1939 Storm over Europe - AAR

[Ivanov]

I totally agree with EV, that the influence of air power should be limited or represented in a bit different way. It should be more indirect, affecting supply values, limit the movement or unit readiness. Aviation being able to obliterate completely in one turn a tank army or any other big unit, just don't seem to be right. It's worth mentioning here a Soviet study from 1942 regarding efficiciency of the attack aircraft in destroying ground targets. During those tests, three highly experienced Ilyushin Il-2 pilots, were attempting to hit captured German tanks and assault guns. Obviously during those tests the anti aircraft fire was absent, the targets were static and unmasked in the open field. Under the real combat conditions it would be much more difficult to spot and hit targets and the accuracy would be lower. Out of 300 cannon and 1290 machine gun projectiles fired, only 9 hits were scored. Even when the tank was hit, in most of the cases, it didn't mean that the armour was penetrated or any kind of serious damage was done. A theoretical study indicated that Il-2 would need to fly 4-5 missions in order to destroy one medium PzKpw III or IV tank and 12 missions in order to destroy a Stug III assault gun. In another test, also performed under perfect, "clean" conditions, the bombing accuracy was 4.3%. In another words, in order to achieve 50% probability of hitting a targed, at least 12 combat missions were needed. The times when a single missile, fired from an aircraft or an attack helicopter, could destroy a tank or any other target, were at least 30 years ahead.

Appart from the tactical aspects of the combat, I think that the economics has decided the outcome of the game. Al few times mentioned that he was getting around 1000 MMPs per turn. I remember playing some scenarios of Patton Drives East, with US having level 5 of industrial tech and getting that amount of MMPs... But fully mobilized US is not the same as Germany, even if it is exploiting resources of the whole conquered Europe and parts of Soviet Union... I think that it would actualy take years, until German war machine could fully benefit from the resources of let's say Soviet Union. Just think of the logistic. In my opinion the resources value should grow slower and their efficiency should depend for example on the infrastructure tech level achieved.

[lhughes41]

Excellent analysis and fascinating Soviet study. I think your last point about infrastructure gating resouces usage is spot on. The recent book "Wages of Destruction" gives much evidence on how the Germans couldn't use all the resources they captured. In theory they captured an economy bigger than the u.s.a but came up far far short of realizing that in practice. Wikipedia has a summary of the book

[Fintilgin]

Yeah, I agree. I think in the designer notes for the boardgame Totaler Krieg, Alan Emrich said something I thought had a lot of truth to it. Namely, that too many WW2 games represent Germany as the Borg. The more they capture the more they can build. Which is pretty unrealistic.

Personally, I'd put a pretty harsh penalty on utilizing captured resources. Like you only get 10% of the MPPs or something. Actually, at the scale these games are built at, I'd probably just go ahead and abstract it down to 0%. Any benefit is expended in occupying the territory.

Maybe you could just say you get 0% from captured cities, but 100% from captured resources/oil?

The primary benefit to the Axis of capturing large areas of the enemy should be denying the production to them. Germany MMPs shouldn't really go up much over the course of the game.

[John DiFool the 2nd]

I've played 'til Sept. '42 in my current game against the AI-one thing which was immediately noticeable soon after I invaded Russia was that, yes, your units can move a fair distance, and yes you get lots of MPPs as Germany (haven't nearly come close to buying everything out yet tho), but your time is much more limited to make substantial gains on anything approximating the historical timeline. There are like 3x as many towns, each of which requires a fairly substantial force to take. As a result I am way behind the German historical advance, only just now knocking on the door of Moscow and Leningrad, with Stalingrad a fair distance away still. I guess you can bypass some minor towns, leaving a minor unit behind to guard it, but many you need to maintain your supply push as they are crucial rail junctions. I think the time scale needs to be tweaked upwards significantly, giving you more turns (at reduced unit movement).

[aesopo]

USSR was too underpowered after Germany's violating the Molotov accord- that would have led to very substantial mobilization and put the ussr on a war footing. The scenario needs rebalancing.

[Ivanov]

. The recent book "Wages of Destruction" gives much evidence on how the Germans couldn't use all the resources they captured. In theory they captured an economy bigger than the u.s.a but came up far far short of realizing that in practice.

The book looks really promising:) Thanks for mentioning it. Another thing that could help to keep the economic balance right is the relocation of Soviet industry to the Uralus. After some time the new industry should be able to outproduce not only the lost Ukrainian mines, but the whole MMPs lost in the Westren Soviet Union. It would be logical due to the fact that the relocated factories were 100% war effort oriented and they were more efficient than the pre war industry due to the simplification of the production process.

[Hubert Cater]

Aesopo, not to worry as this AAR was started with a campaign approximately 5-6 weeks before the official release. Many fixes were incorporated into the official release as well as a few more tweaks planned for the upcoming follow up.

[ev]

Great game and great AAR! Thank you guys!

[lhughes41]

Yes thanks!

[harry33]

It would be nice if one of you would uploade a picture of the complete (unveiled, last turn) map.

[dizpatcher]

Absolutely facinated by the AAR for Storm 1939.

While I was able to track most of the action, I heard a lot about rail hubs and supply. I pretty much understand supply....so....

How do you know if a city (whatever) is a rail hub. Is it just that a rail line is passing thru it or are there a set number of rails - say 4 that go into the city.

Told you I was new.

Thanx in advance. :confused:

Dizpatcher

911. What is your emergency?

[Hyazinth von Strachwitz]

Dear Dizpatcher,

there is no clear definition of a rail hub. Moscow is one, Berlin is one... and a lot of major cities as well. But there is nothing special you need to know.. owning hubs makes it easier to operate troops and receive supplies, that´s all.

Rgds

[Catacol Highlander]

It would be nice if one of you would uploade a picture of the complete (unveiled, last turn) map.

I have just fired up the last turn I have again to give you this, but how do I get a "complete" map? Marc surrendered voluntarily rather than the computer telling us who had won or lost, and I dont see a function to surrender. Thoughts anyone?

[Catacol Highlander]

Absolutely facinated by the AAR for Storm 1939.

While I was able to track most of the action, I heard a lot about rail hubs and supply. I pretty much understand supply....so....

How do you know if a city (whatever) is a rail hub. Is it just that a rail line is passing thru it or are there a set number of rails - say 4 that go into the city.

Told you I was new.

Thanx in advance. :confused:

Dizpatcher

911. What is your emergency?

Hyazinth is right - it was a term I may have used simply to identify very key towns with vital links. Kiev, Bryansk, Odessa, Stalino - these are 4 examples of very key "rail hubs" that I had for getting supply routes secured, both for troop movements and resource collection. You need routes to be on supply 5 otherwise that movement is interrupted. Russian partisans can strike on most towns if they are not garrisoned to destroy the supply level, and if one or two of these key towns are hit it can totally destroy axis strategy.

One thing I will be looking at when I play as allies is whether it is possible as the soviet player to use heavy bombers to hit some of the these key towns at the same time as launching ground offensives. If you stare at the map for a few minutes it is easy to see where the key towns are, and a bomber strike or two could well end up being enough to stop the flow of troops into a zone of the battle. Naval units can also be used - Marc did this effectively in 1942 in Spain and stopped my moving units into Spain quickly.

[Catacol Highlander]

OK - requests for final maps coming in. Here is my bst effort to debrief on that.

This shows my final war map. Notice my 4 main areas of operations in England, Leningrad, Moscow and Stalingrad. Notice how I had stripped units away from the Caucasus where I could not sustain a 5th front at this point, and had much of Spain undefended. On this turn Marc landed in Spain - my reaction actually was to operationally move armour and tac air down to Spain as he had not taken out my supply route this time as he had done in 1942 - not sure why not - and had he not surrendered that US Army would have been wiped out in 1 or 2 turns.

All major ports in France, Norway and Italy were also garrisoned as you can see - I didnt really mind Marc landing in Spain but didnt want landings anywhere else.

Notice also the number of units scattered in the East countering partisans...

[Catacol Highlander]

On my previous post you may also have noticed quite a large concentration of Italian icons. This is what they were:

I was hoping that my attack on Britain would drag Marc's naval forces away from the Med - in fact I knew at the point of surrender that at least 3 carriers were providing intercept air cover over England, and so was close to deciding that the time was right to unleash this Italian Navy.

Note that I had naval tech 2 for the Italians, but to put a battleship to level 2 cost 240mpps, almost my total mpp acquisition in 2 turns, so it was really hard to upgrade this navy. This was particularly the case when one considers the Italian commitment near Leningrad...

[Catacol Highlander]

... and here was the Leningrad front. Note that actually my offensive power here was pretty meagre, but Marc had totally pulled all his armour away to the SE, and so Leningrad was left to slowly wither under the pressure of the stuff I was able to gather here.

I suspect that the city would have fallen in 2 to 3 turns - when I took this turn from here (remember that these shots come from the start of the final turn that I took in the actual game...) I reduced that city corps to 3 but could not take it out fully.

[Catacol Highlander]

Finishing with the Italian theme here was my considerable efforts to make sure that Rome was not successfully attacked - my Italian units were so important in anti partisan and action in Leningrad, plus potential naval ops coming up in the Med, that I really did not want them taken out.

[Catacol Highlander]

Here is the full situation around England, a front I had significantly beefed up as I realised that Marc was struggling to push me out of the SE corner:

Note the massive air power, but also the build up of the Kriegsmarine under the air umbrella. I also had 3 or 3 U boats slightly off this map finishing refitting and reinforcement in German Docks.

You'll also note that I was beginning to run short of ground units that I could ferry across to help the beleagured HQ and paras, but the job of wearing down the RAF and RN was being done, and actually had the game gone on I suspect that my hold on the SE would have stayed in place until Winter, such was the destruction created by my air power.

[Catacol Highlander]

Finally - my 2 major battlefronts around Stalingrad (Offensive) and Moscow (Defensive). I dont know exactly how much Marc had left - I was a bit stretched myself by the end of August and in need of some unit rebuilding, but with an mpp total of at least 1050 every turn I had the luxury of being able to maintain my combat strength fairly easily.

[dizpatcher]

Thanx for the info on the rail hubs.

Gotta tell you that I loved the match between the both of you. Well done and well documented. It's a real joy to watch some pros at work.

Thanx again for the help.

[ev]

A question for Catacol:

Noticed some of the tanks were not brought to max tech level. Was this due to lack of time/mpps or is there some strategy behind this?

[harry33]

Thanks for the pics.

Great AAC, thx!

[lettowvorbeck]

There are some colossal empty areas (no continuous lines at all on the eastern front, just concentrated mobs of units). Too few units given the map scale??

[John DiFool the 2nd]

Yeah, I'd dump all army-sized units and go with all-corps.