Slitherine

Good evening, ladies and gentlemen!

I have one PBEM going with a guy, who did a 1940 Barbarossa. I, as Allies, have the advantage of having great tech in the Soviet Union. Now, I don't know much about it, but doesn't it seem strange that the USSR has so high tech in 1940? I guess it's done like that to make it simple for the developers, but if it's not too hard to change, maybe it could be on the to do list in GS2?

I played a little hotseat, and I had my army + 1 new mech and the Luftwaffe standing ready to attack on the Soviet border by turn 10. I had then conquered both the Netherlands and Denmark. Most of my garrisons were set up as defense on the Siegfried line and in the Netherlands, and I had 10 labs by that time.
I did not play the Allies part of the hotseat "stupid" or something. I did what I'd normally do as Allies, to the best of my abilities.
I realize it may not be the wisest decision to skip France, but it shouldn't be ruled out. After all, my current PBEM opponent surprised me very much with his early Barbarossa. (GS1.07) By the way, I didn't turn on oil consumption, but I know I used very little oil.
Screenshot: http://bildr.no/view/844187

Just a thought.
Best regards, kvadra.

A 1940 Barborossa would be fun to try out, though I think with the way CEAW-GS is currently setup, I think its likely to be a fairly suicidal option for the Axis, though it would be interesting to see how playing this would turn out.

Its certainly a viable option in some other WWII strategic games I've played in the past (e.g. Totaler Krieg, World in Flames etc.)

Well, I can at least tell you what is happening in my current pbem:
I am giving my opponent a serious beating in the Med/Italy theatre where he has begun putting German units now, but he is severely straining my russian defense lines. Though, I did manage to make a quick raid at his spearhead units, killing several MECHs and an ARM. Fortunately, winter is close and I will soon be able to produce more troops. As of now, I make just enough PP to repair my existing units. The convoy shipments to the USSR are vital and I escort every single one of them with great care.
The fact that France is still active is a huge advantage. Belgium acts as the perfect buffer zone between me and the Wehrmacht. I am considering opening a third front there in not long. I have several MECHs and ARMs stationed adjacent to the border at the moment. Most French corps is sent to the south to try to take Torino to make a better defense line there.
Because my opponent need to make huge commitments to produce ground units, he has not yet expanded the Luftwaffe. Though, the Axis minors will join soon, and he will get 2 extra FTRs and some much needed oil.
I am maxing out all labs putting particular focus on quality, and my manpower is all good. As soon as possible, I will start to bomb his most important PP sites in western Germany, reducing his production with 12 PP/turn. Hopefully, he will station at least one FTR in Ruhr, giving me a chance to deplete his oil reserves faster.
I hope to launch a big offensive from France in the spring of 1943. Germany should fall in late '43 or early '44. Should the USSR fall, which I doubt, I will invest heavily in British airpower and build strong defensive positions in France and Italy.
The date is September 1940. The essence of my plan is to exhaust him wherever possible.

Now, it's been a while since I laid out my plans here. The game is still going strong. It's January 28th 1942, and I've built up a substantial force of British and French INFs, MECHs and ARMs in northern France.
In the USSR, I have built up a blitz group in the middle of Russia. It's going to cut the occupation zone in half, then go either south or north, depending on how my opponent moves his troops. Currently, he is trying to siege Moscow.
I'm trying hard to finish off Finland. USSR: 6 INF + 2 GAR, Axis: 5 G INF + 1 F INF + 2 F GAR. All of my air force is concentrated here.
In Italy, French forces in the west and British forces in the south are going to squeeze out the last German stance in Genoa, Milano and Venice.

My plan is to launch all three offensives simultaneously, as soon as the weather becomes nice in the USSR. I hope to overwhelm the Germans with my blitzkrieg. He has more than enough oil, so I don't try to cut off his oil supplies. Though, I do try to make it seem like I want to, by bombing the Ploesti oil field and spreading rumors about how I will send Eisenhower to the Middle East to wipe his units off Caucasian soil etc.

Situation/plans:
Northern France: I am going to blow the Belgian defenses off the surface of the Earth in 1 turn, then move on to the Dutch cities. My goal is to liberate Ruhr, Essen and Scholven. There are only German GARs there at the moment. German production: –16 PP/turn.
The British: 4 MECH, 1 ARM, 5 FTR, 1 TAC, Auchinleck HQ.
The French: 6 MECH, 2 ARM, Giraud HQ.
The Americans: 5 TAC, 1 FTR, 1 STR.

Northwestern/Central-Northern Italy: I am going to take Genoa (German GAR) first. Then I will move the British up to the river, where high quality German units are waiting. The goal is to liberate all of Italy. German production: –4 PP/turn.
The British: 6 INF, 1 MECH, Montgomery HQ.
The French: 4 INF, 5 GAR, Giraud HQ.

Finland: There are German INFs in the western cities. I will leave them alone, and go all in against Helsinki. Then, I will repair my units and ultimately destroy the German INFs. German production: – 5/6 PP/turn.
The Soviets: 6 INF, 2 GAR, 3 FTR, 2 TAC, 1 STR.
The Germans: 5 INF, 2 FTR, 2 TAC.
The Finnish: 1 INF, 2 GAR, 1 FTR.

Central Russia: I will push to the west, and then go either north or south. I'm not going to go particularly far to the west. Objective: To destroy as many German units as possible, exhausting his manpower and production.
The Soviets: 7 MECH, 2 ARM, 2 GAR.
The Germans: Possibly a few MECHs and 2-3 ARMs.
The Hungarians: 1 FTR.

Moscow area: I will defend Moscow whatever cost. Goal: To tie up a few Axis INFs.
The Soviets: 9 INF, 2 GAR.
The Germans: Possibly 4-5 INF.
The Hungarians: Possibly 1-2 INF, 1 MECH.
The Romanians: Possibly 1-3 INF.
The Bulgarians: Possibly 1-2 INF.

Other: I'm going to try to land a British GAR in Copenhagen, if the hex is vacant. In the Baku area, 1 British INF, 3 British GARs and all the Middle East minor GARs are protecting the oil fields, because the Soviets didn't have enough PP/units when the Germans pushed towards the Caucasus. 1 French GAR has landed in Albania, from where 1 British STR is bombing Ploesti. The Soviet cities in the northwest are all garrisoned by INFs.

It seems my opponent has given little or no attention to submarine warfare and Air research. I haven't seen a German sub for 10+ turns now, and the Luftwaffe has poor tech.

My tech is as follows:
The British: 3 INF, 1 ARM, 3 AIR, 2 NAV, 3 GEN. 120% war effort.
The French: 3 INF, 3 ARM, 0 AIR, 0 NAV, 3 GEN. 105% war effort.
The Americans: 2 INF, 3 ARM, 3 AIR, 1 NAV, 2 GEN. 110% war effort.
The Soviets: 3 INF, 3 ARM, 2 AIR, 0 NAV, 3 GEN. 110% war effort.

I still think Germany will fall in late '43 or early '44.

Screenshot taken april 18. 42:

Omg I got no chance with planning like that lol



But yeah I have invested little to none in airforce and navy.

Italy was a debacle and I lost too early and abandoned Libya (which probably not such a good idea to reinforce Sciliy).

One good advantage I found so far was oil as I got Causacus in 1941 (2nd year of campaigning in east).

Apart from this and alot of pressure on Russia, western allies are now very strong. Finland has also had alot of pressure on it and I have only so far just held on to it.

Would like to try this 1940 barbarossa again with some painful lessons learnt against a good player!

Production is also abit low without France although its still solid enough thus far although I am probably getting outproduced 2 to 1 at this stage of game?

Another thing which I found extremely detrimental and is really telling now was/is lack of manpower - another year consolidating with small gains (yugo, greece etc) would sort this out I suppose.

The game is over, as Germany surrenders on July 7. 1942.

My opponent surrendered without Hamburg or Berlin being conquered, but I'd have taken both in one more turn (54).

The Wehrmacht did not manage to siege Moscow, as it didn't have enough time. I think Moscow would eventually fall, had I not launched the attack from France at the time I did.
The coalition army was completely superior to the scattered German defenses.

The Soviet manpower had long been in the 74%-77% range, so the number of Soviet units were limited. It was very important to me not to produce low quality units. I did not manage to take Finland, but it wouldn't hold much longer anyway. In the east of Russia, my blitz group did much harm to the German armoured and mechanized units, with much help from Zhukov and Konev.

The Allied manpower never really saw the yellow numbers, and tech was very high due to limited Axis intervention in the west and south.



I would like to thank my opponent, nicodemus22, again for a splendid game!

Very interesting! I'd be interested to know, do you think under some circumstances a 1940 might be still be a viable option for the Axis or is it really not worth going there?

@oxford_guy: The only reason I was able to resist his early Barbarossa was because the Soviets had unrealistically high tech. It was actually higher than the Germans' for quite some time.
There would have to be made some adjustments to the game to make a 1940 Barbarossa a viable option, in my opinion.

kvadra wrote:@oxford_guy: The only reason I was able to resist his early Barbarossa was because the Soviets had unrealistically high tech. It was actually higher than the Germans' for quite some time.
There would have to be made some adjustments to the game to make a 1940 Barbarossa a viable option, in my opinion.

Having tried a 1940 Barbarossa strategy myself, I have to agree that the unrealistically high Soviet tech level makes it nonviable. In 1940 the Red Army was in terrible shape, but in the game they're real tigers, with better troops in many respects than the Germans. I hope that GS 2 tones down the Russians and we can see what might have been. I like GS a lot, but the Russians are much too high quality both for realism and for playability.

a) Soviet army really have significant better weaponry then germans in late 30s. Soviet specialists actually helped Germany to make wehrmacht from scratch. When soviet engineers visited german tank plants to exchange experience they asked their german comrades to take away that rubbish and show them real modern tanks (its quote about various early pz II - III, I guess)
b) But the game concept is not about this. Game concept with soviet tech is to make soviets someway weaker then germans in 1941. But since soviets have low war effort in 1939-1940 they given some techs. If we remove starting tech and make high soviet war effort (so they can build labs as normal) they will make horde of troops by 1941, not only labs. If we remove starting tech without increasing war effort, USSR will be second Italy with almost totally useless troops until 43-44, which is even worse, then we have now, I guess you agree here.

According to your screen shots, it looks as though the Soviets took the brunt of the war effort of the Germans. While I understand your opponent went all for nothing in the East, he left his western front completely neglected until it was too late. It's safe to say that not eliminating France proved to be his undoing.

Glad to see an Anglo-French-American victory excluding those communists...

JimC wrote:

kvadra wrote:@oxford_guy: The only reason I was able to resist his early Barbarossa was because the Soviets had unrealistically high tech. It was actually higher than the Germans' for quite some time.
There would have to be made some adjustments to the game to make a 1940 Barbarossa a viable option, in my opinion.

Having tried a 1940 Barbarossa strategy myself, I have to agree that the unrealistically high Soviet tech level makes it nonviable. In 1940 the Red Army was in terrible shape, but in the game they're real tigers, with better troops in many respects than the Germans. I hope that GS 2 tones down the Russians and we can see what might have been. I like GS a lot, but the Russians are much too high quality both for realism and for playability.

I agree. In 1940, the Soviet military still had not recovered from Stalin's purges (which previously led to their humiliating performance in the Winter War against Finland) and was in worse shape compared to 1941. A 1940 Barbarossa probably would have had a better chance of knocking the Soviet Union out of the war.