Kuniworth

How weird that no one is locking this up.

I think you have to rephrase that. There were no einsatz-gruppen out to do mass-executions of jews and civilians. Killings occurred and mass rapes yes but it was not the same systematic slaughter that the USSR had experienced for 4 years. Some russian units behaved well while others acted horribly. The soviet leadership first viewed this as a way to spur the troops on but soon found that it affected disciplin and fighting ability too much. They never succeeded however in seriously stopping plundering and massrapes. And reflecting on the scale of the rapes one can wonder how serious they were at all. One thing for sure was that it affected the western allies and how people around the world viewed Stalin's soldiers. [ February 05, 2008, 12:39 AM: Message edited by: Kuniworth ]

I think problem is how fast russians get IT-tech. If they get it late then the germans just can steam roll, if they get it early then its very hard. I would very much like a script that could give each side an increase in IT at a certain date instead of having to use resources for that.

The only thing the russian people got out of it was to survive. The communist leadership capitilized on their suffering to make Stalin the most powerful dictator in world history. Its fascinating that the germans kept on fighting although all were clearly lost in 1945. They kept their disciplin and believed in Goebbels talk of super-weapon etc. But the nazis left a hell of a mark in history, everyone knows who Hitler was. Anyway the battle inside Berlin also saw some insane fighting. The tiger-tanks action at the reichtag or the defense of the Kroll Opera were tough obstacles to the russians.

Regarding the slaughter of Halbe, some russians who fought there says it was worse than Stalingrad. One interesting detail is that still today german researches continue to dig for remnants of the 9th Army, the area they were squeezed into were not more than some kilometers across. Amazing that as many as I think 30,000 came out of it alive.

Thing is that the german 9th Army performed an outstanding defensive campaign on april 16th-20th at Seelow, and it was only lack of reserves that forced the russians to finally break through on Zhukov's sector. And no this was not just a case of Busse and Heinrici avoiding the initial bombardment by pulling back troops, it was an enormous demonstration of the wehrmachts true fighting capability. The problem for the defenders had much to do with the german high command's instruction to both eradicate the russian bridgehead at Kustrin while holding on to Franfurt on der Oder which consumed much resources. Otherwise they would have held out even longer against the onslaught. Both Katukov's and Babadzhanians tanks and Chuikovs 8th Guards Army(the heroes of Stalingrad) pounded Busse's forces but got bogged down. And they would probably have faced even greater problems in Berlin if not Busse deliberately moved to the southwest to save the majority of his forces from harmageddon(the ss corps though lost contact and retreated into Berlin, thats why so many foreign soldiers fought the last stand in central Berlin, swedes, lithuanians, french etc). The result was that Berlin fell a bit quicker, but ironically Busse's men got massacred in the forrests around Halbe instead due to Konev's successful encirclement earlier. [ February 04, 2008, 08:39 AM: Message edited by: Kuniworth ]

Yes russians countered the allies by putting up own polish units startin in 1943.

Ahh Chaplin really got it spot on in that movie. Its rumoured that Hitler loved it and had a great laugh watching it too.

hello [ February 01, 2008, 01:46 AM: Message edited by: Kuniworth ]

hello [ February 01, 2008, 01:46 AM: Message edited by: Kuniworth ]

The sad part is that US wars today is as much about econmy as fighting "the good war". Military spending keeps the US economy rolling, sad but true. Those vets are not only soldiers but also the grease for the economic engine.

Hubert what was it you wanted to tell us?

jawohl, pz-divison commander of Stalingrad.

Hey Strachwitz, I need to cancel todays game. Maybe we can decide on a new time. Do you icq?

Hello how about a game on saturday?

some comments on your comments HQ:s Dont know what you are aiming at, I just did'nt know who "Guererian" and thought you meant Guderian...well are you? I just think you should decid if the hq:s in use are armies or corps for the different sides. If you use corps HQ for germany, don't mix some corps and some armies, use on or the other or both levels, but just dont mix. Movement Yes lower the movement and also check if there are to little chance of mud. It rains often but not a lot of mud. Links For OOB and positions check here web page and here web page Also you should try to model the winter effect on german forces with a strength reducing event.

Hey Strachwitz how about a MP-game?

I thought the same about your Battle for Russia scenario Kuni, and surmised that it was because of the scale/roads turning to mud in bad weather. Is there a different reason? </font>

Much fun. But some comments: - Dont mix command levels, use army hq for germans, not a mix of corps/armies. - Rename to Guderian from "gurerian" - Introduce artillery regiments - Introduce SS and Russian Guard division by using the special commando unit. I want easily to recognise Das Reich SS division and also want the Gross-Deutschland regiment in. - Movement levels are too high, the effect in mud and rain is too small. Reduce it, and also only keep the extra motorisation for the units who need it. - Some roads are missing, feels strange when you have railroads but no roads. great scenario!

Hey Guys, thanks for your kind words about the scenario. I do appreciate all sorts of comments and suggestions, keep'em coming. I thought I should make a comment on the questions that have been raised here. Maybe we can work out some tweaks if that would be necessary: - Position of Stalingrad tile 56,38 Maybe can move it to 56,39 or 56,40? - Missing TAC Bombers and Anti-tank Reason for not including anti-tank are twofold. First of all this is a corps-sized scenario and anti-tank units are simply too small for this scale, secondly the anti-tank unit was needed to create the Cavalry corps. The tac-bomber is kind of a problem. I first intended to use them but I then faced a problem of what unit formations do I try to simulate. I use fliegerkorps for the germans and that would mean 5 tac bombers but this mean problem for Russia where air-armies are the used unit formations. Russians fielded 12-13 AIr Armies at the same time during the war and have all them in plus fighters would mean that the map would be swarmed with airunits. So I let the fighter unit symbolise both fighters and tac bombers. If this should change, my only real demand is that the scenario remain 100% realistic when it comes to OOB. If we want a less swamped map germans can use Luftflottes but for the russians this still will be trouble. During the war the russians went from a diversed airforce split between front-duty to aircover until the Air-army unit was formed and then they kept it for the remainder of the war... - Experience-bars Too much experience are a killer, no doubt. Totally unrealistic too with 5 baras, maybe 2 could work? Im not sure how much 2 bars increase combat values, is it with 2 points? - Tech Costs I have no trouble with a change in tech-costs. Just one thing that is important is that too high tech levels can lead to slaughter too fast(see Spanish civil war scenario how they keep levels to 1-2 max) so I think maybe even level 3 in heavy tanks are sometimes too much. - Russian pop-up tanks This are the soviet mech corps that appear that historically fought the wehrmacht in 1941. Reason for them to pop-up is that I want the hard-build limit for russians to stay down as the Red Army's tank force was reorganized from almost 30 mech corps to 6 tank Armies during the war. With too high hard build limit the russians will have too many tank formationson the board plus it wont be historical. For me realism is very important especially concerning the OOB. Until Hubert fixes it so you can put more units on the board than the hard build limit is set at, we will need those pop-ups. - Russian partisans Ive decided to keep them out as the scale of the game is corps-level. If we put them in at the real historical level the germans would need +10 corps just too fight the which were not entirly realistic. Not that the germans did not put in a lot of units to fight them(russians partisans were hundreds of thousands) but I am afraid that the focus would mess up the OOB that fought the conventional war. Just look at Yugoslavia, I introduced partisan units as Tito historically liberated much of Yugoslavia on their own hand, but it still means problem when the german player need to divert lot of forces that actually fought the red army. If I on the other hand introduced all the anti-partisan forces players could use them to fight the russians as combat-formations which means balance-problems. So it's a trade-off for sure.

In Commander units retreat automatically when taking to much punishment. The exception are units in cities, they never retreat.

The more sc waw I play the more convinced I am that the divisional scale is what works best for WaW scenarios. Bill Runacre's Poland scenario is an awesome presentation of all the possibilities with it. I also think that's why people loved thrawn, large spaces meant different kind of combat.

When the smoke eventually clears, SC2 WaW will have established it self as the premier ww2 game so far. With all the new features this game got more potential then all competitors although sc2 is not best in all areas. Now not to take away anything from this game, the question is where do Hubert go from here? Well there is certainly a strong case to be made to continue on the ww2 path with a sc3 game. We got a pretty strong fanbase here and an experienced and dedicated dev team which makes a good job with the game(trust me I’ve seen the work the guys put into this one, when I made the battle for Russia scenario for WaW). There is some things I love to see in addition to all what waw offers: - Hexes. Mucho importante. Even if tiles never were the gamebreaker as many players thought, it still affected game-play. The big problem was not difficulty to get a good overview but turned out to be cutting off and surrounding towns and enemy forces. It became so much harder to simulate the flow of ww2 combat. SC1 was not perfect either due to lack of retreat rules but worked better. - Lack of Retreat-rules. I think people should look a bit closer on Commander which simulate the ww2-type of warfare in a great way. SC, SC2 and WaW don’t got this which is a serious problem. - bridges that can be blown up - wider rivers and those more narrow, not just one scale - More units, to use. I would like to see as ordinary units for different scales - Cavalry, Militia(volkssturm, people’s militia etc), SS(more elite infantry, not only commandos), - Sea and land mines to be used in different scales of scenarios - Slave/civilian labor force to use for fortification builds. List goes on but I would love a SC3. I promise to make 5 scenarios for the release if ya let me.

Or you could just go to the editor and give the USSR the fighting punch they had IRL.

I like the scenario but Im not sure it's balanced. It would be fun if it were more historical correct, with the right leaders in place etc and correct experience ratings for each unit. If this would be turned into a modern scenario I can only hope we get a simulation of Clancy's red storm rising.