Matrix Games Forums

 Forums  Register  Login  Photo Gallery  Member List  Search  Calendars  FAQ 

My Profile  Inbox  Address Book  My Subscription  My Forums  Log Out

New House Rule Finish Border

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

Logged in as: Guest
Users viewing this topic: none
  Printable Version
All Forums >> [New Releases from Matrix Games] >> Gary Grigsby's War in the East Series >> The War Room >> New House Rule Finish Border Page: [1]
Login
Message << Older Topic   Newer Topic >>
New House Rule Finish Border - 6/7/2016 1:12:01 PM   
HardLuckYetAgain


Posts: 6987
Joined: 2/5/2016
Status: offline 		In recent games I have seen a plethora of ad hoc brigades thrown to the Finish border by the Soviets knowing any unit will suffice to just block. (Especially now the Russian get so many AT Brigades) I think it is about time for a new house rule that the Soviets need to garrison the Finish front with Divisions and not understrength (20% TOE) brigades(i.e. Forts, AT, Airborne). I believe an Air Army be included too since this Front is always stripped of units to hold the line elsewhere. So, what are your feelings on this? (Please don't be bias in your comments and rationalize this out)
Post #: 1
RE: New House Rule Finish Border - 6/7/2016 3:42:42 PM   
Dinglir


Posts: 620
Joined: 3/10/2016
Status: offline 		Personally, I don't like the way the "Finnish No attack" line is handled by the game at all. As you observe, it frees up the russians to make some unreal defenses.

I would have preferred that the Finns were able to attack as far south as they'd like, but that they would face severe supply and morale penalties for "overstepping" the line.

If a house rule is needed to deal with this, I'd prefer it state that at least a brigade size Inf unit be used (one brigade for 10 miles of dense forest frontline with nothing important around seems "right" to me).

_____________________________

To be is to do -- Socrates
To do is to be -- Jean-Paul Sartre
Do be do be do -- Frank Sinatra

(in reply to HardLuckYetAgain)
Post #: 2
RE: New House Rule Finish Border - 6/7/2016 11:04:46 PM   
rmonical

 

Posts: 2474
Joined: 4/1/2011
From: United States
Status: offline 		If you want the no attack rule to be more realistic, then you need to make the Finish participation rules more realistic. To do this, make the no attack line and the no move line the same. The current rule vastly favors the German player. There is no way the Finns would ever occupy Leningrad or points south.

(in reply to Dinglir)
Post #: 3
RE: New House Rule Finish Border - 6/8/2016 3:26:16 PM   
swkuh

 

Posts: 1034
Joined: 10/5/2009
Status: offline 		Think rmonical is about right, but getting "political" war decisions properly reflected in game opportunities isn't done well. Lvov opening, Soviet general retreat in '41, Axis w/o Stalingrad debacle, and maybe more are examples. But, play on and enjoy the game as is while awaiting 2.0.

(in reply to rmonical)
Post #: 4
RE: New House Rule Finish Border - 6/9/2016 7:53:01 AM   
RKhan


Posts: 315
Joined: 1/17/2016
From: My Secret Bunker
Status: offline 		I think WITE reflects the political choices of the Finnish government. It may be "gamey" that the Soviet players know this before they would in a "historical" sense and act accordingly, but only by a few turns.

The question really is whether or not these political decisions ought to be coded into the game. What about, for example, the Japanese decision not to attack in the Far East?

I suppose these political decisions could be option flags at scenario start but they would really handicap the Soviets. Perhaps we can think of some that would work against the Germans.

_____________________________

RKhan

(in reply to swkuh)
Post #: 5
RE: New House Rule Finish Border - 6/9/2016 9:34:25 PM   
HardLuckYetAgain


Posts: 6987
Joined: 2/5/2016
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: RKhan

I think WITE reflects the political choices of the Finnish government. It may be "gamey" that the Soviet players know this before they would in a "historical" sense and act accordingly, but only by a few turns.

The question really is whether or not these political decisions ought to be coded into the game. What about, for example, the Japanese decision not to attack in the Far East?

I suppose these political decisions could be option flags at scenario start but they would really handicap the Soviets. Perhaps we can think of some that would work against the Germans.


The question really is why in actual events that happened in WW2 the Soviets kept a "whole" army (7th Army) on that border to defend/attack. But you are telling me politically it is ok to send that army elsewhere since the Soviets know the Fins can't attack across it without Lenningrad and replace it with trash units? Doesn't seem like reality to me.

< Message edited by HardLuckYetAgain -- 6/9/2016 9:39:39 PM >

(in reply to RKhan)
Post #: 6
RE: New House Rule Finish Border - 6/9/2016 9:55:19 PM   
Icier


Posts: 564
Joined: 7/15/2014
From: a sunny beach nsw
Status: offline 		RIGHT ON !!!!!

(in reply to HardLuckYetAgain)
Post #: 7
RE: New House Rule Finish Border - 6/10/2016 7:26:42 AM   
Kantti

 

Posts: 87
Joined: 6/10/2016
Status: offline 		Hi, a new face here (well have been reading forums like 2 years and playing the game a bit, but my first post), just giving my couple of cents as a professional Finnish historian and wargame enthusiastic.

First, the no-attack -line was a political reality that Finnish had to cope with in reality. There were naturally elements in Finnish High Command that wished to press further and bombard/attack Leningrad and forward from river Svir (Syväri in Finnish), but it was recognized that razing Leningrad (together with Germans) would be something totally unforgivable. Finnish had fought scores of wars (most of them as part of Sweden before 1809) with Russians and recognized that they'd have to cope sooner or later with some form of Russia even after Russo-German war would have ended. It was also recognized that Finnish Army could not stand casualties related to urban warfare or continuing the attacks further east. In the eastern Karelia attack was driven considerably further than on Karelian Isthmus. There driving force was existence of Finnish-related population (at least to some extent in daydreams of Finnish leaders) and reaching natural lines of defence (of which only Svir is visible on WiTE map). Even then Finnish army morale suffered after crossing old state border and there were multiple defections as people weren't prepared for offensive war (instead of just getting back what was lost in Winter War).

What comes to Soviets screening Finnish forces, there was some understanding among Soviet command that Finnish were quite reluctant to push forward. Troops facing Finns were often second-rate of were sent to those lines to refit from some more active theater of Northern operations. This is well reflected in the fact that some really obsolete equipment was still in ToE of some of the formations facing Finns even during the 1944 grand offensive. Some Soviet armored brigades were even equipped with T-26s at the time.

In my opinion demanding a division per hex is too far-fetched against Finns. Historically, even when the Soviets prepared for major assault against Finns in June 1944 to knock them out of the war, there were only 10 divisions and 4 infantry and 2 naval brigades on Svir. So on quieter time perhaps third of that amount would be adequate. But as Soviets cannot break down divisions, use of brigades and AT-brigades to fill gaps between couple of divisions is not so far fetched from reality.

tl&dr: On Isthmus there would be like 2-3 infantry divisons and 2 fortified zones guarding Finns. On Svir something similar should be enough.

Just my 2 cents.

(in reply to Icier)
Post #: 8
RE: New House Rule Finish Border - 6/10/2016 12:04:25 PM   
Manstein63


Posts: 688
Joined: 6/30/2010
Status: offline 		Welcome to the forum Kantti & you make some very salient points. However what I think most Axis players find irritating is the fact that there is no pressure on the Soviet player to put any units of real value on the Finnish front, In fact it's very much like that scene from the Mel Brooks film Blazing Saddles where the evil cowboys are riding across the empty prairie towards the town that they intend to shoot up, & to delay them the towns folk erect a toll booth that forces the cowboys to go through it even though there is nothing at all to stop them from going around it.

In the game that I am staring with Michael T we have agreed on the following house rule a minimum of 1 rifle brigade / division for every 2 hexes of front line fractions rounded up, the remaining hexes can be occupied by any other type of ground unit. To reflect the fact that this was a quiet area the Rifle Brigade(s) should be at minimum of 75% TOE & the divisions should be at minimum of 50% TOE. This will mean that the four hexes in front of Leningrad should be occupied by 2 Rifle brigades / divisions & 2 of any other ground unit type, while the 11 hexes along the Svir river would be manned by 6 Rifle brigades / divisions & 5 of any other ground unit type.

The Final stipulation is that the garrison requirement only comes into force When the Finns reach the no attack line. If they reach the line at Leningrad but do not reach the Svir river then the garrison requirement only applies to the Leningrad front or vice versa. This will mean that if the Soviet player is able to hold the Finns away from the no attack line with fewer units than the garrison requirement they are perfectly at liberty to do so.

Manstein63



_____________________________

'There is not, nor aught there be, nothing so exalted on the face of god's great earth, as that prince of foods. THE MUFFIN!!!'

Frank Zappa (Muffin Man)

(in reply to Kantti)
Post #: 9
RE: New House Rule Finish Border - 6/12/2016 8:35:09 AM   
RKhan


Posts: 315
Joined: 1/17/2016
From: My Secret Bunker
Status: offline 		I have essentially implemented this house rule independent of knowing about it as I worry that if the Fins are released then my defence will be too thin to hold. However, there are definitely a few early turns when all I can put on the Svir is whatever is left over!

As an side, I wonder if a toll booth at the Soviet border would work on the German Panzers? I find it much more plausible that it would work on German officers, who love to follow orders, than cowboys who follow none.

_____________________________

RKhan

(in reply to Manstein63)
Post #: 10
RE: New House Rule Finish Border - 6/17/2016 7:52:58 PM   
wga8888


Posts: 459
Joined: 9/29/2010
From: Sachse, Texas USA
Status: offline 		More rules to ensure a German victory? the later Soviets advantages do not matter if there is no mid-game or end-gaem. The Germans are more or less ensured to capture Leningrad early in 1941 without much effort. That is not historical. The Finns were only interested in reclaiming their 1939 borders; they knew the Russians have long memories. The took massive losses in the Winter War (50K for a population of 2M). They would have to live with their Russian neighbors regardless of the outcome of the Continuation War. They were Finns not Germans.

_____________________________

Bill Thomson
wga8888@icloud.com
Discord: wga8888 #7339
817-501-2978 CST [-6 GMT]

(in reply to RKhan)
Post #: 11
RE: New House Rule Finish Border - 6/17/2016 10:27:14 PM   
HardLuckYetAgain


Posts: 6987
Joined: 2/5/2016
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: wga

More rules to ensure a German victory? the later Soviets advantages do not matter if there is no mid-game or end-gaem. The Germans are more or less ensured to capture Leningrad early in 1941 without much effort. That is not historical. The Finns were only interested in reclaiming their 1939 borders; they knew the Russians have long memories. The took massive losses in the Winter War (50K for a population of 2M). They would have to live with their Russian neighbors regardless of the outcome of the Continuation War. They were Finns not Germans.


Do I hear bias in the above comment????? I play both sides and when playing the Soviets I sent all the AT Brigades, and 3 airborne brigades, and built some forts on the Soviet no attack line. I then lowered the TOE of all these units to 20%. I then took the divisions that were up there and plugged the line elsewhere down south. Would the Soviets "historically" do this? I think not.

Using your own words, "That is not historical" I point yet again to the 7th Army (later 7th Separate Army) that the Soviets kept on the border with the Finns. Was that army comprised solely of AT Brigades? Nope. Was it comprised of Forts and AT Brigades? Nope. Was it comprised of AT Brigades, forts and airborne brigades? Nope It was comprised of divisions. Yet you "cry" historical yet can't see historically that the Russians kept something in front of the Finns (7th Separate Army) just not AT Brigades and a line of forts at the no attack line. :\ Thus historically the Soviets should be required to put at least some division on the no attack line if they balls to the wall retreat to the no attack line.

By the way the good Soviet players I have played use Divisions to stop the Finns way earlier than the No attack line. :)



(in reply to wga8888)
Post #: 12
RE: New House Rule Finish Border - 6/18/2016 5:47:32 AM   
rmonical

 

Posts: 2474
Joined: 4/1/2011
From: United States
Status: offline 		Finnish capability in the game is not historical. I'll accept a house rule to garrison the line in a more robust fashion if the Axis accepts a house rule to make it the no move line.

(in reply to HardLuckYetAgain)
Post #: 13
RE: New House Rule Finish Border - 6/18/2016 2:50:24 PM   
HardLuckYetAgain


Posts: 6987
Joined: 2/5/2016
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: rmonical

Finnish capability in the game is not historical. I'll accept a house rule to garrison the line in a more robust fashion if the Axis accepts a house rule to make it the no move line.




But yeah, I would accept your counter offer with the addition that the Soviets would have to continually increase their garrison and attack in early 42 as they did historically with 3 Corps on the Svir River. So my point now is "where" do we stop trying to mimic "history" and make our own way in this game?

(in reply to rmonical)
Post #: 14
RE: New House Rule Finish Border - 6/18/2016 8:51:38 PM   
rmonical

 

Posts: 2474
Joined: 4/1/2011
From: United States
Status: offline

quote:

But yeah, I would accept your counter offer with the addition that the Soviets would have to continually increase their garrison and attack in early 42 as they did historically with 3 Corps on the Svir River. So my point now is "where" do we stop trying to mimic "history" and make our own way in this game?


With the rules as written?

(in reply to HardLuckYetAgain)
Post #: 15
RE: New House Rule Finish Border - 6/20/2016 11:12:18 PM   
lhmg


Posts: 37
Joined: 4/27/2014
Status: offline 		Can the game be mod-ed in the editor to remove the no attack line. I have tried to find a way around it as the Fins are kind of useless if they cant put any real pressure on the Russians. Besides I want to fight the war my way and not just as a replay of history. Oh and if you are going to argue it has to be straight history then the Russians shouldn't be able to retreat everything they have as fast as they can in the opening turns.

_____________________________

..."And to the Republic, for which it stands."

(in reply to rmonical)
Post #: 16
Page:   [1]
All Forums >> [New Releases from Matrix Games] >> Gary Grigsby's War in the East Series >> The War Room >> New House Rule Finish Border Page: [1]
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

1.203