I played this scenario 2 times now.
The first time I stupidly forgot to guard the northwest coast and had a prolonged battle to reconquer it.
I destroyed a few artillery units and then went in hiding behind the Dnepr river and relatively easily achieved a minor victory with the loss of 1 STuGIIIG. I didn't even use levelbombers. I use three 87G tac bombers which got pretty chewed up.
The second time i was a bit more bold, destroyed a lot of artillery, guarded the coast securely (but with cheap and minimal units).
Deployed a forward defense which was pretty efficient but it still got hairy in the last three turns with the giant Russian closing assault.
I achieved a DV with no losses. yet because of overstrengthening a bit ended up with 57k in prestige after repairs compared with 59k after repairs for the minor victory.
In the second try I destroyed an awful lot of units but you don't get a bonus for that anymore. Sure you can conquer a few cities but that will only net a few 100 at max and for some you still have to fight. Also you gain some extra experience and maybe a hero if you're lucky.
So bottom line is that a decisive victory just isn't appealing for Kremenchug. Which makes it an easy scenario to be honest.
DV at Kremenchug worth it?
Moderators: Slitherine Core, Panzer Corps Moderators, Panzer Corps Design
-
rubyjuno
- Sergeant First Class - Elite Panzer IIIL
- Posts: 432
- Joined: Mon Sep 21, 2015 1:18 pm
- Location: Northumberland
Re: DV at Kremenchug worth it?
I agree PanzerTum, not just with Kremenchug, but with other scenarios also. When I first started playing Panzer Corps (I played the base campaign first, then Afrika Korps, then the GC), I always went for A DV. I felt like anything else was a failure. the further I got through GC East, the more I realised that as long as you progress, a DV isn't always a must. If getting a DV means heavy damage to your units it can often cost more in repairs than you earn, as you found at Kremenchug. I've even taken a loss occasionally (no good if it ends your game!), because I've just wanted to get out relatively intact and move on. As you say, this can make it easy, and feels a bit like cheating yourself, but I always make the effort to win and only downgrade my expectations if it looks too costly (in terms of units) towards the end of a scenario. It's sometimes interesting to replay a scenario with that extra knowledge gained from your first attempt, and try different tactics in the hope of a better outcome, although obviously this gives you an advantage. There's nothing like playing a new scenario for the first time, not knowing what to expect.
Re: DV at Kremenchug worth it?
If I remember the scenario right, you need to strike out and then rapidly retreat.
I did it with a very heavy armoured core, and left behind a lot of infantry in the reserve. I think I was on course for DV but lost it on the last turn because I made a positioning error on the turn before that.
There's no real benefit to it, if you don't lose a scenario option, then settling for normal victory is more than okay.
I did it with a very heavy armoured core, and left behind a lot of infantry in the reserve. I think I was on course for DV but lost it on the last turn because I made a positioning error on the turn before that.
There's no real benefit to it, if you don't lose a scenario option, then settling for normal victory is more than okay.
Re: DV at Kremenchug worth it?
Interestingly the Soviet assault in turn 15/16 differed in location.
When the only city I occupied east of the Dnepr was Kremenchug the assault happened there
When I occupied them all it happened at the objectives in the center (and all my AA was in the wrong place...)
Kremenchug is more suited for a defense in depth with marshes and forests channeling assault routes so possibly for a DV I just occupy Kremenchug so the assault happens there and in the last 2-3 turns make a quick dash for the other objectives.
Not going to try that anytime soon though.
When the only city I occupied east of the Dnepr was Kremenchug the assault happened there
When I occupied them all it happened at the objectives in the center (and all my AA was in the wrong place...)
Kremenchug is more suited for a defense in depth with marshes and forests channeling assault routes so possibly for a DV I just occupy Kremenchug so the assault happens there and in the last 2-3 turns make a quick dash for the other objectives.
Not going to try that anytime soon though.
-
PanzerPlayer01
- Private First Class - Opel Blitz
- Posts: 2
- Joined: Fri Dec 30, 2022 8:49 am
Re: DV at Kremenchug worth it?
DV is not that hard on this scenario. The key to it is to not let the enemy land their boats. You can place units south of the coast where the enemy ships arrive at the beginning of the scenario. Use these units to block each coastal spot while damaging the boats enough so your tac bombers or fighters can damage them without taking damage. Focus one or two at a time based on how many tac bombers or fighters you use for this task.
In terms of the Russian advance, meet the attack on the western shore out in front of the city. Do a tank line to block their advance and have a couple of tanks behind the line to switch in and out to finish off one or two enemies at a time.
Put a grenadier in the city to the east of the western coastal city to block them access with an artillery behind it and an AA gun next to the artillery if you do not have enough air cover.
As you go further east on the river line, the goal is to not let any enemy make it across the river, so station tanks in a blockade one tank apart in front of the city to the east of the grenadier. This formation works well in any scenario as it requires less tanks and has the benefit of the enemy trying to pour through only to open it up to the tank from each side attacking and anything behind this line finishing it off.
The first attack is across the front from the north but the second attack is from the north east and is heavier enemy units. Use the alternate tank per hex in a line here too, careful not to put tanks on any forests or hills as they will focus mostly on the city to the east of the grenadier.
Once the boats are destroyed, bring those troops up to either defend the second attack or take control of the western coastal cities so they can't re-spawn more enemies.
Having the following helps:
3 or 4 tac bombers for the boats and first and second assaults. If you need the bombers simply pull off the boats and keep them blocked with your ground units.
Focus on artillery first and then tanks if you can with the tac bombers.
2 or 3 AA guns total to place one near each city.
One thing to avoid is to try and mount an assault from the eastern most point across into the swamp. The gun supplied, an AA gun and a moderate tank can defend that position easily with the help of a tac bomber pass if needed. Focus instead on clearing up the first attack before the second attack begins.
In terms of the Russian advance, meet the attack on the western shore out in front of the city. Do a tank line to block their advance and have a couple of tanks behind the line to switch in and out to finish off one or two enemies at a time.
Put a grenadier in the city to the east of the western coastal city to block them access with an artillery behind it and an AA gun next to the artillery if you do not have enough air cover.
As you go further east on the river line, the goal is to not let any enemy make it across the river, so station tanks in a blockade one tank apart in front of the city to the east of the grenadier. This formation works well in any scenario as it requires less tanks and has the benefit of the enemy trying to pour through only to open it up to the tank from each side attacking and anything behind this line finishing it off.
The first attack is across the front from the north but the second attack is from the north east and is heavier enemy units. Use the alternate tank per hex in a line here too, careful not to put tanks on any forests or hills as they will focus mostly on the city to the east of the grenadier.
Once the boats are destroyed, bring those troops up to either defend the second attack or take control of the western coastal cities so they can't re-spawn more enemies.
Having the following helps:
3 or 4 tac bombers for the boats and first and second assaults. If you need the bombers simply pull off the boats and keep them blocked with your ground units.
Focus on artillery first and then tanks if you can with the tac bombers.
2 or 3 AA guns total to place one near each city.
One thing to avoid is to try and mount an assault from the eastern most point across into the swamp. The gun supplied, an AA gun and a moderate tank can defend that position easily with the help of a tac bomber pass if needed. Focus instead on clearing up the first attack before the second attack begins.
Re: DV at Kremenchug worth it?
You can have a DV in each scenario of GC East even on higher difficulties like Manstein and Guderian.
I mean without taking excessive losses. A cordon of weak units can defend the coast on the west.
Preventing landing is a valid option. However I find it more efficient to let a 1 or 2 soviet units land each turn and suppress them with artillery for easy surrenders.
I mean without taking excessive losses. A cordon of weak units can defend the coast on the west.
Preventing landing is a valid option. However I find it more efficient to let a 1 or 2 soviet units land each turn and suppress them with artillery for easy surrenders.