Next War 1979 - Expanded (Beta 1.0) play testers needed

Post new mods and scenarios here
User avatar
mussey
Posts: 682
Joined: Sat Dec 02, 2006 1:21 pm
Location: Cleve-Land

RE: Next War 1979 - Expanded (Beta 1.0) play testers needed

Post by mussey »

While Larry & Hellen battle it out in their AAR I've tweaked some things that will be included in the next release. I do not want to post too many refinements in their thread (as I've done in the past), so I will continue here. But I do have to acknowledge how important their feedback has been to me. A few changes that will be in the new release would have greatly changed the direction of their war, and I give my profound kudos for them for continuing under these circumstances. [&o]

Several changes have already been mentioned in their thread, and another one now:
- addition of Warsaw Pact paramilitary units to guard their cities, and border guard bn.s on the border roads.
- a new Event sequence for Warsaw Pact countries depicting the possibility they will not participate at the onset of hostilities, and for the possibility for revolt if NATO were to occupy one of their cities.

Chance of Non-Participation:
Upon open war, each Non-Soviet Warsaw Pact country has a chance their formations will not move (be garrisoned). E. Germany 5%; Hungary 10%, Czech. 15%; Poland 20%. If this triggers, then each of their Formations rolls a die to see if it is affected. The odds are somewhere between 10-50% (some formations are more loyal then others, like Airborne). If this happens the formation will either be permanently garrisoned, or garrisoned for 2-turns, or not affected at all. Thus, none, some, or all will be affected.

Chance of Revolt if NATO occupies a city:
- 50% chance the country revolts
- if so, Warsaw Pact suffers Shock -25% for 2-turns
- NATO receives 50 VP's
- Guerrillas will occur
- chance that each formation will be garrisoned similar to Non-Participation above. No unit will be disbanded leaving gaps in the Soviet lines.

Below is a crude flow chart. Any feedback will be greatly appreciated, especially the sequence logic as well as the percentages:



Image
Attachments
WarsawPac..owchart.jpg
WarsawPac..owchart.jpg (64.4 KiB) Viewed 489 times
Col. Mussbu

The long arm of the law - "The King of Battle"

User avatar
cathar1244
Posts: 1253
Joined: Sat Sep 05, 2009 2:16 am

RE: Next War 1979 - Expanded (Beta 1.0) play testers needed

Post by cathar1244 »

The political events look really interesting. Suggest one for NATO as well; not all members were equally enthusiastic.

Cheers
User avatar
mussey
Posts: 682
Joined: Sat Dec 02, 2006 1:21 pm
Location: Cleve-Land

RE: Next War 1979 - Expanded (Beta 1.0) play testers needed

Post by mussey »

ORIGINAL: cathar1244

The political events look really interesting. Suggest one for NATO as well; not all members were equally enthusiastic.

Cheers

With the introduction of WP paramilitary, NATO will need to use more force to occupy a city. Another thought to make it more interesting is if I set the radius x1 hex of an occupied city, thus NATO doesn't need to actually take the city, just a surrounding hex. But balance this by having a 2-turn delay so that WP has a turn or two to counter-attack.

As for NATO, thus far:
- Norway: a chance a liberal government does not invite NATO forces into country, with another smaller chance it will become neutral.
- France: a chance it will not join NATO.
- Italy: a chance it will quit NATO.

Are there any others for NATO that are plausible?
Col. Mussbu

The long arm of the law - "The King of Battle"

User avatar
cathar1244
Posts: 1253
Joined: Sat Sep 05, 2009 2:16 am

RE: Next War 1979 - Expanded (Beta 1.0) play testers needed

Post by cathar1244 »

Are there any others for NATO that are plausible?

Canada perhaps. PM Trudeau (senior) got up to arbitrary and uncoordinated changes to the Canadian brigade structure in the 1960s. The result was that the Canadian brigade got so weakened that British Army of the Rhine had no suitable mission for it in the terrain the Brits were tasked with defending.

That is how the Canadians ended up in SW Germany, how NATO ended up feeling shorted in north Germany, and how the Second Armored Division got tasked with sending BRIGADE 75 as a reinforcement that eventually became Second Armored Divison - Forward, based in ... you guessed it ... north Germany (Garlstedt).

I think all the smaller members had potential to be shaky. A situation like the one D wargamed with the invasion of Austria may have offered loopholes for countries to "sit it out". I've also wondered what would have happened if the Soviets had stage managed an incident between the two German armies, and then let the DDR army invade Germany while warning the rest of NATO that it was a purely German affair and any interference would result in the use of nuclear weapons ... high risk but perhaps high reward as well.

Cheers
StuccoFresco
Posts: 599
Joined: Fri Sep 17, 2004 10:56 am
Location: Italy

RE: Next War 1979 - Expanded (Beta 1.0) play testers needed

Post by StuccoFresco »

France not partecipating doesn't seem likely to me, honestly. Also, it would damage NATO side too much in case of unfortunate roll.
User avatar
Hellen_slith
Posts: 2009
Joined: Mon Oct 10, 2005 6:46 pm

RE: Next War 1979 - Expanded (Beta 1.0) play testers needed

Post by Hellen_slith »

I believe this is called the KIEL canal.

SUEZ canal is in, like, California.



Image
Attachments
SuezCanal.jpg
SuezCanal.jpg (109.28 KiB) Viewed 489 times
User avatar
btd64
Posts: 14216
Joined: Sat Jan 23, 2010 12:48 am
Location: Lancaster, OHIO

RE: Next War 1979 - Expanded (Beta 1.0) play testers needed

Post by btd64 »

Suez canal is the name of the terrain type....GP
Intel i7 4.3GHz 10th Gen,16GB Ram,Nvidia GeForce MX330

AKA General Patton

DW2-Alpha/Beta Tester
SCW Manual Lead & Beta Support Team

"Do everything you ask of those you command"....Gen. George S. Patton
User avatar
Hellen_slith
Posts: 2009
Joined: Mon Oct 10, 2005 6:46 pm

RE: Next War 1979 - Expanded (Beta 1.0) play testers needed

Post by Hellen_slith »

ORIGINAL: btd64

Suez canal is the name of the terrain type....GP

Other "canals" have simply terrain type, "canal". Why not these? Is there some special attribute to "Suez Canal" hexes that is different?

It just kills a bit of the immersion factor for me when the Suez Canal gets moved. :)
User avatar
Hellen_slith
Posts: 2009
Joined: Mon Oct 10, 2005 6:46 pm

RE: Next War 1979 - Expanded (Beta 1.0) play testers needed

Post by Hellen_slith »

Some observations from my and Larry's ongoing game (now in NATO turn 13...almost 2/3 done already!)

RE: Sweden. IIRC, there are quite a few objective point values there in Sweden that are assigned to Pact from the start. Just guessing, but are those points there to offset any NATO objective point values that arose from the addition of Norway and the new northern sector of the map?
If so, I think Pact is overbalanced. Perhaps those values are an artifact of map addition, but I would suggest looking at those values (for both NATO in Norway, and Pact in Sweden) to make sure that NATO is not losing too much in the exchange. Just from a glance, it seems to favor Pact, esp. if Sweden is considered "off limits".

RE potential "shock and awe" effects for both NATO and Pact: there has been a lot of discussion about those effects and how they should or might play out. Speaking as a purist, I would like to see this scene stick as much to the original boardgame as much as possible while you are revising the orbat. The Pact's shock and surrender effects can be tweaked later if need be if NATO is truly overpowered.

I don't think they are. In fact, I continue to maintain that NATO already has a hard enough time of it in the original, and by adding more map (more territory to defend for NATO) as well as massively more Pact forces (w/ all the firepower they have at their disposal from the new SSR districts) it is NATO that needs more Irregulars, not Pact. There are just as many (if not more) shock effects that Pact can cause. Will you be adding Irregulars for NATO to help them defend those hexes, too? If not, then I think the game will be tipped even farther toward Pact victories.

Well, that's my two cents!! Also, I'm sure you've seen these, but if not, they are fascinating reads, offering insight into the original designs and rationale for "The Next War" boardgame. Much of the discussion will seem dated, but there are tidbits buried in these articles that have helped my push with NATO so well into the Pact backfield. Interesting to see how some of their comments about strategies and tactics are still applicable to fire and movement in TOAW.

Link to articles about The Next War boardgame: "Moves" magazines volumes 41 and 42 at archive.org is

https://archive.org/stream/Moves39/Moves%2041#mode/2up

the part two of the article talks more about strategy and tactices, that is in issue number 42
Ok, well, back to the board!!
User avatar
Hellen_slith
Posts: 2009
Joined: Mon Oct 10, 2005 6:46 pm

RE: Next War 1979 - Expanded (Beta 1.0) play testers needed

Post by Hellen_slith »

ORIGINAL: mussey
Any feedback will be greatly appreciated, especially the sequence logic as well as the percentages:

Not sure of the logic, but it looks very close to the original possibilities. I like that "if units will not move at first" there is chance they WILL activate a few turns later. Maybe an "on going" dice roll every turn, to see if garrisoned units activate later?

Seems pretty complicated to me. Maybe roll out Beta 2 under current logic, with only the new orbat changes, then tweak the logic after a few tests of that? :) that Beta 2, that is? :)

A guy can hope. :)
User avatar
mussey
Posts: 682
Joined: Sat Dec 02, 2006 1:21 pm
Location: Cleve-Land

RE: Next War 1979 - Expanded (Beta 1.0) play testers needed

Post by mussey »

I've returned from a short break.

In a dream, Marshal Tito appeared, deploring why he couldn't play. So below is the newest addition:
- If/when Austria is invaded, the Zone 1 for Austria and Yugoslavia is removed.
- There are increasing odds that Tito will join the Warsaw Pact.

- Austria surrenders 10%
- Graz occupied 5%
- Salzburg occupied 5%
- Klagenfurt occupied - 5%
- Villach occupied - 5%
- Italian x1 hex of 68, 198 - 5%
- Italian Alps passes x2 hexes of 58, 195 - 10%
- Udine occupied - 10%

Yugoslav forces will remain garrisoned unless one of the above occurs. A presumption has been made that a combination of Soviet pressure, the fear of losing possible NATO assistance, and going to war to unite the ethnic population would force Tito's hand. One third of its forces are available for war, the remainder are off-map committed reserves and the Greek border. The forces available are a bit neutered in regards to equipment and supply[x3 Inf Divs/x2 Arm Divs/x2 Inf Bdes/x6 air sdrns/multiple fixed paramilitary rgts]. HOUSE RULE, no forces from either side may move into Yugoslavia until she declares war.

This adds some more complexity to political and military strategy on both sides. I think Italy will now have to keep some forces along the border in the case Tito is enlisted.




Image
Attachments
Screenshot126.jpg
Screenshot126.jpg (561.8 KiB) Viewed 489 times
Col. Mussbu

The long arm of the law - "The King of Battle"

User avatar
mussey
Posts: 682
Joined: Sat Dec 02, 2006 1:21 pm
Location: Cleve-Land

RE: Next War 1979 - Expanded (Beta 1.0) play testers needed

Post by mussey »

Seems pretty complicated to me.

My reasoning/logic/goal is to avoid an 'all or nothing' approach to to a possible revolt. For example, instead of Poland rolling a 2 and totally quitting the Warsaw Pact, now there are levels of non-compliance with only some formations possibly quitting, and if so maybe for only a few turns while reluctant officers/NCO's are replaced. I think this is more credible - keeping in mind its not easy gaming the probabilities of a revolt.

Game-testing should be very interesting! And yes, Beta 2 is so very close........................
Col. Mussbu

The long arm of the law - "The King of Battle"

User avatar
larryfulkerson
Posts: 42638
Joined: Sat Apr 16, 2005 9:06 pm
Location: Tucson, AZ,usa,sol, milkyway
Contact:

RE: Next War 1979 - Expanded (Beta 1.0) play testers needed

Post by larryfulkerson »

Beta 2 is so very close........................
Got a ballpark ETA for us for the next version. Me and Damon, rather Damon and I, would like to playtest it.
Project 2025: The Series Ep 3.5 - The End Of The World?
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zbTn0iz ... kN_Xb0d-Gr
THM67
Posts: 2
Joined: Tue Jul 23, 2013 9:14 pm

RE: Next War 1979 - Expanded (Beta 1.0) play testers needed

Post by THM67 »

I'd be interested to see if you would open Sweden/Finland eventually in the scenario, as that would provide the WP player an opportunity to gain a lot of VPs (you could off set them like Austria) and avoid screwing around in the mountains in exchange for the danger of adding two decently sized armies against you. Just a thought.
User avatar
mussey
Posts: 682
Joined: Sat Dec 02, 2006 1:21 pm
Location: Cleve-Land

RE: Next War 1979 - Expanded (Beta 1.0) play testers needed

Post by mussey »

ORIGINAL: THM67

I'd be interested to see if you would open Sweden/Finland eventually in the scenario, as that would provide the WP player an opportunity to gain a lot of VPs (you could off set them like Austria) and avoid screwing around in the mountains in exchange for the danger of adding two decently sized armies against you. Just a thought.

Good thought. I too had been rolling it over, but as of yet not sure how to wrap my head around this. I suppose Finland would lean to Soviets, Sweden to NATO. The logic for each would depend on the triggers. I see no Finland involvement unless coerced by the Soviets. I see no trigger for Sweden unless Finland were to join (maybe?) or direct Soviet attack on her soil.

Maybe others here have a better insight into this?
Col. Mussbu

The long arm of the law - "The King of Battle"

THM67
Posts: 2
Joined: Tue Jul 23, 2013 9:14 pm

RE: Next War 1979 - Expanded (Beta 1.0) play testers needed

Post by THM67 »

Good thought. I too had been rolling it over, but as of yet not sure how to wrap my head around this. I suppose Finland would lean to Soviets, Sweden to NATO. The logic for each would depend on the triggers. I see no Finland involvement unless coerced by the Soviets. I see no trigger for Sweden unless Finland were to join (maybe?) or direct Soviet attack on her soil.

The way I've seen it done is that Finland does one of three things. The first is that Finland does not resist and lets the Soviet Union pass through (all armies withdrawn) and eventually pro-NATO partisans spawn, or Finland resists their neutrality being violated and their armies activated, or like how certain WP nations don't participate, Finland leaves their troops frozen in garrison. And since Finland almost certainly means the Soviets going through Sweden, the Swedes join NATO.
User avatar
Hellen_slith
Posts: 2009
Joined: Mon Oct 10, 2005 6:46 pm

RE: Next War 1979 - Expanded (Beta 1.0) play testers needed

Post by Hellen_slith »

YES!! Love the Yugo addition.

TITO!! TITO!! TITO!!

Not sure why, but TITO always was like, my hero way back when. He went his own way.

TITO!!
User avatar
cathar1244
Posts: 1253
Joined: Sat Sep 05, 2009 2:16 am

RE: Next War 1979 - Expanded (Beta 1.0) play testers needed

Post by cathar1244 »

ORIGINAL: Hellen_slith

YES!! Love the Yugo addition.

TITO!! TITO!! TITO!!

Not sure why, but TITO always was like, my hero way back when. He went his own way.

TITO!!

I thought it interesting that U.S. forces recreation services had agreements for U.S. service members and their families to vacation in Yugoslavia ... during the Cold War. Cold War had some odd aspects to it.

Cheers
User avatar
Hellen_slith
Posts: 2009
Joined: Mon Oct 10, 2005 6:46 pm

RE: Next War 1979 - Expanded (Beta 1.0) play testers needed

Post by Hellen_slith »

ORIGINAL: larryfulkerson
Beta 2 is so very close........................
Got a ballpark ETA for us for the next version. Me and Damon, rather Damon and I, would like to playtest it.

I second that motion. If I were a betting man, I'd wager on

that date that the scene begins on ... I think it is June 29th?

Not sure. I can't remember right now.

But June 29, 2019 would be a good release date.

The 40th Anniversary of ... Hostilities.

Sweet date. Sweet date. Or whatever date it begins, plus 40 years.

Love the Watchtowers grafx for EG and the Tito addition, too. Thanks!!

H
User avatar
mussey
Posts: 682
Joined: Sat Dec 02, 2006 1:21 pm
Location: Cleve-Land

RE: Next War 1979 - Expanded (Beta 1.0) play testers needed

Post by mussey »

But June 29, 2019 would be a good release date.

The 40th Anniversary of ... Hostilities.

Very interesting, indeed....

I expanded the game turns + 1 more month, so a few more units will be added:
- several more US Natl Gd: 38th Div.; 39th Bde.; 49th Div. (all late-scenario)
- 9th US Inf Div (Ft. Lewis, WA) initially presumed for Pacific ops but realigned for NATO (mid-scenario)
- (the US units are the most difficult to predict arrival dates. Shipping is one issue, NATO or Pacific deployment another, and the reliable mobilization of Res. & N.Gd Units is another another).

I believe I'm ready for a dry run....

PS: Graphics by Cabido add an nice touch. Kudos.
Col. Mussbu

The long arm of the law - "The King of Battle"

Post Reply

Return to “Mods and Scenarios”