Jump to content
Sign in to follow this  
Bill101

1939 Storm over Europe - AAR

Recommended Posts

Handling tech advances.

HOI has an interesting and I think realistic model on this front. They break tech advances into both Research Breakthroughs (ah I know how to do jet engines) and Production Breakthroughs.. ah I know how to produce reliable units fro the field. Historically man research breakthroughs were stalled by lack of production breakthroughs.

Requiring two kinds of breakthrough per an advance (or allow very expensive prototype units till breakthrough) means that statistically the chance of getting "unfair" breakthroughs decreases because you bascially have to succeed twice in a row.

This would tend to flatten advances rather then have odd "runs of luck"...

The other way to do it might be to have the breakthrough simply have a "delay" during which you have acheived breakthrough "3" but cannot produce for a year. This time would allow opponents to have improved chances of getting the research too while not giving you an edge quite so quickly...

There is still a third course of action. You can place an mpp penalty for producing or upgrading units to the maximum tech level achieved. Say for example you have tank level 3. And, lets say it would cost 5% more to upgrade a tech level. So upgrading from 0 to 1 would cost 5%. Again, add another 5% when you upgrade from 1 to 2. But, if you upgrade to your max level researched it would cost yet another 5% for the regular tech increase, plus say another 20% penalty for pushing to the limit of your achieved tech level.

If a few turns down the road you reach tech level 4, then the production cost of level 3 units would drop since you no longer have to pay the 20% penalty for level 3 units. But, of course, you would have to pay the penalty for level four units.

This third option discourages players to push tech production to the very limit (in a rather realistic manner). This in turn allows other players to catch up through "inteligence". But still allows a player to produce top tech units at a premium cost). And we can do all this without having to add new technologies, etc.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
... You may wonder why I advanced that fighter forward - in this incarnation of SC the fighter units have the recon ability and not the bombers anymore as is the case in SCGC. I wanted to take a bit of a look at the surrounding territory so sent it forward.

I have WaW but not SCGC. Could you please explain what is this recon abiliy?

A nice empty caucasus and I can now get that very experienced HQ and my last panzer uit back...

Yes, it is very empty. Aren't you worried about partisans?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

All air units can now fly recon missions to spot for enemy units in 1939 Storm over Europe, though in WWI games it is only Recon Bombers and Seaplane Carriers that can do this.

This gives an extra reason for maintaining air superiority and using your air force to try to discover where the enemy's reserves, or weak spots are.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I have WaW but not SCGC. Could you please explain what is this recon abiliy?

Yes, it is very empty. Aren't you worried about partisans?

1. Basically fighter units now have a longer ground spotting ability than bombers or tac air. At base tech level fighters can "see" 4 hexes, whereas bombers/tac air can only see 2. In GC it is the bombers that have a long ground spotting ability, and fighters are at 2.

2. There are no partisan hexes south of Rostov at all, so none of these rail links are threatened unless Marc attacks.

As Bill says you can ask any air unit to "attack" a hex in enemy terrirory that you have no intelligence on, and it will fly a recon mission giving you intelligence on the hex you target but also a radius around that hex. Not sure how big a radius to be honest - maybe 2 hexes? Something like that. However I have found that this often leads to air casualties as the recon is almost always intercepted and it seems to my eyes to experience more casualties than when flying a combat mission (that is probably nothing more than an illusionary interpretation on my part, but that's the way it feels to me...) so I actually prefer to just use the natural ground spotting range of planes (bombers in GC and now fighters in this version) to allow me to scan the battlefield without taking any casualties from intercept.

Out of interest I dont know the reason why fighters have taken over from bombers in having the recon "eyes." I quite like bombers having that ability in GC as it adds value to them: now that fighters fulfil that role it certainly makes them even more valuable, especially if you have long range tech. I'm sure the SC team have their reasons...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
from intercept.

Out of interest I dont know the reason why fighters have taken over from bombers in having the recon "eyes." I quite like bombers having that ability in GC as it adds value to them: now that fighters fulfil that role it certainly makes them even more valuable, especially if you have long range tech. I'm sure the SC team have their reasons...

It would make more sense from the historical point of view leave the bombers with the long recon ability, but it would be less practical for the game purposes, as there tend to be very few ( or none ) bomber units, especially on the Axis side. Usually only the Western Allies are equiped with few heavy bomber units, so giving the recon skill to the fighters guarantees the recon capability to all sides of the conflict.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Not much to report this turn. Defensive stance in the East. US is driving across Africa. Algeria will fall next turn. It's now the middle of September.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

OK - this was the turn that Moscow fell because the weather stayed good. Deployment for this massive attack was as follows:

Startofmascowassault.jpg

The only problem I had really was that I had positioned my armour just a little too far back: playing around with my units before starting the action showed that movement distances for the panzers only brought them up to the edge of Moscow, and there werent going to be too many action points beyond. I had to plan the breakthrough, make sure the town was taken and try to do some kind of damage beyond.

For those interested this is how I did it:

1. Took away the entrenchment of the west most Russian units using mainly artillery plus 1 corps.

2. Moved my rearmost, and as it happens, strongest panzer unit forward to smash the first corps and a second panzer unit to smash the other. From memory had to then use a couple of armies to finish the job off on those forward entrenched units as the panzers didnt quite do enough.

3. Having opened a hole I used a couple of Stuka attacks on Moscow to soften it up plus one on the engineers adjacent. Then moved more panzers forward to exploit the hole and smash those 2 demoralised units.

4. Seized Moscow with SF (what I think of as Pz Grendier) Division and spotted air and Zhukov behind.

5. With some Stuka runs still up my sleeve decided to leave the air and take out Zhukov first. Did so and had one Stuka run left on the final air unit which unfortunately for me didnt quite do enough to kill it.

6. Then further south seized Tula pivoting my attack a little around Moscow and seeking to put myself in a strong position for next turn on the SE edge of Moscow should the weather hold. I suspect it wont.

7. Further north popped a garrison, seized Kalenin and moved my Hungarian HQ forward to aid with supply.

That was about it and the forward picture ended thus:

Moscowfalls.jpg

Apologies for not breaking this down further with arrows on my pics, but hopefully you can see enough. For any newcomers out there this really was a classic combined arms assault where every arm did its bit. Artillery is very important for breaking down entrenchment: Tac Air does a wonderful job against unentrenched units in the open as do the panzers of course; infantry are great at mopping up and seizing territory, and HQs must be carefully positioned to maximise supply. Fighters provide cover for the whole operation.

The Capital has moved to Stalingrad. I suspect Marc will now evacuate while he still can as I was unable to take the SE district of Moscow which can still serve as a rail hub for him - I will certainly take it next turn unless snow and ice come very early.

I will post an end of campaign season 1942 report when I see what happens next turn, but it is certainly time for the axis now to pay serious attention to the West while still trying to make sure that Russia does not recover. To that end I am likely to form as strong a battlegroup as I can in 1943 to try and smash Stalingrad - although I will have to wait to see quite what the mpp balance is by 1943 before deciding if I really go for broke to seize it - while definitely now forming that Western Army I discussed in my 1942 strategy, ready to counter attack where ever the Western Allies land. I dont think I can afford to gather my entire strength in Russia in 1943 - it is too much of a risk.

I may even have time and mpps enough to do away with pesky Yugoslavia which has eaten away at the back of my mind. Dare I try Sealion in 1943? That is something to ponder.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Classic! When I saw that first screen shot I thought your Panzers were too far back, but the way you handled them was beautiful. You have Moscow and your Panzers are still ready to rumble if needed. Awesome!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Classic! When I saw that first screen shot I thought your Panzers were too far back, but the way you handled them was beautiful. You have Moscow and your Panzers are still ready to rumble if needed. Awesome!

I guess I weas a bit lucky with that - my main northern Panzer force I had to leave where they were last turn in order to reinforce them with the HQ sat on the nearest town, and the fact that they were able to get adjacent to Moscow from there was fortune rather than detailed planning. A couple of them were actually not in a great state: readainess and morale at around 50/60% and that really shows on the battlefield, but they were strong enough to do the job. The panzers further south had been moved up from Bryansk on a full move last turn and were sat in poor supply at the start of this, but again rather fortunately all bar one could get close enough to do damage and one was very strong at 100% morale/readniness and strength 11 due to experience. The one that couldnt get close was used to destroy the Tula garrison.

It went well. I dont know if there was any way I could have used my Stuka runs to take the SE district too: in a way that is a pity because it allows a lot of Marc's stuff to operationally retreat next turn but I'm just being greedy really by thinking that. Moscow will be an absolute pig for the Soviets to recapture even if I fail to destroy them completely in 1943 so I am happy.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Having slept on it last night, and waiting for Marc's next turn, here is my 1942 Strategic report:

Summary: 1942 really could scarcely have gone any better.

1. Oil was secured.

2. Moscow was captured.

3. Spanish allied attack was wiped out.

The only objective that was not met was Yugoslavia, and I will definitely put that right very soon.

On top of this the U boats have assaulted the arctic convoys and got away with it virtually free of damage. Marc must be short of destroyers or using his carriers for something else, because the captains of the boats are just sat on the convoys at the moment wreaking terrible havoc...

1943 will look like this from the axis perspective:

1. Defence of Moscow and Rostov will be assigned to axis minors, and fortifications built.

2. German battlegroup of substantial power will be gathered at Rostov and sent to Stalingrad in an attempt to seize it and knock Russia out the game. At this stage, however, this will not be the Number 1 priority - probably Number 2...

3. Number 1 priority will be given to the defence of the West with strong German garrisons on key ports and mobile forces plus HQs equipped to support them.

4. Air assault on the UK will be undertaken. I sense I have an air tech advantage so I might as well see what the RAF and USAF can do about it if I deploy air in the region and have a go at getting air superiority early. If it doesn't work then no biggie - I can withdraw the air a bit further back...

5. Tentative preparations for Sealion in case that air battle goes especially well.

6. Assault on Yugoslavia will happen, and the capture will be handed to the Italians. I want to be able to use that Italian fleet at some point, and so need an mpp boost for them.

7. Vichy France - ally or enemy? I have invested in diplomatic persuasion to bring Vichy on board after Marc's attack on Algeria gave Vichy a big axis boost. If it comes on board by June then good - if not I'll invade it and again give it to Italy for mpp boost.

8. As a final priority - surprising maybe? - I'll form what I have left for an attack on Leningrad to see if I can take it and liberate Finland. My head cant quite get around the Maths of how many units it will take to do all the above, but we'll see what is left once I've done all that I'll have a go. I doubt Marc will be able to defend both Stalingrad and Leningrad effectively, so if Stalingrad proves too tough a nut to crack then hopefully Leningrad will fall and I can bring the Finns back into the war.

That should do it. A lot to plan for... Good job my mpps per turn should top 1000 within the next few turns!!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Having slept on it last night, and waiting for Marc's next turn, here is my 1942 Strategic report:

1. Defence of Moscow and Rostov will be assigned to axis minors, and fortifications built.

2. German battlegroup of substantial power will be gathered at Rostov and sent to Stalingrad in an attempt to seize it and knock Russia out the game. At this stage, however, this will not be the Number 1 priority - probably Number 2...

Making Soviets a secondary target already may be a mistake... In my opinion they are still far more dangerous than the Allies. I bet US and GB ground forces are still not big enough to pose a serious threat to the Germans. Potential confrontation would be a repetition of the Spanish campaign. Capturing Moscow was a huge symbolic victory, but Red Army will keep on fighting... I'd finish it off first.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Making Soviets a secondary target already may be a mistake... In my opinion they are still far more dangerous than the Allies. I bet US and GB ground forces are still not big enough to pose a serious threat to the Germans. Potential confrontation would be a repetition of the Spanish campaign. Capturing Moscow was a huge symbolic victory, but Red Army will keep on fighting... I'd finish it off first.

Maybe you are right, but with double the mpps of the Soviets the USA and UK now can build faster than the Soviets, especially if they reduce the convoy route. That is why I will wait a little to see the mpp balance into 1943. It is a tricky balance from here: to over commit in the East could lead to a substantial landing in the West that could catch me off guard. In order to get to Moscow Marc will have to cover a lot of ground in poor supply once I have conducted my mopping up operation in autumn 1942, and I will see him coming from a distance. It will be much easier for the Germans to counter attack from positions of strength than it will be to assault a heavily defended Stalingrad which, by 1943, is sure to have 6 or so armoured units around it and presumably much better air defence than Moscow had.

I'm still thinking it through, but we shall see. I dont intend to let him off the hook for sure, but I dont want to be caught with my trousers down in France or the Low Countries.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'm still thinking it through, but we shall see. I dont intend to let him off the hook for sure, but I dont want to be caught with my trousers down in France or the Low Countries.

Makes sense to me especially if the treacherous Allies already produce more MMP's than the wounded Soviet kolkhoz, that I wasn't aware of:D

From the other hand if you allow the Red Army to rebuild and the Western Powers won't attack either in the near future, than the ballance may shift to the advantage of your enemies. I think the key is to keep the preassure on your adversaries and at least cause some casualties. It's a hard choice and the war is still far from being over... Can't wait to see what will be Mark's another move!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Makes sense to me especially if the treacherous Allies already produce more MMP's than the wounded Soviet kolkhoz, that I wasn't aware of:D

From the other hand if you allow the Red Army to rebuild and the Western Powers won't attack either in the near future, than the ballance may shift to the advantage of your enemies. I think the key is to keep the preassure on your adversaries and at least cause some casualties. It's a hard choice and the war is still far from being over... Can't wait to see what will be Mark's another move!

Agree with all that. :-)

I'm off on holiday later today for a week, but have a new laptop with the game running on it that I'm taking with me. You will all have to give me 24 hours at least and then cross fingers that the wireless in the hotel is neither extortionately expensive nor unbelievably inaccessible. Hopefully all will be ok...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Agree with all that. :-)

I'm off on holiday later today for a week, but have a new laptop with the game running on it that I'm takling with me. You will all have to give me 24 hours at least and then cross fingers that the wireless in the hotel is neither extortionately expensive nor unbelievably inaccessible. Hopefully all will be ok...

Nicely done! Holidays without the game would be a torture, not relaxing time;) Have a good one.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
But what happens in Balkans and Greece ?

Is the Axis plans to sort it out, and how is situation in the med

I decided at the start of the game that the Mediterranean was not worth doing anything about. I knew the UK would not be strong enough to invade from there until 1941 earliest, and I also guessed that my Italian army at home, backed up by air force and navy, would be strong enough to defend against any early UK attack.

I havent seen anything to change my mind on this. In GC Africa is important as it allows the Germans and Japanese to link up which can be a huge advantage, but I'm not sure that Africa is anything other than a diversion in this scenario. If a player wants to attack the UK then do it via Sealion - why bother to waste resources doing it in North Africa?

The one thing I did with reference to the Mediterranean was to take Gibraltar at least to make the allies struggle for supplies and communications into that Theatre.

For the future? If Yugoslavia falls easily then I may well decide to plough on into Greece and seize it. Much depends on how aggressive a stance Marc takes from here: I have done my bit, will continue to press in Russia, but otherwise will behave more like a boxer in counter punch mode. In other words if I see an opportunity I will take it - but otherwise I will wait for him to make the first move... Areas of opportunity that I will be looking at will be Greece (after Yugoslavia), Leningrad and on into Finland, the UK itself, Vichy France as mentioned in my 1942 strategic plan and possibly Turkey. Turkey might be a useful way of distracting Marc from D Day preparations. At the bottom of the list will be Sweden and Switzerland - no plans to do anything in these 2.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Not much to talk about this turn. Russia attacked with 2 armies on the East front around Moscow and caused some damage. Al should take Moscow this turn. I still hold Lenningrad and Stalingrad... for how long I am not sure... but Russia is huge. Once past Moscow Al will begin to have serious supply problems due to the distance. He already have a partisan problem that will only get worse.

The US completed the conquest of Algeria. The UK engaged Al's subs up north with DDs upgraded to Anti-Sub 1. Yes the allies are finally getting tech upgrades. The US is almost fully industrialized and is pulling in a large amount of cash now which due to the convoys is helping the UK and Russia.

I think Al's next objective may be England. I think the British will be a tough nut to crack. Then again I thought he would have difficulty on the East Front. :P

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

My first post here... I've just spent a good chunk of time reading through this entire thread.

I own Strategic Command Blitzkrieg as well as a number of other PC games. I like the scale of this one & look forward to scoring a copy. Thanks in advance to everyone who is putting it all together.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I have seen high level tech tanks in the pictures shown. If I remember correctly, I have seen level 4 and level 5 tanks. However, the game is still around the end of 1942.

In WaW, maximum tech level for tanks was 5. Do we have more tech levels in this game? ...or, did we reach maximum tech level (for tanks) already?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi Ev

No, we don't have more tech levels but this AAR game uses the new research model. Based on the feedback from this game and also others being played out by the beta team we've made a few adjustments since. So seeing level 4 or 5 tanks in 1942 should be a bit rarer!

Bill

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Is it possible in this game to try an invasion of the USSR in 1939/1940 .. while seeking to hold the west via fortifications? As can be experimented with in some board games.

Probably I should say "is it at all realistic". I'm sure it's "possible" :-)

Luke

p.s. if not it would be nice if this could be made tenable if difficult. The Soviets were going through purges and had had no Finnish combat experience. Plus their industrialization and uralization might be reduced.. so one could imagine it maybe being a bit possible. Also no modern reorganization had started.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Sign in to follow this  

×
×
  • Create New...