Slitherine

quote:

ORIGINAL: notenome

The second suggestion is in regards to pockets. During the first two winters Axis formations were trapped in pockets (Demjansk and Stalingrad were probably the most famous) yet still resisted for months. I'd suggest that a unit trapped in a pocket, whilst still suffering from increased attrition and having its morale degrade slowly, should make a morale check (d100 vs current morale). If it passes the morale check negative combat penalties and lowered CV values are negated for that turn. This should allow for high morale units (of which the Axis have plenty in the first two years) to survive in pockets for a while, but getting progressively weaker.

This could of course be tweaked in several different ways: for example, the TOE of a unit must be higher than 50% or it automaticaly fails, or perhaps you make it a morale and an experience check, each reducing penalties (so if a unit passes both it defends at 100% for the turn) etc.

quote:

ORIGINAL: Tarhunnas

I believe just take 5 MPs off of the German motorized units, and no Soviet rail movement for units starting west of a line running through Smolensk should do it.

quote:

ORIGINAL: jaw

I made a radical suggestion to the development team that got absolutely no response that the simplest solution to the first turn issues, not just for the 41 Campaign but for the first turn of all campaigns/scenarios, is to have the AI make the first player's move. I called this solution the "Historical First Turn" option. By having the computer execute the first player's first move based on how those operations were conducted historically (with some random variation) we would not only avoid issues like the "Lvov Gambit" on the first turn of Barbarossa but the problem that perfect intelligence causes for the first turn of any campaign/scenario in an IGOUGO game. This option would not be difficult to incorporate into the game since the AI is already scripted to make these moves for any game the AI is the first player. Since it would be an player option no one would be required to use it but for those players annoyed by first turn exploits of the game system it would be an easy way to restore balance without circumscribing the capabilities of either side.

quote:

The first turn movement rules for the Germans were set up to allow the Germans to do what they did historically. In the north and center they do this (plus or minus a hex or so). Cutting to 50% would put them way behind schedule. In the south, the issue has always been the German ability to loan units to AGS and create the Lvov pocket.

quote:

ORIGINAL: Rufus T. Firefly

quote:

The first turn movement rules for the Germans were set up to allow the Germans to do what they did historically. In the north and center they do this (plus or minus a hex or so). Cutting to 50% would put them way behind schedule. In the south, the issue has always been the German ability to loan units to AGS and create the Lvov pocket.

Please excuse me because I am not as well read on the subject as many of you obviously are, but if the German mobility and attack strength is about right (accepting Joel's presumption), then it would seem that the Germans may well have been able to form a Lvov pocket had they chosen to do so. If anyone can prove otherwise I will stand corrected.

So given the above, isn't it correct to say that the problem is not with WitE itself, but with the nature of wargames in general? Players will employ 20/20 hindsight, both in terms of what happened historically and what they have learned from previous games (not to mention AARs!) in order to improve their play and their chances of "winning". Personally, I don't see anything wrong with that. I understand that not everyone agrees, but to me the fun of wargames is in testing different what ifs and seeing if I could do better than historical outcomes. I don't see a lot of point in just trying to replay history exactly.

My solution to this issue (here I go again ). Is to allow both players a free setup with reasonable limits. Now the Russian player can turn the tables by using his hindsight to create a better initial defense, which of course the German player may be able to counter with his setup, but this adds an additional level of challenge, embraces the fact that we have perfect hindsight that we can't get around, and creates more variety in the game.

quote:

ORIGINAL: Rufus T. Firefly

That's an interesting idea. However, I have to say that it is certainly not too hard to form the standard (not the extended one) pocket without borrowing units from PzGrp 2.

quote:

ORIGINAL: map66

Part of the problem is that the game doesn't model that the Germans were not as well prepared in the south as they were in the center and the north, especially logistically, due to the diversions necessary for the Balkan campaign. In game terms, obviously, one rail head can be used be used to support an unlimited number of panzers--- something that sounds like it will be modeled better in WiTW, but for now allows a rather a-historical diversion of forces south and the resulting Lvov pocket.

One possible solution would be to have the turn 1 surprise rules not be in effect south of certain line--- i.e. German units that operate south of there pay normal movement and attack costs. This might do a decent job of modelling the relative German un-preparedness in the south and the relatively higher performance of the Soviet units in that area. Obviously, any units from Army Group Center moved south of the line would start to pay the higher movement costs, and my suspicion is that this might eliminate the Lvov pocket as an option, or make its implementation much more of a trade off then it is now.

quote:

ORIGINAL: notenome

With 20/20 hindsight or a million/million hindsight the Germans wouldn't have been able to form the Lvov pocket. Firstly, the Lvov pocket was pretty much what OKH wanted to do, trap the Soviets vs the Romanian border. The problem was the incredibly large number of Soviet mechanized forces that attacked the Germans in what became a series of meeting engagements (including the largest tank battle of all time at Dubno) combined with Soviet resistance in the swamps which created an elongated right flank.

To Joel:

I agree with the first turn rules except its only three days! By the end of turn 1 (again, 3 days) the Germans hadn't created the large pockets or reached the Dvina in the north. That took a week. Not 3 days. That's the sticking point for me, to advance 200, 250 miles in 3 days was impossible at that time (and still very hard in this day and age). The only commander to do so was Rommel, because he rufueled his puppies at civilian gas stations. Also, what about the unit isolation idea?