AAR – Ronnie vs. Dan (GSv2.01.32) (The War is Over).
Moderators: rkr1958, Happycat, Slitherine Core
Your impressive results with subs are probably the result of high sub tech. Is that correct?
It seems that the supply changes in the East really benefited the Germans. Personally I think that it's ok, because the Germans should be very dangerous to the Russians in 1941-1942 (this was the case historically). I also think that the Allies are being crippled because of the fact that the Royal Navy is extremely passive.
I don't understand why the Allies haven't attacked Vichy France yet. If they captured Tunis, you would be forced to diver more troops to Italy and they could threaten Libya from the west, which could potentially greatly reduce the number of your supply points in NA.
It seems that the supply changes in the East really benefited the Germans. Personally I think that it's ok, because the Germans should be very dangerous to the Russians in 1941-1942 (this was the case historically). I also think that the Allies are being crippled because of the fact that the Royal Navy is extremely passive.
I don't understand why the Allies haven't attacked Vichy France yet. If they captured Tunis, you would be forced to diver more troops to Italy and they could threaten Libya from the west, which could potentially greatly reduce the number of your supply points in NA.
It is amazing how changing the supply rule can benefit the germans in the East. Seeing the results of the 1942 german campaign and regardless of how Dan is performing with the soviets, I think that a good happy term in this question would be to try with including 4 supply level for the germans only from october 1941 as I have already commented in last posts.Cybvep wrote: It seems that the supply changes in the East really benefited the Germans. Personally I think that it's ok, because the Germans should be very dangerous to the Russians in 1941-1942 (this was the case historically).
May be one of them is an armour unit but anyway they are not invasion capable of OCCUPIED enemy hexes but they can effectively land in unoccupied enemy hexes.rkr1958 wrote: Am I missing something? The transports off of Sicily (magenta) are not invasion capable.
Victor, I disagree with changing the supply level back. The Germans did dominate the Russian front in 1941 and the summer/fall of 1942. Changing the supply level back, in my opinion, makes it unrealistically more difficult for the axis. Also, I think Dan had a real opportunity to hurt me in the winter of '41 and missed it. I don't think you can take the results of this game as typical is realistically judging whether or not to make a balance tweak against the axis player.leridano wrote:It is amazing how changing the supply rule can benefit the germans in the East. Seeing the results of the 1942 german campaign and regardless of how Dan is performing with the soviets, I think that a good happy term in this question would be to try with including 4 supply level for the germans only from october 1941 as I have already commented in last posts.Cybvep wrote: It seems that the supply changes in the East really benefited the Germans. Personally I think that it's ok, because the Germans should be very dangerous to the Russians in 1941-1942 (this was the case historically).
May be one of them is an armour unit but anyway they are not invasion capable of OCCUPIED enemy hexes but they can effectively land in unoccupied enemy hexes.rkr1958 wrote: Am I missing something? The transports off of Sicily (magenta) are not invasion capable.
Exactly.The Germans did dominate the Russian front in 1941 and the summer/fall of 1942. Changing the supply level back, in my opinion, makes it unrealistically more difficult for the axis.
BTW wouldn't it be a good idea to bomb Leningrad? With so many cities and convoys lost, it's a major source of income for the Soviets.
-
joerock22
- Captain - Heavy Cruiser
- Posts: 928
- Joined: Fri Oct 03, 2008 12:38 am
- Location: Connecticut, USA
Great AAR you are putting together; I have been following it with interest. This is not something you have to worry about immediately, but eventually it could become a factor. The closest Russian-controlled area to Berlin is the Leningrad area. If the Russians ever recover enough to muster a strong attack, and they attack here, you could be forced to withdraw most of your forces further east to prevent the Soviets from sprinting to Germany. This happened to me in a game awhile back, and I ended up losing.
Again, I think this is just something to keep in mind if you ever have to go permanently on the defensive in the east. For example, if the Western Allies become a major threat in the west. I guess I would advise you to try to clear out that area in 1943 instead of pushing further east or into the Caucuses, unless you feel like the Russians are really on their heels.
Again, I think this is just something to keep in mind if you ever have to go permanently on the defensive in the east. For example, if the Western Allies become a major threat in the west. I guess I would advise you to try to clear out that area in 1943 instead of pushing further east or into the Caucuses, unless you feel like the Russians are really on their heels.
Joe I agree completely with what you wrote. My objectives for '43 is to push to push the Russians back in the north and hold on to Moscow. In the south, my actions are mere diversions and I intend to retreat at any sign of significant Russian strength. To be honest I'm really surprised at what I was able to accomplish with only infantry and most of that axis minors and Italians.joerock22 wrote:Great AAR you are putting together; I have been following it with interest. This is not something you have to worry about immediately, but eventually it could become a factor. The closest Russian-controlled area to Berlin is the Leningrad area. If the Russians ever recover enough to muster a strong attack, and they attack here, you could be forced to withdraw most of your forces further east to prevent the Soviets from sprinting to Germany. This happened to me in a game awhile back, and I ended up losing.
Again, I think this is just something to keep in mind if you ever have to go permanently on the defensive in the east. For example, if the Western Allies become a major threat in the west. I guess I would advise you to try to clear out that area in 1943 instead of pushing further east or into the Caucuses, unless you feel like the Russians are really on their heels.
Great AAR, and great Axis performance!
There is one other area where I would be cautious, besides the northern sector: The Crimea. The Russians can recruit two units there per turn. If aided by one or two TACs, they can quickly break out and unhinge your front. I would either clear out the Crimea, or make sure you can see whats going on.
There is one other area where I would be cautious, besides the northern sector: The Crimea. The Russians can recruit two units there per turn. If aided by one or two TACs, they can quickly break out and unhinge your front. I would either clear out the Crimea, or make sure you can see whats going on.
Good point. Maybe I'll move my SAC down their in the winter to get a peak at what's there. It won't really cost me anything but a bit of oil or a few rail points.eisenkopf wrote:Great AAR, and great Axis performance!
There is one other area where I would be cautious, besides the northern sector: The Crimea. The Russians can recruit two units there per turn. If aided by one or two TACs, they can quickly break out and unhinge your front. I would either clear out the Crimea, or make sure you can see whats going on.
