Adam1988 wrote: Tue Dec 30, 2025 3:46 pm
Q-Ball wrote: Mon Dec 29, 2025 11:53 pm
Adam1988 wrote: Mon Dec 29, 2025 7:43 am
Does the Soviet player receive any bonuses during the winter of 1942/43? Or does the German side suffer any penalties? And does this situation change in the summer of 1943?
It is said that fortifications can be built up to level 1 if there is no contact with the enemy — what is the rationale behind this rather controversial mechanic?
Why is it possible to attach relatively large support units in the form of brigades to mobile units? This can result in “monster” formations, for example cavalry units reaching a strength of 23,000 men.
There are no inherent Soviet bonuses or German penalties in the 42/43 winter, or summer '43 campaigns. Germans are prepared for the Russian winter of '42/'43 (and at any rate it was not as harsh). However, you should notice that Soviet morale is rising, first in Sept '42, and later in Sept '43, while German morale is falling....so in that sense there are changes in overall capability
As far as attachments to Corps....this is totally WAD, as Soviets had alot of unit density. It's a key mechanic the Soviet player should be taking advantage of
“But how do you explain a situation where a cavalry corps, which is a mobile/fast unit, receives slow infantry brigades?”
“Or when the core unit itself is… weaker than every supporting unit?”
“I’m playing a game where, in March 1943, my opponent already has 42 Guards Infantry Corps. In a game like that, you simply lose all motivation. I conceded the game.”
1. Balancing/Bonuees/Penalties: As Q said, there are national Morale levels that change you should look into.
+ all Soviet MOTORIZED units should get +5NM in....IIRC September 1942 (or it's October...)
2. SUs:
The system has certainly some odd things if one uses it without limitations, but adding more rules to it (the code) would just add more things to wonder about like "why can't I assigne this SU?".
For Germans the Brigade sized Inf/MotInf SUs to a large degree once were removed by the Devs to be able to be SUs, but players complained and so they can be SUs. They are just a few in the end.
For Soviets you have plenty of large SUs of which some cause some of the observed weird things happening, as to enabling unrealistic levels of manpower/CV in tight spaces.
If you want more hitorical SU use, the easiest way to enable this is to make a houserule.
- "For Axis it could be as to not be allowed to assign more than 1 of each type and size of any SU to the same Division."
So you could only assign 1xInfantry Brigade, 1xInfantry Regiment and 1xInfantry Battalion (to give an example). This would also remove the fantasy level of attacks where you have 3 Infantry Divisions in an attack with 3xPioneer Battalion attached each. If a MotInf Brigade and a InfBrigade are the same (and so on, just as an example) one has to debate.
- For Soviets this would stop the doomstacking of Rifle Brigades on Rifle Corps or the Cavalry Corps as you mentioned which leads to weird and unhistoric figures. There I therefore disagree with what Q wrote.
If Soviet Rifle, Airborne, Naval, Ski, Mountain, Motorised, Mech Brigade are classified as the "same" for this limitation is up for debate again. Reasonable would probably be to make the Mot, Mech, Infantry (Rifle, Ski, Naval) and Airborne as 4 categories. Engineers for Soviets I would put separate and not limit their use personally.
Also possible to use a rule of "only use 2 of the same" on Soviet side and the "only use 1" for the Axis(or just for Germans) only.
3. GUARDS: The system already has limits to the max amount of GUARDS each category of Units can have, it's all in the living manual and should somewhat reflect historical figures.
The system therefore is limited but can not balance out good/bad players further.