This was a modded FitE game between me and Josh(can't recall his forum name). My opponent was new to FitE but had played DNO...so I suppsoe I had an advantage of some sort. I was playing Axis.
The game lasted 20 turns, after which we ruled that Soviets had no chance of recovering anymore and decided to end the game.
In short I attacked towards Leningrad, Moscow and Kiev. Pushed through in all directions and just kept rolling. You can see the 'spearheads' in the animation quite well.
As a conclusion I'd say that the mod makes the game, or at least the starting turns, much harder for Soviets than they are in the vanilla version.
Actually I was on turn 1 or something of DNO at the time, up to turn 13 now and things are going a little bit better than FITE.
In my game against Karri I decided to form my first line at the DNEPR, Stalin Line, and Luga,
I didn't send any additional units to Luga and didn't place the units that were there very well, so It fell quickly.
DNEPR was too far foward and I didn't have enough men. After seeing that I was going to be enveloped I fell back, but He was close behind, I ended up being pushed to Moscow.
Stalin Line was also too far foward, I lost too many units to form another line and had to keep retreating.
It amazes me that in some games the Germans get bogged down far from historic lines, and in others the Soviet side never has a chance. But this must (I think) have to do with a players ability? Such huge swings couldn't be the result of the game itself, could it?
It amazes me that in some games the Germans get bogged down far from historic lines, and in others the Soviet side never has a chance. But this must (I think) have to do with a players ability? Such huge swings couldn't be the result of the game itself, could it?
We are playing the mod, and it does make the starting turns a bit easier for Germans.
However player ability has huge impact. New players tend to defend far too forward, while 'old timers' build up massive defences further East. If the first Soviet defensive line doesn't hold(and it won't if built too west) then the Axis just has to keep the ball rolling.
It's funny because it's simply a matter of 10-20 hexes.
EDIT:
Of course I destroy every bridge and place roadblocks everywhere as well...and if the Axis player is good then he can crush the defences anyway.
I am assuming that Karri is playing the last mod I put out, 7 I think. To make it harder on the Germans, change the soviet shock on turn 3 (or 4, I forget) to 100. Also it will needed to be changed I think on turn 48 to 100. I think Karri is correct, a player who knows the game and it's workings will do very well, but the casual player will still have a harder time on either side. The one thing that was mentioned before is the "problem" with supply and how you can still move and attack at the end of the supply lines. To really make it harder is somehow make supply a zero vice a one at a certain range so units will have to, motorized, have to stop or move really slowly.
In my game against SMK we hit mud, now I did away with the cease fires so fighting can still go on. But I pushed the german supply down to a very low number and decreased it's range too. I also made the german shock 75 (different shock values for each different mud season), which means that they are very weak. Soviet shock is 85 so they still are more immoble then the germans but stronger.
In a large game like FITE it's tough to get the balance right. I now really appreciate what the orginal designers did, they knew the game system and for the good gamers it is (the stock version) a balanced game. Have fun.
"To really make it harder is somehow make supply a zero vice a one at a certain range so units will have to, motorized, have to stop or move really slowly."
How about a house rule that motorized units with supply at 1% cannot move. All units with supply at 1% cannot initate attacks. Players would be a lot more careful about supply.
DNO has a great house rule, the germans can only have 3 units working on a railroad line, so rail lines take a long time to reach the front.
Also you could lower german general supply level, so at say turn 10, supply goes way down, but then is back up a few turns later. So the german advance would have to take a couple of breaks to wait for supplies to catch up.
All good ideas, but the players differing abilities are difficult to work into the equations. It could be possible to make a modification to help offset a German rapid approach to Moscow, which seems to be the point at which some or many games are quit. Something like 'if prior to turn 32 (the first week of Oct.) the German advance comes within 23 hexes of Moscow (around Vyazma), Soviet rail capacity increases and production boosts for 4-6 turns'. This would simulate the Soviet reaction to Moscow being threatened, as historically Stalin and Zhukov rushed everything they had available to that sector in December '41. Actually, in a post some time ago, someone raised the question of what provisions for this historical reaction does the scenario provide. To my knowledge there aren't any (visible, it may be built into the reinforcement schedule), so this type of change may be very realistic, and maybe should be included for the entire timeframe of the scenario, not just for prior to turn 32. However, as I have never played the Soviet side, I don't know if this would help in a situation where the Germans have reached Moscow very quickly. I wonder if it is the Soviet players experience that at that point of a game, there many units waiting around Gorky to be railed to the front, or are many units not reconstituting due to the lack of rifle squads. If so, this rail and production change may help.
Maybe the soviet player could be given some sort of emrgency theater option where he gets 30 militia divisions the next turn, instead of 30 infantntry divisions over the next 10 turns. This would simulate new recruits being rushed into battle.
In addition his rail capactiy doubles for 10 turns, but then his supply is cut in half for the following 10 turns. This represent every train and truck being used to rush troops to the front, at the cost of moving supplies.
Something like that where he gets a big intial boost to fend off disaster, but at a long term cost.
The Soviets had built a substantial reserve of units "behind" Moscow, and it was these units that launched teh winter counter offensive - only a couple of the divisions in them were from "Siberia" IIRC...the rest were rebuilt or new-built.
It's not really possible to do this agaisnt a good German player IMO....I've been playing Buzz's modded FITE for about a year (?) now - from about version 3, both against Buzz and another guy, and the difference between an aggressive player and one not aggressive enough is like night and day....the "other" guy plays OK, but he's jsut not in enough of a hurry to get to Moscow, and as a result the Sov's get to rebuild defensive lines with some ease against him.
Buzz OTOH pushes hard....it costs him occasionally, but on the whole he keeps the Sov's are under much more pressure.
IMO the "trouble" with FITE is that it is at such a scale that if there is the slightest imbalance in anything in the game then it gets magnified - it's a result of "bottom up" architecture - ie you "accurately" model the individual weapons, provide the rules for interaction between them, and then the result should also be "accurate".
this type of design is common, beloved, and usually works at least OK. But it is liable to fall over if something in the initial modelling or the mechanisms is wrong, and it's a b!tch to try to figure out what it is that's not working OK because there are so many things it could be.
In FITE I think the main "problem" is supply - the TOAW system just doesn't model theatre-wide supply systems accurately. the main beneficiary of this is the Axis in 1941 (under a good player), and probably the Sov's later on when they'er attacking.
Buzz has gone to great lengths to "improve" this in his mods - eg lowering "base" supply and then giving each side supply units to allow increased supply in limited areas to simulate offensives. They jury is still out whetehr this will be a final solution (we're only up to T35 in the latest game), but it shows some promise.
"To really make it harder is somehow make supply a zero vice a one at a certain range so units will have to, motorized, have to stop or move really slowly."
How about a house rule that motorized units with supply at 1% cannot move. All units with supply at 1% cannot initate attacks. Players would be a lot more careful about supply.
This seems like a very good House Rule. Very few historical commanders would launch an attack even at 50% supply. Prohibiting attacks at 1% is extremely reasonable and historically justifiable.
In addition, I would simplify the 1% movement suggestion to all units instead of "motorized" units. It can be tricky defining what a "motorized" unit is. It's easier and also historical to simply say units at 1% supply may not voluntarily move unless that movement is by rail.
I would make one modification to the above House Rules:
An airborne unit may not conduct an air-drop into an enemy-owned hex unless it is at least 100% supply.
A blanket rule liek that is not justifiable. Certainly it'sbetter to ahve good supply, but ultimately you must make do with what you have - Zhukov in early 1942 rails against artiller ysupply figures as low as 2% for some ammo for example....but it didn't stop him attacking.
If you have to attack then you do so regardless of your supply...although if you don't have any gas then you will be attacking on foot.....
I thought one of the interesting things about forcing players to stop at 1% would be the decision players face:
Should they push the offensive those last couple of hexes and risk being surrounded as their divisions are immobile? See a good player would be hesistant to advance even when he gets to 10%, because depending on the terrain, it may only be enough to move 2 or 3 hexes. Also it might be harder for the soviet player to retreat all his tank units early in the game, because they might concievably run out of gas.
"blanket rule liek that is not justifiable. Certainly it'sbetter to ahve good supply, but ultimately you must make do with what you have - Zhukov in early 1942 rails against artiller ysupply figures as low as 2% for some ammo for example....but it didn't stop him attacking.
If you have to attack then you do so regardless of your supply...although if you don't have any gas then you will be attacking on foot..... "
However you can't attack with 0% ammunition (well except for a bayonet charge) but in TOAW there is no 0%. So my aim is to make house rules that make 1%=0%
So 1% supply for a motorized unit =0% gas, which = no movment
And because we cannot simulate a tank unit attacking on foot because they have no gas, 1% supply will have to equal no attacks. I guess it would be a thornier issue for a motorized infantry unit, that could theoretically just march on if they ran out of gas, but hey its a game.
Now I think preventing infantry units with 1% supply from moving might be a little much, since infantry units with such low supply already face big disadvantages, and men with no very little supply can still do things like run away and such. Now I guess infantry units with 0% supply could still concievably attack, if you were desperate enough to make them do it, they already face big disadvantages, so maybe no reason to prevent it.
Do I think however, that artillery units should be prevented from attacking when they reach 1% supply. Now in your post you cited Zhukov attacked with artillery at 2% ammunition, and I don't think players should be prevented from attacking with 2% supply, but to my knowledge, no artillery gun in the world can fire with 0% ammunition, and since there is no 0% in TOAW, we can just make 1% = 0% and say that if your arty unit reaches 1% it cannot attack.
I agree with Fungwu. TOAW doesn't have a 0% supply condition. And since 1% is as bad as it gets in TOAW, then treating 1% as if it was 0% is not unreasonable.
And a simple house rule to simulate 0% supply is to say that units may not attack and may not voluntarily move (except by rail) when they are at 1% supply. I would also add that units may not conduct airdrops into enemy owned hexes unless they are at 100% supply.
Why are Soviet engineer, Military police, and Railroad engineer units so damn tough?!
It seems like these units sometimes resist out of all proportion to the equipment in them. I once had a railroad engineer unit garner 7 continued attacks. Often military police units with a defence of 2 turn back a regiment or 2 of infantry. Sometimes they behave like I would expect and retreat before combat, or fall back, other times they hold out against attacks that could defeat a whole division. Anyone else notice this?
