GD1938 Game 28

[ernieschwitz]

I am having trouble discerning what you want exactly. I'll try to write up what everybody wants, but it won't be right now.

[ironduke1955]

Fairly straight forward.

1) Like the weather it tips the game towards the Soviets slightly in that it reduces German mobility, but that is how it was.

2) No hits to readiness armies adapt and a blanket reduction in readiness is just a assumption about how leaders deal with problems. Some brush them of others act quickly to rectify them. The Germans with the right leader could have been better prepared for the winter of 41/42 better in fact than the Soviets. Unless you have a tech winter warfare that powers have to spend some PP on to avoid winter penalties. It puts a production cost on training clothing and things like wider tracks on tanks.

3) Engineers need to work all the year round allowing builds like factories airports etc in winter months that's mud and snow.

[ernieschwitz]

So basically it comes down to this:
- No hits to readiness
- No effects on building

I thought we agreed that a change that has no effect, is no change at all. This would mean that the weather would basically just be graphical.

[Bombur]

However, winter actually decreases readiness, even if you give this penalty to every nation. My suggestion is to give the Soviets half the readiness penalty and to allow engineers to build things in mud/snow.

[Bombur]

Could you send me the invitation for the dropbox folder?

[ernieschwitz]

... Also an effect that I rather like, the need for using extra supplies in winter, would be lost if there were no readiness loss.

[ArmouredLion]

My take is this: the winter of 41 was terrible, extra terrible, that should be 'hard coded' because it's just part of the history as that year offers a benefit to the Russian beyond tactics and strategy of individual leader who might have done this or that as it was unexpected and a certain eventuality. So, even if the Germans had prepared they would have suffered. Not as much if they hadn't chosen to invade in shorts and a tee shirt, but they would have suffered..just as the Russian would have been prepared due their understanding of Mother Russia. So, readiness should be an issue, but not so extensive. Is it possible to increase supply use and if that supply use is restricted then larger readiness penalties are incurred? Add to that the winter tech that the Germans can only increase to it's highest level after 41-42 winter -- even though tiger running gears froze in 43 -- to represent the experience needed to develop the tech.This would cover a smart German leadership as well as the Russian experience that at any case would have been superior to the Germans even if they had prepared for Barbarossa. It would also give the Russians the reprieve needed after the Blitz to not be consumed in 41-42. Also, AP cost in movement if it's not already implemented would do the trick and if Soviets already posses that tech in 41-42 they'd have a further advantage in offense that wouldn't penalize the Germans defense--ski units swamped retreating Germans fleeing the Moscow battle grounds for example. Anyway, just my two cent -- new to this mod, so you might as well take it as 1 1/2 cents worth of thoughts.

[ernieschwitz]

Is it possible to increase supply use and if that supply use is restricted then larger readiness penalties are incurred?

Supply usage is increased because units try to get to 100 readiness, and they do that by burning supplies. There is no way to increase usage (that is practical) which could be used. Among the impractical ways of increasing supply usage would be to run through ALL the SFTs (all some 400+) and adding a slight increase in usage. Of course such a solution would have to programmed very specifically, as there is no way to "read" how many supplies a SFT uses. So one would have to make a table for this. This table would of course need to be remade every time new SFTs are introduced... In other words a pretty big job for something that could be done much more easily by giving a readiness hit.

Regarding the 41 winter. It wouldn't be much of a surprise to the Germans if they knew it was coming, would it? They would be prepared, and perhaps retreat some, slowly to avoid to costly losses. Of course one could make a card, that the Soviets could play, like cpdyoung is suggesting, but making the Soviets the master of weather (on a global scale) would be somewhat magical. The you might argue (like Tom) that local weather effects should not affect troops in local areas. (Ok that is 8 different types of snow, and mud for each kind of Landcape type ie. forests, swamps, etc.) which would be impractical too. You could argue (within reason) that snow in the Soviet Union would be different, and thus only 1 different type of Snow would be needed (along with 1 snow pr. landscape type)... Still that is alot of work, but not undoable. But if we are at the same time suggesting that no readiness hit should occur at all (which Tom is a proponent of) then it would all be for naught.

But yes, I was thinking I could make various levels of preparedness for snow... But... as Tom points out, only a madman like hitler would not be aware of the Soviet winter. Just like only a madman would reduce the Soviet officer corps to its deplorable state it is in, or for that matter the competancy of its forces.

[ArmouredLion]

I'm not knowledgeable on the game mechanics, but a card sounds good. Also, "hitler would not be aware of the Soviet winter" I think it was more of if they don't win the war in 10 weeks they will lose the war anyway and this was 'supposed to be' a motivator for victory or punisher for their failure. It was mad to not send winter gear for whatever reason, but I'm of the mind that he attacked as he did because Russia was about to launch it's own preemptive attack. Germany was beginning to lose the war not matter what by Oct. snow was just an extra hindrance and suffering on the troops. Also, it wasn't the coldest winter ever, but was colder much colder than usual. So, even if they prepared they would have not been 'totally protected' as it intensity and the fine nuances of operating in the climate would have been a new experience where for Russia it was old hat. So, card or not, Germany should have some penalty for that first winter -- even if it is slight.

[lordlau1]

I'll comment later on everyone else's comments above. It's hard on my phone. I'll be done traveling today. I'm fine to play on.

[cpdeyoung]

I think there may be a misunderstanding of the card I proposed.

It is a card played by a nation to equip troops for winter warfare. It should have a significant cost, perhaps 150PP, and it would negate special effectiveness penalties due to winter in harsh winter areas. Like "Better Training" it would be paid once per game. It would apply to all following winters since no one at the time was capable of predicting when a specially harsh winter would come. Very many invasions of Russia in our games come well before 1941. I also propose that the Soviets get "winter preparedness" without paying the cost.

Let's say the British plan a campaign against the Italians in Spain. It is September so winter campaigning is expected. Because Spain does not have significantly hard winters neither Italy or Great Britain bother to spend the 150PP. They both have some degradation from winter effects bur "no harm, no foul".

Another touch would be to make the card more expensive the closer to winter it is purchased. March, April, May, and June = 150, July, August, September = 180, October, November = 300, December, January, February = 400. This reflects both actual production, but especially the cost of getting supplies to the front. Shipping winter supplies in mud months should be brutal.

Chuck

[ArmouredLion]

Only thing is, Ernie said he can't isolate areas as stronger or weaker winters...it's all or nothing. But, your idea is a good one in my opinion.

[ernieschwitz]

Well, I *can* make stronger winters, it is just some extra effort, and if for all nations it would be an almost insurmountable amount.

[cpdeyoung]

So, no climate zones, too bad, but I still think it works.

The Italians and British can still choose to buy winter preparedness or not. If both do, or don't, then no harm, no foul. If one does and the other does not should we let everybody know? If we tell that the British bought in September then the Italians will have to pony up 180PP in October or face the consequences.

Just thinking, and remember that like the expensive "Better Training" the winter preparedness last all game long after purchased,

Chuck

[ernieschwitz]

I know it is probably just an example, but Spain is never really hit by winter..

In any case, I will do some thinking (brooding maybe)... and try and come up with the solution i think best. I encourage you to continue playtesting until i have thought out something new.

[nedfn1]

Ernie/Bombur
Do you want us to play a few more turns to get through the Winter? If so what information are you looking for so we can be setting up situations to gather the information that you need?

Other than getting some more designer information I think this game is dead.

[ernieschwitz]

Hmm.. well.. if you have nothing else to do, until at least wednesday, which is the first time this week I will have time to program, then you can either discuss what changes you want, or play on.

[Bombur]

My vote is for more playtest until we understand how the current system is working.

[lordlau1]

Ok, well, I'm supportive of this and just assume we play test the game and finish it I'll do my turn now.

[nedfn1]

I am not committed to play beyond May 1939.
I am doing my January turn for USA right now and I see a major problem with the weather zones. Nearly the entire USA is in severe weather including Georgia, Texas, and most of Southern California. A good part of the USA is very pleasant throughout the winter. In fact I would roughly draw the line of Severe weather through New York. Pittsburg, Chicago, Kansas City, Denver, to 190.33 south of Seattle. All of the mountains would be severe weather.

Engineers cannot build north of San Diego or Florida which is not accurate. Actually engineers could build anywhere in he USA. Severe weather would make it more difficult.