Pushing the envelope.

Lokioftheaesir · Post by **Lokioftheaesir** » Sat Feb 23, 2002 11:55 am

Hi

I am in a pbem game against a fearless player. He launches Pz corps from SL 1 hexes and they move up to 5 hexes into my rear. However when he does this and moves through 4 hexes of swamp to end up in SL 1 (in the soviet turn) i must ask his question. If german PZ Kps advance from 6 hexexes NW of Kalinin o 2 hexes NW of kalinin(through swamp) in the august 17th turn having only SL 1 supply and dubious air resupply how come not one tank is lost to attrition. In reality 1/2 (if not more) of the german armour would end up sinking in the mud.

And thus i state. The game system is totally inadequate. In situations where a player is not constrained by perceptions of 'how it should be' then the system can not handle adventurous player moves.

As the soviet i am fairly confident i can hold on to Moscow, but only 'fairly confident'. If anyone else had a 200 CV unit in moscow and 100+ CV units surrounding it they would feel quite safe. I however have the feeling that all that will mean nothing.

Loki

Muzrub · Post by **Muzrub** » Sat Feb 23, 2002 4:14 pm

The lack of Soviet control is also a factor when playing such a player.

Such strategies to me ruin the game (your situation).

Lokioftheaesir · Post by **Lokioftheaesir** » Sat Feb 23, 2002 7:55 pm

Originally posted by Muzrub:
The lack of Soviet control is also a factor when playing such a player.

Such strategies to me ruin the game (your situation).

Muzz

It is not a case of ruining the game. I took this game on specifically to learn something new and i have.
Sorry if the last post had overtones of 'poor me', it was not meant to.
The last paragraph is actually a compliment to my opponent.
I have won the majority of table top and PC/pbem games i have played and victory or defeat in this game will have no effect on that.

I think that nearly all players conduct there moves under the shadow of the historical events and facing a player who plays under only one restriction (what the game mechanics permit) is
very enlightening.
What has happened is that 'the enevelope has been pushed' and as is usually the case, the game system shows its flaws.
In the game, german Pz units that are pretty much in one piece and ready for combat with a week or two to resupply would, in reality, be waisted husks with few vehicles to their name and
reduced to 'infantry' status.

Loki

[ February 23, 2002: Message edited by: Lokioftheaesir ]</p>

Josans · Post by **Josans** » Sat Feb 23, 2002 11:13 pm

Originally posted by Muzrub:

Such strategies to me ruin the game (your situation).[/QB]

??????????????????

Muzrub · Post by **Muzrub** » Mon Feb 25, 2002 4:02 pm

My point is Panzer drives that could not actually take place except in the world of computers and bad game mechanics.

Exploiting the system to gain a victory to me is not a victory at all.

Josans · Post by **Josans** » Mon Feb 25, 2002 5:25 pm

Originally posted by Muzrub:
My point is Panzer drives that could not actually take place except in the world of computers and bad game mechanics.

Exploiting the system to gain a victory to me is not a victory at all.

Muzrub,

The use of panzer drives is historical!!!!

I dont send any korps rear the enemy lines if I believe that they can not regain the supply in my next turn. Neither I airlift my unsupplied panzer korps and usually dont move in the turn. Only I airlift supplied panzer korps.

Use the panzers to make a breaktrough, going fastly to the enemy rear, driving to make pockets, with the close support from the Luftwaffe, is not that blitzkrieg?

PMCN · Post by **PMCN** » Mon Feb 25, 2002 7:00 pm

I think the point is that there is "good tank country" and there is "bad tank country". No one will agrue about what is blitzkrieg and what isn't but a blitzkrieg attack thru a swamp is almost an oxymoron. Although it would be possible (as the Ardennes offensive proved) it is rather unlikely.

I too have experience with playing against people for whom the only limit was what the game (rather than common sense) allowed. I am not sure the experience would be termed "enlightening" although that certainly would be one word for it. And I think this is a two way street, I am certain they found me equally "whatever" <img src="smile.gif" border="0">

A Pz Korps attacking from SL1 that deep into enemy territory will on the next week suffer attrition losses and that is historically accurate. The Pz Divisions lost readiness while moving and that is also historical...I would imagine few tanks started the battle ready and fewer tanks were ready start of next turn. Time for a counter attack.

I also find it surprising that it suceeded given the extreme difficulties in forcing a retreat from a swamp hex and that the losses were not catastrophic for the germans. I have, however, used my tanks aggressively in that area (near kalinin) but generally only in conjunction with infantry Korps or with both Pz Korps of the 3rd Armee fighting together. So I do not find it completely impossible to believe. Depending on what the date is you need worry or not. Once september rolls around the stone is removed from the russians to a great extent and then the german player must think about such actions.

For myself though I would counter attack...hammer it with your overwhelming air power (it has to be outside of air cover range and so every bomber in the red airforce should come for a visit) and then plot movements to ensure it is cut off and then attack. It probably will survive but it will be effective hor de combat for several weeks if not a few months. This is especially true if you can drop its readiness and cut it out of supply. Station some fighter nearby and slice appart his supply missions.

Muzrub · Post by **Muzrub** » Mon Feb 25, 2002 7:36 pm

Muzrub,

The use of panzer drives is historical!!!!

I dont send any korps rear the enemy lines if I believe that they can not regain the supply in my next turn. Neither I airlift my unsupplied panzer korps and usually dont move in the turn. Only I airlift supplied panzer korps.

Use the panzers to make a breaktrough, going fastly to the enemy rear, driving to make pockets, with the close support from the Luftwaffe, is not that blitzkrieg?

Yes Panzer drives are historical I agree.

But there is driving a Panzer Korps historically and there is driving a Panzer Korps manipulating game mechanics.

Mindless drives not to create pockets but to take advantage of the game not allowing the Soviet player the freedom of movement is different.
In the game a player can drive deep into Soviet territory and know that the the chances of anything happening to that advanterous Panzer Korps is very, very low indeed.

The German player know's the Soviet player can do very little but pull back, making the Soviet player use force marches which lower OP points- readiness and add to the chance of a unit shattering.

Not only that but Panzer korps far behind enemy lines suffers little or no attrition, what of broken down vehlces etc etc only readiness is lowered- there is no penalty.
Once supply has caught up to the advanterous Panzer korps all its tanks contiue to roll as if nothing happened.

What I am saying is the German player can drive without fear or penalty and this is not historically correct.

mogami · Post by **mogami** » Mon Feb 25, 2002 7:45 pm

Why oh why do people to this day continue to use the Ardennes as an example of bad terrian to attack through. The Germans came through it three times (it does not appear to be as suited in winter as in non winter months) The Pripet and other marsh/swamps in Russia are another matter in deed. There are no swamps in the Ardennes. Nothing to stop infantry and the roads (in clear weather) can handle the movement of mechanized units. Not true in a Russian swamp/marsh where the tank would sink out of sight in muck (and the infantry too) I think that is the point of the very first post, that the movement is actually impossible. He applauds his opponent being able to do it. My question is why the Russians don't attack these panzer units the turn they come through the muck they have to be among the weakest targets on the entire front for that turn.
(I usally kill my first Panzer Korps around Aug/Sept after the German drives one too far one time too many.)

Ed Cogburn · Post by **Ed Cogburn** » Mon Feb 25, 2002 8:56 pm

Originally posted by Mogami:
The Pripet and other marsh/swamps in Russia are another matter in deed. There are no swamps in the Ardennes. Nothing to stop infantry and the roads (in clear weather) can handle the movement of mechanized units. Not true in a Russian swamp/marsh where the tank would sink out of sight in muck (and the infantry too)

Did the original poster mean to imply that the Panzer corps fought its way through those swamp squares, or just moved through them? If they were just moving through, I don't see a problem, at this scale of sqaure sizes, there are certainly main highways and above-swamp roads to allow relatively easy passage, right?

Josans · Post by **Josans** » Mon Feb 25, 2002 10:46 pm

Originally posted by Muzrub:

What I am saying is the German player can drive without fear or penalty and this is not historically correct.[/QB]

I agree with you that germans can drive without fear in July/August.However in September the russians have more chance of counterattacks.

About the penalty Im not sure. Thinks that there is a readiness drop and from the 2nd turn there is a loss of equipment too.

Anyway I dont believe my style of play ruins the game as you stated!!!

Josans · Post by **Josans** » Mon Feb 25, 2002 11:08 pm

Originally posted by Ed Cogburn:

Did the original poster mean to imply that the Panzer corps fought its way through those swamp squares, or just moved through them? If they were just moving through, I don't see a problem, at this scale of sqaure sizes, there are certainly main highways and above-swamp roads to allow relatively easy passage, right?

In fact the Panzer Korps did not move any hex of swamp and neither did not move 5 hexes to the east leaving my lines far away.

The breaktrough was (in possum map)from Rzhev advancing to the north over the rail line. The other attack was from Novgorod rail down for to close the pocket (all soviet units around Demyansk). The panzers korps regained the supply with my next movement when infantry korps arrived to replace the panzers guarding the pocket.

Really I dont see any unhistorical behaviour in that.

PMCN · Post by **PMCN** » Tue Feb 26, 2002 4:46 pm

Well it is true that the Ardennes was percieved to be impassable rather than was it is by no-means "good tank country". The marshes such as the pripet are even (if not infinitely) worse but I do not think that every marsh hex in the soviet union is a total bog. On the scale of WIR as Ed points out you can always find roads or regional rail-lines.

But the game should assess a sevre penelty to the readiness of a mechanised or motorised unit moving through such a hex (and I believe it does) plus in reality the number of tanks should be halved in any attack on a defender in a swamp to properly reflect the difficulty of attacking along such narrow avenues of assault. The defenders fire should be much more effective as well (in particular his artillary should have a field day). But this is something for the Arnaud to decide if he can or can not implement if he even feels there is a dire need to do so.

It also seems to me that there is two examples being discussed ...one around Kalinin and the other around Dymansk?? Or is this one and the same?