Matrix Games Forums

Units are not out of supply ( south of Marsh) on turn 1 and have full MP's.

This would reflect SHC more, as they counter attacked as much as possible the first 2 weeks slowing GHC advance enough to beable to get semi organized to the east.

SHC had ammo dumps set-up so how they would be considered cut -off seems kinda weird in the first place.

They knew before hand the general routes of Geman advances because of terrain and had some good leaders (for SHC) in the south.

IF SHC can reopen pockets and counter attack this would atleast by a turn and cause more losses for GHC.

Just an idea to float that I don't beleive is a total game changer.

Seems more balanced for both sides without totally screwing up whats been done to date to balance game.

Opening German pocket would have to be smaller and would have a very high chance of being opened in SHC round. Basicly even vs a skilled GHC a skilled SHC could atleast break the pocket with strong forses making the 2nd German move sealing the first pocket and not simply ignoring the first pocket and going for a 2nd in most cases.

The problem is the fantasy flight of Axis armor all the way over to Roumanian border; actually I just had an idea which may help: what if most of these units were placed in Reserve Mode? All it would need is for one or 2 units to react to screw up this flight of fantasy and maybe halt the drive.

Marquo

If you check it out, much of the Soviet units in the South are in Reserve mode already. Occasionally it can really bite the German advance in the rear.

Well, alot are already in Reserve but the MPs are too low and leader morale stinks so little chance for meaningful reaction, but still...

ORIGINAL: Marquo

The problem is the fantasy flight of Axis armor all the way over to Roumanian border; actually I just had an idea which may help: what if most of these units were placed in Reserve Mode? All it would need is for one or 2 units to react to screw up this flight of fantasy and maybe halt the drive.

Marquo

Here we go.. so tell me how this "fantasy flight of Axis armor" took place in the center historically, which was over rougher terrain and a longer distance than what is accomplished with the Lvov pocket manuver?

Careful of how you approach a Lvov pocket "nerf" because the things you impose there may screw things up elsewhere.

The problem in the south with the MPs is that they are subject to the Turn 1 Soviet rules which really lowers their MPs. I think that someone at one time (MT?) suggested that the Southwestern Front be exempt from this rule as it was historically ordered to mobilize for combat two days before the attack in direct contradiction to Stalin's commands.

I am not asking to "nerf" anything; what about a chance to restage the Battle of Brody-Rovnno, the single largest tank battle in the entire history of warfare? Not possible in WITE and the Lvov Gambit.

Thats why I thought giving SHC units max MP's at start would be a help and units from inside the pocket would or could be used to breakout. This way units out side can help break or retreat.

Should make for not as big of losses as before and a net gain of a turn over all.

Again most of the balancing models to date have been based on a Lvov pocket. So this will not throw everything out of balance, but help SHC enough to make the south more interesting and lower losses some.

ORIGINAL: Pelton

Thats why I thought giving SHC units max MP's at start would be a help and units from inside the pocket would or could be used to breakout. This way units out side can help break or retreat.

Should make for not as big of losses as before and a net gain of a turn over all.

Again most of the balancing models to date have been based on a Lvov pocket. So this will not throw everything out of balance, but help SHC enough to make the south more interesting and lower losses some.

You might want to check the alternate GC 41 scenario I started working on a few months ago.

tm.asp?m=2934258

I basically pursued the approach you guys discuss here (increased Soviet units MP's and Morale to top up reserve activation chances, some changes in deployment, etc.). The big problem is the Surprise Turn rules, which basically leave the Soviet player with very little room to maneuver during his turn.

I've found, however, that if I raise - ahistorically - experience elements, Soviet units tend to hold their lot together much better (less chances to become routed, losses when retreating are substantially lower).

This extra experience will eventually go away as losses mount. Another possibility would be to freeze Axis forces northwest and west of Lvov for one turn (and freeze the Soviet armies there, as well, to avoid premature withdrawal).

Last, but not least, I'd also recommend to play the scenario with Logistics reduced to 75% for both sides, to keep the pace more in line with historical timelines.

Besides that, I'm quite convinced by now that this wouldn't work well without alternate victory conditions, to make sure the historical strategic constraints are in place. This involves separate, manual tracking over a spreadsheet. I plan to do some 'work' on this during the Holiday Season, so if people is interested in playtesting it, I would be delighted.

ORIGINAL: Klydon
Here we go.. so tell me how this "fantasy flight of Axis armor" took place in the center historically, which was over rougher terrain and a longer distance than what is accomplished with the Lvov pocket manuver?

Careful of how you approach a Lvov pocket "nerf" because the things you impose there may screw things up elsewhere.

I don't think it's so much a claim that Axis armor cannot or should not be able to cover that kind of distance, but more that the Soviets are completely powerless to stop it and the political implication that such a link-up with Romania would instantly create such a Kessel.

Why not simply reduce the 1st panzer army mobile unit MPs to say 30? This would be the simplest fix.

Because it doesn't make sense in the context of the 1st Panzer Army actually having enough fuel stockpiled to make that kind of trip. They absolutely did. That they did not get to drive as far was because of Soviet reactions and counter-attacks, which are currently under-represented at best, and completely missing at worst.

ORIGINAL: sjohnson

Why not simply reduce the 1st panzer army mobile unit MPs to say 30? This would be the simplest fix.

Which would also make sense in that its a 3 day turn, not 7 days. But still does not compel the Soviet player not to flee east.

No doubt, but, it's hard to deal with the surprise turn effects in the traditional sense of the game model. This is a first turn anomaly - greatly affected by the fact that the whole WitE model is a IGO-UGO play style centered on 1 week turns; hard to capture the responsiveness that ordinary field commanders would have in a full week of action; this is always magnified in exceptional situations (eg the first week of the campaign where the situation is very fluid). Unless you change the base game turn length to 1/2 its current length then I doubt you are going to be able to find consistent model solutions for these type of extreme situations (not the Lvov gambit; but the first turn surprise).

The responsiveness is surely hard to capture with 1-week turns. But on the other hand I like the 1-week turns, as it speeds up the gameplay somewhat. Of course this messes with the surprise turn. But it is not like its unsolvable. Many possibilities exist like decreasing the MPs of German Panzer units, or increasing the readiness of the Southwestern Front. Another issue I would like to see is an increase in the vulnerability of German units. The Wehrmacht, even with the fewer combat opportunities in WITE, suffers far too few casualties up until the blizzard (where they are artificially boosted). If I attack a German infantry division in the open field with a 92% TOE tank division with 300 tanks, it should take more than 10-30 men casualties, even on hasty.

@Bletchley: How did the reduction in logistics affect the game? This is one of the key issues in that logistics is too generous as far as allowing units to sustain drives over multiple turns and it applies to both sides.

It currently costs too many movement points for Soviet armor to launch deliberate attacks in 1941. There's a ton of big Soviet Mech units in the south that could potentially play havoc with the overextended German Lvov pincers, and German regimental breakdown units. But without the ability to mass high movement point units in deliberate attacks the Soviet player is left with the option to either run-away and leave the Lvov pocket to its eventual fate, or launch a series of ineffective piecemeal hasty assaults against the German cordon. And invariably sticking around to counterattack the German Cordon, just means more Red units get encircled on turns 2 & 3.

It also costs soviet units too many movement points to move back into hexes that were moved thru by Axis units. I think hex "possession" should have three possible states. Friendly Controlled -- Enemy Controlled -- AND CONTESTED. Contested hexes include any Friendly hexes that were moved thru during the opposing players movement phase by enemy units. Movement penalties for moving thru "contested" hexes should not be nearly as steep as movement penalties when passing thru "Enemy hexes. Contested hexes become Friendly Controlled\Enemy Controlled in the next friendly movement phase rather than the current system in which hex control switches during the enemy players movement phase.

And I also agree with some of the other posters above that the first turn surprise rules also act to limit Soviet counterattack options in the South during the first turn. Draw a demarcation line thru the Pripet Marshes. Soviet units North of the line get hit with the 1st Turn surprise rules -- Soviet units south of the line don't get penalized by the first turn surprise rules.

ORIGINAL: jwduquette1
I think hex "possession" should have three possible states. Friendly Controlled -- Enemy Controlled -- AND CONTESTED. Contested hexes include any Friendly hexes that were moved thru during the opposing players movement phase by enemy units.

Great idea!
Although I would change that to "Contested hexes include any Friendly hexes that were moved thru during the opposing players movement phase by enemy units that aren't in enemy ZOC at the end of the turn"
For the extra cost of entering contested hexes I'd suggest simply +1 MP.

The point is that the Soviets did "react" in the game sense of "reserve activation" - maybe uncoordinated, disjonted - but they did react and the Lvov pocket did not occur. This really needs to be fixed. And as for upsetting the current "balance" of the game (Pelton's comment) --> Good.

Marquo