Defense in depth

[hm_stanley]

I am developing a large Soviet assault vs Nazi defense (in depth) scenario from the Sudenka (sp?) large map.

I've constructed an extensive defensive works around top middle to right (looking at the map in scenario editor) hand portions of the map. I've modified it so that the Germans control the high ground and it's a hairy defensive set of works, from mine fields, barbed wire, elaborate trench line, bunkers, etc.

I'm wondering a few things as I construct the force ratios. Certainly the Soviets will need a rather large sapper battalion, along with plenty of artillery, that said, I think I can construct an AI that will advance and assault the works, with considerable casualties, like what happened in the real fight, but try none the less.

The Soviet player or AI will need to advance along a set of causeways into the main line, which will most certainly will be affected by direct fire from the German 88 Pak front. I think, in the real battles, this is what certainly faced Soviet forces as they attacked German prepared defenses on the Panther–Wotan line. I know they would go around many of them, but in many cases, they needed to assault them head-on, and there are plenty of examples of these kinds of battles.

My question is that I haven't seen any scenarios developed where the Germans possessed this extensive defense in depth, with the Soviet player assaulting prepared works on high ground. I looked and looked, but could not find examples.

I've seen some smaller battles, but they were not very well thought out (my opinion, just not very good player vs. AI), and the defenses were not "in depth".

I wonder if the engine and the AI supports this kind of scenario? Is the game not necessarily designed around these types of engagements? Is it too hard to construct one of these scenarios for single player gameplay (I think this will be quite hard to do, but not impossible with AI triggers and the like).

I was curious what others think about these types of scenarios and are they better played H2H instead of player vs. AI? and I'm curious with all the defensive works and units will gameplay be "SLOW!" since there are a ton of elements on then screen? It seems to be ok deploying, but gameplay is a different story.

Since we have flamethrowers and other assaulting formations now in the game, I've always wanted to construct a scenario like this, where the Soviet player advances into a proverbial meat grinder, with the Nazi's plugging holes, and trying to maintain force cohesion under pounding direct and indirect fire.. kinda what I think happened on the Eastern Front in '44. Some of these Nazi formations held out for quite a long time..

I used this webpage to help me plan the works: http://www.allworldwars.com/German%20Field%20Fortifications%20on%20the%20Eastern%20Front.html

Any help here greatly appreciated... and/or considerations. I will put up some screenshots of my defensive works if others would like to see what I'm coming up with..

[JasonC]

Put the AI on defense. It is much sounder in that role than it is attacking, and it is particularly bad at "puzzle solving" attacks, where just the right weapon must be used to deal with each successive defensive position. It doesn't do tool box combined arms. It does throw everything at em and hope something sticks. Also, the bigger the forces scale and the higher the ratio of force to space, the worse it will do. Keeping intervals and not bunching up and reinforcing success while starving failure are not in its lexicon.

[kevinkin]

hm_stanley

These types of scenarios are a bear to test due to their size and length. You might want to consider a practice scenario (1/3 final size) were you can watch the AI attack and estimate the force ratio and length of time for the battle. This information may not hold completely for the full size battle but it will help. You might be able to use the final map but limit the action to 1/3 of the area. You can even see how long it takes for the AI attacker to move through all the defenses with no enemy intervention which can serve as a baseline.

Kevin