FITE 2

[docgaun]

I am sorry, I don’t understand, where you are getting this from. They are not removed. There is a lot of them in game. But not all, as not all partisans are there, and not all NKVD. Its not a partisan scenario. Or am I missing your point. Are you talking about the Partisan event?

[BigDuke66]

Don't want to interfere but how did you decide what security Divs to keep?

[Lobster]

ORIGINAL: docgaun

I am sorry, I don’t understand, where you are getting this from. They are not removed. There is a lot of them in game. But not all, as not all partisans are there, and not all NKVD. Its not a partisan scenario. Or am I missing your point. Are you talking about the Partisan event?

Turn One Axis Theater Option: "Let's play without partisans"

If this is selected it begins the process of removing the German Sich divisions

There are the ones in the North turn one.

[Lobster]

Turn Two Soviet Theater Option: Partisans? I can't be bothered either

Select this also and on turn 3...

[Lobster]

And this. The 281 Sich Division was the one that became surrounded an Kholm during the Soviet 1941 Winter Offensive and along with elements of the 285 Sich Division held off the Soviets until relieved. Can't recall how long it took. Some Sich divisions played important rolls during Soviet offensives. Others just got smashed. But they were there in the fight. Forgot to mention. They also took part in mop up operations of pockets.

All of them get removed.






I won't even get into the Wach battalions that were involved in the fighting during the Soviet 1941 Winter Offensive. [;)]

[docgaun]

Big.duke 66 I believe all Sich Divisions are there. But not the battalions Lobster talks about.

Lobster. the answer is simple. Just don’t click the option. It’s for those that can’t be bothered Kristian never takes it, and its soly up to the Axis player.

The battalions you talk about are simply to unimportant to have in a scenario like this. Like the 2000 Soviet reserve battalions of various types, and the different foreign companies that served as rear guard and garrisons.
There are also no MT boats and there is no splitting of the Soviets RVGK and PVO regiments as historical. That would use up more than the available 10.000 units and would simply be a nuisance to play with.

[bcgames]

ORIGINAL: docgaun

...The battalions you talk about are simply to unimportant to have in a scenario like this. Like the 2000 Soviet reserve battalions of various types, and the different foreign companies that served as rear guard and garrisons.
There are also no MT boats and there is no splitting of the Soviets RVGK and PVO regiments as historical. That would use up more than the available 10.000 units and would simply be a nuisance to play with.

These battalions might best be represented in the game system/individual scenarios using amalgamations of all the unit capabilities; IOW find the time to represent the effects of units and less thought on the physical representations of actual unit counters on the map. Sometimes representing the effects of units/capabilities is "more realistic" than physical representations on the game map.

[Lobster]

ORIGINAL: docgaun

Big.duke 66 I believe all Sich Divisions are there. But not the battalions Lobster talks about.

Lobster. the answer is simple. Just don’t click the option. It’s for those that can’t be bothered Kristian never takes it, and its soly up to the Axis player.

The battalions you talk about are simply to unimportant to have in a scenario like this. Like the 2000 Soviet reserve battalions of various types, and the different foreign companies that served as rear guard and garrisons.
There are also no MT boats and there is no splitting of the Soviets RVGK and PVO regiments as historical. That would use up more than the available 10.000 units and would simply be a nuisance to play with.

There are only a handful of Security divisions. They are already there so nothing is being added. They performed mop up duties and at times front line duties. They are not unimportant nor would they be additional units since they are already there. The mop up duties in pockets were very important because it released front line infantry units for more important things. You did say they were not removed. Just ban them from front line work.

For that matter I always see MP units running around as shock troops. Remove them as well since they are also rear area units. They should not be taking part in front line duties let alone used as recon units.

[docgaun]

BCgames: I agree.

Lobster. Just don’t take the darn option. You can use them for mobbing up all you want, AND for fighting partisan as historically. 😉.

The MP units did see combat during Barbarossa; however, it was not their function. They did provide vital pathfinding recon and direction, so that’s why they are there. They were ahead of other combat troops very often, as resistance was sporadic and maps inaccurate. That’s why they had motorcycles. If you haven’t read about how they were used in Barbarossa, you should try to do so. They were NOT rear area units in Barbarossa as you state.
You use them exactly as they were used historically it seems. 😉

But I think I discovered an error, so thank you for that. They don’t have traffic control as they should have. And as you know that is useful in TOAW. Ill fix that in the next update.

Let’s not turn this into a discussion about how has read different books. Just don’t click the “lets play without partisans” event and you can play with all the sec divisions, but you will have to deal with partisans.
On that note lets close the discussion on the "lets play without partisans" event

[fogger]

On that note lets close the discussion on the "lets play without partisans" event

Yes can that be the last "full stop" on the matter. Soren is a very, very busy man and I would much prefer him to be working on the next update than spending time here answering perceived problems which at the end of the day is nothing more "pocket shrapnel".

I for one NEVER play with partisans. They waste so much time and at the end of the day have no effect on the outcome of a game.

[larryfulkerson]

...and at the end of the day have no effect on the outcome of a game.

I remember a game, recently, with an opponent that used his partisans to cut the supply flow to a great section of my Axis front lines and it caused me, eventually, to have to pull back and my Soviet opponent took advantage of my movement to make severe gains in territory and the whole character of the game changed. So partisans can be a minor pain in the butt or game-changers, depending on how you use them.

[Lobster]

I'm always looking for new material on the East Front. Where can I read about these combat MPs and their recon into enemy territory exploits?

[cathar1244]

an opponent that used his partisans to cut the supply flow to a great section of my Axis front lines

This is notable. Depending on game scale, the effects of minor operators like Partisans can be greatly exaggerated in TOAW. Had the same issue with the von der Heydte airborne unit during the playtesting of the first version of Goetterdaemmerung.

If you have the rear area actions going on in a game, all the forces have to be present. In the example I just mentioned, what was missing was hundreds of French, Belgian, and Dutch light infantry battalions on security duties behind the front lines of the Western Allies. Ditto had the para unit been used on the Eastern Front -- there should be all the NKVD etc. units available to combat such incursions.

As mentioned above, it is questionable how worthwhile scenario depiction of the war between the partisans and the security forces really is.

Cheers

[larryfulkerson]

...it is questionable how worthwhile scenario depiction of the war between the partisans and the security forces really is.

I have mixed feelings about partisans. I remember my delight when I discovered partisan units in my first run through of DNO. But that was more than a decade ago. Now when I play an eastern front scenario I feel like I could really do without the partisans, prefering to concentrate on the main theater instead. I could do without the Finns and Swedes and Turks and Iranians entirely. Those are just side issues to deal with. Distractions.

[Lobster]

ORIGINAL: cathar1244

an opponent that used his partisans to cut the supply flow to a great section of my Axis front lines

This is notable. Depending on game scale, the effects of minor operators like Partisans can be greatly exaggerated in TOAW. Had the same issue with the von der Heydte airborne unit during the playtesting of the first version of Goetterdaemmerung.

If you have the rear area actions going on in a game, all the forces have to be present. In the example I just mentioned, what was missing was hundreds of French, Belgian, and Dutch light infantry battalions on security duties behind the front lines of the Western Allies. Ditto had the para unit been used on the Eastern Front -- there should be all the NKVD etc. units available to combat such incursions.

As mentioned above, it is questionable how worthwhile scenario depiction of the war between the partisans and the security forces really is.

Cheers

This is exactly correct. Unless you plan on committing all of the partisan, anti partisan and security forces to the game you might as well not bother. IMO it would be overwhelming in a game like FitE. There were many instances where anti partisan forces were made to fight 'front line troops'. The major Soviet offensives are the best examples. And like cathar pointed out, one of the duties of NKVD rear area troops was to counter airborne units and forces such as Brandenburgers (which are never properly modeled).

[sPzAbt653]

Brandenburgers (which are never properly modeled).

So tell us how you have modeled them in your scenarios. Or if it's easier, just point us to which scenario's you have designed and we can take a look.

Also, when you play FitE2, do you play With or Without the Partisan Option? If you play With, do you use any self-imposed rules?

[Lobster]

ORIGINAL: sPzAbt653

Brandenburgers (which are never properly modeled).

So tell us how you have modeled them in your scenarios. Or if it's easier, just point us to which scenario's you have designed and we can take a look.

Also, when you play FitE2, do you play With or Without the Partisan Option? If you play With, do you use any self-imposed rules?

Currently working on a 2.5km Barbarossa scenario. No partisans because like I said it would be overwhelming and in 1941 the partisans were not really a factor yet anyway. About the only ones that mattered were the ones in the Baltic states and a handful in Ukraine. I really don't think you can properly represent them on a 10km map or greater. TOAW does not do a good job with partisans. It's too easy to know where they will appear. They shouldn't even be represented by units by rather by effects balanced by anti partisan forces present that exert a force that diminishes with distance. Something like a zone of control. TOAW can't do that.

[Zovs]

Jack that is one massive honking map!

My goodness.

Yeah, some how the partisan event's in my game totally screwed up the rail lines. So I have to remove those events for now and see if there is a way to somehow tie partisans in. Originally I did it with an event triggered by the Axis taking a hex but it does not seem to work and they start tearing up the rail line on turn 2.

If your familiar with partisans and events, would you be free to take a look?

[Zovs]

I fixed it!

Man, it was an event that was linked incorrectly!

[Lobster]

ORIGINAL: Zovs

I fixed it!

Man, it was an event that was linked incorrectly!

Evil Ed. [;)]