Matrix Games Forums

 Forums  Register  Login  Photo Gallery  Member List  Search  Calendars  FAQ 

My Profile  Inbox  Address Book  My Subscription  My Forums  Log Out

Capture of Minsk

 
View related threads: (in this forum | in all forums)

Logged in as: Guest
Users viewing this topic: none
  Printable Version
All Forums >> [Current Games From Matrix.] >> [World War II] >> Norm Koger's The Operational Art Of War III >> Capture of Minsk Page: <<   < prev  17 18 19 [20] 21   next >   >>
Login
Message << Older Topic   Newer Topic >>
Capture of Minsk - 12/30/2009 3:50:32 PM   
larryfulkerson


Posts: 39932
Joined: 4/17/2005
From: Tucson, AZ
Status: offline 		Hey dudes: I captured Minsk in turn 6. Just shoved some Soviet arty aside and walked in.




Attachment (1)

(in reply to sPzAbt653)
Post #: 571
RE: Capture of Minsk - 12/30/2009 4:41:53 PM   
TPOO

 

Posts: 180
Joined: 11/15/2007
From: Garden Grove, CA
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: larryfulkerson

Hey dudes: I captured Minsk in turn 6. Just shoved some Soviet arty aside and walked in.






Larry,

Historically it was probably not safe for Soviet troops to be located in Minsk as the Luftwaffe destroyed 80% of the city. Gamewise we wanted this area to be loosely defended and not be too much of a bottleneck for the advancing Axis as the Axis historically captured Minsk much faster than can be done in the scenario. However, if an Axis player takes too long to secure the Minsk area Elmer could move more newly deployed units into this area causing a bottleneck for the advancing Axis units.

(in reply to larryfulkerson)
Post #: 572
RE: Capture of Minsk - 12/30/2009 6:35:12 PM   
larryfulkerson


Posts: 39932
Joined: 4/17/2005
From: Tucson, AZ
Status: offline 		Okay...I recognize you now.  Thanks for the info Rick.  You're a walking encyclopedia from what I understand.  Thanks for the update.

There may be some people that don't know that I'm publishing an AAR on my playtest of D21 and I'm already on turn 6. You could find the url's for the download of each turn's AAR but I've organized them for you in the list below:

D21's AAR files:
turn 1:http://www.mediafire.com/?x5zywyzjexz
turn 2:http://www.mediafire.com/?mon1nlyntlm
turn 3:http://www.mediafire.com/?zyzwvdj42dq
turn 4:http://www.mediafire.com/?nmgudmamzdi
turn 5:http://www.filedropper.com/d2122dec2009turn5

EDIT: fixed the links that didn't seem to work. Thanks for the tip James.

< Message edited by larryfulkerson -- 2/18/2010 8:27:21 AM >

(in reply to TPOO)
Post #: 573
RE: Directive 21 playtesters thread - 1/2/2010 7:54:40 PM   
freeboy

 

Posts: 9088
Joined: 5/16/2004
From: Colorado
Status: offline 		did this new scenario get released? thanks guys

(in reply to sPzAbt653)
Post #: 574
RE: Directive 21 playtesters thread - 1/2/2010 8:27:09 PM   
sPzAbt653


Posts: 9511
Joined: 5/3/2007
From: east coast, usa
Status: offline 		Not yet Matt. It may be included in the next patch. We're following how Mr. Fulkerson's current playtest goes.

(in reply to freeboy)
Post #: 575
RE: 6-21-42 - 1/2/2010 9:40:34 PM   
ralphtricky


Posts: 6685
Joined: 7/27/2003
From: Colorado Springs
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: larryfulkerson

Here's a situation you don't find every day.  During the Soviet turn 14 Elmer moved an embarked construction unit to a 'defensive' position that doesn't quite defend anything.  He had all kinds of units to move instead but chose the construction unit.  This may not be an artifact of the scenario but I thought somebody might be interested to find out what Elmer does sometimes to shoot himself in the foot.



What happened is that Elmer tried to move the unit up as close to the front as possible. In that case he looked at the last objective and the next objective and saw that
1) the last two friendly held objectives were at least 4 or more hexes apart.
2) drawing a line perpendicular to the line between the last two objectives through the destination hex had no enemy units behind that line.

If any unit of the enemy within about 5 hexes had been 'behind' that line, the unit would have not have disembarked on that hex.

If an objective were added less than 3 hexes away, then Elmer would have checked a circle instead of a perpendicular line and noticed that there was an enemy waiting for him.

I've also modified 3.4 so that entrained/enplaned/embarked move last in a given formation which should help as well.

Let me know if that doesn't make sense, or if I'm wrong. I'm going by conjecture from the picture..

Ralph



_____________________________

Ralph Trickey
TOAW IV Programmer
Blog: http://operationalwarfare.com
---
My comments are my own, and do not represent the views of any other person or entity. Nothing that I say should be construed in any way as a promise of anything.

(in reply to larryfulkerson)
Post #: 576
RE: 6-21-42 - 1/2/2010 10:03:13 PM   
sPzAbt653


Posts: 9511
Joined: 5/3/2007
From: east coast, usa
Status: offline 		I think it makes sense. I don't know about three hexes, four hexes, five hexes, perpendicular lines or circles, but the 'RVGK Construct' units are intended to get in the way at river crossings. Unfortunate that Elmer choose to do it in embarked status, but the unit did manage to get in the way.

(in reply to ralphtricky)
Post #: 577
D21 and 3.4 - 2/8/2010 4:31:58 PM   
TPOO

 

Posts: 180
Joined: 11/15/2007
From: Garden Grove, CA
Status: offline 		Hey everyone. Just to let you know Steve and I are working on having D21 ready with some of the new features in 3.4 when it is released.
This includes having at least 4 of the 5 objective tracks in place as well as updating the new supply rules. Elmer is indeed better in 3.4!

(in reply to sPzAbt653)
Post #: 578
RE: D21 and 3.4 - 2/8/2010 5:22:08 PM   
Silvanski


Posts: 2506
Joined: 1/23/2005
From: Belgium, residing in TX-USA
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: TPOO

Hey everyone. Just to let you know Steve and I are working on having D21 ready with some of the new features in 3.4 when it is released.
This includes having at least 4 of the 5 objective tracks in place as well as updating the new supply rules. Elmer is indeed better in 3.4!

Brilliant!

_____________________________

The TOAW Redux Dude

(in reply to TPOO)
Post #: 579
RE: D21 and 3.4 - 2/8/2010 11:01:56 PM   
Telumar


Posts: 2236
Joined: 1/3/2006
From: niflheim
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: TPOO

Hey everyone. Just to let you know Steve and I are working on having D21 ready with some of the new features in 3.4 when it is released.
This includes having at least 4 of the 5 objective tracks in place as well as updating the new supply rules. Elmer is indeed better in 3.4!


Excellent - this is great news indeed!

_____________________________

http://thetoawbeachhead.wordpress.com

(in reply to TPOO)
Post #: 580
RE: D21 and 3.4 - 2/14/2010 2:12:02 PM   
MechFO

 

Posts: 669
Joined: 6/1/2007
Status: offline 		I'm in turn 65 and have survived the first winter offensive.

Some things one maybe consider:

- increase Soviet Shock to 120 or extend the 95 Axis shock for the entire length of the Soviet Winter Offensive
The reason is that even with the shock bonus, the soviet formations tend to be too weak against rested Axis forces. I was able to more or less stop them cold.

- change the 15cm How in the HQ's to 150mm Guns
I don't see why they should only have a 1 hex range while the 105mm has a 2 hex range. Historically they could reach about 13km.

- Split up some German Inf Divs that arrive in turns 50-65 into Regiments.
By this time the frontline is looong and one could really use the extra unit counters. Splitting up existing Divisions isn't really satisfactory because of the proficiency loss they suffer. Also by this time there will be long static stretches of front, so the added micromanagement is minimal.

- Do something about the Red Air force
The Soviets have uncontested Air Superiority from October 41 onward. The German fighter units can't really do very much to stop them. Evaporated air units are back within a few turns, air fields can't be overrun and it's impossible to make a dent due to production numbers.
I suggest giving the Soviets 100 Shock in 44 (their superiority in counter numbers will be enough to make it ugly for the Germans), 95 in 43, 90 in 42 and 80 in 41 after the first 3 turns.

- add a supply loss for Baku in addition to the production loss. For historical reasons but also to make the Caucasus a more attractive target.

- add a supply bonus for the Axis for the capture of Maikop, with a delay of 50-60 turns. Again, makes a diversion into the Caucasus more attractive and gives the Germans a reason to try and hang onto the region, even at a big cost in terms of a longer frontline.


(in reply to Telumar)
Post #: 581
RE: D21 and 3.4 - 2/14/2010 2:42:36 PM   
BigDuke66


Posts: 2013
Joined: 2/1/2001
From: Terra
Status: offline 		The soviet winter offensive worked so good because Germany did not rest and was in his own offensive when the soviets punched right into the exhausted German units.
I guess in-game it will work the same way if the German player allows it but if he forms a defensive line and prepares himself for the soviet attack well then the results you see seem appropriate, I guess historical it may have went that way too.

And for the soviet air force you have to actively hunt them down especially in the first turns and when you come close enough to a soviet airfield use artillery that way you can get a lot planes.

_____________________________

JOIN The Blitz Wargaming Club
JOIN Napoleonic Wargame Club
JOIN American Civil War Game Club

(in reply to MechFO)
Post #: 582
RE: D21 and 3.4 - 2/14/2010 4:55:25 PM   
sPzAbt653


Posts: 9511
Joined: 5/3/2007
From: east coast, usa
Status: offline 		Thanks for the good input MechFO. I agree with what BigDuke says and I'll add:

quote:

the soviet formations tend to be too weak against rested Axis forces


As the Duke said, rested Axis forces is the key. Most players will not run Barbarossa as Hitler did, therefore we won't find the Germans in the terrible state they were in historically, and the Soviet offensive will not be as successful as it was.

quote:

change the 15cm How in the HQ's to 150mm Guns


Can you or anybody provide more info on this, because they did have 150 howitzers, but the database gives them a 6k range, while the WWII database that I have (sorry I don't know who to credit it to) doesn't have a '150 howitzer' but instead has a 150 sFH18 with a range of 13k. I wonder if the standard database is inaccurate, and if the sFH18 is in fact the howitzer model that the Germans used.

quote:

Split up some German Inf Divs that arrive in turns 50-65 into Regiments.


This makes sense but I won't do it because I believe that the Germans did suffer a loss in proficiency by having to protect such an extended front with insufficient numbers. While I appreciate your views at turn 65, I also have to weigh in on the later turns, when defense is more important than coverage.

quote:

Do something about the Red Air force


Gladly, but I need others to give their opinion, because it seems to this point we are fairly evenly split on the matter. About all I can say is that historically the Soviet numbers made Axis air superiority impossible except in small areas, and if the German player concentrates his airforce in the scenario, that is possible.

Baku, Maikop and Grozny -

I'm a fan of the 'big three' being Leningrad, Moscow, and the Caucasus region (as opposed to Stalingrad, which seems to have been one of the big three only because of Hitler). Penalizing the Soviets for loss of the region doesn't seem appropriate as they still had vast resources untapped in 1940 and early 1941, but developed from mid 1941 on. The Axis would have benefited from occupying the region, but only if they could hold it for an extended period (using Maikop as an historical example). In terms of the scenario, modeling this is problematic. It seems reasonable to increase Axis supply and production for gains in the Caucasus, but only after they have time to develop these resources, and they would end immediately if the Soviets reclaimed the region. Currently, the Axis gain supply and the Soviets lose supply for Maikop, a rather simplistic way to deal with the entire situation, but its something.

(in reply to MechFO)
Post #: 583
RE: D21 and 3.4 - 2/14/2010 5:30:56 PM   
Silvanski


Posts: 2506
Joined: 1/23/2005
From: Belgium, residing in TX-USA
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: MechFO

I'm in turn 65 and have survived the first winter offensive.

Some things one maybe consider:

- increase Soviet Shock

I'm on turn 59 and it seems I'll be able to get through the winter without too much harm done by the Soviets. There are attacks here and there but not on a scale that worries me.
I'd give the Soviets a single turn (for surprise purposes maybe on a 3 turn range somewhere in December) with massive shock

_____________________________

The TOAW Redux Dude

(in reply to MechFO)
Post #: 584
RE: D21 and 3.4 - 2/14/2010 5:45:32 PM   
TPOO

 

Posts: 180
Joined: 11/15/2007
From: Garden Grove, CA
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: MechFO


- Do something about the Red Air force
The Soviets have uncontested Air Superiority from October 41 onward. The German fighter units can't really do very much to stop them. Evaporated air units are back within a few turns, air fields can't be overrun and it's impossible to make a dent due to production numbers.
I suggest giving the Soviets 100 Shock in 44 (their superiority in counter numbers will be enough to make it ugly for the Germans), 95 in 43, 90 in 42 and 80 in 41 after the first 3 turns.





I am not sure which version of D21 you are currently playing but we did make adjustments to the Soviet airforce by reducing 1941 YAK 1 production to historical levels from very overloaded 1941 production numbers. The Axis have the possibility of maintaining air superiority as defined by the game engine until 1942. Also, Elmer will not concentrate all fighters on the front lines so despite the "air superiority number" he technically does not have air superiority in most sectors.

(in reply to MechFO)
Post #: 585
RE: D21 and 3.4 - 2/14/2010 5:51:05 PM   
BigDuke66


Posts: 2013
Joined: 2/1/2001
From: Terra
Status: offline 		Well even if Hitler considered stopping for the winter to finish the soviets off in 42 I bet he still would have been surprised by a soviet offensive especially on a big scale.
And the Wehrmacht would still be not prepared for winter war even when sitting in trenches & bunkers and the soviet would use fresh Siberian troops that were prepared for a winter war.
So an Axis shock under 100 and soviet over 100 seems reasonable.
I don't have TOAW installed at the moment so what shock values are used for the soviet winter offensive?

_____________________________

JOIN The Blitz Wargaming Club
JOIN Napoleonic Wargame Club
JOIN American Civil War Game Club

(in reply to Silvanski)
Post #: 586
RE: D21 and 3.4 - 2/14/2010 6:02:24 PM   
MechFO

 

Posts: 669
Joined: 6/1/2007
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: sPzAbt653

quote:

change the 15cm How in the HQ's to 150mm Guns


Can you or anybody provide more info on this, because they did have 150 howitzers, but the database gives them a 6k range, while the WWII database that I have (sorry I don't know who to credit it to) doesn't have a '150 howitzer' but instead has a 150 sFH18 with a range of 13k. I wonder if the standard database is inaccurate, and if the sFH18 is in fact the howitzer model that the Germans used.


http://www.lexikon-der-wehrmacht.de/Waffen/haubitzen.htm

The plain 150mm How is probably meant to model the sFH 13 of WWI, which had a range of about 8km. The standard 15cm How of WWII was indeed the sFH18 (actually designed in the 30's).

As an aside, nothing in RL justifies the 21cm ER and 150mm ER of the korps Art units either, but in those cases I assumed it was done for game play reasons.

quote:

ORIGINAL: sPzAbt653

quote:

Do something about the Red Air force


Gladly, but I need others to give their opinion, because it seems to this point we are fairly evenly split on the matter. About all I can say is that historically the Soviet numbers made Axis air superiority impossible except in small areas, and if the German player concentrates his airforce in the scenario, that is possible.



quote:

ORIGINAL: TPOO
I am not sure which version of D21 you are currently playing but we did make adjustments to the Soviet airforce by reducing 1941 YAK 1 production to historical levels from very overloaded 1941 production numbers. The Axis have the possibility of maintaining air superiority as defined by the game engine until 1942. Also, Elmer will not concentrate all fighters on the front lines so despite the "air superiority number" he technically does not have air superiority in most sectors.



Fair enough. Im playing the version posted in mid December. To expand a bit, I attacked everything in reach for the first 5 turns, then switched to Interdiction, but have since left his air force alone after a few expensive attacks around turn 30. However, as said, evaporations don't help, and shelling produces too few casualties relative to production to make a difference. IMO the main problem is that the game engine ignores operational losses. A huge percentage of production was lost in this way due to the harsh maintenance conditions. As such, a strategy of attrition is a non starter and balancing has to run via shock values and counter numbers. Shock numbers are probably good enough.

The thing is that I can not stop his air attacks. Even if I concentrate 3-4 fighter counters ~120-160 fighters, I can inflict meaningless (relative to production) losses, while taking those fighters out of the game for 2 turns. While his interdiction isn't playing much of a role currently, his Air Force has been able to influence some combats.

quote:

ORIGINAL: sPzAbt653

Baku, Maikop and Grozny -

I'm a fan of the 'big three' being Leningrad, Moscow, and the Caucasus region (as opposed to Stalingrad, which seems to have been one of the big three only because of Hitler). Penalizing the Soviets for loss of the region doesn't seem appropriate as they still had vast resources untapped in 1940 and early 1941, but developed from mid 1941 on.


http://azer.com/aiweb/categories/magazine/32_folder/32_articles/32_ww22.html

Well, Baku was 75% of Soviet production in 1940. Maikop was actually much less relevant.

quote:

ORIGINAL: sPzAbt653
Currently, the Axis gain supply and the Soviets lose supply for Maikop, a rather simplistic way to deal with the entire situation, but its something.


I know this is the way it is in FITE, but the D21 scenario briefing makes no mention of an Axis Supply increase.



< Message edited by MechFO -- 2/14/2010 6:12:31 PM >

(in reply to sPzAbt653)
Post #: 587
RE: D21 and 3.4 - 2/14/2010 6:43:47 PM   
sPzAbt653


Posts: 9511
Joined: 5/3/2007
From: east coast, usa
Status: offline
quote:

The standard 15cm How of WWII was indeed the sFH18


It seems changing it to the 150 gun would be appropriate, because I'm certainly not going to switch to the WWII database (too much work for one item).

quote:

Baku was 75% of Soviet production in 1940


Yes, but that was in 1940. After that other regions were developed, some with higher production than Baku. So while losing Baku wasn't desirable, it wouldn't have been a great loss. It would have been a great gain for the Germans, but I was using Maikop as an historical premise, meaning that for the scenario I have to consider that the Soviets would have detroyed Baku to the point where the Germans would have to hold it for a long time in order to get it producing.

quote:

the D21 scenario briefing makes no mention of an Axis Supply increase


Thanks, we will add that in.

quote:

what shock values are used for the soviet winter offensive?


The Soviet side may employ winter offensives around turns 49 to 62 (Soviet shock of 115 for 10 turns) and turns 143 to 165 (Soviet shock of 120 for 10 turns).
The German side will experience shock of 95 for 5 turns during these times.

(in reply to MechFO)
Post #: 588
RE: D21 and 3.4 - 3/7/2010 11:00:51 PM   
golden delicious


Posts: 5575
Joined: 9/5/2000
From: London, Surrey, United Kingdom
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: BigDuke66

And for the soviet air force you have to actively hunt them down especially in the first turns and when you come close enough to a soviet airfield use artillery that way you can get a lot planes.


Not exactly historical? Sounds like this needs a fix.

...on turn 7 myself now. The PO seems to have a problem digging in in some situations. I waltzed in to Kiev this turn because the two divisions in the city were on "mobile" status.

_____________________________

"What did you read at university?"
"War Studies"
"War? Huh. What is it good for?"
"Absolutely nothing."

(in reply to BigDuke66)
Post #: 589
RE: D21 and 3.4 - 3/8/2010 2:09:23 AM   
BigDuke66


Posts: 2013
Joined: 2/1/2001
From: Terra
Status: offline 		I think a massive strike on turn one is very historical.

Using artillery is not but that's just because there is no way to damage air units when an airfield is overrun so using artillery is a good"replacement.

_____________________________

JOIN The Blitz Wargaming Club
JOIN Napoleonic Wargame Club
JOIN American Civil War Game Club

(in reply to golden delicious)
Post #: 590
RE: D21 and 3.4 - 3/8/2010 3:00:27 AM   
Silvanski


Posts: 2506
Joined: 1/23/2005
From: Belgium, residing in TX-USA
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: sPzAbt653

quote:

The standard 15cm How of WWII was indeed the sFH18


It seems changing it to the 150 gun would be appropriate, because I'm certainly not going to switch to the WWII database (too much work for one item).

quote:

Baku was 75% of Soviet production in 1940


Yes, but that was in 1940. After that other regions were developed, some with higher production than Baku. So while losing Baku wasn't desirable, it wouldn't have been a great loss. It would have been a great gain for the Germans, but I was using Maikop as an historical premise, meaning that for the scenario I have to consider that the Soviets would have detroyed Baku to the point where the Germans would have to hold it for a long time in order to get it producing.

quote:

the D21 scenario briefing makes no mention of an Axis Supply increase


Thanks, we will add that in.

quote:

what shock values are used for the soviet winter offensive?


The Soviet side may employ winter offensives around turns 49 to 62 (Soviet shock of 115 for 10 turns) and turns 143 to 165 (Soviet shock of 120 for 10 turns).
The German side will experience shock of 95 for 5 turns during these times.

I'd try with German shock down to 90 in 1941... We need to see more Axis formations in reorg

_____________________________

The TOAW Redux Dude

(in reply to sPzAbt653)
Post #: 591
RE: D21 and 3.4 - 3/9/2010 8:23:52 PM   
golden delicious


Posts: 5575
Joined: 9/5/2000
From: London, Surrey, United Kingdom
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: BigDuke66

that's just because there is no way to damage air units when an airfield is overrun so using artillery is a good"replacement.


Were many aircraft lost when airfields were overrun? I suspect that mechanical failure was a bigger problem due to the wonders of Soviet engineering.

I'd suggest adjusting the replacement rate to reflect losses to non-combat causes.

_____________________________

"What did you read at university?"
"War Studies"
"War? Huh. What is it good for?"
"Absolutely nothing."

(in reply to BigDuke66)
Post #: 592
RE: D21 and 3.4 - 3/9/2010 10:41:10 PM   
Abnormalmind


Posts: 200
Joined: 11/24/2009
Status: offline 		This has a lot to do with the PO thresholds. In my game, which is well over turn 200, the Soviets are blowing bridges and digging in everywhere. The PO even launched an air assault on a forward airbase, which was nice to see. Usually the PO bombards some lone engineer crossing a river. lol!

(in reply to golden delicious)
Post #: 593
RE: D21 and 3.4 - 3/9/2010 10:59:30 PM   
larryfulkerson


Posts: 39932
Joined: 4/17/2005
From: Tucson, AZ
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: Abnormalmind
The PO even launched an air assault on a forward airbase, which was nice to see.

Did you see this with your own eyes? Did this actually happen? I'm amazed that the PO would do that. That's actually way cool.


_____________________________

If we're all created in the image of god then why aren't we all invisible?

(in reply to Abnormalmind)
Post #: 594
RE: D21 and 3.4 - 3/10/2010 7:17:18 PM   
golden delicious


Posts: 5575
Joined: 9/5/2000
From: London, Surrey, United Kingdom
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: Abnormalmind

This has a lot to do with the PO thresholds.


? You mean the strategic bias set in the event engine?


_____________________________

"What did you read at university?"
"War Studies"
"War? Huh. What is it good for?"
"Absolutely nothing."

(in reply to Abnormalmind)
Post #: 595
RE: D21 and 3.4 - 3/10/2010 8:11:16 PM   
Abnormalmind


Posts: 200
Joined: 11/24/2009
Status: offline 		The PO attacked an airbase, so I guess it was targeting the airbase. It might have been targeting the unit on the airbase, but I couldn't tell.

quote:

ORIGINAL: larryfulkerson

quote:

ORIGINAL: Abnormalmind
The PO even launched an air assault on a forward airbase, which was nice to see.

Did you see this with your own eyes? Did this actually happen? I'm amazed that the PO would do that. That's actually way cool.


(in reply to larryfulkerson)
Post #: 596
RE: D21 and 3.4 - 3/10/2010 8:14:13 PM   
Abnormalmind


Posts: 200
Joined: 11/24/2009
Status: offline 		I do not know what controls this behavior. But in the later portion in my fight, when the PO was backed up in the Caucus and the Axis controlled most of the map (I'm guesstimating 85% of the map was controlled by the Axis), the PO behavior changed.

quote:

ORIGINAL: golden delicious


quote:

ORIGINAL: Abnormalmind

This has a lot to do with the PO thresholds.


? You mean the strategic bias set in the event engine?


(in reply to golden delicious)
Post #: 597
D21 boat question - 3/15/2010 4:21:20 AM   
larryfulkerson


Posts: 39932
Joined: 4/17/2005
From: Tucson, AZ
Status: offline 		Is here a reason I'm not supposed to be able to move my Axis boat(s) to the Leningrad area?



_____________________________

If we're all created in the image of god then why aren't we all invisible?

(in reply to Abnormalmind)
Post #: 598
RE: D21 boat question - 3/15/2010 8:13:57 AM   
sPzAbt653


Posts: 9511
Joined: 5/3/2007
From: east coast, usa
Status: offline
quote:

a reason I'm not supposed to be able to move my Axis boat(s) to the Leningrad area?


Exclusion Zone 2 represents the minefields in that area. The Germans wouldn't have risked moving ships thru the area, and the Soviets didn't clear a path thru it until 1944.

(in reply to larryfulkerson)
Post #: 599
RE: D21 boat question - 4/9/2010 7:29:54 AM   
larryfulkerson


Posts: 39932
Joined: 4/17/2005
From: Tucson, AZ
Status: offline 		Oh, okay.  I was just wondering.

_____________________________

If we're all created in the image of god then why aren't we all invisible?

(in reply to sPzAbt653)
Post #: 600
Page:   <<   < prev  17 18 19 [20] 21   next >   >>
All Forums >> [Current Games From Matrix.] >> [World War II] >> Norm Koger's The Operational Art Of War III >> Capture of Minsk Page: <<   < prev  17 18 19 [20] 21   next >   >>
Jump to:





New Messages No New Messages
Hot Topic w/ New Messages Hot Topic w/o New Messages
Locked w/ New Messages Locked w/o New Messages
 Post New Thread
 Reply to Message
 Post New Poll
 Submit Vote
 Delete My Own Post
 Delete My Own Thread
 Rate Posts


Forum Software © ASPPlayground.NET Advanced Edition 2.4.5 ANSI

5.109