Finnish Front

[Jakerson]

I like the way this game is handling Finnish front of the eastern front this is most accurately handling this front but I think there are ways of improvement.

I think that if soviet troops can push all Finnish troops inside the old borders (I mean border where Finnish units start from operation Barbarossa) for couple of turns this should have chance to rigger event where Finnish government start to seek separate peace with Soviet union as this was how it happened historically at 1944. I think separate peace with Finland should have option for Soviet player even at 1942 or 1943 by making major offensive on this front and secure the rail heads to the north.

Don’t get me wrong I love the game as it is now but this is historical and strategically option I would love to have as a choice for Soviet player to choose how much troops to commit to Finnish front. Keep it passive until 1944 as it happened historically or try to get early separate peace with Finland by starting early offensive.

[Q-Ball]

I would actually question more the "No Attack Line". Not the existance of it, but the fact that the Soviet Player can effectively hold the Finns in place with 15 or so Fortified Zones (about 30K troops). Although the Soviets were well-aware of the Finnish reluctance to move past that line, they did keep actual combat units there.

Maybe there should be a HR that the Soviets should have to keep real units up there

[krieger]

I mostly agree, good points.

[Jakerson]

ORIGINAL: Q-Ball

I would actually question more the "No Attack Line". Not the existance of it, but the fact that the Soviet Player can effectively hold the Finns in place with 15 or so Fortified Zones (about 30K troops). Although the Soviets were well-aware of the Finnish reluctance to move past that line, they did keep actual combat units there.

Maybe there should be a HR that the Soviets should have to keep real units up there

Well this problem can be solved to allow Finnish troops to attack over the no attack line but suffer big moral penalty from fighting other side of line. This makes Finnish troops less likely to be able to penetrate and decent defenses over the no attack line and retreat and route back to Finland in case some Finnish troops cross the line.

This allow Axis player gamble with Finnish troops especially if Soviet do not garrison the Finnish front but still moral penalty makes it very hard to sustain long deployment or offensive over the no attack line with Finnish troops as moral penalty would make soviet easy work to make Finnish troops route or retreat if they are crossing no attack line. As far as I know there is some moral penalty for using Finnish troops over the no attack line to restrict their unhistorical use.

Do not get me wrong this game is still best war-game that simulate at some level Finnish political choice in World War II not commit too much to Axis cause like joining for unrestricted offensive against Soviet Union. In the end Finland was only country in losing side witch capital was never occupied by foreign troops this is why I would love to have Finnish separate peace as strategically option for Soviet player as I see it very valid that Soviet could have forced Finland to separate peace earlier major military offensive. Another condition which could trigger Finland separate peace could have Axis VP going too low in campaign. This simulate the fact that Finnish government see axis starting to lose and they willingness to seek separate peace with soviet union increase.

[B455]

ORIGINAL: Jakerson


Well this problem can be solved to allow Finnish troops to attack over the no attack line but suffer big moral penalty from fighting other side of line. This makes Finnish troops less likely to be able to penetrate and decent defenses over the no attack line and retreat and route back to Finland in case some Finnish troops cross the line.

Not really sure about this so called "moral penalty". I think the effect should not be dramatic if there even was any effect really. Yes, there were some people who refused to go on when the Finnish Army went across the "own" border, but that was it. There were also people who wanted to fight on Soviet side. All something that didn't really have much of significance on the level WiTe portrays the war.

...I would love to have Finnish separate peace as strategically option for Soviet player as I see it very valid that Soviet could have forced Finland to separate peace earlier major military offensive. Another condition which could trigger Finland separate peace could have Axis VP going too low in campaign. This simulate the fact that Finnish government see axis starting to lose and they willingness to seek separate peace with soviet union increase.

Yes I'd like that as well. Good idea. Although tieing it to Axis VP would be perfect I think more realistc(in terms of programming) would be just to allow that option from late -42 onwards. This "threat" of losing Finland and perhaps losing some victory points in the same time as well, would force Axis player to think twice before going on the offensive war with the Finnish Army.

[LiquidSky]

Take the Finnish no attack line off the map, and set a random line that is unknown to both sides. Then Russians won't know the magic point to stop, and the Finns will push until High Command suddenly says stop. For added fun, have a tiny random chance there is no line at all.

[Update]

Take the Finnish no attack line off the map, and set a random line that is unknown to both sides. Then Russians won't know the magic point to stop, and the Finns will push until High Command suddenly says stop. For added fun, have a tiny random chance there is no line at all.

I don't think that above option would work well.

The problem is that Finns had set up five different border options in 5/41, depending on the German success. (below a short summary)
1. Russia would be a major force even after the war and would hold Murmansk, therefore the Murmansk railroad should be left alone.
2. German would take Murmansk and Kuola, therefore the Stalin's canal should be left outside Finnish borders
3-5 Options were the boldest ones, identical in the south,Karelian Isthmus border as in 1939, then along Syväri (Svir) and the border facing east was in different place depending the situation.

In all the options the Leningrad was left outside and Svir was never actively crossed.

During the summer 1941, when the war seemed to go for the Germans, Finns started to go for the boldest option. The idea was to go all the way to the White Sea, but still no Leningrad and the Svir would be crossed only by 163.D assisted by Finnish forces when Germans reach and hold Tikhvin.
When Germans in fall -41 started to run out of steam, Finns dropped these calculations and stopped the eastern push in to the Poventsa (outside of WITE map) area.
By December 1941 Finns had reached all the goals set and would have been happy to sign peace with Russia if it would have been up to Finns alone, Germany was still too strong for Finns to take a risk and withdraw from the war. Starting February 1943, Finnish government started to active negotiations with Russians, but the terms were too hard.

I like the above idea of possible separate peace, that would follow historical lines nicely.

[B455]

ORIGINAL: Pertti

The problem is that Finns had set up five different border options in 5/41, depending on the German success. (below a short summary)
1. Russia would be a major force even after the war and would hold Murmansk, therefore the Murmansk railroad should be left alone.
2. German would take Murmansk and Kuola, therefore the Stalin's canal should be left outside Finnish borders
3-5 Options were the boldest ones, identical in the south,Karelian Isthmus border as in 1939, then along Syväri (Svir) and the border facing east was in different place depending the situation.

In all the options the Leningrad was left outside and Svir was never actively crossed.

During the summer 1941, when the war seemed to go for the Germans, Finns started to go for the boldest option. The idea was to go all the way to the White Sea, but still no Leningrad and the Svir would be crossed only by 163.D assisted by Finnish forces when Germans reach and hold Tikhvin.
When Germans in fall -41 started to run out of steam, Finns dropped these calculations and stopped the eastern push in to the Poventsa (outside of WITE map) area.
By December 1941 Finns had reached all the goals set and would have been happy to sign peace with Russia if it would have been up to Finns alone, Germany was still too strong for Finns to take a risk and withdraw from the war. Starting February 1943, Finnish government started to active negotiations with Russians, but the terms were too hard.

Yes we all know this, don't we? But we have a military simulation here. A tool to explore various "what-ifs?". For instance, yes we know Hitler ordered Panzers to take Kiev before launching Typhoon. We can read about it from history books. In the game a player can try out different strategy. Why not with the Finnish Army? ...And no, crossing Svir river line with Finnish troops is not far fetched.

[molchomor]

Yes the game is a bit too obsessed with historical correctness IMHO for it to be the perfect wargame with endless re-playability, but it is very good anyway and perhaps we can hope for an expansion with optional increased player control over e.g.

- Allied limitations (no-go zones, no attack zones, etc.): would need option(s) to have these limitations active or not
- Withdrawals: e.g. option to let the player select units for withdrawal (surely OKH would accept a pzdiv with comparable or higher CV instead of your beloved and long-nursed Totenkopf ?)
- Production control: Now let's see what happens if I switch Magdeburg Hwy factory from producing 15 pz4/turn to tiger 1 production instead (5/turn)..

[Jakerson]

ORIGINAL: molchomor

Yes the game is a bit too obsessed with historical correctness IMHO for it to be the perfect wargame with endless re-playability, but it is very good anyway and perhaps we can hope for an expansion with optional increased player control over e.g.

- Allied limitations (no-go zones, no attack zones, etc.): would need option(s) to have these limitations active or not
- Withdrawals: e.g. option to let the player select units for withdrawal (surely OKH would accept a pzdiv with comparable or higher CV instead of your beloved and long-nursed Totenkopf ?)
- Production control: Now let's see what happens if I switch Magdeburg Hwy factory from producing 15 pz4/turn to tiger 1 production instead (5/turn)..

Every country that took part of the war in the east had their own political agendas witch where very different from German and Axis goals in general. I have never liked in any war game the fact that axis allies are handled just as mindless slaves of German war machine without any will or political or military goals of their own.

Don’t take this wrong I like this game and this game is really only one of only on the market that take a note about political realities of that era of history and goals of axis allies by guiding axis player to use allied troops at least semi historically by only using those allied troops on the fronts that where most important to those countries historically.