East Front 41-45: Mark v Fabio Playtest/AAR

[USXpat]

June 7: Baku or Bust!

As the screenshot shows, a concentration of SS forces have advanced to the Don. Trying to get all SS units together as then they have Full vs. Limited Cooperation. Being some of the best units at my disposal, their mere presence should be a direct and imminent threat to Stalingrad.

River crossings are made east of Rostov, encircling the city. Italian, Slovakian and Luftwaffe ground troops - supported by regular German infantry and an SS Division are swinging down and advancing toward Stalingrad south of the Don.

No attack is made into Stalingrad. Their only objectives are to keep that rail line broken and to impede Russian units from being able to access the Caucasus.

The freshest available panzer and panzergrenadier divisions, along with two German Mountain korps, some regular infantry, assault and rail engineers will be the main force to drive on the Caucasus.

[USXpat]

T55 - Baku or Bust.

Rostov fell the third week of June and rail engineers started in earnest trying to play catch up with Army Detachments M, N, O and 0. The drive into the Kuban region and northernmost Caucasus met with moderate resistance, first at Maikop and then a running battle toward Grozny.

Group M as shown here just exhausted itself (less than 10% supply), so they are on the process of rotating into R&R south of Armavir and link up with the RR engineers so they can redeploy back to AGC. Group N is the follow-on wave, with the semi-rested panzer divisions picking up where Group M left off.

Group O... heh - is on a site seeing tour... to Baku, mostly to make sure hordes of screaming Soviets don't come pouring out of the mountains.

Group 0's only job is hex conversion, unless they meet up with any enemy's in the course of this role. Once finished, they'll go back and hang with the Italians.

And then there's a Slovakian unit advancing on Grozny. They weren't given orders to do this, I think this is the unit that ran into an MG battalion and kept it following through multiple RBC's.

Meanwhile... aside from the Crimea (and Baku), I only had one other secondary objective. This was to reduce the frontage for Army Group Center near Orel, and so that it would have some extra road, rail and a defensive line behind a river.

Here, the Fuhrer went bonkers! The first wave of attacks against this heavily fortified line was repulsed with little if any gain. This offensive was called off, only to be turned on again, and bloodily repulsed again - this time with a two hex gain. The attack was called off again.

At this point, the Fuhrer read the Scenario Instructions after seeing a unit showing up in the upcoming Reinforcement/Withdrawal Report called, "Summer 42 Offensive" or the like. Hmmm... I wonder what that could be? Oh! That's my Theater Option! (and I should know better because that's how I do mine.) But, I was sort of feeling as if the whole time, except during the winter, the Axis had some small shock benefit.

This left me with a window of 1 turn to use it, before it would be withdrawn... but at this point, most of my units in AGC were still recovering from the on/off series of attacks against an increasingly reinforced Front. However, most of my forces were at close to full strength and I always have at least one group of semi-rested mobile forces in reserve.

Breaking the Orel Line? Fat chance there, good Soviet units, fortified, with plenty of artillery support...

[governato]

Baku is under siege and it will fall soon. The rest of the Front has been quiet for the last few turns, but Mark has activated the Axis Summer Offensive, which will enable him to regain the initiative for a few crucial turns before the arrival of mud season. That TO has several effects: 1) The Red Army recon drops to 0. I can only see units at the front and I am left guessing about his railway movements 2) The Axis will get a 120% shock bonus for 4 turns. That is BIG. I am preparing a defense in depth and placed the strategic reserve (several armies) on the main railway lines to react quickly to any breakthrough. Sevastopol is isolated, but it should be able to resist for a while, hopefully tying a good number of Axis units.

Now that we are well past the first year of the Eastern Front Campaign here are a few things that I have learned playing the scenario.

For the Axis player: the best option is to be where your enemy is not. Your units are fast but cannot take many losses, especially in infantry. So head on battles are tempting, but they will cost you. It's a though balance between pushing through 'Ignore Losses' to gain a strategic objective ((Leningrad in 41 and Stalingrad in 42 were really close and I think Mark could have grabbed them, but who knows!) and over reaching. Sometimes it's a matter of attacking just one or two turns too many. A good example was Winter 41, when the Blizzard caught the Panzer spearheads exposed.

For the Red Army: guessing where the next blow is going to be and prepare accordingly is vital. The frontline will be breached no matter how fortified. It's not a matter of if, just where and when a breakthrough will happen. Trade space for time. Trying to save pocketed units is often just throwing good money after bad as the Axis units are very mobile (and have a ZOC bonus till Summer 42). It's painful, but sometimes it's better to dig them and have them fight to the last men while the other units reform a resemblance of a front. When the chips are down it's worth it to make a stand, dig, in, set units to 'Ignore Losses' and hope that the Axis units bleed themselves out. Remember you have almost unlimited Rifle Squads,at least until 1943. Red Army Air units suck till late 42, and the best way to use them is trying to achieve local superiority and then protect them in the rear. The first generation Formations/units (light red background) are useful to keep around until late 1942 at least, when the unit density is still not that high, and having as many boots on the ground as possible is crucial. Try to bring them up to a decent proficiency and save their HQs at all costs. Remember that their supply efficiency is low, so they tire quickly. They are good defensive units, especially if stacked with an AT or AA units (which are on Free Support). Otherwise try no to mix units with different counter backgrounds to avoid stacking penalties. This is by design as the Red Army improves its logistics and switches to stronger Formations with a dark red background.

For both:
- Always keep strategic reserves. I mean an entire Army/Front if possible, several hexes away from the front and on a railine. This is a fluid game that goes from weeks where nothing happens to intense periods where the front moves by hundred of miles. In this scenario Recon level are kept (realistically I think) very low so it's hard to predict where the focal points are going to be (well the Axis has it easier in 41 while he has air superiority, but it does not last forever).
- Counterattacks are vital. An overextended force that is not entrenched is weak.
- Rotate your units and keep your forces rested.

Overall I am happy about how the scenario is playing.

[USXpat]

T60 - Stalingrad. To Be or Not To Be?

After cutting off the single rail line leading to the Caucasus, the mixed assembly of Axis forces proceeded up to the lower Don. Their only job in this operation was to prevent Soviet troops from reinforcing the Caucasus.

With the remnants of the Soviet navy finished off at Rostov, the Romanian Black Sea Fleet set up a naval blockade of Poti. This shut off reinforcements to Baku by way of evacuating forces from Sevastopol.

As of T60, Axis forces had advanced directly to the outskirts of Baku. It would fall in short order. Sevastapol was also a matter of time - isolated without hope of reinforcements, the main thing needed there was more artillery and more infantry. And while the infantry was available, the artillery was not - so it could wait. Attacks would still be made just to keep the defender's supplies depleted.

The next posts will take a look at the Orel-Voronezh Operations...

But why... why not Stalingrad?

If the map extended a bit further to the east and allowed a second rail line to the Caucasus (via Astrakahn) then perhaps Stalingrad would be more important - or technically, cutting off that second rail line would be very important. With Baku - Axis meets overwhelming victory standards, and Sevastopol will buffer that a bit further.

Stalingrad is worth a full 40 VP and is itself a replacement city making it a prime target. Could it be taken? I really don't know - I don't know what the Soviet OOB is, and while I can see what is on the front lines; Governato has units in tactical reserve everywhere (that I can't see) and the ability to rapidly rail substantial reinforcements anywhere.

Just holding the opposite bank of the Don River is ownership of some of the best defensive property available. Attacking into Stalingrad, from across the Don, whether it could be done or not, presents the flip side of the equation.

This, however, is a test of the scenario, to see what needs to be fixed. One concern was whether the Axis were strong enough to achieve historical results in 1941 and be able to execute a major offensive in 1942. That much has been tested true. And it could be that the Axis are too strong...

So, now we need to test whether the Soviets are capable of recovering and pushing the Axis back. here though, the Soviets will be facing an Axis defense that is significantly stronger and in better positions than was historically the case.

[governato]

USXPat late Summer Offensive strikes in the sector of the Steppe Front around turn 63. Helped my the 120% Shock Bonus option he makes substantial gains in the first couple of turns, although only minor units are encircled. He is aiming towards Moscow or trying to encircle the 1st Ukrainian Front. The Werhmacht is showing some really good tactical skills and the spearheads are much better supported than during the ill fated strike at Moscow. I quickly move most reserves to the area of the breakthrough, but I will likely have to throw the kitchen sink at him to plug the gap.

[USXpat]

T.80 - The Oreo Cookie Offensive - Orel.

Fast forwarding a bit to Turn 80. The Slovakians, Italians, Luftewaffe ground units remain in their positions S/SW of Stalingrad. Mostly the entire contingent of SS forces stand off across the Don to Stalingrad's west - occasionally fishing on the river for some fresh, local osaletetz... where the spelling may be wrong, but is basically salty fish by any other name.

Army Group South is otherwise quiet. Army Group North has taken up yoga practice.

Alas, Army Group Center's leadership became fixated upon reducing the frontage between Orel and Vyazma. This has been an ongoing series of on/off-on/off-and on again offensives. The occasional punctures of the increasingly rugged Soviet lines are met with brutal counterattacks, time and time again.

Governato's maintained a stand and die stance - refusing to budge despite a possible 5-6 hex encirclement. At this stage, that's exactly what he needs to do - as anything less than a fortified position backed by his artillery and mobile reserves does have a good chance of being ejected from its position.

Instead of "reducing total frontage" - I managed to expand it...

[governato]

I picked Winter of 1942 to stage the first major offensive for the Red Army. The Axis is in a stronger position than historically and well dug in allong the whole frontline. Still I have just got a new Front with several fresh Armies and it is a good opportunity to test them and have new Tank Armies get some experience fighting the Panzers. One thing is slowly working in the Red Army favor: Supply efficiency for each Front starts at 30%, but will grow up to 60% (of the global rate for the Soviet side) over several months, due to a slow trickle of Support Squads to the Fronts HQs. [designer's note: this is one of the most efficient way to boost the Red Army over time].


The map shows the situation before the beginning of major operations. It will involve the 2nd Ukrainian Front and several Shock Armies striking North-west of Vorhonez and Stavka reserves hitting 4th Panzer Army East of Orel. I will try to severe the Axis salient pointing to Moscow, but I would settle for inflicting severe losses to the Whermacht.

Current Assigned/Losses for the Red Army

Infantry squads 125k/190k
Tanks 10k/13k
Airplanes 4.5k/10k

The assigned squads are on the low side (it will be addressed in the Scenario update, which will have closer to historical replacement rates). I would be curious to know what the Assigned and Losses figures are at a similar stage for other Russian Front scenarios!
An infantry squad is ~ 10 men, but total losses including the support troops would be several times higher. I have been considering increasing the 'Attrition Divider' for the Scenario as it is supposed to scale with the turn length, with an AD of 10 being the default, and 2 the suggested value for week long ones. Losses are already pretty high for the Red Army. I am using the default value of 10, At about 200.000 squads loss I would not recommend lowering AD to 2 as in the excellent 'Soviet Union 41' as that would multiply losses by 5! I will likely settle for something around [edit AD=6-7, i.e 50-70% more losses] My suspicion is that the best AD may also depend on the scenario hex scale. Nothing like testing vs a Human opponent to figure things out.

[governato]

The past few turns have seen a bloody series of attacks and counterattacks around what it has become known as the 'Orel salient'. Soviet losses in infantry and tanks have skyrocketed and German Tank losses have been high. Kursk style he Germans have not been able to break the Soviet line and deliver a final blow to the Red Army and conquer Moscow. However, the Red Army is still on the defensive, with no strength to regain the initiative even if the Werhmacht has been on the offensive for most of the past six months and with minimal gains. With the Soviet and German armies stopped along somewhat historical lines, Mark and I both agreed that after 90 turns the scenario was starting to deviate from what should be the historical reality and that it was a good time to wrap things up and for me to go back to the design board to work on an updated version of the scenario. Last but not least..did I mention that it was a ton of fun? Nothing like testing with a skilled human opponent who knows the game well. Plus we managed to get to Spring 43 in *just* two months of play .

The first image is the front at Turn 92 (March 43) showing units form both sides (shaded units were invisible to the other side). The one in the next post summarizes infantry losses. A rough conversion from infantry squads to total losses is: squads x 10 x 3-4 for the Germans and squads x 10 x 2.5-3 for the Russians (based on Glantz's books) They [EDIT 3/18] fairly historical for both sides at this stage of the war. The Red Army vs German+Allies squads ratio is about 1.45, (2.4 if 'on hand' squads are included) which is lower than it should be. This is partially do to the intense 'trench warfare of the last turns. The Red Army is low on tanks, planes and artillery.]

The next post will be dedicated to a short discussion of what needs to be improved in 'Eastern Front' and on what features I plan to implement first in a '1.1' version (to be finished by late March) and possibly a v2.0 version of the scenario, to happen on a longer timescale.

[governato]

EASTERN FRONT 41-45

The goal of Eastern Front 41-45 was to take an existing scenario ('Russian Front' by Piero Falotti) and bring it up to TOAW 3.4 standards. I wanted to improve on it by using some new features made available by the last update and test some new ideas presented in recent scenario. The scenario events had been completely rewritten, but unit TOEs and OOBs only received minor changes. I have seen a renewed interest on East Front Scenarios (East & West Fronts 42-45 by Mark Dabbs, the 'Road to Moscow' series by Rob Kunz, 'Battle for Moscow 41-43' by Brian Topp, a new version of FITE is in the works, Matrix's "War in The East" and 'Unit of Command' and I think it would be useful for the TOAW designers to trade ideas on how to develop a new generation of Russian Front scenarios. This is a first attempt on my part. Maybe USxPat, who helped me testing the scenario will stop by to add some comments too.





The first eighteen months of the Eastern Front 41-45 campaign were able to give a good description of the Operational choices faced by the theater commanders, on a very fluid front with large initiative swings largely driven by the weather and the logistic capabilities of the two forces. That was good!

Things that worked:


- Blizzard, rain season and Winter supply effects. I used 4 cold fronts per winter and shock+supply penalties during Spring and Fall rain season. Turned out lot of snow turns are necessary to add a significant snow cover in Winter and then many 'mud' hexes in Spring. These effects added a strong element of seasonality to the game.

[EDIT: added 3/18]

Variable ZOC costs for the Axis. The Axis units pay 20% (for most of 1941) to 10% ( till Fall 42) less MPs when moving across enemy ZOCs. This makes it easier to achieve the multi Army encirclements typical of that stage of the Axis campaign and adds a very realistic feel to the Axis Offensives. I am happy with this feature. It should be used more often!

- Soviet Replacement Rates: As in 'Soviet Union 41' .Soviet infantry replacements are mostly described by unit disbandments. This allowed me to separate the slow decline of infantry replacement that peaked in Summer 41, with the substantial increase in production of tanks, guns and planes, which is still modeled by events. I think this is one of the most important features for any long scenario on the Russian front.

- Variable supply points: Adding a low supply point to Sevastopol made for a realistic siege and Crimea campaign, that lasted several months. This would have worked well for Leningrad or German cities if they had been isolated.

- The map: While necessarily low resolution, adding major rivers + escarpments to describe the Don, Volga, Dniepr and Oka rivers forced the campaigns along realistic lines, making strategic planning on where/when to attack important. The freezing of rivers in Winter also added realism. There will be a few small changes for V1.1, in the Caucasus (making Baku further away and harder to reach) and creating a set of 'distant' airfields for the Soviet to shield some air units from the Luftwaffe.

- Low Recon Levels: Limited recon (at least compared to other scenarios) made for much more realistic/historical play. The Soviet had recon of 5-8% most of the time. the German 10-25%. Recon levels can be lowered when a Strategic option is activated, simulating the hiding of strategic forces movements before large offensives ( Summer 41, Uranus, Bagration). I never knew were the next German Offensive was going to happen and Mark did not really know where my deep reserves were.


- Proficiency: the Summer 1941 campaign depends crucially on modeling the relative quality of the troops and logistics of both sides. Germans started at 70-80 Proficiency, most Soviet units start at 30-50, with heavy losses bringing them often back to 'untried' status. That made for realistic (read horrifying) loss ratios for Soviet attacks onto fortified German lines.

- Supply levels: adding slots for supply squads to Soviet Front HQs allowed to increase (see also Europe 44 and East & West Fronts 42-45 ) the logistic capabilities of the Red Army using a small number of Supply Squads replacements. By Spring 1943 Fronts were finally able to sustain Offensives for 2-3 turns, compared to only 1-2 weeks in 1941. It is a feature I highly recommend to scenario developers.

- Game time managing: It is obviously a matter of personal preference, but at 30-45 mins/turn I liked having the extra time to think over the next move, rather than spending several hours per turn moving hordes of divisions to achieve optimal tactical gains. I do not plan to add many more units in the coming upgrades (one exception will be the Soviet Breakthrough Artillery Corps).

- Maximum Number of Rounds per Battle: I used 4. That seems to work well.

German Force Proficiency: 78 Wish I could decrease it with time. Will change to 77.

Soviet Force Proficiency: 63 It's on the average side, it makes it more likely for fronts to go on reorganization when suffering heavy losses or shock penalties. Will change to 62. (not sure how sensitive these figures are, so incremental changes are best for those global parameters)




Things that need to be improved:

- Modeling attrition of forces. Eastern Front (and most scenarios at this scale) neglects the high rate of losses due to 'attrition', a combination of illness, breakdown of equipment at the frontlines and low intensity combat that is below the 'TOAW horizon' at the scale of this scenario (armies and corps). On the Russian front these losses amounted to 10% of the Total (see 'Colossus Reborn', by D.Glantz). This can be easily implemented by adding a 1% pestilence term for both side for several (10-20) every year. See a thread on Attrition here.

- Entrenchment rates: Eastern Front has an entrenchment level of 45. This means that it takes twice as long to increase entrenchment levels compared to the default value of 100, but this is still too fast for for a scenario of this scale. Historically it would take many months, not weeks to get to 'Fortified status'. I plan to decrease it further, to 30.


- Engineer vs Assault squads: I plan to replace most German engineers at the Korps level with Assault squads. German Pioneers where highly skilled troops armed with flame throwers and explosive satchels. The majority of engineer squads should be attached to the many HQs. This change will increase the offensive capabilities of the German army, and have the nice side effect to slow down the entrenchment speed of German troops vs the Soviet ones. It will also make crossing rivers a bit trickier for the Germans, again as historical.

- The Attrition Divider: I was planning to decrease it a bit from its default of 10. (see a thread here) to increase (confusing I know) the casualty rate for week long turns. But losses were pretty high already so not much to change here. So I plan to stick to AD 10. My thinking is that the AD *scales* as suggested at different scales (basically if I change a scenario turn structure from week long to say half weeks) but the absolute value for a given historical situation should first be found by testing.

- Composition of Russian Armies (TOE & OOBS). Russian Armies arriving in 1942 or later will have a revised/enlarged TOE. The initial version of the scenario adopted a TOE that was representative of what Russian armies fielded in 1941 (4 divisions each + small amount of Support Tank and Arty battalions). In 42 and later each army was fielding 6 divisions and several construction, tank and artillery regiments. In the scenarios this started to become a serious problem in late 1942, when the Soviet would have a large number of infantry and artillery units in the inventory, but not enough slots in the armies to actually field them. The OOB is also a bit too beer and pretzel'.

- German Infantry replacements: As for the Russian infantry, it will be partially be managed by timed unit disbandments, (see also the great 'Soviet Union 41' scenario) by Bob Cross. German Infantry replacements are a bit too high in the current version of 'Eastern Front' as they were still tied to the global replacement rates (which increases with time!). Historically the Werhmacht and its Allies were able to replace about 25k men/week in 41 but only 15k/week in 43 and later. (once the needs of logistic support is factored in, this translates into only ~ 600 TOAW infantry squads/week being replaced in 41, less in later years). This means that the German player will have to watch his infantry losses quite carefully in future updates, a lot closer to the historical situation.

- Soviet Airplanes and tank replacements. They need to be upped (in some cases significantly) to make them close to historical.

- Victory Levels: some adjustments will be required to focus the VP count mostly on territorial gains rather than on unit losses. They never mattered for the Red Army anyway.

There are of course many more of small and not so small changes to further add realism and detail to the scenario, but these will have to wait for V2.0 which will include a complete redesign of the scenario OOB and TOEs and will take some time. However, the above changes should achieve the goal of designing a 'non monster scenario' that a) allows the players to make historically motivated operational choices and b) have fun playing it!

Well, this was along post... but it will help me remember what I need to do before I forget. Hope other designers will find these ramblings useful!


]