garrisoning requirement,

(in reply to Dinglir)
Post #: 13
RE: Razing the Reich II (no Manstein63) - 6/13/2016 8:03:05 AM   
Michael T


Posts: 3436
Joined: 10/22/2006
From: Queensland, Australia.
Status: offline
Turn one is done but I am unable to upload the map for some reason. I will try again tomorrow.

_____________________________

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

(in reply to Farfarer61)
Post #: 14
RE: Razing the Reich II (no Manstein63) - 6/13/2016 10:03:49 PM   
Michael T


Posts: 3436
Joined: 10/22/2006
From: Queensland, Australia.
Status: offline
End Soviet T1 (22nd June 1941) Clear Weather

Manstein63’s opening has left me scratching my head a little. It seems he may be using the tactic of not closing the Lvov pocket on T1 so that the units that are effectively trapped still suck up manpower and armaments. They are then closed off on turn two.

But elsewhere I opened up the north and Kovel. I also managed to slip out a couple of divisions from the Lvov pocket along the Rumanian border. I cut off some leading Panzers but as they most likely have HQ’s nearby with lots of fuel this won’t make difference this turn.

The turn was spend mostly on starting a reorganisation process and beginning defensive works around Pskov and the Land bridge.

I shifted 3 ID’s north to Lake Janis to start preparing the stop line for the Finns (well hopefully a stop line). In some emails Pelton reckons he can easily bust up the Janis defence.




Attachment (1)

_____________________________

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

(in reply to Michael T)
Post #: 15
RE: Razing the Reich II (no Manstein63) - 6/14/2016 1:13:02 AM   
Hunter63

 

Posts: 56
Joined: 6/14/2016
Status: offline
Old H V AI player new poster.

Not a very good opening as south is generally the key H v AI both sides and what I have read on forums HvH

< Message edited by Hunter63 -- 6/14/2016 1:15:37 AM >

(in reply to Michael T)
Post #: 16
RE: Razing the Reich II (no Manstein63) - 6/14/2016 1:22:29 AM   
Michael T


Posts: 3436
Joined: 10/22/2006
From: Queensland, Australia.
Status: offline
I am not sure what happened in the south. Whether he just got in to trouble OR he is playing at this:

http://www.matrixgames.com/forums/tm.asp?m=3890124





_____________________________

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

(in reply to Hunter63)
Post #: 17
RE: Razing the Reich II (no Manstein63) - 6/14/2016 2:29:49 AM   
chaos45

 

Posts: 1432
Joined: 1/22/2001
Status: offline
with that opening hes in for a hard fight.

(in reply to Michael T)
Post #: 18
Good AAR - 6/14/2016 3:08:26 AM   
Girshwin


Posts: 34
Joined: 5/31/2016
From: Rochester, New York
Status: offline
Very much looking forward to this AAR. Based on previous performance by Michael, I think he gets only two stars if he doesn't take back Minsk by December.


< Message edited by Girshwin -- 6/14/2016 3:16:38 AM >


_____________________________

"The President has always been given a choice of the various desks that he can have. That is one of the prerogatives."
-Richard Nixon

(in reply to Michael T)
Post #: 19
RE: Razing the Reich II (no Manstein63) - 6/14/2016 4:22:46 AM   
HardLuckYetAgain


Posts: 2200
Joined: 2/5/2016
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Michael T

In some emails Pelton reckons he can easily bust up the Janis defence.




It can be done but if you wait to long it isn't easy.

(in reply to Michael T)
Post #: 20
RE: Razing the Reich II (no Manstein63) - 6/14/2016 4:33:58 AM   
HardLuckYetAgain


Posts: 2200
Joined: 2/5/2016
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: chaos45

with that opening hes in for a hard fight.


+1

(in reply to chaos45)
Post #: 21
RE: Razing the Reich II (no Manstein63) - 6/14/2016 5:06:10 AM   
Michael T


Posts: 3436
Joined: 10/22/2006
From: Queensland, Australia.
Status: offline
I had a look at some of Herr Pelton's examples of the Janis line he has cracked. I would say his opponents left it too late. You need to have the line ready beforehand, not be preparing it as the Finns are at the doorstep.

_____________________________

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

(in reply to HardLuckYetAgain)
Post #: 22
RE: Razing the Reich II (no Manstein63) - 6/14/2016 12:59:15 PM   
ericv

 

Posts: 305
Joined: 1/21/2012
Status: offline
I have had some tries at cracking that against a Russian player reinforcing it with divisions from turn 1, and can only agree that it is just very difficult to crack. The Germans had one extremely lucky dice roll in 100+ tries to crack it in 20+ different games. That 1 result was just weird. Once it does get cracked however with loss of fort level, there is no stopping the Finns afaik.

like has been said here:
Man the line in turn 1,
I would add to that : give 7th independent Army an even more decent commander than Meretskow, with better initiative for reserve activation, at least for the first couple of months. This commander, Konev mostly in my case, although pretty useless, will keep his win-loss ratio positive and not risk getting sacked with loss of stats. Meretzkov, as Armygeneral, always gets put in command of a Front, without incurring penalties or stat loss, this early on by me, to replace the really crappy ones.
assign 2 construction brigades (although 1 maybe would suffice). Enjoy the rest en relaxation at Janis with some Janis Joplin playing in the background.

< Message edited by ericv -- 6/14/2016 1:04:12 PM >

(in reply to Michael T)
Post #: 23
RE: Razing the Reich II (no Manstein63) - 6/14/2016 1:00:43 PM   
ericv

 

Posts: 305
Joined: 1/21/2012
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: sillyflower

Sorry Eric


Not sure what to make of your reply.
I meant no disrespect, I have the highest regard for your playing skills ever since the beating you are stilling handing out to Brian.




< Message edited by ericv -- 6/14/2016 1:03:29 PM >

(in reply to sillyflower)
Post #: 24
RE: Razing the Reich II (no Manstein63) - 6/16/2016 11:16:40 AM   
Michael T


Posts: 3436
Joined: 10/22/2006
From: Queensland, Australia.
Status: offline
End Soviet T2 (26th June 1941) Clear

Not a huge amount to report. The real interest will come from T3 on. But he has left 3rd PzGp well positioned to head either north to support the drive on Leningrad or head due east to Luki or south east to Vitebsk. This keeps me guessing and means I have to try and cover all bases.

The rest looks pretty standard.

I shift a lot of troops from the south to the Pskov area and the land bridge. His next turn will indicate some of his intentions. That’s when the real game begins.

The Janis line is well under way. I will provide a shot of it next turn.





Attachment (1)

_____________________________

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

(in reply to ericv)
Post #: 25
RE: Razing the Reich II (no Manstein63) - 6/16/2016 8:20:53 PM   
Girshwin


Posts: 34
Joined: 5/31/2016
From: Rochester, New York
Status: offline
I've read in some AARs that the Soviet paratroop units are important to save. I notice here they are screening the front line. I assume their strength and the annoyance factor of them retreating and not routing is the reason they are out in front?

I look forward to seeing how Manstein decides to break the wall.

_____________________________

"The President has always been given a choice of the various desks that he can have. That is one of the prerogatives."
-Richard Nixon

(in reply to Michael T)
Post #: 26
RE: Razing the Reich II (no Manstein63) - 6/16/2016 9:56:58 PM   
HardLuckYetAgain


Posts: 2200
Joined: 2/5/2016
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Girshwin

I've read in some AARs that the Soviet paratroop units are important to save. I notice here they are screening the front line. I assume their strength and the annoyance factor of them retreating and not routing is the reason they are out in front?

I look forward to seeing how Manstein decides to break the wall.


Save for what? There are no paradrops allowed by house rule. Not to mention these bad boys hardly ever route and if you were playing with paradrops you get a ton in Dec 41. Anything and everything is cannon fodder except for Armor & MOT units to delay the Germans. Armor/Mot should be saved/preserved since they have SOOOOO many trucks in them and to loose them by being surrounded is just bad play imho. Pull the Armor/Mot units out of the main line and have them 4th line or guarding cities. If you have to in the early game let the Germans eat open land instead of you armor/Mot units.

(in reply to Girshwin)
Post #: 27
RE: Razing the Reich II (no Manstein63) - 6/16/2016 10:18:11 PM   
Michael T


Posts: 3436
Joined: 10/22/2006
From: Queensland, Australia.
Status: offline
Yes no paradrops so para's are just infantry. They are only about 2500 men each. Difficult to break and have as much glue as full blown division. They are there to suck up MP/gas and to annoy. I am very curious as to see what he does in T3. If I were playing Pelton I would probably have less at the land bridge and more at Pskov. I know nothing of Manstein63's style so I am fumbling around in the dark a bit.

_____________________________

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

(in reply to HardLuckYetAgain)
Post #: 28
RE: Razing the Reich II (no Manstein63) - 6/16/2016 10:53:08 PM   
chaos45

 

Posts: 1432
Joined: 1/22/2001
Status: offline
either way your fine, short of you making a massive mistake you are already in fine shape. He is further behind than most Germans already, time he can never make up for.

You opening the pocket in the north and his opening in the south that failed to pinch off Lvov were both massive mistakes he wont recover from.

The German opening needs to be flawless to really stress the Soviets. He will put some pressure on you but short of you letting him snag an entire Soviet front I doubt you will have much to worry about and thats just the honest truth of how the game plays out.

A flawless German opening is very hard for the soviets to recover from, but they still have the ability to recover. A flawed German opening almost seals the game as an auto German loss most likely sooner than historical.

His opening has most likely cost him 2 turns already.......which means you will have fewer losses and thus prevent more losses in the future by the time he stresses you again....the rich get richer as the game goes.

(in reply to Michael T)
Post #: 29
RE: Razing the Reich II (no Manstein63) - 6/17/2016 7:50:48 AM   
RKhan


Posts: 325
Joined: 1/17/2016
From: My Secret Bunker
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: HardLuckYetAgain


quote:

ORIGINAL: Girshwin

I've read in some AARs that the Soviet paratroop units are important to save. I notice here they are screening the front line. I assume their strength and the annoyance factor of them retreating and not routing is the reason they are out in front?

I look forward to seeing how Manstein decides to break the wall.


Save for what? There are no paradrops allowed by house rule. Not to mention these bad boys hardly ever route and if you were playing with paradrops you get a ton in Dec 41. Anything and everything is cannon fodder except for Armor & MOT units to delay the Germans. Armor/Mot should be saved/preserved since they have SOOOOO many trucks in them and to loose them by being surrounded is just bad play imho. Pull the Armor/Mot units out of the main line and have them 4th line or guarding cities. If you have to in the early game let the Germans eat open land instead of you armor/Mot units.

quote:

ule. Not to mention these bad boys hardly ever route and if you were playing with paradrops you get a ton in Dec 41. Anything and everything is cannon fodder except for Armor & MOT units to delay the Germans. Armor/Mot should be saved/preserved since they have SOOOOO many trucks in them and to loose them by being surrounded is just bad play imho. Pull the Armor/Mot units out of the main line and have them 4th line or guarding cities. If you have to in the early game let the Germans eat open land instead of you armor/Mot units.


You can of course convert them to guard divisions later which is a good reason to save them if possible. However, I understand that in 1941 anything you can throw under the panzers to slow them down is desperately needed.

_____________________________

RKhan

(in reply to HardLuckYetAgain)
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 >> Razing the Reich II (no Manstein63) 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

0.146