Matrix Games Forums

You can combine them into divisions, you can merge/disband them into a new arty division

Are you sure about this? I tried and it did not work. It seems there is some confusion here.

ORIGINAL: Michael T

You can combine them into divisions, you can merge/disband them into a new arty division

Are you sure about this? I tried and it did not work. It seems there is some confusion here.

Apologies, it should be CAN'T combine them into divs but CAN...

Merging a Soviet brigade into an already existing larger unit of the same type is generally possible. You can do this with rifle brigades vis a vis rifle divisions, tank brigades and tank corps, etc. This isn't the same thing as building a unit fresh from combining sub units. Which you definitely cannot do with artillery brigades and divisions.

This is an old trick to keep rifle divisions and tank corps up to strength that are already on the map. (The tank corps trick isn't usually seen outside the 43 scenario, granted.) No new unit is created in the process, but the smaller subunit is removed, and the larger unit absorbs the strength. The game will only allow it if the larger unit is weak enough. Units at or near full TOE cannot consume subunits of the same type otherwise.

I am not totally sure if this applies to arty brigades and divisions, but it should be doable.

Note that merges cost 1 AP to do, exactly the same price you would pay for disbanding a unit.

Yes, there is a difference between 'Merging' and 'Building Up'. I hadn't thought about merging Art Bdes into Divs, but it's an intriguing idea. I think I will tinker around with it a bit.

Ok, just tested this by firing up the 44 scenario: artillery brigade merges into understrength divisions are possible, with some restrictions.

You cannot merge, for example, a mortar brigade into an arty division. However that division appears to be able to absorb any type of gun brigade.

Rocket brigades can be merged into rocket divisions. This could be a good way to bring those up to speed fast, they are notoriously slow to fill out.

I did not test this, but presumably rocket brigades cannot be merged into tube arty divisions, nor will tube arty or mortar brigades be accepted into rocket arty divisions.

I also found a bug: the Soviets don't have any APs on turn one and shouldn't therefore be allowed to do any merges at all. But the game allowed it. This is very obviously exploitable and could allow people to do free merges.

Merges done on subsequent turns with a positive AP pool did cost one AP against the pool as expected.

This is good info. Esp re the Rcts.

To respond to Michael T.'s question about how far Pelton might run (the blizzard ending on turn # 37) with his front on turn #23 already back to the line ... Tallinin...Vitebsk...Poltava.... and 4 hexes east of Z-town .... I think Pelton will be so determined to preserve morale he will not let Michael T. attack, even at horrible odds. So 20-24 hexes further west (he would stop the retreat mid Feb, I think) would be the line, roughly, Riga to Odessa.

Wow my idea has merit!

I have a dozen or so 70+ brigades to merge someday!

Woohoo!

Ty for the experiment Flavius.

Had things wrong,nothing to see here..........good luck in the game.

Well the thing about merges is that it's rather inefficient use of precious APs, especially in 1942. You're going to spend minimum 5 APs on a brigade to give a depleted arty or rocket division you spend 10 more APs on a head start. I'm just not sure iit's worth it. Probably a case by case basis.

Of course you get the use out of the brigade until the division shows up, but still...

It's definitely not an efficient way to use APs, and should be done on a strictly limited basis if at all. But if it can help you knock out the Finns in 42, then that's a justifiable expenditure. Most of the time that opportunity won't come up. This is kind of a special situation. If the game settles down into a mutual staring contest, Michael will have some leeway with APs.

A dozen such brigades will set you back 72 APs including future merging costs. Not a trivial amount, and requires consideration. In opportunity cost terms, that's 3 tank corps and change, or 7 arty divisions and change, or whatever mix of units you need and plan on keeping.

ORIGINAL: Fishbed

haha. We actually nearly see more of Pelton's army than of yours on that screen [:D]
Any reason you'd suspect some spying from a ring of German sympathizers? [&:]

It may just be a map mischievously torn by a child. [;)]

The reports are normally 1 turn in delay but not this time. Hence the limted map. Back to normal once Pelton returns from vacation.

Looking at the Finns more closely I did not realize how weak they are buy mid to late 42. I will deal with them sometime during that period regardless of what Pelton does.

ORIGINAL: Michael T

Looking at the Finns more closely I did not realize how weak they are buy mid to late 42. I will deal with them sometime during that period regardless of what Pelton does.

Yep. Like you I hadn't paid attention to them... until winter 1942-43 arrived. Easy to trash them. And I just have (on my game) few units up north. HAHA, serves them right!

I have done a lot of tests and research while herr Pelton has been away. I really think he is underestimating the power of an unrestrained Soviet Union come 1943 on. He really needs an outstanding 1942 attack to have any kind of hope in this. If he just turns turtle an lets me build up unmolested the power I will be able to wield will be simply irresitable. So bearing that in mind I have determined to maintain a very defensive stance across the front in 42 except for the Finns. Who will become uncle Joe's whipping boys

The Finns collapse rather easy against an organized Soviet assault backed with a lot of artillery. If your going for that strategy long term it actually makes sense to not bottle them up so you get more attacks in for building morale.

Once that one port falls near the Finn/Soviet border the Finns go poof and that is not what you want if your looking to grind wins.

As I recall, you need Vyborg, Narva, and Pskov to trigger surrender. Of those, only Vyborg remains in Axis hands in this game.

Interestingly, Pelton declined to occupy the chokepoint up north. He backed away from it. So Michael lost nothing here by putting a cork in the north.

My own view is that you can't be sure beforehand what's going to happen to Leningrad and if it goes, letting the Finns run amok past the Svir is bad news. Taking them out in 42 is gravy, making sure they don't get out of hand is essential. If need be, you can always force the surrender later on even from those chokepoints. That being said, they can be contained east of the chokepoint but still well short of the Svir. So there's a middle ground here between a runaway to the Svir and a hard contain at the border.

I am not sure of what date it kicks in but all I did in this game was take Vyborg. He never got to Narva and Pskov is still his.

Finland fell in late August 1942 with 2 armies attacking along the isthmus supported by 9 artillery brigades, 6 tank corps and 6 cav corps.

I did have him bottled up.

As far as the cork strategy I am on the fence. If you occupy the Svir line with cheap units and the Axis player snuggles up to you that is more hexes of attrition the Finns have to deal with which sucks dry the few replacements they have. I have not lost Leningrad in the last 10 games or so so maybe I am getting too comfy with the whole thing.


I wanted Helsinki badly in this game and lots of ground victories but the Finns tossed in the towel.

Defending in the Jänisjärvi area is much less expensive in vehicles lost in supply operations, while the Svir line is probably the most expensive such line on the entire map. But you knew I'd point this out. [;)]