Matrix Games Forums

I have been enjoying the scenario Eastern Front 1941-1945, which I believe is the best suited for the Russian Campaign as Human Axis and Computer opponent.
However, there is a question about the OOB I would like to ask to the forum.

The basic unit is Corps but I found some individual Panzer Divisions too. It is confusing because if we have Panzer Corps too, why independent divisions are also provided in the starting OOB?

Panzergruppe 4 has 41st PanzerKorps and 56th PanzerKorps but also 1st Panzer division is showed as independent unit inside PanzerGruppe4. any hint about this?

The best to answer is the one who has designed this scenario.

Perhaps he was willing to represent something particular. TOAWIII does not allow an unit to move from one formation to another. It is true that the 1st panzer division was part of the 4th panzergruppe in June 1941:
http://www.niehorster.org/011_germany/4 ... ps_41.html

But, later in the war, it was also move to the 1st panzer army. Represent it independantly may be explain due to this.

ORIGINAL: fulcrum28

I have been enjoying the scenario Eastern Front 1941-1945, which I believe is the best suited for the Russian Campaign as Human Axis and Computer opponent.
However, there is a question about the OOB I would like to ask to the forum.

The basic unit is Corps, but I found some individual Panzer Divisions too. It is confusing because if we have Panzer Corps too, why independent divisions are also provided in the starting OOB?

Panzergruppe 4 has 41st PanzerKorps, and 56th PanzerKorps but also 1st Panzer division is showed as independent unit inside PanzerGruppe4. any hint about this?

First, I will say Todd Klemme had produced an outstanding scenario in Eastern Front 1941-1945. Are you using the latest Eastern Front 1941-1945v4.1? ( the same OOB, however). We may need to hear from Todd on this. He is presently working on an update to Eastern Front for TOAW IV
tm.asp?m=4312327

In most cases, it does not affect game play.

In my Road to Moscow Series and Ardennes 1944 I tend to order my units in Armee/Panzer Gruppe/Korps/Division/etc. This is in the opening Force Editor, remembering, of course, that in the course of the scenario (five weeks to five years!) all historic armies shuffled units between headquarters. I am not sure how WitE handles this, but even it does, it would require an enormous amount of research in keep track of who is dancing with whom.

Thank for your input, and perhaps we will see TOAW IV.1 with a mechanism for switching units within headquarters on the fly. Another wishlist item is tying units to their historic HQ for supply and control. Today that can be done, only by using the same unit colors in the Formation.

Stay tuned.

These detached divisions may represent corps-army reserve formations, right?

I thought that this scenario was PBEM only? It plays well against Soviet AI?

And governato=Todd Klemme?

Hey y'all. EF 41-45 scenario designer here (not Klemme, although he designed some great stuff too).

The individual Panzer divisions in the OOB were introduced for a number of reasons:

-over time changes in the OOB of the individual Pz Korps
-highlight individual units that distinguished themselves and/or had specific TOEs
-increase the number of Axis units on the map in order to give the Axis player a tactical edge.

here is a longer answer

Hope this helps!

the AI/script is completely functional, within the limits and capabilities of TOAW .

ORIGINAL: governato


the AI/script is completely functional, within the limits and capabilities of TOA .

Thanks man, thought that wasn´t the case. I`m tempted to give a shot then [:)]

Looks like your scenario is included in the TOAW IV release. Are there many differences with this version?

I have an experimental v4.1 for TOAWIV, but they are including 3.6 in the official release for some reason.....PM if you are you on the beta test team...
In any case version 4 for TOAWIII is better (see scenario notes) than 3.6... especially if you make it to the Caucasus.

Not in the beta team [:)], but no worries, I can wait to your final IV version.

Meanwhile I can occupy myself with the v4 version for TOAW III.
Installed and reading the pdf as we speak [:)]

OK! Let me know how you like it. The version for TOAWIV will have the overextended supply feature added but it is otherwise the same.

Sure. A little extra reading and then the bed. Tomorrow code word Dortmund will be send

ORIGINAL: governato

I have an experimental v4.1 for TOAWIV, but they are including 3.6 in the official release for some reason.....PM if you are you on the beta test team...
In any case version 4 for TOAWIII is better (see scenario notes) than 3.6... especially if you make it to the Caucasus.

Fabio, I believe we will be able to post revisions to the Forum (IV in addition to IV Development). I have run a couple of PO vs PO. Not surprisingly, the results are variable. So far, so good.
Incidentally, is the briefing date 20Nov17 not 20Nov15?
Cheers
RAK

small announcement: I will be posting V5 of Eastern Front 41-45 on the TOAWIV forum within a week or so.

It will include new features such as

- improvements to supply (the Overextended supply feature)
- a new eqp file where infantry has a bit more AT `bite'
- some final touches to equipment productions that will affect mobility during the second part of the war.
- from early testing the PO seems to behave better in TOAW IV with more defined front lines.


Btw if anybody has PBEM end of turn files for the TOAWIII or IV v4 they 'd be very useful, it's rare to get real feedback past winter 41. Just PM or reach me via email