Yeah. I'd want there to be some scope for Soviet offensive operations. Quite how much is needed can be established in testing. Operations in the Pacific would probably be a moot point if they happened at all- it's a long way over rather difficult country from Vladivostok to the Urals.Dicke Bertha said:Oh, and in reply to one of your initial questions: map extension: I think Europe and Caucasus would suffice, all other theatres would be secondary anyway. I am a bit scared off by those scenarios with a multitude of squeezed in small maps to cover Africa, Far East, the moon etc.
So Petsamo to Baku or something...
Could you point me to more information or source material on this subject. A long time ago I saw a book on this, I think titled "Mr. Churchill's Nazis". Aurthor unknown, it has been over twenty+ years since I saw the book.Ben Turner said:Definitely. In fact there were plans made for this and captured weapons were stored in such a way as to allow easy redistribution.
I'm afraid not. All I know on the subject is a couple of references on books discussing the decisions made in the last few months of the war. Nothing detailed.dirk 458 said:Could you point me to more information or source material on this subject.
Obviously, the whole point of using the 50km scale is to simplify huge subjects down to more manageable size. It would seem reasonable to expect to pay a price in realism for that simplification. But in actual practice it’s debatable whether it eliminates more distortion than it causes.Ben Turner said:Most 50km/hex scenarios involve considerable distortion.
Actually I think your own 50km/hex scenarios are some of the few out there that make best possible use of the scale, Bob. This is a great scale for making really enjoyable games- your two scenarios, Fall Grau, etc. All of them are definitely worth a go.Bob Cross said:Anyone can have his or her scale preference for any reason they wish. But I’ve been very pleased with the way the 50km scale approximates reality when I’ve used it, even in comparison to my own more detailed efforts.
Hey, good idea, I had thought about trying to design some kind of consecutively run scenarios about small battles leading up to a big one.Dicke Bertha said:Piero, two unrealistic wishes from someone who don't know squat about design:
1) do a Normandy to Berlin scenario, 10 km/hex, regimental scale. Please, thanks, Once this little appetizer is done, get on to the real challenge
2) do a Normandy and Bagration to Berlin scenario, same scale. Make the Soviet player control the German west front units, and the Western Allied player control the German Ostfront units. Depending on how far the Soviets or the Westerners advance (some EEV) some no-cross line in Germany disappears, all Germans are demobilised, and Western Allies and Soviets turn on each other, very probably with many German units reappearing under western control. Wouldn't that be the monster of monsters?
3) If the monsters use up all events etc, then another variant would be to have cascaded scenarios where for example 1) generates input for a 2) that starts with players entering data. For example chosing set TO's for losses taken, ground gained during 1).
Would this be even remotely doable?
Good points. As an Arty man, 'I fart in your general direction' a la Monty Python, but as a realist and a person who enjoys this game very much, it is better to try and avoid the small pitfalls you brought up and I think 50 km/hex is a good way to do it.Bob Cross said:Obviously, the whole point of using the 50km scale is to simplify huge subjects down to more manageable size. It would seem reasonable to expect to pay a price in realism for that simplification. But in actual practice it’s debatable whether it eliminates more distortion than it causes.
First, it eliminates most of the micro-management distortion. (By that, I mean regiments and smaller being used as if they were independent units, subordinate only to the supreme commander, instead of being subordinated via a command hierarchy.)
Second, it eliminates TOAW’s most gamey tactical problem we’re all too familiar with – attacking with a tiny, throwaway unit while bombarding with everything in sight. This means that it is possible to have actual defensive strongpoints. At 50km/hex, a stack of strong units is a formidable defensive barrier, whereas, at 10km/hex, it’s a juicy target for artillery.
Anyone can have his or her scale preference for any reason they wish. But I’ve been very pleased with the way the 50km scale approximates reality when I’ve used it, even in comparison to my own more detailed efforts.