Status Check on game

Sorry to play catch up here ... Happy Holidays and all to everyone.

To answer Dave's question, I have vast gaming experience, including winning an ASL World Championship ... lol. Tons of research into real unit tactics and strategic actions. Favorite book is Maneuver Warfare by William Lind, and is applicable to both tactics and strategic operations. I'd have to say my experience with TitE is average. I spend over a year being indoctrinated by Christian (a play tester). He can vouch for me, as I routinely broke the game for him (although we played version 1.0). Most recently, took Leningrad and Stalingrad at the end of the summer in '41. So he can vouch for my style of play.

My philosophy in this match was one of maneuver and hammer blows. For the Axis in this game, I prefer to keep a high tempo of attack at all times, because it is clear the reinforcement ability of the Soviets can not be matched this early. And this is where the Axis will win or lose the vast majority of games.

So given the Axis HQ cool-down disability, my objective was to overcome that critical bottleneck. I knew Graham would exploit that high PP fact, and give ground to preserve ... because that was what I would do. Turn 1 went well .... but due to Enduring Deprivations, it became impossible to jump any HQs forward turn 1. Glad to see this card is getting nixed from a balance perspective. This was then compounded with the Mech Conversion to 4-5-4s. This was the real killer. Three overrun-able Corps were replaced with 4-5-4 units. So he was able to defend 9 more hexes along his front instead of just 3. Any gaps or holes that I could use to exploit were simply not there. Making large pockets was basically going through 8-4s with reserves behind them. And with the flood of Militia Mobilized, seeing GPW twice, and the normal 10PP per turn, the front solidified to fast.

I'm glad to see this "rule" removed as well. However, replacing it with an IDM and a mystery meat may still be to much (along with still getting the 0.5 EP). I thought the object was to make the conversion process weaker. Or at least it began as limiting the IDM Trench Warfare that I like using as the Soviet. Now I can envision a myriad of ways to exploit this new IDM (although not to the free for all extent I used previously).

Let me end here ... because I still have Christmas festivities to attend to. However, someone asked if I agree with their play style. Yes, all those are in my bag of tricks also, but I don't stop there. My ultimate goal is to keep my opponent off-balance and dictate the battle.

Brian

I'm a good player now, but your moves are better than what I was doing early on. I like your prevention of breakthroughs with a second line, and your shoring up by Pskov to deny Reg Move penetration. [Edited: Front-Line HQ's can set up within six hexes from the border/starting line of ETO Scenarios. Front-Line units may stack with them.] When playing with log files, the early Russians benefit more from well-considered moves than the Germans. If the game is balanced for live or simply faster play, it will favor the Russians in slower play, IMO. For one reason or another, I think the Russians have had a clear edge in most of the evolving versions of Barbarossa, though some good players disagree with me--but then I play slowly. As Germans, I feel great urgency about moving an HQ forward ASAP to a good spot. On July 1, I would have moved HQC to Rovny; or I would have established a RLOC to Minsk by moving units into hexes 7536, 7635, 8135, 8235 (Jekabpils), 8338 and Minsk, and then placed HQC in Minsk--the 41 Pz (two are on the map, but I mean the 10-6 in 8038) would have broken down to help. Minsk is obviously central and good, though Sarny eventually allows an attack on Kiev with a Shift or two. The Russians should not hang around much when an HQ is ready for multiple Shifts for the first summer. For this reason, I always draw Scorched Earth, and wait until a key Timer is down to two, or else the HQ I want to delay might move to a better spot, having a 3-Countdown either way.

End of Soviet July II turn. Counterattacks resulted in two Soviet steps lost: 1 Inf step (flipped 8-4) and 1 Mech Corp.

End of German July II turn.

7 step losses inflicted (2x 8-4s, 4-4 Gds corp, 1 Abn Div)

On the Soviet July I turn, I drew and played both Great Patriotic War (again, I understand this is changing so cards have a cooldown) and Militia Mobilized. This added 16 more steps to the board in addition to the regular builds. No counterattacks this turn, so no Soviet steps were lost on their turn.

A couple of things to note on my defense. I added some strength near Pskov near Leningrad as that was an area I didn't want to give ground. I also made a rules interpretation error; I though the 4-4 guards was a 2 step unit and not overrun-able, so he's left alone (I would have stacked him with another unit otherwise).

Here's the end of the German July I turn. I'm estimating step losses from the Morale board as I'm not replaying the whole turn, so step losses are rough counts, but should be within 1-2 steps.

Step losses = 11 (2x 8-4, 1x 4-5-4, 3x Inf Corps, 2x Mech Corps).

I may have missed a rule, but in the setup file I have the HQ as not listed as one that can setup many hexes behind the front, so I thought it could only be in a city 3 hexes from the front.

Rovno is too close to the front for my comfort and easily surrounded so I choose not to defend it. Early on I value the defensive steps too highly. Every step surrounded is another step that you can't use to solidify your defense.

We've retro-actively moved our game to Mech conversion = ?-4 and 0.5 EP (no IDM, we think that's too much; the Soviets don't need help). I've only converted those 3 so far, so I removed 3 steps from July III builds. Those three steps early do make a difference so it doesn't totally make up for it.

I have lots of wargame experience, but have limited TITE experience (just a 3 turn tune-up and this game). I've only recently internalized the importance of the cities in my defensive considerations and it shows in the early turns of this game.

Graham, I like your Set-Up, except for the HQ on the border. If you put it in Minsk, you can usually prevent it's elimination. Good opening by the Germans. Your June 4 move is good, though I would have held onto Rovno/8249 with a Garrison and a Corps. I agree with your Soviet strategy, which you expressed with eloquence, with the addition of an effort to deny key Cities to HQ's like Grebnova, Polotsk, Vitebsk, Minsk, Sarny, etc. I like your logic that you want the opposite of what the Germans want. If only your Rifle Corps in Latvia were one hex south, you could deny a July 1 German HQ Relocation to several key spots, though it would take clever German play to do it. The Early-Mech Conversion experiment that yielded 4-5-4's was really pro-Soviet. We are now going with .5 EP (if an OLOC is present right after) and an IDM where the Conversion occurs. Clearly, you either have TITE experience or a lot of wargame experience.

No counterattacks on the Soviet June 4 turn, so no step losses on the Soviet turn. Great Patriotic War was played to get the extra 4 steps on the board and 3 Mech Corps were demobilized for another +3 steps (we were still using the 4-5-4 replacement rule). Enduring Deprivations was played on the ensuing German turn to prevent isolation rolls, ensure no special moves for German infantry, to block rail lines, and to hamper real area cleanup.

Here was the Soviet defense:

Position after the German attacks; he used both the Blitzkrieg and German Generals cards. Aggressive use of overruns (like 5 of them) eliminated even more steps than I expected. The attack was well executed, eliminating 27 steps.

Soviet losses:

2x 8-4's

2x 4-5-4's (2 steps, corp put on the board)

7x Inf corps

9x Mech corps

1x Cav div

Here was opening setup. My Soviet strategy was to try and preserve as many of the "within X hexes" frontier army forces as possible while playing cards early that would flood the board with steps. I completely wrote-off the frontier army and just used it as a speed bump; the key was to save whatever units I could from the frontier army allocations. I planned to fall back and trade space for unit preservation. My operating hypothesis is that the strength and resiliency of the Soviet defense is dependent on the volume of steps on the board. And that Soviet defense reaches a tipping point that snowballs into a virtuous cycle. Get steps on the board -> defense is harder to crack -> subsequent German attacks result in fewer step losses -> resulting in further increasing of steps on the board -> repeat and snowball to victory. While the reverse virtuous cycle applies to the Germans: kill more steps = less steps on the board for defense = more holes in the Soviet lines = easier to kill steps. Territory control was a secondary concern, but I would stiffen my defense in certain sectors to channel the Germans into territory that I was okay with giving up. Anyways, that was the theory behind my strategy.

My opening hand was Great Patriotic War and Enduring Deprivations.

Thank you for all of the great comments and perspectives. I'm compiling end turn positions and step losses for each turn that I'll post here. I'm doing it quickly so might miscount a step or two, but it should be pretty close.

Doc, There is the question of how much your Soviet play is different and/or superior to mine, which some of my log files might indicate. There is the question also of German play and Jay's Germans. I wrote in some detail on this thread about things I do as Germans. Is any of it new to you, or do you disagree? I would welcome contrary views. In any case, it is not easy to say exactly what we do as players.

Unless you were playing live and not logging the game, those files should do. :-)

Doc, I had similar thoughts when Jay and I kept seeing Soviet dominance in TITE, with what turned out to be our different styles of play. I thought, "I would really like to see the playtests where the Germans did so much better--if only there were log files!" I will talk to Jay about this within a week, and re log files for you to examine.

I tried to post here but, maybe only pictures can be posted. I will use email.

Jay and David, I'd like to see your log files for these massive Soviet step losses through the summer. I just can't see how the Axis can maintain such pressure given the game mechanics.

The CRT is not forgiving to the Axis until it gets to 5:1, so lower odds attacks are going to cause sever losses for the Axis, too.

I'd like to do a statistical analysis of your turns, and also give me a chance to see if my opponent and I have found a better Soviet style of play.

Thanks!

Doc

This might be dull to read, but: I have been counting all steps lost by Isolation and combat, and counting the RP's it would cost to replace them. Cav count as only a .5 step. Mech have been valued at only one, ignoring their EP value during Conversion, following Alan's lead. Literally, 72 or 74 Soviet steps were lost thru July 2, if Cav and Garrisons had not been halved in my accounting. This accounting is a lot of work, to say the least, since it is different from how we keep track of Morale losses. But in our game, I have received ten PP from Refugees, a rule which not many are employing yet. In my very lucky game against Jeff, and in part because he counterattacks a lot, his Soviets lost 14.3 steps per turn through the Su 0f '41 by Alan's account, throughout the Summer of '41.

To Doc and anyone else with an interest:

I have logfiles of the moves but not the combats but looking at the Morale Mat for the three turns in question, I got to 67 steps. Flipped units still on the map do not show up. There were eight

4-5-4s which might have inflated the steps on the morale mat. I was not counting the steps.

Isolated losses would make it to the mat and Dave's total might have included losses from the start of July 3. Maybe we are just looking at a rounding up statement.

I did start with hot dice and I had a nice attack with Tanks coming from the North and Tanks coming from the south to have a nice pocket of the defenders in the Minsk area. Retreating through EZOCs kill a step per hex but, if the units have no retreat, they all die.

<<He averaged over ten steps killed per turn, and we both have large armies in Nov. So maybe 12 or 13 steps per turn is needed for a German edge. We are using even newer rules in some cases than ETO, so we'll see.>>

I don’t see this. How to you kill 10 steps per turn Through August? I would need to make upwards of 8-15 attacks per turn at 3:1 odds or better. (Assumes you get some DRs in there.). You don’t have enough LW (nor escorts) to support such a tempo.

Doc