Matrix Games Forums

There is a scenario design being discussed at TDG which I find interesting in the extreme. The name is Deep Battle 1930. It is located at;

http://www.tdg.nu/cgi-bin/yabb2/YaBB.pl ... ;start=all

I am not part of the test team, but it would appear that this scenario is designed for the operational tacticians that enjoy the challenge of commanding a force in the uncertainty of battle. This does not appear to be a set piece battle as is customary in TOAW; rather it appears to have a strong element of randomization that provides the players with variety in attack and defensive strategies.

To me, this is a grand endeavor for the TOAW designer. The formulative years of the 1920’s thru mid 1930’s have always been one of my favorites. These are the years in which the lessons learned in WW I are developed into military doctrine. The acceptance of this new warfare doctrine in not universally accepted and neither is the equipment, i.e. the armored fighting vehicle. The result is that warfare in this period is highly biased in favor of the force that is armored and mobilized. Note, Ethiopia and Libya

This scenario hints that it will contain both the modern 1930 armies and the elements of the armies that kept to the 1918 model. I think that this is a very intriguing concept for a scenario.

Hopefully some TDG members/play testers will provide details as the scenario evolves.


Regards, RhinoBones

Chuck and I had started a playtest. We didn't get far enough for me to get a good sense of the scenario as a whole. I can say that the opening book is fast and variable. A player will need some skills beyond the usual tactical level to be successful.

The map is fairly large, leaving room for manuever and exploitation. It's based upon Tukhachevsky's theories, which were developed out of the Eastern Front of WW1, Russian Civil War, and the Polish-Soviet War. Here there was more in the way of fluid, non-static warfare that wasn't present on the Western Front. In the scenario there won't be a static front for some time - when that develops I'm not really sure.

The OOB and TOEs are entirely generic. However, the premise of the scenario is that in 1930, while there were a lot of ideas floating around, it wasn't possible to pay for them. So you still have a lot of infantry and cavalry divisions to work with, along with the tank and armored car divisions. You really want to concentrate on getting the most out of your mechanized units as they aren't too plentiful.

There is also an industrial/supply element to the scenario, which represents one of the principles of Deep Battle that the goal of operations should be capturing "economic sources which feed the war". The idea is to keep throwing corps and armies at the enemy, as to overwhelm their defenses and cause a defeat of their logisitics network.

I hope it's not a scenario where tactics win out. There are so many operational choices available to players, that I think good operational planning can win out even if tactical skills are lacking.

This afternoon I was playing around with the scenario and started to wonder how it would play if the land mass was completely surrounded with ocean.  Quite a bit of amphibious doctrine was being developed during the 1930’s therefore, you might want to include a small amphibious capability.  Think that if the players needed to make a 360 degree defense to guard rear areas against small amphibious operations it would add a whole new level of difficulty to the scenario.
 
[font="times new roman"][font=verdana]Regards, RhinoBones[/font] [/font]

Deep Battle comes from a Russian perspective and is mostly concerned about land and air operations. The map is presently shaped to give both sides a coastline to watch, but it is not the major focus of the scenario. I might give each side enough tonnage to ship a regiment or so each turn for raiding the coast.