Biggest surprises

[Clark]

I thought it might be interesting to discuss the biggest surprises that you've ever sprung on anyone in CEAW and/or anyone has ever sprung on you. No need to shame anyone (if you got one over on them) or reveal some of their favorite tricks (if they got one over on you) so don't name names!

I haven't played PBEM that long, so I haven't had the opportunity to surprise many people, much less the skill to put one together, but I did manage a nice sneak attack through Finland as the Axis once. I landed a decent sized force in Finland as soon as I was able and rested them for a few turns, careful to keep them out of sight of Russian radar. I timed the assault with a delay so that my adversary counterattacked in the North against a weak German advance in the Baltic region and worked to hold the line against a powerful assault in the south. After the Finnish had softened up Leningrad's defenses, I smashed right through Leningrad and captured Novgorod and Rzhev in short order.

I've been on the receiving end of many surprises, even in one game, but one in particular shocked me, and it partially came from my own stupidity. As the Axis, I left Copenhagen undefended. My opponent snuck a transport next to Copenhagen and landed before I even knew it was there, and quickly reinforced Denmark with British infantry while Germany was in pitched battle in the East against the USSR. Copenhagen! Under Allied control! In 1942! This became enough of a bridgehead that later in the war it was the entry point for the invasion of Germany, not so much the landings in France. 20 PP for an Italian garrison in Copenhagen would have been a worthwhile investment in 1941.

[ftgcritt2]

I am in the middle of a game where my Allied opponent spent almost all of his pre-Barbarossa Russian PP's on tanks. I didn't realize what he had done, however, until I was about three turns in with my forces fairly spread out. He started picking off my lead units, and I was forced to stop the advance and wait for the rest of the army to catch up. I didn't even make it across the Dnieper before winter. I was thinking that this was going to be a terribly short game until I pulled off a HUGE 1942 offensive, pushing him all the way from the Dnieper line to Siberia. '43 was spent fending off Russian attempts to break through to the caucuses. Now its the summer of '44, and I am about to capture Omsk. The mistake that he made was that he never really started producing infantry in any substantial numbers. So when '42 rolled around, he only had a single defense line composed largely of tanks (which can be extremely expensive to use as cannon fodder). Last time I checked, his armored casualties stood at around 25,000. I dont know what these numbers mean, but I've never seen them this high before.

[joerock22]

I am in the middle of a game where my Allied opponent spent almost all of his pre-Barbarossa Russian PP's on tanks. I didn't realize what he had done, however, until I was about three turns in with my forces fairly spread out. He started picking off my lead units, and I was forced to stop the advance and wait for the rest of the army to catch up. I didn't even make it across the Dnieper before winter. I was thinking that this was going to be a terribly short game until I pulled off a HUGE 1942 offensive, pushing him all the way from the Dnieper line to Siberia. '43 was spent fending off Russian attempts to break through to the caucuses. Now its the summer of '44, and I am about to capture Omsk. The mistake that he made was that he never really started producing infantry in any substantial numbers. So when '42 rolled around, he only had a single defense line composed largely of tanks (which can be extremely expensive to use as cannon fodder). Last time I checked, his armored casualties stood at around 25,000. I dont know what these numbers mean, but I've never seen them this high before.

Well, each armoured step represents 52 casualties, so that's almost 500 armour steps! Holy cow!

[rkr1958]

I am in the middle of a game where my Allied opponent spent almost all of his pre-Barbarossa Russian PP's on tanks. I didn't realize what he had done, however, until I was about three turns in with my forces fairly spread out. He started picking off my lead units, and I was forced to stop the advance and wait for the rest of the army to catch up. I didn't even make it across the Dnieper before winter. I was thinking that this was going to be a terribly short game until I pulled off a HUGE 1942 offensive, pushing him all the way from the Dnieper line to Siberia. '43 was spent fending off Russian attempts to break through to the caucuses. Now its the summer of '44, and I am about to capture Omsk. The mistake that he made was that he never really started producing infantry in any substantial numbers. So when '42 rolled around, he only had a single defense line composed largely of tanks (which can be extremely expensive to use as cannon fodder). Last time I checked, his armored casualties stood at around 25,000. I dont know what these numbers mean, but I've never seen them this high before.

Well, each armoured step represents 52 casualties, so that's almost 500 armour steps! Holy cow!

To further put that in perspective; 25,000 armor casualties = 481 armor steps. A new armor build costs 8 PP's per step and repair costs 4.8 PP's per step (i.e., repair cost is 60% of the new build cost per step). Not knowing the exact breakdown between new builds and repairs, if we take the average (which is 6.4 PP's) then the cost of your opponent's losses from armor alone is equal to 3078.4 PP's and that's equivalent to almost 88 new infantry corps (@ 35 PP's each).

[Clark]

I am in the middle of a game where my Allied opponent spent almost all of his pre-Barbarossa Russian PP's on tanks. I didn't realize what he had done, however, until I was about three turns in with my forces fairly spread out. He started picking off my lead units, and I was forced to stop the advance and wait for the rest of the army to catch up. I didn't even make it across the Dnieper before winter. I was thinking that this was going to be a terribly short game until I pulled off a HUGE 1942 offensive, pushing him all the way from the Dnieper line to Siberia. '43 was spent fending off Russian attempts to break through to the caucuses. Now its the summer of '44, and I am about to capture Omsk. The mistake that he made was that he never really started producing infantry in any substantial numbers. So when '42 rolled around, he only had a single defense line composed largely of tanks (which can be extremely expensive to use as cannon fodder). Last time I checked, his armored casualties stood at around 25,000. I dont know what these numbers mean, but I've never seen them this high before.

Well, each armoured step represents 52 casualties, so that's almost 500 armour steps! Holy cow!

Or almost 4,000 PPs!! Probably not that many, as a lot of that would have been repaired tanks. But still, almost every single Russian PP must have gone into armor or repairing armor.

I've heard of people resorting to this tactic at least early in the game (pre-Barbarossa) and amassing a big herd of Soviet tanks to smash an unprepared German offensive. Seems kind of risky though - the Soviets don't have that much of a war economy in the beginning and if you lose a bunch of tanks right off the bat, you're in big trouble.

[rkr1958]

I've been "surprised" by opponents in three games and in each case these surprises led to changes in the CEaW-GS (formerly BJR) mod.

1. Joe Rock pulling off a one turn invasion from Cherbourg, France and establishing a beachhead in England. Basically, he had an armor unit next to the port and the port was occupied by a naval unit. When he loaded the armor unit on the transports it formed in the English Channel next to the English coast because Cherbourg was occupied. Up until then it never occurred to me that one could load a transport and land in the same turn across the channel. This surprised caused us (the mod developers) to move to port of Cherbourg one hex to the south to prevent this channel skipping tactic.

2. As the Axis in the invasion of France I came up against an unexpected strong BEF that included two motorized corps, two mechanized corps, both UK fighters and strong support by the RN (including a CV). This was in version BJR mod v1.02 (I believe) and France held out to late September 1940. Also, German lost 3 or so corps. This strong UK response resulted in repositioning of the Canadian ground corps such that it takes longer to get them to France and reduction of UK starting manpower levels. Also, we've added a 20 point effectiveness loss (i.e., DOW morale loss) to Allied troops in France when Germany invades Belgium. This represents the morale loss on the part of the Allies when they realized that the phony war has ended and that they are again in a shooting war with Germany.

3. The last surprise was as the Axis when the Allied player built and deployed to the UK an unbelievable large number of air units by early 1943. These units were able to blow away German coastal defenses in France and depleted anything that moved in France. My opponent was able to land in the fall of 1943 almost uncontested in mass. This game led to the reduction of US manpower and other game tweaks to counter this.

[rkr1958]

I've heard of people resorting to this tactic at least early in the game (pre-Barbarossa) and amassing a big herd of Soviet tanks to smash an unprepared German offensive. Seems kind of risky though - the Soviets don't have that much of a war economy in the beginning and if you lose a bunch of tanks right off the bat, you're in big trouble.

We call it the armor blob and we've done a number of tweaks in CEaW-GS to diminish the effectiveness of this strategy.

[trulster]

2. As the Axis in the invasion of France I came up against an unexpected strong BEF that included two motorized corps, two mechanized corps, both UK fighters and strong support by the RN (including a CV). This was in version BJR mod v1.02 (I believe) and France held out to late September 1940. Also, German lost 3 or so corps. This strong UK response resulted in repositioning of the Canadian ground corps such that it takes longer to get them to France and reduction of UK starting manpower levels. Also, we've added a 20 point effectiveness loss (i.e., DOW morale loss) to Allied troops in France when Germany invades Belgium. This represents the morale loss on the part of the Allies when they realized that the phony war has ended and that they are again in a shooting war with Germany.

Well, the BEF was a historical factor and certainly *could* have been more effective. Not sure if this morale loss is really warranted nor makes sense, the UK has to deal w the manpower and PP issue as it is. IMO the Allies, as well as the Axis, should be allowed different strategies and not be tied to the historical development.

[rkr1958]

2. As the Axis in the invasion of France I came up against an unexpected strong BEF that included two motorized corps, two mechanized corps, both UK fighters and strong support by the RN (including a CV). This was in version BJR mod v1.02 (I believe) and France held out to late September 1940. Also, German lost 3 or so corps. This strong UK response resulted in repositioning of the Canadian ground corps such that it takes longer to get them to France and reduction of UK starting manpower levels. Also, we've added a 20 point effectiveness loss (i.e., DOW morale loss) to Allied troops in France when Germany invades Belgium. This represents the morale loss on the part of the Allies when they realized that the phony war has ended and that they are again in a shooting war with Germany.

Well, the BEF was a historical factor and certainly *could* have been more effective. Not sure if this morale loss is really warranted nor makes sense, the UK has to deal w the manpower and PP issue as it is. IMO the Allies, as well as the Axis, should be allowed different strategies and not be tied to the historical development.

You can still deploy a BEF of one infantry and mechanized corps to France. You can even build an extra corps or two if you want in time for the invasion of France. You can also have two fighters and a CV in support. However; you won't be able to get the two Canadian corps to France before April or May.

[ncali]

I think the efficiency loss helps model the initial tactical surprise and superior coordination "shock and awe" of the German blitzkrieg, what historically was a rout of French forces in the Ardennes. Not sure about the late arrival of the Canadians, but I don't think they were historically prepared for deployment in France in time for the German attack - so the changes may make some sense.

[Lawrenson]

You're right. The first Canadian units landed in mid-June 1940 as French resistance was collapsing. They landed at Brest, started inland, thought better of it and were quickly evacuated back to England.