Gotterdammerung im Osten

[KG_RangerBooBoo]

I really enjoyed this scenario even though I took an overwhelming loss in it, surrendering on turn 55. I want to preface any remarks that I make by saying right out that I started this battle pretty raw and have probably progressed to just being raw so keep that in mind as you read my comments.
First I want to thank the designer for a great scenario. It was a very large and complex battle but I never really felt like I was bogged down or overwhelmed by the number of units or the size of the map. I do think it may need a little tweaking but then again one of you veterans may have made hay while I was watching the sun shine.
My opponent opted to rapidly withdraw the majority of his units from most of Russia and used them to dig in behind the super rivers etc. without really putting up much of a fight for Russia. Since he could withdraw faster then I could overwhelm his rearguard and pursuit he was well fortified along the super rivers, fortified hexsides, and mountain passes when I managed to get the majority of my forces in place. I think a better player would have managed to destroy more German units in the beginning but even then this defensive line is extremely hard to break. It is basically consists of super rivers, fortified hexsides, and mountain passes from the Baltic to the Adriatic. I wonder if the German shouldn't really be penalized a little more for giving up all of Russia and a chunk of Eastern Poland without a fight. I realize that we all play these battles to see if we couldn't do better but I thought that this stretched history a little far. Also I was confounded by the number of HQ's that my opponent used as rearguards along with RR units. In actuality these would have been some of the last units used for that purpose. I don't know enough about the game to know if there was a higher penalty for losing these units then combat units but to me there should be, but that is just my two cents worth.
I will be looking forward to trying this again though as the scale, for a large scenario, was very enjoyable and I would recommend it to anyone. Hopefully I have learned enough to do better next time though.

 

[tigersqn]

Also I was confounded by the number of HQ's that my opponent used as rearguards along with RR units. In actuality these would have been some of the last units used for that purpose. I don't know enough about the game to know if there was a higher penalty for losing these units then combat units but to me there should be, but that is just my two cents worth.

HQ units are often used as rearguards due to the advantage they have in any disengagement. The cost in losing these units is that all the subunits in the formation are then placed in a reorg status.

I agree about this scenario. It's quickly becoming one of my favorites.

 

[KG_RangerBooBoo]

HQ units are often used as rearguards due to the advantage they have in any disengagement. The cost in losing these units is that all the subunits in the formation are then placed in a reorg status.

I agree about this scenario. It's quickly becoming one of my favorites.

Ah, learn something new every day!

 

[Kraut]

I am playing against Xandamere, too, also as the soviets and Xandamere used the same strategy in our game, a quick withdrawal to the vistula line. But I don't think that this somehow helped the germans, quite on the contrary, they lost 50% of their available terrain in just a few turns and the soviets have than a way shorter way to Berlin. In my game I was able to sit at this new frontline, rest my forces and than used the Rumania shock bonus at turn 21 to crack his line. Now the germans have to mobilise everything to stop me, even in unfavorable terrain because they can't risk to lose even more chuncks of terrain. So the penalty of a quick retreat is the increased risk of a catastrophic breakthrough
As for the HQs: they are really valuable for the germans and should never be put on risk or first line duties, they have very little staying power but many artillery pices and should always be in the second line to help in the supply distrubution and support the front line troops with arty fire. Also, if destroyed the formation proficiency will drop by 50%. The higher HQ units are a little different, they often have no assigned units and can't therefore force reorg but using them on suicide missions to slow the soviet juggernaut is questionable because they, too, have very little combat power and will be quickly anihilated. I think they would be better used in the rear to help resupply the depleated regiments.

And I too agree, the scenario is fun


Just one thing: you should talk with your opponent prior the scenario about an additional house rule: no soviet seaborn invasions into Finland. I did a little test was easily able to capture Helsinki at turn 02, 5 out of 5 attempts succeeded. If the finns would be forced to strongly guard all their ports the finish front would collaps in just a few turns and in my oppinion that somehow defeats the purpose ond historical feel of that front.
If any person here can show how the soviets could have launched their own D-Day in Finland he should speak now, or hereafter remain in silence

 

[KG_RangerBooBoo]

I think a lot of that can be attributed to the difference between a more experienced player and an relatively new one. I think playing this again may lead to better results for me.