Lvov Pocket exploit - Q for developers

[KenchiSulla]

ORIGINAL: asdicus

Thank-you for all the opinions and replies posted regarding my query.

I asked the question regarding the Lvov pocket only because it seemed so unlikey to ever have happened based on the actual history of the campaign. As a potential game purchaser I want to buy a game that is as accurate as possible to history bearing in mind it is a game of course and thus compromises must always be made. I do wonder at the view of some german players who believe the game is too hard for the germans anyway so any extra initial advantage to the german advance is fair enough. Many of the aar's show the germans taking moscow, leningrad and rostov in 1941 which does not indicate to me that the game is too hard on the german side.

I am disappointed that not one of the recent aar's is in 1944 or 1945 - the german players always seem to stop when events turn in 1943. From a bug stopping viewpoint this is a worry as I have to wonder about game stopping bugs only appearing in 1944 or 1945. witp and witp ae had a similar problem - there were bugs with kamikaze and russian activation in 1945 that remained hidden because no-one had played a full 1941 game into 1945.

I would like to express my thanks to all the players who write the aar's. Not only are they often an entertaining read (just like a good story) but many also contain tips and strategies for new or potential players such as myself.

Asdicus, if you want my two cents... If you have the cash to burn buy this product. It is good, it is fun and there is a great time/money spend ratio! Support is excellent so anything popping up will be dealt with..

And no, matrix games is not paying me to make this statement...

[gradenko2k]

I don't see the point in holding off your purchase of this great game on the basis of a single opening move that might not even mean all the much in the long-term outcome of a match. It would be like not buying War in the Pacific just because the Japanese can redirect the Kido Butai to Manila instead of Pearl Harbor.

[Schmart]

If the Lvov pocket gets nerfed, then the game must guarrantee the Kiev pocket, because after all, the Kiev pocket was historical...The reason the Lvov pocket is essential for the Axis, is precisely because the game is unlikely to produce a Kiev pocket, and I have yet to see anything close to the Kiev pocket in any of my games. If the Russian player was forced to play into a Kiev like pocket possibility, then by all means nerf the Lvov pocket...

[abulbulian]

This whole idea of trying to find a way to prevent the Soviets from not getting some units bagged around Lvov is utter BS.  Do people actually know what they are asking for?  So you want to imply more tunneling out what one side can do, but still give operational freedom to the other?  What the heck are people thinking?  If people want to sending some extra Pz units south that was not historical, then let them.  This continuing idea of some people to try and mirco one side to doing some historical path is really starting to be annoying.  I bought this game to offering me many choice of how to play.  So just get the darn historical parameters (units, toe, combat mechanics, etc) straight and let the players play. 


Sure some people will always find a more optimum strategy for the start, but that's like any game .. computer or board.  So does that mean the game sure start to imply more rules on the game?  No.  I feel strongly already that the game is much more forceful on the axis players in historical paths rather than the Soviets.  The game needs to offer more flexibility to the Axis with production and su creation rather than to put any more constraints on how their forces can operate.

Like Schmart said, if you want to try and force historical crap to happen in the game then let's talk about the Kiev pocket of 600k Soviets or the less know pocket of another 600k Soviets at Vyazma.  Where does it end.

Let's keep the developers working on fixing/enhancing stuff that has meaning rather than some people's crying about the axis having the ability to shift forces on the opening attack to pocket more Soviets in the south.... really

[:-]
 

[PeeDeeAitch]

I have made a Kiev pocket of 600k men...ask Pawlock - it was 60 some infantry divisions, some tank divisions, cavalry divisions and Budenny's large vats of wine.

[janh]

ORIGINAL: Schmart
If the Lvov pocket gets nerfed, then the game must guarrantee the Kiev pocket, because after all, the Kiev pocket was historical...The reason the Lvov pocket is essential for the Axis, is precisely because the game is unlikely to produce a Kiev pocket, and I have yet to see anything close to the Kiev pocket in any of my games. If the Russian player was forced to play into a Kiev like pocket possibility, then by all means nerf the Lvov pocket...

And in return force the German player by some rules to be trapped in a Stalingrad pocket? And maybe ensure that the Panzergroups can't be send to a different Army Group that they did not perform the 41 storm with?

In the case of the Kiev pocket, a number of mistakes must be made by both sides, and progress in the weeks before also needs to mimic the harder fighting and slower progress in the South (which accidentally means that a huge Lvov pocket would reduce that chance). Yet this is almost as unlikely as a German player overextending at Stalingrad.

[bwheatley]

ORIGINAL: Schmart

If the Lvov pocket gets nerfed, then the game must guarrantee the Kiev pocket, because after all, the Kiev pocket was historical...The reason the Lvov pocket is essential for the Axis, is precisely because the game is unlikely to produce a Kiev pocket, and I have yet to see anything close to the Kiev pocket in any of my games. If the Russian player was forced to play into a Kiev like pocket possibility, then by all means nerf the Lvov pocket...

The kiev pocket is post T1 and after T1 history is out the window. I think the point is folks doubt that this maneuver could have happened at the start of barbarossa.

[76mm]

ORIGINAL: bwheatley

I think the point is folks doubt that this maneuver could have happened at the start of barbarossa.

And moreover there is absolutely nothing the Sov player can do about it. In my limited experience whether or not the Lvov Gambit takes place makes a significant difference to the opening campaign season.

[heliodorus04]

ORIGINAL: 76mm

ORIGINAL: bwheatley

I think the point is folks doubt that this maneuver could have happened at the start of barbarossa.

And moreover there is absolutely nothing the Sov player can do about it. In my limited experience whether or not the Lvov Gambit takes place makes a significant difference to the opening campaign season.

Just as there is nothing the German player can do about the Soviet creating perfect 2-hex gaps between any Soviet unit and the next one, so that there's perfect ZOC maginot line.

Just as the Soviet is free to NOT fight the Germans along the frontier, so too the German is allowed to re-arrange units to suit his strategic plan. Why does this bother people so much? Germans can do Lvov, Soviets can run for the hills to avoid early encirclement.

Both sides have freedom to deviate from history equally. The German pays a strategic cost for this maneuver: He EITHER has a panzer corps in AGS that reports to AGC, and it will have serious problems with fuel, combat effectiveness, and overall admin efficiency. OR, if he allocates AP to put it into AGS, he overloads AGS (the most grossly over-loaded Tier 2 HQ in the entire game at the start of the GC'41) and spends a phenomenal amount of AP to do this. Considering all the Romanian shit-units that start attached to AGS, and the insane cost for Germans to move Armies out of Army Groups, there's virtually no hope of fixing the command situation of AGS until AG A and AG B form. Ultimately if you move this corps from AGC, you will need to spend APs to move it into an AGS command.

Now, if I could unfreeze the frozen motorized units in AGS on Turn 1, I wouldn't need this. But that will never happen without someone creating an edited version of the GC'41 start situation.

[Rafo35]

ORIGINAL: heliodorus04

The German has so many disadvantages over his historic counterpart in that the Soviet player won't repeat any of the mistakes that his predecessor did.

He also has a lot of advantages, like knowing precisely what he is up for or having a very kind logistical system.

In addition, the German is bound by his historic TOE, whereas the Soviet is not.

The Soviet are bound to their historic TOE as well, and that's far worse. The advantage they have is in the long term OOB.

And whereas the historical German couldn't do a lot better as far as OOB and TOE are concerned, the Soviet could. And yet, whatever how the campaign unfold, the Russians will have to use brigades of tanks and infantry, weak infantry divisions, hopelessly weak tank corps (at least until late 42), etc.

All the divisions pocketed in that Lvov pocket come back for free (as shells that reinforce nicely over a few turns). It also forces serious compromise on the goals of Army Group Center.

That's a serious argument to ponder : what's the real cost / benefice of the operation. The pb with the Lvov pocket is that it is currently as sure and hermetic as the Minsk one, whereas the conditions were very different. That wouldn't bother me much if it was proven that it is a decent choice but not a no brainer.

[Schmart]

ORIGINAL: janh
And in return force the German player by some rules to be trapped in a Stalingrad pocket? And maybe ensure that the Panzergroups can't be send to a different Army Group that they did not perform the 41 storm with?

Sure, and why stop there? Don't allow the Soviets to defend with a carpet or checkerboard, because that too is un-historical (other than in July 1943). Don't forget the Russians must attack, attack, attack in the summer of 1941 and cannot retreat, because that is what happened historically (how many Russian players play out THAT part of the historical campaign? I never do...). We could go on and on forever...

The point is that this is a game. Not a re-enactment. The game becomes un-historical the moment the Axis player moves his first unit on T1. Nerf the Lvov pocket, and everything else un-historical should also be nerfed.

The Russian player can't do anything to prevent a Lvov pocket? No sh*t! Show me an IGOUGO game where the second player can prevent anything that happens on T1...

[sveint]

What is really needed is a scenario with a free setup turn for each side.

[Q-Ball]

The problem with free setups and other more "realistic" ways to prevent the Germans from forming a big pocket, is that they aren't that realistic politically. The problem is that Stalin expected a forward, aggressive defense.

If I had a free Soviet set-up, I would NOT set my guys up offensively, but very defensively. Given enough freedom, I would leave the bare minimum along the border, and set everyone up to make a stand along the old Stalin line, or further back. Do you think Comrade Stalin would have been OK with that strategy?

Having played Soviets myself, I personally don't have a problem with the Lvov pocket. It's the last freebie the Germans get. Chalk it up to "Hold Fast' order.

[Flaviusx]

Q-ball, I don't recall the hold fast order resulting in two dozen divisions pocketed in the first 3 days of Barbarossa and an early activation of the Romanians...

But I agree that a free set up isn't the answer. Or even a freeish one. I'm more inclined towards this special surprise turn/reaction move idea as a long term solution.

[Helpless]

The problem with free setups and other more "realistic" ways to prevent the Germans from forming a big pocket, is that they aren't that realistic politically. The problem is that Stalin expected a forward, aggressive defense.

If I had a free Soviet set-up, I would NOT set my guys up offensively, but very defensively. Given enough freedom, I would leave the bare minimum along the border, and set everyone up to make a stand along the old Stalin line, or further back. Do you think Comrade Stalin would have been OK with that strategy?

Having played Soviets myself, I personally don't have a problem with the Lvov pocket. It's the last freebie the Germans get. Chalk it up to "Hold Fast' order.

You are greatly simplifying the situation. In fact the choice was (which is also very doubtful if there was a choice at all) between very bad and very very very bad. The scenario you are trying to play without forward offensive is the one which would end much worse than it was in reality. But realistically it was just impossible... and not due to the political reasons.

[janh]

ORIGINAL: Helpless
You are greatly simplifying the situation. In fact the choice was (which is also very doubtful if there was a choice at all) between very bad and very very very bad. The scenario you are trying to play without forward offensive is the one which would end much worse than it was in reality. But realistically it was just impossible... and not due to the political reasons.

Just out of curiosity, why do you think it was impossible? I think the fact that the Germans can rearrange their Army Groups a bit for the opening does add to the value of the game. I would also go as far as to bet that if there was a game variant to be chosen at game start in which the Soviet player could reposition his forces, within some limits (perhaps in a zone within 10 hex of the border, or anything reasonable), and the German player would get some extra recon for the 1st turn to mimic the German preparations, that would even add further to the replayability and value. Just throwing out ideas...

[janh]

ORIGINAL: Schmart
Sure, and why stop there? Don't allow the Soviets to defend with a carpet or checkerboard, because that too is un-historical (other than in July 1943). Don't forget the Russians must attack, attack, attack in the summer of 1941 and cannot retreat, because that is what happened historically (how many Russian players play out THAT part of the historical campaign? I never do...). We could go on and on forever...

The point is that this is a game. Not a re-enactment. The game becomes un-historical the moment the Axis player moves his first unit on T1. Nerf the Lvov pocket, and everything else un-historical should also be nerfed.

The Russian player can't do anything to prevent a Lvov pocket? No sh*t! Show me an IGOUGO game where the second player can prevent anything that happens on T1...

Obviously I failed to be sarcastic. I just wanted to drive your arguments a bit further and show that it really doesn't make sense to force any player to replay historical mistakes -- unless you want ultimately just watch the War as an interactive movie without many choices on your comp. You could add in a load of "force this or that mistake" policies and rules, fix ToEs, allow Soviet only to build historically built units at the historical dates, and attach them only to their original Fronts etc. etc. But why would you want to design a game that aims at allowing you to chance history in that way?

In fact I think the argument with the Lvov pocket is valid, and is simply just due to the I-Go-U-Go system, and cannot be purely attributed to alternative German strategies. Things like the latter possibility is lastly why many people plays games -- to check out alternatives. I suppose most people want a good strategy game like this to be accurate in terms of physics, logistics, etc -- anything that was a real given (and could not have been changed even by Hitler or Stalin), yet allow freedom of decision for the rest. I.e. for a good simulation you'd want to be sure that the model is accurate, for example that your tank can't cross the bridge because of size or weight, but not just because someone decided at that time it wasn't deemed sensible to try (and all world already knows if he had tried it could have made all the difference).

The Lvov pocket is artificial in the sense that the Soviet side cannot react -- something like a meeting engagement or try to block the spearheads isn't possible, and surely on a time-scale of 1 week the Russians would have reacted and thrown in the kitchen sink to prevent this pocket.
The Soviet side has already been trimmed by cutting armaments and the 2:1 rule etc etc, and obviously these changes will have to show their effect first before claiming that the Lvov pocket is a big deal (aside from these units being canned unrealistically early, meaning just a couple weeks early). It doesn't seem to be a game breaker to me, though, and does have only limited side effects (less likely big pockets will be formed in the south etc); and this is a feature that occurs also in later game stages, simply to the sequential movement system. I suppose it is best to live with it, or look for simple solutions like adjusting the MPs of Soviet up, or Germans down, for the 1st turn down south.

[Klydon]

ORIGINAL: janh

The Lvov pocket is artificial in the sense that the Soviet side cannot react -- something like a meeting engagement or try to block the spearheads isn't possible, and surely on a time-scale of 1 week the Russians would have reacted and thrown in the kitchen sink to prevent this pocket.
The Soviet side has already been trimmed by cutting armaments and the 2:1 rule etc etc, and obviously these changes will have to show their effect first before claiming that the Lvov pocket is a big deal (aside from these units being canned unrealistically early, meaning just a couple weeks early). It doesn't seem to be a game breaker to me, though, and does have only limited side effects (less likely big pockets will be formed in the south etc); and this is a feature that occurs also in later game stages, simply to the sequential movement system. I suppose it is best to live with it, or look for simple solutions like adjusting the MPs of Soviet up, or Germans down, for the 1st turn down south.

Sorry, not buying the "Soviet side cannot react" point specificially for the south. The fact is that Minsk is a further drive from the border than the Rumanian border, but everyone seems to be just fine with how things are going in the center and the massacre of the border Western MD armies. Part of the reason is because that is what happen in the real campaign, so in a sense, it "feels" right.

The drive for the Rumanian border is a shorter distance and over less terrain (PG2 must cross a couple of rivers and go through forests to get to Minsk). The big heartburn is that it didn't happen historically and that makes it feel "gamey" when the fact is no one knows for sure what would have happen if the Germans had committed more armor on the opening offensive rather than just the 4 panzer divisions normally available on the first turn to PG1.

[janh]

Argument taken, and makes sense.  Probably the same reason that later in the game neither side complains about similar situations.  As I said, I don't oppose the Lvov pocket, though after all the cuts the Soviet side had to accept in 1.05, undoing it likely wouldn't hurt.  And if it leads to more pocketing in the South, or one large pocket similar to the Kiev one later, you would be right in the sense that it would even "feel" more historic.  Anyway, (in a very unlikely) perhaps the devs will alllow for the possibility to mod the turn-length some day, which would address all these issues as well.

[LiquidSky]

The real problem is a lot of these russian units are not set up in the correct spot. I have no doubt that the developers spent massive amounts of resources to accurately place them where they should be on June 22; trouble is, that is not where they were when they made contact with the Germans. The russian's south front reacted to the invading army. It did not sit like a bunch of pylons for the Germans to drive tanks around.

The other problem is the perfect knowledge of troop deployment in the south. This is even worse then hindsight as it extends over the 4 days of the first turn.

I see no problem with the Germans wanting to send more armour to the south, or even having some of these units start in Rumania (where they could have). What I do have issue with is the Russians sitting and doing nothing while Germans drive around them.

Perhaps having an initial setup turn would be a good idea. Make it blind, and allow the Germans certain historical limits on placement of units, and make the Russians set up in the hexes they start in, or any hex closer to the front line. This would represent the unknown reaction of the Russian divisions, and would add some excitement to the start of the game.