Directive 21

[sPzAbt653]

Make the infantry and the headquarters/artillery one unit ...

We've been over this before but no harm in covering it again - there aren't enough equipment slots in the units to be able to combine them.

... make the formation the army korps and not single divisions.

I've considered this several times but haven't pulled the trigger on it. I can't think of a reason not to do it.

In many cases the Germans can find different Soviet units that will retreat, and then surrender if challenged by an infantry division. This makes things too easy, because you can destroy many units without fighting.

Not really sure what you mean by this, because units don't surrender and how do we destroy units without fighting?

A change will most likely be made (mentioned below) to have the panzer divisions, when upgraded, return as one unit. It seems fairly necessary to make this change for the later part of the scenario. When the Axis are facing larger numbers of Soviet units that are organised better, the German regiments are very vulnerable. If you peek into the German 'OKH' formation, you will see two possible examples of the late pz div's (Model A and Model B).

Here are some notes on the drawing board, for when I can get 3.4 working so that Rick and I can get to work on D21 v2.0.

Redo all 5 objective tracks. Remove OKH unit, give AG HQ's a movement of 1 [or remove], roll all independent artillery into Army and Corps HQ's based on Neihorster.
Change the ER guns to regular guns? (reduces range from 3 to 2). Give the Soviet Mech Corps 'none' replacements. Make a decision on the later Pz Div's being one unit. Change 150mmPzW production to 2 from t170 to t290. Fill 'flooded marsh' in hex 145,145. SS Reich has 99 StgIII's. Give 214th Inf Pz I's and Char's instead of Stug's and Hetzers. Change 'German Garrison' formation to 'Volkssturm' ? AG Supply Units - change their trucks from 300/300 to 300/??, so they lose some asset sharing capability.

From the guys at TDG, we got some suggestions for Soviet units:
At start units - 40% prof, 0% supply, 33% ready, veteran.
Reinforcement units up to 11-42 - 0% prof, 33% supply, 33% ready, untried.
Reinforcement units after 11-42 and Gds units - 50% prof, 50% supply, 50% ready, veteran.

Thanks for the comments Josh, very good.

[Fungwu]

T23:

Captured Murmansk.

Pushing forward on wide front.

[Fungwu]

...
I meant that in the case you right click on a unit and it retreats before combat until such a point that it evaporates. So for instance tank brigades will retreat before combat until evaporating when confronted by infantry divisions. The tanks don't force a round of combat, they retreat until they evaporate, which I interpret as surrendering. The effect on the game is to make it much easier for the Axis.
...
Any suggestion that the Soviets should be weaker makes me think, how much weaker could they be? The game is a challenge so far, but the Soviets are really weak in the beginning turns, any weaker and it wouldn't be enough of a challenge to be interesting to me.
...



There is a really interesting spot in this scenario for me, that I haven't seen explored.

If you ask the questions:

How many troops does the enemy have?
How many can we make available?
Where are they deployed?
Where can we deploy?
What are their plans?
Do they know our plans?
Are they prepared?
Are we prepared?


How many variations could there be?
The next development I hope would be in these questions.

For instance:
Take the same map and general balance of units as 'Directive 21'.

When the game begins portions, or the entire army of either side is available, prepared, equipped, or alternatively not. Minor countries have armies allied to either side or neutral, stronger or weaker. Certain territories are possessed by one side, or neither side.

The scenario then could be, an overwhelming German attack, coordinated with its allies against a totally prepared Soviet Union. Or it could be An overwhelming Soviet attack with its allies against a totally unprepared Germany. Or it could be several variations in between.

What battle am I about to fight? Barbarossa or Bagration?

[sPzAbt653]

...for instance tank brigades will retreat before combat until evaporating when confronted by infantry divisions.

Ok, understood. Good point about the Soviet tank brigades being rbc'd all over the map. We are aware of it and are working on them in two ways, 1) combine some of them together where it is reasonable to do so, 2) give them better objectives so they will travel along with other formations (hopefully). I originally tailored them to run around on their own rather ineffectually as I felt this was the best way to represent them. Maybe historically correct, but in the game you see the issues this created.

Any suggestion that the Soviets should be weaker ...

I also agree. This matter can get real deep. On the surface, the Soviets were overall really weak up until around Stalingrad/Uranus. What you are experiencing in your game may be easy, but it should be. Any changes that will weaken the Soviets makes me look hard at the Axis for a reciprocation. For example. if those outlined changes are made to the Soviet units, I'm inclined to further knock down Axis trucks, and to consider changing some of the German infantry divisions (namely the 300 series) back to three regiments. This suggestion (I forget who made it) makes sense as these units and some others were considered defensive only. However, it could create the issue of making them helpless to hold a hex by themselves, forcing the player to stack them, which defeats the purpose of the change.

[TPOO]

The version released in the 3.4 beta does have the Soviet Mech. Corps replacements set to "None".

In regards to the RBC of some units, I believe Ralph mentioned in another thread that having formations orders set to ignore losses makes it easier to RBC a weaker unit than if it were set to other orders. We may have to consider setting some formations to something else, especially in the open terrain of the Steppes. In the north where there is more difficult terrain it is not as much of a problem. Also, when you do RBC one of the tank brigades in a sense it is really not eliminated. Because of there unit make up they reconstitute almost immediately near the front although weaker.

[MechFO]

I hope Fungwu doesn't mind the cluttering of the thread but while you guys are at it...

ORIGINAL: sPzAbt653

Make the infantry and the headquarters/artillery one unit ...

A change will most likely be made (mentioned below) to have the panzer divisions, when upgraded, return as one unit. It seems fairly necessary to make this change for the later part of the scenario. When the Axis are facing larger numbers of Soviet units that are organised better, the German regiments are very vulnerable. If you peek into the German 'OKH' formation, you will see two possible examples of the late pz div's (Model A and Model B).

To be honest I don't think a single Pz Div unit is a good idea. One looses a lot of flexibility attacking and one can't use them defensively as a mobile fire brigade due to prohibitive stacking penalties.

What I would do instead is to split them up into 2 KG's instead of 3 Regiments. Best of both worlds IMO.

ORIGINAL: sPzAbt653

Here are some notes on the drawing board, for when I can get 3.4 working so that Rick and I can get to work on D21 v2.0.

roll all independent artillery into Army and Corps HQ's based on Neihorster.

I would leave it like it is. Sometimes one would like to mass Korps/army artillery units, or give critical fronts artillery while denuding others. Deleting independent Art units would force players to constantly shuffle HQ's, instead of placing them to help keep an organisational overview.

ORIGINAL: sPzAbt653

Change the ER guns to regular guns? (reduces range from 3 to 2).

I wouldn't do this for the Korps Art units. While technically accurate, considering the scale and granularity of the Scenario, I think a 3 hex range is more appropriate.



IMO there are 2 additional areas which one should look at.

First, shock. I know it's supposed to help the scenario have a historical flow, but IMO it makes things too deterministic at the moment. I would normalize both sides to 100, and instead confine shock bonuses to theatre events. The exception being 41 up to first mud, with maybe a smaller bonus up to winter.

Second, the air war. Right now, the Soviets have air superiority in late 41 and general air supremacy in 42 due to attrition and weight of numbers. Maybe the proficiency of the air units coming in 41/42 should be looked at.



An idea for using a 3.4 feature might be to give certain key Soviet cities a very limited supply point (for both sides?). Right now it's fairly easy and cheap to take even large cities by isolating it for a few turns. Battles like Brest Litowsk, or for that case, Stalingrad, showed that even cut off forces can have considerable staying power, right now this isn't very well represented.

[Fungwu]

Captured Kharkov, Stalino, Riazan, looking to complete intermediate objectives before the rainy season.

[Fungwu]

Turn 28:

The Soviets launched many attacks this turn. The most important were two attacks through my lines that cut the rail lines for both the north and the southern forces. This had a large and negative effect on the supply situation for both fronts.

It was important to regain the initiative and push the Soviets further away from the rail lines to prevent more attacks like this. Many axis units that had been on the defensive switched to attacking. Soviet forces were especially weak after their latest round of attacks, and the axis attacks achieved results.

Around Moscow the situation developed in such a way that all the Soviet forces in this area were put in danger. Now it is time to see the response, and to follow up the initial attacks with advances to secure a good jumping off point for an attack against Moscow after the rainy period. In attacking Moscow the plan is to avoid the fortified line to the south and west of the city and to launch an encircling attack reaching the less defended northern and eastern sections.