RE: Balance discussion/suggestions
If a scenario has a limited number of bunker objectives that need to be held to be won by the defender, like Gertsovka or Butovo, equal stacking limits make taking those objectives very hard for the attacker.
It's the same problem PzC has with some of its smaller scenarios, where the defender can place large stacks on crucial objectives and sacrifice them because unit points are worth less than objectives or hold the objectives because they're supply sources (this also applies to one of the objectives in Gertsovka).
Any Gertsovka game, including ours, has shown what this problem can do to a game.
You were of the opinion that bunkers can be taken with proper tactics at all times.
I was of the opinion that in the scenario the Soviets could put most of their forces in a handful of bunkers, making it unlikely that all of them would disrupt. When you look at the mechanics, your loss was predictable. It had very little to do with the tactics of either of us.
This is actually one of the few wargames where the attacker is forced to stick to the hex stacking limit when attacking, and it can cause problems. It's one of the design decisions that I still don't really understand, particularly for PzC where replacements can cause defending forces to regain strength rapidly. The Soviets have no realistic way of removing a nearly full strength German battalion from its position by assaulting it most of the time, unless they apply ahistorical amounts of force for the timeframe (in Moscow '42) or have the time to fatigue the unit in a situation where the Germans can't bring in reinforcements.
|