-
We have updated our Community Code of Conduct. Please read through the new rules for the forum that are an integral part of Paradox Interactive’s User Agreement.
This is where trying to match up the map projection that Paradox have used with a different one is a bit of a nightmare. It sort of works out ok where there are big land marks (coasts, major river systems etc) and doesn't where there are so few reference points. I'm going to persist with the drawn maps as I think they work out mostly ok but there are a few situations coming up that'll only make sense with an in-game screenshot. If it helps to put stuff in context I'm perfectly happy to do a normal screenshot in one of the response threads. Here's the shifts on the game map from Jan-1 March and then what I retook in April:
that also might help answer the IC question. On a normally scaled map I lost a lot (I still think Paradox have the line of the Dniepr wrong, should be one province to the west in this sector - but thats a judgement call & they are generating a map for a game not an authoritative cartographic source), but in game I was pushed back 1-2 provinces over 2 months. I reckon I lost about 2-3 IC and a small bit of leadership and that was offset by my gains up north.
A KV-1 variant in the background, and a T-60 or T-70 in the foreground.
Do I sense an Operation Blau variant, with Kursk and/or Kharkov as its primary target?
Good spot, I got mixed up as I originally planned to pull a T-60 image over for a different battle and forgot to treble check ... have changed the description. I think the T-60 maybe one of those they constructed using the PzIIIs they captured at Stalingrad, hence the rather odd structure?
Good question ... and one I was asking myself. In effect I start to learn the hard way that the best way to take ground is to shift the focus of my attacks when the defense gets too hot. Since the German AI seems to use the 'firebrigade' defensive model that means that they sometimes weaken a sector to deal with me elsewhere (but in other instances it just means they go straight into a counterattack).
So April-May sees a big Soviet offensive in the Ukraine and some small gains east of Vologda while the forces that attacked in winter recover. I then managed to drive west to Smolensk and that forced them to pull a lot out of the arctic (the AI is very sensitive to falling into encirclement) and I was then able to push into their weakened defences. But key is to draw them off first, then attack when they are a bit weakened. All this takes me to well into the Autumn of 1942 and its early 43 before I've cleaned up in the Arctic (this is one reason why my attack in early summer 42 ran out of steam - I had too much reducing the axis hold around Archangelsk).
I get my first small pockets in June and July 42 but its not till Sept-Oct do I start to really cull their OOB, to put it in context in 42 I lose 125,000 as POW and they lose about 240,000 (so a trade of say 15 of my divisions for about 30 of theirs) - this excludes losses in Central Asia.
"There'll be that Dark Parade": The Ukraine March 1942
The Ukrainian fighting in March 1942 indicates just how much the events in early 1942 were connected right across the front with the Germans. In this case, the German drive on Kursk was deflected as much by victories to the north around Bryansk and Soviet naval supremacy in the Black Sea as by direct combat.
(Soviet transports being escorted off Odessa)
The halting of the German offensive came at a high price – 25,255 Soviet lives for 17,320 Germans and only 1,485 of their allies (for the most part after the February battles the Germans tried to keep their Italian and Rumanian allies out of the main combat sectors).
These losses are partly explained as the Soviets had to fight this stage of the Ukrainian war without armoured support, both 1 and 3 Tank Corps had been badly beaten in the February battles and were drawn back to the rear to re-organise and re-equip.
Again it is useful to seperate the fighting into 3 distinct sectors – the defense of Kursk, the German offensive in the Azov region and the Soviet incursions across the Black Sea littoral.
In the northern Ukraine, the Germans were badly hampered in the renewal of their offensive by ongoing supply problems,
(another German bridge is about to be destroyed)
by their own losses in February and the Soviet counterblow at Bryansk. When they had driven in 5 Army in January, the Soviets had held onto Bryansk and this was creating a dangerous bulge to the north of their forces in the Ukraine. A bulge that was to become more threatening as 10 Army and 3 Army drove into their lines west of Bryansk.
The Germans renewed their offensive in the Kursk region on 1 March with assaults on Lokot and Sevsk in the north, but here they were forced onto the defence by 8 March as Soviet forces started to threaten their rear at Bryansk.
(Soviet infantry defending at Sevsk)
Further south at Khorol and Kobelevsky they made initial gains and both towns were in German hands by 13 March raising the possibility that they might still threaten Kharkov.
This part of their offensive was undermined when 26 Army counterattacked and drove 27 Panzer out of Khorol by 17 March.
(Soviet counterattack at Khorol)
This was followed by fending off a major axis counterstroke by 27 March,
effectively ending the German offensive in this sector – even if they still occupied most of the eastern side of the Dniepr.
This relative restoring of the front in the north Ukraine was offset by a renewal of the German offensive in the Azov sector. Here they drove into Tokmok (by 11 March) and to Berdyansk (28 March) again raising the fear of the loss of Stalino and the Dombas coal fields.
As in the Kursk battles in February, the use of their heavy armour (in this case 4 Heavy Armour) was key to their success.
(a rare successful ambush in the Azov battles)
One reason for their defeats in the central Ukraine lay in their need to respond to another series of naval landings by Soviet forces in the western Black Sea. In this case, Constanta was heavily garrisoned but Odessa and Vylkove were seized.
Both were lost by 18 March but significant axis forces had been diverted from the main front. This time elements of the main Italian navy tried to intervene but the Black Sea fleet managed to drive them off and extract the Soviet marines from their bridgeheads.
(Soviet Marines at Vylkove)
The result was that the Soviets were able to regain some initiative in the northern Ukraine and to fight a series of fierce attritional battles in the south at a time when almost all their armoured assets were regrouping. These formations, re-equiped and reorganised were to form the backbone of the Kutusov offensive that dominated the war in the Ukraine in April and May 1942.
The Ukrainian fighting in March 1942 indicates just how much the events in early 1942 were connected right across the front with the Germans. In this case, the German drive on Kursk was deflected as much by victories to the north around Bryansk and Soviet naval supremacy in the Black Sea as by direct combat.
(Soviet transports being escorted off Odessa)
The halting of the German offensive came at a high price – 25,255 Soviet lives for 17,320 Germans and only 1,485 of their allies (for the most part after the February battles the Germans tried to keep their Italian and Rumanian allies out of the main combat sectors).
These losses are partly explained as the Soviets had to fight this stage of the Ukrainian war without armoured support, both 1 and 3 Tank Corps had been badly beaten in the February battles and were drawn back to the rear to re-organise and re-equip.
Again it is useful to seperate the fighting into 3 distinct sectors – the defense of Kursk, the German offensive in the Azov region and the Soviet incursions across the Black Sea littoral.
In the northern Ukraine, the Germans were badly hampered in the renewal of their offensive by ongoing supply problems,
(another German bridge is about to be destroyed)
by their own losses in February and the Soviet counterblow at Bryansk. When they had driven in 5 Army in January, the Soviets had held onto Bryansk and this was creating a dangerous bulge to the north of their forces in the Ukraine. A bulge that was to become more threatening as 10 Army and 3 Army drove into their lines west of Bryansk.
The Germans renewed their offensive in the Kursk region on 1 March with assaults on Lokot and Sevsk in the north, but here they were forced onto the defence by 8 March as Soviet forces started to threaten their rear at Bryansk.
(Soviet infantry defending at Sevsk)
Further south at Khorol and Kobelevsky they made initial gains and both towns were in German hands by 13 March raising the possibility that they might still threaten Kharkov.
This part of their offensive was undermined when 26 Army counterattacked and drove 27 Panzer out of Khorol by 17 March.
(Soviet counterattack at Khorol)
This was followed by fending off a major axis counterstroke by 27 March,
effectively ending the German offensive in this sector – even if they still occupied most of the eastern side of the Dniepr.
This relative restoring of the front in the north Ukraine was offset by a renewal of the German offensive in the Azov sector. Here they drove into Tokmok (by 11 March) and to Berdyansk (28 March) again raising the fear of the loss of Stalino and the Dombas coal fields.
As in the Kursk battles in February, the use of their heavy armour (in this case 4 Heavy Armour) was key to their success.
(a rare successful ambush in the Azov battles)
One reason for their defeats in the central Ukraine lay in their need to respond to another series of naval landings by Soviet forces in the western Black Sea. In this case, Constanta was heavily garrisoned but Odessa and Vylkove were seized.
Both were lost by 18 March but significant axis forces had been diverted from the main front. This time elements of the main Italian navy tried to intervene but the Black Sea fleet managed to drive them off and extract the Soviet marines from their bridgeheads.
(Soviet Marines at Vylkove)
The result was that the Soviets were able to regain some initiative in the northern Ukraine and to fight a series of fierce attritional battles in the south at a time when almost all their armoured assets were regrouping. These formations, re-equiped and reorganised were to form the backbone of the Kutusov offensive that dominated the war in the Ukraine in April and May 1942.
Last edited:
Oh, nice landings lol.
Do you believe the Germans have any chance of regaining the initiative?
Do you produce any armour btw?
Do you believe the Germans have any chance of regaining the initiative?
Do you produce any armour btw?
Hm, the Regia Marina... If they concentrate, they easily outclass your Black Sea Fleet. But clearly, for now, you're able to handle them. Which is good.
You didn't talk about strategic goals, like you did in the Arctic/Northern campaign, but you liberated a fairly uniform belt of territory in the Ukraine. Good work. Apart from a few German gains just north of the Crimea, this update dealt with an unending stream of successes.
You didn't talk about strategic goals, like you did in the Arctic/Northern campaign, but you liberated a fairly uniform belt of territory in the Ukraine. Good work. Apart from a few German gains just north of the Crimea, this update dealt with an unending stream of successes.
Great update.
PS. Are we about to see a map of the entire "Ostfront" anytime soon?
PS. Are we about to see a map of the entire "Ostfront" anytime soon?
Its a devastating blow to the AI if you at close intervals make landings like that as a huge chunck of German forces will go back and forth between the various fronts without ever reaching any battles. You should perhaps give yourself a house rule against retrieving amphibiously landed troops - just to even up the odds
quite agree - march/april should be the worst campaigning season in the Ukraine, as it is the weather is perfectly clear
Awesome, I like your maps
glad you're enjoying it, as mentioned a few times they started as a combination of need (in game screenshots were so ugly with the messed up borders) and trying to do something different
Yes they do, I'll explain what the problem was and all that would have sorted it out in the next post and then do a Soviet OOB update in a couple but on 7 June 1941 I had 8 Tank Divisions (ie 2*med army brigade, 1*mot, some with SPA) and by 1 April 1942 I had 11 (& end up with 15 by the time I had to stop building any new formations to conserve manpower)
Its a devastating blow to the AI if you at close intervals make landings like that as a huge chunck of German forces will go back and forth between the various fronts without ever reaching any battles. You should perhaps give yourself a house rule against retrieving amphibiously landed troops - just to even up the odds
To be honest I had no big goal in the Ukraine in March except to stop them slowly chewing their way eastwards. The offensive at Bryansk broke off their northern pincer and I just about fought them to a standstill directly in front of Kharkov.
I don't think they over-reacted, as I'll show in the next post there are an awful lot of German and axis-allied forces rattling around to the rear of their battlefront. The Soviets were actually quite good (read as totally ruthless) in naval landings in the Black Sea littoral, their first in December 41 put tanks ashore in the N Crimea in a storm in temperatures of -15 (one reason why the Soviets were less than impressed when the Anglo-Allies kept on putting back the 2nd Front due to storms etc). So its a fair opinion but I do avoid the more gamey stunts (esp around Paras - which I use fairly conventionally just in front of a spearhead or to reinforce a front in an emergency).
The emergence of the RM is actually pretty significant. Its indicative of what a mess the UK is in that they feel no need to keep to the Med, thats my second run in with them and in both I escaped with minimal damage. Next time I pull this stunt they turn up in force (in May) & enforce your house-rule in any case, after that I had to be much more cautious about naval actions for quite a while.
Next post - which I'll do as a gameplay one as its a good place to both give a fair bit of detail on their OOB and to discuss some in-game issues -- & how I tried to handle them
German Production, OOB and Game Play issues
As in the previous update, I'll configure this one as a game play post as its a lot easier to discuss the issues that way - & it sets the context for some in-game changes I make later in 1942 (should have made them at this stage ideally!)
First 3 posts are screenshots showing the front - 1st is the NW, 2nd is what I refer to often as the Bryansk-Kalinin sector and the third the Ukraine (as you can see this splits almost evenly between a German and a Rumanian sector).
The next post is possibly the most important. This is the German production schedule for 1 April and its totally thrown by the supply to network need and has scrapped all new production and reinforcements. It took me a while to catch onto this (it was by July when their units were shattering which seemed odd as I knew they still had quite a lot of manpower). Now I gave them about 5000 supply, 5000 fuel at Minsk in early Feb (that triggered a lot of air activity and I think their offensive in the Ukraine), once I worked out what was going wrong I just gave them a stock of 50000 supplies in Berlin (so they had all the delivery problems etc) & that sorted them out. At that stage they soon after hit me hard all over the front and drove me a long way back eastwards. The frustration is if I'd done this about April/May I reckon 1942 would have played out quite historically.
The next shows Axis forces in the UK, France, Benelux and W Poland:
some of this definitely was moved east later in the year as I recognise Panzer divisions I tangled with. Note the low garrison in W Poland - which is an area of v high partisan scores, esp when you note how many garrison divisions are in the Reich proper:
thats just silly, as they face a high supply tax in Poland.
Here's a schematic OOB for the East Front (I'll marry this up to the Soviet OOB in a couple of posts):
This excludes the forces besieging Leningrad, viz:
and advancing up towards Murmansk:
So the German AI is quite cute here - its allocated two quiet sectors to its allies but it does no sensible force tailoring - that Murmansk force is probably 50% too much for the supply lines (& thats before I'm bombing their communications)
This is the Axis forces scattered around the NW (map 1 above) - a lot seem to be transiting around behind the lines looking for supply:
Here's the Axis forces on map 2 - one for those who like detail (again quite a lot are wandering around - now as I find out later its a really bad hit on your supply to have units SR-ing out/across a combat front)
Here's the German sector of the Ukraine, this is the stuff I've just been fighting in the last two posts:
and this is what is in the Rumanian sector:
At this stage when I loaded as Italy, the majority of the Italian forces are trying to SR back to Italy in search of supply, generally the German AI is doing far too much SR activity (I think moving stuff back westwards), this is almost sensible (they are trying to move to where the supply is), except that by doing so much SR they are worsening the situation.
On the subject of fuel and supply issues - I gave Japan a load too in August to see if they'd do anything - they do & its quite surprising ... but you'll have to wait for that one.
As in the previous update, I'll configure this one as a game play post as its a lot easier to discuss the issues that way - & it sets the context for some in-game changes I make later in 1942 (should have made them at this stage ideally!)
First 3 posts are screenshots showing the front - 1st is the NW, 2nd is what I refer to often as the Bryansk-Kalinin sector and the third the Ukraine (as you can see this splits almost evenly between a German and a Rumanian sector).
The next post is possibly the most important. This is the German production schedule for 1 April and its totally thrown by the supply to network need and has scrapped all new production and reinforcements. It took me a while to catch onto this (it was by July when their units were shattering which seemed odd as I knew they still had quite a lot of manpower). Now I gave them about 5000 supply, 5000 fuel at Minsk in early Feb (that triggered a lot of air activity and I think their offensive in the Ukraine), once I worked out what was going wrong I just gave them a stock of 50000 supplies in Berlin (so they had all the delivery problems etc) & that sorted them out. At that stage they soon after hit me hard all over the front and drove me a long way back eastwards. The frustration is if I'd done this about April/May I reckon 1942 would have played out quite historically.
The next shows Axis forces in the UK, France, Benelux and W Poland:
some of this definitely was moved east later in the year as I recognise Panzer divisions I tangled with. Note the low garrison in W Poland - which is an area of v high partisan scores, esp when you note how many garrison divisions are in the Reich proper:
thats just silly, as they face a high supply tax in Poland.
Here's a schematic OOB for the East Front (I'll marry this up to the Soviet OOB in a couple of posts):
This excludes the forces besieging Leningrad, viz:
and advancing up towards Murmansk:
So the German AI is quite cute here - its allocated two quiet sectors to its allies but it does no sensible force tailoring - that Murmansk force is probably 50% too much for the supply lines (& thats before I'm bombing their communications)
This is the Axis forces scattered around the NW (map 1 above) - a lot seem to be transiting around behind the lines looking for supply:
Here's the Axis forces on map 2 - one for those who like detail (again quite a lot are wandering around - now as I find out later its a really bad hit on your supply to have units SR-ing out/across a combat front)
Here's the German sector of the Ukraine, this is the stuff I've just been fighting in the last two posts:
and this is what is in the Rumanian sector:
At this stage when I loaded as Italy, the majority of the Italian forces are trying to SR back to Italy in search of supply, generally the German AI is doing far too much SR activity (I think moving stuff back westwards), this is almost sensible (they are trying to move to where the supply is), except that by doing so much SR they are worsening the situation.
On the subject of fuel and supply issues - I gave Japan a load too in August to see if they'd do anything - they do & its quite surprising ... but you'll have to wait for that one.
This advance in the north by the axis does not make any sense...
they do not even have roads there!
Except that it forces you to send units there.
they do not even have roads there!
Except that it forces you to send units there.
I've had a bit of time to catch up today, and another enjoyable read. I didn't realise how far the Germans had advanced to your north, which I assume doesn't bother you too much because of the supply problem this creates for them?
Also, interesting use of the Black Sea Fleet and your Marines. Reading your last post is also educational for game purposes, particularly in the light of how the AI uses supplies. It seems (to my mind anyway), that the AI is in some respects not at all as bad as some players suggest, while in other respects a certain amount of tweaking is required from time to time to help the AI in order to prevent stalemating.
In any event, what makes for a balanced game is infinitely more enjoyable to read and, I should imagine, to play too. I shall be interested to see what happens when you gave Japan oil.
Also, interesting use of the Black Sea Fleet and your Marines. Reading your last post is also educational for game purposes, particularly in the light of how the AI uses supplies. It seems (to my mind anyway), that the AI is in some respects not at all as bad as some players suggest, while in other respects a certain amount of tweaking is required from time to time to help the AI in order to prevent stalemating.
In any event, what makes for a balanced game is infinitely more enjoyable to read and, I should imagine, to play too. I shall be interested to see what happens when you gave Japan oil.
There are a lot of badly mauled German units in those screenshots - must've been due to their deadly supply obsession.
I'm amazed by how many non-German divisions you're facing. Instinctively (that's to say, without bothering to find out any hard facts), it feels like their sheer weight must make a lot of difference to the German war effort, even as that same sheer number makes a mess of the Axis supply situation.
I'm amazed by how many non-German divisions you're facing. Instinctively (that's to say, without bothering to find out any hard facts), it feels like their sheer weight must make a lot of difference to the German war effort, even as that same sheer number makes a mess of the Axis supply situation.
This advance in the north by the axis does not make any sense...
they do not even have roads there!
Except that it forces you to send units there.
Tend to agree, doing this AAR I've come to appreciate the AI-AI has 3 'moods', if its aggressive it'll prioritise hitting weak spots and vacant provinces, so since the German AI was agressive so far it saw my gap in the North West and piled in, makes sense they should have taken what was for the taking but its the force mix that is wrong. It then seems to have a defensive mood, where it pulls out of salients and attacks in a very cautious manner, finally it has a 'run away' mood, close to what as a player I call 'bump and go' (in other words use a brief combat to inflict a combat delay and then pull back). Its quite interesting watching it rotate between these moods.
I tend to agree, yes of course the supply model needs refinements and improvements but I think it does basically work and work well.
Someone had to say it!
It does show how much damage I did over the winter as I presume they've not been reinforcing as all their IC is on supply production. Their allies are a bit of a mixed blessing. I think handing over Murmansk & Leningrad to them is quite neat, elsewhere they make my life hard as I have to fight (often repeatedly) for everythiing as they can always rustle up another formation. On the other hand all those Italians on the Bryansk-Kalinin sector are really out of supply and easy meat, but I presume still adding to the German supply problems.
I've also realised I forgot to show the Bulgarians so add on about another 15 divisions in the central regions.
"The Waters Wrecked the Sky": The war at sea June 41-April 42
Pre-war, the Navy (RKKH) had the same notional role as the VVS – to protect the Soviet Union and to support the operations of the RKKA. In reality, apart from a small number of submarines delivered in late 1939 and a new heavy cruiser in 1940 it saw no investment pre-war either in equipment or training.
(RKKH June 1941-April 1942)
A large number of WW1 era submarines had been scrapped in August 1939 so that the small number of trained crews could be concentrated on the better equipment and the submarine forces formed into 3 active commands.
The 4 squadrons in the Baltic were ordered to interdict axis shipping off the North German force and off the Baltic states respectively. This would also provide an advance warning of any major German naval movements in the region.
Once Rumania entered the war, the Black Sea squadrons were split between raiding in the western Black Sea and in the Aegean (where Italian, and later Greek, shipping was vulnerable). Later on, this range was extended to the central Mediterranean to raid Italian convoys supplying their forces in North Africa.
Overall, for very few outright losses, these campaigns were incredibly sucessful:
(axis shipping sunk June 41- Dec 41)
(axis shipping sunk Jan 42-April 42)
The only major losses were in the Meditteranean at the Gulf of Bomba where several formations were caught near the surface.
These losses, and the overall sucesses, convinced the GKO to allocate some scarce resources of both industrial capacity and research to building more modern submarines and to the training and doctrinal development of the submarine arm.
Two of the main surface fleets were also frequently in action. In the Baltic, the fleet had helped to defend Leningrad in both major assaults and had been able to target German concentrations to the south of the city area.
(Baltic Fleet an anchor)
(refueling in the Gulf of Finland
In the third battle of Leningrad, the fleet took up a similar role but this time the Kriegsmarine intervened. After a short battle the Germans withdrew despite sinking a destroyer squadron.
At this time, intelligence reports indicated they had redeployed the Graf Zeppelin and at least one of the Bismarck or the Tirpitz to the Baltic. In view of this, Soviet surface operations in the Gulf of Finland were scaled back to avoid irreplaceable losses.
In the Black Sea area, the surface fleet had supported two major invasions of Rumania
(Soviet destroyer off Odessa during the March landings)
and sunk the small Rumanian navy as well as driving the Greek navy to shelter in port. This dominance was helped by LAGG-3s from the VVS
(LAGG3 at Sevastopol)
maintaining air superiority and driving off any interventions by axis naval bombers.
(Rumanian naval bomber)
However, by March it was clear that the main Italian navy was in a position to operate in the Black Sea.
(The Kirov from the Black Sea Fleet)
Three inconclusive actions were fought in early and mid March and although neither side lost any ships the Black Sea fleet was badly damaged.
This led to a temporary suspension of naval activity and urgent complaints to the British – if they did nothing else they should be able to keep the Regia Marina engaged in the Mediterranean, not free to operate in the Black Sea.
In addition, the RKKH, using the tradition of the Civil War, supported the RKKA using the network of great rivers. A small squadron on the lower Dniepr was crucial to the defense of Dnepropetrovsk
(Soviet navy on the Dniepr)
and Soviet river boats supported the various actions on the upper Volga and the Rybinsk Reservoir.
(Soviet gun boat from the Volga Squadron)
With the sucess of the winter offensive, Soviet planning started to think about how to deal with those Axis powers (particularly in Latin America, and, of course, Japan) or holdings (such as the UK) that were separated by sea. By mid-1942, a modest re-equipment programme was started that saw a steady improvement in both the size and quality of the RKKH. The first new destroyers were commenced on 8 May 1942 and would be ready in early 1943. At the same time more and more of the oldest destroyers and submarines were decomissioned.
(Soviet naval research - note how the combat experience has grown mainly due to the sub campaign)
Pre-war, the Navy (RKKH) had the same notional role as the VVS – to protect the Soviet Union and to support the operations of the RKKA. In reality, apart from a small number of submarines delivered in late 1939 and a new heavy cruiser in 1940 it saw no investment pre-war either in equipment or training.
(RKKH June 1941-April 1942)
A large number of WW1 era submarines had been scrapped in August 1939 so that the small number of trained crews could be concentrated on the better equipment and the submarine forces formed into 3 active commands.
The 4 squadrons in the Baltic were ordered to interdict axis shipping off the North German force and off the Baltic states respectively. This would also provide an advance warning of any major German naval movements in the region.
Once Rumania entered the war, the Black Sea squadrons were split between raiding in the western Black Sea and in the Aegean (where Italian, and later Greek, shipping was vulnerable). Later on, this range was extended to the central Mediterranean to raid Italian convoys supplying their forces in North Africa.
Overall, for very few outright losses, these campaigns were incredibly sucessful:
(axis shipping sunk June 41- Dec 41)
(axis shipping sunk Jan 42-April 42)
The only major losses were in the Meditteranean at the Gulf of Bomba where several formations were caught near the surface.
These losses, and the overall sucesses, convinced the GKO to allocate some scarce resources of both industrial capacity and research to building more modern submarines and to the training and doctrinal development of the submarine arm.
Two of the main surface fleets were also frequently in action. In the Baltic, the fleet had helped to defend Leningrad in both major assaults and had been able to target German concentrations to the south of the city area.
(Baltic Fleet an anchor)
(refueling in the Gulf of Finland
In the third battle of Leningrad, the fleet took up a similar role but this time the Kriegsmarine intervened. After a short battle the Germans withdrew despite sinking a destroyer squadron.
At this time, intelligence reports indicated they had redeployed the Graf Zeppelin and at least one of the Bismarck or the Tirpitz to the Baltic. In view of this, Soviet surface operations in the Gulf of Finland were scaled back to avoid irreplaceable losses.
In the Black Sea area, the surface fleet had supported two major invasions of Rumania
(Soviet destroyer off Odessa during the March landings)
and sunk the small Rumanian navy as well as driving the Greek navy to shelter in port. This dominance was helped by LAGG-3s from the VVS
(LAGG3 at Sevastopol)
maintaining air superiority and driving off any interventions by axis naval bombers.
(Rumanian naval bomber)
However, by March it was clear that the main Italian navy was in a position to operate in the Black Sea.
(The Kirov from the Black Sea Fleet)
Three inconclusive actions were fought in early and mid March and although neither side lost any ships the Black Sea fleet was badly damaged.
This led to a temporary suspension of naval activity and urgent complaints to the British – if they did nothing else they should be able to keep the Regia Marina engaged in the Mediterranean, not free to operate in the Black Sea.
In addition, the RKKH, using the tradition of the Civil War, supported the RKKA using the network of great rivers. A small squadron on the lower Dniepr was crucial to the defense of Dnepropetrovsk
(Soviet navy on the Dniepr)
and Soviet river boats supported the various actions on the upper Volga and the Rybinsk Reservoir.
(Soviet gun boat from the Volga Squadron)
With the sucess of the winter offensive, Soviet planning started to think about how to deal with those Axis powers (particularly in Latin America, and, of course, Japan) or holdings (such as the UK) that were separated by sea. By mid-1942, a modest re-equipment programme was started that saw a steady improvement in both the size and quality of the RKKH. The first new destroyers were commenced on 8 May 1942 and would be ready in early 1943. At the same time more and more of the oldest destroyers and submarines were decomissioned.
(Soviet naval research - note how the combat experience has grown mainly due to the sub campaign)
Those AI moods are fun. Especially when it leads to the Wehrmacht seeing one gap in the Soviet line, pouring 70% of their forces into it, and inevitably getting stuck inside a pocket the size of Romania.
(I have a picture, want me to post it?)On the AAR: Jolly good show with them submarines chap!
Given your limited (and mostly obsolete) resources, you're getting a lot of bang for the buck from your navy. Good job.
So how do you plan to expand the navy, for when the Germans are on the run? You won't be able to compete directly... Use naval bombers and subs instead?
So how do you plan to expand the navy, for when the Germans are on the run? You won't be able to compete directly... Use naval bombers and subs instead?