Operation Munchen

VR designs has been reinforced with designer Cameron Harris and the result is a revolutionary new operational war game 'Barbarossa' that plays like none other. It blends an advanced counter pushing engine with deep narrative, people management and in-depth semi-randomized decision systems.

Moderators: Vic, lancer

Post Reply
ChuckBerger
Posts: 279
Joined: Wed Aug 09, 2006 11:11 pm

Operation Munchen

Post by ChuckBerger »

Post number two in my "fixing AGS" series...

On the Romanian front, "Operation Munchen" - the joint Romanian-German offensive to recapture Bessarabia - kicked off on July 2, and officially concluded on July 26. Kishinev fell on July 16, marking the end of significant fighting in southern Bessarabia.

So in game terms, the offensive didn't start until Turn 3, with Kishinev falling on turn 7, and battles in the north continuing until turn 9.

In the game, though, the offensive starts on Turn 2, and Kishinev generally falls on turn 3 or 4. The Russians have little incentive to fight here, generally preferring to fall back to the Dniestr line, if not further back. Often, the Axis is in a position to assault Odessa by turn 6 or 7.

Also, the Romanians suffered very heavily in this campaign, suffering more than 20,000 casualties, more than the Russians. In this game, sometimes one or two Romanian units get beat up a bit, but generally the Russians lose heavily. The loss ratio here is very strongly in the Axis' favour.

Given all of the above, I think there is a case for a bit of rebalancing along this front. Put simply, the attack here was nothing like the main front in Poland. The Russians weren't encircled, they were slowly pushed back, and they inflicted heavier losses than they took.

I'd suggest the following:
1) Freeze this entire front (3 Axis armies & Soviet 12th, 9th & Southern armies) until turn 3. The "What if?"s can move that forward or back a turn.
2) Switch the 3 Axis armies from "blitzkrieg" to "sustained offensive" from the start. There was simply no capability to blitz down here, the Axis shouldn't automatically get the additional attack or AP bonuses.
3) Reduce the offensive capability of Romanian units in some way. Either reduce the offensive ratings for Romanian infantry troop type, and/or reduce the experience/morale of the Romanian divisions (Maybe exp from 35 to 25). Pretty much anytime the Romanians attacked in Barbarossa, they took very heavy losses...
4) Increase starting entrenchment for Russian units in this front, to give them more of an incentive to fight on the frontier.
5) Consider putting some or all of the 3 Soviet armies here on neutral posture (as with the Soviet armies facing the Finns).
governato
Posts: 1366
Joined: Fri May 06, 2011 4:35 pm
Location: Seattle, WA

RE: Operation Munchen

Post by governato »

The Russian units along the Romanian border should then be definitely be frozen in place until the Axis forces in front of them activate. At the moment both sides gets positive bonuses (the Axis units start in blitzkrieg posture, but they are frozen in place for a turn or two, on the other hand the Red Army gets the option to step back on turn one, forcing the Romanian army to chase...)
lancer
Posts: 2963
Joined: Tue Oct 18, 2005 8:56 am

RE: Operation Munchen

Post by lancer »

Hi ChuckBerger,

There's a reasonable case for treating the Romanian frontier differently.

It was one of the things considered in the design stage and dropped because of the perceived fiddliness of having too many special rules & cases.

I'll give it some thought.

Cheers,
Cameron
User avatar
Michael T
Posts: 4445
Joined: Sat Oct 21, 2006 9:35 pm
Location: Queensland, Australia.

RE: Operation Munchen

Post by Michael T »

I think this part of the game could be improved, along with the Finnish Front. Both area's did not start on cue with 22nd June Op's, but much later.
User avatar
warspite1
Posts: 42130
Joined: Sat Feb 02, 2008 1:06 pm
Location: England

RE: Operation Munchen

Post by warspite1 »

There are a number of good threads being raised - Hungarians, Romanians, Slovaks etc. I trust that this is being looked at carefully. The problem being that at the moment the game appears binary. The Germans get off to a good start and its game over - but if they don't then there is no way to get through the sheer mass of Soviet units.

By 'making things more realistic' i.e. making the Germans less powerful, there is less chance of the former and more chance of the latter. But there comes a point at which all these changes together simply make AGS impossible for the Axis.

Sure, the game takes liberties on some historical aspects, but that's a given and the designers acknowledge that. I have no problem with increasing the realism of the game - but only if its being done to try and perfect the game balance. This game is the dogs dangly bits - it just needs so fine tuning - balance first, further historical amendments second please.

My 2 pence.
Now Maitland, now's your time!

Duke of Wellington to 1st Guards Brigade - Waterloo 18 June 1815
User avatar
demyansk
Posts: 2874
Joined: Wed Feb 20, 2008 12:55 pm

RE: Operation Munchen

Post by demyansk »

Just thinking - Japan invades the Eastern portion of USSR instead of pearl harbor. Coordination with OKW on a real alliance
User avatar
Toby42
Posts: 1630
Joined: Sat Aug 09, 2003 11:34 pm
Location: Central Florida

RE: Operation Munchen

Post by Toby42 »

ORIGINAL: demjansk

Just thinking - Japan invades the Eastern portion of USSR instead of pearl harbor. Coordination with OKW on a real alliance

The War That Came Early by Harry Turtledove!
Tony
Post Reply

Return to “Decisive Campaigns: Barbarossa”