How to limit attacks all over the front - attack supply, the golden bullet (Full Version)

All Forums >> [New Releases from Matrix Games] >> Gary Grigsby's War in the East Series



Message

Tarhunnas -> How to limit attacks all over the front - attack supply, the golden bullet (7/19/2011 8:38:14 AM)

An excellent point raised by hfarrish in the 1942 problem thread led me to write down some thoughts on front wide attacks in WITE, and I realized the subject probably merits its own thread.

quote:

ORIGINAL: hfarrish

2. Blizzard - also basically working, although some system of restricting the Soviets to targeted offensives rather than broad, entire front wide blastings couldn't hurt (no idea if this is possible, but throwing it out there).



I think this is coupled to the supply issue. A system where each side had the ability to activate a number of armies for "attack supply" on different levels would solve this. Armies on full attack supply would attack normally, armies on lower levels would have their attack ability (maybe chiefly artillery effectiveness) reduced, or reduced after a very small number of attacks (to allow for local counteroffensives and such). This could also nicely replace the HQ buildup system. German armies on full attack supply would receive higher levels of fuel.

Levels of attack supply would be set during the previous turn, simulating that major offensives required planning and a buildup of supplies beforehand.

The amount of attack supply would of course have to be tailored to what seems to have been available historically. In 1941, the Germans were able to attack over the whole front for most of the summer, but at the end of 1941 they basically were forced to concentrate all their efforts to operation Typhoon. I suspect the reason for not pressing the attack on Leningrad was partly a function of having to prioritize supplies.

The Soviets should not have much attack supply in 1941, simulating general chaos and unpreparedness, and in winter 1941 the ability to attack with a reasonable number of armies.

In 1942 Germans should be able to attack over about half the front, but at the end of the year confined to a last push (Stalingrad) and so on.

It should of course be able to accumulate saved attack supply to prepare for big offensives.

This would have a number of positive side effects. The Soviets might not have to rely so much on forts to stop the Germans in 1941 if the Jerries run out of steam supply wise, and that might help to solve the fort issue. The system of static units that is used to limit activity in the later scenarios could be revised.

Attacks all over the front are at present mostly held back due to the forts and their effects, which have been identified as a problem. A system of attack supply would enable a much freer hand in solving the fort issue.

It might also incidentally make it possible to reduce the mud attack penalty, which I think is excessive, to something more reasonable. If players want to waste attack supply attacking in mud at lower chances of success, let them do it. It would probably also reduce German post 1941 blizzard activity, which is currently much too easy IMHO. Germans would be loth to waste attack supply with the high movement costs and smaller chances of breakthrough in blizzard.




davetheroad -> RE: How to limit attacks all over the front - attack supply, the golden bullet (7/19/2011 9:35:39 AM)

This would potentially tranform the feel of the game in a positive way

Without going into details Chasman and I played the Stalingrad scenario of the 'old' SPI War in the East

Standard scenario. Germans attack everwhere in the summer and wipe out the russian salients in the north. russians attack everywhere in the winter etc etc.

Modified scenario - we gave each side 'command elements' and restricted attacking to within a certain distance of these.
The germans had 2 and intially the russians 1 rising to 2 in the winter.

The germans had to place one in the Crimea at start so their initial offensive on the main front was in one place until Sevastopol was reduced.

Result - It TOTALLY tranformed the scenario in a positive way. The Germans did not have the resources to attack in the north AND drive east in the south. The russians could throw huge slabs of armour at 2nd army and only in the winter did they have the capability of launching a Uranus and Mars.

I am not suggesting that this is the soluton for this game but even late war the russians were staging their offensives and it was probably for logistical reasons. 1944- supply goes to Belorussia and once the front goes fluid supply is diverted to the Ukraine and when that goes fluid supply is diverted to Rumania. Result- a lovely echeloned trategic offensive.



jomni -> RE: How to limit attacks all over the front - attack supply, the golden bullet (7/19/2011 9:40:48 AM)

The Army activation idea is also what I got from the other thread.

Why not use AP's to activate armies?  It's easier and more elegant.  Makes you think more about AP spending.  And you wouldn't have to rewrite the supply code.



davetheroad -> RE: How to limit attacks all over the front - attack supply, the golden bullet (7/19/2011 9:41:54 AM)

In essence the germans could attack with 3 army groups in summer 41, Two in summer 42 and one for the rest of the war one?

The russians one in 41 and 42 and two in 43 - 44?

Pity the russians don't have the 'Direction' command level or it could be called the STAVKA representative.



davetheroad -> RE: How to limit attacks all over the front - attack supply, the golden bullet (7/19/2011 9:44:59 AM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: jomni

The Army activation idea is also what I got from the other thread.

Why not use AP's to activate armies?  It's easier and more elegant.  Makes you think more about AP spending.  And you wouldn't have to rewrite the supply code.

That sound interesting
Of course the devil is in the detail, imagine ingenious players ending up with 50 divisions in a army!



Tarhunnas -> RE: How to limit attacks all over the front - attack supply, the golden bullet (7/19/2011 10:02:08 AM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: davetheroad


quote:

ORIGINAL: jomni

The Army activation idea is also what I got from the other thread.

Why not use AP's to activate armies?  It's easier and more elegant.  Makes you think more about AP spending.  And you wouldn't have to rewrite the supply code.

That sound interesting
Of course the devil is in the detail, imagine ingenious players ending up with 50 divisions in a army!


I think it needs separate attack supply points. The cost of putting an army in attack supply would be related to the number of units in the army and their weaponry. I am pretty certain the game calculates this already for normal supply.

Also, I envisage different levels of attack supply, perhaps 0 to 4, not just on or off, but that could be handled either way. The main advantage of different levels would be to enable it to replace HQ buildup. One Panzer Group could get 4, which gives it more MPs than the neighboring Panzer Group which has 3, while a third PG has 0 and is sitting resting.



Mehring -> RE: How to limit attacks all over the front - attack supply, the golden bullet (7/19/2011 11:36:13 AM)

Surely such an attack supply should be modified by the logistical support of the unit in question and the ability of the supply net to supply the unit. There should also be a finite quantity of such supply per turn based upon industrial and rail capacity.



Tarhunnas -> RE: How to limit attacks all over the front - attack supply, the golden bullet (7/19/2011 11:50:22 AM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: Mehring

Surely such an attack supply should be modified by the logistical support of the unit in question and the ability of the supply net to supply the unit. There should also be a finite quantity of such supply per turn based upon industrial and rail capacity.


Yes, of course the actual supply delivered to the units should be subject to distance and supply path etc.



Aussiematto -> RE: How to limit attacks all over the front - attack supply, the golden bullet (7/19/2011 12:32:38 PM)

Definitely like the idea of putting armies into attack mode. It really would work nicely (and I note that some house rules from 1.03 have been used along these lines for the Sovs at least). In effect, just as you can put a division into static mode, you can put Armies into 'attack' mode. You could, also, flip it, and have armies that go 'defensive' (equivalent to static) and, in doing so, free up supplies etc for the rest of the armies. So either do a 'spend APs to get 'attack mode' and power' or do a 'you won't have enough power unless you put some armies to defensive'.





Commanderski -> RE: How to limit attacks all over the front - attack supply, the golden bullet (7/19/2011 3:03:16 PM)

+1

I Like the idea and that should be something that could be included in a future update.



zanekin -> RE: How to limit attacks all over the front - attack supply, the golden bullet (7/19/2011 7:41:41 PM)

If it could be implemented, it would fill the last gap to the perfection.

I appreciate this concept extensively used in SSG operationnal games.



Q-Ball -> RE: How to limit attacks all over the front - attack supply, the golden bullet (7/19/2011 11:22:32 PM)

It's a good idea. Other than the Germans in 1941, nobody was able to sustain a total front-wide attack stance. Well, maybe late in the war for the Soviets.


The ONLY problem I forsee is that the computer can't tell the difference between an "Offensive", and a "Counterattack". All units need the ability to counterattack while conducting a strategic defense. You wouldn't want that taken away. Not sure how to solve that one.



Mehring -> RE: How to limit attacks all over the front - attack supply, the golden bullet (7/19/2011 11:58:25 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: Q-Ball
The ONLY problem I forsee is that the computer can't tell the difference between an "Offensive", and a "Counterattack". All units need the ability to counterattack while conducting a strategic defense. You wouldn't want that taken away. Not sure how to solve that one.

Good point. But wouldn't counterattacks use the same 'attack points' but less due to their localised nature? If each side attacks and defends in equal measure who is attacker and who defender becomes blurred.



Ketza -> RE: How to limit attacks all over the front - attack supply, the golden bullet (7/20/2011 1:00:17 AM)

Armies not in attack supply have firing rates for offence halved.



jomni -> RE: How to limit attacks all over the front - attack supply, the golden bullet (7/20/2011 2:58:06 AM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: Ketza

Armies not in attack supply have firing rates for offence halved.


Or armies not in attack supply can only do hasty attack (same effect?).
Or do you want the penalties to stack up? Yikes!



Mynok -> RE: How to limit attacks all over the front - attack supply, the golden bullet (7/20/2011 4:19:16 AM)


A very interesting idea indeed....the HQ buildup issue has been problematic for a while, and this idea almost seems to me like forcing a 'buildup' with the supporting infantry as well. This sounds good on the surface as right now, infantry pretty much is always in attack supply if it is in supply.

If it were done on an AP basis, it would have to be carefully modeled as the Germans have lots of APs and might be able to still do more than they possibly could. On the Russian side, it might become too much of a hinderance come 43 and later if not set right.

But I do think it could work nicely.




Mehring -> RE: How to limit attacks all over the front - attack supply, the golden bullet (7/20/2011 9:33:10 AM)

I think attack stockpiles' might best be dealt with points held in and transfered between HQs.



hfarrish -> RE: How to limit attacks all over the front - attack supply, the golden bullet (7/20/2011 11:34:00 AM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: Ketza

Armies not in attack supply have firing rates for offence halved.


One thing to consider is that I don't think you want to limit the ability to launch diversions - might it make sense to have a rule like this apply to subsequent attacks (both within the same turn and in subsequent turns)? In other words, every unit could launch one attack under normal firing rates - but the second attack (or an attack by the same unit in the next turn) if not in attack supply would suffer the penalty.

This also might help deal with the counterattack issue QBall mentions.



Mehring -> RE: How to limit attacks all over the front - attack supply, the golden bullet (7/20/2011 12:40:29 PM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: hfarrish


quote:

ORIGINAL: Ketza

Armies not in attack supply have firing rates for offence halved.


One thing to consider is that I don't think you want to limit the ability to launch diversions - might it make sense to have a rule like this apply to subsequent attacks (both within the same turn and in subsequent turns)? In other words, every unit could launch one attack under normal firing rates - but the second attack (or an attack by the same unit in the next turn) if not in attack supply would suffer the penalty.

This also might help deal with the counterattack issue QBall mentions.

The only way to avoid this becoming an artificial constraint is to use 'attack points' as what they are supposed to represent- producable, expendable stockpiles of war materials. An attack with X many men, guns and vehicles uses X amount of the corps/army/front stockpile. Attacks made without the benefit of such stockpiles would have some CV penalty, the amount determined by testing the system.

Could also be subdivided into fuel and munitions, maybe. Factories and resource centres produce these materials.



herwin -> RE: How to limit attacks all over the front - attack supply, the golden bullet (7/20/2011 2:16:30 PM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: Mehring

quote:

ORIGINAL: hfarrish


quote:

ORIGINAL: Ketza

Armies not in attack supply have firing rates for offence halved.


One thing to consider is that I don't think you want to limit the ability to launch diversions - might it make sense to have a rule like this apply to subsequent attacks (both within the same turn and in subsequent turns)? In other words, every unit could launch one attack under normal firing rates - but the second attack (or an attack by the same unit in the next turn) if not in attack supply would suffer the penalty.

This also might help deal with the counterattack issue QBall mentions.

The only way to avoid this becoming an artificial constraint is to use 'attack points' as what they are supposed to represent- producable, expendable stockpiles of war materials. An attack with X many men, guns and vehicles uses X amount of the corps/army/front stockpile. Attacks made without the benefit of such stockpiles would have some CV penalty, the amount determined by testing the system.

Could also be subdivided into fuel and munitions, maybe. Factories and resource centres produce these materials.


Treat the points as ammo/fuel/engineering materials. A week's attack by a mobile division = a week's movement by a mobile division = a week's attack by an infantry corps = a week's movement by an infantry corps = one level of fortification built in a hex. Defence is a bit cheaper, but also has to be paid for. Juggle the ratios a bit, but that's the flavour.



Mehring -> RE: How to limit attacks all over the front - attack supply, the golden bullet (7/20/2011 7:04:42 PM)


How would it work if the generation of existing fuel, supplies and ammo were cut back to realistic levels and the player given a way to allocate his resources (in the manner of the TOE %) as he sees fit? 100% then becomes sufficient to defend without penalty, over that gives an attack advantage?



Thomas_B -> RE: How to limit attacks all over the front - attack supply, the golden bullet (7/21/2011 12:26:46 AM)

I'm not a big fan of introducing "attack supply points", whether tied to APs or not, into the game. This would just be another level of abstraction or even gimmick.

The game already models key logistics factors that are relevant for that: ammunition, fuel and general supply.

What needs to be done is get the balance right between the respective costs of these resources for hasty or prepared attacks delivered by units and their ability to replenish stock spent every turn.

Off the top of my head my expectation would be that the supplies carried by a unit should allow it to engage in not more than 2 turns of attacks (multiple hasty/prepared attacks) before significant replenishment was required.
Rate of replenishment should be driven by the state of the unit's supply network (distance to corps HQ and to nearest railhead, availability of trucks,etc.) - I assume that is already the case?

What might make sense to consider is to enable Front / Army level HQs to stockpile supplies in large quantities in preparation for offensives (condition to the HQ not moving, being on a rail hex or at least within x hexes of an operational rail hex, etc.)

My 2 cents

Cheers

Thomas



Lieste -> RE: How to limit attacks all over the front - attack supply, the golden bullet (7/21/2011 12:40:22 AM)

Perhaps have the attacker's supply commitment and usage based partially on the defender's strength and resilience - so the defender doesn't get the best of both worlds - an attacking force fighting for 'days' and expending every round of ammunition it can, and a defending force taking few casualties "as it would run straight away".

If the lead regiment brushes aside the strongpoints, then the entire Corps doesn't need to join in the attack...



Zebedee -> RE: How to limit attacks all over the front - attack supply, the golden bullet (7/21/2011 3:52:26 AM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: Thomas_B

I'm not a big fan of introducing "attack supply points", whether tied to APs or not, into the game. This would just be another level of abstraction or even gimmick.

The game already models key logistics factors that are relevant for that: ammunition, fuel and general supply.

What needs to be done is get the balance right between the respective costs of these resources for hasty or prepared attacks delivered by units and their ability to replenish stock spent every turn.

Off the top of my head my expectation would be that the supplies carried by a unit should allow it to engage in not more than 2 turns of attacks (multiple hasty/prepared attacks) before significant replenishment was required.
Rate of replenishment should be driven by the state of the unit's supply network (distance to corps HQ and to nearest railhead, availability of trucks,etc.) - I assume that is already the case?

What might make sense to consider is to enable Front / Army level HQs to stockpile supplies in large quantities in preparation for offensives (condition to the HQ not moving, being on a rail hex or at least within x hexes of an operational rail hex, etc.)

My 2 cents

Cheers

Thomas



Agree with this post. If we're needing layers on top of what exists already, then the problem is being masked rather than dealt with at source. There are issues with the logistics in the game. Wish I could put my finger on it more precisely after accounting for the problems caused by the abstractions.



Tarhunnas -> RE: How to limit attacks all over the front - attack supply, the golden bullet (7/21/2011 6:15:06 AM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: Thomas_B

I'm not a big fan of introducing "attack supply points", whether tied to APs or not, into the game. This would just be another level of abstraction or even gimmick.

The game already models key logistics factors that are relevant for that: ammunition, fuel and general supply.

What needs to be done is get the balance right between the respective costs of these resources for hasty or prepared attacks delivered by units and their ability to replenish stock spent every turn.

Off the top of my head my expectation would be that the supplies carried by a unit should allow it to engage in not more than 2 turns of attacks (multiple hasty/prepared attacks) before significant replenishment was required.
Rate of replenishment should be driven by the state of the unit's supply network (distance to corps HQ and to nearest railhead, availability of trucks,etc.) - I assume that is already the case?

What might make sense to consider is to enable Front / Army level HQs to stockpile supplies in large quantities in preparation for offensives (condition to the HQ not moving, being on a rail hex or at least within x hexes of an operational rail hex, etc.)



Very good point!

Edit: But it would still be desirable to have some kind of priority system, where the player could prioritize which armies get the most supplies.



randallw -> RE: How to limit attacks all over the front - attack supply, the golden bullet (7/21/2011 7:48:17 AM)

I have often wondered if the permanent supply points have some value assigned to them; if there is then wouldn't giving the Soviet points a lower value do the job of simulating problems?



amatteucci -> RE: How to limit attacks all over the front - attack supply, the golden bullet (7/21/2011 2:55:04 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: Thomas_B

I'm not a big fan of introducing "attack supply points", whether tied to APs or not, into the game. This would just be another level of abstraction or even gimmick.

The game already models key logistics factors that are relevant for that: ammunition, fuel and general supply.

What needs to be done is get the balance right between the respective costs of these resources for hasty or prepared attacks delivered by units and their ability to replenish stock spent every turn.

Off the top of my head my expectation would be that the supplies carried by a unit should allow it to engage in not more than 2 turns of attacks (multiple hasty/prepared attacks) before significant replenishment was required.
Rate of replenishment should be driven by the state of the unit's supply network (distance to corps HQ and to nearest railhead, availability of trucks,etc.) - I assume that is already the case?

What might make sense to consider is to enable Front / Army level HQs to stockpile supplies in large quantities in preparation for offensives (condition to the HQ not moving, being on a rail hex or at least within x hexes of an operational rail hex, etc.)

I completely agree with this post.
I already wrote elsewhere that the Gamer's OCS (boardgames) became one of the most realistic operational wargame series because it allowed (well... required) the players to stockpile supply.




Mynok -> RE: How to limit attacks all over the front - attack supply, the golden bullet (7/21/2011 3:47:24 PM)


I like the idea as well as long as there is as Tarhunnas mentioned a prioritization method, ala the current 'HQ Buildup'. Heck, call it HQ Buildup but make it work a bit differently.

This would also provide a simple means of slowing the Russian ability to maintain offensives by limiting the stockpile capacity of their HQs. This could be expanded through TOE upgrades in future years (assuming that HQs could have TOE upgrade paths).



Tarhunnas -> RE: How to limit attacks all over the front - attack supply, the golden bullet (7/21/2011 4:15:19 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: Mynok

This would also provide a simple means of slowing the Russian ability to maintain offensives by limiting the stockpile capacity of their HQs. This could be expanded through TOE upgrades in future years (assuming that HQs could have TOE upgrade paths).


Thats brilliant!



kvolk -> RE: How to limit attacks all over the front - attack supply, the golden bullet (7/21/2011 4:53:48 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: Thomas_B

I'm not a big fan of introducing "attack supply points", whether tied to APs or not, into the game. This would just be another level of abstraction or even gimmick.

The game already models key logistics factors that are relevant for that: ammunition, fuel and general supply.

What needs to be done is get the balance right between the respective costs of these resources for hasty or prepared attacks delivered by units and their ability to replenish stock spent every turn.

Off the top of my head my expectation would be that the supplies carried by a unit should allow it to engage in not more than 2 turns of attacks (multiple hasty/prepared attacks) before significant replenishment was required.
Rate of replenishment should be driven by the state of the unit's supply network (distance to corps HQ and to nearest railhead, availability of trucks,etc.) - I assume that is already the case?

What might make sense to consider is to enable Front / Army level HQs to stockpile supplies in large quantities in preparation for offensives (condition to the HQ not moving, being on a rail hex or at least within x hexes of an operational rail hex, etc.)

My 2 cents

Cheers

Thomas


I think to some extent the fuel does this especially with the panzer units by limiting their mobility. Some refiniment of this as it relates to the other two supply items and looking at tighter useage models. Then add in the ability that others are talking about to direct that flow where you want. It would be a whole new sub game to play.



Page: [1] 2   next >   >>

Valid CSS!




Forum Software © ASPPlayground.NET Advanced Edition 2.4.5 ANSI
0.796875