FITE2 v.1.9 two average players till max winter 42/43 with some new House rulre

[gliz2]

(Updated on 18/05/21)
Two quite average players pitched against each other usually tends to end up in a Soviet victory or Germans surrendering the game.

So me and my buddy we are very average players. And therefore whoever plays as Germans had long struggled.

We have drawn the following extra House Rules:
1. T1-T10: The Soviet player MUST attack if in contact with German units.
2. T1-T6: The Soviet player cannot blow bridges and MUST move Inf and Mot Corps to meet the Germans.
3. Till August Soviets have just one combat turn.
3. No units with Att:1, AT or Flaks may
blow bridges. Exception: Engineers and HQs.
4. German Auxiliaries might be use freely. But they cannot attack together (e.g. combined Hungro-Rumanian is not allowed).
5. Disregard Naval.
6. No interdictions.
7. Germans are allowed to move extra 4 Inf and 1 Pz/Mot.Divs to Finnland.
8. Disregard odds: the game gives way too much information on the strength of opponent. Rule of a thumb: Soviets were flying blind in '41 and most of '42 and generally disregarded potential casualties.
9. Trial by combat: in reality when two units meet in EF there was almost certain initial combat as the CO need to establish the strength of the opposition and many times they were just meeting enemy on the way to objective.
10. This is war: the most important one. The tendency to calculate by tables and artificial representative of force is many board gamers weakness. In reality there is always a force pressuring commanders to act.
Should a bridge/town be taken by the enemy you will be ordered to take it back. Not to sit in front of it and dig in.
You must act even if the tables, odds and knowledge of events to come says otherwise. Try to be realistic and not a gameistic about it 😁


Same goes for the historical events. Sure as hell the STAVKA was calculating in Sep'41 to hold on till Winter Offensive. Or the Germans knew that the Winter Offensive is coming.
This one, unfortunately in TOAW, cannot be randomised as in most board games (with probability rolls), and hence is one single factor that negatively impacts the experience. No matter how hard we try if we know something will happen we will include this is in our decision making process.
E.g. oh I need to take Tallin by Turn X so I get the following units.
Like this is how the things worked in reality.

Thus we also came to the (sad) conclusion that this (and probably any other grand scenarios) shouldn't be played for more than the first 12-24 months. And that the outcome should be based on gentlemen agreement.

We will try to do our best to adhere to our rules and forget about the programmed outcomes.

"May the best Dwarf wins!"

[gliz2]

Ze Germans (no objectives to be posted) notes for T1-T6
1. The Soviets put some fighting but generally they were just buzzing so far.
2. I have decided to employ strict Schwerpunkt strategy and not go across the board.
3. Chris seems to be a little too enthusiastic with executing the House Rules which led him vulnerable in some key places.
4. Generally so far the HR works well enough. I was able to push hard as the Soviets didn't had a chance to set up a proper defence line. However I failed to push hard enough towards Stalin Line in Ukraine which seems to be getting manned in T5-T6.
5. I got stuck with some Pz/Mot units because of bad planning. This led to some inefficiencies locally.
6. Need to better execute them small pockets eradication. Now committing to many units to kill off the Soviet remnants.

[gliz2]

Soviets results for T1-T6
1. Never stop your turn in the middle. Did it twice and twice the results were short of catastrophic. First time I forgot to move units in Bessarabia 😠 but next turn I forgot to move some units towards Vitebsk region (and gues what happened) 🤬
2. I underestimated Michael. He did got stuck with some of his initial moves in T2-T3 but otherwise he was pressing very hard.
3. Was surprised that he did completely bypassed Minsk. Although if not for my blunder I doubt he would have taken Vitebsk in T5 but otherwise he did few moves I was not expecting.
4. I tried to stick hard to the HR. And now paying the price. Only in T6 I started hastily set up some sort of defence on the highway to Smolensk, Stalin line and in the Baltics.
5. Michael keeps me on my toes as to where he is going to focus his offensive. Moscow is an obvious one but where else he will hit me?
6. I think he failed to go through his bombers in T4/T5 as almost no action happened.
7. The Soviets cannot win any fight but they can stall some German movements. I managed to catch some of Michael's units with pants down. This seemed to create enough confusion to slow him a bit in those areas.
8. I moved my fleet from Riga and it wad completely gone while moving. Asked Michael to check but he had no sea interdictions (maybe the Finns?). Anyhow a very peculiar outcome.

[golden delicious]

ORIGINAL: gliz2

We have drawn the following extra House Rules:
1. T1-T10: The Soviet player MUST attack if in contact with German units.
2. T1-T6: The Soviet player cannot blow bridges and MUST move Inf and Mot Corps to meet the Germans.

That's about right. Of course, this won't be much fun for the Soviet player- it would perhaps be more convenient if designers would start the scenario at the point where the Red Army had begun to behave with some small amount of rationality.

Interested to see how this looks.

[gliz2]

I will post the T6 summary tomorrow. I am playing Soviets and have quite some fun. Unfortunately I made two big and costly blunders: forgot to move Soviets in Bessarabia (sic!) and left some cities like Vitebsk with just skeleton crews.
Still I must say that I am happy that I can finally start setting up defenses and blow up bridges. My buddy is already quite close to Smolensk 🙄

TBH the biggest issue is that in reality that mighty boardgame tactics of run and dig in wouldn't stand a chance. The political pressure for counterattacks plus the need to establish a frontline (how on earth there is no "meeting fightg" system in TAOW I really do not understand) are absolutely not present. Hence normally the Soviet player just plays defend and destroy. Which the guys try to tackle with them initial German biases.
In the end I think it's bit of a wrong approach.
Honestly I think it would be good to have the option to start FITE2 two-three weeks later. Would Save a lot of counter shuffling that brings little value, as everyone is anyhow expecting from this first turns as much historical results as possible.
I'd defo love go skip them initial rounds.

[Lobster]

Simply receiving Soviet reinforcements when they actually arrived and eliminating reconstitution would solve much.

The Soviets only stood to fight only until the end of June. Then they fell back to the Stalin line. After that they fell back to other locations. Look at the history to see what happened.

They did blow up bridges across the major rivers. Only a few fell into German hands intact. They just didn't blow up every bridge on every little stream in the country. [:D]

The Soviet air units did not retreat out of German range. They flew the entire time.

To disallow interdiction is a mistake. If you are complaining about the Soviets being too powerful why would you do this? If the Soviet player wants to cut down on German interdiction don't pass through airfields or cities.

Starting two or three weeks later, four to six turns, in historical terms would give the Soviets more units. This is because of the way TOAW handles retreats. What would you do about shock and bias? By that time Army Group South had a bloody nose and Hitler was beginning to interfere everyplace else.

This:
On 29 June, Hitler, through the Commander-in-Chief of the German Army Walther von Brauchitsch, instructed the commander of Army Group Center Fedor von Bock to halt the advance of his panzers until the infantry formations liquidating the pockets catch up. But the commander of the 2nd Panzer Group Heinz Guderian, with the tacit support of Fedor von Bock and the chief of OKH Franz Halder, ignored the instruction and attacked on eastward towards Bobruisk, albeit reporting the advance as a reconnaissance-in-force. He also personally conducted an aerial inspection of the Minsk-Białystok pocket on 30 June and concluded that his panzer group was not needed to contain it, since Hermann Hoth's 3rd Panzer Group was already involved in the Minsk pocket. On the same day, some of the infantry corps of the 9th and 4th Armies, having sufficiently liquidated the Białystok pocket, resumed their march eastward to catch up with the panzer groups. On 1 July, Fedor von Bock ordered the panzer groups to resume their full offensive eastward on the morning of 3 July. But Brauchitsch, upholding Hitler's instruction, and Halder, unwillingly going along with it, opposed Bock's order. However, Bock insisted on the order by stating that it would be irresponsible to reverse orders already issued. The panzer groups resumed their offensive on 2 July before the infantry formations had sufficiently caught up.

It wasn't until July 2 that the Soviets made a concerted attack to stop the Germans in the center. After that came the battle for Smolensk. It was because of Hitler's meddling that Leningrad didn't fall and the Moscow objective was never reached.

If you are going to insist on historical results then try using historical methods for both sides. Historically the Soviets were churning out units as fast as they could. TOAW does it too fast when you use reconstitution. Force the Soviet player to conduct a set number of offensives in areas that are left up to the Soviet player. But attack everything across the board regardless of local situations? That's just crazy.

Anyway, been ignored before when people complained about the Soviets. Don't see that changing. [:D]

[gliz2]

I think You are responding to yourself Lobster, and that's a problem 😉

I am against historical results but this is TOAW and everything is programmed. Except political mendling in the war.

As to the issue of first turns: if you will not achieve very good results in them T1-T10 you might as well as surrender the Game as German player. You've already lost.
The quasi-historical results for T1-T10 guarantee an average German player a fighting chance at winning. Also the Soviet player has to rethink the usual strategies as they won't work (or not allowed).
And in the end this gives a bit of unpredictability.

As to the mighty Soviets. Imagine Hitler didn't declare war against USA. Because the Leningrad or Moscow had fallen. Or perhaps he had a heart attack. Or....
But this is not possible in the game. Therefore the German player MUST perfectly execute his initial turns. And that requires in-depth engine knowledge and much experience with FITE2.
I after all this years only have so-so understanding of the engine. And this is ment for people like me and my buddy who play more the war than the game (engine).

[golden delicious]

ORIGINAL: gliz2

TBH the biggest issue is that in reality that mighty boardgame tactics of run and dig in wouldn't stand a chance. The political pressure for counterattacks

Well this begs the question of who is the Soviet player? If he's Stalin, then what pressure? He can simply declare the truth to be whatever he wants and watch while everyone else scurries about in a panic.

[golden delicious]

ORIGINAL: Lobster

Simply receiving Soviet reinforcements when they actually arrived and eliminating reconstitution would solve much.

The Soviets only stood to fight only until the end of June. Then they fell back to the Stalin line. After that they fell back to other locations. Look at the history to see what happened.

My understanding is that they "fell back" when the front line armies had essentially been eliminated. Most designs get around this problem by systematically underestimating the strength of the western military districts so that the German player can just roll over them even if they're handled rationally.

[Lobster]

Only 10 rifle divisions were destroyed at Bialystok-Minsk. 12 at Smolensk, 15 Uman in August. 34 at Kiev in September. 36 at Vyazma-Bryansk in October.

Reminds me of some of the contortions people went through with the SPI game War in the East because the Germans couldn't win and Soviet ahistorical production did win.

Sticking to historical reinforcements is all you need. Reconstitution blows that up. For instance the 37 Rifle Division was destroyed before the end of June. That number didn't reappear until September. But go ahead with fake history. It's just a game right? But I think starting July 1 might be a better option, yeah. Getting the numbers right will be a beyatch. [;)]

[gliz2]

Lobster please do have in mind that I am very average player and although played a FITE a lot I have never ever did appropriate read of the Scenario Manual.
If you could formulate your opinion simpler/clearer I would much appreciate it.

As to historical probabilities. If someone like Speer had been able to convince AH already in 1940 about sending German ladies to the factories and lowering the standard of living in Germany the production figures of tanks, planes and guns would easily doubled if not tripled. Thanks to Hitler Germany was the only country where women were not part of the manufacturer workforce from day 1 (as a matter of fact they only were used from late '42 onwards).

[gliz2]

The pictures will be posted with delay of 4 turns. Otherwise I would know the German plans
Turn 6 (end)


Some details from the AG Mitte

[Lobster]

Regarding a later start date. Was looking at situation maps. Probably 10 July. All the easy stuff was done by then. [;)]

Probabilities are fiction so I didn't mention any. But to play with if how about if Hitler had released new tank production to the German armies on the East Front. 170+ PzIV and 570+ PzIII (with the 50mm gun). They would have replaced the Pz38 and Pz35 that had 37mm guns.

[golden delicious]

ORIGINAL: gliz2

Thanks to Hitler Germany was the only country where women were not part of the manufacturer workforce from day 1 (as a matter of fact they only were used from late '42 onwards).

There's a story that the Allies were astonished when they entered German zoos to find all the animals still in their cages. All but the most valuable and irreplaceable animals in London Zoo had been killed in 1940 to save on food and fodder.

[golden delicious]

ORIGINAL: Lobster

Sticking to historical reinforcements is all you need. Reconstitution blows that up. For instance the 37 Rifle Division was destroyed before the end of June. That number didn't reappear until September.

I think this comes back to underestimating the western MDs. Most scenarios, these units will be missing half their equipment and have low supply and proficiency- then they reconstitute and have filled out with all the good stuff from stores.

Miraculously, the new conscripts make better soldiers than the serving regulars in first-line units! By all means the Soviets can "form" a rifle division in three weeks- remember the line at the start of Enemy at the Gates? "First man takes a rifle, when he dies, the second man picks it up..."? It's not normally a good idea to send units like this into a mobile battle.

[Lobster]

ORIGINAL: golden delicious

ORIGINAL: Lobster

Sticking to historical reinforcements is all you need. Reconstitution blows that up. For instance the 37 Rifle Division was destroyed before the end of June. That number didn't reappear until September.

I think this comes back to underestimating the western MDs. Most scenarios, these units will be missing half their equipment and have low supply and proficiency- then they reconstitute and have filled out with all the good stuff from stores.

Miraculously, the new conscripts make better soldiers than the serving regulars in first-line units! By all means the Soviets can "form" a rifle division in three weeks- remember the line at the start of Enemy at the Gates? "First man takes a rifle, when he dies, the second man picks it up..."? It's not normally a good idea to send units like this into a mobile battle.

As the Soviets reclaimed lost territory they did indeed draft people that had been left behind and gave them a rifle and used them to fill ranks with little or no training. STAVKA put a stop to that because it was declared wasteful with STAVKA Order 089. There was a time when if a soldier did not recover a fallen comrades rifle he could be shot. They were that short of hardware. And officers. And NCOs.

The instances where a Rifle Division was sent to the meat grinder with less than four weeks training are few. Four weeks is about how long it takes to get everything together and teach the rank and file which end of the rifle is the lethal end, how to load it and how to run towards the machine gun bullets. It's hard to imagine how desperate things were. No one was getting enough to eat even.

BTW, the number of GKO and STAVKA orders concerning the doling out of vodka is pretty humorous. I guess if you're drunk you don't really mind charging machine guns.

[Lobster]

History aside, the real challenge making any scenario is to make it fun for both sides. And since no two players are alike giving Theater Options to balance the scenario for any two people is what you need to focus on. For instance if you have someone who has played the opening moves to death so they know exactly how to achieve the best results and someone else who has only played a couple of times.

[golden delicious]

ORIGINAL: Lobster


BTW, the number of GKO and STAVKA orders concerning the doling out of vodka is pretty humorous. I guess if you're drunk you don't really mind charging machine guns.

I doubt they were routinely getting the men drunk, but a little to calm the nerves would have helped. Also given the nature of the Russian winter alcohol would probably lessen the effects of the cold as well as serving as a reward or a privilege that can be taken away.

This was pretty routine in the Royal Navy where the whole crew would get issued with a ration of rum on a regular basis, but I don't think the point was to get the men drunk at their posts.

[golden delicious]

ORIGINAL: Lobster

History aside, the real challenge making any scenario is to make it fun for both sides. And since no two players are alike giving Theater Options to balance the scenario for any two people is what you need to focus on. For instance if you have someone who has played the opening moves to death so they know exactly how to achieve the best results and someone else who has only played a couple of times.

Yes although it can be hard to get players to admit that they're hopeless.

One can also impose or waive house rules to balance things.

[cathar1244]

Yep, likewise, the French Army and their wine rations. It was just a drink to go with their meals. I was reading a memoir of a U.S. veteran of the First World War the other day. His comment was that the French drank wine like others drank tea.

Cheers