Matrix Games Forums

Hello everyone, I am hereby publishing a scenario of the Russian Federation's attack on the Suwalki Gap. This is my first scenario for TOAW IV. I wish you enjoyable gameplay and many exciting moments.

SUWAŁKI GAP – ZAPAD 2025
(Operational Variation)

Platform: TOAW IV
Mode: Primarily designed for PBEM
Turns: 28 (6-hour turns)
Scale: Operational

Overview

This scenario explores a 2025 crisis in the Suwałki region under a Zapad-style force posture.

The core concept is simple:

Both sides have comparable maneuver mass.
Victory depends on operational decisions, not scripted inevitability.

Russia must decide between:

Securing a land corridor to Kaliningrad

Crushing Lithuanian resistance

Escalating strategically (4th Guards Tank Division / Iskander strikes)

Or maintaining a limited war posture

NATO must decide between:

Holding terrain forward

Trading space for time

Counterattacking the corridor

Or risking escalation by striking Kaliningrad / Belarus

This is not a scripted corridor rush.
It is a maneuver contest with escalation thresholds.

Design Philosophy

This scenario was designed primarily for PBEM play.

The escalation system, operational ambiguity, and axis flexibility are intended for human command decisions. An AI-compatible version is included, but the full experience emerges in player-versus-player mode.

The AI can execute a credible campaign, but it cannot fully leverage deception, delayed reserves, or escalation timing.

Key Features

• Escalation mechanics (Belarus entry, 4th Guards Tank Division, Iskander strikes)
• Multiple viable Russian operational approaches
• Lithuanian defense with irregular / territorial capability
• Limited stockpile war (logistics matter)
• Operational—not tactical—decision space
• No guaranteed outcome

Balance Notes

This is not a corridor “autowin” scenario.

If Russia overextends into Lithuania, Kaliningrad becomes vulnerable.
If NATO pushes too early into Belarus or Kaliningrad, escalation penalties apply.

Both sides can win.

Marginal and Draw outcomes are common — which is intentional.
A decisive victory requires operational coherence and risk acceptance.

Tested Variants

Zapad-style mixed regimental grouping

Reduced Russian logistics hubs

With and without 4th Guards Tank Division

AI vs AI stress tests

Human vs AI test cycles

PBEM remains the intended format.

Suggested Play

Play blind.
Avoid reading designer notes before your first game.

For NATO:
You cannot win by forward defense alone.

For Russia:
You cannot win by brute mass alone.

If there is interest, I may later release:

• A “Hardcore” version (higher Russian mass)
• A pure AI-focused simplified variant
• An escalation-heavy edition

Below are a few screenshots from the game showing various stages of operations (human FR vs NATO AI):

Early Operational Phase - Turn 7
Russian maneuver groups advance toward Mariampol and Kalvarija while NATO attempts to delay and concentrate reserves

Endgame Situation - Turn 28
Heavy attrition from both sides. The corridor remains contested. Strategic escalation possible but costly.

Feedback welcome.
Best regards,
Rafal