[WarInEur] strategic surprise rule - more lipstick for the piggy!; )

[Chuck Sutherland]

Its' nice to know you enjoy WWI! Only problem is its not WWI! Its not a 
strategic game it is scaled down enough to allow operational issues to 
enter the mix, otherwise it would be a corps vs army scale game!

Noel & Pamela wrote:
> Why would I disagree with this?
>
> Perfectly true and correct - as far as it goes.
>
> Not much of a game though, at this scale.  Doctrine belongs to a different
> scale.  If you want to play a game of sweeping tactical movements, go play
> Squad Leader.  Or design something else and leave WIE alone.  WIE is a
> strategic game and this is just the way I like it.  The scale is much too
> big for you, except maybe in Russia, for a time.
>
> You shouldn't be able to make headway in this game against ANY competent
> player on either side.  You know too much - the real commanders on the
> ground didn't know anywhere enough - they didn't even know if Tanks were any
> good in rough terrain, whether Strategic Bombing could win a war, or if the
> French and the Italians even knew which end of a gun was the pointy one.
> Ultimately everyone failed to come to grips with not knowing what was even
> possible, let alone even practical, except maybe Russia for a time.  Only
> the massive material and ultimately personnel advantage of the Allies
> eventually creamed the Axis.
>
> By the way, France falling late has nothing to do with it.  The Brits ruling
> in North Africa is because the Brits should have.  If the idiot politicians
> had let the Army et al crush the Italians and not have them embark on
> ridiculous Greek expeditions etc., there would have been NO North Africa
> campaign.  No Rommel; no Monty.  No threat to Suez.
>
> But then again - Hitler might have seen the light.  Invaded Malta, supplied
> a different Africa Corps properly, stayed out of Russia until Western Europe
> was secure, and then ruled the world...
>
>
> And lastly, I CAN stop the Allies in 1944 now - again because I know too
> much.  And I'm not an evil madman who wrecks any chance of a proper defence.
> THAT is really my gripe; not everyone is that competent and I can win
> against them. You want to deny me that chance because it is ahistorical.  
>
> regards,
> Noel 
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Chuck Sutherland [mailto:csutherland at gamewoodinc.com] 
> Sent: Thursday, December 13, 2007 7:45 AM
> To: Noel & Pamela
> Cc: warineur at mailman.halisp.net
> Subject: Re: [WarInEur] strategic surprise rule - more lipstick for the
> piggy!; )
>
>
> You do not have the ability to change you tactical doctrine no matter 
> how much you know you as the Leader of your country can not provide the 
> data that was acquired in combat. The allies over time adapted to the 
> modern war style the Germans were using. Dieppe was a learning 
> experience for the British, and a very bad defeat, only in time did they 
> gain the ability to partially counter the German methods.
>
> As for history, I do not want to condemn you to have to repeat history, 
> certainly strategic choices can be made differently, I do want to free 
> you from the WWI style positional play that happens in the middle of the 
> game, where in 1942 except for the para terror attacks you can make 
> little headway in Russia, and later when Patton is ready to rumble allow 
> him to break the German defenses and go off to the races.
>
> Once you restore the mobility the choice of where you take things is up 
> to you, you can follow history, and that is something you can't do now 
> against a competent player or either side. I would be in favor of just 
> changing the French combat values for the second line units to a 2's or 
> 1's but this would only fix France and not address the root cause and 
> that is armor/mobile units can't use that mobility to break through a 
> weak spot and exploit.
>
> Again I challenge you to play the 1940 scenario and give the French all 
> their forces from the 39 scenario + reinforcements and let them setup 
> freely. Use 2 mp for overruns and 1 mp for zoc, applying the blitz zoc 
> rules and watch what happens to your standard double line defense. You 
> can't stop the Germans and its a very scary feeling to be out of control 
> and in total reaction mode trying to stem the tide of armor exploiting 
> into your rear areas. The alternative is a WWI style combat that is 
> about as exciting as watching grass grow!
>
> All things are connected, the brits ruling in NA is caused by France 
> lasting to long, dealing with the root cause, that of mobility in combat 
> will begin to fix the real issues, then you can deal with the para 
> effects and take away the forced retreats because you won't need them to 
> take territory etc.
>
> If you want to see how poorly the combat system is modeled play without 
> paras. Once the russians start using 9-6/5-5/AT combinations to hold 
> critical hexes you will not advance till you have 13-8's, and later you 
> will only take ground when the germans decide to allow you to take it.
>
> As for stopping the Russians or Allied in 44, if you have enough panzers 
> around and the air power I think you should be able to rock their world!
>
> Noel & Pamela wrote:
>   
>>> Doesn't matter if there are a million players play testing if you 
>>> can't
>>> match history! Historical movement 1940 May 16-21, 5 days Germans move 
>>> 100+ miles, 5 hexes in a week against France.
>>>     
>>>       
>> Disagree completely.
>>
>> To allow this to occur would require me, as the Cwlth commander, to 
>> perform as incompetently as the real Cwlth commanders did - and I know 
>> everything that they didn't know, and I can't forget that.
>>
>> Any simulation that provides exact historical recreation is a 
>> wonderful thing to behold, but is also a boring and completely DEAD 
>> letter.  I want to NOT repeat history as the defender.  All you want 
>> to do is condemn me to watching a rerun overwhich I have no control.
>>
>> And as the German in 1944, I want to stop the Russian juggernaut, and 
>> the Normandy invasion - but you won't let that happen, as that doesn't 
>> replicate history.
>>
>> No, No a 1000 times NO.
>>
>>
>> regards,
>> Noel
>>
>> -----Original Message-----
>> From: warineur-bounces at mailman.halisp.net
>> [mailto:warineur-bounces at mailman.halisp.net] On Behalf Of Chuck 
>> Sutherland
>> Sent: Wednesday, November 14, 2007 9:40 AM
>> To: sgminfo
>> Cc: Wardall Clark; warineur at mailman.halisp.net
>> Subject: Re: [WarInEur] strategic surprise rule - more lipstick for the
>> piggy!;)
>>
>>
>> Doesn't matter if there are a million players play testing if you 
>> can't
>> match history! Historical movement 1940 May 16-21, 5 days Germans move 
>> 100+ miles, 5 hexes in a week against France. Does the changes so far
>> proposed allow this to happen?
>>
>> http://content.answers.com/main/content/wp/en/d/d1/1940FranceBlitz.jpg
>>
>>
>> Attack on the March, limited to only the Mech phase. Germans attack on
>> several hex fronts and move 20 miles in the combat phase. During the 
>> Mech move phase they hit the second line at 3-1 or higher with 2x 8-8 
>> and 2x10-8, using air they get a DR, thats 2+1 mp, they hit a second 
>> stack, another 3-1 or better, they have gained 3 hexes total for 60 
>> miles and if they are free of enemy ZOC they move another 2 hexes for a 
>> total of 5! Historical gains in one week!
>>
>> Attack on the March using both phases, movement phase they hit twice 
>> at
>> 3-1, attack again in the combat phase at 3-1 or better and finish up 
>> with 2 more attacks for a total of 5 hexes taken. If there is a gap they 
>> may do better then 5 hexes if the French player has not defended very 
>> deep. And considering there is a real chance of an exchange or BR the 
>> germns will flip a few units in order to gain territory.
>>
>>
>>
>> France falls quickly, very much like historical time lines. Sealion 
>> now
>> has several months to be a threat and keep the English home to protect 
>> against invasion. Because a majority of English divisions are home, the 
>> Germans and Italians can build up in NA with a much better chance of 
>> causing some grief instead of being overwhelmed from Tunisia or Egypt 
>> from 20 or more divisions.
>>
>> Thus AOM fixes both France 1940 and North Africa to give the Germans a
>> good start, in the NA battles the Italians can be of use in a defense in 
>> depth and the brits have to watch out for a very mobile opponent.
>>
>> June 1941, again will the changes allow Minsk to fall in the first 
>> turn?
>> If not then the change does not represent the historical gains made by 
>> Germany in the first week of the war.
>> AOM blows open the front allows a movement deep into the USSR, no matter 
>> how the Russians defend.
>>
>> Again historical gains, but it will break the production system 
>> because
>> it was designed without the massive losses the russians suffered in 
>> 1941, so 3 things fixed, one thing broken that needs retooling to up the 
>> numbers of russian troops to slow the germans. Of course this assumes 
>> that the silly AEX for OOS attacks is finally killed.
>>
>>
>> Ok I am officially stopping the snipe hunt for now, I know I am a pain
>> with this argument, but I know that I want to see this baby sing at 
>> blitz speed. It can if we have the guts to try! For the record I am FOR 
>> ANY change that brings historical abilities for the mech forces of all 
>> nations and know that this is what is being worked for, I just want the 
>> hole deal.
>>
>> As for Europa, any system where the armor hides behind the infantry,
>> comes out and attacks and then hides again to protect against being hit 
>> by the other sides armor is silly! At least that is how it played the 
>> last time I looked at it.
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> sgminfo wrote:
>>   
>>     
>>> Well there should be a surfeit of players on the list here with
>>> experience of that particular animal, so these will not be slow in 
>>> coming to the mark...
>>>
>>> :-)
>>>
>>> -|steve|-
>>>
>>> Chuck Sutherland wrote:
>>>     
>>>       
>>>> Yes but taking small baby steps to towards a mobile combat system
>>>> means that you have to rebalance and re playtest it anyway, so you 
>>>> are already doing the extra work but not gaining the goal of showing 
>>>> off the blitzkrieg style of combat. We we will take 20 small steps 
>>>> over the course of what 20 years maybe and end up in the same place.
>>>>
>>>> Lets just make the quantum leap and get on with it! That way we are
>>>> talking about maybe 3-5 years to test the options.
>>>>
>>>> The subroutines are already there, the combat system just simply
>>>> needs to be able to be turned on when the overrun code is triggered, 
>>>> a flag setting combat during movement on, the costs of overruns is 
>>>> already recorded in the code at 2 mp. The Russian production system 
>>>> is already coded, all that is needed is to make it work during the 
>>>> weekly turns, again a flag to turn it on, the only change there might 
>>>> be moving from a cycle count to a turn count for entry of units.
>>>>
>>>> After that its a matter of tuning the production to give increased
>>>> 1-4 and 1-3 production while turning down the 4-4s to make them stay 
>>>> level with that is currently being produced.
>>>>
>>>> Even if the AEX could be turned off by using a flag,
>>>>
>>>> If you move the Minsk training center to Lenningrad, the combat and
>>>> movement system should allow the Germans to reach and take Minsk on 
>>>> the first turn of the war. If you use the historical 1940 scenario 
>>>> you should be able to take france out in 6 weeks, if you can't then 
>>>> you have not reached the proper mobility levels. I think the counter 
>>>> mix will allow it without any renumbering of counter strengths.
>>>>
>>>> If I knew how to use cyberboard and thought there was an outside
>>>> chance that we could actually get to this level of change I would 
>>>> playtest the hell out of the system proposals.
>>>>
>>>> sgminfo wrote:
>>>>       
>>>>         
>>>>> The caveat is, as always, change only one thing at a time as you
>>>>> experiment, moving the goal posts in 3 dimensions simultaneously is 
>>>>> apt to give unexpected results as players find new ways to exploit 
>>>>> your new environment to the limits. Moving many variables tends to 
>>>>> leave you with a new game and a heap load of playtesting to sort out 
>>>>> the unexpected.
>>>>>
>>>>> ..as the beta test group have found...
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> -|steve|-
>>>>>
>>>>> Chuck Sutherland wrote:
>>>>>         
>>>>>           
>>>>>> Oh its actually pretty easy, just allow the Russians to build 
>>>>>> units
>>>>>> each turn instead of every four turns and lower the number of units 
>>>>>> built except for 1-3 and 1-4s to 1. Historically during the active 
>>>>>> campaign the Russians lost between 3.5 and 4 million men in 41. 
>>>>>> Based on the starting OOB and the militia that is added, you have 
>>>>>> to be able to produce about 320-350 1-4 to match the manpower on 
>>>>>> the eastern front. So in about 4 production cycles you need about 
>>>>>> 20 training centers pushing out 1-4s if you were using the normal 
>>>>>> production rules.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Thus my conclusion is the Russian 1-4 cannon fodder production is
>>>>>> way down, the reason is to compensate for the lack of mobility and 
>>>>>> the AEX OOS supply effects.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Every suggestion that has been talked about, is a bandage of sorts
>>>>>> for the flaw in the combat system and the lack of mobile combat 
>>>>>> that is partially made up by parachute units. So the current combat 
>>>>>> system has the Paras as the most important ground unit for taking 
>>>>>> territory instead of armor, because armor can be stopped by 3 
>>>>>> points worth of defenders or less if there is a river involved!
>>>>>>
>>>>>> So we can apply a small bandage here and there like was done
>>>>>> originally aka lower then historical Russian production, over 
>>>>>> modeled parachute effects and continue to past and plaster adding 
>>>>>> additional lipstick to the pig in the hopes that something pretty 
>>>>>> will finally show up, or you can bite the bullet and take apart the 
>>>>>> combat system and restructure it so that is models historical results.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Right now even with surprise, you can't model France 1940, you
>>>>>> can't model Russia 1941 on, and because France is broken you can't 
>>>>>> model North Africa because Sealion is not as big a threat as it 
>>>>>> would be in middle of summer 1940.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Unless you can drop France in six weeks and take Minsk on turn one
>>>>>> of Barbarossa you have not modeled the historical abilities of the 
>>>>>> German army in early WWII! Does the optional rule allow this to 
>>>>>> take place????
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> sgminfo wrote:
>>>>>>           
>>>>>>             
>>>>>>> Given that Chuck points out the 'hazards in terms of
>>>>>>> implementation, i.e. additional work on ob and counter sets, 
>>>>>>> nothing need be said on that poont...but a consideration that 
>>>>>>> might be useful in the implementation of such a rule.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Painting the extreme case,
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> the penetration and exploitation of a line, without the defender
>>>>>>> being able to physically react because of the strictures of the 
>>>>>>> game turn (alternate phase sequencing)...one might consider 
>>>>>>> reaction movement, or a variation thereto.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> i.e. The Arnhem situation, where airborne land and XXX corps
>>>>>>> double match throught the German line, and past a SS Panzer 
>>>>>>> division, through Zocs and into a link up...
>>>>>>> Instead of the German division being totally passive, and the zoc 
>>>>>>> being totally fluid, one might have the ability to enmesh someone 
>>>>>>> in a zoc, such that they have to stop...
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> This might thereby allow well found and rested reserves to really
>>>>>>> act as a 'firebrigade ' style unit as operational reserves tend to 
>>>>>>> do...
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> There might be a trigger die roll, based on the strength
>>>>>>> (attrition) and training (crt number) of the units in reserve, 
>>>>>>> that modify the capabilities...so an Italian 1-4 on crt 4 might 
>>>>>>> not have reaction abilities, or reaction abilities are resytricted 
>>>>>>> to mechanised and or elite units...
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> But it is an idea to think about...
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> The key element is allowing the defender not to be so unhinged
>>>>>>> (given a moderately balanced situation), that he is in defeat 
>>>>>>> before he can roll with the blow and punch back...
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> -|steve|-
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Don Lazov wrote:
>>>>>>>             
>>>>>>>               
>>>>>>>> Chuck,
>>>>>>>>  
>>>>>>>> Are your combat on the move ideas similar to OCS during movement
>>>>>>>> overruns?
>>>>>>>>  
>>>>>>>> For those not in the know, in OCS during your movement phase (or
>>>>>>>> the enemy's reaction movement phase) you may overrun units, in 
>>>>>>>> this sense overrun is just like combat but you do it in the 
>>>>>>>> movement phase by expending MP to overrun a hex, you may not even 
>>>>>>>> take the hex, but cause losses (to both your self and his forces).
>>>>>>>>  
>>>>>>>> Again in OCS the only units that have a ZOC are units in Combat
>>>>>>>> mode.
>>>>>>>>  
>>>>>>>>  
>>>>>>>> --
>>>>>>>> Don Lazov
>>>>>>>> ~Best Regards
>>>>>>>>  
>>>>>>>>               
>>>>>>>>                 
>>>>>>           
>>>>>>             
>>>>       
>>>>         
>>   
>>     
>
>
>   


-- 
Chuck Sutherland
Technology Specialist
Gamewood, Inc.
116 South Ridge Street
Danville, VA 24541
(434) 799-8407 x218