Slitherine

Middle East:
The port city of Umm Qasr at the Persian Gulf has been reached.
The attack on Aleppo proves to be a real challenge.
Haifa has been seized and Axis troops stand close to Beirut.

Turn 94 – 18 April 1945
Weather: clear and dry

Ostfront:
Army Group North reached Kirov.
Middle East:
Aleppo and Latakia have been reached.
Further South, Beirut has been reached as well and the Middle East has been conquered.

Turn 94 overall situation:
(right click and open in new tab for larger picture)
Turn 94 casualties:

Turn 99 – 2 July 1945
Weather: clear and dry

Turn 99 overall situation:
That’s how the map can look like when seizing the last victory objective (in this case either Aleppo or Beirut) only during turn 99 (with fog of war off):
(right click and open in new tab for larger picture)
Turn 99 casualties:

... and for easier comparison I also repeat the incoming casualties as well:
So thanks again to McGuba (viewtopic.php?t=47985) for his great work!

I hope you enjoyed the AAR. In case of any questions or suggestions, please feel free to comment. Thanks and all the best!

... and in case you are more interested in defensive than in offensive operations, please feel free to compare my second AAR based on the Normandy/Bagration save of McGuba’s Battlefield Europe v1.9: viewtopic.php?f=145&t=87739

Some thoughts for discussion…

What went well/OK:
1. Fast advance to Moscow
2. Initial encirclements at Minsk and Kiev
3. Static defense along the line Moscow to Bryansk
4. Avoiding major winter battles around Kursk and Kharkov
5. Mobile defense and strong counterattacks at the Ostfront after 1943
6. Keeping the initiative at most times, i.e. being able to actively decide when to attack and when to defend as well as where
7. Repelling Operation Torch and holding Libya/Tobruk against British attacks
8. …


Even better if:
1. More effective/faster attack on Leningrad
2. More effective/faster attack on Vologda
3. Earlier start of Operation Sea Lion
4. Stronger beachhead in Southern England
5. Air superiority in Western Europe
6. Capture of Caucasian oil fields through mountains or maybe the Black Sea vs. with too light tanks through open terrain trying to cross the Kuma River
7. Faster advance towards Egypt and Palestine, capture of Aleppo
8. …

Any other thoughts from your view/observations? Also, what worked for you and what didn’t? Any comments are welcome so we could all learn from them maybe…

WOW! Great AAR!
Very interesting.
Maybe someone make a tablet of the TOP-5 fastest winners in BE mod.

What units did you purchase? Do you have many free slots left?
How do you think it is preferable to purchase new units or spend prestige on elite replacement or units upgrade?
What was the tactic of mobile defense?

Thanks Intenso82 good points! … and yeah, Uhu seems to be heading such an imaginary table from what I have read? Chapeau!

Purchases/free slots:
Actually, given the limited number of unit slots I didn’t purchase many units for the first half. Purchases later on were mostly armored units such as tanks and AT units, so mainly Panther A/G, StuGs and Hetzer plus filling some specific gaps in remote locations (e.g. England, Norway, Caucasus, and Egypt to some extent) with time-sensitive situations. I think my highest number of free slots this round was 16. Once I have free slots (later in the game) I usually keep one or two slots open for emergencies…

Latest models vs. elite replacements vs. more units/purchases:
Overall, I think having latest models on several unit types (not all) is much more important than elite replacements in general. In my first attempts I tried elite replacements for selected ground units (to some extent to spearhead attacks) and for some fighters but I didn’t see much value/difference, so I go with normal replacements at 99% of the cases. Regarding latest models or purchases of more fire power, it depends on the individual situation IMHO, when I have free slots I would probably go with buying an additional unit but at the latest model, i.e. more and better fire power (if prestige allows) and only then/after these purchases upgrade existing but experienced units.

Upgrades:
My upgrades in the beginning weren’t ideal from a prestige point of view but I like some more mobility for the initial blitzkrieg rounds (mainly less pressure to reach the Kremlin) so I upgraded several infantry to grenadier with transport as well as some infantry to Gebirgsjäger for the Caucasus and England.

I also upgraded (most) lighter tanks to Pz III, I don’t like the Pz IV for BE as it’s a dead-end basically. For a change, I tried Flammpanzers for the first time in BE, they have some value in the North around Leningrad but become very easy prey after 42, so not sure.

I upgraded the ATs to 5 cm and then to 7.5 cm, although the 7.5 cm is only needed for a short time period before the StuGs are available/of more value. However, if you don’t survive this period when the 7.5 cm was needed (because you didn’t upgrade to it) then the StuGs won’t help you anymore later on as you might get overrun…

I upgraded to the FW 190 series as much as possible (but not as a priority as I had given up on the Western airspace, maybe a net loss but anyways…), to some extent I also upgraded the Axis fighters (mainly to keep them alive and for support).

I also upgraded several lighter AA to 8.8 to defend against heavier tanks and to attack/bust forts, i.e. in North Africa (more success) and partly for England (limited to no success).

Mobile defense:
So the thing with mobile defense vs. static defense (from my limited understanding) is basically what von Manstein had proposed for Army Group South when he had realized that the Red Army was too strong for the Wehrmacht. (He must have realized it latest after Stalingrad was lost, maybe already when Moscow hadn’t been captured or even during the first weeks of Operation Barbarossa.)

I have mentioned mobile defense in the AAR (same with some other hints to actual history) because it wasn’t used that often in WW2 as von Manstein’s idea was rejected several times by the OKW. He applied it during the Third Battle of Kharkov, maybe also compare here for more background as well as the historical context: https://www.globalsecurity.org/military ... 0/ch10.htm

Mobile defense in BE:
The thing with mobile (or elastic) defense in BE for me was to avoid the typical static and entrenched defense line along Tula-Voronezh/Kursk-Kharkov-Rostov (+/- 3 to 5 hexes East West) as I didn’t have the resources to build such a sufficiently strong line nor to hold it against the second Russian winter offensive/steamroller, i.e. when all the pre-placed Russian units cross the Don and hell breaks loose around turn 37 and later. I didn’t have the resources as they all went into the Caucasus looking for oil...

So if you keep your light defense line behind the rivers (Desna/Dnieper) the Russian counteroffensive will roll out / to some kind of a stop around Kursk, i.e. only some selected units will come to you early 43 after the winter and stop at the river. Then Kursk will be fortified at some point (historically: Kursk salient) and after that a new Russian offensive will start sometime later in the year… and then you can counterstrike that offensive with much stronger German tank and AT units in open terrain between Kiev and Kursk, and you can always trade space for armor/number of available units so the Russian counteroffensive will overstretch itself and you can finish them one by one…

In summary, for me it was important to avoid the required static defense in winter 42/43 in the South and to apply a more mobile (i.e. armored) defense later in 43 that will lead to a final strike along the entire Eastern battle area. However, I still applied the typical static defense from Moscow to Bryansk/Orel in the Northern part.

I hope this makes sense, nothing fancy… just an alternative approach to what I had read in several AARs/tips for BE previously...

Congratulations. I think 94 is an excellent result (Uhu is simply playing in a different league).

I thought you would get a problem to capture Palestine in time because it took you long time to solve the situation around Tobruk. And I expected you would not find enough free resources to cross the Caucasus from the north with a second army.

But you managed it.

This wall of steel starting winter 42/43 is a problem. It is static, you can control it and normally you can avoid the loss of valuable units. But it takes a lot of time to defeat the Red Army especially if the strong Russian artillery appears behind the Russian frontline and starts to fire.

I will try your strategy, too. Let the Russian tanks strike deeper in my territory, try to encircle them with infantry in rough terrain and try to fall the Russian artillery in the back with own tanks. This will raise more victims on my side but hopefully will save some time and I can quicker start to move east again.

I hope I can post my first order of battle in operation "unthinkable" tomorrow. Will be approx. round 20.

With kind regards
Werner

Thanks GeneralWerner!

Yeah I guess solving the situation around Tobruk can be improved as well. In addition, I had Rommel wait several turns until all ships of Regia Marina had returned from the Western Mediterranean Sea to help with the fortifications at El Alamein and the British ships around Alexandria. Advancing faster into Palestine could have reduced the overall turn count, well maybe to around 90, not sure?

If you are faster in capturing the Caucasus from the North (through Rostov on Don) I guess you can actually cross the Kuma River with tanks (as I had planned it) as the Northern Russian tanks are still without fuel. If you only come via the Black Sea and capture Grozny through Poti, all these tanks North of Kuma River might come to Grozny once they get fuel... So capturing Grozny through Poti also requires some tanks/ATs somehow, at least based on my very bad experiences…

So about the Russian wall of steel in winter 42/43, I have been struggling with this wall several times before. For me it just consumes too much prestige and eventually too many of my units without achieving much. I tried various locations, entrenched, backed up with artillery, with space to retreat for suppressed units and with tanks behind to manage Russian breakthroughs. Nonetheless, I ran out of prestige (due to the losses) and eventually out of time and units (due to the losses and the constant flow of heavy/armored Russian reinforcements as I hadn’t captured the Russian oil fields)…

For me, encircling with infantry only worked better in Northern Russia as I didn’t find much connected rough terrain in the South (more steppe), maybe only around Bryansk forest, so not sure? In addition, the Kursk salient holds 10-15 armored units when they start their offensive, yes you can take them one by one more or less but you might also need some armor around, e.g. the 7.5 cm ATs upgraded to StuGs from behind the Dnieper River.

Anyway, the mobile defense thing can be further improved for sure. However, it definitely helps to have the Russians overstretch their lines with tanks heading ahead and support units (e.g. artillery) being loaded onto trucks (i.e. when they start the scripted offensive after the Kursk salient) … and then being crushed!

Thanks again and good luck, I am always curious to see new ideas/discuss alternative options and I am definitely excited to read your entertaining more role-based AAR!

Yes indeed a very nice, and certainly the most detailed AAR made so far. And of course a nice achievement

I believe it requires at least above average playing skills to achieve a DV in the current version, even after several replays. And yet still...

Each and every replay and obviously the knowledge of the history of ww2 makes it easier at the strategic level. For example sending units to the border of Tunisia before the Allied invasion certainly helps a lot. Or knowing from previous long plays how the AI reacts to certain moves or how its offensives are being scripted. So in the future I might try to improve this. But how is it possible to make it more unpredictable while keeping it historically accurate as well? Nearly impossible, I guess. Historically Stalin did not expect the German invasion, the Germans did not expect the Allied landing in North Africa, the Allies did not expect the Ardennes offensive, etc. etc. But if these are all scripted, to make it all historically accurate, then where is the surprise? That's why I became interested in the multiplayer version as in that one none of the players know what strategy the other will follow. Just as it happened historically. But multiplayer games can be hard to organize and we need two players with similar skill level for an entertaining game. And of course it is very hard to balance it since historically the Allies had a lot more men and resources which makes it inherently unbalanced. So it is not for everyone, which I understand.

So another possible solution for single player games might be to create an alternative version (while keeping the original one as well of course), in which the AI would randomly choose between several options, instead of always following the historical path. For example the Allies were contemplating a possible landing in the Balkans or in Norway and the Germans never knew for sure where and when these landings would occur and so they made great efforts to fortify for example Denmark as well, which was never even attacked by the Allies, and then they were of course shocked by the American landings in Morocco and Algeria. Therefore I think it would be interesting to have such an alternative reality version as well, especially for those who already mastered the "classic" version of this mod. I would certainly prefer to see players trying to beat this version as well, instead of trying to achieve a DV in less and less turns in consecutive replays. Do not get me wrong, it is also nice that people try to make it better each time, but still...

However, for now I am "only" focusing on the next version which will bring quite a few changes that might significantly alter the gameplay here and there, making it sometimes harder, or maybe even a little easier. It will be more like an experimental version and we will see what works and what not. Unfortunately since I do long hours at my workplace these days I still cannot say when it will be ready, but hopefully it will not take so long. Actually I just want to give it some finishing touches and test a few things but it still takes a little more time.


As for the current AAR.
I think you can try to improve things here and there, but the mod has been designed in a way that players always need to make compromises. You cannot be very successful everywhere. For example you can only be more effective/faster with your attack on Leningrad or Vologda or whatever at the cost of being less successful elsewhere. (By the way, if we are here, I plan to make the siege of Leningrad a bit more worhtwhile as now it looks like most players do not really bother besieging it as it takes too long.)

Apart from this, the only thing that got me puzzled was I did not really understand why you kept your heavy siege artillery units near Moscow for much of the war, using them for defense. I believe these could have been better used in their intended role, i.e. besieging and in offensives for example during the invasion of Britain, attacking their numerous strongpoints, or maybe even in the attack of Grozny/Baku. For the same reason I did not really understand why you kept two of those Würzburg radars at Moscow when they might have been better used in the west to counter the superior Western Allied fighters. But these are only marginal things, the overall strategy was excellent, just as your so-called mobile defense. I think many players do not realize the importance of the latter and lose a lot of their units in creating phalanx-like defense lines which can be broken by the AI, especially during those nasty winter offensives in bad weather, which puts a cap on initiative and limits the effectiveness of defensive artillery. I believe many players lose their interest in the mod after suffering heavy losses in these, which is sad.

McGuba wrote: ↑Wed Jul 18, 2018 11:54 pm Yes indeed a very nice, and certainly the most detailed AAR made so far. And of course a nice achievement

I believe it requires at least above average playing skills to achieve a DV in the current version, even after several replays. And yet still...

Thanks a lot McGuba for your feedback and comments (especially from a developer’s/creator’s perspective)!

Please allow some thoughts, I had started a shorter and less detailed AAR but struggled with what to leave out. I actually was about to stop it. However, ESPADATXI’s “photos from the front” approach viewtopic.php?f=145&t=86225 inspired me to add more pictures and then I actually enjoyed writing and had some time at hand as well.

I now realize that a more detailed AAR might become lengthy/boring at times and it might contain some spoilers for first time players as well. I also can't access the first post anymore to add a warning. So sorry for that.

On the other hand, I think it seems almost impossible to make a DV at the first attempt anyway. At least, it took me several attempts with varying strategies (a possibility the OKW didn’t have in real life of course)…

In addition, a more detailed AAR might give some ideas to players that maybe got frustrated or lost interest in the mod after suffering heavy losses (e.g. in winter offensives). So it’s maybe also a bit of “giving back” to the community as I had learned quite a bit from the forum as well…

McGuba wrote: ↑Wed Jul 18, 2018 11:54 pm So another possible solution for single player games might be to create an alternative version (while keeping the original one as well of course), in which the AI would randomly choose between several options, instead of always following the historical path.

This sounds like a great idea. I also read about your planned changes in the Black Sea as well as the value and availability of oil, I expect these changes will make it more historical and already harder again for now…

McGuba wrote: ↑Wed Jul 18, 2018 11:54 pm As for the current AAR.
I think you can try to improve things here and there, but the mod has been designed in a way that players always need to make compromises. You cannot be very successful everywhere. For example you can only be more effective/faster with your attack on Leningrad or Vologda or whatever at the cost of being less successful elsewhere. (By the way, if we are here, I plan to make the siege of Leningrad a bit more worhtwhile as now it looks like most players do not really bother besieging it as it takes too long.)

Sorry, not sure what "worthwhile" could really mean in this context, i.e. given that the actual siege took something like 800 to 900 days, if I recall correctly. The initial OKW plan was to take the city while the siege didn’t really achieve its military objectives in the end (if there actually were any real military objectives besides not having to feed the population and not getting trapped in another city again, i.e. like they did in Kiev and of course later again in Stalingrad). So not sure if reducing the time of the siege or increasing the Russian losses to be incurred as a consequence of the siege would be historically correct?

McGuba wrote: ↑Wed Jul 18, 2018 11:54 pm Apart from this, the only thing that got me puzzled was I did not really understand why you kept your heavy siege artillery units near Moscow for much of the war, using them for defense. I believe these could have been better used in their intended role, i.e. besieging and in offensives for example during the invasion of Britain, attacking their numerous strongpoints, or maybe even in the attack of Grozny/Baku. For the same reason I did not really understand why you kept two of those Würzburg radars at Moscow when they might have been better used in the west to counter the superior Western Allied fighters.

Thanks, yeah these are also valid observations as well, of course.

So the explanation for keeping the Karl-Gerät around Moscow is that I usually deploy it either along Brest/Smolensk/Moscow/Leningrad in the North or for Brest/Odessa/Sevastopol in the South and that I had almost lost it several times before already (mainly due to air raids). It’s also rather small in terms of strength points (3) and repairing it is quite expensive. Bringing it to the Caucasus or to England is definitely an option, however I was too concerned to lose it in the wide steppe of the Northern Caucasus or while crossing the Channel/landing in the South of England, so I let it sit in Moscow and help defend a bit…

For the Würzburg radars, also very true. The reason is that I didn’t have the prestige to upgrade all my fighters in the West to the FW 190 series quickly enough and then I missed the point to defeat or at least hold the RAF/USAF at bay, so I gave up on the Western airspace entirely and moved the radars to the East to help protect the Moscow area from joint air and ground attacks by the Russians…

McGuba wrote: ↑Wed Jul 18, 2018 11:54 pm I believe many players lose their interest in the mod after suffering heavy losses in these, which is sad.

Yeah as said, maybe the AAR can give some ideas to other players. Maybe some players will try again or will try different approaches...

Unfortunately, I can't access the first post anymore to add a warning, so I add it here at the end...
Warning: This AAR may include spoilers!

Time-lapse of turns 1 to 99 - ground map:
(right click and open in new tab for larger picture/animation, after that maybe use browser zoom: "Ctrl" and "+")

Based on Goose’s suggestion for the “The Race to Berlin!” AAR and also to complete this original end-to-end AAR, I now prepared a time-lapse (with fog of war on) of the air map as well!

Actually, starting around halfway through you can see how it will look if/when you lose control over the airspace in (Western) Europe…

Time-lapse of turns 1 to 99 - air map:
(right click and open in new tab for larger picture/animation, after that maybe use browser zoom: "Ctrl" and "+")

Almost one year in from the very first post... thanks to all for more than 12,000 views! I had never expected this!

Maybe I will find some more time later this year for another AAR based on the new BE version 2.0...

PeteMitchell_2 wrote: ↑Thu Jun 27, 2019 12:10 pm Almost one year in from the very first post... thanks to all for more than 12,000 views! I had never expected this!

Maybe I will find some more time later this year for another AAR based on the new BE version 2.0...

My hope is to see you finish your US Corps playthrough and provide feedback on that playthrough. I have finished the Ruhr battle and will be starting to post videos again Friday.

Yeah, things should get better by August... Remagen is next for me...

PeteMitchell_2 wrote: ↑Thu Jun 27, 2019 12:10 pm Maybe I will find some more time later this year for another AAR based on the new BE version 2.0...

Yes, it would be great.

Where can I buy this game ?

konzev wrote: ↑Tue Jul 16, 2019 7:56 pm Where can I buy this game ?

Slitherine sells it http://www.slitherine.com/products/prod ... atformID=1 or ya can pick it up on STEAM