Mad Russian

I don't have a book that gives me very good stats on the Japanese tanks but here is what I came up with. Type 95: Max Speed: 30 mph Gun: 37mm Armour: Hull front - 14mm Hull Side - 11mm Turret Front - 11mm I don't have the length of the 37mm and don't know for sure but it looks more a howitzer than an AT gun on the tank. All Japanese tanks have barrels that are short with large openings. That is a sign of a howitzer. AT guns are long with small holes. Velocity is the key. While I expect the Soviets took heavy causualties in their tank force they had the one thing the Japanese never had. After each battle in the overall operation the Soviets controlled the battlefield. That allowed them to recover and put back in the field some of their damaged armor. It can't be stressed enough how important this can be. Also, IIRC, and I may not the Japanese pretty early on in the battle decided that they were going to be beaten but were going to die on the chosen ground rather than retreat. This IIRC, is part of what allowed Zhukov to "bag" them. I agree that BT's and T-26's, though I think the Eastern Armies were mostly cavalry formations and they would have had BT's, aren't the greatest tanks in the world. That is relative to time and place. They were pretty impressive at K-G. A PzII is pretty impressive against a BT-5 or T-26 but it can be killed too. T-34's are pretty impressive against PzIII's with 50mm guns but they can be killed too. It's all relevant.

I also use multiple websites that are almost exclusively Soviet archival material. If you aren't aware of their existance there are websites with Soviet maps on them as well.

Where did you get this book? Here in the US or overseas? Maybe mailorder. Do they have offerings in English? I would really like to have a source where I can get the newer Soviet information. However, I don't read Russian so that keeps me to english speaking authors or books that have been translated. I own several of what you termed "it was communist" garbage and most of what I have written by them is just that. But as I said before not all of it.

Please accept my apology. I never intended to insult your source, on the battle, in any way. What I was ROFL'ing about is just what you point out. Books published by the Germans have a German bias. Books published by the Americans have an American bias, or if they are military intellince information after the war, also a German bias. You quote a Soviet source saying the Soviets did great in a battle. I was simply suggesting that there may be a Soviet bias. All writers do it. Some are less bias in their presentations than others. It is natural for the side presenting the story to tell it their way. Never having seen this book and with no way, at this time of being able to, I have to go on your opinion. Just becasue it is in a book also doesn't make it true. Even if it is a Soviet book. They have been known, for over 60 years, for writing histories so bad as to classified as fiction. That doesn't mean that this book series you like is not historically correct. You may just have to take what they say with a grain of salt. And maybe they are dead on accurate. Whether you like it or not "it was communist" is a valid point. The state controled everything published. IT WAS COMMUNIST. That is a fact. I'm hoping it will be different now. It would be interesting to see some of the Soviet works being written now that their archives have been opened. Until I start to see some of the books written by Soviet authors, that have been translated, I will continue to be just a bit skeptical of their work as a whole. But, one of the best books I have on the Russian Front is a book written V.I. Chuikov. His book on the end of the war while biased is with an admited bias. He also sites times when he felt the Germans did good. It is hard to find an honest opinion in most books where they give positive credit to the enemy for anything. His insightful point of view is very interesting and refreshing. If you have the opportunity you may get some of his works. I don't know how you acquired your source material on the battle but maybe you can get other Soviet books as well. And what would an uber Tiger book have to do with K-G? By the way you need to take all the crappy german books on uber tigers with some skepticism as well. It has been a very long time since I have read up on the battle. I don't have the numbers at my fingertips nor the time to look them up at the moment. Again from what I remember the Japanese had only a Tank Division or two and Zhukov took them apart with his tanks. The Japanese should have had lots of "stuff", IIRC, they outnumbered Zhukov's force considerably. In my earlier post I understated Zhukov's generalship in the victory. But he wasn't the only reason they won. A comparison of Japanese tanks to Soviet ones in K-G should bring you to some interesting conclusions. The Soviet tanks were some of the most innovation in the world at the time. They were fast well armed/armoured. Their one major draw back was alot of them were without radios. But the Japanese tanks didn't have radios either. They weren't fast, they didn't have good armour but the guns were adequate. What made it even worse was the way they were deployed. It is interesting to look at this battle and see the results of world history. Zhukov goes on to eventually destroy the German war machine as the Soviets over the years improve on their use of massed armor attacks. Almost exclusively under his leadership. While the Japanese practically did nothing with their armor for the entire rest of the war. Only when meeting American Sherman tanks did they decide there was a need for an upgraded version of their older models. K-G would be an interesting situational matchup for CM. Maybe in the future BFC will have the Japanese tanks available to allow scenarios on the subject. [ June 09, 2005, 02:57 PM: Message edited by: Panther Commander ]

ROFL!!! The Russians don't want it to look like a technology victory. They want it to look like a brilliantly fought operational battle. And it was. Don't get me wrong, Zhukov and Zhukov alone took the Japanese apart but he had excellent tools to do it with. Counting beans won't tell you the story...for a single example of that, in 1940 the French Army had more tanks than the Germans. You see how that worked for them... K-G is a mini-France 1940 preview in a way. The Japanese didn't have, and never got, a doctrine for the use of armor enmass. The bigger guns were in stationary positions that Zhukov outflanked then overran. IIRC, Zhukov pinned the main Japanese force then caved in the sided. He didn't attack them where they were the strongest but at their weakest. And no, since I don't read Russian, I've never heard of the Frontline Illustration series.

There are accounts of Zhukov taking the Japanese Army apart outnumbered, with armor and almost destroying their forces! Also, IRRC, the Japanese have few to no AT assets that would destroy the Soviet armor. But the air war didn't turn the tide of battle, the tanks did. To me, that is technologically one sided.

I sent you a map that I am working on. Maybe it will help. It's not London or Paris but it is 100% to scale and as accurate as I could get it. I pride myself on my mapmaking skills so of course I think it is pretty good. It is large enough that you can make a lot of bits and pieces out of it.

I have a scenario over there with over 1000 D/L's and no reviews... I didnt even think the scenario was that good yet it has been D/L'ed that many times... Why... I have come to expect no reviews... but as a designer when I do get one I will ALWAYS write a response... Also if I play a scenario from The Depot I will take the time to post a review... though most of my comments are on the playtesting side over at The Proving Grounds That is all... </font>

Buddy those were just my own personal guidelines that I use when doing CMBB scenarios. If everybody had agreed with them I would have probably had a heart attack!! To defend my Red Army 1941 recommendation though...what the Red Army learned in the wars that you mentioned did not prepare them for the fight that the German Army gave them. The Red Army fought very poorly in Finland and Civil War vets that were 20 in 1920 would be 41 in 1941. Not an impressive age for your basic infantryman. The war in Asia was a mechanized force against an infantry one. While the Soviets beat the Japanese bloody it was technologically one sided. The same thing happened to the Red Army with a lack of radios hindering their having control of their forces to the same degree as the Germans.

This isn't a thread about you guys doing reviews for HSG work. While we'll take them, and are grateful for the reviews we get, I think we are far ahead of the normal scenarios posted to reviews received ratio that most designers/groups get. I personally think that is because we have such a quality product...but I could be just a little biased. This thread is about guys who take the time to come to BFC and type THOUSANDS of words of, at times, meaningless babble, who could do at least one review a month and give a scenario designer some feedback. For instance, A CMAK scenario, Attack the Farm has 1532 DL's and only a single review. A lot of guys have DL'ed that scenario and only one has every said anything about it on the Scenario Depot. I forgot one group of scenarios that I personally try very hard to write a review on, and that is, a designer that has posted his very first scenario to the Scenario Depot.

I would like to start by thanking each and every person that has ever written a review on an HSG scenario! We appreciate you!! But what makes people write reviews? We often ask why people won't write them... I write reviews for a variety of reasons mostly in this order... 1) The scenario has 400 downloads and no reviews yet. I know how this feels. I actually have some scenarios with over 650 Downloads and no reviews. I also have had a review done with only 20 Downloads (DL's) I feel that ANY and EVERY designer deserves to get at least one person's opinion of their work. 2)Something about the scenario caught my eye. I have in the past done only historically based scenarios, either historical or semi-historical in nature. So that is where I start my search. 3) Size. I don't like monster scenarios which is funny considering my latest scenario shows up as HUGE. But I don't have alot of time for playing with as much time as I spend in the editor. I bring all this up because HSG has ABSOLUTELY been BLESSED by the CM community in it's support of our work. If there is a way to spread the wealth we would like to do just that. For those of you that rarely do reviews or have never done one. Just do one a month. Think of how many reviews that would be by the end of the year if everybody that came here to BFC just did one review a month! Okay, I'm off the soapbox now.

HSG EW Bloody Road will give you both more than you can handle. It's at the Scenario Depot. It's a CMBB scenario. This one will as I have said before "ROCK YOUR COMPUTER "!!!! Beware the tank battle on the plains of the Ukrainian steppe. This is a MAJOR TANK BATTLE... Good Luck and

It was a year ago today that Keith upgraded the Scenario Depot. I just wanted to say thanks! Both for the site and all the hard work that has gone into it. I know, that, real life issues have taken Keith away from working on the site for the better part of this year. Here's to calmer times for you buddy! Keep brewing the beer and stop being your own best customer... I appreciate all The Scenario Depot does for our hobby!! :cool:

ROFL!! Having some successful scenarios along with some duds makes you a veteran designer! That's the way it works. For me personally, fanaticism works in the same places and in the same way it did in the real world. I only use it for desperate defenses or rarely attacks. Normally at the front end of the Russian Campaign through Stalingrad for the Soviets, and with any German force on German soil. Then, there are those rare occasions, where a particular force just won't take "no" for an answer. Like the spices in your chili, you need to be careful how much you add. But once again, playtesting will tell you how your scenario reacts with fanaticism in it. Like you, as gamers most of us have run into the buzz-saw of a fanatic defense. Where they have to be killed almost to a man. It can make for a very tough fight. As a designer that can sometimes absolutely be the intent.

I agree with you. Since all of my scenarios are historically based I may have less to worry about with the actual points than most designers. When I design a scenario I never even know what the point value of the sides are until I go to upload it to The Proving Grounds for playtesting. I also specialize in low odds attack scenarios. The HSG Knight's Cross(KC) series has been very successful judging from the feedback I get from players. Which means that the attackers are often outnumbered. So, I live in the land of wildly skewed points ratios. That is why I said, that the scenario should be extensively playtested. All vices of a scenario can be fixed if they are identified, but that means they must get extensive playtest time. First from the designer then from outside playtesters. I get a bit bent out of shape when a designer wants me to tell him what is wrong with his scenario and he hasn't playtested it himself. Judging from the high ratings, with the reviews you get on your scenarios, I'd say you do a good job in both playtesting and balance. But I'm assuming, this post, is about your running into a scenario that wasn't necessarily as well playtested or balanced as it might have been. I would urge ALL scenarario designers to send their scenarios to The Proving Grounds for playtesting. Those guys will tell you how your balance is and even makes suggestions on how to fix it. Now, if it is 300 turns long, with 100,000 points worth of units, it may take awhile before you see any results. But for the most part it will get attention in a reasonable amount of time. http://the-proving-grounds.com

If the scenario designer will playtest their scenarios, they wlll know if the balance is off and have plenty of time to fix it, before it is released. Fanaticism plays a big part in the German defenses of 1945. Not to mention, the defenses of some Soviet units, at different time periods in the war as well. Most notably but not limited to Stalingrad. I think you are right though you need to play the scenario extensively if you include fanaticism to any large degree.

Good information. I use panick for making troops surprised. Works well since you don't know how long they will be panicked. It won't be for long though and they come back in stages normally.

11 August, 1943, Vysokopol'ye near Bogodukhov, Ukraine Operation Polkovodets Rumyantsev is well under way. 3rd SS Panzer Divison "Totenkopf" is trying to protect the rail line running into Kharkov from the south. 6th Tank Corps of the 1st Guards Tank Army led by the famous Lt. General M.E. Katukov is driving hard to cut it. Soon the steppes would tremble with the clash of battle. Soon these two armored forces will determine the fate of Kharkov one last time. Soon the road would be bloody. Can you hold the road open? Or close it? We'll see... This is a MAJOR TANK BATTLE! This is the Ukraine! This isn't going to be easy! A TPG "King of the Hill 1" tournament scenario this is the toughest tank battle I've ever fought in CM! While it shows huge, it doesn't play that way, do to the way the forces enter the action. Get a partner and play this scenario! You won't be sorry...the scenario will actually play H2H or vs the AI, but it is much more fun H2H!! Find a partner here if you need one: http://the-proving-grounds.com This battle will rock your computer. It has everything you want in a CMBB battle: an SS Panzer Division, the steppes of Russia, did I mention TANKS? Then there are Guards tank units, did I mention that it takes place in the Ukraine and that there are lots of TANKS? That there is no air power in this scenario, that it is fought in the Ukraine and that you will have to use much different tactics to win this fight, and that there are lots of TANKS? This is where we seperate those who are REAL Tank Commanders from those that just want to be. The scenario is called HSG KH Bloody Road and is at the Scenario Depot now. Get it while it's hot!!

Have you tried demonstrating yet? If you lived through the 60's that shouldn't be a problem. If you didn't I can't explain it to you... :eek:

There is an entire section on scenario design with over 30 topics and over 200 posts. The entire site is geared to help new scenario designers, new players, and veteran gamers; either get help, give help, or find opponents. The atmosphere is different than any other site as well. Give it a look see...maybe you'll find something to help you or maybe you'll help somebody else. http://the-proving-grounds.com

I just uploaded HSG AG Tired Old Tigers at The Proving Grounds. 8 July 1944, Leipciani, Russia The Soviet 1st Byelorussian Front was advancing west. The Soviets had just captured Baranowicze. The 4th Panzer Division was stretched to the breaking point in this sector. They called for help and the German High Command sent the 507th Heavy Tank Battalion. The German Tiger tanks went into the attack immediately. A fierce tank battle developed around the village of Leipciani. The peat bogs and forested terrain were as much a part of the battle as the opposing forces. Are you a Tiger commander? Or do you like taking them out? This scenario will be a challenge to you either way. Go give it a try if you are inclined towards playtesting. The balance on this scenario may be off since it is at The Proving Grounds for playtesting. http://the-proving-grounds.com

That would be great. The screen shots didn't do a lot for me. I'll send you my scenario file if you are interested. Or anyone else for that matter.

I've not seen any of Jason's maps or tactical situations. That is why way back in the beginning I asked Jason if this thread was about his campaign or a general discussion about tactics in the Ukraine. His answer was a general discussion but I think it was aimed more at his campaign. I would like to see some of Jason's maps. The ones I have made have gotten interesting comments. Some of which I posted here at the beginning.

It would be okay. Jason is a very prolific writer. I believe that he could do this faster than you think...

I have some time to spare for this. If you want to demonstrate these non-"combined arms drill" methods where you don't have armor or artillery, I'd oblige to take the defending side. I'd even be willing to do a little bit of an AAR. If you can really pull it off without taking many casualties, you can join the campaign on my side any day. We can even use one of the generated maps from the campaign. </font>