Cities… just another terrain hex

[Pford]

Maybe some kind of 'hoard supplies' switch is desirable for isolated units. Or an option to discard the vehicle pool. I can't envision a plausible 'Winter Storm' scenario incorporating a 6th Army breakout in WITE as things stand.

But beefing up CV factors in cities will also have the effect of slowing the Blitzkrieg in '41, already a bone of contention.

[blam0]

+1

[alfonso]

Well, I do not agree completely. I think our perceptions might be a little biased by those instances in which there was heroic fights in cities or by isolated units, which are the ones that are more widely known. But I would tend to think that the rule was for those fights being rather short, not the struggle expanding weeks or months which is usually assumed. I think we need a greater sample of cities to measure how many weeks did the fight last.

Let's see

Minsk (in 1941 and in 1944), Riga, Rostov, Vitebsk, Kharkov, Mogilev, Kiev, Warsaw, Berlin, Praga, Rzhev, Velikiye Luki...how many weeks were necessary to take those cities? (it is not a rhetoric question, I do not know the answer for most of them, so I am only asking). But we have also Breslau 1945 (a long siege), so, what is the rule and what is the exception?

I will try to make some searches, to see if I can find out.

[alfonso]

I have made some searches at the Wikipedia (yes, not the most authoritative source, but…)

Berlin 1945: 24 April- 2 May (1 TURN)

Riga 1941: 29 June-1 July (1 TURN)

Kharkov 1943: 7 March-15 March (1 TURN)

Kiev 1941: isolated 16 September, city itself surrendered 19 September, last forces in the pocket 26 September (less than 2 TURNS)

Minsk 1944: Bagration commenced 22 June, Minsk fell 4 July, 8 July surrender of 4th Army (2-3 TURNS)

Rostov 1941: German assault began 17 November-city captured 21 November (1 TURN)

Breslau 1945: 13 February-6 May 1945 (buff, 12 TURNS ??!!!)

Smolensk 1943: “On 25 September, after an assault-crossing of the northern Dnieper and street fighting that lasted all night, Soviet troops completed the liberation of Smolensk” The Smolensk operation had begun 7 September, but the battle for the city itself was shorter.

We have also the battles of Konigsberg and Sevastopol, although it is difficult discern between a “simple” siege and the real fight

In the game, after Leningrad is isolated, you need about 4 Turns to force the surrender. I do not know how many turns would be necessary to force the surrender of a 6th Army at Stalingrad, athough I think it is unlikely it could last more than 5 turns under heavy attack.

The Soviet troops in the Kharkov operation in May 1942 (not a city battle, though) were surrounded during 24 May, and surrendered the “next turn”, 30 May. Well, that would be another (but related) topic, that of the surrounded troops, not necessarily inside a city.

And, as a final note, a pocket can subsist more or less indefinitely if it is not attacked seriously, so it could be a little tricky to deduce conclusions from a real-life pocket without making references to the efforts made to force its surrender (in one game as Russian I still have some surrounded NKVD regiments at the frontier two months after the war began)

[76mm]

ORIGINAL: alfonso

And, as a final note, a pocket can subsist more or less indefinitely if it is not attacked seriously...

We must be playing different games--I routinely kill off pockets by attacking with my weakest units, often with a CV of 1 or 2. I would not call this being "attacked seriously".

[alfonso]

ORIGINAL: 76mm

ORIGINAL: alfonso

And, as a final note, a pocket can subsist more or less indefinitely if it is not attacked seriously...

We must be playing different games--I routinely kill off pockets by attacking with my weakest units, often with a CV of 1 or 2. I would not call this being "attacked seriously".

I was referring to the real-life pockets in this case. But, in the game, with my 1=1 Soviet Units I cannot kill surrounded PanzerDivs, so perhaps we are playing different games

[76mm]

ORIGINAL: alfonso
I was referring to the real-life pockets in this case. But, in the game, with my 1=1 Soviet Units I cannot kill surrounded PanzerDivs, so perhaps we are playing different games

Ah, didn't understand your reference. But my lowly 1 CV units (or at least 2 CV) can indeed force the surrender of isolated panzer divisions, although usually it takes several hasty attacks, sometimes by a couple of units. But I still wouldn't call that a serious attack.

[alfonso]

ORIGINAL: 76mm

ORIGINAL: alfonso
I was referring to the real-life pockets in this case. But, in the game, with my 1=1 Soviet Units I cannot kill surrounded PanzerDivs, so perhaps we are playing different games

Ah, didn't understand your reference. But my lowly 1 CV units (or at least 2 CV) can indeed force the surrender of isolated panzer divisions, although usually it takes several hasty attacks, sometimes by a couple of units. But I still wouldn't call that a serious attack.

Ok, yes. I sometimes can force the surrender of a PanzerDiv, but it requieres some planning (at least select a good commander) , normally a hasty attack don't do the trick. Even a deliberate attack sometimes fails. And that for a PanzerDiv in the open, normally with 0 fort level. Perhaps my word "seriuos" was not very precise, but I meant that many times the surrender is not that automatic.

I said that because in some real-life pockets that lasted weeks, in reality there was no fight each single day during the whole period. Obviously, the NKVD regiments I mentioned before in my game were not attacked at all, and they cannot be used as examples of how strong pocketed units are in the game. But the same should be applied to real-life pockets. For instance, Konigsberg was under siege many weeks, but not every week saw assaults on that city. That is the point I was trying to transmit...

[Tarhunnas]

ORIGINAL: alfonso

And, as a final note, a pocket can subsist more or less indefinitely if it is not attacked seriously, so it could be a little tricky to deduce conclusions from a real-life pocket without making references to the efforts made to force its surrender (in one game as Russian I still have some surrounded NKVD regiments at the frontier two months after the war began)

Nope! Playing the Soviets, some of my surrounded units seem to surrender of themselves after a couple of turns. This is displayed as a "Soviet" (Red) combat indicator that just says that the unit has surrendered. Naturally I try to discourage this deplorable lack of spirit by sending their relatives to the Gulag, but unfortunately that seems to have only limited success...

[Farfarer61]

I must have a bug in my game. I have played 9 GC games vs AI now and I have never, ever seen the mass surrender of units. Perhaps 10%, but usually none. Only some terrain 'turns colour' when a couple of units give up. Most try to cruch out towards a supply source, often (thankfully) abandoning Forts. It is to the point now where as soon as the Sovs 'turn Red" I attack them all. I have sat for turns waiting for the big surrender to no avail. Time to uninstall and re-install I guess.

[alfonso]

ORIGINAL: Tarhunnas

ORIGINAL: alfonso

And, as a final note, a pocket can subsist more or less indefinitely if it is not attacked seriously, so it could be a little tricky to deduce conclusions from a real-life pocket without making references to the efforts made to force its surrender (in one game as Russian I still have some surrounded NKVD regiments at the frontier two months after the war began)

Nope! Playing the Soviets, some of my surrounded units seem to surrender of themselves after a couple of turns. This is displayed as a "Soviet" (Red) combat indicator that just says that the unit has surrendered. Naturally I try to discourage this deplorable lack of spirit by sending their relatives to the Gulag, but unfortunately that seems to have only limited success...

OK, I edit...
And, as a final note, a pocket can usually subsist more or less indefinitely if it is not attacked seriously, so it could be a little tricky to deduce conclusions from a real-life pocket without making references to the efforts made to force its surrender (in one game as Russian I still have some surrounded NKVD regiments at the frontier two months after the war began)

OOps, but I was referring in the first part of the paragrapgh to real-life pockets. Poor redaction from my side, it seems. But as I cannot say with certainty what happened in every case, the caution seems necessary anyway.

[bwheatley]

ORIGINAL: Mynok


It's not the treatment of cities that are the problem. It is how isolation is treated. That could use some rethinking.

+1

[Q-Ball]

Maybe units should suffer a big morale drop when they are forced to retreat, and there is no retreat path.

Low-morale Soviet units in 1941 would then surrender anyway, just like they did. Higher-morale units would hold out for a couple of those before surrendering.

[bwheatley]

ORIGINAL: alfonso

I have made some searches at the Wikipedia (yes, not the most authoritative source, but…)

Berlin 1945: 24 April- 2 May (1 TURN)

Riga 1941: 29 June-1 July (1 TURN)

Kharkov 1943: 7 March-15 March (1 TURN)

Kiev 1941: isolated 16 September, city itself surrendered 19 September, last forces in the pocket 26 September (less than 2 TURNS)

Minsk 1944: Bagration commenced 22 June, Minsk fell 4 July, 8 July surrender of 4th Army (2-3 TURNS)

Rostov 1941: German assault began 17 November-city captured 21 November (1 TURN)

Breslau 1945: 13 February-6 May 1945 (buff, 12 TURNS ??!!!)

Smolensk 1943: “On 25 September, after an assault-crossing of the northern Dnieper and street fighting that lasted all night, Soviet troops completed the liberation of Smolensk” The Smolensk operation had begun 7 September, but the battle for the city itself was shorter.

We have also the battles of Konigsberg and Sevastopol, although it is difficult discern between a “simple” siege and the real fight

In the game, after Leningrad is isolated, you need about 4 Turns to force the surrender. I do not know how many turns would be necessary to force the surrender of a 6th Army at Stalingrad, athough I think it is unlikely it could last more than 5 turns under heavy attack.

The Soviet troops in the Kharkov operation in May 1942 (not a city battle, though) were surrounded during 24 May, and surrendered the “next turn”, 30 May. Well, that would be another (but related) topic, that of the surrounded troops, not necessarily inside a city.

And, as a final note, a pocket can subsist more or less indefinitely if it is not attacked seriously, so it could be a little tricky to deduce conclusions from a real-life pocket without making references to the efforts made to force its surrender (in one game as Russian I still have some surrounded NKVD regiments at the frontier two months after the war began)

This seems like a lot of selective searching.
Siege of Sevastopol oct 30 1941 - july 4 1942 - 8 months about 32 turns.
Odessa - Aug 8 - Oct 16 (9 turns)

There are more but i'm actually going to have to look more later. At work atm.


Also i am not sure what you are talking about with pockets able to live on indefinitely. In all my games the attacking player just has to wait out the people surrendering. I'd be willing to take a guess of at least 85% of my forces surrendered without having a shot fired.

edit: didn't see later posts where you said real life pockets. Though soviet troops still fought to the last in a lot of cases. Being captured was a treasonous offense/crime in the ussr. It wasn't until the frontier battles were over that morale was starting to cause a lot of deserting etc. At least that's how it sounds from reading "absolute war" and glantz smolensk book.

[timmyab]

ORIGINAL: bwheatley
This seems like a lot of selective searching.
Siege of Sevastopol oct 30 1941 - july 4 1942 - 8 months about 32 turns.
Odessa - Aug 8 - Oct 16 (9 turns)

Don't forget that both of these pockets could also hold out in the game as well due to port supply rules.

I would like to see pockets put up a little more resistance though as long as morale is good and especially if a good leader is present.Certainly assaulting an isolated city should be almost as daunting as a supplied city on the first turn of isolation.Not impossible, just heavy casualties expected.On turn two of isolation the defensive CV's should weaken to simulate the supply situation.

[2ndACR]

Yes a pocket can last a long time, if they are not attacked at all. But bump a unit and it will go bye bye.

Low morale can cause units to surrender by themselves if isolated. Isolated rules need to be looked at real hard. Because right now, they are basically dead meat with no hope of being saved. Especially during the blizzard. No hope for any cut off unit.

[Mynok]

I'm thinking that maybe morale should modify the CV effects of isolation. A high-morale isolated unit with plenty of supplies should not be easy pickings. Perhaps also each turn requires a morale check and if failed, causes morale to drop a lot (and thus CV). Supply of course would be used normally, which would of course eventually cause supply problems. Large cities would provide a boost to the morale check roll.

This should not drastically effect the 41 campaign if the morale check roll is properly designed. Soviets have poor morale in 41 and thus would almost certainly fail their morale checks and be ripe for surrender. However, there would be the possibility for a unit with good leadership to be stubborn.

This seems doable and workable.

[Baron von Beer]

Just to nitpick, those Berlin & Kharkov examples are 9 days, 2 turns. 

[Mehring]

Didn't beta 5 tweek the morale of isolated units? And aren't supply stocks in cities available to their isolated defenders?

[heliodorus04]

ORIGINAL: Mehring

Didn't beta 5 tweek the morale of isolated units? And aren't supply stocks in cities available to their isolated defenders?

In reference to my above mention where I encircled Leningrad (vs. AI) on Turn 12, I'm very surprised that 2 turns into their siege defense, they are giving 18 Army all it can handle. In 2 turns of isolation, where I face a belt of Level 4 forts that is 3 hexes deep (including the north side of the Neva River), I have taken exactly 4 hexes and have seen 3 more "Held" results (two of those on the 2nd turn of isolation).

This is the strongest defense in isolation I've yet to see.
FWIW...
These 7 attacks were all deliberate, and by at least 2 full-strength, reinforced 18 Army divisions, sometimes 3 divisions.