"Battle for Moscow 1941-1943"

[ColinWright]

ORIGINAL: Panama

ORIGINAL: ColinWright

ORIGINAL: Oberst_Klink

... I am just trying to make it easier for the lads who spend hours just looking for OOB etc...

But that's the fun part. Looking for oob.

[:D] You are certifiably insane.

Looking for TO&E for anything under brigade for Soviet units has been an exercise in frustration.

Nonsense. It's a challenge. Don't you like challenges?

There's Neihorster, and there's Glantz. No problem -- or at any rate, no worse than the Commonwealth.

Real problem is determining just how far off units are from the TO&E. For example, at one point in the Summer of 1942, the 'Fourth Tank Army' was jokingly known as the 'four tank army.' That was a fairly accurate count for a while.

[briantopp]

In my latest elmer-to-elmer playtest, the Soviets basically wiped the Axis off the map in the last third of the game. Possibly not inaccurate. However, it has me looking at the re-allocation of forces on the Axis side at the time.
 
It would seem that 11th army under Manstein was deployed to Leningrad after victory at Sevastopol. And then, in late 1942, it was disbanded and its divisions scattered among AGC and AGS (two of its divisions already enter this scenario as reinforcements).
 
Is it plausible that in a "Moscow first" strategy, 11th army would be re-assigned in say October 1942 to AGC, rather than (mostly, in pieces) to AGS?
 
If so, then the following would deploy to this theater, seems like:
 
HQ AOK11 Manstein
 
L corps Kleffel
50th
225th
45th
SS-Norway
 
LIV corps Hansen
250-Spanish
SS-Polizei
 
XXVI corps von Leyser
170th
22th
5-gebirgs
 
XXX corps Fretter-Pico
24th
132nd
 
Would probably balance the back half of the scenario somewhat.

[r6kunz]

  It looks like we are getting there as far as German TOE (well, to the point we are grognard nit-picking stage?).

   A much bigger question, and with a much greater impact on game play, balance and ultimately, modeling, is the Soviet side.   Soviet TOE (Shtat) is less complicated-Zaloga The Red Army Handbook, as well as Nigel Askey, cited above, give reasonably precise numbers for the various Shtat of 1941-2.   But what percent fill for these emergently raised divisions, as well as force parameters? Any ideas?  David Glantz and others have made various references to 50 to 70% strength.  Most of the Soviet divisions in September 1941 were either worn-down veteran, or hastily formed units.  And what about proficiencies? Alex aka AMVAS at his RKKA project site, gives specific tank strengths, but not so specific concerning rifle division strengths:
http://rkkaww2.armchairgeneral.com/

I think member input concerning references/opinions/gut level feelings would be welcomed.

[Panama]

ORIGINAL: ColinWright

ORIGINAL: Panama

ORIGINAL: ColinWright




But that's the fun part. Looking for oob.

[:D] You are certifiably insane.

Looking for TO&E for anything under brigade for Soviet units has been an exercise in frustration.

Nonsense. It's a challenge. Don't you like challenges?

There's Neihorster, and there's Glantz. No problem -- or at any rate, no worse than the Commonwealth.

Real problem is determining just how far off units are from the TO&E. For example, at one point in the Summer of 1942, the 'Fourth Tank Army' was jokingly known as the 'four tank army.' That was a fairly accurate count for a while.

I'm very familiar with Leo's site. No TO&E for the things I need. Glantz's books all cost money which is in short supply at the time. Not sure if his has TO&E for what I need anyway. Asked for info in the RKKA forums. That was of some help. [;)]

I did finally get a lead on Soviet engineers. Again, no TO&E. I think to find the TO&E for all the different units would cost more money than I could possibly justify for a scenario.

In the year+ that I've been researching I've compiled well over 100 web sites. Collected the information for all the air forces and all units from company to Front. What's missing are the TO&E for some things. It's getting to where I feel I may have to make things up. I hate to do that though. I prefer some kind of historical accuracy.

The Soviet side of things is a real mess of conflicting information. Like I said earlier, you have to settle on one thing and go with it. Otherwise you end up going in circles.

[sPzAbt653]

Is it plausible that in a "Moscow first" strategy, 11th army would be re-assigned in say October 1942 to AGC, rather than (mostly, in pieces) to AGS?

I think L and XXVI Corps would have remained as part of 18th Army at Leningrad in order to fight of the Soviet counter attacks there. Those corps weren't part of 11th Army in the Crimea.

The original 11th Army had XXXXII Corps (which was left in the Crimea after Sevastopol fell), and XXX and LIV Corps, which moved to Leningrad initially but only with four divisions as others were needed to shore up defenses elsewhere.

So I am thinkiing that the deployment of the 11th Army solely to AGC might not have been possible, considering that many of its divisions were needed elsewhere. Maybe in 9-42 just the XXX Corps could be given to AGC with the 72nd Inf, 170th Inf, 28th Leichte, and 22nd Panzer Divisions?

[ColinWright]

ORIGINAL: sPzAbt653

Is it plausible that in a "Moscow first" strategy, 11th army would be re-assigned in say October 1942 to AGC, rather than (mostly, in pieces) to AGS?

I think L and XXVI Corps would have remained as part of 18th Army at Leningrad in order to fight of the Soviet counter attacks there. Those corps weren't part of 11th Army in the Crimea.

The original 11th Army had XXXXII Corps (which was left in the Crimea after Sevastopol fell), and XXX and LIV Corps, which moved to Leningrad initially but only with four divisions as others were needed to shore up defenses elsewhere.

So I am thinkiing that the deployment of the 11th Army solely to AGC might not have been possible, considering that many of its divisions were needed elsewhere. Maybe in 9-42 just the XXX Corps could be given to AGC with the 72nd Inf, 170th Inf, 28th Leichte, and 22nd Panzer Divisions?

22nd Panzer wound up as a reserve for AGS. Very low on tanks, anyway -- 40 at the end of June, as I recall. Mostly Pz-38's, to boot.

[r6kunz]

Brian, (re: Posts your #255) Looks very good.

Re: LMG, MMG and HMG.

I would reiterate discussions in Posts #224, #226 and #238 re: LMG, MMG, HMG.
Like Colin, I would not have any TOAW HMG: I use the MMG for the MG34 in the heavy weapons platoon/company. That leaves the issue of the second MG34 in the Heavy Rifle Squad (both have a two man crew, often belt fed). I have used the formula of 70% the number of rifle squads for the number of additional MMG. (I believe it was Colin who used a similar formula on a long lost Forum topic).

A similar discussion would apply not using HMG in the Infantry division.
I appreciate this is a designer decision and a case could be made for any organization.
(edited to address to Brian, Post #255)

[BigDuke66]

Well:

L corps Kleffel stayed with 18. Armee
50th stayed with HG A
225th moved to II Korps 16. Armee in January 1943
45th already on map
SS-Norway not sure I think it stay in front of Leningrad till dissolving in May 1943

LIV corps Hansen stayed with 18. Armee
250-Spanish stayed with 18. Armee
SS-Polizei stayed with 18. Armee

XXVI corps von Leyser stayed with 18. Armee
170th stayed with 18. Armee
22th moved out of theater in, on 1st August 12. Armee in Greece
5-gebirgs stayed with 18. Armee

XXX corps Fretter-Pico moved to 9. Armee in December 1942(OK latter to the south but without Stalingrad there seems no need to go south)
24th stayed with 18. Armee
132n stayed with 18. Armee


My idea to beef up the HG Mitte is to check how many divisions Italy, Romania, Hungary & Slovakia send in 1942(additional to the ones already in the front) and for 3-4 of these divisions you could pull out a German division, either one that stayed with HG Süd the whole time or a new division that was intended as reinforcement to HG Süd.
-Romania... unfortunately I couldn't find out how many division they send, it also seems they also rotated some out of the theater so I can't get a clear picture of how much surplus compared to 1941 is there, has anyone a good source for infos about them?
-Hungary send 10 of these 3 are already in the game so 2 German divisions could be pulled out.
-Italy send 6 divisions, 3 brigades & 1 security division, again 2 German divisions could be pulled out.
-Slovakia did not sent any additional units in 1942.
Well 4 divisions not much but I bet Romania send a bunch of divisions maybe we get another 4 out making it a total of 8, not sure if these should come in or be available as reinforcements by using TOs.
Still not much but there is the 225th that can come in for the 16. Armee and one could think about an additional Hungarian Korps "to keep contact with HG Süd" for the southern edge.

BTW in the Elmer test play did the German side used the reinforcement options at all?

Also I think the German side needs a capable player to keep the Russians at bay I'm not sure if Elmer is good in the style that is needed to achieve this so I wouldn't worry too much about it.
If H2H show the same that it could be a problem but even than would it really be(Moscowgrad)?

[sPzAbt653]

Romania... has anyone a good source for infos about them?

Don't know how 'good' it is considered, but we used this site for most of their oob in D21:

http://www.worldwar2.ro/organizare/

Also I think the German side needs a capable player to keep the Russians at bay ...

This is true as the Axis have limited units to cover the front and has to do some strategic juggling in order to hold any line. That's not something that Elmer can do (yet!).

[briantopp]

Big duke -- excellent research and very interesting. In the run I did yesterday I activated all of the emergency reserves except 22 & 23 pz. I agree Elmer is no Manstein and I don't mind leaving the game balance as an overwhelming challenge to thevsoviets in 1941 and to the axis in 1943 . That's the core attraction of this theatre. Just want both oobs to be historically plausible and without glaring omissions. We are theorizing here that ags is standing on it's April 1942 line and will not conduct Blau. So if the rumanians, italians and hungarians are featheredvinto the line, I guess what that would do isvfree up a corps from aok6 and perhaps elements of 1pzg to push towards, say, Voronezh?

Kunz -- I agree on hmgs.

[ColinWright]

ORIGINAL: HPT KUNZ

Brian, (re: Posts your #255) Looks very good.

Re: LMG, MMG and HMG.

I would reiterate discussions in Posts #224, #226 and #238 re: LMG, MMG, HMG.
Like Colin, I would not have any TOAW HMG: I use the MMG for the MG34 in the heavy weapons platoon/company. That leaves the issue of the second MG34 in the Heavy Rifle Squad (both have a two man crew, often belt fed). I have used the formula of 70% the number of rifle squads for the number of additional MMG. (I believe it was Colin who used a similar formula on a long lost Forum topic).

A similar discussion would apply not using HMG in the Infantry division.
I appreciate this is a designer decision and a case could be made for any organization.
(edited to address to Brian, Post #255)

I actually use a 'Schutzen' squad I created with the bio-editor to handle those two-MG squads in the Panzer division schutzen regiments and such. An AP strength of 5, as I recall.

The bio-editor is a wonderful thing. Once you get the hang of it, it takes about five minutes to implement your latest inspiration, and with TOAW III, it imposes no burden to speak on on the players, so...

[ColinWright]

ORIGINAL: sPzAbt653

Romania... has anyone a good source for infos about them?

Don't know how 'good' it is considered, but we used this site for most of their oob in D21:

http://www.worldwar2.ro/organizare/

I like that site. Unlike certain 'national' sites, its claims are relatively restrained, which suggests a likelihood that the material contained therein is likely to be similarly accurate.

[briantopp]

Here is the latest build of this.

A summary of changes since first posted (as far as I can remember):

- Axis infantry & armour TO&E is re-executed.
- Soviet infantry TO&E is re-executed.
- Axis units redeployed to more closely comply with the real situation map.
- German tank park and production is revised.
- German and Soviet OOBs have been tweaked and revised.
- Relative effectiveness of German and Soviet air units adjusted.
- A mechanism is implemented to revise German panzer unit TO&Es about a third of the way through the scenario.
- Some theatre events come and go (spring 1942 resupply is hardwired; a couple of additional optional panzer divisions are available in the late spring of 1942; a theatre event allows you to avoid a victory point penalty by withdrawing 10-panzer and sending it to Tunis).
- Various errors that slipped into the events are fixed, refixed and rerefixed.
- Axis stop line is revised .
- Weather events are tweaked.
- Victory conditions are tweaked and described in the end of game text.
- Rail repair is revised and Axis gets more accurate complement of pioneers.

Some issues that need looking into:
- Axis flak units need a second look.
- Need to consider plausible transfers from AGN and AGS in back third of the scenario.
- Some details of the heavy equipment deployment and production need to be ironed out.

Almost all of these edits are informed by the discussion above, for which I am very grateful. I'll add some specific credits to collaborators in the notes shortly. I think this is getting closer to being serviceable --

[BigDuke66]

Great!

Maybe something for the time when everything else is done but I thought I mention it already.
What about the empty text fields(for example 0,98)? Do they have a purpose or could they be erased?

[BigDuke66]

I just had an idea to smooth the drastically Panzer units changes a bit.
What I and I guess you too don't like is that the units withdraw so any level of equipment your reach rather high or low will be reset as the new units come in already filled with equipment, that is somehow "disconnecting" to what the player achieve up to this point.
So what if you disband the old units and let their material fill up the new units?
OK we would still have some kind of reset has the units would fill evenly but its better than nothing.
Regarding the problem that it will take time to fill up the new units, I would let them appear even more earlier than now maybe 8-10 turns and set the replacement priority higher that the old unit it replaces, in that way the new unit should already begin to fill up as it gets more than the old unit.

Problem is if the old units are disbanded by an event but are marked to Reconstitute will they appear again?

[briantopp]

ORIGINAL: BigDuke66

Great!

Maybe something for the time when everything else is done but I thought I mention it already.
What about the empty text fields(for example 0,98)? Do they have a purpose or could they be erased?

These are ghost events I killed -- a few not cleaned up properly. I'll do a cleanup shortly

[briantopp]

ORIGINAL: BigDuke66

I just had an idea to smooth the drastically Panzer units changes a bit.
What I and I guess you too don't like is that the units withdraw so any level of equipment your reach rather high or low will be reset as the new units come in already filled with equipment, that is somehow "disconnecting" to what the player achieve up to this point.
So what if you disband the old units and let their material fill up the new units?
OK we would still have some kind of reset has the units would fill evenly but its better than nothing.
Regarding the problem that it will take time to fill up the new units, I would let them appear even more earlier than now maybe 8-10 turns and set the replacement priority higher that the old unit it replaces, in that way the new unit should already begin to fill up as it gets more than the old unit.

Problem is if the old units are disbanded by an event but are marked to Reconstitute will they appear again?

I dont love the mechanism although it isn't entirely ahitorical. Most of these regiments were almost entirely devoid of battle-ready runners by late March 1942, and were essentially rebuilt from scratch. So withdrawing the old shells and replacing them with new ones kind of looks like what happened. In the latest build I did move this event backwards a few turns, earlier in the spring 1942 "mud ceasefire".

They do rebuild if disbanded -- the basic problem with the withdraw event alternative.

[Panama]

ORIGINAL: briantopp


They do rebuild if disbanded -- the basic problem with the withdraw event alternative.

If someone is concerned about losing equipment when withdrawing a unit that is to be returned later why not disband it with one event and withdraw it in a later event?

[Telumar]

Why not to set it to not reconstitute..? [:D]

[BigDuke66]

ORIGINAL: Telumar

Why not to set it to not reconstitute..? [:D]

Well that would be an option too, if those panzer units shrink so much it maybe would be better if they don't reconstitute so you have fewer units but with at least some combat worth.