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

[Chuck Sutherland]

In the original WiE computer game the soviet setup allows a massive 
german airdrop that cuts off all of AGC and AGS! I know about the city 
loss rules, the russians are still going to run away, they will leave 
enough to hold the cities but that is it and after turn 5 its see ya in 
the south!

Wardall Clark wrote:
> In my WitE Games, the Russians are always subject to the Shock of War 
> rule;
> If Both Riga & Odessa fall by the 2nd week the Soviets LOSE.  If Kiev, 
> Minsk
> Riga and Odessa all fall by turn 5's end, the Soviets LOSE;  Game over 
> end of
> story.   The run-away strategy is allowable, only if in conjunction 
> with a
> hedge-hogging of the Personnel centers for the opening weeks of the 
> campaign.
>  
>  
> The only reason that there is no such rule in WIE is that (a) the 
> Soviets don't start with
> zero hexes in a fortified state. (b)  The Germans might begin their 
> invasion with surprise
> 1940 parachute drops and amphibious assaults during some week in which 
> the Soviets' garrisons
> are in transition.
>
> 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
> > ***************************************
>
>
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------
> Windows Live Hotmail and Microsoft Office Outlook – together at last. 
> Get it now! 
> <http://office.microsoft.com/en-us/outlook/HA102225181033.aspx?pid=CL100626971033> 
>
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------
>
> _______________________________________________
> 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