FITE 2

[Lobster]

ORIGINAL: larryfulkerson

And at what point to the Germans blow up bridges in the first turns. Because they bombed the hell out of them.

Yeah, that's another thing that gives me heartburn...no bombing of bridges and no INT missions. Those rules ruin the game for me. Too unrealistic. For the Axis not to use it's planes to do those missions is like tying one hand behind your back and trying to fight that way. I'd rather not play the Axis side if I can't do that. If those rules are needed for balance then balance your scenario some other way. A special rule about the Soviet side skipping T1 is a better way to balance a scenario but it sounds rather harsh on the Soviets. Why not deploy them in garrison mode so that the Soviet player doesn't have to give it a single thought.

They had to do something with interdiction. It is badly broken. At the end of a player turn any interdiction missions remaining were supposed to be allowed 'opportunity' bombardment attacks.(it is an undocumented feature) At the end of the player turn. Instead, these opportunity attacks came at the end of EVERY round of combat. There could be scores of free air bombardments. You can't fix that with balancing.

[docgaun]

Hello

Your suggestions are noted. However, we try to keep the house rules to a minimum.

I am pretty sure that Kristian would kill anybody as German with those house rules you present. Partisans are a German option. So, they usually stay in game.

To answer your requests.
1. It’s based-on calculation of historical available air transport at the time. Just after Crete, the Germans were low on Ju-52. So, it’s completely historical. Split your Brandenburger’s, to maximize the effects.

2. All options are described in the short briefing, and its effects can be seen on the spreadsheet, in details.

I think we all agree that the Germans have to be buffed slightly, but without house rules if possible. We have just seen the effects of the latest changes, the Pz,Mech,mot halved conversion cost, the 3 offensive chits.
From what we have seen it seems more balanced, but there is no way you can simulate every historical feat. Some are simply down to personal courage and initiative, like the Brandenburgers disguised as wounded Soviet soldiers taking bridges. Or indeed that the Germans took Crete, at all.

So, after seeing games of Fite2, and playing with Kristian, I still hold that opinion that planning and attacking skillfully as Axis, does make it real hard as Soviets. Kristian almost destroyed me, and I am very good at playing the soviets. It was down to blind luck (2 turns ending with failed proficiency at 1 or 2 rounds).
Having said that, there will in the next version be some nerfing to the soviet side, and perhaps some buffs for the Axis, still to be decided. However, it’s very close to balanced when it comes to Kristian and me.

[larryfulkerson]

ORIGINAL: docgaun
Your suggestions are noted. However, we try to keep the house rules to a minimum.

I am pretty sure that Kristian would kill anybody as German with those house rules you present. Partisans are a German option. So, they usually stay in game.

To answer your requests.
1. It’s based-on calculation of historical available air transport at the time. Just after Crete, the Germans were low on Ju-52. So, it’s completely historical. Split your Brandenburger’s, to maximize the effects.

2. All options are described in the short briefing, and its effects can be seen on the spreadsheet, in details.

I think we all agree that the Germans have to be buffed slightly, but without house rules if possible. We have just seen the effects of the latest changes, the Pz,Mech,mot halved conversion cost, the 3 offensive chits.

From what we have seen it seems more balanced, but there is no way you can simulate every historical feat. Some are simply down to personal courage and initiative, like the Brandenburgers disguised as wounded Soviet soldiers taking bridges. Or indeed that the Germans took Crete, at all.

So, after seeing games of Fite2, and playing with Kristian, I still hold that opinion that planning and attacking skillfully as Axis, does make it real hard as Soviets. Kristian almost destroyed me, and I am very good at playing the Soviets. It was down to blind luck (2 turns ending with failed proficiency at 1 or 2 rounds).

Having said that, there will in the next version be some nerfing to the Soviet side, and perhaps some buffs for the Axis, still to be decided. However, it’s very close to balanced when it comes to Kristian and me.

If I understand you correctly you guys "calculated" what the air cap. for the Axis side should be. If, in the real thing, all 5 regiments of the paratroopers flew simultaneously, then it must be made possible in the scenario. IIRC, in the original FITE all five flew at the same time.

I would be curious to know if the new version was going to allow dropping bridges and INT missions for Axis bombers. It would make a more realistic game possible. A real shame to leave them out, IMHO.

[gliz2]

Well I will stick to the proposed rules for T1-T2. If you give Soviets absolute freedom in operations that is completely non-historical.
If you are for the historical accuracy then the Soviets should not be allowed to withdraw and obliged to advance and attack every German unit in its ZoC at least till very late in 1941.

This is a board game, no offence to the creators but not the best one, and currently FITE2 is a quasi-simulation due to the time-span and scenario editors views. Therefore I'd think one should try to follow the historical approach to the extend possible.

And being able to master a scenario & engine doesn't mean a thing other then knowledge and skill of the player are on upper end. I was able to beat the hell out of the French in Waterloo cause I knew all the opening moves by heart. It didn't make the game more or less historical. Just the knowledge of the engine and the scenario was on my side.

The Germans were capable of transporting over 3.000 thousand paras at one time in June 1941 (they had 355 Ju 52/3m out of total 567 transport planes available on 21 June 1941) therefore the capacity limit doesn't add up.
Also the OKHW had almost 1.000 AFV in reserve which were not used for Barbarossa (only about 200 were send to the Eastern Front as replacements).

So when we talk about "historical" is not actually written in stone. On small scale like Normandy 1944 campaign it is easy to make decisions to stick to the historical events. But in FITE2 I do not see it. I mean you should only provide framework like Hitler declaring war on USA or Land-Lease but it would be nice to have more history-related options. For example the extreme winter equipment could have been available to Germans (the Winter of 1940/41 was also very extreme but for some reason the OKH ignored this) or the priority in AFVs replacement could have been to the Easter Front rather than to Africa Korps.

[larryfulkerson]

Well, I will disagree with the T1.

+1

[Lobster]

The Germans only ever used the Brandenburgers in company sized formations and even that was rare. Typically platoon and lower. Also, players use them in game as assault troops or to hold road junctions or bridges. They were not equipped to hold anything. They could seize an objective but had only light weapons so had to be quickly relieved in game terms. Indeed they should be represented more as partisans than regular infantry. Showing them as infantry is a complete misrepresentation of their abilities. They all returned to Germany by autumn 41 except for 6th and 9th companies. Some returned to the East Front in 42 but they also operated in North Africa.

Also, to paint the entire Soviet side with one brush is highly ahistorical. It wasn't like that at all.

[gliz2]

Well not entirely true Lobster. But I agree that in the scenario they are misrepresented.

The real issue is that the player is limited by historical accuracy where the system completely disregards political influences and logistic and operational limitations. Player is not restrained by any'higher authority' thus he can move units freely. Whereas in reality even the Fieldmarschalls were responsible to High Command and had to follow they orders.

Just something I noticed of late which makes little sense to me. The moment I move any unit it fighting strenght deteriorate. While I do understand that fatigue and supplies are of impact a stationary (resting or refitting) tank company is less effective that one in combat movement. Thus when in combat formation the unit should have more strenght than when stationary or simply in transit.
I assume this is related purely to the game engine isn't it?

[Lobster]

What is meant by this:

Germany
Turn 3-24
Operation: 3x Offensive chit
Axis ground shock 140 for 1 turn
Description: For more dynamic offensive, 3 x chits are added to boost the Axis 1941 offensive.

[Lobster]

I see no red stars:
In the game this means that if the Russians tries to conquer Finland before turn 214 by taking a hex with a red star

Ah now I see. They are present in 1.6 but not 1.4

[Lobster]

Getting a game started with this as the Germans. However, I see a problem. The partisan theater option will give the Soviets their partisans, yes? However, it does not give the Germans their Landesschutzen or Wach units that were used to battle the partisans. Granted there are a few scattered about the Sich divisions but no where near what the Germans actually had (~78 battalions) not counting any that arrived after 22 June 1941. So it is to the German player's disadvantage if partisans are enabled. The German player should always disable partisans. At least in my opinion.

[BigDuke66]

Just wondering if other stuff needs to be updated, the FITE2 graphics folder is pretty full including FITE2.col, FITE2.eqp, FITE2.nqp and FITE2.sce all from 2017, does none of them need an update to 1.6?

[Lobster]

Another thing that has been omitted. When do the Axis minors and Finland activate? I know Operation Silver Fox in the north started about 29 June so the Finns that took part in that with the Germans should release then. But the south part of the Finnish theater didn't start until 10 July. I think the other minor Axis July 7? Was wrong. 2 July is when the attack out of Romania came.

[fogger]

I found another 2 small errors last week and when I advised Soren and Kristian of the errors they advised that "there is a big update in process"

[larryfulkerson]

ORIGINAL: BigDuke66

Just wondering if other stuff needs to be updated, the FITE2 graphics folder is pretty full including FITE2.col, FITE2.eqp, FITE2.nqp and FITE2.sce all from 2017, does none of them need an update to 1.6?

It's my understanding that the brand new FITE2 doesn't have any graphics alterating files associated with it.
There IS however documentation that comes with it.

[gliz2]

That's a very good point Lobster. I think it would be better if that was simulated (some randomly destroyed railway tracks) and some inaccessible hexes for Axis forces (especially in Prypat marshes).

Is there any limitation on making releasing auxiliary units randomly? Like sometime between X and Y? That would make FITE2 far more interesting.

I would strongly recommend adding the following:
-version with start date of 1 July 1941 to avoid the issues relating to the initial week of German advance. So far the only solution I have found out is to skip first 2 turns for Soviet players (it works like a charm creating chaos and allowing ze Germans to wreck a havoc).
-option for Germans to use Paras and release the tank reserve (over 800 Pz.IIIs and Pz.IVs).
-releasing of Far East Soviet reserve happening randomly between 3-31/Dec'41 to simulate possible dates of Japan attack on Pearl Harbor

[Lobster]

I notice Blau starts on turn 106. But it should start as early as turn 101. That's when Wilhelm (Blau precursor) was set to kick off. It only was delayed to 10 June because of rain. Then comes Fredericus II, the second Blau precursor. You might as well wrap up Sevastopol and Blau into one package. Since Wilhelm and Fredericus offensives are both part of Blau.

[docgaun]

ORIGINAL: Lobster

The bridges at Riga nearest the sea are broken. Even though they get blown up units can cross them at one MP at 184, 266. Makes it kind of pointless blowing the bridges. There have been a couple of other places like this but I didn't make note of the locations. Kind of wonder about the design decision to make major rivers into minor rivers at bridges. That one has me scratching my head.

I am pretty sure its because the bridge is build on the narrow spot of the river.
Regards
Søren

[docgaun]

Hello
Larry:
On paradrops. According to my books the Brandenburger’s didn’t fly at the same time. Only detachments of each regiments, leaving equipment behind. The calculations are correct.

About interdiction. It’s a game killer simple as that. Try it yourself, its simply too overpowered. I have asked for an adjustment, or the possibility to scaler it. Ralph and Bob haven’t responded. I would love to have interdiction in the game.

If you read the short manual you will get the answer to bridge bombing. Supply is calculated at the start of your sides turn. As bridge bombing is and the other players turn, you will always be out of supply, as the bridge is always down 😉. Its optional, Kristian and me have just decided not to play with it cause Kristian is too good in using it.

Gliz2.
The Soviets don’t have operational freedom the first 3 turns, as shock is 80, some formations are locked, and you are getting killed resulting in reorg. How bad its going to be is up to the Axis.

I am sorry you don’t like the scenario, we truly believe we are following the historical path, when not confronted with anything game technical like interdiction, and supply calculation. We will have to work around it.

If you have historical documents to back up a beefed up para capability for the Axis by all means lets have a look, you can send it to me at sg@medflex.dk

In your post 28/7 you write some good options; however, they are somewhat unhistorical. We would prefer to make it better from the start. Not sure if you have studied Kristian’s first 2 moves. None of the starting soviet border forces survive. He is much more efficient than historically.

Lobster.
The activation of minors is explained in the short briefing.
Not all soviet partisans are in the game, so not all sec units are. Not all NKVD are in the game, either. It’s always a balance and we are trying not to make it a partisan game within a war game. But still having some effect.

Blaus was delayed and then moved up at bit. It is as it was historically.

Bigduke66
Nope all the old files should be good still.

sorry I haven’t seen the new post, been working To answer the old questions:
Hope I get them all, else rewrite them and ill promise to be more online 😉

As to why the Tank divisions doesn’t get tanks as historical. They were disbanded and the logistic system broke down. Individual units got some, but most did not. If you have specific correct historical data ill implement them, just write me.

The starting point in Norway we will try to change. However, the way its build means that formations must be moved around and that screws up all events on the Axis side. And that Is a huge job to do once again. But we will have to anyway at some point so we will do it then. (Can’t say when but probably when adding more axis formations)

Ill check the recon lobster. Sorry for the confusion.

The Trappenjagd and Størfang is there to represent German planning and minor operations. Its also there to soften up the Soviet defense, and if it’s a sane soviet player, dug in in depth.

The new version will see a nerfed Soviet side, still trying to balance it, but is quite close now.

By all means keep the questions coming. Improvement is a team effort
Thanks
Have a nice day
Regards
The Doc (aka Søren)

[cathar1244]

docgaun, I don't have a stake in how FITE2 is designed, but I have to state the way you wrote your reply and addressed concerns was top-level professional. Well done!

Cheers

[Lobster]

You do realize the Sich divisions played an important role other than anti partisan operations. Even some of the Wach battalions were used defensively in the Soviet winter offensive and performed at least as well as 2nd line Heer divisions even with their weaker TOE. IMO completely removing the Sich divisions is not appropriate and puts the Axis player at a disadvantage. At least 1/3 of the elements of every Sich division were regular German troops. It's your scenario but if your goal is to make the scenario work better for the Axis side removing the Sich divisions is not the way to go. [;)]