German supply

Gary Grigsby’s War in the East: The German-Soviet War 1941-1945 is a turn-based World War II strategy game stretching across the entire Eastern Front. Gamers can engage in an epic campaign, including division-sized battles with realistic and historical terrain, weather, orders of battle, logistics and combat results.

The critically and fan-acclaimed Eastern Front mega-game Gary Grigsby’s War in the East just got bigger and better with Gary Grigsby’s War in the East: Don to the Danube! This expansion to the award-winning War in the East comes with a wide array of later war scenarios ranging from short but intense 6 turn bouts like the Battle for Kharkov (1942) to immense 37-turn engagements taking place across multiple nations like Drama on the Danube (Summer 1944 – Spring 1945).

Moderators: Joel Billings, Sabre21, elmo3

chuckfourth
Posts: 222
Joined: Wed Oct 26, 2011 5:25 am

German supply

Post by chuckfourth »

Hi I have been away for a while and have not played since version 1.07.08
I stopped playing because I didn't like the German supplies running out up to the first winter making it impossible to get to Moscow and encouraging the Russians to pull back rather than being forced to try to slow the Germans down.
Is this still the situation?
Thanks in advance Chuck.
Best Regards Chuck
Stelteck
Posts: 1420
Joined: Tue Jul 20, 2004 5:07 pm

RE: German supply

Post by Stelteck »

Completely changed. Now the germans have a lots of cards in hand in 1941 and 1942.
Brakes are for cowards !!
chuckfourth
Posts: 222
Joined: Wed Oct 26, 2011 5:25 am

RE: German supply

Post by chuckfourth »

OK excellent and Thank you.
I will give it a go again
Best Regards Chuck
chuckfourth
Posts: 222
Joined: Wed Oct 26, 2011 5:25 am

RE: German supply

Post by chuckfourth »

Well I am sure no one is interested but I guess I'm going away for a few more years.
By turn 3 I have outrun my fuel same as last time, and there is not enough air transport to really make a lot of difference as far as I can see.
I do not recall hearing about any panzer corps on the way to Moscow sitting around for a week waiting for fuel to arrive.
Does anyone really know, how long it took to get the rail lines working? wouldn't they have used captured soviet rail stock etc etc etc?
And cant the forward units be put in motor driven supply if they can trace 5 hexes to the corps and if the corps can trace 15 hexes to the panzer group and panzer group can trace 45 hexes to the Army group. They all have their own responsibilities to make supply get forward. They knew what the roads were.
The German general staff had this planned down to the last track link. They didn't run out of Fuel before Moscow they ran out of Oomph.
Best Regards Chuck
User avatar
STEF78
Posts: 2088
Joined: Sun Feb 19, 2012 3:22 pm
Location: Versailles, France

RE: German supply

Post by STEF78 »

The key in 1941 is to use HQBU to keep momentum for german Pzd. You cannot only rely on rail repair
GHC 9-0-3
SHC 10-0-4
User avatar
Crackaces
Posts: 3858
Joined: Sat Jul 09, 2011 3:39 pm

RE: German supply

Post by Crackaces »

ORIGINAL: STEF78

The key in 1941 is to use HQBU to keep momentum for german Pzd. You cannot only rely on rail repair

There is an AAR in progress in which the Germans are doing a pretty good job with the HQBU purposely not in play. But not past the dreaded turn 7 yet...
"What gets us into trouble is not what we don't know. It's what we know for sure that just ain't so"
darbycmcd
Posts: 400
Joined: Tue Dec 06, 2005 8:47 am

RE: German supply

Post by darbycmcd »

I suggest you do a bit more reading on the state of supply for the armor spearhead during Barbarossa. They did have very serious supply issues that the game actually diminishes. I get that it is frustrating, but it was way worse for the historical military. (you know they didn't make it to Moscow, right?)

This by the way shows the real incredible prowess of the German military, especially at the operational and tactical level. That they could do what they did, with the limitations they had, is, in my opinion, the greatest display of military art in history. But it wasn't ever going to be enough....
chuckfourth
Posts: 222
Joined: Wed Oct 26, 2011 5:25 am

RE: German supply

Post by chuckfourth »

Hi darbymcd
I have read quite a bit, paul carell Hitlers war on Russia
Purnells world war 2
John Keegans Barbarossa : invasion of Russia 1941
and many more.
Nowhere have I ever found a reference to serious supply difficulties (a corps stuck for a week) before the first winter. For armoured spearheads or anyone else.
I suggest you tell me where you have read this, page numbers or quotes would be very usefull.

Thanks STEF78 but I am still tied to the railhead, even if at 20 hexes. It just doesn't seem right. I will have to wait another couple of years to see how things turn out.
Best Regards Chuck
No idea
Posts: 495
Joined: Fri Jun 24, 2011 11:19 am

RE: German supply

Post by No idea »

ORIGINAL: chuckles

Well I am sure no one is interested but I guess I'm going away for a few more years.
By turn 3 I have outrun my fuel same as last time, and there is not enough air transport to really make a lot of difference as far as I can see.
I do not recall hearing about any panzer corps on the way to Moscow sitting around for a week waiting for fuel to arrive.
Does anyone really know, how long it took to get the rail lines working? wouldn't they have used captured soviet rail stock etc etc etc?
And cant the forward units be put in motor driven supply if they can trace 5 hexes to the corps and if the corps can trace 15 hexes to the panzer group and panzer group can trace 45 hexes to the Army group. They all have their own responsibilities to make supply get forward. They knew what the roads were.
The German general staff had this planned down to the last track link. They didn't run out of Fuel before Moscow they ran out of Oomph.

Then you should read better. Just saying.

On any acase your problem is that your panzer units are far, far ahead your infantry and supply head. You cant hope to take your panzers very far ahead of your supply lanes and still have fuel. That is how things worked irl. Offensives petered out when fuel/supply/ammo became low. The they had to wait for them to catch, and keep on going. Granted, some small units still had fuel, but most of the divisions would be stuck for a few days. This games turns are one week. That is the shortest possible amount of time.

Ps. If you want examples, I remeber, just to given an example, about most of Guderians panzergruppe being stuck south of Tula for a whole week due to lack of fuel. That situation started just a few days BEFORE the first snows fell. Making a combat group out of the vehicles that still had fuel (or transferring fuel from vehicle to vehicle) was a very common thing to make the units going forward. But they were small sized units, not whole divisions. The game doesnt get into such little details.
chuckfourth
Posts: 222
Joined: Wed Oct 26, 2011 5:25 am

RE: German supply

Post by chuckfourth »

Hi No Idea
You might trust your memory but I don't, If you cant supply a reference, then its just a pipedream to me.
Best Regards Chuck
Searry
Posts: 1223
Joined: Fri Jan 24, 2014 9:01 am

RE: German supply

Post by Searry »

The game would be unbalanced if not for the supply issue.
-Flashpoint Campaigns Southern Storm Beta Tester
-Rule The Waves 3 Beta Tester
No idea
Posts: 495
Joined: Fri Jun 24, 2011 11:19 am

RE: German supply

Post by No idea »

ORIGINAL: chuckles

Hi No Idea
You might trust your memory but I don't, If you cant supply a reference, then its just a pipedream to me.
No idea
Matrix Veteran


 

Posts: 281
Joined: 6/24/2011
Status: online

Robert Forczyk, "Tank warfare on the eastern front. Schwerpunkt. 1941-1942". Kindle edition. Sorry, dont remeber the page of the example I gave you.. I could look into it.
No idea
Posts: 495
Joined: Fri Jun 24, 2011 11:19 am

RE: German supply

Post by No idea »

On any case, what you should do it use HQ builups (which, trust me, are something much better than what the germans could do irl).

I agree that being stopped a whole week because of lack of fuel was rare, but being stopped for one, two or even three days wasnt. This game only gives us one week turns, and that is why you are stopped for a whole week (one turn). To balance things, think that, once you have made a HQ buldup CORRECTLY, you will have enough fuel for TWO whole weeks of operations. You change one week of being stopped for two weeks of being fully fueled and supplied. That is not realistic either, but one things balances the other (altough I still think the german side wins on that trade).
darbycmcd
Posts: 400
Joined: Tue Dec 06, 2005 8:47 am

RE: German supply

Post by darbycmcd »

Hey there Chuckles.
I would add a couple reads
Martin van Creveld: Supplying War
It has a good chapter on the logistics of Barbarossa which gives an idea of the challenges.

David Stahel: Operation Barbarossa and Germany's Defeat in the East or Kiev
Both give a great picture of the operational limitations that the logistics tail put on the Germans

David Glantz: Barbarossa Derailed
Ok he is the preeminent western scholar of the Patriotic War right now, but he is a dry dry DRY writer. Still this book also shows impact of logistic constraints.

No Idea is completely right about the way the game has to model these things, we get the overall effect without the specific details. I would add one thing, if your question is 'Why do my panzers run out of gas when historical commanders didn't?'... the answer is sort of in the question. Historical commanders didn't do the things that players are wont to do, like run their panzers as far as they possibly can each turn. So it sort of averages out, on one turn you run way far, and the second turn sit. Historically they would run less far on turn one but further on 2... This difference is exacerbated by the lack of march attrition on vehicles in the game, which was a very significant issue for both sides. This means that in addition to the very generous logistics model that the germans have, they do not have one of the important opportunity costs of rapid and deep penetrations....

In the end, the majority of German players report historical or better rates of advance over all so I don't think it is too big of a problem.
chuckfourth
Posts: 222
Joined: Wed Oct 26, 2011 5:25 am

RE: German supply

Post by chuckfourth »

Hi Searry
I don't think so, If the armour runs too far forward it is easily isolated as the infantry cant keep up. Or if it does make a playbalance issue then in a complex game like this it is easy to adjust something else to counter it say better Soviet Morale.
Best Regards Chuck
chuckfourth
Posts: 222
Joined: Wed Oct 26, 2011 5:25 am

RE: German supply

Post by chuckfourth »

Well sounds like you guys are bluffing. All that fabulous resources and still no Quote. Get your ""s out and share with all of us where it says German panzer division x was held up for y day(s) because of lack of fuel. Before the first winter.
Best Regards Chuck
Sammy5IsAlive
Posts: 591
Joined: Sun Aug 03, 2014 11:01 pm

RE: German supply

Post by Sammy5IsAlive »

It is Chapter 4 p141 in Glantz

https://books.google.co.uk/books?isbn=1906033722

"the supply and transportation situation in mid July was sufficient to support operations as far as just east of Smolensk, but no further...In short, given ammunition and fuel requirements and the realities of the railroad and road network, by mid-July it was already evident an advance by Army Group Center to Moscow in the immediate future would be logistically impossible."

This is an interesting read about the point at hand from a WITE standpoint

http://www.quartertothree.com/fp/2011/0 ... ad-tycoon/

If you look at Dinglr's AAR (where his opponent to a large extent abandoned the centre in the first few turns) he has pretty much reached the same point with his infantry on turn 6 which is mid-late July. If he was using Panzers and HQBUs he would have been at Vyazma more than a month ahead of schedule. If you read the AARs over the last year or so my rough estimate is that in at least a third of the games Moscow falls to the Germans

Where are you stuck at on T3?
User avatar
KenchiSulla
Posts: 2956
Joined: Wed Oct 22, 2008 3:19 pm
Location: the Netherlands

RE: German supply

Post by KenchiSulla »

It is a guy called "chuckles" all.....
AKA Cannonfodder

"It happened, therefore it can happen again: this is the core of what we have to say. It can happen, and it can happen everywhere.”
¯ Primo Levi, writer, holocaust survivor
No idea
Posts: 495
Joined: Fri Jun 24, 2011 11:19 am

RE: German supply

Post by No idea »

ORIGINAL: chuckles

Well sounds like you guys are bluffing. All that fabulous resources and still no Quote. Get your ""s out and share with all of us where it says German panzer division x was held up for y day(s) because of lack of fuel. Before the first winter.

"Chapert 2, position 2875:

"Guderians logistic situation was the most tenuous of any of the three Panzergruppen involved in Thyphoon and he would start the operation with less than two V.S. of fuel on hand, enough for a 200kms advance. Moscow was 550kms from Guderians strtaing position".

"Chapter 2, position 2883:

Thyphoon: Guderians battle, 30 september-16 october

"... yet Guderians euphoric advance was short lived, becuase the XXIV armeekorps (mot.) used all his fuel to get to Orel and had none left. (...) contrary to myth, Guderians spearhead was immobilized four days prior to the first snowfall, due to lack of fuel. (...) von Schweppenburgs was forced to send his supply columns back to the rear for fuel and it would take four days to restock his two panzer divisons with one V.S. each. (...) it was clear that Panzerarmee 2 logistic support was grossly inadequate for a further large scale advance and Guderian was reduced to conducting a "rock soup" style offensive, by robbing fuel and ammunition from some units to give just enough resources to Kampfgruppe Eberbach tp continue advancing toward Tula and Moscow"

From Chapter 2, startin on position 3436:

"Guderian tries for Tula, 22 october-30 november

After two weeks of inactivity at Mtensk, Guderian struggled to get his Panzerarmee 2 back into the the last days of october. Aside from a paucity of fuel and ammunition, he only had two panzer divisions from von Schweppenburgs XXIV Armeekorps (mot.) to continue the advance toward Tula. (...). Kempfs XXXXVIIII Armeekorps (mot.) was advancing due east toward Kursk while Lemelsens XXXXVII Armeekorps (mot.) was immobilized around Bryansk and Orel for lack of fuel. (...). Fuel was a problem for the panzers throughout the offensive and since the normal supply trucks could not cross the muddy terrain around the Zusha river, Eberbach had directed that each panzer regiment would use tank transporters towed by Sd.Kfz.9 semi tracks from its Panzerwerkstattkompanie to carry about 9.000 liters of additional fuel. On the morning of 25 october Eberbach used his remaning fuel to form a Vorausabsteilung from Scheneider-Kotalskis III/Pz. Regt 6, the 1./SR3 and detachments from Panzerjager abteilung 521 and divisional artillery, and sent them up the road to Tula in pursuit.(...)

Continued rain and frost made the german logistic situation in Tula even more precarious in the first week of Novemeber. (...) Guderians nearest railhead was 130kms behind his forward forces and the road from Orel to Tula was a mess, so the supply situation was not going to improve anytime soon."


Now I would like less trolling and some kind of apology

chuckfourth
Posts: 222
Joined: Wed Oct 26, 2011 5:25 am

RE: German supply

Post by chuckfourth »

So I am out by 4 days, I can live with that.
Anyway before the snow there has been mud? Army group centres supply problems are because of mud? Mud is already factored into the game. Substitute Mud for Winter in my original proposition and you might get my meaning?

Thanks for that post Sammy5isAlive, That is an interesting book and article, in the second link it has Glantz saying this about German supply, " almost contemptuously ignored" It sounds a little to me as though he might have a barrow to push. I guess you can find Authors to promote either view without looking too hard.

In my trial game I have pushed a panzer corps forward to be too far away from the railhead to do HQBU and on turn 3 it is already mostly out of fuel and down to a few MPs which I think is unrealistic, here's why

North Africa

Rommel at Tobruck has 5 mechanised and five infantry divisions, so a bit more than 3 corps. He operated very successfully against the British. He was supplied from Tripoli about 1255 kilometers away along a SINGLE road (NO RAIL AT ALL). He is in the Desert and EVERYTHING has to be brought forward by road. If you apply the Railhead (being Tripoly) rules of this game to Rommels situation he is permanently out of fuel and everything else. He wasn't out of fuel.
The distance from Fortress Brest Litovsk to Moscow is about 1055 kilometres there are many, many roads and a largely functioning Russian rail network for which the Germans have captured rolling stock. The infantry divisions can feed their horses at the side of the road as they move forward. The Russian towns, farms, villages, and cities are FULL of FOOD and WATER and FUEL. Looking at this comparison leads me to believe that the Supply limitation rules are much to harsh.

I think it would be sufficient to simply increase truck attrition the further the units move from the railheads, the more distance they travel the more are destroyed. So limiting supply through truck attrition without recourse to special "rules".

If play balance is too upset then there is another rule I don't like, Surprise.

When you look at this rule the German can make twice as many attacks in the first week as he can in the second, This doesn't make sense in any kind of way. So this should be dropped. If the German has normal movement costs on the first turn his infantry will largely be on the start line at the beginning of turn 2 and if the armour has gone forward as far as it can on turn 1 and again on the latter turns then even though it arrives at Smolensk or wherever it will be so far past the infantry it will be easily encircled itself. Removing the surprise rule will push play balance back towards where it came from.

While Im here I would also remove the German ability to Motorise infantry I doubt this was really even done wouldn't the trucks have had their hands full moving the fuels forward? also it would compensate a bit further for relaxing the supply restrictions.

If you did a beta with these rule changes it would I think be a much more lively game and the Soviet would be encouraged to defend as he really did rather than retreat. The supply "Rules" lock the German too closely into one particular version of history, the Russian too for that matter (Retreat).

Look I really like this game but the supply restrictions and surprise rules don't ring true to me. Airlift, Motorise and HQBU rules seem to be there to compensate for the supply restrictions, Better I think to just bite the bullet loosen up supply a la Rommel, drop HQBU, drop motorise, nice and neat heh?

I see how you got your Legion of Merit now KenchiSulla, maybe go back to the shallow end of the pool now?
Best Regards Chuck
Post Reply

Return to “Gary Grigsby's War in the East Series”