TGW v1.8 playtest

[larryfulkerson]

Alright !! The supply is back so we're back in business. The war is on again.

[larryfulkerson]

Here's the T40 view of Leningrad. I'm in the process of infiltrating the Soviet line and getting into his backfield. Since the
Soviet reinforcements have now arrived the Axis is outnumbered and outgunned in arty. The Soviets are getting stronger
in the air and the war is getting harder to wage. Supply is better but not outstanding yet. I'm optimistic we can make some
gains this spring.

[larryfulkerson]

I've blown a hole in the Soviet line near Kursk but there's no horde of troops to pour through it. I'll have to rail some troops
into this AO just to take advantage of the hole. If I can find some troops to rail into this AO. Almost everybody who carries
a weapon is standing a position on the front line somewhere. There's SOME slack of course but not much.

I was toying with the idea of trying to capture Stalingrad but that would make a really long front line and I would have to
start breaking down the divisions into brigades to make it work. On the other hand there's just about enough time to
make it there, capture the city, and then back out of there just before the winter. I'm thinking that timeline is just too
tight. Not enough slack. Probably can't be done. Instead, I'll just concentrate on killing Soviet units by making pockets
and liquidating them.

[larryfulkerson]

Here's that image above shifted to the east a little bit. You can see the distance between where the lines are and Stalingrad.
With the supply level as low as it is and the possibility of Soviet resistance between here and there being stubborn...I'm just
not convinced that Stalingrad is doable this season. I think I need to be closer before starting to be able to pull out before
winter supply levels hit again.

[larryfulkerson]

Here's the T40 situation at Sevastopol. I'm trying to get a surround on that group to the east and I'm thinking I might ought to
get some bombers down here close in to bombard those big guns around the port itself and I need to get the ship killers, the
Stuka's, down here to take care of that Soviet boat. Supply here isn't the greatest and the going is slow.

[larryfulkerson]

Here in T41 I've blown a hole in the Soviet line and I'm trying to roll up the lines and get into the Soviet backfield. I'm trying to
get Elmer to notice that there's a problem so he'll start backing everybody out and I can trap them. I'll keep you posted.

[larryfulkerson]

Here's the Leningrad area now. I'm in the process of making a pocket if I can. Elmer can still back that stuff outta there so I have to
scramble to do it now before they get out. Two more pockets are being constructed down south. I'm guessing I can fight the war this
way. So far so good.

[larryfulkerson]

Here's my ground losses so far ( INF ): I can't tell if they are light, heavy, or what. I've been doing one-dot attacks so I'm
guessing the losses are light so far.

[larryfulkerson]

That pocket I was building down south....I finished cutting them off from supply but my cordon can be broken still so it's not
permanent yet. I've got some units to move yet so I'll see if I can't make it more secure.

[larryfulkerson]

Further down south is the scene of another budding pocket. I'm hoping I can trap all them inside without much of a hassle because
supply is low and the slack in this operation is low.

[larryfulkerson]

Here's Leningrad now. I'm trying to form a large pocket of Soviet stuff but Elmer keeps trying to back them out of danger.
The terrain is badlands and marshes and it's hampering both of us from moving and attacking. I've assaulted the city but
the Soviets hold on still. This last hex is a tough nut to crack.

[Michael T]

I have been checking out some other scenario work in the folders and many new works in progress seem to just die. I really hope this one gets completed. Because apart from CFNA I don't see too many truely updated scenario's that interest me. Keep going lads!

[sPzAbt653]

No fears, I've been working on this one daily. I've run that first draft thru to the end and have straightened up a lot of stuff. Currently I am working on improving the Soviet PO and putting in a rudimentary PO for the Axis. I am also redoing the Soviet Air Force, trying to reduce the number of units by combining some and removing others based on when they were disbanded or folded into the new Air Armies. It shouldn't be too long before it is ready.

[Michael T]

I am also redoing the Soviet Air Force, trying to reduce the number of units

This I really like

[Michael T]

Do you have something in the game that is a dissuader for the age old Soviet Player ploy of run run run rather than defend forward in 1941?

[sPzAbt653]

Not yet. Any suggestions ?

So far everything is simply basic, or basically simple. Victory Conditions = 50 points each for Berlin, Budapest, Bucharest, Leningrad, Moscow and Stalingrad.

[Michael T]

Perhaps some events that would place permanent negative replacement modifiers on Soviet production. Not sure if that is possible.
But for example if say Smolensk falls before a certain date -10%, Kiev would be another -10%. You need some severe penalties so that the Soviets actually fight. Otherwise they will run away and build a line somewhere between Smolensk and Moscow and by the time the Germans reach it the Russians are well and truly dug in with an almost intact army. Whatever you decide on that is the thing you have to avoid. Sudden death is another approach to take. I am not sure what is possible to do with events. But I am sure you could come up with something.

[sPzAbt653]

I am not sure what is possible to do with events.

There is always a way to do something. FitE, D21 and FitE2 all have mechanisms to penalize the Soviets for abandoning territory. FitE2 [not yet available] also penalizes the Axis for not advancing quickly and that is good because in that scenario there is now a part of Stalin and a part of Hitler.

One thing I might like to try is to give the Soviets no rail capacity until turn x, and have all newly raised formations arrive in forward areas until turn x. Rather than being seen as a straight up penalty to force the Soviet player to recreate history over the first few months, this could be seen as a way to make the Soviet player consider not abandoning areas where he can gain a significant amount of drafted manpower.

Along the same lines, the Soviets regained a large draft of replacements when reconquering territory in 1943 and 1944, and this is reflected in the scenario.

We also need Mr. Fulkerson to weigh in because he is in charge of the design decisions. To that end I will also throw out the idea that the scenario is for the players to be able to make different decisions than were made historically in order to explore different outcomes. In this case no restrictions would be placed on either player.

[larryfulkerson]

ORIGINAL: sPzAbt653

I am not sure what is possible to do with events.

There is always a way to do something. FitE, D21 and FitE2 all have mechanisms to penalize the Soviets for abandoning territory. FitE2 [not yet available] also penalizes the Axis for not advancing quickly and that is good because in that scenario there is now a part of Stalin and a part of Hitler.

One thing I might like to try is to give the Soviets no rail capacity until turn x, and have all newly raised formations arrive in forward areas until turn x. Rather than being seen as a straight up penalty to force the Soviet player to recreate history over the first few months, this could be seen as a way to make the Soviet player consider not abandoning areas where he can gain a significant amount of drafted manpower.

Along the same lines, the Soviets regained a large draft of replacements when reconquering territory in 1943 and 1944, and this is reflected in the scenario.

We also need Mr. Fulkerson to weigh in because he is in charge of the design decisions. To that end I will also throw out the idea that the scenario is for the players to be able to make different decisions than were made historically in order to explore different outcomes. In this case no restrictions would be placed on either player.

So um....I've played games before where the Soviet player runs for the hills and doesn't defend forward and succeeds in getting a
front line built etc. and it's not much fun. Especially for the Axis player. A lot of the fun of the scenario for the Axis player is
racing to catch all the fleeing Soviet units in the early game. By turn 10 there's a character shift in the scenario where the Soviet
player finally has enough units in one place to form a proper front line and the retreating stops. No more decisive slash and dash.
But it's not much fun for the Soviet player to get decimated in the early game and there's a tendency to flee rather than fight and
thus there's a problem in the scenario where the Soviet player has an incentive to flee and there's very little incentive to fight
using the official Soviet doctrine at the time ( which was to attack reguardless of losses ). This we all know. So the problem is to
somehow use the events, victory points, and or house rules to get the Soviet player to fight rather than flee. SO......I'd like to see
some reinforcement degradation as cities are captured. My theory is that the cities are important in that they supply the manpower
and infrastructure to facilitate defense and organization principles. The Soviets should be inclined to hand onto his cities somehow.
How about 1% loss in the reinforcement rate for each major city captured with the exception of those victory points cities that are
already associated with reinforcement rate degradation upon capture like Minsk, Smolensk, Kiev etc. Make the cities more
valuable to the Soviet player so he's inclined to hang onto them as much as is possible. I guess. I'm no expert but I've seen a
picture of one.

[Lobster]

ORIGINAL: sPzAbt653
One thing I might like to try is to give the Soviets no rail capacity until turn x, and have all newly raised formations arrive in forward areas until turn x. Rather than being seen as a straight up penalty to force the Soviet player to recreate history over the first few months, this could be seen as a way to make the Soviet player consider not abandoning areas where he can gain a significant amount of drafted manpower.

The Soviets had no problems railing troops around during 1941. In fact, there were even some on trains when the Germans crossed the border. Meantime, the Germans noticed large numbers of trains moving East. The Germans didn't realize they were hauling entire factories. They thought the Soviets were sending them to bring troops west.

So denying the Soviets of any rail capacity at all would fly in the face of history.

ORIGINAL: larryfulkerson
SO......I'd like to see
some reinforcement degradation as cities are captured. My theory is that the cities are important in that they supply the manpower
and infrastructure to facilitate defense and organization principles. The Soviets should be inclined to hand onto his cities somehow.
How about 1% loss in the reinforcement rate for each major city captured with the exception of those victory points cities that are
already associated with reinforcement rate degradation upon capture like Minsk, Smolensk, Kiev etc. Make the cities more
valuable to the Soviet player so he's inclined to hang onto them as much as is possible. I guess. I'm no expert but I've seen a
picture of one.

To be honest, the Soviets called up 5 million reserves and had and additional 5 million volunteers almost immediately. That's 10 million troops right off the bat. While it may be alright to do something to make the Soviets hold on to cities, denying replacements would not be proper since these people had already joined the cause. If anything they should receive MORE replacements for holding on to cities.

One of the problems I've seen with East Front scenarios is a tendency to give Soviet units a proficiency that is far too high. Some of these guys shouldn't even have a proficiency of 20. Many divisions had just formed up in May. The armored units had little or no large unit training. In other words they didn't know how to function as a unit. The motorized divisions had little or no transport so they were actually infantry divisions. Proper leadership was had to find.

A human player with any intelligence would cut and run. So maybe Stalin was stupid because he wanted to attack, attack, attack but that was Soviet doctrine. They didn't know how to retreat. Perhaps give the Soviet maximum lines of retreat depending on where the Germans are. They can't retreat any farther until the Germans reach such and such place. Divide it up, North, Central and South. Also do away with the gamey German tactic of running ant units all over the map to cut off the Soviets. MPs were not mobile shock troops. Motorized Engineers and Recon units were not either. Neither could hold a ten kilometer line. They were equipped to establish a strong point but not an entire six to eighteen kilometer front.