ETO-scenario is here!

[Flaviusx]

8 armor corps is perhaps too generous.
 
The siberian reinforcement waves come in batches of 3, with 2 mechanized and 1 armored corps per batch, and fires 2-3 times a game. So effectively 4-6 mech corps, 2-3 tank corps.
 
I'd replace at least half the tank corps with mechanized formations.
 
Truthfully, the way the game represents this whole Siberian business is kind of off. While the Sovs got some armor out of Siberia, the vast majority of the formations in question were leg infantry units. But the game lacks a winter shock effect against the Germans, and instead gives the Sovs these mechanized formations in lieu of that. This sort of works, but it's really not the right way to do it and winds up prematurely building up the Sov mobile force. I suppose the mech units represent the Guards Cavalry corps that spearheaded the winter counteroffensive, but even so. (Guards Cavalry corps at this stage of the war were division sized units and notably lacked armor. I really don't see how that equates into level 3 mechanized corps. Note that "corps" in Red Army nomenclature frequently were equivalent to divisions in western armies, especially the mobile corps of various flavors. And Soviet "armies" were really corps sized units in 1941.)
 
RoV did this better: that game threw a 50% shock penalty against the Germans in the 1941-2 winter. Not sure why they dropped that event for ToW. If ToW had such a rule, my Siberian troops would come in as the infantry outfits they truly were, keeping the level 3 tech. The shock to the Germans was as much a product of the collapse of their entire logistical system in the winter as the Siberians. But Wrath doesn't simulate this at all, and it's a rather major oversight in my view.
 
Germans in this game just shrug off the winter and can keep pressing forward. The check to their mobility due to weather slows them down, but doesn't stop them.

[Flaviusx]

Kind of odd that the British SMP limit is lower than the Italian or French. Seems to me it ought to be higher than either.
 
 
 
 

[Uxbridge]

ORIGINAL: Flaviusx

Kind of odd that the British SMP limit is lower than the Italian or French. Seems to me it ought to be higher than either.

Yes, of course. Must be getting a bit tired by all numbers. The British can use SMPs even outside of the UK, so the level must be higher. And USA can't have unlimited. Any ideas of levels? Ten each?

[Flaviusx]

10 each sounds doable, although my American bias would be to make the US SMP cap slightly higher than the British one. Maybe 12 US and 10 UK?
 
 

[Uxbridge]

ORIGINAL: Flaviusx

8 armor corps is perhaps too generous.

The siberian reinforcement waves come in batches of 3, with 2 mechanized and 1 armored corps per batch, and fires 2-3 times a game. So effectively 4-6 mech corps, 2-3 tank corps.

I'd replace at least half the tank corps with mechanized formations.

Truthfully, the way the game represents this whole Siberian business is kind of off. While the Sovs got some armor out of Siberia, the vast majority of the formations in question were leg infantry units. But the game lacks a winter shock effect against the Germans, and instead gives the Sovs these mechanized formations in lieu of that. This sort of works, but it's really not the right way to do it and winds up prematurely building up the Sov mobile force. I suppose the mech units represent the Guards Cavalry corps that spearheaded the winter counteroffensive, but even so. (Guards Cavalry corps at this stage of the war were division sized units and notably lacked armor. I really don't see how that equates into level 3 mechanized corps. Note that "corps" in Red Army nomenclature frequently were equivalent to divisions in western armies, especially the mobile corps of various flavors. And Soviet "armies" were really corps sized units in 1941.)

RoV did this better: that game threw a 50% shock penalty against the Germans in the 1941-2 winter. Not sure why they dropped that event for ToW. If ToW had such a rule, my Siberian troops would come in as the infantry outfits they truly were, keeping the level 3 tech. The shock to the Germans was as much a product of the collapse of their entire logistical system in the winter as the Siberians. But Wrath doesn't simulate this at all, and it's a rather major oversight in my view.

Germans in this game just shrug off the winter and can keep pressing forward. The check to their mobility due to weather slows them down, but doesn't stop them.

I thought you said they were all armour, but I remembered wrong.

Yes ... hmm. [8|]

You're of course right in that the Siberians were nothing like armour and mechanized.

I have an idea. Let's skip the armour and mech altogether and instead give the Ruskies eight level-4 infantry corps. These units are really naughty, but lack the mobility to make any beautiful manouvres.

At the same time, let's assume a weather oriented, pre-set trigger for the German problems in USSR. Maybe, as an example for the moment, it could be once all the cities Warsaw, Poznan and Cracow are covered in snow. When this happens the Russian player have the option to declare the Winter rule. If he does, this will be in effect until the snow lifts from any of these three cities.

Of course, the Russian player must be careful. Declaring winter early, only to discover that the condition was just a bad fluke of randomness with weather as clear as summer over Warsaw the next turn, he will forfeit the entire benefit of the rule. The German player, on the other hand, will never really know when the condition will set, or when the Russian player will dare putting it into effect, so both will be sweating with suspense.

In order to simulate the winter, I prepare a special consts.csv for the German player, with which he replaces the standard one immediately on the turn following the Russian players declaration. In this file, which is different from everybody elses, the max supply value will be 20 instead of 30, making the situation grave for any German units at a distance from the cities.

How about this? [;)]

[Uxbridge]

ORIGINAL: Flaviusx

10 each sounds doable, although my American bias would be to make the US SMP cap slightly higher than the British one. Maybe 12 US and 10 UK?

Consider it done.

[Uxbridge]

I have also added a number of graphics today, like the ability to see what hexes are "straits" and must be occupied to access certain sea areas; German and British flags to emphasize what hexes are part of the economy abroad; and what hexes are oil fields or refineries. Of course, they only work with Uxbridge map.

[Flaviusx]

Uxbridge that sounds great, didn't realize you could mod the events to change supply like that. And I like the element of strategy you've thrown into the winter rule.
 
Question, how does mud affect this rule? Do the city hexes have to be clear, or will mud do the trick to end the winter supply hit?
 
 

[Uxbridge]

Hey, wait a minute! [:)]

There's really no event involved in it. I can't do those.

The thing is that although we constantly will be changing turns, there's one file that never changes. That's consts.csv. This is in the original ETO-folder and contains all the fixed values in the game that isn't hard-coded. What I'm thinking of, is to create an extra such file, only for the German player and only for this special event. We will watch out for the prerequisite (well, you will anyway) and once it occurs and you like to trigger it, the German player replaces the original file with the special one. He will then be handicapped by bad supply, whereas the rest of us, with the normal file on our computers, will not.

In fact, although it's a staggering thought, we could all have a different consts.csv. That way each nation would have it's own special strength and weaknesess: supply capability, movement speed, cost of building tanks, defensive tenacity, air ranges, ship build time ... well almost anything.

[Hairog]

I'm staggered. lol. [;)]

[Harbinger]

[font="Tahoma"]...24-April 1940..

German Army HQ

Amphibed with Div's into Norway only to find that the nearest I could get to Narvik was 6 land hexes.
Oslo was 2 land hexes from nearest amphib hex.

Dropped both units on the beach and was able to move 1 hex.
Deployed Mulberries in the vacated hexes at both locations (150pp each).
Set Convoy supply to Narvik and Oslo since mulberries were not an option in Fleet Ops.

...16-May 1940

All units in Norway report Out of Supply status.

...24-May 1940....all unit in Norway report out of supply 1 turn..
...1 June 1940....all units in Norway report out of supply more than 1 turn..

I'm curious to know if the Mulberry supply ran out because of the 2 turn interval that crossed two different months (April,May). The manual states Mulberry supply is available for 2 months. Not sure if this means 8 weeks supply, or if the timing of Mulberries should be calculated on both the time of month and the length of supply time required to gain a port.

I'm aware of the events mentioned that bring Norway into the war for the Axis. However, I have not yet been able to re-create this event in several games of play, regardless of when Germany attacks Norway.[/font]

[Uxbridge]

ORIGINAL: Hairog

I'm staggered. lol. [;)]

Hairog, check personal messages.

Yes, one could do a lot with these files.

[Uxbridge]

ORIGINAL: Harbinger

[font="Tahoma"]...24-April 1940..

German Army HQ

Amphibed with Div's into Norway only to find that the nearest I could get to Narvik was 6 land hexes.
Oslo was 2 land hexes from nearest amphib hex.

Dropped both units on the beach and was able to move 1 hex.
Deployed Mulberries in the vacated hexes at both locations (150pp each).
Set Convoy supply to Narvik and Oslo since mulberries were not an option in Fleet Ops.

...16-May 1940

All units in Norway report Out of Supply status.

...24-May 1940....all unit in Norway report out of supply 1 turn..
...1 June 1940....all units in Norway report out of supply more than 1 turn..

I'm curious to know if the Mulberry supply ran out because of the 2 turn interval that crossed two different months (April,May). The manual states Mulberry supply is available for 2 months. Not sure if this means 8 weeks supply, or if the timing of Mulberries should be calculated on both the time of month and the length of supply time required to gain a port.

I'm aware of the events mentioned that bring Norway into the war for the Axis. However, I have not yet been able to re-create this event in several games of play, regardless of when Germany attacks Norway.[/font]

I'll look into it. Haven't tried beachheads "in anger" myself, so it will be an experience.

[Harbinger]

I'm more interested in how this effects Mulberries.

Is the stated 2 month supply equal to 8 weeks from the date I set the Mulberry? (1-Jan thru Feb 24)
This is critical.

Is the stated 2 month supply equal having supply in two separate months? (March / April?)
This is critical.

Which answer is correct?

[Uxbridge]

In ETO, as I believe you have used, the time is one month.

I have tried it briefly, but it seemed to work (only attacked in the Oslo region). I didn't investigate from the point of your latest questions, however. Will do some more tests later today. Have to be off for work now.

I will change back to two months in any case.

[Uxbridge]

No, I can't reproduce your problems. The Mulberries works fine for me (in 1.3 due soon). Not sure how long they last (actually forgot to test that), but I have now changed it to two months for 1.3.

[Hairog]

ORIGINAL: Uxbridge

ORIGINAL: Hairog

I'm staggered. lol. [;)]

Hairog, check personal messages.

Yes, one could do a lot with these files.

Nothing in there. [&:]

[Uxbridge]

ORIGINAL: Hairog

ORIGINAL: Uxbridge

ORIGINAL: Hairog

I'm staggered. lol. [;)]

Hairog, check personal messages.

Yes, one could do a lot with these files.

Nothing in there. [&:]

Hrmm ... maybe I sent it to someone else. [8|]

I want you to give me your full name, e-mail adress and the password you like to use. Could you send me this through personal messages. I'm sure you will handle that better than I do. Keensey is off for some days, but I will most probably post the latest version of the scenario on Sunday and then we can begin.

[gwgardner]

this house rule seems odd:

8. All non-naval units given to the player as an effect of events, must upon placement be immediately disbanded. There’s no exception! The player is of course free to use the 50 % thus regained in PP for any spending of his desire.

what's the reasoning?

[Uxbridge]

The reason for this is that there's a lot of units hidden in the events that I dare not try to remove. Events are a part of ToW that I have very little knowledge of. Neither have I a good program to edit them, even if I wanted to. The computer opens the files in the web browser.

In ETO such units as BEF and DAK are already represented. I recently discovered that they appear as event reinforcements as well, which is especially complicated regards the latter since in ETO the role of the DAK has been transfered to Italy. There might be other complications that I'm not aware of.

A second reason was the economy. I have strangled the economy a lot for certain countries and sudden reinforcements at a larger scale might upset these settings. In disbanding the lot, at least this nuisance is halved.

A third reason was, I admit, that I went to great pains to re-name every unit in the game to reduce the clutter (is that the right word) of text protruding far outside the unit hexes. To my horror I saw it all come back with the reinforcements. I really hated the long unit designations, especially so when in the nations own language, which made many of them nonsensical anyway.

But it's only a house rule. If you think it's better to go ahead and use the event generated units in group 2 game, I have no objections. Just be in agreement with the others.