GSv2.00(Beta) AAR - Ronnie vs Neil (Game Stopped).

[rkr1958]

AAR. Ronnie (axis) vs Neil (Allies) with GS v2.00d

GS v2.00d Developer Notes

Turn 1. September 1, 1939 Axis.

This game I will be more aggressive against Neil in the early game that I was in our last game ( viewtopic.php?p=165310#165310 ). I railed a mechanized and infantry corps from the Polish boarder west and rebased a fighter unit in preparation for a turn 2 invasion of Holland, which I've code named Case H (H for Holland). I also deployed Rundstedt to command this force. It's going to take a bit getting use to the new changes we've made for leaders. Note that Rundstedt, who has a quality of 6, now has a command range of 4. The full details on the changes made (so far) on leaders is captured in Section V of the developer notes linked to above.

The attack against Poland went better than I expected. Note that I hit the infantry corps in Krakow with two infantry attacks. In hotseat testing I had found that this corps, if left alone and supported by the Polish fighter, could inflict several steps of damage on a full strength crops. By degrading it I don't have to worry about protecting the right flank of my tanks corps. Also, I've isolated the Polish corps in Posen so that it can only counterattack against infantry and not against a higher value tank or Mechanized corps.

I sent the German BB to the Baltic via Keil to get it out of the way of any potential French naval probe.

I built an air lab.

[rkr1958]

Turn 2. September 21, 1939 Axis.

The first two screen caps highlight two changes made in GS v2.00. This first shows the 4-hex command range of Rundstedt. Notice the units under his command are highlighted when you click on his corps. The second is the reduced ability of air units to defend against ground attacks. In this case, I decided to attack the air unit so that I wouldn't have to counter intercept it and could move a second fighter to the west. The German tank corps inflicted 9-steps of loss. So this is a big change and the use of air units in defense roles must be rethought under v2.00.

Warsaw holds out at 2-steps and Poland survives. Disappointing but not totally unexpected given the forces I moved west to attack Holland. Also, the attack on the Polish air base, while reducing German air losses, contributed to this.

The attack on Holland went well with The Hague isolated.

I also had exactly enough PP's to purchase a armor and infantry lab.

[zechi]

Great to see another AAR from you two!

Just one remark since Warsaw survived this turn. I think it would have been better, if you had attacked the Polish FTR with an INF, or was this not possible? This would have had the same effect (FTR could not intercept the TAC) and you would have been able to attack Warsaw with 3 ARM and one MECH, which would most likely be sufficient to take Warsaw and bring Poland down.

[rkr1958]

Great to see another AAR from you two!

Just one remark since Warsaw survived this turn. I think it would have been better, if you had attacked the Polish FTR with an INF, or was this not possible? This would have had the same effect (FTR could not intercept the TAC) and you would have been able to attack Warsaw with 3 ARM and one MECH, which would most likely be sufficient to take Warsaw and bring Poland down.

Because of ZOC's the armor corps was the only unit that could attack the fighter immediately.

[rkr1958]

Turn 3. October 11, 1939 Axis.

!%$&@^! Weather!!!

Poland is easily finished off but Holland holds due to the weather.

One thing to point out in GS v2.00 is that ground units repaired at 8- or 9-steps don't lose any experience. I need to be careful with units at this strength and only use them on attack if I absolutely have to.

[rkr1958]

Turn 4. October 31, 1939 Axis.

Mud & rain again in Central Europe, Holland holds out again and I did what I said I wasn't going to do and lost another step off the mech corps (knocking it down to 7-steps). What a difference the weather can make. I was planning to execute a Blitzkrieg against Neil assuming I got the expected fair weather turns in October. Now, because of the weather I've decided to execute a Sietzkrieg.

I'm also the axis in a game against Ray and in that game I also just finished the October 31, 1939 turn. However; in that game I got the expected fair weather in October and just conquered Belgium with Holland falling last turn. Back in this game my troops are up to their waists in mud and their vehicles are buried down to their axles. I really wanted to be more aggressive against Neil; especially in the early game in part to counter his strategy of committing significant British forces to France. However; that plan's a bust due to weather. ARRG ...

Also, I need to point out a new feature. I had a 6-step German corps get caught up in the Soviet part of Poland. He was sent to the build queue and got out this turn.

[rkr1958]

Turn 5. November 20, 1939 Axis.

The Hague is finally captured and Holland falls. The Luftwaffe commissioned a third fighter corps this turn.

[Aryaman]

I have one question about the new lower defense of planes against ground attacks, is that also in effect against sea attacks? My concern is about the Mediterranean front, where, for instance, the Malta fighter, sitting in the Malta air base, could be destroyed by the Regia Marina.

[rkr1958]

I have one question about the new lower defense of planes against ground attacks, is that also in effect against sea attacks? My concern is about the Mediterranean front, where, for instance, the Malta fighter, sitting in the Malta air base, could be destroyed by the Regia Marina.

The survivability for air units attacked by destroyers or battleships is NOT halved but is caped at 5.

I couldn't find the post where I had posted an analysis I did on this change so I'll repeat the analysis here. Below are the results of 10 attacks against air and ground units before (v1.07) and after the change (v1.10, which is now v2.00).

The two take aways from this analysis are:

(1) The damage inflicted by shore bombardment against air units is not much (if any) greater with the change. The biggest impact for naval units appear to be the damage that they receive not how much they give. While they inflicted about the same amount of damage from shore bombardment against air units they received significantly less damage in return in v2.00. This is realistic. Air units should inflict their damage against naval units from the air and not from their ground defense.

(2) Ground units are significantly more effective against airbases.

For each of the 10 attacks I give the attack sequence and the number of steps left. Each air unit started with 10-steps. For v1.10g (i.e., v2.00) I'll give two numbers for each attack. The first is the number of steps remaining after the naval attacks and the second is the number left after all attacks.

[zechi]

You got really unlucky with the muddy weather, but this is why I like the weather system in GS so much. The weather affects your tactics and strategical decisions. Especially the opening turns can play very differently, depending on the weather in turn 3-5 and this helps concerning the replayability.

As an early blitz strategy is not possible anymore, what "Grand Strategy" will you try: Early Barbarossa, Sealion, Opening the Med or something new?

[Peter Stauffenberg]

The best players always have contingency plans so they can immediately switch from e. g. Blitzkrieg to Sitzkrieg if the weather is not favorable. This is one reason that it's maybe not always a good idea to rail lots of units to the west in 1939 so you can launch an early invasion. You spend a lot of PP's on overusing the rail network and you might not even be able to use the units as early as you hoped.

It seems to me that everybody wants to attack Belgium while the weather is fair so they can benefit from the efficiency loss that Belgium and France will suffer. So you need to get fair weather on turn 4 and have Holland knocked out as well. That's not an easy task. I think that's good because it means that great players will be able to do better than lesser players.

I also noticed that the play you were used to in GS v1.06 won't work in GS 2.00. E. g. it was a given before to place the French Gamelin leader in Paris. From there he could command almost all French units along the front. Now he has a command radius of only 2. So if you place him in Paris he won't be able to command units at all except the nearby armor. So you might place him near Reims or Lille instead to command some units. But here he wil be vulnerable to German attacks so you might have to fall back earlier with this unit to save the leader.

The introduction of paratroopers and amphs means that you can plan the attack upon France differently. E. g. dropping a para unit behind the French lines might be good if you need this unit to force a retreat to open up a river line. Germany can use amphs to invade England and that makes it much more risky to waste UK garrisons and corps in France. You might even want to send the Canadian land units to England to be able to stop Sealion.

I think that both sides have to rethink how they play because of the changed rules.

[zechi]

I also noticed that the play you were used to in GS v1.06 won't work in GS 2.00. E. g. it was a given before to place the French Gamelin leader in Paris. From there he could command almost all French units along the front. Now he has a command radius of only 2. So if you place him in Paris he won't be able to command units at all except the nearby armor. So you might place him near Reims or Lille instead to command some units. But here he wil be vulnerable to German attacks so you might have to fall back earlier with this unit to save the leader.

I also noticed this in hot seat play and I think this is a really good change. I think the best way is to put Gamelin on the ARM to quickly move him around on the front and the ARM is also the best French unit, which will protect him a little bit. However, he will be much more vulnerable as you said. The French player could buy a second leader. I think there is a relative cheap French General (as Leader prices ares reduced in 2.0) which also has Defense 1. This one could be the optimal choice for the final stand in Paris. The other alternative is to use a second French Leader to cover the whole western front with two leaders.

The same goes for Auchinleck. If the Allied player chooses to send a BEF to France, it will be more difficult to command the BEF from Britain with Auchinleck, because of the reduced commad range.

I think the leader changes in 2.0 will really affect the game in a good way.

PS. If for balancing reasons and to help the French a little bit, the French could get Weygand for free after Gamelin is destroyed (injured). Gamelin was exchanged as Commander in Chief of the French Army in May 1940. This would also be "historical". However, right now I do not think that this is necessary.

[richardsd]

I have to say the weather (in my games) has been a massive factor late in the game.

If the allies get lots of 'good' weather in 'winter' 44/45 they get two or three turns worth of extra attack through this effect which can easily decide the game.

[rkr1958]

Turn 6. December 10, 1939 Axis.

With Holland finished I now begin my build up for Case Yellow. Since the weather has forced me to change my planned Blitzkrieg to a Sietzkrieg I can now take my time. Because of Neil's tenancy to heavily commit UK to the defense of France I've decided that my next air build will be a 4th fighter instead of a 3rd tactical bomber. Also, I will build List to command my air units. List is a 5 quality leader who costs 35 PPs and has a command range of 3. Rundstedt will command the ground forces and advance with them.

[Plaid]

What do you think about leaving Rundsterdt to command air units and purchasing something with attack bonus to place on panzer and lead the assault?
There is variety of new low-cost + stats leaders now, thanks to GS changes. Or maybe Rommel/Guderian, which are very good commanders aswell as with attack bonus. Maybe increased effectiveness will lead to lower casualties and better axis units experience, so this PPs spent on leaders will pay off?

[richardsd]

Anyone know how to 'launch' the Para's you are going to buy?

[rkr1958]

Anyone know how to 'launch' the Para's you are going to buy?

Airborne divisions in addition to moving like regular infantry can also drop into unoccupied hexes. These drop hexes are indicated by parachute symbols and this distinguishes them from the hexes that it can move to via normal movement. Paradrops cost 10 PP’s each and consume 4 oil points. They are subject interception by enemy fighters (so you better either have suppressed those fighters or have fighter escort to the drop hex available), subject to loss from flak form the landing hex and subject to random loss (0 to 3-steps) from the drop. So a drop into an unoccupied city or resource hex would subject the airborne division to loss from flak and the random loss due to an airdrop. Without fighter cover this would add loss from enemy fighter interception and would be a suicide drop for the division.

[richardsd]

no such symbols showing in my game, supply level 5 effectiveness 84, hmm

I wonder if its something about the graphics on my laptop because I can't see the visibility shading for units either

[Peter Stauffenberg]

You have to be in or adjacent to a city, capital or fortress in order to paradrop.

The steps lost from landing in a hex is dependent upon the terrain type. Clear = 0..3, rough = 0..4, forest and swamp = 0..5 and resources (fortress, oilfield, etc.) = 0..6. In addition you have to fight the flak in the hex (only resource hexes).

In addition the number increases by 1 for each enemy unit adjacent to your landing hex. So you can with bad luck have your paratrooper almost wiped out from the drop alone.

This means that you have to have a good reason to land in non-clear hexes.

[afk_nero]

This all sounds excellent - do you still need to be at supply level 5 to do the air drop?