From: graham@cs.washington.edu (Stephen Graham)
Subject: Re: Fire in the East, German Strategy
Organization: Computer Science & Engineering, U. of Washington, Seattle
Date: Wed, 30 Dec 92 18:12:03 GMT

In article <Bzpp27.7D3@nocusuhs.nnmc.navy.mil> viktor@mgr.hjf.org (Viktor Kaufmann) writes:
>My big question deals with the German strategy.  When a group of friends
>and I played the Leningrad scenario, and then another scenario of our
>own creation, which expanded the Leningrad scenario to include
>Army Group Center (and Army Group South, if it fit on the same map), we
>found that the Germans were having a hard time breaking out.  Although
>it may be a result of our playing in too restricted an area, we decided
>that the Germans were attacking incorrectly.
>
>What is a good strategy for the Germans to use while attacking?  Is it
>a good idea to create three overrun stacks per Army group, and use a
>"damn the torpedos, attack at all cost" approach, in which defenses are
>completely ignored?  Or can the German achieve similar effects on a 
>broad frontal attack.  It struck me that encirclement of the Soviet
>units was a better choice, since they would ultimately die anyway,
>yielding many fewer replacement points.  How difficult do experienced
>FITE/SE players find this to achieve?  As mentioned before, as far as
>the eastern front goes, I've only played the Leningrad scenario from
>The Europa Magazine, and a slightly expanded one of my own creation.

The Germans in Army Groups North and Center shouldn't have many problems
breaking out. They should use a broad frontal attack, aiming to kill as
many frontline Soviet units on the first turn as possible. German casualties
are acceptable up to about 30 points. While it would be nice to encircle
most of the frontier troops, your infantry would be unacceptably slowed
down. 

A good general guideline for attacking in FiTE/SE: a 5:1 straight-up is
a reasonable attack (HX, DR, DR, DH, DE, DE). Treat die-roll mods as
column shifts. (So, 2:1 +3 or 7:1 -2 are good attacks). However, this should
be modified based on whether or not you can exert ZOC into all hexes
surrounding the defender. If you can, a lower odds attack is possible.
Remember, a DR is as good as a DE with ZOC lock. Therefore, it's often
good to plan your attacks in triplets: kill or retreat the stacks on
either side of a central hex, and then try for a DR on the center. 

Overrun-capable stacks should be avoided as inefficient, unless a key
hex can be overrun. I recently played against a set of German players
who consistently attacked at 8:1 or 9:1. They took the hexes they
attacked, didn't lose anything, and thought things were progressing
moderately well. At least until the Soviet offensive to reclaim the
Rodina started in September 1941. They've since learned that lower
odds attacks are Good.

In general, during the surprise turn, AG North and Center should try to
attack 75-80% of the frontier hexes. Of particular importance are clearing
paths for armor and infantry to Riga, Daugavpils, and Minsk. It
is vitally important that either Riga or Daugavpils fall on June II
regular turn. Losing a turn of movement on the approach to Leningrad
is not good.

The situation in AG South is a bit different. A broad front offensive is
not possible or worthwhile. Instead, forces should be concentrated to
clear one axis of advance towards Kiev. Generally the Lvov axis is 
better. This effort should involve one of the infantry armies and the
panzer group. The other infantry army should attack the defenders but
shouldn't expect real progress. Encirclement of most of the frontier
troops is standard. If you want a preview of what the AG South front
may look like in the future, we'll be publishing a Heeresgruppe Sud 
scenario in Panthers & Pikes when we get the second issue out the door.
(Sorry, it'll be real soon now.)

Another general comment on the German initial attack in FiTE/SE: the
group I play with is tending to use almost all of the Luftwaffe for
the surprise attack on the Soviet Air Force. We hold back two Me109s
to drop the number of attacking aircraft to 69. 
-- 
Stephen Graham
graham@cs.washington.edu	 uw-beaver!june!graham