Eureka, have the issue now! Problem can be solved..

[76mm]

ORIGINAL: jzardos

IMO, there's a group of you with your 'sheepish' mindset and inability to add constructive criticism to WitE are not doing the game any favors. I tried to gather some data and present it, but that's only backfired and got most of you to run to the defense of WitE. So be it. I'm done trying to help in this 'hostile' community and will just patiently wait until at some point the issues are actually found and resolved.

"I tried to gather some data and present it"...haha, that's pretty funny. Us sheep would be happy to hear from you again if next time you gather more data (one battle?!) and present it in a more objective, rational manner, with perhaps some recognition that your hysterical conclusions might not be correct.

[Michael T]

Interesting thought there, to prorate ZOC costs based on unit size and ability to interdict movement. I'm assuming both are in mind there, and even if they aren't, they probably should be. This would of course apply to the German regiments and brigades as well.

Yes spot on. Even old boardgames like FITE/SE have zoc costs based on unit size/supply state and time period, eg German Mot units pay less zoc costs during June/July/Aug. This recreates the fluid mobile feel of the period. Currently its too easy for Ivan to bog down the Germans with zoc costs. Which = MP and fuel costs. This is the most effective Soviet defence. Use MP penalties with a swarm of ants to suffocate the Panzers. Placing a bunch of ants behind a river = gold for sucking up enemy MP's.

I don't have a problem with the zoc costs for large effective units. But these low grade ants are sucking out too much gas and MP.

Disclaimer. I am not a German Fanboy. I like playing both sides. But I think these ants are over rated in their ability to slow up an advance.

[Ketza]

ORIGINAL: Flaviusx

The problem is that too many players aren't making tank corps with these brigades. They are instead opting for a strategically uncreative and frankly boring carpet defense.

WAD?

It seems that if a player prefers a brigade sitting alone in a hex over a properly built up and trained tank corp something is not right. Either brigades are too strong or tank corps are too fragile.

Or there could be compromise and let the Axis have all their ants on the board as well [:D]

[76mm]

ORIGINAL: Ketza
It seems that if a player prefers a brigade sitting alone in a hex over a properly built up and trained tank corp something is not right. Either brigades are too strong or tank corps are too fragile.

Don't really agree with this, for two reasons:
1) I don't see what is unrealistic about having a single brigade in front of the main line as a screen (although granted you would typically expect a rifle brigade in this role) or as an exploitation role in an attack; and
2) I use tank brigades not because I want to, but because I have better uses for my AP than to create a bunch of tank corps. Let me combine tank brigadese into tank corps for zero AP and I can promise that they will disappear quickly.

[Flaviusx]

76mm, not sure what better uses for APs you've got in April of 1942. It should be fairly easy to horde 400ish APs over the course of the blizzard counteroffensive to raise 20 odd tank corps during the mud.

But players aren't doing this. I don't get this at all. They just want to fight WWI with an infantry army and a horde of ant tank brigades. No real mobility or offensive capability at all. Nor any real counterattacking ability if the German conrives to bust a hole open in your lines.

They aren't even building cavalry corps. Nor do they consolidate those stupid rifle brigades into divisions. The carpet is idiotic past a certain point. You have to start upgrading the Red Army into an offensive instrument of war.

I say again: you will never reach Berlin with a 1941 style Soviet army of ants and rifle divisions.

[Pawlock]

ORIGINAL: 76mm

ORIGINAL: Ketza
It seems that if a player prefers a brigade sitting alone in a hex over a properly built up and trained tank corp something is not right. Either brigades are too strong or tank corps are too fragile.

Don't really agree with this, for two reasons:
1) I don't see what is unrealistic about having a single brigade in front of the main line as a screen (although granted you would typically expect a rifle brigade in this role) or as an exploitation role in an attack; and
2) I use tank brigades not because I want to, but because I have better uses for my AP than to create a bunch of tank corps. Let me combine tank brigadese into tank corps for zero AP and I can promise that they will disappear quickly.

I really think your missing a trick not to convert to tank corps as and when you can. Granted they weak as anything , but the extra mps make them the best units the soviets have for deep thrusts and encirclements

[Flaviusx]

Pawlock, they do start off weak, but if you raise them early on, train them up with easy wins, by September of 1942 they can be 10+ CV units.

The longer you delay this, the longer it will take to get those suckers up to speed. And the longer it will take you to get to Berlin.

And I'm entirely serious about training these guys via combat. 8-10 wins on a tank corps will flip them over to guards status. You need to find easy victories for these boys when they are weak, but they can be found. And as you say, the mobility is invaluable.

[heliodorus04]

Well, this thread has caused me to see that there is a problem with brigades.
I believe what others are saying that the brigades create scaling problems and lead to an unrealistic defense mechanic.  The fact that they cost as much to attack as a division, and they have the same ZOC impact on movement around them is a problem for the German.

I've no idea what to do about it, but I think it's one of those perverse incentives like HQ buildup range.

[pompack]

Well, even in the blizzard you tend to do the following

1. Blow a hole in the German line
2. Fail to advance because infantry can't penetrate interlocking ZOCs
3. Next time move up a tank brigade to exploit the gap
4. Watch a Rumanian inf div blow away your tank brigade

In a 42 counterattack, you can use a tank corps to exploit the gap. It will still get blown away, but at least the Germans have to work at it and you don't have to worry about vicious Rumanians savaging your tank units [:)]

Also note that an infantry corps imbedded in a checkerboard of ants and set to reserve can really ruin a panzer's day if it activates. Later in 42 a line of inf corps backed up by a double line of close checkered inf corps in reserve is not only a formidable defensive line it is an excellent way to blow a hole in the flank guard of a penetration that can then be exploited by a tank corps held as part of the checkerboard. In depth defense with a strong, immediate counter-punch

EDIT: : After early Summer 42 the place for ants is in STAVKA reserve behind your first three lines digging. Also note that a good emergency use for ants (if a bit expensive in AP) is to move an inf brigade forward and merge with an inf corps as emergency (but immediate) replacements.

[Scook_99]

I haven't played 1.04 rules as of yet, but prior to that.....tank brigades are really good at building fortifications. Players are generally scared of the idea of making a bunch of tank corps when a carpet of units is perfectly acceptable to slowing the Hun down, and you can bleed out his units by mid '43. Because there is no player reference to getting into a mobile war with the Germans, you stick with the devil you know vs. the devil you don't.

[TulliusDetritus]

ORIGINAL: pompack

Well, even in the blizzard you tend to do the following

1. Blow a hole in the German line
2. Fail to advance because infantry can't penetrate interlocking ZOCs
3. Next time move up a tank brigade to exploit the gap
4. Watch a Rumanian inf div blow away your tank brigade

Nope, I saw another thing on my game during the Blizzard Massacres [:)] One of those ant Tank Brigades (totally alone) annihilated the 9th Rumanian Division. Shattered. Bye bye, gone, poof... vanished... [:D]

And they resisted attacks made by Panzer Divisions.

What I don't understand is this: shouldn't you keep some tank brigades as support for your infantry (one per army, for example)? [;)] Are you sure this does not make sense? I would say infantry without some tanks is what doesn't make sense... After all, the Tank Corps you'll be creating will NOT be spreaded but concentrated... Am I missing something? And I am thinking about 1942: a D E F E N S I V E campaign... No one is thinking about taking Berlin on 1942, but about securing Moscow, Leningrad and avoiding the destruction of the Red Army... These are the real Soviet objectives.

[76mm]

ORIGINAL: TulliusDetritus

What I don't understand is this: shouldn't you keep some tank brigades as support for your infantry (one per army, for example)? [;)] Are you sure this does not make sense?

Makes sense to me. I plan to keep at least one tank brigade per army, with tank corps concentrated in a few fronts, at least initially.

One thing I've never understood--when you create a corps from units of different armies, how can you tell to which army the corps will belong?

[Pawlock]

ORIGINAL: 76mm

ORIGINAL: TulliusDetritus

What I don't understand is this: shouldn't you keep some tank brigades as support for your infantry (one per army, for example)? [;)] Are you sure this does not make sense?

Makes sense to me. I plan to keep at least one tank brigade per army, with tank corps concentrated in a few fronts, at least initially.

One thing I've never understood--when you create a corps from units of different armies, how can you tell to which army the corps will belong?

Ive kinda experimented with this, not 100% sure but I think the topmost unit of the stack dictates the designation.

[TulliusDetritus]

This is what I will be doing as well, 76mm... Humm, I don't want to have armies with NO tanks at all. Unless the TOE of these divisions includes tanks. Tank Brigades on reserve mode seems quite rational.

As for the Tank Corps, they should be (in 1942, because we talk about this year) Stavka Reserves... ready to meet -along with the Shock and Guards Armies, filled with some normal and Guards Rifle Corps- the most dangerous enemy threat that year.

Now 1943 will be the year of the Corps, no doubt [;)]

[Flaviusx]

ORIGINAL: TulliusDetritus

What I don't understand is this: shouldn't you keep some tank brigades as support for your infantry (one per army, for example)? [;)] Are you sure this does not make sense? I would say infantry without some tanks is what doesn't make sense... After all, the Tank Corps you'll be creating will NOT be spreaded but concentrated... Am I missing something? And I am thinking about 1942: a D E F E N S I V E campaign... No one is thinking about taking Berlin on 1942, but about securing Moscow, Leningrad and avoiding the destruction of the Red Army... These are the real Soviet objectives.

You are better off sticking a tank battalion in each Army HQ for this purpose. As the war progresses, tank brigades become progressively less useful. To the point where I eleminate them entirely by 44, save for a handful of guards tank brigades.

I believe in an aggressive defense and am always looking for counterattacking possibilities and amass a very substantial mobile force by summer of 42 for this purpose. Wherever the panzers go, so do these mobile reserves go. I actually welcome limited German breakthroughs in selected sectors in order to string out the panzers, fatigue them, bring them out in the open, and bash them to pieces. This, to my way of thinking, is far more effective in the long run than simply building a maginot line across the entire front.

[76mm]

ORIGINAL: TulliusDetritus

As for the Tank Corps, they should be (in 1942, because we talk about this year) Stavka Reserves... ready to meet -along with the Shock and Guards Armies, filled with some normal and Guards Rifle Corps- the most dangerous enemy threat that year.

Don't understand this comment--you're going to have tank corps assigned directly to Stavka, or to Stavka armies? Assigning them directly to Stavka does not seem like a good practice, because they'll be almost guaranteed to be out of command range, right? And I would think it would be better to assign them to a army attached to a front, so that you can make use of a good commander assigned to that front (assuming that Stavka will be massively overloaded).

[Flaviusx]

By leaving them attached to STAVKA they are free for commitment to any army HQ as need arises.

Corps are very expensive to reassign.

That said, as soon as I can build some tank army HQs, I do fill those out with corps, even if the tank army HQs themselves remain unattached to a Front pending events. I'm a lot less keen about prematurely assigning tank corps to combined arms HQs. I do like giving each shock army one tank corps (or a cavalry corps in the alternative.)

[TulliusDetritus]

ORIGINAL: Flaviusx

You are better off sticking a tank battalion in each Army HQ for this purpose. As the war progresses, tank brigades become progressively less useful.

Ah, I had missed that (the last time I checked these Bns were not available). That makes more sense. Ok, I don't need the Tank Brigades anymore. Thanks [:)]

[TulliusDetritus]

76mm, Flavio already answered. Anyway, I use "assigned to Stavka" in a broad sense. That means these units are kept on reserve, behind the front-line, ready to be sent to critical places and therefore temporarily assigned to ie x Army (a Shock Army possibly on 1942, the bonus thing).

[76mm]

ORIGINAL: Flaviusx
You are better off sticking a tank battalion in each Army HQ for this purpose. As the war progresses, tank brigades become progressively less useful. To the point where I eleminate them entirely by 44, save for a handful of guards tank brigades.

Well sure, but 1942 is not 1944, and the tank battalions SUs do not serve the same function as the tank brigades, which can provide each army with at least some ability to penetrate into a gap. I think having pure rifle armies is a recipe for the WWI warfare that you don't like?

PS, helpful comments about the tank armies, I have never created one (still in July 1942) and keep forgetting about their advantage.