Matrix Games Forums

Army Group South is now lacking German forces

Army Group Center continues to delay a decisive battle

Germany and her allies are being worn down continually tipping the scales towards the Allies.

A look at Axis income/losses, both of which are swinging drastically in the wrong direction. The question is not if Germany can win the war but if they can last long enough to sue for peace.

Southern USSR

Late September 1944 - Western Europe

The Dutch are liberated! Next stop Germany!

Hmmm.... the breakthrough in the Netherlands is something I've seen a time or two before in D-Day WIE AARs. Historically the Rhine was sufficient as a barrier to hold the Western Allies up for six-months but it seems to fall fairly easily. On the map it is shown as plains terrain, but in reality the Dutch banks of the Rhine are polder and were flooded by the Germans to turn it into what is basically marsh terrain. During Operation Market-Garden the advancing allies were often reduced to a "one-tank front" since there was only one road they could advance along, as the land either side of the raised roads had been flooded - part of the reason why the Netherlands was not the easy invasion route into the Reich it seems to have been here.

Am I right in thinking it is not possible to change terrain by event? If the banks of the Rhine in the Netherlands could be changed to marsh terrain by some "flood the lowlands"-type event this might be useful. Of course you could just make it marshes in the base map, but this might mess up the 1940 invasion.

It's not possible to have the terrain type amended by event, which means if they were made marshes in the game they would always be so, e.g. in 1940 when the Germans are advancing west, as well as later on when the Germans may well be retiring to the east.

So it will have to be up to the German army to slow the Allied advance. Though perhaps a good use of Engineers is the answer here?

ORIGINAL: BillRunacre

It's not possible to have the terrain type amended by event, which means if they were made marshes in the game they would always be so, e.g. in 1940 when the Germans are advancing west, as well as later on when the Germans may well be retiring to the east.

So it will have to be up to the German army to slow the Allied advance. Though perhaps a good use of Engineers is the answer here?

I suppose you could make them marsh in the D-Day scenario map and leave them as plains terrain in the 1939 map? At least this would give some motivation to the Allied player to try to take the crossings via an airborne assault a la Operation Market-Garden.

The issue with Marshes is that they expose the troops to heavier air combat losses. Air combat losses are already quite substantial and a main reason I was able to break down the entrenched forces in the Netherlands with the American air force near London, especially when attacking the capital. I think I may actually try how things will play out without the ground attack aircraft bonus attack value in marshes in my next version, it would certainly make the battle of Leningrad more interesting, that is one place that comes to mind. I also think that I'm going to tinker with Anti-Aircraft units to make them a bit stronger.

ORIGINAL: crispy131313

The issue with Marshes is that they expose the troops to heavier air combat losses. Air combat losses are already quite substantial and a main reason I was able to break down the entrenched forces in the Netherlands with the American air force near London, especially when attacking the capital. I think I may actually try how things will play out without the ground attack aircraft bonus attack value in marshes in my next version, it would certainly make the battle of Leningrad more interesting, that is one place that comes to mind. I also think that I'm going to tinker with Anti-Aircraft units to make them a bit stronger.

Marsh terrain giving a BONUS to air-attack is rather counter-intuitive. You'd assume that, if anything, it would give a malus.

ORIGINAL: FOARP

ORIGINAL: crispy131313

The issue with Marshes is that they expose the troops to heavier air combat losses. Air combat losses are already quite substantial and a main reason I was able to break down the entrenched forces in the Netherlands with the American air force near London, especially when attacking the capital. I think I may actually try how things will play out without the ground attack aircraft bonus attack value in marshes in my next version, it would certainly make the battle of Leningrad more interesting, that is one place that comes to mind. I also think that I'm going to tinker with Anti-Aircraft units to make them a bit stronger.

Marsh terrain giving a BONUS to air-attack is rather counter-intuitive. You'd assume that, if anything, it would give a malus.

I agree, but not sure if it should be any more defensive bonus than clear terrain. I've tweaked the defensive bonus of marshes and set the Artillery/Bomber defense penalty to 0 in my next version. Marshes were the only category with a defensive penalty and I have never been a fan of it as the units were always just bombed to smithereens from bombers which already would have done a lot of damage even without the defensive penalty.

The Western Allies are prepared to advance into German territory, however we will be at the mercy of weather in the coming turns.

The Allies try to up the pressure on German forces within Italy.

The Soviets cross the Romanian border.

Army Group Center's retreat continues.

ORIGINAL: crispy131313

ORIGINAL: FOARP

ORIGINAL: crispy131313

The issue with Marshes is that they expose the troops to heavier air combat losses. Air combat losses are already quite substantial and a main reason I was able to break down the entrenched forces in the Netherlands with the American air force near London, especially when attacking the capital. I think I may actually try how things will play out without the ground attack aircraft bonus attack value in marshes in my next version, it would certainly make the battle of Leningrad more interesting, that is one place that comes to mind. I also think that I'm going to tinker with Anti-Aircraft units to make them a bit stronger.

Marsh terrain giving a BONUS to air-attack is rather counter-intuitive. You'd assume that, if anything, it would give a malus.

I agree, but not sure if it should be any more defensive bonus than clear terrain. I've tweaked the defensive bonus of marshes and set the Artillery/Bomber defense penalty to 0 in my next version. Marshes were the only category with a defensive penalty and I have never been a fan of it as the units were always just bombed to smithereens from bombers which already would have done a lot of damage even without the defensive penalty.

I suppose the rationale is that marshland gives more vegetation to take cover under/hide positions, and tends to deaden the effect of bombs, but like you say at the least it shouldn't make air-attack more powerful.

The argument for marshes making air attack more powerful is probably something along the lines that marshes tend to concentrate vehicles on roads and makes them more vulnerable, but I can't think of any battle in history where it actually worked out that way: Marshes have always tended to favour defenders (e.g., in the Iran-Iraq war).

PS - great AAR Crispy, as always.

November 1944, the Allies break through the Germans Southern defensive line.

November 1944 - Army Group Center defends the Polish/Soviet border