• Havoc
  • Caius
  • redboot
  • Rules
  • Chain of Command
  • Members
  • Supported Ladders & Games
  • Downloads


New Campaign Game for Rzhev '42 Gold
10-12-2019, 01:03 AM,
#11
RE: New Campaign Game for Rzhev '42 Gold
(10-12-2019, 12:39 AM)Strela Wrote: Of interest, no we don't have variable VP's in Panzer Campaigns currently. One thing though that was bought in with France '40 Gold (and everything subsequently) was 'terminating' VP locations.

Essentially, these must be taken by the first player by the turn stipulated for the points to count. If not captured by that time then they aren't include in the victory total.

These are perfect for getting an attacker to go somewhere that hindsight suggests they shouldn't and is a way to force them to go out in harms way.

This will be especially useful in a game like Kharkov '43 where you want the Russians to try and go towards the Dnepr River, yet there is absolutely no motivation as they no they will get creamed.

These terminating VP's can possibly be games (rush a fast unit out and then back) but that can be countered and both sides will have some idea what is going on.

The variable VP's in Panzer Battles is the ultimate solution, due to flexibility, but I don't expect that any time soon.

David

David,

Kharkov 43 treatment could be great for some scenarios. It's a good idea to consider for future updates and mods.
Quote this message in a reply
10-12-2019, 06:15 PM,
#12
RE: New Campaign Game for Rzhev '42 Gold
(10-12-2019, 12:39 AM)Strela Wrote: Of interest, no we don't have variable VP's in Panzer Campaigns currently. One thing though that was bought in with France '40 Gold (and everything subsequently) was 'terminating' VP locations.

Essentially, these must be taken by the first player by the turn stipulated for the points to count. If not captured by that time then they aren't include in the victory total.

These are perfect for getting an attacker to go somewhere that hindsight suggests they shouldn't and is a way to force them to go out in harms way.

This will be especially useful in a game like Kharkov '43 where you want the Russians to try and go towards the Dnepr River, yet there is absolutely no motivation as they know they will get creamed.

These terminating VP's can possibly be gamed (rush a fast unit out and then back) but that can be countered and both sides will have some idea what is going on.

The variable VP's in Panzer Battles is the ultimate solution, due to flexibility, but I don't expect that any time soon.

David

Yes, I had seen the terminating VP's in the Gembloux Gap scenario and thought they were a great innovation. And then I seem to have forgotten all about them! I could kick myself. I think this would solve the Kharkov problem I mentioned.

It would not matter if the Soviets could not permanently hold objectives associated with their offensive. So long as they could hold an objective until its expiry turn, then they get the VP's. Simply set the expiry turn to a date that makes sense historically and the hindsight problem becomes much less a factor. This is brilliant.

My mind is racing with possibilities for other campaigns as well. Seems too good to be true.
Quote this message in a reply
10-12-2019, 06:33 PM,
#13
RE: New Campaign Game for Rzhev '42 Gold
(10-11-2019, 08:15 PM)Indragnir Wrote: This an interesting topic. I really changed my mind about Alternate Fire rules like a dozen times, because I agree with your thougths, however if those rules are not checked in, the germans at Kharkov area would need really higher defense values, higher fatigue recovery (that affects both sides), a lot more of firepower and good replacement rating to try to hold the red tide like they did historicaly.
 
Thanks César. Good to understand the rationale behind your choices. That all makes sense to me.

Part of the problem I have is that I hate high casualty rates but as the Russian player I guess you just have accept it and keep on attacking. This is what actually happened, after all. But I have always thought it is a shame that there is such a big difference when using the Alternative Fire rules. It would be nice to have something in between that takes into account unit density without being quite so dramatic. But it is what it is and choices have to be made.   

I have sent you and email regarding the list. There are some gaps but you may be able to fill these from sources you have. Let me know if anything else is needed.
Quote this message in a reply
10-13-2019, 09:04 AM,
#14
RE: New Campaign Game for Rzhev '42 Gold
(10-10-2019, 04:25 AM)Indragnir Wrote:
(10-10-2019, 04:04 AM)Mr Grumpy Wrote: Great work guys!!  Big Grin

Thank you!

Next stop Budapest 45!

Gent:  Smoke7

Any advance notice on plans for Budapest '45?   Idea2

I always considered Budapest '45 an underrated game. 

Lots of late war equipment to play with... King Tigers, Panther V-D, SPAs, IS-2, etc.

Don't want to hijack thread... but since you are teasing!  Smile
Regards, Mike / "A good plan violently executed now is better than a perfect plan executed next week." - George S. Patton /
Send this user an email
Quote this message in a reply
11-10-2019, 06:10 AM,
#15
RE: New Campaign Game for Rzhev '42 Gold
Cesar,

It may be a while before I have a chance to actually play your Rzhev '42 campaign but I have had a look and have some comments.

Firstly, I think the Fixing of those units that did not actually affect the battle, is a great idea. It will make this campaign far more playable and at the same time closer to history. This alone should radically improve the game.

I see that the 337 Inf Div is not Fixed although the 312th Rifle Div opposite to it is Fixed. Hard to imagine this Division moving away but I mention it in case it was not deliberate.   

One concern I have (not specific to your Mod) is the rate units can travel along Primary Roads. Because they are exempt from Ground Conditions, it means that moving on Primary Roads is no different than it would be in Summer (unless there is a Storm). Were any roads in the Russia really that good? In your scenario the weather is always Snow or Frozen, so all other terrain is subject to a modifier of 200%, 250% or 300% depending on terrain type and movement class. The only two exceptions are Ski which is not modified and Horse which is 150% in Snow but 200% in Frozen.  

Reading Glantz, the impression is that the main roads were not so easy to use. For example;

"The fact was that 1st Panzer Grenadier Regiment had begun its long march to Belyi late on 25 November, and on the 27th its columns stretched for almost 50 km along the snow bound roads..."

In this game, even though this unit is not Released until 0800 26 Nov, it could travel the necessary distance in just 4 turns, and so be in place by 1400 26 Nov (unless other road traffic slowed it down). If it was released on the 25th as suggested above it would arrive well ahead of this, even allowing for possible Night Move Disruption and the fact that its speed is halved due to the Storm conditions on the 25th.

Given that the conditions in this campaign never get better than Snow, I think you could increase the Primary Road movement cost without causing any anomalies. For instance, you could double it (except for Ski and Horse) and it would still be faster for travel than any other terrain. There would be an impact on supply but a minor adjustment, principally to the map edge sources, could compensate for this. Might be worth thinking about, unless you think my assumptions are wrong.

I like the idea of giving the Penal Companies the ability to clear mines. It may be a bit too much as it makes them as good as engineers at clearing mines but their low Morale should make them easier to Disrupt. It is a nice touch as it gives an incentive to use them as they were historically (as gruesome as that is).

I am sure you have good reasons for all the changes you have made to Release dates but the one that stands out for me is that 9.Panzer Div. This is no longer Fixed on 25 Nov but my understanding was that Model did not release the Division until the evening. The earlier release seems to allow it to reach the fighting sooner than it did historically.  

And on a trivial note I see that Gr.Rgt.14 of the 78.Inf Div has been renamed Gr.Rgt.141. Is this correct?

That is all I have at the moment. Cannot wait to give it a try. It looks seriously good!

John
Quote this message in a reply
11-10-2019, 09:15 AM,
#16
RE: New Campaign Game for Rzhev '42 Gold
John,

I’ll let Cesar answer your queries (I’m essentially only the publisher!).

That said, I agree Cesar’s work is seriously good and together with Brian Jennings work is some of the most innovative out there. Add some of what the Prucha/Michas team are creating (their next title is an eye opener) and I’m really pleased with what is being made available to you all!

I just wish I had some time to actually play!

David
Quote this message in a reply
11-10-2019, 11:23 AM,
#17
RE: New Campaign Game for Rzhev '42 Gold
(11-10-2019, 09:15 AM)Strela Wrote: John,

I’ll let Cesar answer your queries (I’m essentially only the publisher!).

That said, I agree Cesar’s work is seriously good and together with Brian Jennings work is some of the most innovative out there. Add some of what the Prucha/Michas team are creating (their next title is an eye opener) and I’m really pleased with what is being made available to you all!

I just wish I had some time to actually play!

David

Thanks, David. Certainly these are very exciting times for the PzC community. So much content and so little time. But I know I will be making some time available for whatever Prucha/Michas are coming up with. If it is anything like the work done for the Gold version of France '40, it will be brilliant!

And I have to admit, I am not that unhappy to hear you have no time to play - it means you are working hard. That is music to my ears. Big Grin
Quote this message in a reply
11-11-2019, 08:01 AM, (This post was last modified: 11-11-2019, 09:49 AM by Indragnir.)
#18
RE: New Campaign Game for Rzhev '42 Gold
My reply in italics

Green

Cesar,

It may be a while before I have a chance to actually play your Rzhev '42 campaign but I have had a look and have some comments.

Firstly, I think the Fixing of those units that did not actually affect the battle, is a great idea. It will make this campaign far more playable and at the same time closer to history. This alone should radically improve the game.

I think so.


I see that the 337 Inf Div is not Fixed although the 312th Rifle Div opposite to it is Fixed. Hard to imagine this Division moving away but I mention it in case it was not deliberate.   

This an inteteresting question. Since that dividion junture with 78th ID was attacked by elements of 29th Army I decided against fixing the unit in case russian player put in that area more troops than they historically did.



One concern I have (not specific to your Mod) is the rate units can travel along Primary Roads. Because they are exempt from Ground Conditions, it means that moving on Primary Roads is no different than it would be in Summer (unless there is a Storm). Were any roads in the Russia really that good? In your scenario the weather is always Snow or Frozen, so all other terrain is subject to a modifier of 200%, 250% or 300% depending on terrain type and movement class. The only two exceptions are Ski which is not modified and Horse which is 150% in Snow but 200% in Frozen.  

Reading Glantz, the impression is that the main roads were not so easy to use. For example;

"The fact was that 1st Panzer Grenadier Regiment had begun its long march to Belyi late on 25 November, and on the 27th its columns stretched for almost 50 km along the snow bound roads..."

In this game, even though this unit is not Released until 0800 26 Nov, it could travel the necessary distance in just 4 turns, and so be in place by 1400 26 Nov (unless other road traffic slowed it down). If it was released on the 25th as suggested above it would arrive well ahead of this, even allowing for possible Night Move Disruption and the fact that its speed is halved due to the Storm conditions on the 25th.

Given that the conditions in this campaign never get better than Snow, I think you could increase the Primary Road movement cost without causing any anomalies. For instance, you could double it (except for Ski and Horse) and it would still be faster for travel than any other terrain. There would be an impact on supply but a minor adjustment, principally to the map edge sources, could compensate for this. Might be worth thinking about, unless you think my assumptions are wrong.

You're right. PzC units moves too fast in the snow, even in Primary roads.
I ruled against raising Primary road movement cost because I didn't remember Snow condition is the best condition in the scenario and didn't want to slow things when the Snow was over... so mistakes were made.

I will change it.  
Supply is not a concern, in general, forces are better supplied than in history.



I like the idea of giving the Penal Companies the ability to clear mines. It may be a bit too much as it makes them as good as engineers at clearing mines but their low Morale should make them easier to Disrupt. It is a nice touch as it gives an incentive to use them as they were historically (as gruesome as that is).

They were employed like that, the poor bastards.



I am sure you have good reasons for all the changes you have made to Release dates but the one that stands out for me is that 9.Panzer Div. This is no longer Fixed on 25 Nov but my understanding was that Model did not release the Division until the evening. The earlier release seems to allow it to reach the fighting sooner than it did historically.  

Another interesting question. In this case after a long time thinking about if that area would hold until 9th PzD arrives (which is critical for the game) I decided releasing the division a little earlier to ensure germans have reasonable chances to block the main thrust there.



And on a trivial note I see that Gr.Rgt.14 of the 78.Inf Div has been renamed Gr.Rgt.141. Is this correct?

IIRC (I don't have my sources here) Gr.Rgt.14 was part of the division in 1943. Since 1939 but prior to the 1943 Sturm conversion, there were another Gr.Rgt. (the 238) however in some some sources I recall they stated GR.141 was attached to the division for make up the casualties of the hard fought summer offensives. Since I didn't found any other source claiming otherwise I decided to change it.

As you say it's quite minor but if anyone can provide sources claming GR.14 was with the division by November 1942 I will change it.


That is all I have at the moment. Cannot wait to give it a try. It looks seriously good!

John

Thank you very much, the mod will be better with comments and checks like you are doing.

César
Quote this message in a reply
11-12-2019, 01:06 PM,
#19
RE: New Campaign Game for Rzhev '42 Gold
César,

"This an inteteresting question. Since that dividion junture with 78th ID was attacked by elements of 29th Army I decided against fixing the unit in case russian player put in that area more troops than they historically did."

That makes sense and anyway, if the Germans moved this division it would leave a rather serious gap in the line.

"I will change it. 
Supply is not a concern, in general,  forces are better supplied than in history."

Great. I think that would be an improvement and the effect on supply is small. It would not be so easy to change in games like Kharhov '43 or Moscow '42 as the supply lines are longer and the supply effects would be considerably greater, but should work well in this one.

"Another interesting question. In this case after a long time thinking about if that area would hold until 9th PzD arrives (which is critical for the game) I decided releasing the division a little earlier to ensure germans have reasonable chances to block the main thrust there."

I knew there would be a good reason. And if the road movement rate is increased, this will also slow them down a bit.

"As you say it's quite minor but if anyone can provide sources claming GR.14 was with the division by November 1942 I will change it."

I have no sources other than Glantz, who usually refers to it as the Gr.Rgt.14 (Occasionally he omits the Grenadier designation and refers to it as Inf.Rgt.14). And it may not count as a source but it is included as Inf.Rgt.14 in the Moscow '42 game. But really I have no idea and just flagged it as a possible error since 14 and 141 are quite similar.   

Thanks for taking my comments seriously and taking the time to answer. Most appreciated. If I come up with anything else, I will let you know. Keep up the good work!

John
Quote this message in a reply
11-13-2019, 01:33 PM,
#20
RE: New Campaign Game for Rzhev '42 Gold
Hi there,

Re 78th Infanterie Divisions, it is definitely GR.14

My go to source for German Infantry Division layouts confirms it here; http://www.diedeutschewehrmacht.de/78%20inf%20div.htm

Translated to English it mentions; 

The Inf.Reg.238 is dissolved on 11.11.1941 and by the Inf.Reg.14 I.-III.Btl. replaced, from 10.12.1941 without III., The Div. becomes on the 01/01/1943 the Sturm Div. reclassified.

So it definitely had the 14th Regt from November '41 and my notes from Moscow '42 mentions that the III Battalion was disbanded on Dec 9th, 1941.

I'd double check the attachment of 141st regiment as I can't find any reference to this regiment online beyond the First World War.

David
Quote this message in a reply


Forum Jump:


Users browsing this thread: 1 Guest(s)