Panzer Battles - Kursk Version 1.01 released

[ComradeP]

I think the effect of the significantly greater view ranges on the perception of how the mechanics do or don't work might be underestimated.

Simply put: Compared to PzC, view ranges are huge. This has a direct effect on a number of features, such as how likely Fixed units are to be spotted which in turn encourages the player to pick a different approach path that won't release as many units, on the effectiveness of artillery, on weapon ranges and on the ability of one side to move in or out of contact without taking significant damage.

To emphasize that last point, an example: In PzC, you would in the vast majority of cases only attract opportunity fire if you moved adjacent to an enemy unit, for the simple reason that most unit types have a range of 1. To do that same thing, move a kilometre to get into direct contact with an enemy unit, in PB you need to cross 4 hexes. On each of those moves, your boys might take opportunity fire. That's also why the current not too high number of opportunity fire actions isn't bad in all cases.

For a division, everybody is usually a spotter for all divisional, corps and army assets aside from battalion and regimental mortars, which can only fire on targets supported by men belonging to their battalion or regiment. As artillery limits are still generous in my opinion due to there being no difference between the kind of artillery fire you call in (most or all of the Katyusha's in an army firing at a single hex is as possible as calling in fire from some battalion mortars), this can lead to "double whammy" situations where your assault stack that didn't make its attack gets hammered (which is fine - for a turn) or your retreating men keep taking significant losses as something spots them as they move back.

More opportunity fire for gun and vehicle units at what in game terms is range S is still something I'd like to try as a possible solution to the relative ineffectiveness of some unit types currently.

If you're the side with units that quickly lose combat effectiveness or are likely to be disrupted and facing enemy units with excellent soft attack values, this means you're likely to suffer when you move around. The chance of moving out of spotting range of an enemy unit is also small in most cases. In practice, this means the Soviets suffer badly when not in bunkers in a way that they wouldn't in PzC as there both the more limited engagement ranges and the more limited spotting ranges would save them from getting mauled when moving around on their turn.

The difference between not being targeted by a German company when moving around or being hit is fairly significant: the Germans tend to inflict around 10 losses per shot at range 1-2 for units with 120-144 men. This is why infantry guns and mortars not being too effective isn't bad in all cases. However, there are cases where one side can mass troops and advance upon an enemy line where support weapons being more effective would help. For example, the German move to increase support weapon numbers to counter lower infantry strength would within the current system be less effective than it was in real life, as staying - and killing power is primarily dictated by infantry strength.

As this is a game, and we're not actually moving through the fields of southwestern Russia ourselves, we are used to launching attacks that in real life would be suicidal or at the least very costly without flinching. As we have a feeling for how things work in the game, those attacks might work within the confines of the system.

We're also able to launch far more efficient attacks than our historical counterparts, as we have full information on the state and location of our own forces and either full (if you've played the scenario before) or still fairly detailed information on the state and location of the enemy forces.

That last point is particularly relevant in scenarios where, historically, one side made serious mistakes with the deployment of his units, which we don't have to repeat, like in the July 8th Voronezh Front scenario (although player impact is still limited there through the release order for Fixed mobile formations) or Ozerovskii, where you could theoretically attempt to squash the SS between the hammer and the anvil through a coordinated attack by both Tank Corps. It will be very interesting to see how the Ozerovskii games go in the tournament, but I find it unlikely that the SS will move through the Soviet lines with the same relative ease as they seem to have done historically, comparing their tank strengths on the 6th and 7th. Obviously, the German player has a similar advantage on the western flank where poor cooperation seems to have done more to slow the Germans than the Soviet resistance on some days.

Being able to get up close and personal without taking too much opportunity fire is primarily a problem for the side that relies on quality over quantity or which has less protected, but (fairly) well armed vehicles like the Germans. When you have a vehicle with a defence rating of 3, like the Marder, it's a problem that the Soviets can rush you in such a way that you can't use the Marder in its historical role (medium to long range sniping, using the advantages of better optics, a far better view range to begin with due to being open topped and a longer ranged gun than the T-34/76).

The T-34/76 has both a gun that has a better hard attack values than the defence values of the majority of enemy vehicles, and a higher defence value than the majority of enemy tanks (which are still Panzer IIIm's). To counter that, the Germans have an edge in quality, but as the Soviets don't necessarily suffer from mediocre to poor coordination and don't have to attack one brigade at a time in situations where they historically did so, the sheer numbers of T-34's can cause problems.

Those problems are then amplified by the low casualty rates per firing action for vehicles and guns also favouring the side with the most units (as that side can fire more often) in situations where the vehicles of both side have a realistic chance of knocking out a vehicle of the other side.

As to assaults, both sides using the same stacking limits can also cause problems in PzC, but generally speaking the attacker can achieve local numerical superiority or is able to disrupt the defender through artillery fire. In Panzer Battles, with the Soviets in bunkers, disrupting the defenders through artillery fire is unlikely, and both sides using the same stacking limit might not be so much of a problem in situations where your men don't have heavy weapons or vehicle support if it were not possible to use the limits of the system by stacking several units in a hex, all of which need to be disrupted before you can move in. The Soviets generally have some small MG or AT Rifle units to spare so they might not even go over the 50% of the stacking limit which would increase their casualties.

This situation can happen in PzC/FWWC too, obviously, as it's the same system (in an EP'14 game against myself, the Russians won after their small HQ unit saved a disrupted stack of battalions from moving out of an objective hex several turns in a row) but it feels less common, also because you often have fewer units per hex.