Help, I'm terminally scared to attack the Soviet Union

[Thaars]

Just turn down the gamespeed. when starting Barbarossa i usually turn down to "slow". Makes everything easier. And those huge amount of divisions you see at the frontline are just the AI not stacking units. Go for it. The war will be over before christmas. Surely

 

[fizy45]

At first make a plan and do not make all front attack leave enough troops on every province to defend at same time put your most powerful divisions according to your plan and encircle your enemy use tanks and motorized infantries with air support to win and go fast (take out the middle of soviet defence with making large rings on map) with this way you can take out at least 30 -40 divisions then the push your enemy try to make more encirlements if possible after a couple of months most of the soviet army would be destroyed then its easy just keep chasing them to urals once you take the western russia and causcus the bitter peace event fires and you made it = ))

 

[unmerged(229899)]

I'm surprised at the number of HQs you guys imploy. I usually just use 2-3 and sometimes 4, but often times don't build any HQ's other than the single one at the beginning of the '36 senerio and the one when Austria is annexed. I almost always play as Germany and the buildup to the SU war is the most fun and challenging for sure. I agree that waiting makes things much worst when invading the SU so often times I will wait just for more of a challenge.

I know that several people have mentioned the southern route through Turkey. I often find this the most effective method of securing oil at Baku as well as the caucusis and securing a huge pincer to the south. Another method I've had great success with is to secure the front defensively and move most of my mobile forces with atleast 12 transports based in Narvik. When the war breaks out, let the SU mobilize west then move on with amphibius assault through Archangelisk and move fast south to Moscow. You need more units than you would initially think, but 15 should do it with good amount of armor.

Also how many people pause the game alot? I pause it to make changes all the time to adjust production, tech, ect. Is this unusual?

 

[unmerged(59184)]

Also how many people pause the game alot? I pause it to make changes all the time to adjust production, tech, ect. Is this unusual?

I pause all the time for everything. I have auto-pause at least for :

Tech completion
Production completion (not convoys/escorts)
Naval/Air mission completion
Unit reaches destination
Unit attacked
Partisans
Province lost
Naval Battle

Sometimes for Air battles too, but usually turn this off. Too many pause screens make you prone to just clicking them away without even reading, and with the AoD 'Ok' button delay on pop up messages, it becomes too slow so have to limit it somehow.

 

[marxianTJ]

The key to hurting the USSR is to ignore what Hitler did. Encirclement is important but you don't want to waste time encircling small groups of units, as they aren't all that threatening (due to low ORG).

You want to rush to Moscow quickly and with that dividing line set up in Russia, use your tanks and other fast moving units to establish 1-3 large pockets (not encircling one province but several provinces). If you can stop a breakout from occuring in at least one of those pockets you'll severely cripple the Soviets if you don't have enough troops to just toe to toe them all the way across the entire front.

 

[mcganyol]

Never ever try in multiplayer what marxianTJ suggests.
Even a novice human player can easily counter this "rush for Moscow, no matter what and pocket half of the su" strategy.
Ai performs so bad that it may work, but it doesn't change the fact that it is reckless and bad strategy.

 

[unmerged(52751)]

Airpower - just like in real life, airpower is more than a force-multiplier, it is the most important weapon you have. If you can wrest total air superiority on the Eastern Front (while also having enough units to defend France and the Ruhr from strategic bombing, then after that your TACs and CAS will rain havok on the Soviet forces. Really, it actually makes the game too easy to use airpower in any way historically!

I also usually fear a big Barbarossa campaign... I like to divide it into stages as well, with the southern front stabilizing on the Dnieper (?) River line east of Kiev. Let the Sov infantry sit in the Priapt marshes and the Baltics, while you secure and hold the Ukraine. Usualy I like to build a line of lvl 5 fortifications along the Northern (East Prussia) border as that will remain a mostly static front.

Using an imphib invasion, or attacking through Baku is just going to confuse the AI, and is probably gamey.

For a real challenge, blitz Poland in '36 and then keep going to Moscow.

Of course, the biggest issue with defeating the USSR first or early is that afterwards the game is basically over because there us no way any AI country can hurt you. So I usually prefer to try Sea Lion first and then the USSR in '43 or '44 when it's a slogfest.

 

[unmerged(140582)]

I'm surprised at the number of HQs you guys imploy. I usually just use 2-3 and sometimes 4, but often times don't build any HQ's other than the single one at the beginning of the '36 senerio and the one when Austria is annexed. I almost always play as Germany and the buildup to the SU war is the most fun and challenging for sure. I agree that waiting makes things much worst when invading the SU so often times I will wait just for more of a challenge.

HQs are a funny thing. You don't absolutely need them, true, but I hate it if some of my units are out of reach. The ESE boni and especially the doubled command limits are just so practical for offensives. I regularly have 10 or more HQs pointed at the USSR. Probably not the most sensible thing to do, but it feels very comfortable - no matter where you are, you can always easily mount overwhelming attacks.

 

[Count of Reval]

I'm surprised at the number of HQs you guys imploy. I usually just use 2-3 and sometimes 4, but often times don't build any HQ's other than the single one at the beginning of the '36 senerio and the one when Austria is annexed. I almost always play as Germany and the buildup to the SU war is the most fun and challenging for sure. I agree that waiting makes things much worst when invading the SU so often times I will wait just for more of a challenge.

If you want to cover all your Eastern Front units with a constant HQ command (and I think it's wise thing to do most of the time (or maybe I'm wrong?)), you need at least 5 HQs. In the HoI2/AoD map the Eastern Front is, depending on line, 11-15 provinces wide (if you ignore for a moment provinces that situate North from Leningrad and East from Black Sea). So if you keep smooth and unbroken battle front, you need in your widest most stretch line (right after crossing the "Dnieper River line") 5 HQs placed like this (numbers mark provinces and asterisk mark the presence of HQ unit):

1 2* 3 4 5* 6 7 8* 9 10 11* 12 13 14* 15

If you like to keep your HQs behind the front line or use not completely vertical and smooth battle front, you may need - for the sake of flexibility - even more HQs. The same applies if you like to use spearheads that fight deep ahead the main front line and use separate "pocketing units" (that make hook-shaped movements behind the enemy), and want to cover with a central command those special task units as well. (In Barbarossa battle scenario, there are 11 HQs... one could think of them as: 5 for the front, 3 for the 3 spearheads (directed at Leningrad, Moscow and Stalingrad), 2 for the fast "pocketing units" (that zig-zag between corridors created by spearheads) and 1 - just in case - supporting defenders of the home front.)

 

[gorgias96]

I dont advice u to attack URSS. AoD is the HoI2 version more disbalanced. The allied countries and URSS are greatly favored. U cant play with any country in axis out of Germany. If u play Italy or Japan the german IA lose with the URSS 100% of time. So u havent any chance to win the war.

Play the Iron Cross "Mod/Expansion", is a lot of fun and a lot of better that the vanilla game.

Sorry for my english.

 

[Count of Reval]

I dont advice u to attack URSS. AoD is the HoI2 version more disbalanced. The allied countries and URSS are greatly favored. U cant play with any country in axis out of Germany. If u play Italy or Japan the german IA lose with the URSS 100% of time. So u havent any chance to win the war.

You are too pessimistic. In my last handsoff test game (AoD 1.07, normal/normal, Liberia), AI Germany does quite well. They also own India.

 

[Count of Reval]

Let me quote one sad ignorant poster first...

I think that one of the main questions concerning this issue, which also interest me as a new player to HoI series, is: How big should be the German forces that would be enough for beating USSR in 1941-42 (in normal circumstances), and what would be the optimal mix of different unit types? In more detail... How many infantry and armor divisions are required for more or less comfortable win? How many HQs? Do you need any other unit types besides those three mentioned to be successful (including air support)? What land techs should be definitely researched before the assault? How do you choose your brigades?

In Barbarossa battle scenario, Germany starts with a following land units (many of them brigaded): 109 Infantry, 1 Cavalry, 16 Motorized, 7 Light Armor, 12 Armor, 2 Paratroopers, 4 Mountaineers, 11 HQ - 162 units in total - and some more troops from its allies. At least this amount and structure of troops gets the job done in most of the cases. But if you use blitzkrieg tactics well, what do you think, how much can you economize and save up at the expense of these land units involved in the operation? What is a number of troops that is sufficient? (For example, can you beat Russia only with 80 Infantry, 10 Armor and 5 HQ?)

Now I know how big can be the gap between the size of the Soviet forces in the Barbarossa battle scenario on the one hand and - in normal circumstances - in the 1936 scenario (as of June 1941) on the other. The outproduction of the AI makes the two cases in great extent incomparable - strategies that work in the battle scenario can't be extended on one-to-one basis to the same operation of the main scenario. Just take a look at those figures...

Soviet Union army in the start of Barbarossa battle scenario:
94 Infantry, 7 Cavalry, 23 Motorized, 38 Light Armor, 8 Armor, 5 Paratroopers, 7 Mountaineers, 6 HQ - 188 units in total.

Soviet Union army in 1936 scenario before Barbarossa (as of June 1941):
183 Infantry, 5 Cavalry, 82 Motorized, 4 Light Armor, 45 Armor, 0 Paratroopers, 11 Mountaineers, 3 HQ - 333 units in total.

Anyway, the question about how big should the German forces be to beat Russians should inevitable put into context of the size and structure of the opposing army (what a surprise!) - luckily the map/terrain stays the same. But suppose the Soviet army consists of 333 land units with a structure presented above (a lot of mobile units)... Taken into account German troops' quality advantage, with what force would you dare to launch an attack as Germany in this situation? (Now I'm scared too: often mentioned 100 Infantry + 15 Armor can't be enough.)

 

[unmerged(140582)]

Yes, it's enough. At least for experienced players. Though I don't actually consider myself to be a particularly good player - I mostly avoid deliberate encirclements since its a weak point of the AI, more often than not I completely ignore the weather as long as it isn't winter and sometimes I embarassingly forget to check for the proper command limit when ordering attacks (since I'm so used to having lots of HQs supporting me on the front that I'm sometimes unpleasantly surprised when there isn't one around).

Anyway, the German units aren't supposed to go up against the Soviets alone, at least not normally. You'll have to rope in some Balkan allies, who'll usually provide upwards of 50 additional cannon-fodder divisions. So it's less a 1:3 disadvantage and closer to 1:2, or maybe even 2:3 if you get everyone into the Axis. The superior German techs should ensure that you're always pretty comfortable with these odds.

I have a save from my last Barbarossa attempt - the 100 infantry/20 armored/10 HQs number comes from that game. I had wasted a lot of my attention and production on the Battle of the Atlantic (and assisting Italy in Africa) and several other sideshows - I started extremely late in September '41, there was a huge planning fuckup in the early parts of the war and I didn't realize that I had forgotten to order any motorized divisions until a few months before Barbarossa - in other words, the situation was far from ideal. Nevertheless, I still reached Bitter Peace in August '42.

 

[MarkusH]

This takes me back to my great german Reich was actually scared of them too but I attacked anyway and I was suprised how easy it was, I had a few setbacks but managed to conquer all way to mongolia when the game become inpossible to start again for some reason gave most of yugoslavia to my allies, novi sad and parts of croatia to hungary, zrenjanin to romania and the rest (besides slovenia) to italy. entire norway to my swedish allies and st. petersburg to finland. the conquered the soviets. Japan sucked however only conquered a part of china and then didnä't bother to do anything more, colombia actually conquered some islands from them

 

[Commander666]

Playing seriously I would probably go through Turkey and enter the Soviets back door. Particularly the oil rich province of Baku.

Your back door approach to defeating the Reds sounds great but has some serious diplomatic, logistic, and military problems.

DIPLOMATICALLY, as Bulgaria is probably in the Axis alliance, you really are not "going through Turkey" but rather going thru your partner Bulgaria to first take Greece, and then going thru Turkey to finally attack the Soviets. This will result in all the provinces of Turkey and any further advance into Russia going to the credit of Bulgaria because - regardless of who annexes Greece (be it you or your partners Bulgaria or Italy) the Greek province of Kavala will go to Bulgaria because Bulgaria has cores on Kavala. Bulgaria will claim Kavala in spite of whatever advance you plan. In fact, Bulgaria will annex Greece - even if you don't - as soon as Athens is taken (and I am sure you will not omit taking Athens to eliminate a huge threat of remaining Greek troops on your flank). So, the only way around the fact that progress into Turkey will result in all provinces becoming Bulgarian is to use amphibs on Turkey to give Germany a new fresh landing past Kavala so future provinces taken are indeed German controlled and not Bulgarian controlled. If you try that (amphibing Turkey) you will encounter the next problem - LOGISTICS.

Even if you could place German transports in the Mediterranean to conduct an amphib on Turkey (only possible if you deny Italy the Yugoslavia provinces it claims along the Adriatic Sea by the way you conduct the conquest of Yugoslavia) your transports will not survive very long against the British fleets roaming the Med. But let's say you did manage to amphib Turkey with German troops to so start a new German controlled territory from which all further progress towards Russia results in the next conquered provinces also being German. Your supplies to those new German controlled provinces in Turkey and finally Russia will all run thru your ally Bulgaria and/or Italy. While that is not bad, unfortunately for you - once you get the oil rich prize of Baku - you will discover that you simply have no way to extract any oil because you don't have a single port you can convoy to. As both Gibraltar and the Suez are closed to you, and all other ports that you can reach are your allies (possibly Nationalist Spain, Italy, Bulgaria, Romania and maybe even Yugoslavia) you just have no way to extract any resources from that beachhead you won in Turkey and which you extended into Russia to reach oil rich Baku. In fact, you need to wait for your normal Barbarossa to conquer deep enough into Russia and get around the Black Sea to connect to your isolated territory in Turkey before you can extract resources. Likely you will also suffer serious TC problems for all your troops advancing past Turkey into Russia.

If the above two reasons were not enough to cancel any thoughts of attacking Russia via a German conquest of Turkey, perhaps the third reason will: MILITARY

Neither Greece nor Turkey are “push overs”. Assuming you are allied with Italy, Bulgaria, Romania, and Hungary you will still find that the military units you need to first take out Greece and then Turkey seriously deplete the strong position you could have against Russia if all those troops were on the German-Russian border facing Russia in a normal Barbarossa set up. The greatest loss of strength will not be in the obviously fewer ground troops you can position against Russia, but will be in the greatly reduced air force that you can put against Russia at the German-Russian border because you will need to relocate several of your Interceptor and some Tactical Bombers to the south to have success in the conquest of Greece and Turkey so you can march on to Baku. By the time you get those diverted air units placed into air bases you just conquered in Turkey you should loose terribly in any air encounter with Soviet planes because you are advancing onto bases that start at zero value and your aircraft are also suffering heavy loss of org due to rebasing forwards. It’s not at all like the 100% org planes on 100% airbases you can build along the German-Soviet border before Barbarossa starts. And the real killer of your German planes will be the fact that you are moving your weakest air units onto the worst airbases but taking on the very strongest part of the Soviet Air Force which is the two sets of interceptors that the Reds traditionally base at Odessa and Sevastopol and which will cut your air assets in Turkey to pieces. And without an effective German Air Force in conquered Turkey you will probably next realize just how easy it is for the Soviets to halt your planned advance to Baku by redeploying a few of their units to that most defendable mountain region of The Caucasus where you simply will not advance without adequate air support, mountain troops, and greatly superior numbers. But if you do, be sure to cover all the beaches along the way because any human Soviet player would be sure to build some transports at Sevastopol and land in your rear and then eliminate your whole “Baku Expedition Force”.

In my opinion, a German thrust into Turkey seriously decreases the chances of success for a German Barbarossa. Historically many people think that Hitler failed at Stalingrad only because he delayed the start of Barbarossa by three weeks helping out the Italians.

While the idea of a “diversion attack thru Turkey” is a good idea, it should not be done using German forces. It would be much better to let Italy realize it’s historical dreams of connecting from Venice to Tirana/Vlore (it has cores on all the Yugoslav provinces in-between) and possibly – if Italy smashes the British fleets in the Med – then let Italy amphib Turkey and take on the Soviet Black Sea Fleet. Italy can easily go around Greece if desired as they got the convoys and short convoy routes. In fact, Italy could go all the way to Baku. They could use the oil too.

 

[Commander666]

Help, I'm terminally scared to attack the Soviet Union

I sympathize with you completely even though I have successfully done Barbarossa several times on earlier versions.

Playing AoD 1.05 the first time I started with my favourite country Germany and played until Barbarossa historically occurred setting up all my forces and allies the very best I could. But then I went back a couple months and switched to playing the Soviet Union, working frantically to reposition forces and prepare for Germany’s coming onslaught, and just managed to repel the invasion and – eventually - annexed Germany. However, I don’t think the Soviet AI plays as well as a human, so I would not worry too much about launching your Barbarossa. As stated above, it is only a game and losing (or nearly losing) can be a lot more fun than an easy win.

I would like to add a couple points not mentioned above to help Germany win. While the importance of a strong German Luftwaffe was mentioned, I don’t think the importance of good front line airbases was mentioned. As Germany I place ALL my air force on or very near the German-Soviet border. I don’t care about the Allies bombing Dresden to rubble but I do care that on opening Barbarossa I have my aircraft placed so as to insure quick air superiority over the Reds. As such I build a lot of bases in old Poland and make sure at least 8 interceptor units support any tactical bombing run. That way, when the Reds intercept my planes I got the over whelming odds to cut them to pieces while my own air units remain strong enough to keep flying. Using the same believe that air power is the key to winning or losing at Barbarossa, I plan the land conquest to concentrate on capturing Soviet provinces with air bases. The fact that this often also results in surrounding masses of Reds is merely incidental but certainly most helpful!

The other point not mentioned is the importance of mixing panzers with infantry to get the substantial “combined arms” bonus that you will see when you click on any ongoing battle and hover your mouse over the individual troops participating. And, while I don’t know the exact stats, I think it is really important to at least have one HQ every third province along the battle front (so all units are at least next to a HQ).

Finally, I long ago gave up dreams of “panzers blitzing thru the Russian front”. While it is possible, in the beginning such panzers end up fighting alone against the next line of Reds (includes Reds that retreated back) and so the mighty panzers quickly become meowing pussies. As tempting as it is to push with a big stack on that enemy province ahead of you, it usually ends up as a mistake AND it is much better for your army to wait until nearby units complete their advance so the next battle can be done from several angles of attack. “Many angles of attack” and “effective air force” is, in my experience, the sure way to beat the Reds. That will weaken their front the most while keeping your units the strongest possible. Eventually an opportunity for a surround will open up. Seize it then, because for every dozen Red units you eliminate they are building a dozen more.

 

[Commander666]

The Soviets were prepared to lose Moscow, the Soviets would have just retreated further, if necessary into Siberia, to continue their resistance against the fascist invaders.

You are absolutely right Dain. Napoleon learned the hard way that the Soviets were prepared to give up everything in the west of their country to draw the invader in deep enough so he would freeze and starve to death in the inhospitable Soviet climate while suffering huge losses of supplies along nearly impossible overly long supply routes the invader was forced to maintain. Besides, look at all the industry in Russia that is EAST of Moscow. They did not need Russia west of Moscow to turn out thousands of new tanks and millions more infantry. In fact, they were quite happy to scorch their own country just to deny the invader any scrap of food or hovel of a shelter. But there was a definite psychological element to losing their key historic cities. Hitler understood that (and the lessons learned by Napoleon) but he failed to take either Lenningrad, Stalingrad or Moscow because he was stupid enough to go against the advice of all his generals and attack Russia in the first place when he couldn't even paddle the short distance across to England. Of course, having another idiot like Goring for a pal didn't help Hitler see the realties that he needed to see in order to relistically evaluate the true difficulties of his planned expansions.

But in the game we can all do better than Hitler, right? I brought the United Kingdom to it's knees using just rockets. Got it down to only 8 ICs and never suffered a single bomber even damaged. Saved me uddles of ICs on reinforcement and prepared the way for a rather easy conquest of the Isles. Hitler should have stayed at home once he had Norway's heavy water and just concentrated on nukes instead of marching the Wermacht into Russia without them even having a scarf or mittens to wear.

But then Hitler optimistically believed if he could get the 3 key cities before winter the Soviets would capitulate. He was right about the importance of those cities, but wrong to not anticipate how hard the Reds would try to deny him those psychological victories. Leningrad held out for 872 days under the most horrific conditions until the seige ended. In any case, I doubt very much the SU would have collapsed even with the taking of Leningrad, Stalingrad and Moscow. Would anyone willingly give up to an enemy if they have the choice to simply retreat several hundred miles (or even a thousand) and so remain free?

 

[Commander666]

In my last handsoff test game (AoD 1.07, normal/normal, Liberia), AI Germany does quite well. They also own India.

I am most amazed by your screen shot because I have never seen an AI Germany do so well. I have not yet played 1.07 (only up to 1.05) but I don't think it matters. Neither in earlier games (HoI 2 and Doomsday) have I ever seen such a huge expansion of AI Germany. Of course, I am always playing a major or medium power and I am therefore inclined to think that your screen shot is only possible because you played, as you say, hands off Liberia (a most minor puppet).

In short, I am wondering if there is any relevancy to your test game result. Could it be that AI Germany's expansion we see in this screen shot only occurs if playing a minor? Have you ever seen anything similar playing any real country and not some little puppet?

I realize you did the test to run the game quickly to get other info and am NOT criticizing that. I am just questioning if there is any relevancy in the German AI expansion we see in screen shot. Would it be greatly different if you had run the test playing UK, USA or some other country. Like just turn off all the message notices and run the game to same time. I mean, I am just saying I have never seen a German AI beyond the historical when playing any major country normally.

Did you arrive at the Red Army total of 333 units by running Liberia hands-off until June 1941? If so, there may not be any relevancy to the figure so gotten. This might be a case of "What you see doesn't exist if you look at it in normal play". I don't know and am just wondering how this screen shot result occurred?

But I would not expect the unit totals to be similiar in the Barbarossa Battle Scenario (or any scenario) versus the unit totals that will be gotten playing the 1936 game to any given same time. I am sure somebody can give much more accurrate info on this, but I would naturally expect any scenario to use much less units to so make a simpler game (ie. "scenario"). The only hard facts I can supply is from the game I am currently playing which is the Soviet Union. But I did not start that game as SU. Rather I played 1936 as Germany and switched to SU a couple months before Barbarrossa. So most of the building was done by Soviet AI while I played Germany. Hence it should be a very realistic example of what the Soviet Union AI built.

As of June 22, 1941 the Soviet Union had the following:
238 INF, 5 CAV, 38 MOT, 4 LT ARM, 18 ARM, 0 PARA, 11 MTN and 8 HQ for total of 322 units.

You got using the 1936 scenario and running to June (date unspecified)
183 Infantry, 5 Cavalry, 82 Motorized, 4 Light Armor, 45 Armor, 0 Paratroopers, 11 Mountaineers, 3 HQ - 333 units in total.

So, that is actually a very similiar result. Interesting.

ANYWAY, if you got your figures running Liberia to start of Barbarossa then I seem to have nullified my main criticism regarding the "validity of running a minor puppet". It seems to be valid. And that would give a lot of support to the validity of that huge German AI we see in the screen shot. But I still have never seen a German AI expanded to that degree (and it includes India too) so I am still wondering if anyone else has ever seen a German AI be so successful. Heil Hitler!

 

[Commander666]

- finland is a worthy ally, too. they can alone - or with minimal german support - defend scandinavia (sweden most importantly),

I don't understand your comment of "Sweden most importantly"

You are discussing about Finland being a worthy ally of Germany (true) and Finland can defend Scandinavia (also true). Then, depending how one reads the next part, you seem to imply that Sweden is also a most important ally. But that is not possible because Sweden - as a democratic nation - can not join alliances unless their intervensionism is very high. If you have managed playing as Germany to influence Sweden so successfully to get their intervernsionism high enough that they joined the Axis alliance, I would like to know what German Foreign Minister you used.

Perhaps I am mis-reading your piece and you mean to say that Finland is important to defend Scandanavia which includes Sweden. In short Finland is important to have in the Axis alliance so it can defend Sweden.

Defend Sweden from who?

May I point out to you that the only threat of invasion on Sweden is yourself - Germany. I have never known Sweden to be threatened by the Soviets. The Soviets went to war with Finland because the Soviets and Finns have core claims to the same 3 provinces on their border. At least that is how the game portrays it. In reality I think Soviet Union and Finland simply had "border disputes" that the Soviets wrongly thought they could fix by invading Finland. But there never was any intention - even if the Reds had won the Winter war - to go on and invade Sweden. So Sweden does not need to be defended from anybody except a megalomaniac like Hitler (ie. the human who plays Germany and is bent on world conquest).

Actually, in reality and in the game, it is Sweden who helped defend Finland against the Reds in so far as they sent to Finland supplies and some troops too, I believe.

Or perhaps there is another interpretation of your comment regarding Sweden?

 

[lazarus.plus]

I have said before on these forums and I would say again that the ultimate force multiplier is quality. Smaller numbers of more mobile and potent soldiery will overcome the enemy when handled properly, even when outnumbered by odds of 5-1 or worse.

If you are fast enough and focus your industry and research on self propelled artillery and the best armor and mechanized infantry you can get, you can have a very small and overwhelmingly powerful force that will simply cut the enemy masses into ribbons through maneuver. I am suggesting envelopments with this strategy, oh well, if you call it gamey I will still be able to sleep at night.

Do not build any additional infantry unless you feel exceptionally nervous about a low mass. In my opinion foot infantry are simply too slow. Great for holding static lines of defence or for a slow push, but not great at much else. This strategy definitely requires nerves because you will need to settle the wars and seize resources in order to keep moving forward. You could potentially run out of oil in 42 if you didn't secure enough supplies.

Momentum is key. Lean on the enemy until he falls over. Then step on his windpipe. (To be poetical about it.)

There are endless variations on how you can rapidly maneuver the Red Army into destruction. One of my favorites are pincers from south Poland that undercut the Pripet Marshes and arc north to land against the sea, and arc south to hook the Ukraine against the Black Sea. Use minimal force along the southern front and deliberately withdraw into the Carpathians, and then hold to suck them in to prevent an escape. Because the fast units are always the first "in the sack" you have a good chance of wiping out all mobile units in the south with this enormous pocket.