• 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.
Good actions all round. I picture the poor riflemen from the 133rd frantically looting and burning everything in sight, desparately torching yet another supply depot while the German Panzers are rolling towards Bucarest. Must've been one sucky assignment. ;)
The 133rd RF should be reconstituted as a Guards Rifle Divison, using any cadres that were evacuated out of the encirclement, or returned home wounded at the early stages of the raid.

Once I'd developed the Gds Inf tech (I think about feb 42) I actually did sort of do this. As I'm not reinforcing my rifle divisions some get shattered and as they usually had very high experience levels I'd upgrade them to gds status as they recovered their manpower - with fairly high inf practical this mostly took about a month. Feels more real than building Gds formations from scratch and it meant that my Gds units started out with very high exp. If you then research the Gds warfare tech in the Common Weapons mod you get 5% on org and 5% on morale for Gds units at each stage. Once I had two levels of this done, you really notice how tough the Gds formations become, its not just they could stand more damage in combat but they also recover pretty quickly. Credit to DiDay for such a simple elegant way to get a Soviet player to start to emulate the evolution of the Soviet OOB. Also good now in SF that you can upgrade.

Also tend to upgrade armour much more slowly. Losing a good tank div for 6-8 weeks is quite a hole in my offensive power - but again it did pay off over time.

I like the little dog serving in the Red Navy. :)

I'm going to see how many animal pictures I can include. I've got a camel lined for a quick cameo (bad pun I know), there must be more ....
 
"This was the leopard's nature": Stalemate in the Ukraine, September 1941

The start of September briefly brought a lull across the Ukrainian front. 5 Army, after the defeat at Konotop, had to pull 1 Tank Corps back to refit. Elsewhere German and Axis units were redeploying from Rumania back to the main battle front.

Equally it became clear that the Germans had reinforced their armoured forces in the Ukraine. Some seemed to be either freshly raised or brought from France, others had seen action already in Bielorussia and at Rzev. In effect, the 9 Army counterstroke had not only bought time, it had also forced the Germans to permamently divert units to the Ukraine away from the Moscow axis.



Some of these new units operated broadly on the Bryansk sector, sometimes up against the 5 Army in the Ukrainian sector, sometimes against 10 Army in the Moscow sector. Soviet intelligence identified 3 heavy armoured divisions (2, 4 & 9 Heavy Armour) and 9 Panzer divisions (1,2,5,6,16,18,20 & 26 Pzr) now in action across the Ukraine. Of these 9 Heavy Armour and 5 of the Panzer divisions were new to the sector (1.2,16,18 & 26 Pzr). If this increased the pressure in the Ukraine, it lessened the power of the German offensive on the Moscow sector.

The fighting again split into 3 sectors. The fall of Konotop saw 1st Tank Corps pulled out of the line for a refit. Initially the German forces were diverted to shore up their positions at Bryansk but by 17 September, they sought to break 5 Army's front at the small town of Pyriatin. The first battle from 17-19 September saw 6 Pzr beaten off.



The town was briefly lost on 22 September


(T-34 destroyed in the second battle of Pyriatin)

and then regained from 2 Panzer by 27 September.



The southern flank for 1 Tank was held at Lebedyn. Here from 23 September to 4 October, the Italians launched their first independent offensive on the Soviet front and crashed into 49 Armija Corps.



Unfortunately for them, this unit had just been reinforced by a brigade of KV1s and, as at Leningrad, these proved very effective when used defensively.


(emergency field repairs for the KVs assigned to 19 Rifle Division)

This pattern of both sides gaining a short time advantage, followed by a counterstroke was repeated across 5 and 12 Army sectors.

The frailty of the German supply net left them vulnerable


(Soviet partisan operations continued, especially in the Bryansk-Homyel-Kiev region)

but their advantages in terms of equipment and tactical skill meant they could usually halt any Soviet blow before a decisive breakthrough was achieved. But for the first time, it felt as if the RKKA was controlling the pace and location of operations, not the Wehrmacht.

Along the bulk of 12 and 26 Army sectors, the Soviets contented themselves with a fighting retreat. STAVKA had stripped this sector of local reserves and these were moving to reinforce 10 Army's offensive at Bryansk. The result was a number of major attritional defensive actions, most notably at Kremenchuk. The latter became the focus for both sides as it was seen as key to the dominating the Lower Dniepr.



A 20 day battle raged from 20 September to 9 October before 26 Army admitted defeat and pulled back. With almost 12,000 dead from both sides, the net effect was to stall the German drive directly towards Kharkov. This battle also set the tone for the campaign in the central sector of the Ukraine for the rest of the year. Both sides tended to mount a few, large scale but localised attempts to pierce the front. These set piece engagements were invariably bloody but indicative that, by the end of September, the Ukrainian front had settled into a stalemate.


(Soviet infantry attack at Kremenchuk)

Key to this was the firm Soviet hold on Dnipropetrovsk. A combination of a major city guarding the wide lower Dniepr, with its north flank protected by the lakes produced by the great Stalin dam, gave 26 Army a near impregnable defensive position. The Germans were forced to heavily screen this sector while at the same time looking to mass so as to breakthrough to the north or south of this de facto fortress.

This breakthrough looked to have been achieved when 15 Panzer breached the Lower Dniepr at Nova Kakhovoka on 23 September after 5 days of intense fighting. This breach cost them 2,528 dead (and with 1,823 Soviet dead).


(Soviet artillery moving into action on the Lower Dniepr battles)

This allowed them to commence a major offensive into the Dombas and to isolate the Crimea. Yakmivka fell in a bitter action from 23 September to 1 October leading to a direct threat to the coal mines of the Dombas.



With this defeat, a counterblow by 64 Corps from the Crimean Isthmus at Novooleksiyivka was broken off on 4 October. The forces in the Crimea were now isolated from the main front in the South Ukraine.

By the end of September, the position in the Ukraine was complex. Essentially, and largely aided by German problems with their supply lines, in the north 5 Army was more than holding its ground. In conjunction with the fast developing Bryansk counterstroke it was making some gains, even if these were frequently lost to German counterblows. In the 12 and 26 Army sectors, the war was becoming one of isolated violent actions, it seemed as if the Germans could no longer mount a sustained assault here. However, STAVKA was consistently weakening these two armies with 5-6 rifle divisions sent to the Bryansk battles and, at the start of October, 8 Mech Corps sent south to bolster 9 Army's positions on the Azov-Stalino sector.


(T-34 of 8 Mech being redeployed to the Stalino-Dombas sector)

Thus overall, both Soviet Fronts in the Ukraine could feel confident that they had done more than just slow the German offensive. Except in the far south, they had all but stalled it, any gains being isolated with the German's incapable of building any momentum from one victory to the next.

The costs reflected this relative stalemate. In August, Soviet dead amounted to 46,558 (and a further 14-15,000 prisoners). The Germans lost 28,353 and their allies 6,586 (and some 7,000 prisoners). In September, Soviet combat losses were 32,313, the German casualties increased to 29.530 as the battles became more attritional and their allies lost a further 7,085. September, effectively set the tone for the rest of the year in the Ukraine. The only sector where the Germans were able to sustain their offensive was the far south, elsewhere both sides reached for a decisive action but in reality neither side had the power to achieve anything but stalemate.

The focus of both supreme commands was on Moscow and Leningrad.
 
Manpower, precious manpower.
How much do you have left, and how much does Germany have left?
It is all about who shall be dry first.

Do they get more monthly manpower than you?
 
I don't think the Common Weapons mod has the manpower modifiers for the Great Patriotic War, does it? There are some very nice manpower & reinforcement rate boosts for the USSR in ICE.

Good job so far. As David Glantz wrote in his book "When the Titans Clashed", the German rapier was defeated by a blunt Soviet club - i.e. a few powerful German mobile formations vs. Soviet armies that kept being recreated after every defeat. Out-teched and under-weaponed, those Soviet formations bled the Germans to death...
 
Nice job, though without an 'after' map it's hard to gauge the accuracy of your statement that the Ukraine is basically a stalemate, except in the south. :)

I'm impressed with the Italians - a whole corps! No, seriously, I don't think I've ever seen such a potent allied force (as opposed to little dribs and drabs here and there). Of course, it didn't really do them any good... But I appreciate the effort.

Does the camel feature into the next push to Moscow or Leningrad, or will we have to wait a bit longer for that?
 
Very nicely done managing to withstand the Axis attacks and even mounting a successful and daring amphibious attack of your own against Romania. Hopefully the stalemate between the Axis and yourself can be continued until you can muster enough men to begin the counter-attack in earnest.
 
Yep, in the end it is gonna revolve about manpower and shere numbers. The Germans have nothing to fear from the Americans, because they wont mount an decisive invasion in the West soon. So you are probably on your own for the next few years. Just the way we like it.
 
Manpower, precious manpower.
How much do you have left, and how much does Germany have left?
It is all about who shall be dry first.

Do they get more monthly manpower than you?
Yep, in the end it is gonna revolve about manpower and shere numbers. The Germans have nothing to fear from the Americans, because they wont mount an decisive invasion in the West soon. So you are probably on your own for the next few years. Just the way we like it.

I'll cover manpower - both mine and theirs in the next post. I rather foolishly ignored the agriculture techs till it was almost too late but I'd (rather wisely) conserved a lot of manpower by not routinely reinforcing the rifle divisions. In the end they ran lower than I did, but I had a lot of shattered divisions.

The US are resolutely ignoring this grubby European war ... they are close to the allies but see no threat worth bestirring themselves over. Even if they do, the AI has to solve the problem of a German occupied UK so I'm not expecting to meet US units on the Oder to be honest.

I don't think the Common Weapons mod has the manpower modifiers for the Great Patriotic War, does it? There are some very nice manpower & reinforcement rate boosts for the USSR in ICE.

Good job so far. As David Glantz wrote in his book "When the Titans Clashed", the German rapier was defeated by a blunt Soviet club - i.e. a few powerful German mobile formations vs. Soviet armies that kept being recreated after every defeat. Out-teched and under-weaponed, those Soviet formations bled the Germans to death...

In truth, if the Soviets don't lose, they win. The challenge is in the not losing bit.

No the vanilla has a nice General Winter event that boosts org regain and manpower (but nothing like ICE). I never had the Great Patriotic War event fire - I think as I patched to 2.03c fairly late and that had different events for both that and the industry to Siberia than the original - so it may have got rather confused.

Nice job, though without an 'after' map it's hard to gauge the accuracy of your statement that the Ukraine is basically a stalemate, except in the south. :)

I'm impressed with the Italians - a whole corps! No, seriously, I don't think I've ever seen such a potent allied force (as opposed to little dribs and drabs here and there). Of course, it didn't really do them any good... But I appreciate the effort.

Does the camel feature into the next push to Moscow or Leningrad, or will we have to wait a bit longer for that?

For sept in the Ukraine, the before and after would have been more or less exactly the same. At the end they had a toehold over the central Dniepr and had isolated the Crimea but most of the rest of front saw the same provinces traded back and forth.

The German AI seemed to often leave whole sectors to its allies, where if I got lucky later on my tanks got to play to great effect. In fact it seemed fairly cynical, if I got a pocket it usually contained axis allies either under their own colours or as exp forces.

There was a famous camel that the 12th Gds Inf took from Stalingrad to Berlin via Bagration. The beast even learnt, apparently, to hide in air raid shelters. Unfortunately my source for it is Vassily Grossman and he left no pictures I could smuggle in. My camel picture has a different provenance, but will appear soon enough - when I have to confess to yet another major foul up.

Very nicely done managing to withstand the Axis attacks and even mounting a successful and daring amphibious attack of your own against Romania. Hopefully the stalemate between the Axis and yourself can be continued until you can muster enough men to begin the counter-attack in earnest.

From now on, on small sectors of the front I've got counterattacks almost all the time. Most go no where but it forces the Germans to respond to my actions rather than the other way around. I don't get the chance for a theatre level offensive for quite a while yet - and my first attempt does rather end in tears before bedtime :eek:o
 
Annex 1: The Numbers of War, June-December 1941

Adapted from Military and Industrial Statistics of the Soviet Union 1917-2000 by C Zetkin.

Perhaps one of the biggest mistakes in any military history is to put too much emphasis on numbers. An army can lose more than its opponent and win a battle, an economy can be smaller and produce more weapons. So raw numbers are never the only explanation. However, they can be very informative as to what happened and start to offer some explanation as to why.

This section studies the period from 7 June to the end of December 1942. Further annexes look at later years of the war.

The first impression is that the RKKA expanded considerably in this period, despite the loss of 15 rifle and 5 garrison brigades:



At the same time the VVS more or less remained static (it lost one wing of Pe-2s to German interceptors)



as did the RKKH with minimal losses in destroyers and submarines



However, these are perhaps the least useful of all measures. They tell us little about the Soviet Union's ability to sustain operations and to ultimately defeat the Axis powers.

One consequence of the loss of so much territory was a severe loss of leadership – whether for research, to lead the army or for the NKVD. It is worth noting the temporary damage done by the catastrophic defeats at the end of July.



One ongoing problem in this period was the leadership of Soviet forces at the divisional level. The constant gaps meant lower organisation, slower recovery after a battle and generally made Soviet operations more cumbersome than they should have been. By the end of the 1941-2 winter this had become so bad, that effort was switched away from research to providing additional officers.



In this period, raw manpower was less of a problem for either the Germans



or the Soviets



However, both were to face growing constraints.



In this the Soviet decision not to regularly reinforce the Rifle Divisions left them vulnerable to shattering but also meant that manpower could be channelled into new formations and the armoured units. Note that of all the main participants, the UK faced the least problem but, with the loss of the bulk of the British Isles lacked the industrial capacity to make much use of this.

In the main Soviet industry proved more resiliant than leadership capacity. Despite the losses, at the end of the year this was effectively only 17 units less than it had been at the start of July. This resiliance was mainly due to the speed with which plant was switched to Siberia.



If we now look at casualties, the first impression is that intensity of combat peaked over August to September when the Red Army sought to fight the Germans to a standstill. However, in reality on the main Moscow-Leningrad sector, only November represented a relative lull when both sides reorganised for what they hoped would be the decisive actions.


(this shows the 4 major sub divisions of the Soviet forces in the West)



The shifting intensity and balance of the war can be explored in a number of ways.

First is to simply look at the number of combats that started each month and who started it. Fairly obviously, until October, the Germans started most actions. This reflects their strategic control over the pace and place of operations. The relatively high number of actions in July is misleading. Many of these were little but short clashes between advance and rear guards, over in a matter of hours.



This can be shown by looking at the average number of days each combat lasted. Now we start to see how the war actually intensified as the year went on. There may have been a reduction in the spread of battles, but those that started were more and more critical to both sides – and thus fiercely contested.



The final table confirms this. This shows the losses of both armies for every day of combat. It is worth noting that despite all its defeats in the summer and early Autumn, the Soviet army was able to inflict roughly even losses on the Germans. Finally the battles at the end of the year show a significant increase in intensity.

 
Do you love Excel, loki100? ;) That's a lot of numbers you're crunching.

The numbers are not looking so good for the Germans - their base manpower is vastly less and they have been unable to deliver any lopsided blows against the Soviet hordes (nothing like the monstruous encirclements from Summer 1941). Of course, they are pushing deep into your territories, but based on the numbers above neither your manpower nor your industrial base is seriously affected. Add the almost equal casualty numbers and it looks like the Germans are doomed in the long run - unless they manage to take significant resources away from you, or destroy a large section of your armies.

Lots of numbers, lots to digest. And how on earth do the British-in-exile have such an ocean of manpower? Have they conscripted all the warrior castes in India wholesale?

PS: Japan's manpower numbers are pretty scary, too. I don't remember what their relationship vis-a-vis you is, but do you have anything left on the border with Manchukuo?
 
Wow, these are some stats, a lot of work to make. Kudos! All in all it seems that the SU is pretty safe for the moment. The initial shock of Barbarossa is certainly a thing of the past. And the Soviet can take revenge.

All the best!!
 
A very interesting update. Most of the stats seem to provide reason for cheer for you. The Axis did not inflict as many casualties on you as I had thought, plus their lesser manpower seems to show that you will come out on top should things continue as they are. I too am rather shocked at the British manpower though!
 
Lovely, but hard to believe that Germany gets more manpower monthly than you. :mad:

I think what is shows is the importance of the agriculture tech ... its never really clear just what is affected by the modifier for some of the techs but that makes it really clear. My agric tech is at 1936, I guess there's is 1940 (they are up to date with everything), so they are generating as much manpower as I do off half the base value. One thing I've learnt is not to ignore that tech so much in the future (or the trickleback one - I end up putting a lot of effort into both to get the manpower situation under control)

Interesting theater shapes. :p

my orginal plan was to fight effectively with 2 - one north of the pripyet, one in the ukraine, hadn't actually expected the Germans to go so far east. I make very little use of the Theatre AI so its more for OOB organisation.

Do you love Excel, loki100? ;) That's a lot of numbers you're crunching.

The numbers are not looking so good for the Germans - their base manpower is vastly less and they have been unable to deliver any lopsided blows against the Soviet hordes (nothing like the monstruous encirclements from Summer 1941). Of course, they are pushing deep into your territories, but based on the numbers above neither your manpower nor your industrial base is seriously affected. Add the almost equal casualty numbers and it looks like the Germans are doomed in the long run - unless they manage to take significant resources away from you, or destroy a large section of your armies.
A very interesting update. Most of the stats seem to provide reason for cheer for you. The Axis did not inflict as many casualties on you as I had thought, plus their lesser manpower seems to show that you will come out on top should things continue as they are. I too am rather shocked at the British manpower though!
Wow, these are some stats, a lot of work to make. Kudos! All in all it seems that the SU is pretty safe for the moment. The initial shock of Barbarossa is certainly a thing of the past. And the Soviet can take revenge.

wasn't sure if it was too much - I did stop once my mind was starting to think of a few statistical tests to run and maybe a bit of ANOVA, multiple regression analyses :D. At which stage it was looking far too much like something I do for work, not fun.

Its come out of how I'm storing data. In the past I've played a bit, written up an update, played a bit etc. However, partly to get the right perspective, I've played a fair bit ahead, so had to keep better records. Partly these are just notes and ideas, but I captured virtually every battle report as a screenshot and transferred it, and lots of other thiings, off to a spreadsheet. So at least when I'm writing up a post I can usually work out what the hell I was up to at the time.

I think the near even losses are coming off a few things. One is, up to autumn 1941, if I was in a losing battle I tended to run off before the losses became too skewed. Second the AI remains very linear in its approach, so it tends to generate say 4 battles where it has a small advantage rather than 2-3 where it has a real advantage (somewhat later on one front I briefly got into a very good position and the casualty ratio went vastly in my favour for this reason). On the other hand, I nowhere have numerical superiority. So I can generate the weight for a counterattack by robbing other sectors, or by logistics etc, but then, at least in 1941 I neither can, nor I do I dare, push in too deep. So my offensives tend to be linear as well and then add in a fair few Soviet attacks designed to occupy them rather than beat them and it all seemed to come out even.

So yes, one of the big dynamics is which side hits bottom first and if the other then has the capacity to take advantage. As a player I can nurse my manpower a bit more deliberately than the AI does (it later on spends a lot replacing losses in a bunch of axis minors that shifted to being expeditionary forces).

Overall, I still think a stalemate is possible, certainly this is not going to end in a Soviet WC in any case.

As to the UK - looks like the 'India' question has been raised again - in HOI2 the UK got no/little from India, now it looks like its all feeding in. For this game its irrelevant as they lack the IC to convert that pool into combat formations, but off a 1936 start if the UK can snag/build IC, then it could end up with an awful lot of troops.


Lots of numbers, lots to digest. And how on earth do the British-in-exile have such an ocean of manpower? Have they conscripted all the warrior castes in India wholesale?

PS: Japan's manpower numbers are pretty scary, too. I don't remember what their relationship vis-a-vis you is, but do you have anything left on the border with Manchukuo?

Things with Japan are wierd and tetchy. They are in the axis but not at war (in fact the only bit that is staying out of the main event so far). However when the Nationalists crashed out Guanxi and Xibei for some reason ended up in the axis and in the main war (which is how Guanxi got occupied by the UK & France). Equally for even odder reasons, Mengkukuo (? spell) is a Japan puppet but in the axis in its own right.

So when things kicked off, Sinkiang/Mongolia/Tuva on my side were at war with Xibei/Guanxi/Meng-thingie (& later Yunnan). So this looks like a war of the incompetents which I more or less ignored except for dispatching a rifle division to join in the glorious victory.

Problem is Japan has then converted a fair bit of its army into an expeditionary force - mostly to Xibei, so Sinkiang's rubbish 1918 inf and militia suddenly get humped by rather good troops.

I'll cover this in a post soonish (just sketching out how best to report the autumn-winter battles), but I have to strip some of the trans-baikal forces to shore up Central Asia but equally I keep the overall numbers in the Far East as high as I can - I don't trust Japan one little bit.
 
Lovely, but hard to believe that Germany gets more manpower monthly than you.

I am showing my ignorance of HoI3, but do they get manpower from occupied territories?
 
Last edited:
I am showing my in=gnorance of HoI3, but do they get manpower from occupied territories?
The occupation governments define how much of it they gain of it.
Not too much I believe, even with the best type of policy.
Maybe up to 25% max?

Both screenshots are for 1 oct 41 (apols should have made that clear), so the German base manpower will include N France, Benelux, UK - where I'd guess the AI has picked the most benign occupation policy, Poland where its scripted to the most malign and those areas of the USSR they have their paws on.

I'm not sure what the conversion factors for occupation is - I know you get masses of leadership off the more benign policies but less sure about manpower (one could say I really ought to learn how the game works at some stage ;)). But if you look at the baseline they have 639 and I have almost 1200.

To me those numbers sound fair enough. Its the consequence of the tech that is then meaning we both, at this stage, got more or less the same actually made available.

So the key is the impact of any suitable ministers (I got rid of the one who boosts manpower in favour of one who gives me faster org regain) and the agriculture tech. In previously games (prior to SF) I tended to ignore this one, as the USSR you never really got the sustained bashing from the AI that meant I ran into real problems ... its a testimony to the improved AI that this time my manpower is a real issue ... & that driving their's down is a major in game strategy.

So I guess that the +7.5% they have is coming off 3 iterations more than I have of the agric tech (at this stage I was on 36), what does surprise me is that this has such an impact, since its implying a roughly double conversion from potential to actual manpower - I wonder if the tool tip is either (a) just showing base manpower off German owned as opposed to occupied territory or (b) not showing any minister impact, or (c) its just not clear what the impact of the tech is and somehow 57.5% gives you double the manpower that 50% does (may be a bug, as it wouldn't be the only part of the game rules where an exponential rather than multiplier has been left - or a + instead of a - :confused:

In game its hard to find any baseline comparisons (since provinces are swithching back and forth all the time) but I may have a poke around with a 1/1/36 save file and test out different levels of the agric tech to see what the real impact is.

As a quick test here's the respective positions for where I am in-game (1 Mar 43):





so their base is down - makes sense as I've retaken some ground since Oct 41 and mine up, & I'm ahead a little bit in terms of monthly input. But the 1 level gap between our respective agric techs is worth +6.75% to the Germans - there are no relevant ministers on either side, so I must admit to being utterly bemused as to quite how this particular game mechanic works - I'll stick a post up on the main forum and see if anyone actually knows.
 
Game mechanics aside, it seems that Germany is in deep trouble by Mar'43 with 0MP and needing 486 to reinforce. Looking forward to finding out how it all goes!

the two positions aren't quite like with like. I'm saving my manpower as much as I can by not letting something like 80% of the army reinforce on a regular basis - just the armour and the guards. The rest are only allowed manpower when a division dips below 4000 (I try to bring it up to about 6000) or if it shatters and its got good experience (though most of those now get promoted to Gds - its as quick as waiting for the manpower to replenish). I originally did this to save IC so that it didn't all go to reinforcements, but now manpower is as important as IC. If I acted as the AI, I too would have 0 and a huge back log, so both armies have a lot of divisions very ground down (quite realistic really), its just I'm a bit more judgemental as to which ones.

So my guess is the real position is much closer than the screenshots imply.

as to where things are - well they are just getting stuck into their now traditional early Spring counterattack and shredding part of my front.