[WarInEur] RE: WarInEur Digest, Vol 39, Issue 7

Mon Oct 8 13:50:08 EDT 2007

I must be misunderstanding you. When I attack 3 x 1-4  they all three die on any result 
of DE, EX, or HX.  The trade is 3 Soviet infantry divisions destroyed per 6-5 flipped.  When out of
supply the Germans must lose 3 x 2 =6 factors in an exchange and so only a single division 
flips.

Chuck you need to check your math.   Incidently, unless there is another unit in the hex, a fortified
unit may has no ZOC and hence doesn't block the supply lines of units that choose to bypass it. 
BOB

> Date: Mon, 8 Oct 2007 12:00:21 -0400> From: warineur-request at mailman.halisp.net> Subject: WarInEur Digest, Vol 39, Issue 7> To: warineur at mailman.halisp.net> > Send WarInEur mailing list submissions to> warineur at mailman.halisp.net> > To subscribe or unsubscribe via the World Wide Web, visit> http://mailman.halisp.net/mailman/listinfo/warineur> or, via email, send a message with subject or body 'help' to> warineur-request at mailman.halisp.net> > You can reach the person managing the list at> warineur-owner at mailman.halisp.net> > When replying, please edit your Subject line so it is more specific> than "Re: Contents of WarInEur digest..."> > > Today's Topics:> > 1. Re: RE: WarInEur Digest, Vol 39, Issue 4 (Chuck Sutherland)> > > ----------------------------------------------------------------------> > Message: 1> Date: Mon, 08 Oct 2007 08:33:27 -0400> From: Chuck Sutherland <csutherland at gamewoodinc.com>> Subject: Re: [WarInEur] RE: WarInEur Digest, Vol 39, Issue 4> Cc: warineur at mailman.halisp.net> Message-ID: <470A2397.8000808 at gamewoodinc.com>> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed> > A smart Russian will not stand and defend Minsk, Riga, Odessa, or even > Kiev, he will pull back out of overrun range and setup the quickstep > defense and only defend Leningrad to in supply attacks in 41! Placing 3 > 1-4 one in each hex extending east will stop all overruns by out of > supply germans, this will force you to trade minor allies or 6-5 for > single 1-4s! While the russian builds up his defense for 42 and makes a > few arty to crush oos germans in winter 41-42. Using the quickstep > forces the trades if the germans want to make ground, thus the minor > allies of Hungry, and Rumania take the brunt of the losses in the > south. The german army is also better off building as much 6-5 as they > can to allow those exchanges to try and bleed the russians ability to > put out 4-4 and 5-5.> > > Wardall Clark wrote:> > I just "played" the Barbarossa Scenario without attrition or any any > > air units, In the five weeks> > before the heavy Russian first Cycle's reinforcement could be > > railroaded to the front, my axis managed to> > fatally compromise the Soviets ability to hold, Odessa, Minsk and > > Riga, and was manuevering to do the> > same with Keiv. How did this happen? I utilized the mobility to armor > > to wiggle into and often through> > any hole that emerged while my infantry ground up the bulk of his > > forces. When the situation called for it,> > I sent 5 mechanized division through the swamp. Two were > > (temporarily) trapped by ZOC but the other three> > emerged to spearhead a two-pronged advance on Kiev.> >> > The computer set up the Soviets so as to not allow any > > meaningful first week breakthroughs such as Hoepner and> > Guderian acheived . However, by the Axis second mechized phase I had > > units on the divina exactly when Von Mansteins > > panzer Corp crossed. The break through at Brest-Livestok was hampered > > by the fact that my russion defense forced a panzer corp into the > > marches. However by beefing up Army Group South with extra Panzers > > and sending the rest north> > to reinforce AG North's spearheads I kept finding weak spots, and when > > I didn't have one I made one by trading> > a few flips to annialate some Soviet stacks that were in the way. > > > > With the Front jumbled I attacked a lot out of supply Soviet stacks > > and my Panzers spent a lot of time out of supply, but that> > didn't stop them from using each mechanized phase to wiggle through > > holes to isolate Soviet units as they tried to fall back in an orderly > > manner. The famed panzer mobility is perfectly well captured by the > > Blitzkrieg rule along with the post combat mechanized> > movement phase.> >> > All of this would work just as well in France except that the ratio of > > units to frontage is too high on both sides. This is> > a problem for other WWII games such as Third Reich as well, the plain > > truth is that the French and British have more than enough> > troops to cover from the channel to the maginot line twice over. The > > only way to create a breakthrough is if the Allies can be induced to > > create a crescent-shaped line, or if some sector is left improperly > > covered. The second of these requires a mistake by the allied > > player. the first is the natural result of the allies plan to defend > > the majority of Belgium. If the Allies advance all the way to the > > dutch border they are taking on a crescent-shaped position that taxes > > the available units.> > > > If the axis player wants to, he can drive to the channel between the > > Belgium forces and the primary allies on his opening opening turn. > > This cuts off Belgium and allows those units to be destroyed in > > detail. Unfortunately, it creates a perfectly straight front, which the> > Major Allies will have no trouble adequately covering in Depth. > > Eventually, the Germans has to resort to the taking of massing his> > High combat factor units where the rivers fail to provide defensive > > doubling and battering his way forward one hex per week.> > > > Even if the Allies "cooperate" with a full scale defense of Belgium > > there are still so many units on the map that Overruns, bypasses> > and breakthroughs will be few and far between by comparison to what > > can happen in Poland or the USSR.> > > > BOB.> >> > > From: warineur-request at mailman.halisp.net> > > Subject: WarInEur Digest, Vol 39, Issue 4> > > To: warineur at mailman.halisp.net> > >> > > Send WarInEur mailing list submissions to> > > warineur at mailman.halisp.net> > >> > > To subscribe or unsubscribe via the World Wide Web, visit> > > http://mailman.halisp.net/mailman/listinfo/warineur> > > or, via email, send a message with subject or body 'help' to> > > warineur-request at mailman.halisp.net> > >> > > You can reach the person managing the list at> > > warineur-owner at mailman.halisp.net> > >> > > When replying, please edit your Subject line so it is more specific> > > than "Re: Contents of WarInEur digest..."> > >> > >> > > Today's Topics:> > >> > > 1. Re: Design issues:- cause &effect (Chuck Sutherland)> > >> > >> > > ----------------------------------------------------------------------> > >> > > Message: 1> > > Date: Fri, 05 Oct 2007 08:43:34 -0400> > > From: Chuck Sutherland <csutherland at gamewoodinc.com>> > > Subject: Re: [WarInEur] Design issues:- cause &effect> > > Cc: warineur at mailman.halisp.net> > > Message-ID: <47063176.8050402 at gamewoodinc.com>> > > Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed> > >> > > Sorry I was away due to a death in my family, so this is old news to > > you> > > but not to me! ;)> > >> > >> > > ------------------------------> > > SGMINFO at aol.com wrote:> > > One of the catch 22 pockets of design, is achieving the desired result,> > > but incorrecting perceiving the influences of real life pressures.> > > Take the perennial problem of airborne divisions. In the classic game,> > > gamers developed the "parachute & Panzer" tactical role of airborne,> > > dropping at every available opportunity to enforce the occupation of > > the> > > hex regardless.> > > Devastating in France against the 3rd Republic, yet impossible to> > > achieve in real life.> > > Airborne were never used repeatedly as part of any operational plan in> > > this manner, by either side, a sort of airborne super artillery.> > > Airborne ops were a relatively rare occurance, absolutely > > devastating in> > > effect when they went right, but needing meticulous planning and some> > > careful thought, before "getting away with it".> > > In the game, that doesn't happen.> > > The conclusion is:- some element is missing.> > > ------------------------------> > >> > >> > > I totally agree the airborne is much to powerful in this game. As for> > > their effect I would say they are over modeled because the armor is> > > under modeled and thus it balances things in game terms. The thing that> > > IS missing is the ability of armor to push through and exploit its> > > mobility, so if you "fix" the para issues no matter how you fix them,> > > unless you address the lack of mobility to exploit with you will be > > left> > > with even a more broken system that acts even more like WWI!> > >> > >> > >> > > ---------------------------------> > > SGMINFO at aol.com wrote:> > > Can that be fixed by changing the factors that influence? or > > introducing> > > a rule to strait jacket the players from straying off the straight and> > > narrow?> > > The latter is clearly the easier concept to apply, but usually> > > completely falls down in the application.> > > For example, cycle all the ATPs in the airdrop for 2 cycles.> > > After Normandy, Germans heave a big sigh of relief, now certain thaat> > > they are free of airborne ops for x turns. As one can see, you can> > > create circumstances where a careful panzer pusher can exploit the> > > nuances created.> > > The nearest method that might work, would be one adding uncertainty to> > > the equation> > > For example, ATPs do not cycle, but go to a pool. In the pool, each> > > survining ATP is subject to a die roll, on a roll of 1 it is recycled.> > > The rolls to be applied each turn, and the "winning" ATPs then take 4> > > weeks to cycle, before being made available once again.> > > This might engender the feeling of restraint in their use, the players> > > realising that airborne resources are delicate, and need careful> > > handling, before all the elements can be brought to concert pitch> > > together again to repeat the exercise.> > > The uncertainty element, tends to act as a brake on the assumptions of> > > the defender, and as a restraining influence on wild continuous > > airborne> > > ops by the attacker.> > > At the moment, used in the classical roll, the units clearly dominate> > > the French campaign in a way that tends to completely skew the gamers'> > > experience of the campaign.> > > On the other hand in the standard game the combination of units and> > > application of the standard rules, almost force the attacker down the> > > same road to resolve the impasse inherent in the defensive interplay of> > > forces.> > > --------------------------------> > >> > > The simple fix is to make the owning player plot 4 turns ahead of time> > > where the drop will take place, this way if reflects the planning > > needed> > > to execute such an operation and also will add the element that says> > > drop even when it seems like a bad decision because they did not > > want to> > > wait another month for the updated plans like the allies did in late> > > summer at Arham. As for forcing a retreat everytime, perhaps retreats> > > should be forced no matter if airborne are used or not unless you are> > > defending a city or fortress or maybe a town, then you should be > > allowed> > > to take a EX to stay in the hex. But allowing attacks during movement> > > would stop people from taking EX's instead of retreats and thus would> > > make paras a moot point. You would have to make cities be able to > > ignore> > > retreats to allow the defenders to hold the hex at least until it was> > > flanked and cut off.> > >> > > -------------------------------> > > SGMINFO at aol.com wrote:> > > Experience of the attrition option raises the spectre of French > > Collapse> > > in 1940 almost every time, without using airborne, so some moderating> > > influence on their arrival may be a necessary balancing agent, to> > > prevent France 1940 going down the road of garranteed defeat in a> > > totally ahistorical manner.> > > I might point out that experience so far with attrition options, is > > that> > > Hitlers fundamental appraisal of the prospects of an autumn campaign> > > seem to be very accurate, more perhaps than he dreamed.> > > Only once have I managed to snatch stalemate (more by luck than design)> > > from the Jaws of defeat in France, and that was without the use of> > > airborne being available to beef up the German attack.> > > ------------------------------> > > What are the computer rules for attrition?> > >> > >> > > ------------------------------> > > SGMINFO at aol.com wrote:> > > So the questions on the strategic level are:-> > > Are the current rules overplaying the tactical role of airborne?> > > Is there a way of restraining without fatally compromising them?> > > If they are restrained, does this have the unintended effect of> > > destroying the balance in the standard classical French campaign? i.e.> > > Making the German mountain too high for them to climb?> > > ------------------------------> > >> > > Yes> > > Yes> > > Yes unless armor is also addressed.> > >> > > --> > > Chuck Sutherland> > > Technology Specialist> > > Gamewood, Inc.> > > 116 South Ridge Street> > > Danville, VA 24541> > > (434) 799-8407 x218> > >> > >> > >> > > ------------------------------> > >> > > _______________________________________________> > > WarInEur mailing list> > > WarInEur at mailman.halisp.net> > > http://mailman.halisp.net/mailman/listinfo/warineur> > >> > >> > > End of WarInEur Digest, Vol 39, Issue 4> > > ***************************************> >> >> > ------------------------------------------------------------------------> > Boo! Scare away worms, viruses and so much more! Try Windows Live > > OneCare! Try now! > > <http://onecare.live.com/standard/en-us/purchase/trial.aspx?s_cid=wl_hotmailnews> > >> > ------------------------------------------------------------------------> >> > _______________________________________________> > WarInEur mailing list> > WarInEur at mailman.halisp.net> > http://mailman.halisp.net/mailman/listinfo/warineur> > > > > -- > Chuck Sutherland> Technology Specialist> Gamewood, Inc.> 116 South Ridge Street> Danville, VA 24541> (434) 799-8407 x218> > > > ------------------------------> > _______________________________________________> WarInEur mailing list> WarInEur at mailman.halisp.net> http://mailman.halisp.net/mailman/listinfo/warineur> > > End of WarInEur Digest, Vol 39, Issue 7> ***************************************
_________________________________________________________________
Climb to the top of the charts!  Play Star Shuffle:  the word scramble challenge with star power.
http://club.live.com/star_shuffle.aspx?icid=starshuffle_wlmailtextlink_oct
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://mailman.halisp.net/pipermail/warineur/attachments/20071008/b187ef8a/attachment-0001.html