Finnish Troops

WaterRabbit

Member
Joined
Jul 25, 2004
Messages
2,566
Reaction score
27
Location
Somewhere
Country
llGreenland
One thing I have never understood was the design decisions behind Finnish Troops. At the outbreak of the Winter War the two Nationalities’ squads would have looked something like this:

Finnish Rifle Squad

1 x 9mm SMG (M1931 Suomi)
9 x 7.62 mm Rifle (M1891 Mosin-Nagant Bolt Action Rifle)

Russian Rifle Squad

1 x 7.62 mm LMG (DP Ruchnoy Pulemyot 1928)
11 x 7.62 mm Rifle (M1891 Mosin-Nagant Bolt Action Rifle)

So why are Finnish 1st Line Squads represented by a 6-4-8 and Russian 1st Line Squads represented by a 4-4-7 given the almost identical make-up?

It seems to me that the 1st Line Finnish Squad should be represented by a 4-5-7 squad at best – just like British 1st line squads (the extra point of range and the no cowering representing the greater willingness to engage the enemy). While the Finns were able to hold off the Soviet Army for 4 months, their success had as much to do with:

a) winter (their tactical doctrine embraced it, USSR did not);
b) terrain (robbed the USSR of its advantage in Arty and Armor);
c) on the defense with both of the above advantages;
d) Russian army suffering from political control and not military control;
e) Russian supply problems due to terrain;
f) Superior knowledge of the terrain;
g) poor Red Army tactics that were changed for the February offensive (also what called off the December offensive)

Additionally, while the Sissi-Joukkeet (Guerrilla ski troops) were definitely crack troops, they were mainly employed to disrupt Red Army supply. There were in effect commandos.

The Finns did not have much in the way of Artillery assets and suffered from not having wireless sets to call in artillery (only field phones and messengers). Their Armor assets were non-existant.

Finally, the number of weapons produced/acquired does not support the wide spread use of SMGs even in the Continuance War. The number of bolt-action rifles in use greatly exceeds that of any other small arms.

I could possibly see an argument for a Finnish 6-4-8 to be am amalgamation of both a Rifle Squad and a MG Squad:

Finnish MG Squad
1 x 7.62 mm LMG (Lahti-Saloranta M/26)
2 x 9 mm Pistol (Lahti L-35 Pistol)
5 x Rifle (M/91 Mosin-Nagant M1891 Rifle)

However, this would create a two squad platoon instead of a four squad platoon. At best I could see this creating a 5-5-7 unit with Assault and Spraying Fire. Perhaps someone else has some better insight into the ASL design of these units? Perhaps the design of the Finnish module will correct some of this (assuming it has not become a sacred cow of asl).
 

Ole Boe

Member
Joined
Apr 21, 2004
Messages
2,874
Reaction score
12
Location
there...
Country
llNorway
WaterRabbit said:
One thing I have never understood was the design decisions behind Finnish Troops. At the outbreak of the Winter War the two Nationalities’ squads would have looked something like this:
...
So why are Finnish 1st Line Squads represented by a 6-4-8 and Russian 1st Line Squads represented by a 4-4-7 given the almost identical make-up?
Because the Finns kicked Russian butts big time :horse:

It seems to me that the 1st Line Finnish Squad should be represented by a 4-5-7 squad at best – just like British 1st line squads (the extra point of range and the no cowering representing the greater willingness to engage the enemy). While the Finns were able to hold off the Soviet Army for 4 months, their success had as much to do with:

a) winter (their tactical doctrine embraced it, USSR did not);
b) terrain (robbed the USSR of its advantage in Arty and Armor);
c) on the defense with both of the above advantages;
d) Russian army suffering from political control and not military control;
e) Russian supply problems due to terrain;
f) Superior knowledge of the terrain;
g) poor Red Army tactics that were changed for the February offensive (also what called off the December offensive)
I guess most of those points were considered too hard to implement, so they chose the easy way, make the units god-like.
While some of the points can be simulated in ASL, many of them cannot easily be, especially not d-g.

Perhaps someone else has some better insight into the ASL design of these units?
I think its so simple as: "The finns kicked russian butt, and the easiest way of complishing that is to make the units much better". Don Greenwod & co. weren't as focused on accurate historical portrayal as many later designers are.

Perhaps the design of the Finnish module will correct some of this (assuming it has not become a sacred cow of asl).
Well, it will include a more normal line of MMC in addition to the old. I don't remember their stats though.
 

AdrianE

Senior Member
Joined
Feb 14, 2003
Messages
913
Reaction score
268
Location
Ottawa, Ontario
Country
llCanada
I think that this is another case of a design decision that was made because ASL is a DESIGN FOR EFFECT game not a historically accurate game.
 

paulkenny

Member
Joined
Jan 28, 2003
Messages
3,848
Reaction score
54
Location
USA
I believe this will be rectified in teh upcoming module Haaka Patatoe.

There is new MMC being developed.

I think.
 

WaterRabbit

Member
Joined
Jul 25, 2004
Messages
2,566
Reaction score
27
Location
Somewhere
Country
llGreenland
Ole Boe said:
Because the Finns kicked Russian butts big time :horse:

I think its so simple as: "The finns kicked russian butt, and the easiest way of complishing that is to make the units much better". Don Greenwod & co. weren't as focused on accurate historical portrayal as many later designers are.
Unfortunately, this is just simply not true. The Finns stalled the Red Army. Once the Red Army broke through the Mannerheim Line, the Finns had no choice but to capitulate. The Feburary offensive systematically dismanteled the bunkers, trenches, and other fortifications.

Point d) is already represented in the system by commissars.
Point e) is represented by proper scenario design.
Point f) is represented by SSR used for partisans, like the cost to enter woods is only 1 mf instead of 2 mf.
Point g) is the hardest to represent even through scenario design, but still can be done.

The main issue I see here is that the Finnish troops in ASL have been given a large number of tactical advantages without the normal disadvantages (other than leadership) that other units receive. I have never really enjoyed any of the Finnish scenarios because of this -- they are simply just too over the top. They are generally one-sided affairs that are the Finnish player's to loose and not the Russian player's to win.
 

jasperdog3329

Member
Joined
Nov 28, 2003
Messages
505
Reaction score
2
Location
Toronto
Country
llCanada
I had always thought the 6 FP was a reflection of both 2-3 SMGs and 1 LMG per squad plus a high willingness to engage in a firefight. Based on the above thread and the information below it doesn't appear that the superb Suomi SMG was plentiful until well into the war. HP should probably therefore take an approach similar to Gung Ho's USMC counters and reflect changes in armament and squad organization over time.

In addition, if HP takes a historical bent then it should somehow reflect early war Finn units that were extremely poorly armed (a bolt action rifle OR pistol per man) and sent off to scavenge Russian small arms. They might look like German 1939-1941 paratroopers who have not yet found an arms container.

In terms of weapon availability, I came across this info. The asterisks indicate that total includes some captured Russian weapons of similar characteristics.

Rifle M/91 to M/39 7.62x53R # avail 1939: 254581 # avail 1941: 507601* # acquired during Continuation War: 366079*

Submachine gun M/31 'Suomi' 9.00 mm # avail 1939: 4150 # avail 1941: 10650 # acquired during Continuation War: 53664*

Light machine gun M/26 'Lahti-Saloranta' 7.62x53R # avail 1939: 2900 # avail 1941: 14601* # acquired during Continuation War: 6355*

Machine gun M/09 'Maxim' 7.62x53R # avail 1939: 2405 # avail 1941: 5252* # acquired during Continuation War: 2483*
 
Joined
Feb 24, 2004
Messages
1,181
Reaction score
0
Location
Staten Island, NY
The Finn, man for man, was superior as a fighting man to the Russian soldier, for that time and place. The figures for the Finn counters are but abstractions to reflect that superiority. It is simpler to make that abstraction then to create a progressive table or conditional rules to reflect change over time.

The final penetration of the Mannerheim Line did bring the Finns to the table. However, it was not Russian tactical superiority, it was superior Russian numbers. The Russians did learn from their early mistakes in the campaign, and made adjustments. In the end, it was simple attrition that defeated the Finns.
 

jasperdog3329

Member
Joined
Nov 28, 2003
Messages
505
Reaction score
2
Location
Toronto
Country
llCanada
"The Finn, man for man, was superior as a fighting man to the Russian soldier, for that time and place. The figures for the Finn counters are but abstractions to reflect that superiority."

Iron Mike, I don't think you will get much of an argument on your point BUT I have seen some ASL analyses which break down the firepower of a squad into individual weapons. Typically a bolt action rifle is worth 0.25 FP and a SMG 0.9 FP in these calculations. So a squad with 9-11 M-N rifles and a Suomi SMG nets out at 3.15-3.65 FP. IF you add an integral LMG (highly debatable whether this is valid) you add 1-2 FP and some overall range. I don't see 6 FP being realistic early in the war EXCEPT as a design abstraction to reflect historically strong performance.
 

rdw5150

it's just a game
Joined
Feb 13, 2003
Messages
8,288
Reaction score
941
Location
Erie, PA
First name
Roger
Country
llUnited States
I think what Mike is saying is that in the "ASL world" the Finn HAD to be treated differently, so the scenerios would be a boring affair.

While they did end up loosing the Winter War, they did hold off a far greater greater force (in terms of numbers) for a long time and this had to be abstracted for the "ASL world".

Were they the supermen that ASL makes them out to be, no. But seems to work OK.

In the end I have played very few Finn scenarios as no one seems to want to play the Russians :D

Peace

Roger
 

'Ol Fezziwig

Repressed Dissident
Joined
Nov 18, 2004
Messages
6,640
Reaction score
725
Location
hazy fold of reality
Country
llUnited States
jasperdog3329 said:
...BUT I have seen some ASL analyses which break down the firepower of a squad into individual weapons. Typically a bolt action rifle is worth 0.25 FP and a SMG 0.9 FP in these calculations. So a squad with 9-11 M-N rifles and a Suomi SMG nets out at 3.15-3.65 FP. IF you add an integral LMG (highly debatable whether this is valid) you add 1-2 FP and some overall range. I don't see 6 FP being realistic early in the war EXCEPT as a design abstraction to reflect historically strong performance.
Yet, even that isn't all together accurate. The IJA 13 man squads, Italian 18 man squads would warrant, what, 5 and 6 FP? Obviously, other factors are weighing in, performance of the units in question, tactical employment etc. I agree the 6 FP may be too high, but my main beef would be the reduced range of Finnish MMCs. While most Finn/Russian scenarios take place in the closer wooded terrains, the aforementioned Mannerheim Line battles had some extended range possibilities for both sides.
As for the 6 FP, it would appear a greater preponderance of SMGs & LMGs (actually, more a BAR-type weapon than true LMG) was factored in.
The 6 could have been given to show greater effective use of the similiar weaponry used by the Finns. Likely, we'll never know the nuts and bolts rationales, but I have heard the Finn MMC structure will be different in HP. Given that Finnish ASL'ers are involved, I'm confident the values will be closer 'actuality'
I must say, however, I'm surprised there aren't more non-forest Finn scenarios.
 

Robin Reeve

The Swiss Moron
Staff member
Moderator
Joined
Jul 26, 2003
Messages
19,597
Reaction score
5,557
Location
St-Légier
First name
Robin
Country
llSwitzerland
I thought the "6" FP factor was a way to simulate an "inherent" -1 DRM (which is quite equivalent to a column shift from 4 to 6), as Finns self rally and had more independance and initiative than the Russians...
This could also compensate the poor leadership DRMs.
So a 648 could approximately simulate a 447 with an inherent 8-1 leader...
The FP is not only a question of firepower : also a question of will to fight, ammo provision, etc.
 

paulkenny

Member
Joined
Jan 28, 2003
Messages
3,848
Reaction score
54
Location
USA
I think it also has something to do with the relative ability vis a vis their opponent. Giving the Finns 6 FP gets them to the 3:2 column on the CC table. They were generally tactically much better in 39 that the designers likely game them some relatively higher values.
 
Joined
Feb 24, 2004
Messages
1,181
Reaction score
0
Location
Staten Island, NY
[QUOTE='Ol Fezziwig]Yet, even that isn't all together accurate. The IJA 13 man squads, Italian 18 man squads would warrant, what, 5 and 6 FP? Obviously, other factors are weighing in, performance of the units in question, tactical employment etc. I agree the 6 FP may be too high, but my main beef would be the reduced range of Finnish MMCs. While most Finn/Russian scenarios take place in the closer wooded terrains, the aforementioned Mannerheim Line battles had some extended range possibilities for both sides.
As for the 6 FP, it would appear a greater preponderance of SMGs & LMGs (actually, more a BAR-type weapon than true LMG) was factored in.
The 6 could have been given to show greater effective use of the similiar weaponry used by the Finns. Likely, we'll never know the nuts and bolts rationales, but I have heard the Finn MMC structure will be different in HP. Given that Finnish ASL'ers are involved, I'm confident the values will be closer 'actuality'
I must say, however, I'm surprised there aren't more non-forest Finn scenarios.[/QUOTE]

The Finns were constantly counting their bullets. It seems reasonable that short range for MMCs would account for tighter fire control. Waitng, so to speak, "to see the whites of their eyes."

As far as non-forested Finn scenarios, the Mannerheim Line battles were mostly slugfests, with the Russians hammering the defenders, and the defenders rallying to repel. Early the Russians just went in in human waves, wnd the Finns just mowed them down. Later, the Russians pummeled the defenders under artillery barrages, followed by fresh troops on top of fresh troops. Not very sexy.

Battles on the frozen Gulf and the many lakes were usually target practice for the Finns. The far north battles bogged down quickly to a stalemate due to the cold and arctic night, again not very sexy.

The battles in the central part of Finland, as the Russians tried to move through a near prehistoric landscape, was where the Finns earned their reputation. The Finns striking fast and hard against defenders renowned for their defensive skills. far more interesting.
 

WaterRabbit

Member
Joined
Jul 25, 2004
Messages
2,566
Reaction score
27
Location
Somewhere
Country
llGreenland
Robin said:
I thought the "6" FP factor was a way to simulate an "inherent" -1 DRM (which is quite equivalent to a column shift from 4 to 6), as Finns self rally and had more independance and initiative than the Russians...
This could also compensate the poor leadership DRMs.
So a 648 could approximately simulate a 447 with an inherent 8-1 leader...
The FP is not only a question of firepower : also a question of will to fight, ammo provision, etc.
This is at least a rational that makes sense.

Iron Mike USMC said:
The battles in the central part of Finland, as the Russians tried to move through a near prehistoric landscape, was where the Finns earned their reputation. The Finns striking fast and hard against defenders renowned for their defensive skills. far more interesting.
All of these scenarios so far have been boring. Sorry. They all become 'ambush' situations. The stealthy Finns ambush the the Lax Russians and kill them in a 3:2 -1 melee attack or better. Yawn. The overall scenario situation becomes the same.

I think part of the problem with Finnish scenarios is that they loaded them up with so many Finnish advantages that is makes it difficult to balance and make them interesting. What you have are scenarios that highlight all of the Finnish advantages, none of their disadvantages verus Russians with all of their disadvantages and none of their advantages.
 

'Ol Fezziwig

Repressed Dissident
Joined
Nov 18, 2004
Messages
6,640
Reaction score
725
Location
hazy fold of reality
Country
llUnited States
Iron Mike USMC said:
As far as non-forested Finn scenarios, the Mannerheim Line battles were mostly slugfests, with the Russians hammering the defenders, and the defenders rallying to repel. Early the Russians just went in in human waves, wnd the Finns just mowed them down. Later, the Russians pummeled the defenders under artillery barrages, followed by fresh troops on top of fresh troops. Not very sexy.
Perhaps after the 'Line' was identified: in the Summa/Lahde sector, the Russians were unaware of the existence of the fortifications until the defenders openened fire on them. Having scenarios showing the disparity of the entrenched Finns and the uncoordinated Russian attacks is little different than other scenarios already extant. The Russians offensive doctrine was little different than the more reknowned German blitzkrieg. The difference, obviously, was in the ability to actually -implement- it, which the Russians, for a variety of reasons, were unable to do until 1940.

For example, there was a preponderance of armour/inf/artillery/air on the Russian side but a nearly total lack of coordination between the various arms. Air support would roll in, artillery (often firing from inaccurate map coordinates) would fire afterwards and the armour would attack independant of the infantry. The Finns often, due to a near total lack of AT assets, would let the armour toll unopposed, defeat the clots of infantry and deal withthe armour after the infantry was repulsed. This was made easier by the armours' tendency to 'circle the wagons' at night, allowing Finnish T-H teams to attack individual tanks.
A case could be made for a HS of the Lahde/Summa sector, particularly in regards to the maturation of Soviet methods over the clumsy intial efforts.
 

Matt Book

Senior Member
Joined
Nov 9, 2004
Messages
1,977
Reaction score
402
Country
llUnited States
It's just for game sake play....

The Finns are tough in the game because they have to take on hordes of Russians. 12 Finnish 4-4-7's aren't gonna last long against those 26 Russian 4-4-7's. I don't care how well you ski. It's trying to strike a balance in the game mechanics and playability. This the same with the American 6-6-6's who have the same morale as Italians. While the Marines are morale 8. They are morale 8 because of the Japs who step reduce instead of just break. It gives the Marines the ability to hang in there as they whittle the Japs down. Just like Russian using the red TH numbers. It's there to let the Germans survive the game better, because there is usually so fewer of them. You can find these historical indiscrepancies all over. A Russian HMG/MMG with portage capicty of 5 ? Yeah maybe in buildings and woods, but it has wheels. It is going to carry faster then any other MG in open ground while troops are moving. Leave the Finns be......
 

Pitman

Forum Guru
Joined
Jan 27, 2003
Messages
14,104
Reaction score
2,371
Location
Columbus, OH
Country
llUnited States
I got news for you, Matt. Far more 6-6-6's faced Japanese troops in World War II than Marines. So your rationale doesn't hold water.

With regard to Finns, I think the values are so egregious, that I won't even play scenarios with 6-4-8 Finns. I think the only other type of counter for which I have that categorical refusal is the 7-6-8 Marine counter.
 

da priest

Member
Joined
Feb 7, 2003
Messages
2,783
Reaction score
10
Location
Lebanon, Mo., turn r
pitman said:
I got news for you, Matt. Far more 6-6-6's faced Japanese troops in World War II than Marines. So your rationale doesn't hold water....
Sigh, it does, the only thing he left out was the designer's rational too, from the FF(Fine FAQ):

"The short "official" answer is, apparently, they have to be that tough to survive fighting the Japanese, especially when making Beach Assaults. During playtest, ML7 Marines often broke and died for failure to rout from the beach, which did not seem correct to the designers.
Many people feel that this is unfair to the regular US infantry (whose "Elite" troops only have a ML of 7). Too bad; deal with it. It's a game thing (and a source of a great (and greatly humorous) rivalry between the Marines and the Paratroopers/Rangers on the ASLML)."

So RtFF.:devil:

We are divided between the "bullet-counters" and the "play for effect" groups in ASLdom, think the designers got it right, even with the Finns.
 

Pitman

Forum Guru
Joined
Jan 27, 2003
Messages
14,104
Reaction score
2,371
Location
Columbus, OH
Country
llUnited States
It is the excuse, not the answer. A simple rule upping morale levels during an amphibious invasion would have solved that problem without making Supermen.
 

Matt Book

Senior Member
Joined
Nov 9, 2004
Messages
1,977
Reaction score
402
Country
llUnited States
pitman said:
It is the excuse, not the answer. A simple rule upping morale levels during an amphibious invasion would have solved that problem without making Supermen.
I doubt it, all the scenarios dealing with Japs in jungle would have pummled 6-6-6's goin up against fortifications and such. It's simple, replace any scenario that has 6-6-6's with Marine troops and the play balance and feel is thrown out. You designed a ton of scenarios in the PTO. Ability of flow in game mechanics is a major factor......
 
Top