|
ChuckBerger -> RE: Disappearing units? (2/11/2017 1:57:36 AM)
|
I see your point, but...
Remember Odessa held out until mid-October, and even then the Axis didn't take the city, the Russians evacuated it to provide the troops for operations in the Crimea. Odessa should be really hard to take if the Russians decide to contest it. I think some Axis players seem to feel the game is somehow unbalanced if they don't take Odessa on the second attack in mid-July! In real life, the Russians pulled about 3 or 4 divisions into the fortress, plus the major garrison, and reinforced it by sea with the equivalent of another 2 divisions, perhaps.
How much to invest in the Odessa battle should be an interesting resource allocation choice for both players. For the Russians, a strong force of regulars in Odessa means fewer troops for the Dniepr, and the Russians don't have all that many regulars down south. If the Russian over-commits at Odessa, a good German player should screen the city (there's no reason you HAVE to have it!), and push further east against weak opposition. Or, mount a serious attempt with 11th army, with artillery, with Luftwaffe based at Nikolaev, with command focus, and with a good rotation set up. Most complaints about these cities are from players that haven't yet learned how to maximise an attack.
I have even less sympathy for complaints about Riga. The thing is right in the path of a friggin Panzergruppe! Often Riga can simply be smashed on turn 2-4 even if it does have a major garrison, because of the surprise penalties etc. And if it holds out longer, it can be attacked from 4 sides. A German player who can't take Riga just isn't doing it right.
And here again, there's no reason the German player actually needs Riga. It's a valid choice to bypass the city if the Soviets have over-invested in it, and move right along to Leningrad, leaving a few divisions to screen the place.
Ideally, supply by sea would only be available in the Black Sea and, arguably, Tallinn. The Germans had much greater ability to interdict in the Baltic, and in reality Riga could not be maintained indefinitely. But I think there are coding reasons for not differentiating between those sea areas?
Another thing that would help is a "sea transport" card, available to the Russians but with an escalating PP cost, which would allow troops to move between ports. This would allow evacuation of the 100,000+ troops that Russia did pull out of Odessa, just in time for Sevastopol siege part one.
The Russian player holding on to either Riga or Odessa fomany weeks or months is not unbalanced - it's what actually happened (at Odessa), and it comes at an opportunity cost to the Russian player of not having those troops available elsewhere. Again, as happened in real life.
Interesting comment on the Soviet AI, I haven't found this to be a problem. If anything, I find too often major cities are undergarrisoned, I often get Riga or Odessa for free against the AI.
|
|
|
|
