Smolensk 41 opponent wanted

[larsonney]

Thanks, King, on your suggestion, but I would add on that Locking ZOC as mandatory one and also ,Alt inf fire' ON as moderate recommendation. Btw I always play , Optional surrender', don't know why it would harm anyone. :)

As I said, earlier, I think we should use the standard ALT rules only. Regarding your add-ons:

Locking zone of controls are huge...here is the Blitz comment on it:

Locking Zones of Control
Selecting this rule prevents units moving through an enemy ZOC into an adjacent friendly occupied hex, this movement is allowed by default and this rule should not be used as it allows the attacker to trap defensive units more easily.

Alt indirect fire is described as:

Alternative Indirect Fire Resolution
Indirect Fire of non-mortar, non-heavy weapon units is conducted under different rules. First, each such Indirect Fire is doubled in fire value, but the cost of firing is doubled (so arty units will only fiire once). Second, such Indirect Fire is applied against all units in the target hex, proportional to their strength, instead of being applied against a single target unit, so the more men/vehicles/guns you have stacked in a hex the greater your losses will be.

Finally, optional surrender is described as:

Optional Surrender
When this rule is selected, then Broken units which have been assaulted and have lost the assault, but have no valid retreat are eliminated.
This rule will help the attacking player and should not be used unless the historical situation in the scenario justifies it.

So, all three of those drastically help the attacker...

Since I am the defender, I would have a real problem with the first two, since I think they give the attacker a significant play advantage.

I might consider the optional surrender, but even then, with the low quality Russian units involved, I think it would speed up the German advance.

What are your thoughts/justifications for wanting these play advantages?