The Kuniworth-Jersey People's War

[imported_Rannug]

I think Kuni has done a great work in this scenario and I played 5 or 6 solitaire games(1.02) with it and had great fun.

In two games the Axis took Moskwa but after november/december it's all over for the Axis. Russia just keep buying back all those corps mixing it up with a few Armies and a tank now and then and soon they can flood the map. It doesn't matter that the Axis kills a lot of them every turn, more is always coming to fill the ranks.

When the russians kill a panzer at great expense, the Axis can not aford to buy them back since the MPP is needed to repair the still living units.

Investing in tech for Axis is only a dream....

Taking Moskwa has not any special effect (like lower supply for Russian cities for a while) as it should since it was the communication center of Russia.

Finland has a hard time surving the attacks of air, tanks and naval units.

I would like to have a copy of the new version and I hope someting will be done about the problems with the Baltic navy and the Red air force that can hammer at will against the Finns.

My email is elgenstrom@hotmail.com

I like to try a few games HvH if Kuni, John or anyone else is up to it.

This scenario is the best new mod so far I've seen.

[ July 28, 2006, 04:08 AM: Message edited by: Rannug ]

[Kuniworth]

Well thank you Rannug, good to hear you enjoyed it.

Due to the scope of this it's rather hard to balance it, because the front line is just too large. And as axis starts the advance supply, experience and MMP is factors that all come together to make it difficult to balance. Add to this the evolving tactics of players(Scook's bombers destroy axis supply, massed tank attacks etc) makes it difficult to get a good sustainable balance.

And also players are not likely to make the same mistakes done historically. This is a huge disadvantage for axis as there is no evolving process in sc2 where units slowly learn to fight effectivly war which took the russians even to 1943 to understand. But in SC2 this advantage is measured in experience which make it come and go at a more rapid pace.

Also the editor is putting a break on the scenario. Operational capabilities and low upgrade costs are very difficult to parry, hopefully Hubert will adress this. Because one of the axis advantage in 1941 was the advantage of chosing where to outnumber the russians, this was particulary the case in Armygroup Center, the central sector saw the russians heavily outnumbered at start of Barbarossa. Now in SC2 currently you just move troops up and down with no restrictions other than the size of your MMP which means more risk of the "ONE HUGE BATTLE"-syndrom and with Russia at an advantage thx to less prone to attrition and more MMP to move units.

Now I and Jersey will try the new settings and try to see if it works. I by most of the changes however supply 8 may be too high as Scook pointed out, but we will have to see.

I'm posting here below my reply to JerseyJohn over at Buntaland in which I try to analyze our first game;

KUNIWORTH POST;

John!

Glad for all the help you providing.

Ok here are my two cents;

What is the problem?

I think what we saw in our game is that russian recovery is too fast. Germany must kill 5-6 russian units a week to keep the pressure up but this is only possible as long as they kill off the remnants of the russian defense line. Many of those units are in a bad state and isolated and in general - in bad defensive positions. But as soon as Germany reach Mogilev-Smolensk(and similar in North and South) they run out of steem. This is because of HQ:s are by now so far into Russia that supply drops dramatically and the units have to wait for it to reach 6(so HQ get supply 10) before advancing. But in front of Moscow there are a lot of cities close to each other so advance is not as hard as in the north and south.

Now with the high russian MMP this means that Russia get some free turns to reorganize and form solid lines. I think that is ok and gives the german advance a more historical pace. Historically the battle for Smolensk lasted for more than a month and the germans had by then had to resist furious counteroffensives at Smolensk and was in a position that to break the russian central defense they did need to mass units. What happened as you know was they sent Guderian on a detour to help Armygroup South bogged down outside Kiev. So already by then Germans needed to mass forces to advance powerful in one direction where the russians defended.

Now this in my opinion works out quite nice. But with the large russian MMP base this means they can build hordes in the 6 weeks it takes for Armygroup Center and the others to start moving again. And the buildup is so massive that they push Germany into a war of attrition as I did which will easily win russian the war.

There are two reasons for this;

First of all russians are on the defence and can do massive buildups(like I did with tanks) and just "ambush" the germans at location of their own choice, let it be south, center or North. The germans with their tanks spread out to be able to advance naturally gets hammered.

Secondly the low german MMP per turn does'nt allow them to fight a war of attrition. Soviets got double MMP=after a few turns germans will have to go on the defensive, I mean it cost just 200 MMP to reinforce a tank or a fighterplane.

But the dilemma here is that if you increase german MMP they get very strong and can fight a war of attrition=Russia lose everytime. And battles will be so intense that neither side will care for caution and take an extra turn or two and put in replacements. I think this will lead to both side massing all forces and in one gigantic battle the whole campaign will be decided. And that's not what I want.

Now supply as we talked about will help germans for sure, but they would still need to wait for the supply in cities to increase from 0 and that will take time, so russians will still be able to build gigantic hordes of troops and wear down german units in bad supply in a war of attrition. Of course one could turn of scorched earth but I like it as it is now, destruction of cities every time a side conquers one is a good simulation of rail-lines destruction plus it keep a leash on ability to conduct pro-longed offensives. And also it makes offensives a bit harder which is probably good since in sc2 every unit can be attacked from 8 directions which makes defense very hard in any case. So I think this is both good and more historical than doing without.

Reduction of russian MMP is therefore in my opinion probably a better solution but this is an area that one needs to be careful with. Partly because we want it to stay somewhat historical but mostly because fewer soviet units = much easier for Germany to kill. And when Germans get easy kills they get LOT of experience = They become 4-5 stars killing machines. Remember my russian armies at Kiev needed 4 attacks just two kill off a german 1-2 stars infantry corps. Imagine it with the double experience.

What can be done?

I think the best way here is to reduce the Soviet MMP at start. This can be done in several ways, what is an important rule of thumb though is that even if germans reach Leningrad-Moscow-Rostov soviet production should increase as it did historically. Now this is quite hard to do so I can think of some solutions;

- As it stands now russians can buy armies for 150 MMP each and Corps for 100 MMP. This is wuite low and gets even lower when russians rebuy them at 60%(units that got supply 5 or more when destroyed which are almost always the biggest part). Corps are mostly useless until infantry weapon tech are researched and are simply just speedbumbs. However they only cost 60 MMP and armies 90 MMP to rebuy which could be changed.

A german corps cost about 300 MMP plus tech-costs to reach the same combat values as a russian army. I think russian infantry units could very well cost in the same range, but not more than 300 per army I think. I mean historically 1 russian army had the same size as 1-2 german corps so the russian army should have at least the same combat value. But if cost are set to more than 300 the russians can't afford too many and a soviet army with same attack values as a german corps are in this campaign at a great disadvantage anyway as germans got much more experience. I mean we saw many example when you just ripped open soviet armies as though they were made of paper.

If soviet units are increased in cost the corps unit must be thought of. In the beginning it's useless but when russia develops infantry tech-and remember that can go rather fast with the catch up effect - russians can crank out 60 MMP corps and add just some cheap IW and be on the same level as the germans. They then just can outproduce axis easily.

So I say maybe increase cost of russian armies to 300 MMP and corps to 200 MMP?

- Another way around this is reducing russian MMP. As I said the dilemma here is to find a way that actually heavily increase production while cities are lost. Russia starts with like 850 MMP and then soon get IT 1 which brings it up with 25%. Now if we forget about the 1 IT-chit and remove it from the start a german advance to Leningrad-Moscow-Rostov will actually bring Axis and Russia on the same MMP-base, rtougly 500-600!!! And that is wrong while Germany with it's experience can continue to steamroll.

So conclusion is that Russia need to be more in trouble early on but be able to rapidly increase production. So maybe if one should take away the IT-chit to start with and/or also deleted some of the mines on the right side(representing cities) or delete some Ural industries that come in play in 1942. But I like to have the ural industries as they and russian convoys give around 200 which is about the sum of the cities axis are gonna take if they advance Leningrad-Moscow-Rostov. But maybe then reduce IT increases to 20%?

- A third way around this could be to lower russian productive capacity from 100% to say 80% eg from 850 to 700 a turn.

More scenario-problems

I'm very pleased with how many things work out in this scenario, and some things are I'm not that pleased with. I think those should be discussed as well.

GOOD;

- I think the width of the karelian isthmus of 1 hex just south of Vyborg makes the finnish campaign really realistic. No side are interested in entering it as it gives the opponent the possibility to get two units to bear down on the opponents one. So the Karelian Isthmus will probably be locked at historical frontlines for the major part of the time until germans siege Leningrad or russians are in the position to counterstrike later in the war with massive support. They will probably need to advance between Ladoga and Onega to Petrozavodsk and then flank the finns to achieve a breakthrough. That is ok. Meanwhile the static lines brings the finns the possibilty to march with 2-3 units to Petrozavodsk and capture it after some experience gained.

- I also like the central part, Axis can reach Smolensk in mid july which is historical but then need to slow down and frontline will stabilize which is very historical.

-In the south the addition of the stalin line at Kiev often makes Armygroup south turn south to look for Dniepr-crossings which works out really great. That happened historically and also brings Uman into action and the encirclement there can be reproduced.

BAD

- I'm very concerned about Armygroup North and advance on Leningrad. Historically this was very fast and they reach luga in mid july while in this scenario germans take Riga on turn 2-3 but then have a slow advance on Pskov. And after Pskov falls(which takes a long time) the lake Peipus is getting them into big trouble. Historically the 18th Army cleared Estonia with it's two corps but this is not possible here because there is no retreat rules and you need to completly destroy a unit to conquer it's position. So Armygroup North gets very weak if they divide their forces on each side of the lake and it take a lot of time before they can advance. In our game Talinn fell in august which is historical but in the mean time you were many many turns away from taking Pskov which is not good. So what to do here, something needs to be tweaked for sure.

- The swampy terrain at Leningrad is another factor. Although this areas was swampy maybe this need to be reduced just a little to make any advance at all possible in autumn when action points are halfed.

- The crimean got no strategic value at all in this game. Mostly people just don't go there. Maybe because the path to Sevastopl is too long, now that is why I added the city of Kherson on the lower Dniepr but still it might not be to "attractive"? Who knows.

JERSEY

Great Analysis, Kuni, I think you've got the problems perfectly defined!

I hadn't realized the Soviet corps and armies were that inexpensive. Agreed that this, at least as much as the other problems, throws the whole thing out of whack.

Of course, with a slow advance, the Germans are unable to destroy huge sections of the Stalin Line and, if they have to go at them later, against strong Soviet units that are dug in, the war of attrition you mentioned becomes impossible for the Germans to deal with on even an equal basis, let alone conducting an offensive.

My own view of the German-Russian War is something like this, in general terms:

1941 -- It was all Germany's to win, very little the Soviets could do except try to channel the German offensives and make desperate defenses, trading men for time.

1942 -- Early German fiasco outside of Moscow during the winter and hard Soviet counteroffensive that also led to a fiasco for themselves in the spring, making situation a push. At the end of it all the Germans were still significantly stronger but only able to resume the drive on one front: South. They took a lot of territory but Stalin, by hording his new tank armies, was ablt to turn the tide during the winter with the pincers move against Stalingrad.

1943 -- Germany reeling from Stalingrad disasster but still powerful enough to make one last titanic effort. Hitler unwisely chose another battle of attrition, this one at Kursk, in which he ground his own forces, especially the panzers, down to a point they'd never recover from.

1944 -- Germany is lost, can only withdraw and try to hold out as long as possible. Add to this Hitler's by then regular stupidity with things like the Crimea and Army Group Kourland, and the result was outright defeat.

So, bringing that into game focus, I think the thing is to have Germany overwhelmingly strong during the entire first six months, greatly increase new Soviet units in 1942 and 1943, at a point where Germany would, historically, have been sending troops to North Africa and Italy.

-- Suggestion:

Make new Soviet units far too expensive to be built except in very long term strategy: corps 600, army 1000 etc.

New Soviet Units come into the game according to a regular schedule that the Soviet player pays nothing for.

-- I don't know what pace they should come in at, but I'm sure you'd be able to set it down without much trouble.

Something like @start Soviets have 4 tank armies and receive 1 tank army per month for the rest of 1941 and 2 per month starting March 1942.

Infantry corps -- 3 new ones July of 1941, 4 new ones August 1941 and afterwards 2 per month till the end of game.

Infantry Armies -- 1 per month starting in July 1941.

In this way I think the Soviets would be able to recover from their initial losses, but would still need to be very careful with their new units till the situation levels around mid-1942.

-- No suggestions on your other ideas, but they definitely sound good.

Happy to find out that amphibious invasions aren't possible -- that was a huge consideration.

[Kuniworth]

Originally posted by Rannug:

I think Kuni has done a great work in this scenario and I played 5 or 6 solitaire games(1.02) with it and had great fun.

In two games the Axis took Moskwa but after november/december it's all over for the Axis. Russia just keep buying back all those corps mixing it up with a few Armies and a tank now and then and soon they can flood the map. It doesn't matter that the Axis kills a lot of them every turn, more is always coming to fill the ranks.

When the russians kill a panzer at great expense, the Axis can not aford to buy them back since the MPP is needed to repair the still living units.

Investing in tech for Axis is only a dream....

Taking Moskwa has not any special effect (like lower supply for Russian cities for a while) as it should since it was the communication center of Russia.

Finland has a hard time surving the attacks of air, tanks and naval units.

I would like to have a copy of the new version and I hope someting will be done about the problems with the Baltic navy and the Red air force that can hammer at will against the Finns.

My email is elgenstrom@hotmail.com

I like to try a few games HvH if Kuni, John or anyone else is up to it.

This scenario is the best new mod so far I've seen.

Ok first some comments, I think the best thing we can do to improve this scenario is discuss it alot to find out what works or not.

First of all, yes Moscow was an important communication center but in sc2 so far there are no railroads and the possibility to reduce supply for some shorter time. In this scenario the 3 capitals of Russia(Leningrad, Stalingrad, Moscow) all acts like industrial centers eg they act like supply centers. This could of course be debated but I feel that especially Leningrad would be impossible to defend without supply if cut off. There are no possibility to airlift supplies or send it over Ladoga, but well maybe this ougtha be changed.

Regarding Finland. I'd say Finnish Corps placed on Vyborg and the fortified areas are rather hard to kill and seriously damage with ships. And if the russians bring up overwhelming force it's only fair they may advance. But then Germany will punish them a bit extra elsewhere.

The fortifications could actually be abolish as they were just put there to hinder russia from an early rampart. But since I've narrowed the Karelian Istmus it will be hard for any side to advance by force. They need to go around Petrozavodsk to flank the opponent.

The red navy in the Baltic got not much to do except bombing finns as amphibious landings are not included in this scenario. What I would like to have is MINEFIELDS for the seas so Hanko-port would be the only way out for the red navy from the finnish gulf. That way finns would most likely be even more interested in capturing Hanko.

Finally, I love to play a game against you. But let us first together find some really good solutions to the problem at hand.

[imported_Rannug]

When playing the Russians I use 3 or 4 air against Finland + the Baltic Navy and a L-2 tank to defend/take back Viborg. Axis advance in the north is slow so you will be left alone hammering on the Finns. In Nov/Dec your Air/Navy/Tank will have 1-3 bars of experience and sometime during the spring of 42 you will break through. This doesn't drain much MPP from Russia since the air should be out of range of German air anyway. With gained experience it will be very costly to repair the Finns. The minefields in the Baltic Sea could be represented with a movment range of 1 for the Russian Baltic Navy, this would also take a little heat of the Finns.

About the loss of Moskwa effect; One could use a script similar to the "Russian winter strikes" that will be triggered once Moskwa falls...bringing all Russian cities down to 5 or 6.

I also think the random allied bombings are to powerful during 41/42. i HAD bERLIN down to 1 a few times. No AA in Berlin?

The German panzers start out on equal strength but the 41th, 24th and 39th panzers where stronger then the others - I would make them overstrenght 13 with 3 bars. The 56th and 46th panzers where weaker - I would make them overstrength 11 with one bar.

In may every year one should give the Axis some xtra MPP(1000-2000) to boast a summer offensive.

I don't know if all these things are posible with the editor but might be (Kuni)worth a try?

[ July 28, 2006, 09:47 AM: Message edited by: Rannug ]

[Kuniworth]

Maybe a supply-effect could work for Moscow, good idea! I will see if it can be done.

Im not all sceptic about making some german panzer units stronger. Already some infantry Corps are made stronger, those with many divisions.

Regarding extra MMP there is no script making it possible yet. What could be done is add extra resources on germany's west border that activates on certain dates. But Im not sure having resources giving extra MMP for the rest of the game is a wise idea.

Regarding the finns;

what if Germany is stronger and reach Leningrad before spring of 1942? Then Finland's position ought to be better.

[imported_Rannug]

Yes, if the Germans gets close to Leningrad faster the Russians will have other things to do then abuse the poor Finns but what about some restrain on the Baltic Navy...if the scenario would go on to 43 they will all have 4 bars of experience and be a Uber Navy killing of all living thing at the costline. Solution; My idea about 1 movment point or one could also (if possible) give no experience to them after battles.

About giving xtra MPP; start some kind of convoy that is very limited in time?

The 49th mountain corps was also stronger then any other corps and could have 3 bars, same goes for the 4th inf corps.

[imported_Rannug]

Another idea; Why not have Finland as a major nation and thus getting better supply and have a convoy route from Germany to be able to help out with MPP when needed. The convoys will represent German aid add to this a house rule of maximum one German/Axis corps entering any Finish harbour.

[K Jonsson]

Just throwing out some ideas that might work to simulate some of the ideas. Please remember that I haven't used the editor either so some of my suggestions might seem a bit strange...

Extra mpps for german summer offensive

Add an extra minor that is activated on a certain date. To get rid of it, let it be anectaded by lets say USA which also has to be added.

You can also have o convoy from some country, lets call it Kruppsland, that that only comes at a certain date. Easy (?) to fix with events.

paralyzed Soviet at the start

Make all(?) russian cities start with 0 supply.

Have the russian capital start at an island with no connection to the rest of Russia, ie maximum supply level of 5. Then move it to moscow at a certain date.

simulate Soviet disorganization in 1941 and some of the stupid mistakes made by them

Add extra major/minor countries to represent some of the military districts. It would almost force the soviet player to make some suicide attacks. Or maybe put the capital in the urals.

stopping russian fleet from unhistorical adventures

Just place the units in Leningrad and give it a movement of zero.

I hope I have at least given you some new ideas on how to use the editor to simulate what you want.

/Kristian

[JerseyJohn]

Kuni,

Glad to have been of some use in this.

Rannug,

Having a great time reading the discussion between yourself and Kapitain Kuni.

Of all the points you're making, and I like all of them -- along with Kuni's -- the one I most emphatically agree with is the Soviet Baltic and also Black Sea fleets. They're downright terrors in this game and, to be honest, weren't in the actual war.

The Soviets had a lot of submarines, the most famous of them sank a clearly marked hospital ship leaving Kourland for Germany in 1945, stuffed with wounded troops and civilians and it's captain was removed from command! They were of some effectiveness but mainly stayed clear of German destroyers and aircraft. The surface ships in the Baltic, as far as I know, were mainly used as moored armored artillery batteries at Leningrad.

Additionally, Germany could have easily recalled from Norway the Tirpitz and several heavy cruisers along with the two surviviing armored cruisers/pocket battleships anytime it wanted. After the channel run of 1942 it also had Scharnhorst and Prinz Eugen (Gneisenau being too badly damaged by mines for further use). And then there would also have been older ships left in the Baltic posts, of little use against the Royal Navy, but a match for their Soviet counterparts. None of that is possible in the game, so the Soviet Navy roams the seas much like that Frog in Australia that goes anywhere it wants because it has no natural enemies.

[JerseyJohn]

K Johnson,

We posted at the same time. Just saw what you wrote and like your ideas very much, especially the solution for the Baltic Fleet.

Of course, the Russians would still have that submarine unit which would hinder the movement of troops back and forth from Germany to Finland, which is a good thing.

[Kuniworth]

In what way would a movement of 1 for Russian cruisers and BB:s hinder them from bombarding the finns?

[JerseyJohn]

K Johnson's suggestion that the Soviet surface ships (which would make them a single unit) start in port with a mvt of 0, would make them moored artillery.

While I can understand, and even go along with this as a solution for this specific problem, I don't normally care for such fixes. The problem being, of course, that there's no way to allow Germany to enter it's own major naval units into the Baltic.

-- In the Black Sea there doesn't seem to have been any historical counter to the Soviet squadrons. Yet, for reasons I don't know personally, they were a major factor till the retaking of Sevastopol. Could be that it was too risky to use them while the Luftwaffe was still fairly strong. Don't know, though.

[Kuniworth]

Originally posted by Rannug:

Yes, if the Germans gets close to Leningrad faster the Russians will have other things to do then abuse the poor Finns but what about some restrain on the Baltic Navy...if the scenario would go on to 43 they will all have 4 bars of experience and be a Uber Navy killing of all living thing at the costline. Solution; My idea about 1 movment point or one could also (if possible) give no experience to them after battles.

About giving xtra MPP; start some kind of convoy that is very limited in time?

The 49th mountain corps was also stronger then any other corps and could have 3 bars, same goes for the 4th inf corps.

Rannug, I don't think it's possible to delete experience for certain units. What could be done is raise all attack and defence values for all units so experience matters less. But then you get other problems.

Regarding the infantry corps, yes as you see already today those german infantry corps with more than 2 infantry divisions start with 12 in strength while the others start at 11.

One thought regarding panzers could be to transform the weaker panzer corps into Mechanized Units(like Fredo does in his mod with Fab) but then either mechanized or regular units need to be engineers.

[Kuniworth]

Originally posted by JerseyJohn:

K Johnson,

We posted at the same time. Just saw what you wrote and like your ideas very much, especially the solution for the Baltic Fleet.

Of course, the Russians would still have that submarine unit which would hinder the movement of troops back and forth from Germany to Finland, which is a good thing.

Yes it may work.- But how to simulate the Baltic Fleet evacuating it's primary base at Talinn in august to seek cover in Kronstadt?

[JerseyJohn]

This is starting to make me dizzy.

Seems at this point that any adjustment, while it might solve one problem, will create another, as Kuni says.

[JerseyJohn]

Originally posted by Kuniworth:

[...] Yes it may work.- But how to simulate the Baltic Fleet evacuating it's primary base at Talinn in august to seek cover in Kronstadt?

Right. That's what I was wondering about also. Can't have it both ways.

[imported_Rannug]

It would not totaly hinder them but the readiness will be lower since it will take some time to go back to Leningrad and resuply and it would be harder to coordinate any attacks.

Another idea is to have the whole Navy represented by one single Battleship stuck in Leningrad harbour unit with a strong shoreattack but with a movement of 0 but a firing range of 2. The sub will offcourse remain.

The Black Sea Navy could then be only cruisers and should only be 2 units.

[Kuniworth]

Ok how about this. Reduce russian MMP base to 70%, increase cost for russian units to 300(corps) and 350(army). 350 is about the same cost of a german corps with AT-1 and IW-1.

Now leave supply at level 6.

Russians will get like 600 MMP at start. It aint much and will force him to either try to slow down axis or save forces and go for IT-tech.

[JerseyJohn]

Kuni's MPP idea sounds good to me.

Rannug's naval suggestions also. Not sure what the tile size is so I can't give an opinion on the naval bombardment range out of Leningrad, but assuming it's 10 or so miles to a tile I think a range of 2 for (I'd assume pre-sighted) naval artillery sounds reasonable as at least one of them is a battleship.

[imported_Rannug]

Yes, I think it might be better to leave the supply at 6 and lower the MMP base. This will make Russia weak at start but not make it to easy for the Axis in mid/late war.

[imported_Rannug]

I tried to put the movment cost for a Battleship to zero but 1 was the lowest value. But why not place a minefeild around Leningrad, this shold be possible to do with the "around Africa" arrows. I would pick tile 27,6 and 28,7 and 28,6. If the Battleship moves there it will be sent to some far away and isolated lake with no supply.

The look of the arrows could be changed to a mine.

[glenmorangie]

Best thread for a while!

[Curry]

Kuni,

Great mod. Although my experience against the AI is like Runnungs. The only problem is he is better than me and I just got to Moscow. On the door steps of Lenigrad. I guess historically not bad but in the south very little headway. Didnt even take Kiev. Again just at the door of Kiev. The real problem is the Russians just keep coming and coming and coming. I think the problem is as you stated in one of the posts above, in 1941 the Russian units were not close to how good the Russian units were in 1943 or 1944. But in the game its all the same. Hard to balance.

I will try a few games with the AI set at a lower level. But that is just the AI. Perhaps in a human verses human game the Axis could get a bid like we use to do in SC1.

Anyway it was great fun and thanks for all the hard work you did.

[Scook]

I am really liking the discussion of the minutae of Baltic Fleets. It really makes a difference to the Finns though! I have nothing to add to the naval discussion that hasn't been said.

I have been playing around with V1.03 vs. the prototype V1.04. I have to admit I like the Soviets having all those tanks in 1.03. What I am playing with is adding 2 movement and 1 to all attack and defense of the Panzer Korps. At the highest level,the panzers have more staying power and maneuverabilty, making them the glue that holds the German Army together.

I am also attempting to script all the initial Soviet Tank forces so they exist and can't be rebuilt or upgraded.It would be great if I could get it show those tanks couldn't be reinforced too. That would be nice and fragile.

[Curry]

Kuni

Will post this here hope it fits

Testing a game of the lastest version of your excellent mod. BTW - the SC community should commend you for this effort, great job. Excellent.

I tested how fast the Germans could get to Smolensk. Historically this key city fell on July 16th, with the Germans beginning the battle on July 10th and it continued for some time with an encirclement after the capture of the city which the soviets broke for awhile. This gives a good idea of how fast the Germans drove into Russia.

In the mod when I play a hot seat game. I move the Russians just out of the way so as not to impeed the Germans, the fastest the Germans can get to Smolensk is to the hex outside the city on the game date of July 13th. That is only of course armor with the Russians not getting in the way at all. The ground troops are still way back.

Could the map be just a bit too large. Just a question?

In a teaching mode the game teaches me how fast the Germans drove into the USSR and still could not conquer them. The Blizkrige failed for one of many reasons in that the USSA was just too large.

Thanks for the mod great job.