Razing the Reich II (no Manstein63)

Post descriptions of your brilliant victories and unfortunate defeats here.

Moderators: Joel Billings, Sabre21

Post Reply
User avatar
Michael T
Posts: 4443
Joined: Sat Oct 21, 2006 9:35 pm
Location: Queensland, Australia.

Razing the Reich II (no Manstein63)

Post by Michael T »

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.
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
User avatar
A game
Posts: 97
Joined: Tue May 08, 2012 10:35 pm

RE: Razing the Reich II (no Manstein63)

Post by A game »

Awsome, good luck MT and lets hope this is a long one!
User avatar
Icier
Posts: 564
Joined: Tue Jul 15, 2014 1:23 pm
Location: a sunny beach nsw

RE: Razing the Reich II (no Manstein63)

Post by Icier »

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.
Those are my principles, and if you don't like them... well, I have others.
HardLuckYetAgain
Posts: 7060
Joined: Fri Feb 05, 2016 12:26 am

RE: Razing the Reich II (no Manstein63)

Post by HardLuckYetAgain »

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.
User avatar
Michael T
Posts: 4443
Joined: Sat Oct 21, 2006 9:35 pm
Location: Queensland, Australia.

RE: Razing the Reich II (no Manstein63)

Post by 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.
HardLuckYetAgain
Posts: 7060
Joined: Fri Feb 05, 2016 12:26 am

RE: Razing the Reich II (no Manstein63)

Post by HardLuckYetAgain »

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 :)
User avatar
Michael T
Posts: 4443
Joined: Sat Oct 21, 2006 9:35 pm
Location: Queensland, Australia.

RE: Razing the Reich II (no Manstein63)

Post by Michael T »

Bit of a delay on this as Sean has had some Windows 10 issues. I should have his move in a day or so.
ericv
Posts: 325
Joined: Sat Jan 21, 2012 8:44 pm

RE: Razing the Reich II (no Manstein63)

Post by ericv »

hope it is going to last a bit longer this time. the much anticipated MT vs silly was a bit of an anticlimax.
User avatar
sillyflower
Posts: 3509
Joined: Wed Aug 04, 2010 4:39 pm
Location: Back in Blighty

RE: Razing the Reich II (no Manstein63)

Post by sillyflower »

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?
User avatar
sillyflower
Posts: 3509
Joined: Wed Aug 04, 2010 4:39 pm
Location: Back in Blighty

RE: Razing the Reich II (no Manstein63)

Post by sillyflower »

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?
User avatar
Michael T
Posts: 4443
Joined: Sat Oct 21, 2006 9:35 pm
Location: Queensland, Australia.

RE: Razing the Reich II (no Manstein63)

Post by Michael T »

Anyone with a tag of Manstein must be tough [8D]
User avatar
Dinglir
Posts: 620
Joined: Thu Mar 10, 2016 5:35 pm

RE: Razing the Reich II (no Manstein63)

Post by Dinglir »

Der Manstein kommt!
To be is to do -- Socrates
To do is to be -- Jean-Paul Sartre
Do be do be do -- Frank Sinatra
Farfarer61
Posts: 713
Joined: Wed Jul 21, 2004 1:29 pm

RE: Razing the Reich II (no Manstein63)

Post by Farfarer61 »

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,
User avatar
Michael T
Posts: 4443
Joined: Sat Oct 21, 2006 9:35 pm
Location: Queensland, Australia.

RE: Razing the Reich II (no Manstein63)

Post by Michael T »

Turn one is done but I am unable to upload the map for some reason. I will try again tomorrow.
User avatar
Michael T
Posts: 4443
Joined: Sat Oct 21, 2006 9:35 pm
Location: Queensland, Australia.

RE: Razing the Reich II (no Manstein63)

Post by Michael T »

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.

Image
Attachments
T1.jpg
T1.jpg (1.19 MiB) Viewed 116 times
Hunter63
Posts: 28
Joined: Mon Jun 13, 2016 9:35 pm

RE: Razing the Reich II (no Manstein63)

Post by Hunter63 »

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
User avatar
Michael T
Posts: 4443
Joined: Sat Oct 21, 2006 9:35 pm
Location: Queensland, Australia.

RE: Razing the Reich II (no Manstein63)

Post by Michael T »

I am not sure what happened in the south. Whether he just got in to trouble OR he is playing at this:

tm.asp?m=3890124



chaos45
Posts: 1875
Joined: Mon Jan 22, 2001 10:00 am

RE: Razing the Reich II (no Manstein63)

Post by chaos45 »

with that opening hes in for a hard fight.
User avatar
Girshwin
Posts: 33
Joined: Tue May 31, 2016 3:47 pm
Location: Rochester, New York

Good AAR

Post by Girshwin »

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.
"The President has always been given a choice of the various desks that he can have. That is one of the prerogatives."
-Richard Nixon
HardLuckYetAgain
Posts: 7060
Joined: Fri Feb 05, 2016 12:26 am

RE: Razing the Reich II (no Manstein63)

Post by HardLuckYetAgain »

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.
Post Reply

Return to “After Action Reports”