Buzz's Fite Mod

[Slayer_of_kings]

Another e-mail sent.

[larryfulkerson]

ORIGINAL: will5869
Thanks. sent you an e-mail

Your's was replied to early this am. Hope it went well.

ORIGINAL: Slayer_of_kings
Another e-mail sent.

Just sent it just now ( 12:03 noonish Tucson time ) and hope you get it as well.

[Slayer_of_kings]

Got it!! thanks again, Larry
 
MC

[sPzAbt653]

I think we all decided that the Partizan units can be done away with. The only thing I'm not sure of is if the Russian player relies on these units from a strategic standpoint. Maybe they are a big help in cutting German supply late in the game. I don't know if anyone has played into it far enough to know.
 
Here is the Partizan schedule for location and arrivals and the German Sich. divisions and mp units I scheduled for withdrawal (the turn after each Partizan unit arrival):
 
Partisan schedule -  Pripet North & South - t 5       286 sich div, 403 sich div, 501, 521
       Kaunas - t 10       207 sich div, 531
       Valga - t 15       285 sich div, 541
       Korosten - t 20       213 sich div, 551
       Minsk - t 25       221 sich div, 561
       Gulbene, Idritsa - t 60      444 sich div, 581
       Lubny - t 65       454 sich div, 591
       Perekop, Narva - t 110      201 sich div, 203 sich div, 671, 682
       Kholm, Kremenets - t 200      683, 685, 689, 693
       Pripet West, L'gov - t 205      694, 695, 696, 697
 
I put the partizan units on a turn entry of 600, so they are still there, they just won't appear.There were also some other German Security Divisions not in the oob, and I intend to look into other units that may have spent most of their time in rear area security instead of at the front. I left the 'Operation Bagration' partisans in for now.
 
I'd like to know your thoughts about the naval units in the game. I think they are the same as the partisans, historically nice but they add aggravation to this huge scenario. I haven't found any good use for them, does anybody think that not having them would really handicap one side or the other?

[larryfulkerson]

ORIGINAL: sPzAbt653
I'd like to know your thoughts about the naval units in the game. I think they are the same as the partisans, historically nice but they add aggravation to this huge scenario. I haven't found any good use for them, does anybody think that not having them would really handicap one side or the other?

I've been using the ships in the Leningrad area as floating artillery. It really helps to have some artillery to reduce the forts and bust open a stagnant front line. Just ask Karri how he would feel about the loss of his artillery units. I'm not so sure that the destroyer units are very useful, except perhaps as AA protection for the battleships since they have a propensity to loose when bombarding shore installations.

[Zort]

ORIGINAL: larryfulkerson
I've been using the ships in the Leningrad area as floating artillery. It really helps to have some artillery to reduce the forts and bust open a stagnant front line. Just ask Karri how he would feel about the loss of his artillery units. I'm not so sure that the destroyer units are very useful, except perhaps as AA protection for the battleships since they have a propensity to loose when bombarding shore installations.

SMK and I have talked about this and his recommendation was to get rid of the naval units but put a fortification unit in Leningrad to simulate the hvy ships use as art for the defense of Leningrad. Just remember when you reduce the soviet forces from the 1999 they have now they will be able to divide some units. If that is what you want then ok but I intend to add units when I take some out.

SMK has also recommended that I put the MP NKVD units into division that can be broken down. Not sure if that is historical but has the possibility of reducing the indestructable ants[:)]

sPzAbt, are you starting from scratch or using my mod as a starting point?

I am going to do away with the cease fires in my next mod, in their place I am going to reduce the supply radius to 2 and decrease the shock to 70%. Since we can't do mud by area it will effect the entire map. But will stop the total reorganization of the front lines and let there be a continuation of attacks but with the posibility that the units next to the attackers won't be able to support the attacks.

[SMK-at-work]

Another thing you can do with the naval units is combine them all into a single unit for each sea.

Also my idea for the NKVD regiments was that they & the "new" divisions they were broken down frrom would not reconstruct

[freeboy]

re to above .. partisans do not add anything.. they simply ty up computer time

[sPzAbt653]

ORIGINAL: freeboy

re to above .. partisans do not add anything.. they simply ty up computer time

That's my thought also. Freeboy, do you think the naval units fall into this category too?


I like the idea of adding the naval guns to a new fort unit, or to the existing one. As they were there it wouldn't be proper to delete them entirely. But historically neither side would have risked a capital ship in this theatre. Tirpitz spent most of the war hiding in the Norwegian fjords, the Russians wouldn't give escort for the convoys, nor would they interdict German movements across the Kerch Straits. Buzz, let us know what units you will 'add'. For now I have left the naval units in the oob but put them on an entry of turn 600, like the partizans. That way the Soviet unit count doesn't change.

I don't think I have an opinion yet about the NKVD MP units.

Buzz, I started from scratch but added most of your changes I saw on page 1 of this thread. Like I said in my e-mail I had already been making alot of other changes, so I couldn't add the mod straight up to mine.

Very interested in the 'cease fire' mod. Please start a game asap so we can know how it works out!!

[SMK-at-work]

IMO having a russian front without Partisans is like having hte Western Front without the battle of hte bulge - it's one of hte defining features and you cannot do away with them and still claim to be doign a definitive Russian front game.
 
The Russian fleet did provide escorts for convoys into Murmansk/Archangel - but only close to those bases as they had no means of co-operating with the Western Allied warships on longer voyages.  
 
The Black sea fleet was very active until the fall of Sevastopol - by which time most of its heavy units had been sunk.  Operating against axis transport across the Kerch straights was not a realistic idea - any naval forces would have been crushed by the Luftwaffe operating out of nearby airbases in the Crimea.

[Zort]

ORIGINAL: sPzAbt653
Buzz, let us know what units you will 'add'. For now I have left the naval units in the oob but put them on an entry of turn 600, like the partizans. That way the Soviet unit count doesn't change.

Buzz, I started from scratch but added most of your changes I saw on page 1 of this thread. Like I said in my e-mail I had already been making alot of other changes, so I couldn't add the mod straight up to mine.

Very interested in the 'cease fire' mod. Please start a game asap so we can know how it works out!!

As for adding units, I don't have specific ones yet but SMK and I found that several of the ski units are abstracted other units for later in the war. So I would be inclined to add in other ground forces and not reconstruct others.

I would like to get a copy of your scenario when you are complete and would like to see what changes you have made. I have added the heavy rifle at squads to the PG regts like you have in my next version.

Still working on the cease fire changes. Too nice outdoors to sit behind the computer all day.

I think I read somewhere that the soviet CA's and BB's in the Black Sea basically couldn't fight since their gun barrels where in need of replacing and all energies were put to the ground forces. Take a look at the soviets naval units that tried to stop the evacuation by the Romanians of Sevastopol, armed barges, tug boats, subs, a motley of collection of ships on both sides. And the soviets keep the big boys away due to the threat of german air like SMK indicated.

I think not allowing Soviet units that reconstruct now to not reconstruct will unbalance the game. They need all the guys they can get. I believe that there is a way with the current game system to achieve some of the effects we all seem to want. Unfortunately it's seems to be tough to get a game to last the entire war. In my game with Karri, he as the sovs has started his offensive 14 turns before his shock goes up. I have only taken 4 prod cities and have crippled my forces. His point on somehow penalizing the soviet player for giving up his production cities too soon is something else to work on. There has to be a reason for the soviet player to stand and fight in places. One option would be if these prod cities fall to soon then the soviet shock goes down.

I agree with SMK on the partisans but there has to be a better way to do them. Do you know if a unit can have the option of appearing at different locations?

[sPzAbt653]

ORIGINAL: Zort

I agree with SMK on the partisans but there has to be a better way to do them. Do you know if a unit can have the option of appearing at different locations?
[/quote]

Buzz, not sure I understand, what units should have optional location appearances?

Thanks for the comments. SMK and Freeboy, thanks for taking the time to respond (still waiting to see if Karri will weigh in on any of this). I am only asking these questions about Partisans and Naval units from a German against the PO standpoint. As I am attempting to make it playable that way, I appreciate the feedback. Because of the problems the Partizan units create (regenerating Soviet Armies), I thought I came up with a reasonable solution. The naval units do create another problem. As Mr. Fulkerson said, they provide fire support, but the PO sends them about shelling, quite a waste of time.

Buzz, you said 'One option would be if these prod cities fall to soon then the soviet shock goes down. ' Quite an incentive for the German to take these cities, and for the Soviet to hold them, do you think this can work ?

[Karri]

Regarding partisans, they can have two points where they appear. First is the initial place where they start at, and the second can be a fixed reconstruction point...I think that's how it is done now...? So far I haven't seen them cause any trouble whatsoever, of course as the game progresses there will be more of them and they all potnetially tie down 6 units. However I use the Korps HQ units to surround them, and thus they mostly sit there for quite a few turns until I bother to attack and destroy them.

Now as I said earlier maybe just converting a set number of hexes by a certain event(something the Soviet could for example do every ten turns or so...if it's possible) would achieve the same result. These could be major raillines. Or then siply add an option for the Soviet to enable partisan activity and as a result the Axis loses a few supply points for x turns.

The naval units for Axis are complete waste, most of the time they have no use. For Soviets they only acts as artillery. I think it would be best to make one big unit of them.

[freeboy]

re navel units, .. if we are talking ways to reduce numbers of troops units, The eastern front is primarily an land/air front. Perhaps making there use an effect in a theater option.. ie axis sorties fleets against murmansk... 5% drop in aid for x turns etc.
 
Same for partisans, I regard them as a nuisanse, and using them as an abstraction suits me.
One thing Fite does that really bugs me... and I am not saying I am right, just my opinion.. is this:
 
It does seem to straight jacket one into a historical replaying of the war. Why? seems silly to me.. I prrefer that the sovs get shock punished and rewarded based on cities lost... same for the Germans with options for FullWar mobilization and  "liberation" policies that would attempt to recruit Eastern Europeans into anti Communist divisions.

[Zort]

ORIGINAL: sPzAbt653
Buzz, not sure I understand, what units should have optional location appearances?

I was wondering if partisans for example can arrive in different places. Partisans are a nuisance and they should be but now you just hang out around the area they come in.

Buzz, you said 'One option would be if these prod cities fall to soon then the soviet shock goes down. ' Quite an incentive for the German to take these cities, and for the Soviet to hold them, do you think this can work ?

I think this could work.

Within the game limitations I think there are two options available to get the game to go past 41 and deep into 42. One is reducing the growth of the soviet production and spread it out over 1942, which I have done in mod 5. Along with a slight reduction in the soviet shock from the original game.

Second is causing the soviet shock to go down either by cities lost before a certain time or a number of cities (non production cities included in this list) lost before a range of time. Each chosen city is given a point(s) and based on how many the germans take by a certain time shock changes for the soviet. And if the soviet holds out longer his shock doesn't go down. Similiar to what the DNO scenario does to figure out an auto victory. Soviet shock would still go up in 42 etc as they hold on.

I want to see more effects of terrain on units. IE in FITE Finland can become a main tank battlefield if the sovs want, where in reality they were stuck to the roads and became cannon fodder. Also would like to see the supply limitations greater, ie again Finland, the Germans tend to bust through the center of Finland where as they had to build a railway there to get supplies up to the front. I am all for taking off some of the straight jacket but within what was really available both politically or physically.

[sPzAbt653]

Like Karri said the partisans arrive within a certain distance of the location of their 'fixed' reconstruction. I don't think it could be moved. Hex ownership can be changed with the 'guerilla' event. And it can be increased and decreased, mimicking partisan activity. I had thought about this before and thought it would have me spending time moving non-combat units all over the place reclaiming hexes, and that is what I am trying to avoid. Maybe when the Soviet takes an offensive, the German supply and rail capacity could drop for a time, creating the effect of coordinated partisan activity.

I really like the idea of Soviet shock going down due to loss of certain cities. The player could still opt to run away to the east, and the additional shock suffered due to giving up the cities would model the effect of such a large scale withdrawal over such a distance. This also makes sense as far as the production lost from each city and not regained until the factories were running again from the other side of the Urals. Somebody posted a schedule of when certain cities were actually captured. Should that be used as a guideline? And how much shock for each one?

I was also thinking about the terrain in Finland. I have seen other people making terrain mods, I haven't messed with any of this, is it possible to make an 'apline' type terrain that represents the heavy forests and swamps? If so some of them could be placed up there and this would restrict the lines of advance to something more historical (as the alpine is an impassable hex).

[SMK-at-work]

I'm not so sure about using shock as the major deterant to Soviet fleeing - some of the cities are much easier to capture in the game than historically - those in the Ukraine (Kiev, Odessa, Stalino, Kharkov) because of game limitations - historically the Axis southern front was not as strong as the central and northern ones, and so advanced slower. 

This is a function of a couple of things - it's a simple matter to move troops to different fronts - only 1 level of command applies so any divisions can be easilty transfered to new/different areas of operation, and supply is similarly only applied at divisional level.

[larryfulkerson]

ORIGINAL: sPzAbt653
Like Karri said the partisans arrive within a certain distance of the location of their 'fixed' reconstruction. I don't think it could be moved. Hex ownership can be changed with the 'guerilla' event. And it can be increased and decreased, mimicking partisan activity. I had thought about this before and thought it would have me spending time moving non-combat units all over the place reclaiming hexes, and that is what I am trying to avoid.

Um.....whenever I've played FitE as the Axis I would endevor to convert the hexes to my control only because if a partisan appeared in one of MY hexes I would see it and could react faster. If he appeared in a Soviet controlled hex it isn't always visible to the Axis player. That being said, I can see making the partisans more abstract and reducing the number of Axis MP units coorespondingly so that less units would be in play. Most of the time consuming part of play ( at least for me ) is going through the order of battle, deciding where to move each unit, deciding whether to entrench or not, etc. I've seen some turns take about two hours to finalize because of the number of units in play.

[Zort]

ORIGINAL: larryfulkerson
I've seen some turns take about two hours to finalize because of the number of units in play.

Larry, just think about having 4000 units to move vice just 1800!!

I'm not so sure about using shock as the major deterant to Soviet fleeing - some of the cities are much easier to capture in the game than historically - those in the Ukraine (Kiev, Odessa, Stalino, Kharkov) because of game limitations - historically the Axis southern front was not as strong as the central and northern ones, and so advanced slower.

SMK, well Smolensk fell on turn 8 historically and I have yet to see it fall that fast. Why shouldn't the Germans have the option of sending more forces to the south? (this is the counter to the soviets runaway defense!) The Soviets seem to usually throw everything in front of Moscow around Smolensk and thus reducing the forces in the south. In our game I will probably take the cities of Zaporozhe and Dnepr.. on the turn or turn after they fell historically. So far in the games I have played, the only cities I have taken early have been Kiev, Odessa and Kharkov. This doesn't count the game where the soviets had a sever shock handicap.

If we want to handicap the german player more then a house rule would be that only the rumanians can attack Odessa. That will slow the date of capture a bit!!

So my thoughts on the shock loss due to city early loss would correspond to the historical turn they fell. If taken early then shock goes down 1 or 2%. Now to counter the arguement of Kiev falling early change those turns to 12 for Kiev and 22 for Smolensk. My intention is that this only lasts till winter then shock goes up as in the game now after the winter offensive.

[Karri]

Currently one of the biggest problems seems to be air war. The Soviets rule it by 42 in all games I've played. Have you experimented with keeping the Soviet air chock at say 90 or 95?