Pocketed Eastern Front #55 |
||
---|---|---|
(Attacker) Germany | vs | Soviet Union (Defender) |
Formations Involved | ||
---|---|---|
Germany | 4th Panzer Division | |
Soviet Union | 104th Tank Division |
|
Overall Rating, 8 votes |
---|
3.5
|
Scenario Rank: 419 of 940 |
Parent Game | Eastern Front |
---|---|
Historicity | Historical |
Date | 1941-08-04 |
Start Time | 09:30 |
Turn Count | 36 |
Visibility | Day |
Counters | 88 |
Net Morale | 1 |
Net Initiative | 2 |
Maps | 4: 3, 4, 5, 8 |
Layout Dimensions | 86 x 56 cm 34 x 22 in |
Play Bounty | 97 |
AAR Bounty | 153 |
Total Plays | 8 |
Total AARs | 4 |
Battle Types |
---|
Inflict Enemy Casualties |
Road Control |
Conditions |
---|
Off-board Artillery |
Randomly-drawn Aircraft |
Scenario Requirements & Playability | |
---|---|
Eastern Front | Base Game |
Introduction |
---|
South of Smolensk, the Soviet "Group Kachalov" of 28th Army prepared for a strike northward into the right flank of the German forces in front of Smolensk, hopefully surrounding the Germans then fighting in the Yelnia salient. Heinz Guderian turned the tables on Kachalov with an unexpected strike at 28th Army's own left flank. Within days, it was 28th Red Army fought to keep a corridor open for Kachalov's escape. |
Conclusion |
---|
Taken by surprise, 28th Army found its own flanks collapsing on either side. Though 104th Tank Division fought hard, it was facing German assaults from two directions and eventually gave up the vital corridor. The division's survivors made their way through the German lines anyway, and received a new name (145 Tank Brigade) and new vehicles (T-34's) and fought well enough to earn Guards status. |
AFV Rules Pertaining to this Scenario's Order of Battle |
---|
|
4 Errata Items | |
---|---|
The reduced direct fire value of the Heer HMG became 5-5 starting with Fall of France. (plloyd1010
on 2015 Jul 31)
|
|
The Pz IVe appearing in the original Panzer Grenadier game had an Anti tank value of 4-7. As of Afrika Korps (2002), continuing onward through the 3rd and 4th edition games, the anti tank value has been 4-4. (plloyd1010
on 2016 Jul 25)
|
|
All SPW 251s have an armor value of 0. (Shad
on 2010 Dec 15)
|
|
The reduced direct fire value in Kursk: Burning Tigers is 4-4. (plloyd1010
on 2015 Jul 31)
|
Why we actually look at the number of turns in a scenario |
---|
If you commit your troops too early you will risk running out of troops before the end of the battle. Patience, grasshopper! In this one I committed the Soviet tank forces too soon and watched them vaporize 1/3 of the way in. The Germans then methodically (is there any other adjective when discussing 1941 German army efficiency?) mopped up the rest. A less impetuous Soviet defense could have caused much more of a headache to the Germans. I'm afraid that my silly use of armor handed this one over on a silver platter. |
0 Comments |
It's supposed to be mobile warfare, dummy! | ||||||||||||||
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
In this scenario, the only disadvantage the Russians don't face is lower morale for their reduced units. Otherwise, they are simply outclassed by the Germans in every aspect of this scenario. That being said... About half the Russians seized the field in the middle of the southern half of the board, while the rest held tight to defensive positions on the hill and in the field to the northwest. BIG MISTAKE. I should have kept my guns limbered and used them to deter armored probes; instead they were sitting ducks (even dug in) against the artillery and air strikes. The Russians did manage to cause the Germans at least momentary annoyance, using the BT-7's to dart out and eliminate some SPW251s early in the game. The field gambit, however, just crumbled under German pressure. No infantry survived that cauldron, but three tank platoons managed to limp back to the final defensive line. Going into this scenario, I had been hoping to watch and learn from my opponent how to better handle infantry/armor coordination on the attack. What I got out of it, however, was that a dug-in gun is a dead gun. Static defenses more often than not are untenable positions. I think the NKVD guys are here to take me to see Comrade Stalin... |
||||||||||||||
0 Comments |
Leadership was the difference | ||||||||||||||
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
Being overconfident the Germans with superior leaders, higher morale, better artillery, and superior direct and antitank fire overextended themselves in racing to engage the enemy in the field on board 4. The Soviets laid a trap that sprung when their Bt-7s came roaring out of the field cutting apart loaded spw251s and some armor cars. The German initiative dropped from 4 to 3 and it took over 2 hours to clear the field and begin to organize again on the offense. Slowly the soviets began losing men and equipment, until the Germans regain the advantage they had at the being of the game with the initiative and firepower. The hill on board 5 was heavily defended but the leadership displayed by the German officers carried the assault and the day. |
||||||||||||||
0 Comments |
Well Managed Assault |
---|
The Germans had to clear all the Soviets from a road in 36 turns. The Soviets deployed along the road and dug-in. Additionally, the Soviet's speedy armored car planned to dart around near the end of the scenario threatening to grab any available road hex for a quick win. Since some Germans will have to chase the armored car and every road hex will have to be assaulted the strategy was to run out the clock. The Germans were patient. They moved just out of the Soviet's weapon range and let the HMGs, air and arty grind the Soviet foxholes. This continued this for 18 turns! By then a good third of the Soviets were gone. Then CHARGE! The available leadership, better weapons and higher morale blitzed the remaining Soviets. After only 7 turns after the charge the road was cleared. Oh, the armored car? It kept two German tank units busy chasing it around and that did keep them out of the assault. But the car met its end while hiding in a bit of woods. |
0 Comments |