1.8(a)

[Mark Stevens]

I've posted 1.8(a) on the Board, and will ask Ulver to update the other depots. All of the changes are listed in the 'Barbarossa and other minor changes' thread below. In addition:

The Red Army reconstitution hexes are now more widely spread around the USSR, including one Tank Formation in Omsk to represent the trans-Ural factories, and one mixed Formation in Baku to simulate it's importance as an oil production centre. I did toy with the idea of making a whole Mechanised Infantry or Tank Formation reconstitute there, but on balance it seemed too drastic. Russia did have other sources of oil, and the British and USA would presumably have made enormous efforts to ship in tankers of the stuff had Baku fallen.

As a very minor change, I've made one of the Priphet Partisan units Amphibious, and added a few more Flooded Marsh (although none with unrepairable bridges!) and Jungle hexes. The more I read, the more I think that our previous versions of the scenario didn't make the Priphet Marshes difficult enough terrain.

The other changes, many suggested by Dan, are detailed in the earlier thread.

The most significant thing is the automatic triggering of 'Barbarossa' if it's not used six turns after the German DoW on the USSR: I'll be interested to see how this affects future games. I've tested it extensively, and can promise that it works!

If anyone does fancy taking up the challenge of redoing the entire game, including utilising the spare Events that Dan identified, and maybe rewriting the whole land and air ORBAT using SkyVon's research, I'd be happy to give them any advice that I can. Regrettably I'm not up for it myself. I won't make any more changes to this version unless someone spots a deadly bug, or we reach a consensus on this Board.

Meanwhile I leave you with one of Mussolini's favourite slogans: "Believe - Obey - Fight!"; although most of you seem to ignore the first two.

[Palantir]

Hi Mark,

:banana:man and I :cheeky: are just starting a 1.8a.
We'll let you know how it goes, in a YEAR! :thumup:

[Chuck?]

Good job Mark. I got a feeling that there will be a 1.8(b) though.:cry:

[Mark Stevens]

I.8 (z) if past experience is anything to go by!

Who's the giant dancing condom meant to be?

[Siberian HEAT]

Originally posted by Mark Stevens
I.8 (z) if past experience is anything to go by!

Who's the giant dancing condom meant to be?

Uh, I think that is meant to be me! It's only a banana though...get your head out of that London gutter!:bounce:

[Siberian HEAT]

As a side note, by putting PZ 38t's in the starting German PZ corps (v1.8a), it just about halved their starting strengths from what they were in 1.8. Just wondering if that was intentional?

[Mantis]

Ugh. Thrilling. Have you noted how long it will take to get them back up to par?

[Siberian HEAT]

Originally posted by Mantis
Ugh. Thrilling. Have you noted how long it will take to get them back up to par?

No I just sat down this morning to play my turn 1 against Kerry after we decided to stop our newly started 1.8 game and pick up 1.8a instead. Since I had just moved in 1.8 I knew my unit strengths pretty well. When I opened up 1.8a and saw a 5-6 instead of a 10-6 PZ Corp...I knew something was amiss.

I can work through it if that was intentional...

[Dan Neely]

I think it's intentional. Mark said he intended to have the weaker pz corps appear before hte stronger ones.

[Mark Stevens]

Yes, wholly intentional. I've deliberately rescheduled the Panzer Corps so that the weakest appear earliest. In 1939 it wasn't the strength of the German armour that beat the Poles, but the fact that the west of the country was surrounded from East Prussia, Germany itself, and the newly annexed Czechoslovakia. Although German proganda made a lot of the new armoured tactics, they were very much the icing on the cake, which was actually a good old-fashioned infantry encirclement. The armour should be handy for getting behind the slow Polish units, putting them out of supply and preventing them retreating as fast, but not for head on assaults. All this from Len Deighton's 'Blitzkreig' - a very good, readable account of the war in Europe up to Dunkirk.

In earlier games its been perfectly feasible to stomp into Warsaw in two moves or so with the armour and motorised infantry: nothing remotely like that occured in 1939.

"Meanwhile the little PzKw Is and IIs made up virtually the whole German tank arm. By the time that Poland was invaded, only 211 PzKw IVs had been delivered and even fewer PzKw IIIs, scarcely more than the Panzer Lehr (tank testing) unit needed to do its battlefield evaluation for Army Ordnance."

It'll also make it less likely that the Germans can swing south after Poland without pausing for breath and knock out Yugoslavia and Greece.

Tanks were more useful for their psychological value than for their ability to crush determined, entrenched infantry in open battle. That came later.

By Spring 1940 the Germans will have more and better armour, provided that the Axis Player hasn't bled it white by trying to roll all over Eastern Europe and the Balkans.

[Dan Neely]

Is this the version in the warfarehq scen depo? I know you uploaded a 1.8a to it a month and a half ago and wanted to confirm that it was the most recent revision.

[Mark Stevens]

No, sorry Dan, the earlier version was - or should have been - 1.8. I may have been asked to fill in a version field when I first uploaded it in September and typed (a), but 1.8 (a) is the most recent, with the automatic trigger for 'Barbarossa', some of the changes you suggested, the revised German panzer deployment and the changes to the Red Army's reconstitution hexes.

If that is the case, I suppose that I should reload this one as (b)?

As you know, differentiating the scenarios has never been my strong point, but if it causes confusion I could rename the latest.

It's everyone else's fault for continually suggesting improvements, hem hem.

[Siberian HEAT]

Originally posted by Mark Stevens
No, sorry Dan, the earlier version was - or should have been - 1.8. I may have been asked to fill in a version field when I first uploaded it in September and typed (a), but 1.8 (a) is the most recent, with the automatic trigger for 'Barbarossa', some of the changes you suggested, the revised German panzer deployment and the changes to the Red Army's reconstitution hexes.

If that is the case, I suppose that I should reload this one as (b)?

As you know, differentiating the scenarios has never been my strong point, but if it causes confusion I could rename the latest.

It's everyone else's fault for continually suggesting improvements, hem hem.

I just pulled down 1.8a yesterday and it had the PZ38t in the German starting corps. Can I assume this is the latest version of the scenario?

Thanks.

[SkyVon]

So...then there will be a 1.8b? :lier: :whist: :cheeky:

[Dan Neely]

Looking it over, I have noticed a few odities. Is anyone here even slightly surprised that I started picking nits the same day I DLed the scenario? Seriously though, if it wasn't so close to perfect I wouldn't be quibbling over minutiae. :thumup: :clap: :thumup: :clap: :thumup:



Most russian formations have between 20 and 30% formation supply levels, but 3 have values well outside this range. Central Reserves 85%, soviet art 10%, gaurds reserve 10%. Central reserves has rail arty, and various 'heavy' ~10-10 motorized/mech corps. In the former cases with massive arty barrages being the hallmark of a soviet attack and with the gaurds being elite troops, their lower supply levels don't seem to fit. With a supply level in the 20s to low 30s these units will only be able to launch 1 single attack, or move thier full distance once a month without running out of supplies. The latter just seems disproportionately high.

The second is that the 1st yugo partisan OOB has 75% supply, and the 2nd and 3rd only 10%. In this case I'd recommend boosting the other 2 to a similar level. As is stands the partisans will almost univerasally reconstitute with minimal supplys left and be killed again before they can regain any. Sincy supply is a major factor in combat effectiveness, increasing it would help prevent the large tito units from being speedbumps.

On an unrelated related note, shouldn't the Caspian have restricted naval transport just like the Black/Baltic seas do. especially in the axis case, large ammounts of shipping wouldn't be readily available for landing troops in the rear of hte allied line.

[Mark Stevens]

Damn it, Dan, I've an ugly feeling that I agree with you on most of these points as well! It's getting a bit spooky.

The Central Reserves is largely - although not exclusively - composed of those 'what if' units that are a bit speculative: Eastern crusade, fall of Moscow, fall of Stalingrad. I think we found that early versions of an Eastern Crusade game were a walkover for the Axis, so we deliberately made the units stronger to give the Soviets some tougher units to form some sort of line before the other reinforcements kick in, but looking at the raw figures it does seem disproportionate. Perhaps more units, but lower supply might be better? I'm sure that an unprovoked attack on the Soviet Union by the whole of Central and Eastern Europe would have led to the Russians springing to arms more willingly, and beavering away in the factories, than they did in June 1941, and the loss of Moscow and Stalingrad would have produced an all-out response. I'll take a closer look.

Massed artillery was, by definition, very heavy and slow, and maybe one big assault per month would be justified; and the 'Guards' designation was often more of an honorific than a genuine reflection of combat ability (all right, not Chuikov's men at Stalingrad), but perhaps making them roughly the same as the rest of the Red Army would be more sensible.

The Partisans: we were trying to make them unpredictable - they ranged from quite decent, motivated, properly trained men down to armed bandits, but the range does appear too wide - I'll even it out a bit.

But that'll mean (b) or possibly (c)!!!

Will anyone ever finish a game, think to themselves "That was quite challending, I'll give it another go.", and still be able to recognise the scenario? I still get direct enquiries, not via the Board, from brave souls struggling with 1.5(c) or whatever, and wondering why their Spanish haven't mobilised, or the Colonial Italians won't surrender: it breaks my heart to tell them that they're driving a Trabant when a BMW, or at least a Toyota, is now doing the rounds.

[Mantis]

Is a Trabant one of those little English 3 wheel jobbies that Mr. Bean loves harrassing?

[Kraut]

nop, it's a car built in the former DDR :)

http://www.luffa.nu/shock/bild/trabant.jpg

http://digilander.libero.it/cuoccimix/TRABANT-WHITE.JPG

[Mantis]

Looks close to an Austin Mini. Or a little like a Lada...

[Kraut]

Originally posted by Mark Stevens
I've posted 1.8(a) on the Board, and will ask Ulver to update the other depots.

Ahhh... were exactly can I download the new 1.8a ? What board are you talking about ? :hmmm:

If I undestand you currectly the 1.8a posted here at WarfareHQ is in reality the 1.8 but were is 1.8a ?? Couldn't find it at Ulvers HP either.

[Mark Stevens]

The real, latest game, 1.8 (a) is on the Board under Depots. I've an ugly feeling that when I posted the original 1.8 there's a compulsory field asking for version number, so I probably stuck (a) in there.

[Mantis]

Even tho I have (a), I still don't follow you. On this board? On Ulver's page?

[Chuck?]

I think he means at WarfareHQ.

[Dan Neely]

The timestampt listed for the version in the WFHQ scenario archive is 7/31, if that's not the current version where is it?

[Mark Stevens]

*******. Let's call the newest version 1.8 (b). I've just tried to upload it, but got an error message saying 'This page cannot be displayed'. I'm certain that I filled in all of the fields, and will keep trying.:(

[Chuck?]

LOL. I knew there would be a version 1.8(b)! :banana:

[Siberian HEAT]

Mark, I sent you a PM to this effect... but send me the new version and I will make sure it gets somewhere that everyone can download it.

I :love: new versions!

[Mark Stevens]

Thanks, but it seems OK now: I'm crap at pressing the right buttons.

Cheers

Now, where can I put an updated Full Briefing for 1.8 (b)? It's a Wordpad document, unzipped, about 20 pages long.

[Siberian HEAT]

Originally posted by Mark Stevens
Thanks, but it seems OK now: I'm crap at pressing the right buttons.

Cheers

Now, where can I put an updated Full Briefing for 1.8 (b)? It's a Wordpad document, unzipped, about 20 pages long.


Mark, you can post it to this thread. When you are typing in a new reply, you can use the "attach file" option to put the briefing into your message.

I am going to set you up with your own page over the weekend if I can get some free time to do so. That way everyone has a central depot where they know the latest information can be found. :thumup:

[Mantis]

Can you link it to HQ?

[Siberian HEAT]

Originally posted by Mantis
Can you link it to HQ?

Yeah, that is what I was trying to say... It will be a page inside WarfareHQ so everyone can easily find the latest info for this scenario!

:love:

[Mark Stevens]

Thanks again, but it isn't one of the file extensions mentioned below. Can I send it directly to your personal e-mail address?

'PC Illiterate'

[Siberian HEAT]

Originally posted by Mark Stevens
Thanks again, but it isn't one of the file extensions mentioned below. Can I send it directly to your personal e-mail address?

'PC Illiterate'

Sure!

[Mantis]

HEAT, can you please let us know one way or another when/how it's available? I'd like to get the latest version as well. Thanx!

[Chuck?]

You can put it in the new scenario archive page now.

[Bad Axe]

I have an opponent, and we need the notes and the latest version of the scenario, presumably 1.8(b). Any help?

Edit - We have 1.8(a) which is, I think, the latest. I would like to see the new notes, as all we have are the notes from the EA web site. Thanks.

[Mark Stevens]

I think that Siberian Heat's going to post 1.8(b) and the latest Briefing soon, but if you send me your personal e-mail address I'd be happy to mail them directly.

[Dan Neely]

Several hours after HEAT shoehorned 1.8b into the old scen archieve Maddog put up the new one. You'll have to post the scen into it yourself.

[Mantis]

I don't think Mark would cry foul if HEAT got to it first... lol