Immediate Fix Required

[heliodorus04]

No single factor more influences German capabilities over the 1941 campaign season than rail advancement.

With the bug fix that 'properly' reduced the advancement limit to 4 hexes, it's time to also fix two other problems.

There is absolutely no reason that an FBD cannot advance rail where it is even if an enemy unit has ZOC someplace touching the rail net far behind it, and there is no reason that an FBD cannot advance rail on a turn in which a partisan attack behind it does damage to a rail line.

To deprive Germany of the ability to build rail network ENTIRELY because of these conditions is too much. Germany needs to build rail each turn, and these punishments are egregiously punitive.

No one should start a game as Axis until the ridiculous handicap advantages that are handed to the Soviet are remedied. I certainly will not.

[pompack]

ORIGINAL: heliodorus04

No single factor more influences German capabilities over the 1941 campaign season than rail advancement.

With the bug fix that 'properly' reduced the advancement limit to 4 hexes, it's time to also fix two other problems.

There is absolutely no reason that an FBD cannot advance rail where it is even if an enemy unit has ZOC someplace touching the rail net far behind it, and there is no reason that an FBD cannot advance rail on a turn in which a partisan attack behind it does damage to a rail line.

To deprive Germany of the ability to build rail network ENTIRELY because of these conditions is too much. Germany needs to build rail each turn, and these punishments are egregiously punitive.

No one should start a game as Axis until the ridiculous handicap advantages that are handed to the Soviet are remedied. I certainly will not.

Well, I think that a lack of materials could be a factor in reducing progress. The FBD units did not carry a large inventory of materials as they advanced along the rail line, instead they depended on a steady stream of supplies from the rear. Remember they were not just moving the rails, they were also building (or re-building) additional water points, signals, maintenance facilities etc.

[TulliusDetritus]

Heliodorus, aren't they trying to slow down the pace of operations with that new rule? It is a simple fact that operations are way too fast (not realistic).

This was exactly the first big issue when WitP appeared. Too fast, too far. And historical counterparts could not do that in the first place.

By the way, I am reading Zhukov Memories... the 1941 Red Army was not that shabby. Suffice to say that Germans were stopped one month near Smolensk (AGC, main push). They also managed to defeat the mighty panzers in Leningrad Area. Zhukov even says that some German armored hordes could have been "annihilated" near Leningrad hadn't they been helped by an infantry corps... And yet we have ants [:D]

Now try to resist ONE month (4 turns) in the game near Smolensk (and I mean with the German hordes -armored forces included- next to you)... I would call anyone saying that a lunatic...

[Flaviusx]

Zhukov exaggerates a bit here. AGC had to stop for logistical reasons as much as anything else.

A long time ago, in a version far far away, it was possible to make the Germans work for Smolensk, particularly in the scenarios. The Red Army was much tougher back then, too. See my old AAR with Bob. That would no longer be possible in today's game. This, I suppose, is progress.

[Redmarkus5]

Wasn't the Battle for Smolensk, including as it did Timoshenko's counter-offensive, a major defensive battle which put AGC on the strategic defensive until Typhoon?

[Flaviusx]

Well, not exactly. The Soviets managed to extract a fair amount of stuff that got surrounded by the Germans and gave the spearheads a rather hard time. Afterwards, it was clear that AGC had to pause and get its supply situation in order. Hitler decided to send its panzers north and south, where the advances were lagging in comparison to AGC.

During this operational pause the Soviets launched a bunch of attacks on AGC and had some limited success at Yelnia in particular, but suffered such severe losses during this Timoshenko offensive that they mostly just made themselves ripe for disaster when the Germans launched Typhoon. In retrospect, they should have conserved their strength. Whatever they got out of this counterattack hardly compares to the Orel-Vyazma fiasco.

[RCHarmon]

I am no expert at all, but isn't supply a big problem in the game?  The armies are not restricted enough and therefore have been able to advance unrealistic distances? If they slowed supply down then isn't that making it more accurate.

When I first starting playing this game, I started putting "fortifications" along my direction of advance at several rail intersections.  It did help keep the damage to rails by partisans to a minimum.  You could get "gamey" and place  several fortifications along your rail lines. I just put them at certain rail intersections.   

[heliodorus04]

ORIGINAL: pompack

Well, I think that a lack of materials could be a factor in reducing progress. The FBD units did not carry a large inventory of materials as they advanced along the rail line, instead they depended on a steady stream of supplies from the rear. Remember they were not just moving the rails, they were also building (or re-building) additional water points, signals, maintenance facilities etc.

And if all of my army group downstream of the partisan attack was out of supply that answer would make sense. But why are 30 divisions able to move along fine, but the railroad unit has to stop entirely?

As far as what Zhukov says: the same people quoting Soviets are quick to point out that Germans exaggerate. I'm not interested in history. I'm interested in gameplay.

I'm all for making the Soviets have some offensive capability somehow (no idea how) in 1941. But the German side needs to have all the artificial brakes taken off of the railroad advancement. While supply on offense is a well known issue, the extent to which Germany advances its railroad network in 1941 is everything for their offense. Everything. So dumb rules need to go.

I think the 4 hex limit is dumb, but in lieu of removing that (which would cause Soviet-only players to go blind with rage at the suggestion), then the partisan/unit ZOC (when far upstream of the FBD) has to go.

[gingerbread]

In game play terms you can/must sweep  a corridor 5 hexes to each side of each converted rail line every turn. During '41 when there is one feeder line per Army Group Area, I would consider it mandatory.
Once the HQ attached rail converters ("gnats") have opened multiple throughput lines, you can move the sweepers east to sweep there or garrison.

It used to be enough to station a combat unit in every third rail hex, but that was deemed an exploit and nerfed.

[pompack]

ORIGINAL: heliodorus04

ORIGINAL: pompack

Well, I think that a lack of materials could be a factor in reducing progress. The FBD units did not carry a large inventory of materials as they advanced along the rail line, instead they depended on a steady stream of supplies from the rear. Remember they were not just moving the rails, they were also building (or re-building) additional water points, signals, maintenance facilities etc.

And if all of my army group downstream of the partisan attack was out of supply that answer would make sense. But why are 30 divisions able to move along fine, but the railroad unit has to stop entirely?

Well, I just repeat myself and say the the FBD units did not carry a large inventory of materials. OTOH, the primary function (in real life anyway) of higher HQs is to accumulate stocks of supplies from the rear, organize those supplies into dumps, move supplies to the next lower echelon HQ, and move the non-distributed supplies in the dumps forward when the HQ displaces forward. I am speaking of real life here of course, not the game [:)]

[sillyflower]

ORIGINAL: heliodorus04

ORIGINAL: pompack

Well, I think that a lack of materials could be a factor in reducing progress. The FBD units did not carry a large inventory of materials as they advanced along the rail line, instead they depended on a steady stream of supplies from the rear. Remember they were not just moving the rails, they were also building (or re-building) additional water points, signals, maintenance facilities etc.

And if all of my army group downstream of the partisan attack was out of supply that answer would make sense. But why are 30 divisions able to move along fine, but the railroad unit has to stop entirely?

As far as what Zhukov says: the same people quoting Soviets are quick to point out that Germans exaggerate. I'm not interested in history. I'm interested in gameplay.

I'm all for making the Soviets have some offensive capability somehow (no idea how) in 1941. But the German side needs to have all the artificial brakes taken off of the railroad advancement. While supply on offense is a well known issue, the extent to which Germany advances its railroad network in 1941 is everything for their offense. Everything. So dumb rules need to go.

I think the 4 hex limit is dumb, but in lieu of removing that (which would cause Soviet-only players to go blind with rage at the suggestion), then the partisan/unit ZOC (when far upstream of the FBD) has to go.

I play both sides equally and I think I'm with you here H.

FBDs have more limited needs than combat divisions and IRL you can use trucks to transport over short distances if needed. Losing a turn of rail advance is a disproportionately severe penalty on jerry. I do support the max 4 hex conversion rule but as a quid pro quo a partisan bowing a small bridge or a few metres of track should not bring railhead advance to a stop for 1 week.

[Peltonx]

As far as what Zhukov says: the same people quoting Soviets are quick to point out that Germans exaggerate. I'm not interested in history. I'm interested in gameplay.

The facts are the Soviets out right lied about figures, because they did not want to get shot by Stalin. Stalin killed more of his own poeple then Hitler did while in power.

GHC figures when the numbers have been looked into the past 10 yrs were the most accurate of all nations, because they had several commands that counted the same stats. So one could check the numbers vs other branches.

The fact is the Germans were winning the war of attrition vs Russia.

Russian population 170 million
German Population 86 million.

Combat ratio 3.5 to 1

The myth of unending manpower was a myth created by Stalin and beleived by the world.

If not for the western allies Germany would have won the war in the east.

Russia was putting kids, old men and woman into service by late-44.

Hopefully WiTW will reflect history and not myths created by a doomed Empire.

Russian population in 1995 was only 150 million. It has yet to recover from Hitler and Stalin.

Pelton

[elmo3]

Some interesting excerpts from an article on the rail situation on the Eastern Front:

[font="arial"]

...German military railroad planners made one critical error in their Barbarossa calculations - they did not take the primitiveness of the Soviet interior into account when planning for their attack. This would cost the Germans dearly later.[/font]

...[font="arial"] In fact, the majority of the Soviet rail line network was the same as it had been for the Czars armies 20 years earlier.

[/font][font="arial"]...Signals and rail safety efforts were primitive when compared to German or western European standards. Except for large urban areas, few switches were electrically operated.

[/font][font="arial"]...Only the Kharkhov to Moscow double track line was placed onto a proper bed. The rest of the soviet rail network was placed onto sandy beds, or the ties were simply tapped lightly into the existing ground. The lower the engineering standard of the railway bed, the lower the amount of weight which could traverse same.

[/font][font="arial"]...Many of the existing railroad bridges of European Russia were in fact temporary structures. Most of the bridges were built during the First World War to satisfy the military needs of the Czars' Army in 1914-1917. Some of these temporary bridges were in fact manufactured of sheet steel and simply riveted together. By German and western European standards, these temporary bridges were of no value for the heavier trains (carrying heavier tanks and so on) of the late 1930's and early 1940's.

[/font][font="arial"]...Soviet coal was not of optimal quality locomotives even by Soviet standards. A number of the larger Soviet rail yards contained coal-processing plants which soaked the Donets coal in (bunker) oil before it was suitable for use in locomotives. Frequently, wood was used as a substitute for coal, especially in the northern regions of the Soviet Union.

[/font][font="arial"]...Soviet water for locomotives was also not of optimal value. For example, on the rail line between Dniepropetrovsk and Stalino, at each of the 11 water towers, a separate additive had to be mixed with the water to prevent boiler scales from forming in the locomotives.

[/font][font="arial"]...All along the 1939-1941 Soviet-German border, the Soviets had re-built all of their border rail centers to only allow for through traffic. All marshaling yards and other major railroad transportation and workshop facilities near the western Soviet border areas were removed to prevent the Germans from making use of same in case they attacked. This precaution in fact slowed the Germans down during their advance and it also created difficulties for them during the retreats of 1943, 1944 and 1945.

[/font][font="arial"]...Germany did not posses enough qualified personnel to manage the Soviet rail system effectively. She would have to supplement her forces with local nationals.

[/font][font="arial"]...As is well known, Heeresgruppe Nord (HGrN) was assigned to fight on the northern wing of the invasion front. Heeresgruppe Mitte (HGrM) formed the middle wing and Heeresgruppe Sued (HGrS) was in the south. All three were ordered to penetrate as far as they could and seize key Soviet railheads and bridges intact. Regretfully for the Germans, with a number of exceptions, the Soviets were able to destroy nearly every bridge the Germans needed as the Soviet forces retreated eastwards.

Partisans are mentioned as well:

[/font][font="arial"]No discussion of German rail during WWII would be complete without a discussion of the impact Soviet Partisans had on German rear area rail lines.

The Partisan "problem" really started as soon as the German invasion began. In the early phases of this war, German anti-partisan efforts were relatively successful. German Police and rear area units usually were able to secure and neutralize the attackers quickly. As the war progressed, Partisan activities were more and more successful in disrupting German rail traffic - often with disastrous consequences for the Germans. For example, during the month of September 1943, an average of 64 attacks per day were taking place against German trains.

One of the consequences of the increased Partisan activities was that German armored trains now found themselves more and more engaged in rear area security duties than in supporting front line units and direct military operations.

Source:  http://www.feldgrau.com/dreichsbahn.html
[/font][font="arial"]

[/font]

[alfonso]

ORIGINAL: Pelton

Russian population 170 million

Russian population in 1995 was only 150 million. It has yet to recover from Hitler and Stalin.

Pelton

It seems to me that you are comparing the pre-war Soviet population with the 1995 Russian population.

The Russian population in 1939 was about 110 million, and the Soviet population in 1990 was 290 million.

But, of course you are right in your claim that the combined effect of Hitler and Stalin was a heavy blow to the demography and economy of Russia/USSR

[KenchiSulla]

ORIGINAL: Pelton

The fact is the Germans were winning the war of attrition vs Russia.

If not for the western allies Germany would have won the war in the east.

Pelton

Ofcourse the opening of additional fronts helped defeat Germany but to say that the axis were winning the war in the east by a war of attrition...

Meh.. unfounded...

[Mehring]

ORIGINAL: Pelton
The facts are the Soviets out right lied about figures, because they did not want to get shot by Stalin. Stalin killed more of his own poeple then Hitler did while in power.

GHC figures when the numbers have been looked into the past 10 yrs were the most accurate of all nations, because they had several commands that counted the same stats. So one could check the numbers vs other branches.

The fact is the Germans were winning the war of attrition vs Russia.

Russian population 170 million
German Population 86 million.

Combat ratio 3.5 to 1

The myth of unending manpower was a myth created by Stalin and beleived by the world.

If not for the western allies Germany would have won the war in the east.

Russia was putting kids, old men and woman into service by late-44.

Hopefully WiTW will reflect history and not myths created by a doomed Empire.

Russian population in 1995 was only 150 million. It has yet to recover from Hitler and Stalin.

Pelton

OMG, there's only so much crazy eyed mouth froth I can take on a Sunday afternoon.

[heliodorus04]

ORIGINAL: elmo3

Some interesting excerpts from an article on the rail situation on the Eastern Front:

[font="arial"]

...German military railroad planners made one critical error in their Barbarossa calculations - they did not take the primitiveness of the Soviet interior into account when planning for their attack. This would cost the Germans dearly later.[/font]

...[font="arial"] In fact, the majority of the Soviet rail line network was the same as it had been for the Czars armies 20 years earlier.

[/font][font="arial"]...Signals and rail safety efforts were primitive when compared to German or western European standards. Except for large urban areas, few switches were electrically operated.

[/font][font="arial"]...Only the Kharkhov to Moscow double track line was placed onto a proper bed. The rest of the soviet rail network was placed onto sandy beds, or the ties were simply tapped lightly into the existing ground. The lower the engineering standard of the railway bed, the lower the amount of weight which could traverse same.

[/font][font="arial"]...Many of the existing railroad bridges of European Russia were in fact temporary structures. Most of the bridges were built during the First World War to satisfy the military needs of the Czars' Army in 1914-1917. Some of these temporary bridges were in fact manufactured of sheet steel and simply riveted together. By German and western European standards, these temporary bridges were of no value for the heavier trains (carrying heavier tanks and so on) of the late 1930's and early 1940's.

[/font][font="arial"]...Soviet coal was not of optimal quality locomotives even by Soviet standards. A number of the larger Soviet rail yards contained coal-processing plants which soaked the Donets coal in (bunker) oil before it was suitable for use in locomotives. Frequently, wood was used as a substitute for coal, especially in the northern regions of the Soviet Union.

[/font][font="arial"]...Soviet water for locomotives was also not of optimal value. For example, on the rail line between Dniepropetrovsk and Stalino, at each of the 11 water towers, a separate additive had to be mixed with the water to prevent boiler scales from forming in the locomotives.

[/font][font="arial"]...All along the 1939-1941 Soviet-German border, the Soviets had re-built all of their border rail centers to only allow for through traffic. All marshaling yards and other major railroad transportation and workshop facilities near the western Soviet border areas were removed to prevent the Germans from making use of same in case they attacked. This precaution in fact slowed the Germans down during their advance and it also created difficulties for them during the retreats of 1943, 1944 and 1945.

[/font][font="arial"]...Germany did not posses enough qualified personnel to manage the Soviet rail system effectively. She would have to supplement her forces with local nationals.

[/font][font="arial"]...As is well known, Heeresgruppe Nord (HGrN) was assigned to fight on the northern wing of the invasion front. Heeresgruppe Mitte (HGrM) formed the middle wing and Heeresgruppe Sued (HGrS) was in the south. All three were ordered to penetrate as far as they could and seize key Soviet railheads and bridges intact. Regretfully for the Germans, with a number of exceptions, the Soviets were able to destroy nearly every bridge the Germans needed as the Soviet forces retreated eastwards.

Partisans are mentioned as well:

[/font][font="arial"]No discussion of German rail during WWII would be complete without a discussion of the impact Soviet Partisans had on German rear area rail lines.

The Partisan "problem" really started as soon as the German invasion began. In the early phases of this war, German anti-partisan efforts were relatively successful. German Police and rear area units usually were able to secure and neutralize the attackers quickly. As the war progressed, Partisan activities were more and more successful in disrupting German rail traffic - often with disastrous consequences for the Germans. For example, during the month of September 1943, an average of 64 attacks per day were taking place against German trains.

One of the consequences of the increased Partisan activities was that German armored trains now found themselves more and more engaged in rear area security duties than in supporting front line units and direct military operations.

Source:  http://www.feldgrau.com/dreichsbahn.html
[/font][font="arial"]

[/font]

Again, I do not care about history, because the Soviet army in WitE is entirely divorced from the reality it suffered in 1941.

I care about gameplay.

Neat recreation of history on paper: completely un-balancing given the gampelay criteria on which Germany depends.

People who want to beat Germany should beat Germany and quit allowing game balance decisions to force the Soviet to hide behind passive game mechanics for victory.

[Jakerson]

ORIGINAL: TulliusDetritus

Heliodorus, aren't they trying to slow down the pace of operations with that new rule? It is a simple fact that operations are way too fast (not realistic).

This was exactly the first big issue when WitP appeared. Too fast, too far. And historical counterparts could not do that in the first place.

By the way, I am reading Zhukov Memories... the 1941 Red Army was not that shabby. Suffice to say that Germans were stopped one month near Smolensk (AGC, main push). They also managed to defeat the mighty panzers in Leningrad Area. Zhukov even says that some German armored hordes could have been "annihilated" near Leningrad hadn't they been helped by an infantry corps... And yet we have ants [:D]

Now try to resist ONE month (4 turns) in the game near Smolensk (and I mean with the German hordes -armored forces included- next to you)... I would call anyone saying that a lunatic...

Could not agree more some of my opponents reach front of Leningrad two month faster than German were able to do historically. Still Soviets are tied up to historical appearance of reinforcements and troops with don’t arrive two month earlier like Germans are able to do and this happens even when I do more heavier resistance in the north that happened historically but German use only army group north historical OOB there.

This is simple reason why I am not big fan of making German logistics even easier than it is already. Historically German logistics could not support pace of advance what players are able to archive already.

[pompack]

MG, there's only so much crazy eyed mouth froth I can take on a Sunday afternoon.

Shouldn't that be "finger froth" [:D]

Very few of us have voice to text conversion [;)]

[Mehring]

ORIGINAL: pompack

MG, there's only so much crazy eyed mouth froth I can take on a Sunday afternoon.

Shouldn't that be "finger froth" [:D]

Very few of us have voice to text conversion [;)]

I may have been caught on this technicality before. It's just I'm uncomfortable with the mental image conjured by 'finger froth'.