War in the East Q&A

[Iron Duke]

ORIGINAL: jaw


Bulgaria and the Balkans in general are not in the game. The dynamics of the game are such that if you don't defeat the Soviet Union in 1941 your chances of doing so become progressively less. It is difficult to imagine a game in which both the Russians are holding on by their fingernails in 1944 and the Germans actually need the help of a couple Slovakian infantry divisions.

Ok ... can you expand a little on this , are you saying that Slovakia,Hungary,Rumania and Finland will leave the Axis Alliance on set dates no matter what the strategic situation is? or is there other criteria involved for these countries to change side

[ComradeP]

Can you name an amphibious operation the Germans conducted in the Black Sea?

Operation Bluecher. Planned as an attack across Strait of Kerch (from the Kerch Peninsula to the Taman Peninsula) in early August by 5 out of Eleventh Army's 7 German divisions after the fall of Sevastopol, according to Hitler's Directive 43, written in early July 1942. The objective was to capture Anapa and Novorossiysk, turning the flank of what would be the Soviet 47th Army at a crucial time if it had been executed.

Hitler changed his mind and decided that if German troops succesfully pushed towards the Caucasus, the operation would be scrapped and the 5 divisions moved to Leningrad, with most of the siege artillery from Sevastopol to launch an attack on Leningrad in September at the latest.

Eventually, Operation Bluecher was decreased in size to Bluecher II, executed on September 2, 1942, which brought a Romanian mountain division and a German division across the Strait of Kerch to help the Third Romanian Army already on the other side. Enough aircraft were diverted from the Stalingrad front to keep the Black Sea Fleet from messing with the landing.

If the player could have the means to execute the original Bluecher plan, that could seriously help in trying to secure the Caucasus.

Bulgaria and the Balkans in general are not in the game. The dynamics of the game are such that if you don't defeat the Soviet Union in 1941 your chances of doing so become progressively less. It is difficult to imagine a game in which both the Russians are holding on by their fingernails in 1944 and the Germans actually need the help of a couple Slovakian infantry divisions.

The Germans might not need the help of the Slovak Fast Division or the Slovak Security Division, but over a dozen Bulgarian or Romanian divisions fighting for the Soviets magically popping at the western edge of the map at set times would be quite troubling for the German player, and quite unrealistic. If the player is forced to stick with historical surrender dates, regardless of whether the Soviets are losing badly, I'd like to know how the appearance of formerly allied troops that switched sides would work. If they're excluded, I'd also like to know why as those troops could make offensive operations easier for the Soviets as they approach Germany.

[jaw]

ORIGINAL: Iron Duke

ORIGINAL: jaw


Bulgaria and the Balkans in general are not in the game. The dynamics of the game are such that if you don't defeat the Soviet Union in 1941 your chances of doing so become progressively less. It is difficult to imagine a game in which both the Russians are holding on by their fingernails in 1944 and the Germans actually need the help of a couple Slovakian infantry divisions.

Ok ... can you expand a little on this , are you saying that Slovakia,Hungary,Rumania and Finland will leave the Axis Alliance on set dates no matter what the strategic situation is? or is there other criteria involved for these countries to change side

Slovakia withdraws due to the internal political situation in Slovakia (essentially same reason Italy withdraws); Hungary, Rumania, and Finland have to be forced to surrender by Russian forces invading their countries.

[jaw]

ORIGINAL: ComradeP

Can you name an amphibious operation the Germans conducted in the Black Sea?

Operation Bluecher. Planned as an attack across Strait of Kerch (from the Kerch Peninsula to the Taman Peninsula) in early August by 5 out of Eleventh Army's 7 German divisions after the fall of Sevastopol, according to Hitler's Directive 43, written in early July 1942. The objective was to capture Anapa and Novorossiysk, turning the flank of what would be the Soviet 47th Army at a crucial time if it had been executed.

Hitler changed his mind and decided that if German troops succesfully pushed towards the Caucasus, the operation would be scrapped and the 5 divisions moved to Leningrad, with most of the siege artillery from Sevastopol to launch an attack on Leningrad in September at the latest.

Eventually, Operation Bluecher was decreased in size to Bluecher II, executed on September 2, 1942, which brought a Romanian mountain division and a German division across the Strait of Kerch to help the Third Romanian Army already on the other side. Enough aircraft were diverted from the Stalingrad front to keep the Black Sea Fleet from messing with the landing.

If the player could have the means to execute the original Bluecher plan, that could seriously help in trying to secure the Caucasus.

At the scale of WitE this is not an amphibious operation. An amphibious operation in WitE is a "blue water" operation involving major naval assets none of which the Axis possessed in the Black Sea.

Bulgaria and the Balkans in general are not in the game. The dynamics of the game are such that if you don't defeat the Soviet Union in 1941 your chances of doing so become progressively less. It is difficult to imagine a game in which both the Russians are holding on by their fingernails in 1944 and the Germans actually need the help of a couple Slovakian infantry divisions.

The Germans might not need the help of the Slovak Fast Division or the Slovak Security Division, but over a dozen Bulgarian or Romanian divisions fighting for the Soviets magically popping at the western edge of the map at set times would be quite troubling for the German player, and quite unrealistic. If the player is forced to stick with historical surrender dates, regardless of whether the Soviets are losing badly, I'd like to know how the appearance of formerly allied troops that switched sides would work. If they're excluded, I'd also like to know why as those troops could make offensive operations easier for the Soviets as they approach Germany.

See my next post explaining who withdraws and who surrenders. BTW, no one changes sides in WitE, they just surrender.

[ComradeP]

At the scale of WitE this is not an amphibious operation. An amphibious operation in WitE is a "blue water" operation involving major naval assets none of which the Axis possessed in the Black Sea.

So, in short, the Germans can't bring troops across the Strait of Kerch unless it's frozen?

It's also a bit odd that the Soviets do get amphibious capabilities if scale is an issue, as most of their operations were of a smaller scale than what 5 German divisions+support assets would amount to in terms of manpower strength.

As the main ports for the Black Sea Fleet were in the Ukraine, the Black Sea Fleet was also stuck without adequate facilities, which means that by the end of the war it had lost most of its operational strength, due to ship losses and poor maintenance.

Slovakia withdraws due to the internal political situation in Slovakia

That's just plain silly. Tiso was one of the most popular leaders Slovakia had in the 20th century, and it's very unlikely the uprising would have happened without threats of a German occupation and proximity of Soviet forces.

Italy withdrawing: OK, the Allies would probably land in Italy and knock it out of the war, but an automatic Slovak surrender due to the "internal political situation" is by no means historically accurate.

[Helpless]

So, in short, the Germans can't bring troops across the Strait of Kerch unless it's frozen?

They can. Kerch strait is considered to be a major river and doesn't require amphib capacities to cross it.

[jaw]

ORIGINAL: ComradeP

Slovakia withdraws due to the internal political situation in Slovakia

That's just plain silly. Tiso was one of the most popular leaders Slovakia had in the 20th century, and it's very unlikely the uprising would have happened without threats of a German occupation and proximity of Soviet forces.

Italy withdrawing: OK, the Allies would probably land in Italy and knock it out of the war, but an automatic Slovak surrender due to the "internal political situation" is by no means historically accurate.

That is your opinion and not a question. This thread is to answer questions about the game not debate how aspects of the War are treated in the design. If the treatment of the Slovkians in the game is so important to you, I suggest you start a threat to debate it with others on the forum. I'm here to answer questions not argue.

[jaw]

ORIGINAL: Iron Duke

ORIGINAL: jaw



Ok ... can you expand a little on this , are you saying that Slovakia,Hungary,Rumania and Finland will leave the Axis Alliance on set dates no matter what the strategic situation is? or is there other criteria involved for these countries to change side

I checked with the design team and the actual mechanics of Axis Allies surrendering has yet to worked out. The final rules could be more elaborate than simple surrender or withdrawal.

[thackaray]

ORIGINAL: jaw


ORIGINAL: ComradeP

Is the player forced to follow Hitler's philosophy that more divisions could do "more with less", which turned out to be "less with more" as many weaker divisions couldn't quite match the achievements of several early war full strength divisions? As the player is forced to stick with historical production, does that also mean that we're stuck with weaker units or can we increase their strengths up to early war standards?

The Axis player gets the units historically assigned to the Eastern Front. The TOEs of all units, Axis & Russian, change over time so you cannot go back to an outdated TOE. The actual strength of your units depends as much on how well you play the game as it does the production system or your current TOE.

Do late war German infantry units simply get their infantry squads cut by 1/3 as they're missing a battalion in each regiment, regardless of losses or does a "wear and tear" system set in which makes the divisions full strength as long as manpower is available?

As state above, the TOEs change over time so most of your German infantry divisions will adopt the '44 infantry division TOE.

In previous postings when a unit refits to new equipment there is an experience loss. What happens to a unit's experience when they change TOE's automatically?

[jaw]

ORIGINAL: thackaray

ORIGINAL: jaw


ORIGINAL: ComradeP

Is the player forced to follow Hitler's philosophy that more divisions could do "more with less", which turned out to be "less with more" as many weaker divisions couldn't quite match the achievements of several early war full strength divisions? As the player is forced to stick with historical production, does that also mean that we're stuck with weaker units or can we increase their strengths up to early war standards?

The Axis player gets the units historically assigned to the Eastern Front. The TOEs of all units, Axis & Russian, change over time so you cannot go back to an outdated TOE. The actual strength of your units depends as much on how well you play the game as it does the production system or your current TOE.

Do late war German infantry units simply get their infantry squads cut by 1/3 as they're missing a battalion in each regiment, regardless of losses or does a "wear and tear" system set in which makes the divisions full strength as long as manpower is available?

As state above, the TOEs change over time so most of your German infantry divisions will adopt the '44 infantry division TOE.

In previous postings when a unit refits to new equipment there is an experience loss. What happens to a unit's experience when they change TOE's automatically?

TOE changes don't effect the experience of elements carried over from the old TOE but if new elements were called for in new the TOE (such as a new model of medium tank) they would be added at the then current national morale level which may be higher or lower than existing elements in the unit.

[Jison]

Jaw, thanks for your clear and informative answers - much appreciated! [:)]
 
Are the finnish units prohibited to enter soviet territory not owned by Finland before the winter war?
 
Will the map change visually to reflect mud and snow, or is this yet to be decided?
 
Are national borders visible on the map?
 
Jison

[ComradeP]

They can. Kerch strait is considered to be a major river and doesn't require amphib capacities to cross it.

OK, that seems to be pretty logical considering that many major rivers in Russia can be quite a bit wider than the Strait of Kerch.

How do vehicles cross a major river? I'm guessing pontoons, if included, would not be enough to bridge a major river.

That is your opinion and not a question.

OK, my point as a question: why does Slovakia automatically leave the war at a certain date, specifically what is the historical foundation for that action?

I can always start the thread you suggested if you can't answer that clearly at this point.

[jaw]

ORIGINAL: Jison

Jaw, thanks for your clear and informative answers - much appreciated! [:)]

Are the finnish units prohibited to enter soviet territory not owned by Finland before the winter war?

They can't attack into pre-'39 Soviet territory but they can move into it if the Soviets don't garrison the frontier.

Will the map change visually to reflect mud and snow, or is this yet to be decided?

There is a switch to turn on and off weather graphics.

Are national borders visible on the map?

Not yet but it is being added.

Jison

[jaw]

ORIGINAL: ComradeP

They can. Kerch strait is considered to be a major river and doesn't require amphib capacities to cross it.

OK, that seems to be pretty logical considering that many major rivers in Russia can be quite a bit wider than the Strait of Kerch.

How do vehicles cross a major river? I'm guessing pontoons, if included, would not be enough to bridge a major river.

The game isn't at that low a resolution. The on map units are regiments or larger and they pay extra movement points to cross rivers.

That is your opinion and not a question.

OK, my point as a question: why does Slovakia automatically leave the war at a certain date, specifically what is the historical foundation for that action?

The actual mechanics of how Axis Allies surrender or defect have yet to be determined. Currently Slovakian divisions have a fixed withdrawal date but that may change if a mechanism can be devised that won't be subject to player abuse. Sorry but I cannot be more specific than that at this time.


I can always start the thread you suggested if you can't answer that clearly at this point.

[ComradeP]

The game isn't at that low a resolution. The on map units are regiments or larger and they pay extra movement points to cross rivers.

Scale isn't much of an issue when it comes to bridging units, as there were no true dedicated bridging units as regiments. Most units were company size or possibly battalion size and could build boat bridges, the units were not intended to build permanent bridges.

Of course, the Germans did not have Bailey bridges and the larger Bailey bridges covered about 350 meters and would be incapable of covering many of the major rivers in Russia without supporting pillars in the actual river, which would be fairly impossible in the Strait of Kerch unless they were on barges.

Although it would, of course, be possible to build a bridge across the Strait of Kerch it would be more than a few engineer units could handle in a limited amount of time. Most divisions lacked the equipment to cross such an obstacle within a practical timeframe (a day or two) in general without help from boats or barges.

I understand that the designers can't make every river unique, as that would be very impractical, but being able to cross major rivers with units that didn't have the equipment to do so would be quite gamey.

Can actual bridges be constructed on the map as permanent features, or are they tied to an engineer unit with pontoons remaining at the location like in, say, the Decisive Battles series?

The actual mechanics of how Axis Allies surrender or defect have yet to be determined. Currently Slovakian divisions have a fixed withdrawal date but that may change if a mechanism can be devised that won't be subject to player abuse. Sorry but I cannot be more specific than that at this time.

OK. Earlier on, you made it sound like the mechanics of Slovakian surrender were fixed and would not be altered, whilst the surrender mechanics of the other minor Axis nations were still being worked out, hence my surprise.

I'll save further questions on the matter until the game is closer to release.

[jaw]

ORIGINAL: ComradeP

The game isn't at that low a resolution. The on map units are regiments or larger and they pay extra movement points to cross rivers.

Scale isn't much of an issue when it comes to bridging units, as there were no true dedicated bridging units as regiments. Most units were company size or possibly battalion size and could build boat bridges, the units were not intended to build permanent bridges.

Of course, the Germans did not have Bailey bridges and the larger Bailey bridges covered about 350 meters and would be incapable of covering many of the major rivers in Russia without supporting pillars in the actual river, which would be fairly impossible in the Strait of Kerch unless they were on barges.

Although it would, of course, be possible to build a bridge across the Strait of Kerch it would be more than a few engineer units could handle in a limited amount of time. Most divisions lacked the equipment to cross such an obstacle within a practical timeframe (a day or two) in general without help from boats or barges.

I understand that the designers can't make every river unique, as that would be very impractical, but being able to cross major rivers with units that didn't have the equipment to do so would be quite gamey.

Can actual bridges be constructed on the map as permanent features, or are they tied to an engineer unit with pontoons remaining at the location like in, say, the Decisive Battles series?

I don't think I explained river crossing adequately. The game scale is 10 miles to the hex and one week turns. At this scale crossing a river is merely a question of time not physical construction. Units pay a movement point cost to simulate the time it would take to cross the river. Bridges (temporary or permanent) are not represented on the map.

[Dili]

There goes the submerged tank attack in Bug River... [:)]

[Hard Sarge]

but don't forget, the Russians had the submerged attack dogs waiting for that attack

oops, that is not a question

so, how are Aircraft upgrades going to be handled ?, if you can't build what you want, how do you handle what you already got ?

[thackaray]

ORIGINAL: jaw

I don't think I explained river crossing adequately. The game scale is 10 miles to the hex and one week turns. At this scale crossing a river is merely a question of time not physical construction. Units pay a movement point cost to simulate the time it would take to cross the river. Bridges (temporary or permanent) are not represented on the map.

Thank you for your answers so far. I have a question about movement points when crossing a river in a hex that has already been captured and under your control.

If a unit not involved in the original crossing of a river in a hex that is now under your control, moves through that hex, what happens to it's movement points?

The scenario I have in mind is when a unit is setup up in defensive posture a few hexs away from the main front. That unit may be used to exploit any offensive gains by passing through a river hex (major/minor/frozen/unfrozen) which is now under your control. My current understanding based upon what has been explained, is that the original unit making the river crossing uses up a lot of movement points, to cross the river. It follows, that any other unit going through that hex, pays the same movement cost.

Has Gary and other designers thought that other units should pay a less cost in terms of movement points through a captured river hex? This would simulate, that the necessary brigdes have been built by the original unit making the crossing and do not have to be rebuilt.

[jaw]

ORIGINAL: Dili

There goes the submerged tank attack in Bug River... [:)]

No, that is an effect that would not be simulated at this scale.