James Ott

The data that I have is for 1945, but it shows that the German Army deployed 176 infantry division and 31 Panzer divisions. I agree that the Allies faced some pretty fierce opposition, and that EB's point was over-stated, but the vast majority of the German's combat power was still facing East.

OK, I get it, you want me to hunt down a bunch of data so that you can sit back and dismiss it based on some spurious and non-justifiable comparisons of the different “value” between things like subs and infantry platoons. The data is well known, troops deployed, AFV's deployed, aircraft deployed, casualties caused, terrain taken, etc. You apparently have some sort of alternative analysis that places a proportionately higher value on western originated equipment/troops/etc. than eastern originated. If you would indicate to me the exact proportionate “value” that sinking a sub is "worth" compared to destroying an infantry platoon (5.6 times? 10.2 times?) then I’d be glad to hunt down the data you are looking for. Within one order of magnitude? That would be between one-tenth the contribution to ten times the contribution. I think pretty much everyone would agree with you there. You ask me to provide data but you have yet to define the term “when measured in what counts in modern warfare”. You have erected a very ill defined, straw man of an argument that cannot be proven nor dis-proven. So I guess the argument is over.

Also, I don't understand the issue associated with Lend Lease. Apparently some are not comfortable with the fact that lend lease numbers are "baked into" Russian production. This game isn't about giving "credit" to the US. The Russians received around 20,000 AFVs (compared to around 40,000 T-34s manufactured), over 300,000 trucks and nearly 80,000 jeeps from the western allies. These are the numbers factored into the Russian MPPs that originate from Western production.

You seem to have some sort of axe to grind. The discussion isn't about "credit" nor the fact that the Russians didn't participate in the war in the Pacific, its about the relative impact of each country's war effort in WW2. Despite the massive production capability of the west, they were still only able to inflict one-eigth the number of casualties as the Russians. That is a pretty big disparity that can't be explained away by the value of sinking a sub compared to killing an equivalent number of ground troops. And it is about killing men. If Hitler had been able to line-up another 1 million men along the Atlantic Wall do you think we would have had much success in Overlord? Do you realize that the Russians were well into Poland when the Allies invaded France? Sure, the western Allies played an important role, but the war would have had pretty much the same outcome (delayed) if the Allies hadn't invaded France. The US' effort was important, but it was not the overwhelming dominant influence on the war that many portray it to be. My opinion is that the MPP balance in the game is pretty close to dead-on. [ October 15, 2002, 02:37 PM: Message edited by: James Ott ]

IMO the MPPs are meant to reflect "combat power" as distinguished from production capability. This would include men employed as well as tanks, aircraft, etc. Also IMO, the best way to determine the relative combat power of the various allies is to analyze the casualties caused by each ally. It is difficult to segregate the casualties caused by the western powers of the UK and the US, but when you compare the casualties infliced on the western front with the eastern front, then there is no argument that the Russians had a many-fold greater impact on the war. In fact, the Germans received over 8 times as many casualties on the eastern front than the western front (including the German invasion of France). </font><blockquote>code:</font><hr /><pre style="font-size:x-small; font-family: monospace;"> Losses per theater Theater Dead Africa 16.066 Balkans 103.693 North 30.165 West 339.957 Italy 150.660 Eastern Front (- Dec 1944) 2.742.909 Germany (1945) 1.230.045 Various 245.561 Total 4.859.056 </pre>

I've frequently read the board here, but just finished my first PBEM and decided to offer my suggestions. I love the genre and think that it is an excellent game. I also agree with the argument that the play balance favors the axis. 1. Contrary to other's opinions, I do NOT think that US economic capacity is under-estimated by the game. Look at the number of actualy combatants employed by the various countries (as well as casulaties sustained) and, IMO it will roughly match the importance of the US in the game. 2. The impact of the Russian winter is under-represented in the game. The Russians are never given an opportunity to pause and re-group early on. Furthermore, historical counterattacks by the Russians would be nearly impossible to simulate in the game because of the difficulty in halting the Germans long enough to prepare for a counteroffensive (again, early in the game--winter 41/42 and 42/43). IMO the Russians should get a winter entrenchement bonus and the Germans should receive a supply penalty during winter months. (Perhaps "Winter Rules" could be a game option). Also it seems to me that an HQ should be able to supply and command twice as many Corps as Armies. Since corps buidling is the preferred Russian strategy, this would also help play balance. 3. "Operational Move" is too easy. It is too easy for the Germans to use all of their units in an attack on Russia, with the option of "operationally" moving them back to the western front if needed. If the Germans were forced to garrison the western front to a greater extent, this would also better balance the play. I think there should be a distance penalty used in operational movement (i.e. if you move a unit twice as far, it should cost you twice as much in mpps). All in all a very addictive game. [ October 14, 2002, 11:22 AM: Message edited by: James Ott ]

I've been experimenting with this to no avail. My objective would be to launch a sea-based invasion of the Russian oilfields. Unfortunately every time I invade Turkey I get the "USSR Prepares for War" warning in early 1941...before I am prepared to wage the eastern war on two different fronts. Part of the problem is that I have invaded Yugoslavia and Greece to get to Turkey (I can never get all of the Axis minors to join in time)...therefore, by that time the Russians are in a tizzy.

I invaded it a few times...one time (in a current game with PO) I invaded just the hexes that prevented the Axis from entering the Black Sea..then I didn't have to slog through the mountains and send a bunch of airfleets down there. I got everything I wanted (the ability to invade the oil fields by sea) without the hassle. The only thing I missed was the plunder. The PO apparently sent elements of the Turkish army to the main conflict in Russia...where they were easily terminated without having to deal with the entrenchment. This may make conquering Turkey pretty easy.

Avoid attacking off of river hexes unless absolutely necessary. Also cities can be tough to conquer. You often need air support and attacks from several sides, but its key to take the cities out quickly since they can be a source of replacements for the Russians. I often find that my attacks bog down around the cities and once I conquer the city hexes my advance continues.

I love the smell of cardboard in the morning... My first game was D-Day by AH, circa 1980. I remember waiting months and months for the next iteration of the ASL series. Also it seemed like the magazine the "General" always took forever. Its a shame whats happened to Avalon Hill since most of us cut our teeth on their games.

I think you are looking at this from the economic side. Look at it from a personnel side. Estimates are that 10 million russian military died in the war compared to 300,000 to 400,000 for the US (including Pacific theatre). I can't easily find the amount of men committed to the war by each side, but the casualty differential I think shows the dramatic difference in manpower resources dedicated to combat--which is undoubtedly included in the MPP calculation.

I am sure you have checked this out, but in case you haven't the Achtung Panzer site has a lot of links on AFV modelling as well as its own forum on modelling. Here is the link: http://www.achtungpanzer.com/modlk.htm

http://www.skalman.nu/third-reich/ This link will have most of the data that you are searching for with respect to the Third Reich.