Missing and incorrect information on Finland

[Tero]

Originally posted by Pak_43:

I'm afraid I just can't believe that the Finns were light years ahead of the British in terms of artillery deployment, doctrine and effectiveness... All of the supposed revelations about Finnish arty doctrine seem to be cribbed almost directly from the lesson learned by the British in World War I.. (1920? co-incidence?)

Actually the doctrines and experiences of at least the Germans, the French and the British were studied. The Russian methods and experiences were well known since the developers of the Finnish arty had served in the Imperial Russian army arty corps.

What must be taken into account is the fact that with a very strickt shoe string budget the Finnish arty had to come up with a method that enabled them to use what little they have with the utmost efficiency. Long, heavy area barrages were totally out of the question so instead they came up with the use of fractions of a fire unit on highly localized point targets.

Was a copy or very similar to the system used by the British in World War I...

Which the British had to reinvent during WWII ?

All the mapping and fire control charts in the world isn't going to help fix this kind of problem....

That is why it is beneficial to get the data down correctly.

I'm afraid I just don't buy the assertion that

"The Finnish arty doctrine was quite unique.

You can NOT apply your knowledge of German, Soviet, British and American arty doctrine to the Finnish arty."

But you do acknowledge the fact there were differences between each and every apporach to solving the problems ?

[Keke]

Originally posted by Foxbat:

Was There any Threat to Leningrad from the North in 1941? by N I Baryshnikov

Exploring hitherto classified sources, this article provides a fresh examination of the diplomatic and military circumstances surround Finnish participation in Hitler's war against the Soviet Union in 1941. By doing so, it challenges the widely accepted arguments that Finnish partcipation in the war on Germany's side was at best only lukewarm and that Finnish wartime objectives were limited to regaining territories lost by Finland in the 1939-40 Winter War.

Every Finn knows that the Finnish participation was not only "lukewarm and regaining the lost territories". By the time the general idea was to free Finnish speaking peoples in Eastern Karelia from Soviet rule. By the time it seemed possible.

What these Russian historians always seem to ignore, while they support the myth of "peaceful" USSR who was unexpectly attacked, is the Soviet aggression towards Finland during the peace between Winter and Continuation War; several border violations, shooting down a civil aircraft, demanding the control of Petsamo nickel mines and Molotov asking several times Germany´s approval for "final solution" to the "Finnish problem". These may not justify the `extended´ war goals for Finns, but they make them more understandable.

It must be added that Soviet bombers hit several civilian targets in Finland after German started their offensive in 1941. Finland hadn´t even declared war by the time.

[Keke]

Originally posted by Panzer76:

Only reason Finland wasnt crushed was because the stiff German defence, which meant that Russia needed their forces elsewhere. If not, Finland would have ended up as a Russian province, make no mistake about it.

Now that I have cooled down a bit, I must ask you what was the reason Finland wasn´t crushed during the years of 1939-40, when USSR and Germany were basicly allied and USSR didn´t have to fight on any other front and Finland had no allies?

[Geier]

After reading this thread and others I have come to the conclusion that, since CM:BB totally fails to correctly model the Finnish Armed Forces, that they be totally and completely removed from the game in an upcoming patch.

I also suggest that the coming engine rewrite is centered on getting everything tero has ever wanted to be put in the game. It is the only way to correctly model this paragon of armed forces everywhere and well worth the investment and development time.

Until these huge failures are fixed, the Finns must be removed completely or it will be a huge blow to the credibility of BFC.

.

.

.

Or not.

[Juha Ahoniemi]

Originally posted by Geier:

After reading this thread and others I have come to the conclusion that, since CM:BB totally fails to correctly model the Finnish Armed Forces, that they be totally and completely removed from the game in an upcoming patch.

I also suggest that the coming engine rewrite is centered on getting everything tero has ever wanted to be put in the game. It is the only way to correctly model this paragon of armed forces everywhere and well worth the investment and development time.

Until these huge failures are fixed, the Finns must be removed completely or it will be a huge blow to the credibility of BFC.

.

.

.

Or not.

Geier: Perhaps You should play Europa Universalis where You can play Swedes. Just wait over the week-end that we can put some pictures of that Finnish invention, "korjausmuunnin". We Finns just want to have the goodies what Finnish army REALLY had. Accept that or just go bitching some other thread. You don't have to read this one, You know. Or is it so hard to swallow that Finland isn't part of Sweden any more?

[Geier]

Originally posted by Juha Ahoniemi:

We Finns just want to have the goodies what Finnish army REALLY had.

One problem with your credibility might be that you won't accept the baddies, only the goodies.

The sooner you realize that your nationalistic chest thumping makes it impossible to take you seriously the better.

Accept that or just go bitching some other thread.

Last time I looked you do not dictate where and what I post. If you can't take it then that is your problem.

Or is it so hard to swallow that Finland isn't part of Sweden any more?

I find it fascinating that you manage to turn this into a narrowminded nationalistic argument. But then again, that is all this is anyway.

[Sesam]

I have made a huge 11 battle historical operation. It's a Finnish assault against a fortified Soviet line on summer 1941. Email to me if you want to get it.

Title: Näätäoja

Type: Finnish assault operation (Historical)

Date: July 17th, 1941

Time: 0700 hrs

Location: Karelia, north of Lake Ladoga

Region: Finland

Weather: Clear, Dry and Warm

Battles: 4 days, 2 battles/day (nights not playable)

Turns: 30+ turns/battle

Background:

On the north of lake Ladoga the Finnish Karelian Army began it's offensive on 10th of July 1941. The objectives were to reach the northern shore of lake Ladoga and advance to east to the old border. In the middle sector 5th Division advanced fast to SE. Recon battalion Kev.Os.4 (light infantry detachment 4) covered 70km in 5 days. On July 15th they arrived at Näätäoja where they met enemy in fortified positions. On the next day reserves were called to replace light recon forces and to make a breakthrough so that the advance to east could continue. This followed 12 day long continuous battle in which both sides suffered heavy losses.

Historical: 2 player or Human Finland vs. Soviet AI

The map is based on 1:20000 topographic map (printed 1939).

Author: Matti Vesanen, matti_vesanen@hotmail.com

Matti

[Sardaukar]

Heh..this thread is degenerating into slugfest between Finns and others. "Time to circle wagons" .

Now...my proposal of changes to CMBB inventory was to include following things:

- JU 87 dive bomber for Germans in Finland, June-July 1944

-FW 190 F, ditto

- KV-1 m42 and KV-1E from summer 1942(only one each, but they were used as lead vehicles in armoured column's advance)

-T-28 m38 and T-28E, first from start and second from late summer 1941.

- T-20 Komsomolets gun tractor from start

-somewhat better FOs for Finns (not asking them to be better than others, but they sure were not that much worse than others).

-ISU-152, July 1944 (this I can live without, however)

Now...all that is historical and is backed by references. Nothing in that makes Finns "überfinns" or imbalance the game. What I don't understand is the resistance to minor changes that are totally feasible (at least to me). But what are the historical references not to include them ? And for what reason ?

Cheers,

M.S.

[Juha Ahoniemi]

Originally posted by Sardaukar:

- JU 87 dive bomber for Germans in Finland, June-July 1944

-FW 190 F, ditto

- KV-1 m42 and KV-1E from summer 1942(only one each, but they were used as lead vehicles in armoured column's advance)

-T-28 m38 and T-28E, first from start and second from late summer 1941.

- T-20 Komsomolets gun tractor from start

-somewhat better FOs for Finns (not asking them to be better than others, but they sure were not that much worse than others).

-ISU-152, July 1944 (this I can live without, however)

Add landsverk anti to that list and I'm happy too. As noted before, those babies saw frontline action as much as the rest of the armoured forces in general.

-Juha

[Guest PondScum]

Originally posted by Sardaukar:

- T-20 Komsomolets gun tractor from start

If the model for that isn't already in the engine, I doubt that BFC are going to be adding it.

[ October 18, 2002, 12:49 PM: Message edited by: PondScum ]

[Keke]

Originally posted by Juha Ahoniemi:

</font><blockquote>quote:</font><hr />Originally posted by Sardaukar:

- JU 87 dive bomber for Germans in Finland, June-July 1944

-FW 190 F, ditto

- KV-1 m42 and KV-1E from summer 1942(only one each, but they were used as lead vehicles in armoured column's advance)

-T-28 m38 and T-28E, first from start and second from late summer 1941.

- T-20 Komsomolets gun tractor from start

-somewhat better FOs for Finns (not asking them to be better than others, but they sure were not that much worse than others).

-ISU-152, July 1944 (this I can live without, however)

Add landsverk anti to that list and I'm happy too. As noted before, those babies saw frontline action as much as the rest of the armoured forces in general.</font>

[Sesam]

Originally posted by Keke:

</font><blockquote>quote:</font><hr />Originally posted by Juha Ahoniemi:

</font><blockquote>quote:</font><hr />Originally posted by Sardaukar:

- JU 87 dive bomber for Germans in Finland, June-July 1944

-FW 190 F, ditto

- KV-1 m42 and KV-1E from summer 1942(only one each, but they were used as lead vehicles in armoured column's advance)

-T-28 m38 and T-28E, first from start and second from late summer 1941.

- T-20 Komsomolets gun tractor from start

-somewhat better FOs for Finns (not asking them to be better than others, but they sure were not that much worse than others).

-ISU-152, July 1944 (this I can live without, however)

Add landsverk anti to that list and I'm happy too. As noted before, those babies saw frontline action as much as the rest of the armoured forces in general.</font>

[Juha Ahoniemi]

Originally posted by Geier:

One problem with your credibility might be that you won't accept the baddies, only the goodies.

Please explain. We already have told two "baddies" to BFC: StuGs will be available later than they are now. And Pzkf IV never saw action against the Russians. One might say that they are in just for what if-scenarios though(like ISIII). But Finns were those who informed that. Free feel list any "baddies"

The sooner you realize that your nationalistic chest thumping makes it impossible to take you seriously the better.

I don't "thump my chest" without evidence. As I alredy have stated in this thread, there will be pictures of "korjausmuunnin" by monday for grogs to see. I am not arty expert. I just happen to saw document/read about that thingie. It was decisive factor at Tali-Ihantala battle concerning Finnish arty accuracy and speed to change target for multiple tubes by single command.

Last time I looked you do not dictate where and what I post. If you can't take it then that is your problem.

I only wanted to save You the trouble of reading and getting pissed of about something You don't like. That may be bad for Your blood pressure. Therefore I suggested something more pleasant for You to read. That is hardly dictating, eh?

Then You quoted my text:

"Or is it so hard to swallow that Finland isn't part of Sweden any more? "

But You mister, left the off and accused me for "narrowminded nationalistic argument."

Do You not know what stands for?

One more friendly advice: grow thicker skin, dear neighbour

-Juha

[Battlefront.com]

Hi all,

We have been following this thread to see what can be done to improve the data used for the Finns. If you take a look at the 1.01 patch list you will see a number of data tweaks have been made already.

As for why one off vehicles were not included... to lesson our workload and to prevent gamey overuse we did not include any vehicle that was produced in numbers less than a dozen or so. We had to draw the line somewhere and this seemed to be a reasonable and logical place to do it. And it did rule out about a couple hundred German vehicles We included the IS3 and T44 more or less for "fun", but of course we didn't devote precious development time to doing models/textures for them at the expense of other stuff.

Now, should we include one of a kind Finnish vehicles captured from Soviet stock? The argument "but I can't make this battle without one" is a weak for something so rare. There are more than a 100 or so vehicles absent from the German inventory alone that could be equally argued for. That would mean a delay in CMBB's release until... oh... sometime in 2004 Gamers have a very horrible habit of looking at their own pet issues and think "gee, it wouldn't take any time to add this, so add it". Pet issues add up to serious development time, and since one person's pet issue might not be more important than another's, we have no choice but to draw a line and stick to it.

Perhaps we can put them in, but it was perfectly reasonable to leave them out. In fact, it would have been perfectly reasonable to have left out all Axis Minor nations, so be thankful for what we did instead of moaning about what we didn't

Steve

[Foxbat]

Originally posted by Keke:

Every Finn knows that the Finnish participation was not only "lukewarm and regaining the lost territories". By the time the general idea was to free Finnish speaking peoples in Eastern Karelia from Soviet rule. By the time it seemed possible.

That's what I wanted to illustrate, what makes the article potentially interesting is the not the (alleged) nationalistic spin, but that it refers to actual documents and evidence of what we all know but pretended to have forgotten (on both sides) during the cold war.

It must be added that Soviet bombers hit several civilian targets in Finland after German started their offensive in 1941. Finland hadn´t even declared war by the time.

Ouch. So what were those heinous russians to do? Pick out the germans in Finland? Because the Finns had allowed germans to use their airbases to lauch raids against the USSR (that is generally considered an act of war).

[ October 18, 2002, 02:50 PM: Message edited by: Foxbat ]

[Battlefront.com]

Hi again,

I have seen the debate about Finland vs. Soviets compared to other events. I have to say as a historian, with a HUGE amount of admiration for the Finns, I think that many Finns take their experience out of context when making judgements about how good/bad various things were.

Make no mistake about it, the Finnish people and their Armed Forces were tough buggers to go up against. They showed amazing resourcefulness, bravery, and national unity in the face of a traditionally powerful and hostile neighbor. If the Finnish people had been less than this they most likely would have been utterly defeated. But that doesn't mean that they were undefeatable.

The Winter War was as much a display of Finland's amazing fighting ability as it was a harsh example of how badly Stalin had gutted the Soviet Armed Forces. Leadership was piss poor, equipment was substandard, supply logistics were horrible, and doctrine was totally inadequate. Making matters worse, the terrain and weather conditions were completely and utterly not suited to the type of force and doctrine the Soviets employed. On top of all this, their enemy (the Finns) was totally underestimated. Becuase the Soviets lacked leadership and flexibility at all levels, this obviously resulted in major disaster for the Soviet forces.

However, the Winter War was technically not "won" by the Finns, any more than the Korean War was won by the United Nations forces. It was a stalemate with the Finns having to give up something they previously had (territory, population, national resources, money, and many dead). Why did they have to give up these things? Because the Finns were smart enough to know that if the Soviets continued to press they would eventually get more. It is a simple equation of more vs. less. The Soviets had a LOT more of everything, and had already shown the willingness to spend inordinate amount of effort and lives to secure their goals.

As it was, in March 1940 Finland was streached to the limits and good campaign weather was only a couple of months away. Manneheim wisely convinced Finland's political leadership that chosing to lose some things (perhaps temporarily) instead of everything (perhaps permanently) was the smart path to go down. Finns are apparently as pragmatic as they are brave, which is a combo very often not found in the world of the time. The Soviets too were pragmatic. They had other things on their agenda coming up and a protracted war with Finland, which could be won at some point by shere numbers and effort at the very least, was simply not as important to them. So like the Finns, they accepted much less than they wanted in exchange for the freedom to move against other countries. Specifically, the Baltic States and Romania.

Stalin and his military leaders were also very concerned about Germany's intentions (and to a lesser extent Japan's) and didn't want to be bogged down in case Hitler moved against them. They also plainly understood that their armed forces needed a total overhaul BEFORE the Germans attacked or things might not go very well. And a reorganization of this type needs to be done without an active war on their hands.

OK, so where does that leave us?

- Finns tough bastards, Soviets poorly prepared to deal with them for a number of reasons.

- Finns cost the Soviets far more than they expected to pay. However, the cost to Finland was also very high.

- Both sides, for their own reasons, wanted to end the war. Since the Soviets had the upper hand by the Spring of 1940, the Finns had to give up something to secure this peace.

- Soviet attention was freed up to deal with military reorganization in anticipation of larger national interests while at the same time being able to walk away with SOMETHING other than a large military loss.

Conclusions... a lessor nation would have been defeated early, but the Finns were dangerously close to flat out losing the conflict. What saved them was that their staunch defence and the horrible state of the Soviet Armed Forces post purge. Stalin was made to blink and think twice about continuing a war which might start to effect larger Soviet national interests. The war could have been totally won by the Soviets, but the Finns had made the initial price so high that Stalin was willing to accept less than originally sought.

Next, some thoughts on the Continuation War.

Steve

[Foxbat]

Originally posted by tero:

Nope. There are three classes of FO's in the game: Fast, Medium and Slow.

So, due to circumstances beyond our control a German vetean 81mm mortar FO with a radio gets his barrage delivered in (say) 1-2 minutes on any target location on the map whereas a veteran Finnish 81mm mortar FO with a land line gets his in 3-5 minutes.

AFAIK the movement speed is not what is referred to during purchase when you see the term "slow", "medium" of "fast" next to the FO.

I'm pretty sure it is, in fact I'm pretty sure youre whole "we are soooo disadvantadged" airbubble is based on nothing but prejudice and misunderstanding.

Did you actually test your mortar-FO example? Did you test the delays for other types of FOs? Did you test to see what caused the differences? NO you just assume that slow means long delay. Period.

If you had bother to look at the earlier discussi0on I linked you would have seen that everyone else's experience is the exact opposite of your claims eg:

tabpub

The +/- to the wire/radio seem to be:

wire: slow, shorter TOT (time on target), can't get on vehicle.

radio: faster, longer TOT, can ride vehicle but cannot call mission while onboard.

Ex. took 2 41 german 81mm spotters. wire 1min to area in LOS, radio 2min to area in LOS

Note that he refers to an actual test, not what he believes to be the case.

Battlefront.com

Guys,

Before I detail this a bit, I want to reassure you that we had two real life artillery "experts" as Beta Testers. Several others had personal experience with FO duties while in the military, but not specific to it.

[..]

Moving a wire FO is, in generaly, totally unrealistic. However, an FO should be able to relocate a little bit within a small radius from his initial setup point. However, CM has absolutely no way of keeping track of such movement (i.e. where did he start and where can he go) and therefore we could not code this in. So instead we kept the movement speed realistically slow and that should keep abusively large relocations to a minimum.

[..]

The story that follows is about why wire-spotters move slowly, and most radio spotters at medium speed. NOT why they have the long delays that you think they have.

[Juha Ahoniemi]

Originally posted by Battlefront.com:

Perhaps we can put them in, but it was perfectly reasonable to leave them out. In fact, it would have been perfectly reasonable to have left out all Axis Minor nations, so be thankful for what we did instead of moaning about what we didn't

Steve

Well You can always try !

Seriusly, I hope You don't think that we are ungrateful, that is not the case. And wasn't it supposed to be Your Finnish partners to do all the background checking (for example that StuG thing)? So You are not to blame about those. But this community has so many different people with different attitudes and knowledge that these kind of conversations tend to heat up at some point. I myself am keen on asking for landsverk anti vehicle since I served as a driver on modern Flak-tank, and have done some reading how they (landsverk anti)did manage in WWII. Some guys who served as FO of course are interested in arty - availability, modelling correctly and so on. I guess that makes us humans

-Juha

[JonS]

Originally posted by tero:

</font><blockquote>quote:</font><hr />Originally posted by JonS:

* Well, sort of. Was reading the NZ Official History for Artillery. 2(NZ)Div worked closely with the Canuckians for a few months in Italy, and commented on the difference in the way they used their artllery. Same words and procedures, different application and effects on the ground. interesting.

I hope you see the light now. </font>

[Foxbat]

Originally posted by Sardaukar:

Eh...I doubt that could be modelled in game anyway. And it'll be best solved with different experience levels. What was historical was that Finns were generally better motivated, trained and led than most of their counterparts...but not always. But it's damn hard to model in computer game, especially things that are not measured in millimeters or kilograms or meters/sec.

The easy, and available route is of course to make Finns regular/veteran and the russkie's conscript/green except where better is appropriate (and for the early years the russians are automatically "worsely" trained and led anyway ).

If Finnish arty would be in par with others, that's OK...but I'm not that interested about artillery issue...it seems to work relatively well even now.

That's because the whole idea that Finnish arty is worse than others appears to be a figment of the imagination. The only thing that should, possibly, change is the inclusion of the "Korja"

And there is a lot the player can do to make his finnish arty act in a historically accurate, and effective, way.

1) Buy light artillery over heavy.

2) Buy light artillery in preference to mortars.

3) Buy TRPs.

4) Use observed fire.

5) Focus your artillery fire.

6) Use light artillery where you would normally use mortars

And most importantly of all, set your artillery asset up with the greatest possible care at the start of the game (a few well placed TRPs can really run the enemies day).

If at all possible set your FO's in such a way that they won't have to move during the game, and if they have too work out in advance where you want your them to go.

[Battlefront.com]

The Continuation War was an opportunity for the Finns to get back what they lost during the Winter War. For the Germans it was a chance to ensure that their most northern flank was secure, but definitely a sideshow for them.

Unfortunately, the Germans failed to realize the importance of cutting Murmansk and Archangel from the rest of the Soviet Union. They understood that this was important to some degree, just not how much of an impact it could have made on the war on the main front. The also totally underestimated the terrain and how well the Soviets could defend it. Unlike the Winter War, the Soviets only had to defend and defending is inherently easier (especially in such tough terrain, as the Finns already proved). The combo of these things meant that the German advance in northern Finland went very poorly and resulted in huge losses for no significant gain. After the failure of the 1941 offensive in Finnland, action there was largely restricted to local, static warfare until the Soviet offensive of Summer 1944.

The Finns ran into some of the same problems. The Soviet Armed Forces of 1941 were surprisingly better than those of the year prior. Not only that, they were defending this time and could utilize the same difficult terrain to their advantage as the Finns had done the year before. The Soviets also managed to maintain a cohesive front for the most part, always showing up with more troops to replace those wiped out or surrounded. They also managed to inflict serious casualties on the Finnish forces, which of course presented serious problems for the future.

But in a nutshell, the Finnish theater of operations was a sideshow for everybody but the Finns themselves. The "real war" was fought south of Lenningrad. That was where the war was to be decided and both Germany and the Soviets realized this. Finland itself was of no real importance to either side compared to the main front. As a result, the Germans only comitted a tiny effort and the Soivets only what was necessary to keep the front stalemated. Both nations had MUCH bigger fish to fry.

During 1942 and 1943 the war was fought with great intensity on the rest of the non-Finnish Eastern Front. And by 1943, it was clear that the Germans were at best going to have to sue for peace. This made the Finns understandably uncomfortable. They realized that the Soviet forces facing them could easily double or tripple in no time at all. On top of that, the weapons the Soviets were fielding in 1943 were frighteningly powerful. Even the biggest and best German forces were soundly defeated by the combo of numbers and weapons during the failed 1943 summer offensive to secure the Kursk salient. Therefore, the Finns began to be a bit "concerned" about what 1944 was going to bring to their largely quiet front. And they were correct to worry.

The Soviet summer offensive against Finland in 1944 was a rude shock to both Germans and Finns. It was large, well coordinated, and very well supported. Within a few weeks the Finns realized that they weren't going to be able to hold out for very much longer. They also didn't trust the Germans to help out in a significant way since Bagration had pretty much decimated the main German front.

Sound familiar? It should Now the Finns found themselves in a simliar position to the one they faced at the tail end of the Winter War. The Soviets had the upper hand and it looked pretty certain that the longer the war lasted the less say Finland would have about its very existance. So once again they sued for peace and the Soviets cut them a fairly reasonable deal for similar reasons.

Once again the Soviets knew the big payoffs were not in Finland but in Eastern Europe and Germany itself. Finland was always a sideshow for them and now it became even more of one. The Soviets knew, as they did in 1940, that they could crush Finland totally given time and effort. But time and effort spent doing this meant risking bigger gains elsewhere, including the Far East. Therefore, a quick peace with Finland on favorable terms was preferable to dragging out the conflict with them. Because Finland realized it had no better prospects, it accepted.

Conclusions about the entire conflict...

Finland, technically, lost both the Winter War and the Continuation War. However, compared to what was lost by other nations and the actual outcome of the military conflict itself... they won their right to exist as a free nation. Other nations with long standing problems of Russian/Soviet agression, like Romania and Poland, were not so lucky. But part of the reason for this difference is that Finland was not in the path of the major Soviet emphaisis (political, economic, and military). If Finland had been squished inbetween Poland and Hungary, you can pretty much bet that its future would have been the same as both of those nations. Regardless of the qualities of the Finnish people and their Armed Forces.

While I have a great deal of respect and admiration for the Finns, I refuse to take their experience out of context with the events surrounding their experiences with the Soviet Union. They were a blessed nation for sure, but one of the biggest blessings was that Soviet and traditional Russian interests lay in Central and Eastern Europe and NOT in Scandinavia. Had it been otherwise, I am certain Finland would have been a vasel state of the Soviet Union just as the nations of Central and Eastern Europe were.

Steve

[JonS]

Is this 'korja' thingamijig starting to sound like the bren-tripod to anyone else?

I wouldn't bother with the photos of it guys, the 'grogs' around here have shown a marked disinclination to regard those as of any use.

[Juha Ahoniemi]

Steve summed up winter war quite good

Winter war and continuation war since summer -44 are kind of alike. Let's think those as CM battles: Russian assault vs Finland defence

When turns run out, there is massive damage done, but the defender still holds majority of flags. Turns running out simulates the political situation of the world. Timeframe to totally conquer Finland and destroy its forces has ended.

Losser are bad. But there was no auto-surrender!

What bothers me is that many non-Finns seems to believe that we Finns believe we were/are über and thus should get über artillery, infantry and so on. Finns were good soldiers, sure. BUT THEY WEREN'T WINNING ALL THE TIME! There were losses, bad ones. But in the end, after looking at odds in those wars, it was a great accomplisment to stop the red juggernaut and let it have about 10% of Finnish soil among all other things to maintain independency. Finns went after those lands lost in winter war, but ended up with losing some more. But Finnish army wasn't destroyed like was planned.

-Juha

[Battlefront.com]

Tero,

So, due to circumstances beyond our control a German vetean 81mm mortar FO with a radio gets his barrage delivered in (say) 1-2 minutes on any target location on the map whereas a veteran Finnish 81mm mortar FO with a land line gets his in 3-5 minutes.

You are comparing the wrong things. You should compare wire to wire, radio to radio. Not radio to wire. Reread my post on Page 7 detailing how artillery is simulated.

From what I can see, there is no need to make adjustments to Finnish artillery delay times or FO speeds. I think this is just another case of Tero wanting to inject national bias into the game. And like the other hundred or so attempts he has made, we once again politely decline to destroy the integrity of the simulation to please him

Steve

[Battlefront.com]

Juha,

Steve summed up winter war quite good

Being a non-Finn, and you a Finn, this is high praise It is true that the amount of detailed accounts of the Continuation War (not to mention Winter War) in English are few and far inbetween, that doesn't mean that we "Westerners" as Tero likes to put it are all ignorant. If more books were available in English about these conflicts, I would be the first to buy them. In fact... soon you will see that I have

What bothers me is that many non-Finns seems to believe that we Finns believe we were/are über and thus should get über artillery, infantry and so on.

Unfortunately, this is in part due to the way many past discussions about Finnish abilities have been conducted. Tero in particular has done more to establish this stereotype than anybody else. His unashamed campaign to get "national modifiers" inserted into the game is the prime example. Take a look at his quote about comparing German Radio to Finnish Wire FOs. Why did he not compare German Radio to German Wire FOs, Finnish Radio to German Wire FOs, German Radio to Finnish Radio FOs, and German Wire to Finnish Wire FOs? Because it would weaken his argument that the Finns are being short changed

Steve

[ October 18, 2002, 03:05 PM: Message edited by: Battlefront.com ]