On the AT Controversy:
Let me propose a simple fix for the German side and a poll for Allied side:
-For the Germans, I'd like to reduce the starting AT Teams to AT- Teams. In August large amounts of AT Teams would start flowing in. And in November, it would switch again to AT+ Teams. Whatever each division starts with in AT- Teams they would have authorized for the other two. I'm inclined to disregard the PzF150/250 appearing in March since they arrived in limited numbers.
-This will also require that divisions arriving after these dates (Aug44 & Nov44) have their TO&E changed so they arrive with this new equipment.
Allied poll:
There's only one way to test if the Allied side is too strong AT-wise. Are they over-effective in killing German tanks. I don't think we should compare inf to inf. We need to look at how effective they are at their jobs. With this in mind, do we really need to make their tank killing ability less effective. Would turning HRS AT- into HRSs and adding in AT (whatever) Teams do this, or would it produce the same effects?
My vote is to change the Germans and then see how it works from there.
##################################################
On French ports and supply:
As of the Allied breakout, the Allies were short of their estimated supply tonage. Bradley ordered that Brittany be taken for its ports, but so much as I've read, this move has been severely questioned because of its cost and actual effects. Antwerp was the biggest gain in this respect. I've modelled supply by using supply radius increases when ports are captured rather than raise supply levels. As the scenario stands, Antwerp is the big one! It is the only other supply point in NW Europe for the Allies. As is, I think it is a harsh system for the Allies, requiring them to capture as many ports as possible. I do think I need to double the supply units the Allies receive as a result of capturing Calais, Cherbourg and Brest - raising it to six.
####################################################
Check on the PAK 40s. I'll make the necessary changes.
####################################################
On new divisions vs reinforcements:
After the Allies breakout, new divisions will be of more use to the German player than reinforcements. Kraut, your idea is sweet, except for the fact that reconstituting units only need a certain percent of their first line equipment to reconstitute. So these new divisions might appear severely lacking equipment. Especially those arriving later.
I think what we need to concentrate on is getting the scenario (more or less as designed) working and playing properly. Once we get to a certain point of satisfaction and know how it works, we can start playing with the model.
####################################################
No one's mentioned the air units so far?
####################################################
I'd like to redo the east front/west front interchange dramatically. This is a pretty easy thing to do if someone else can come up with the unit interchange. IDEA:
-Two models for units that start on the east front and can be called to the west front & units that start on the west front and are called to the east front.
-Give the German player several TOs to call units to the west front from the east front at a VP loss.
-Give the German player TOs to cancel units withdrawing to the east front at a VP loss.
-The VP loss simulating Russian advances.
Are there any suggestions for units/corps/armies that Hitler could have ordered to the west front from the east? Time line for such TOs to appear? VP cost? For the west front units moving east, I can go initially with what Trey put in place.
We don't have to do this...just an idea. This would give the German player some choices.
Perhaps we could even do this with equipment. Have a TO to disband an equipment store unit to simulate equipment diverted to the west as opposed to the east. Dunno...
####################################################
IMPORTANT:
On the jeep issue. What recon percent should I be shooting for? That's what I'm going to go by when reducing jeeps.
####################################################
