Can we save the Bear, Richardsd vs Morris (no Morris please)

[kaigab73]

yes, winter is maybe the problem expecially in '41. in my games as allies, i always hurt axis during winter if they stay close to me. don't know why in this game it didn't happen.

[richardsd]

because there aren't that many Russians with high tech and high efficiency who can get that close before winter without getting slaughtered - you don't know when winter comes and the Russian start tech levels have been reduced

one of the big mistakes a beginner makes is getting the Axis punished during the 41 winter, experienced players don;t let this happen

[richardsd]

so here is the problem, just not killing enough Germans, Morris doesn't fight with them except in Russia at great advantge - pretty clever really

the only good news is that he probably only has 1 sub left



its probably the last winter turn, so here he comes!





in the Med we sink the BB that stayed and hit his retiring fleet for some more steps



elsewhere we get ready for the onslaught in the East, didn't seem to capture an after shot in the south

[kaigab73]

Moscow doesn't look good, neither is Caucasus where i think you can lose many units if he attacks. i would fall back to caucasus mountains and let him take oilfields (he will do anyway but you save the troops so you can defend Omsk/Moscow).

[ncali]

Interesting AAR! Overall, I like your defense of the Caucuses - it's pretty low-cost with the garrisons at the front. You can fall back and/or form a secondary line of defense as needed. If you could keep Moscow over the summer (and I'd try to), then I think you're in pretty good shape! It may be hard, but it will take some commitment on Morris's part to take it (another advantage of forcing him to attack in the Caucuses is that it keeps some of his forces busy down there)! It might be fun to consider some type of tactical counterattack in the summer by the Soviets if an opportunity arises and you can achieve a little surprise with a temporary commitment of airpower. I'm sure you're planning on a major attack from the US and British at some point!

[richardsd]

Moscow doesn't look good, neither is Caucasus where i think you can lose many units if he attacks. i would fall back to caucasus mountains and let him take oilfields (he will do anyway but you save the troops so you can defend Omsk/Moscow).

you can't just give it too him (the Caucuses) then you lose. I will make him burn oil for it. You can see that he has to move into position (in strength) then attack then move back , thats 3 turns AND three turns of oil, just to get back to the position he finished 41 in.

I don't care about holding Moscow at all costs, but I do want him him to burn PP's fighting through the forests

[Peter Stauffenberg]

Do you think we should allow for neutral countries to use research focus again? This way Russia can put focus in e. g. fixed defenses and get tech 2 faster so corps units get 4 defense instead of 3.

[richardsd]

Do you think we should allow for neutral countries to use research focus again? This way Russia can put focus in e. g. fixed defenses and get tech 2 faster so corps units get 4 defense instead of 3.

I think I would prefer the Russian Infantry tech back (for game balance) as that just helps the Russians and not the US as well. I also prefer the start tech back up over research focus as research is very random (the Russian's have been utter rubbish in this game for instance)

[ncali]

Do you think we should allow for neutral countries to use research focus again? This way Russia can put focus in e. g. fixed defenses and get tech 2 faster so corps units get 4 defense instead of 3.

Yes. It also has the added benefit of making things more unpredictable for the Axis in terms of their attack on Russia.

[richardsd]

so here we are at the first turn in May, some decisions to be made!

here is Morris progress





and the Med



in the Med we continue to nibble and launch a small attack on Sardina (not really )



on to the real deal, Russia

we decide to make him spend more oil and time in the south (effectively delaying some decisions a turn) and implement operation nibble and slide!



you will see that I have targetted the MECH's (of course Dietrich is only off for two turns ) thats so he has to attck with ARM and burn more oil.

of course I am going to lose more units, but its buying me a little time and costing him oil and I am not emtirely sure he can ignore the 'sliders' on his right flank

in the North we reinforce a little, no shot oops

[jjdenver]

Do you think we should allow for neutral countries to use research focus again? This way Russia can put focus in e. g. fixed defenses and get tech 2 faster so corps units get 4 defense instead of 3.

Stauffenberg, I'm not sure what the solution is but if you step back and look at how the East Front is working it doesn't model history well at all. The Soviets were able to fight very hard against the Germans and cause heavy casualties. By the time the winter of 41 was reached German infantry regiments in many cases were at battalion effective strength, panzer divisions were fielding effective AFV's numbering in the teens. The Germans were forced to take significant operational pauses to concentrate panzers and to refit units. The Germans bled a lot even in 1941. The Soviets took heavy losses but were always able to rebuild very quickly and field large formations again. The Soviets were unable to stop the Germans everywhere but they were able to force the Germans to really concentrate their armor to make progress and cause large encirclements as summer ended and fall began. The German advance as it neared Kiev and Vyazma and Leningrad turned from a steamroller into a lethargic stalement except where the panzers were pulled into the fight as a focused assault force....but that panzer assault force was ground down steadily so that by end of fall it was a shadow and the Soviets were able to stop the Germans almost everywhere. The attrition the Germans faced was terrible. But in the AAR's it looks like the Soviets are worried about 2 things:
1) losing too many units to the Germans to be able to defend effectively in 42
2) being completely unable to stop the Germans anywhere and causing very few actual casualties to the Germans by defending against them

Also supply difficulties are not really modeled since Morris can run a huge blob to Stalingrad. Supplying that sort of large mech/armor force in an advance all the way to Stalingrad was just unthinkable for the Germans in 1941. Even in 1942 the Germans had a very hard time supplying a much smaller blob to Stalingrad after having all of 1941 and early 42 to convert rails and stockpile supplies even after stripping most of the rest of the forces in the east of trucks and transport. I'm not suggesting supply be changed necessarily but there might be some creative was to add this factor into German thinking in 41 at least.

So the Soviet players are devolving into a "run away" strategy. This doesn't feel like the Russian Front in 1941....so some change is required. Perhaps higher Soviet effectiveness or some tech raised at start or lower infantry movement rates, or more terrain features, or fortifications of some sort, or an event that reduces German strength by 1 SP per unit in SU each turn in summer/fall of 41 to force refits (just brainstorming here) ----not sure.

[Kragdob]

So the Soviet players are devolving into a "run away" strategy. This doesn't feel like the Russian Front in 1941....so some change is required. Perhaps higher Soviet effectiveness or some tech raised at start or lower infantry movement rates, or more terrain features, or fortifications of some sort, or an event that reduces German strength by 1 SP per unit in SU each turn in summer/fall of 41 to force refits (just brainstorming here) ----not sure.

I think that one of the major work after GS2.1 should be rethinking of Eastern front mechanics as I have similar thoughts (Germans were stopped by Soviets in areas where they were not supported by ARM forces).

My idea is to get rid of effectiveness drop and add it only to mechanized/air forces during attack/defense decreasing slowly to disappear in 1943 + maybe to INF at very limited scale in 1941 as well.

[Cybvep]

This is outside of the scope of 2.1. I gave an idea about Soviet industrial transfer and efficiency drops for losing cities some time ago in order to make the Allied player defend western Soviet cities, but a decision was made not to implement this in 2.1. In CEAW the Eastern Front in 1941 has always been too focused on running away and not enough focused on actual fighting. This was true in 2.0 and it is still true in 2.1. The only exception was the Soviet MECH blob, but this doesn't work that well anymore (which is good).

[Diplomaticus]

We're starting to get off topic here, but I think it'd be a good idea to start a separate thread to spitball ideas for a 2.2 revision of the Russian front. One thing nobody talks about much is the almost total absence of the armored encirclements which were such a distinctive part of the Eastern front. For some time now, almost the only major encirclements you see are just the units stuck in the front lines at the beginning of Barbarossa.

[Schnurri]

Maybe something as simple as more units at the front (GARs mainly) just to slow the Axis advance?

[trulster]

IMO the Russian effectiveness loss is now too much, the Germans can run riot with armour without any fear of counterattack in 41. Thus they are able to reach Stalingrad since there is no need to be a bit cautious with spearheads as the Russians are just too weak to do anything.

[kaigab73]

we have too keep in mind always balance. if in the game Barbarossa starts in June 1941 germans barely get close to Moscow. IMO if barbarossa starts in May Germans should have high chances to get either Moscow or Stalingrad, since in RL a barbarossa started in May would have had germans taking Moscow in August/September.

By the way yes, war in the east plays as RL only after '41. in '41 Russians just retreat because there is no chance to hold germans. I would like to see too more battles, so we should make russians stronger but at same time also avoid the gamey tactic to fall back in far east. i mean, russians should be able to make some resistance to germans, but at same time germans should have a chance to beat russia or get close to it.

[PionUrpo]

we have too keep in mind always balance. if in the game Barbarossa starts in June 1941 germans barely get close to Moscow. IMO if barbarossa starts in May Germans should have high chances to get either Moscow or Stalingrad, since in RL a barbarossa started in May would have had germans taking Moscow in August/September.

By the way yes, war in the east plays as RL only after '41. in '41 Russians just retreat because there is no chance to hold germans. I would like to see too more battles, so we should make russians stronger but at same time also avoid the gamey tactic to fall back in far east. i mean, russians should be able to make some resistance to germans, but at same time germans should have a chance to beat russia or get close to it.

I agree, the '41 period is pretty much a setup for rest of the game. I think it's partly a game engine issue, the 20 day/turn for example makes OP pauses etc quite tedious to simulate as ANY stop will set you back a lot. Also the movement/combat system has effect to it (enclirclements aren't really that profitable/achievable for example. Making a huge pack of panzers on the other hand works always as the logistical problems for mega concentration are non-existant).

In the core CEAW is rather simplistic system (no insult) and it can only do so much. Hopefully in later GS version(s) the system can be further refined. Balancing the Soviet resistance while making German advance at least 'interesting' for a player is a difficult proposition for a fully commercial development crew. Try to get the system work for Fall Gelb, Battle of the Atlantic, BoB, Desert War as well... takes a lot of effort and for that alone Kudos for the team.

[richardsd]

here we have the next onslaught of the Morris machine





its actually just not viable to defend Moscow, even fully entranched, never moved, with an 8 leader you hardly dent the Aixis units!

we decide to take a gamble (game is lost anyway) and fight it out in the south



in the med our scouts find a blocking SUB so we invade Sardina after all!



its been a tough game, but played again I think I could certainly make Morris sweat

[jjdenver]

its actually just not viable to defend Moscow, even fully entranched, never moved, with an 8 leader you hardly dent the Aixis units!

It's sad to read that this is the case in 1942. There is really some tech imbalance here that is throwing the east front out of balance. One thing the Soviets should be able to do in any game is make the Germans pay in blood. Even in a worst case 1941 scenario the Germans should take heavy casualties vs SU.