TGW v1.8 playtest

[larryfulkerson]

Here's the NW of Stalingrad now-a-days.

[larryfulkerson]

Here's what it looks like north of Moscow:

[larryfulkerson]

Here's what the SW of Stalingrad looks like now.

[larryfulkerson]

Here's the results of a JU-87 strike on some Soviet boats.

[larryfulkerson]

Here's how the air war is going in T50:

[larryfulkerson]

I finally completed the pocket west of Moscow. Now to reduce the perimeter.

[larryfulkerson]

Here's Moscow in T52:

[larryfulkerson]

Here's the front lines in T53:

[Michael T]

Is there a link to the latest version of this somewhere?

[larryfulkerson]

TGW.zip is attached to this post. Just truncate the dot txt off the filename to make it a zip file again and unzip it. I'm
including the equipment file for this scenario. Lemme know if you have problems.

[Michael T]

Got it. Thanks[:)]

[larryfulkerson]

ORIGINAL: Michael T
Got it. Thanks[:)]

And now for the small print. Acceptance of the scenario by downloading it automatically binds you to agree to keep Steve
Sill and I in the loop about your progress and your observations. You're a playtester now. Thanks for your interest.

[larryfulkerson]

Here's what Stalingrad looks like now. I'm opening branch offices all over the map. Business is booming.

[larryfulkerson]

Here's a close-up view of the Rostov area now. I've captured the bridge intact and I'm pouring units across it.

[Michael T]

My first question is why do the Soviets have HQ's but not the Axis. Unless I don't see them.

[larryfulkerson]

ORIGINAL: Michael T
My first question is why do the Soviets have HQ's but not the Axis. Unless I don't see them.

I'd like to know the answer to that one myself. My theory is that Steve Still has a design philosophy that less is more. If the unit
doesn't contribute in a material way to the playability of the game then it isn't represented in the game. The arty that the HQ unit
had has been broken out into separate arty units so that the HQ unit had no useful purpose and isn't included in the mix. In other
words, we'll have to ask Steve.

[sPzAbt653]

My first question is why do the Soviets have HQ's but not the Axis.

Reducing number of units by consolidating some, in this case the artillery units. The Germans were organised into convenient ArKo and HArKo units [Artillery Command and High Artillery Command]. The Soviets had no such equivalent that I could find, so their Army level artillery assets are organised into Army HQ units. Similarly, Soviet Front engineer assets are consolidated into their Front HQ's.

The file you have is the first draft which Mr. Fulkerson is running thru to test everything. I've already run it thru to the end, so many changes have been made since the first draft. If you are interested in looking it over or playing it yourself, I should send you the latest.

@Mr. Fulkerson - I haven't sent you this latest file yet because I am still working on a few things. Mainly the Soviet PO. So in the meantime your testing is still valid as you may find something I haven't yet. Also, I got to a point where the PO was taking an hour to complete a turn. I think this might have to do with the objective paths I created [not sure though] and that is what I am working on now. So if you get to a point where the PO is taking too long, you may want to shelve it and wait to restart when I get done making the adjustments.

[Michael T]

But HQ's give adjacent units supply benefits don't they?

It would seems the Soviets would be gaining an advantage if they have HQ's and not the Axis.

[sPzAbt653]

That's taken into account with the overall Force Supply Levels.

[larryfulkerson]

Here's Moscow in T54. I'm thinking that it's possible to reduce the Moscow pocket before winter hits. And then once the
supply collapses I can move the men back to where the supply is, having converted all the Moscow railroads etc.