Stopping the Lvov pocket, getting a better turn 1 and balancing the game

[Don77]

What, programmed chaos?

[76mm]

ORIGINAL: Don77
What, programmed chaos?

Partially-randomly generated chaos as per appropriate computer code, if you prefer...

[Aurelian]

So how would one enforce this "runaway" house rule?

Especially as what one would call a runaway another would call a retreat.

The only runaways I see is when a unit routs.

[janh]

You guys are pretty much on the mark regarding the difference between retreats, withdrawals, tactical regrouping, or a true Sir Robin. There is plenty of grey space there, and plenty of room for a mud fight. The best thing is probably to pick PBEM opponents that will judge such issues within reason and not drag you into arguments. After all a game is supposed to be fun, no matter who wins, or whether a few units just escape a German pocket or a Soviet blizzard assault.

Nonetheless I am curious how Tarhunnas game will look like by summer 42; and especially see whether avoiding the Soviet Sir Robin is indeed allowing him to take Berlin in the end, or whether fighting forwards will only make his situation worse. It could be the latter, but maybe it will be offset by the rule disallowing the Germans to retreat in winter.

PS. The idea of a random setup turn for both sides is intriguing, I recall some older game that had it. I wouldn't underestimate the consequences for this freedom on the German side, some nasty ideas would come to mind. Technically, I don't think you can do it for both sides with the editor since the 2nd player would see the 1st ones setup. On the other hand, the German setup was only in part governed by the previous operations in Yugos and Greece, the preceding security mission to Ploesti and Hungary, and the tight rail schedule for deploying units just in time to the "alledged" new training grounds in Poland. The other part of the deployment was governed by the setup of the Russian units, which was to a good degree known to the Germans. For example they expected the toughest resistance in the fight for the Ukranian grain basin, knowing that some of the better formations were in the south.
So certainly the German should know a little bit about the Soviet dispositions when deploying, but how much? And also, how much did the Soviets know? Maybe this would be another good suggestion for the WitE2 wishlist, but perhaps allowing the Soviet a handful of short-legged redeployments by editor prior to start would be a fair offer as a short term solution against a standard Lvov?

[Encircled]

As a Soviet player, you fight where you can

You only run away when its close to disaster

Judging when to hang around and when to go is the real test of a Soviet player in '41

And you only run to the limit of German infantry movement. You want to fight Panzers all the time if you can.

[Tarhunnas]

Another possible idea to encourage forward fighting by the Sovs would be to increase the Stalin Line fortifications to level 3. Level 2 is too flimsy after the fort nerf. I must admit though, I have little idea how extensive the Stalin Line was.

BTW the Stalin Line at level 2 will melt away if not occupied, and realistically that seems odd, since some forts are unoccupied and have presumably been so for a year or so, so why haven't they melted away before the game even starts? Perhaps all the fortified hexes that are the Stalin line should have a (weak understrength?) FZ on them?

[76mm]

As far as I know based on limited reading on the topic, the Stalin line had been largely stripped of weapons, etc. before Barbarossa; from what I recall, it did not sound like much of an obatacle.

[Tarhunnas]

ORIGINAL: 76mm

ORIGINAL: Don77
What, programmed chaos?

Partially-randomly generated chaos as per appropriate computer code, if you prefer...

A nice way of simulating Soviet confusion on turn 1 would be to give all German units the lowest possible spotting level, and prohibit all Soviet Air Recon. Without Air Recon, you would tend to bump into things completely unexpectedly as the Soviet, which would probably be eminently realistic. I guess this wouldn't be too hard to implement.

[Klydon]

@ Tarhunnas: I like the idea of a FZ on the Stalin line forts. They are sort of push overs, but will hold the exisiting fortifications in place. Overall, the Stalin line was not a serious obstical to the advance.

I think if you give both sides free setup, it should benefit the Russians the most from the standpoint that their initial setup was so bad. However, with the first turn surprise rules, etc I don't know that it matters a lot. In addition, I would assume most German players will assign some AGC panzer units to the south to give them more punch on the opening turn while possibly reassigning some of the frozen PG1 units to act as follow up units in AGC. As usual, the devil is in the details in terms of what are the rules with "free setup" for both sides. Most important is how far back do you go and how far back do you let the Russians set up from the border areas?

[Panzer Meyer]

Perhaps a change to the way that industrial evacuations are handled could give the Russian player an incentive to fight forward more often. For example a rule could be instituted that industry cannot be evacuated from a city until Axis forces are within 'X' hexes. As mentioned by other posters the difference between tactical and strategic withdrawals can be murky. I think this would be a more elegant solution than further hampering Soviet movement capabilities.

EDIT: If such a rule already exists, please forgive my ignorance as I have not studied the manual as closely as many on these forums undoubtedly have.

[76mm]

ORIGINAL: Panzer Meyer
For example a rule could be instituted that industry cannot be evacuated from a city until Axis forces are within 'X' hexes. As mentioned by other posters the difference between tactical and strategic withdrawals can be murky. I think this would be a more elegant solution than further hampering Soviet movement capabilities.

I appreciate your efforts to think of a creative solution to this thorny issue, but this one doesn't work unless the x > 20, in which case it would be sort of useless. I think we've had enough panzer raiding in this game, this proposal would lead to a panzer raid frenzy.

[Rufus T. Firefly]

@janh

I don't think you can do it for both sides with the editor since the 2nd player would see the 1st ones setup

True, but this is no different from the current situation. It could be an interesting thing if it was programmed into WITE 2 to allow for a no peak setup.

@ Tarhunnas

A nice way of simulating Soviet confusion on turn 1 would be to give all German units the lowest possible spotting level, and prohibit all Soviet Air Recon

I like this idea. It sounds simple to implement. The no air recon could be a house rule.

@Klydon

As usual, the devil is in the details in terms of what are the rules with "free setup" for both sides. Most important is how far back do you go and how far back do you let the Russians set up from the border areas?

The draft rules I'm working with (see link to my earlier post farther back in this thread) allow only extremely limited redeployment farther from the border than the default setup. Mostly movement is only allowed at the same distance or moving closer to the border (for the Russians, opposite for the Germans). Even movement parallel to the border has limits on it. Interestingly, when I experimented with the Russian depolyment I actually ended up moving quite a few units closer to the border in my enthusiasm to see if I could plug all the holes. This will probably be a mistake.

[Panzer Meyer]

ORIGINAL: 76mm

ORIGINAL: Panzer Meyer
For example a rule could be instituted that industry cannot be evacuated from a city until Axis forces are within 'X' hexes. As mentioned by other posters the difference between tactical and strategic withdrawals can be murky. I think this would be a more elegant solution than further hampering Soviet movement capabilities.

I appreciate your efforts to think of a creative solution to this thorny issue, but this one doesn't work unless the x > 20, in which case it would be sort of useless. I think we've had enough panzer raiding in this game, this proposal would lead to a panzer raid frenzy.

I think we can all agree that a panzer division driving into and out of a city hex in one turn should not result in all of its factories being destroyed. It's definitely a gamey move. If anything they should remain intact, and the Russians should be able to evacuate them if they recapture the city.

[cpt flam]

even with that you will face another problem
if i'm right during 41 Russia can nt repair rail closer then 5 hexes from ennemy
so a raid by a panzer/moto will creeple the city even if industry is not destroyed immediatly

[Redmarkus5]

ORIGINAL: Farfarer

So, you can imagine an axis player winning (not a 1945 draw) without Lvov ?

Surely a 1945 'draw' IS a win for the Axis...? If you keep the Soviet army out of Germany I would count that as a huge achievement in any east front game that's been designed to match the historical conditions.

[vinnie71]

But correct me if I'm wrong. Don't the Soviets get back all the destroyed units in November '41? Frankly that is the most crucial time in the game, when the Germans are at the last gasp, with the Soviets looking forward to their blizzard offensive. Frankly, the Axis side does not gain much by destroying the Soviet Southern forces because they still have to roll over the (sometimes) empty expanses and that costs time, fatigue and losses all the same. Also by penetrating deep in the south the Axis are essentially exposing themselves for the inevitable counterattack.

Furthermore, most Soviet players would try to adopt a good strategy in the sense that they would opt to defend coherent lines and I would guess use the Dniepr as a final stop line. This would not be totally historical either since the many counterattacks were local in nature happening either through chance or because the commanders, both local and high up, thought that they percieved a good chance. So basically it is a trade off.

Frankly by defending close to the Pripet Marshes, any soviet player can slow down the German juggernaut. And there are suffiecient forces outside the Lvov pocket that can be used to slow down the Germans

[Aurelian]

ORIGINAL: redmarkus4

ORIGINAL: Farfarer

So, you can imagine an axis player winning (not a 1945 draw) without Lvov ?

Surely a 1945 'draw' IS a win for the Axis...? If you keep the Soviet army out of Germany I would count that as a huge achievement in any east front game that's been designed to match the historical conditions.

Certainly they do better than history if they do that. Something the disgruntled few don't consider.

[Tarhunnas]

ORIGINAL: Offworlder

But correct me if I'm wrong. Don't the Soviets get back all the destroyed units in November '41?

Yes you are wrong! [;)] Units destroyed prior to november come back, but 4-27 turns after being destroyed, not necessarily in november. And only the units, not the men and guns in them.

[Hermann]

The key weakness of the german player is the armor, in the initial phases most german players toss em around like gangbusters without realising the soviet player can use the soft symbol function to track supply status. Air resupply defaults to fuel unless its done manually. Their key role is using movement to create movement paths for infantry and when used in an attack role they run out of ammo very fast. its critical to engage them constanly when theyre unsupported.