EP '14 mechanics/balance

[Volcano Man]

Apart from the issue about choosing where the Russian 2nd Army HQ will arrive in advance, unfortunately I disagree with just about everything you said. While we can split hairs about whether the Russian supply level should be X or Y, or with the number crunching that you do with this or that (I will avoid that and just concentrating on the main points here), the Russian Bde HQ command radius size should absolutely NOT be anything other than it is. Believe me all manner of radius values were tried during testing and the very small radius felt the best, considering that it allowed the Russian Army to be strong in very specific circumstances but can over extend itself rather easily. The small radius for Russian Bde HQs (and all other HQs for that matter) encourages them to be historical and maintain dense formation for good order, or spread out and become brittle. Someone could argue that Russian infantry should all just be D quality, and HQs should just be higher radius -- but this doesn't do them justice as, like you said, they were known to be tough defenders. With the current approach it allows them to occasionally solidify into a very tough nut to crack, or make an effective push at the expense of certain parts of the division's front. Also it means that it gives the Russian Army some historical and very real character in that it could be effective in very specific situations. I guess you just have to trust me, a change here would break everything. With all due respect, there is a very fine balance at work here that you don't seem to realize. Just ask some of the testers and they might tell you how the Russian were early on when they had larger command radii, among other things. ;)

Re: Russian Supply level, they begin the campaign at 60%, and this is very optimistic IMO if you read about their supply situation. 60% is certainly adequate for offensive operations, and especially the bumbling and indecisive kind. The decline is supply levels coincides with the fact that we don't really know if their actual supply level was 60% or 40% -- is this documented somewhere where we can put a finger on it? It is like trying to put numeric values on the difference between "terrible" and "abysmal". No, all we know is that it was bad, and inadequate, which to me is 40% to 60%. Even with 40% supply you can still attack, but momentum will break down in areas that are heavily engaged , while areas that aren't engaged will recover all supply to full capacity in about a day. This sounds right to me. The final -10% decline on September 1st (thereby making Russian supply level = 30% for the 1st Battle of the Masurian Lakes) is all about putting them on the defensive at that point. Maybe this final -10% isn't really needed anymore, but during design I thought it was to throw the Russians into defense by that point, which was essentially the case for Rennenkampf by that time. He wasn't exactly marching towards Konigsberg anymore by then and we all know the reason why, but in a campaign where it is very difficult for the Germans to reproduce their historical successes (the nearly complete destruction or full rout of the Russian 2nd Army) then if both Russian armies still exist by September 1st then they must have their supply reins pulled back, so to speak. The rationale here being a transition from attacker to defender. Can you still attack with 30% supplies? I think so, but obviously you wouldn't want to be making a full frontal assault on German positions by this point.

Re: the Samsonov HQ decision, yes it is a bit gamey I agree, but it had to work within the given constraints, and most importantly in game design, it had to have a pro - con relationship while at the same time representing something you absolutely must have in a wargame about Tannenberg: a mechanism to degrade 2nd Army. So, the player is given a choice -- better units and historical degradation of the 2nd Army, or keep 2nd Army in order (and with a better HQ) but give up some of their best units (the guards). I don't see any other way it would work.   Yes I do agree that choosing where Samsonov will magically return to the battlefield if he passes his trial and defies history is a bit of a gimmick in how it is handled, but again, as a designer you have to think of ways to "make it work".  I could have not done anything with Samsonov, then I would receive complaints about how 2nd Army cannot be destroyed because it never actually gets degraded in any way. So choosing where Samsonov will return a few days in advance is of minor importance to that in my book. Edit: in regards to the Tannenberg scenario, all three (Rifle Bde, Guards Div and Samsonov HQ) are indeed all present, but if you look closely Samsonov is removed during the scenario as a withdrawal. The only difference is that in the campaign you have a choice, albeit you have to make it in advance, though.

Re: fortress supply levels dropping to 0%, this is true but it is intentional that they drop to 0 - at least I was fully aware of it during design and was fine with it. The fact is that the Russian supply system was totally inadequate and struggled to maintain consistent supply. If that means you cannot fall back an army onto Osowiec fort, get it isolated, and not get 5% supply from the fort, then so be it - it sounds perfectly fine to me especially since I know that the main reason why I put those supply sources there was simply to prevent the ISOLATED status from occurring to a force isolated around a fort. ;)  Beyond that Kovno is the most important fortress on the map but it has a primary supply source within arms reach and would be impossible for the Germans to get to without dealing with the fortress (unless they exercised some kind of outrageous pontoon bridge attack across the Neiman and Neris, then down the east side of that map. If someone did that in a game then I would recommend to the Russian player to quit immediately and stay far away from the gamey German player who did this. That said, I have it on my to-do list (when we get around to a battle with important forts with vital supply sources) to be able to specify a minimum level that a supply source will drop to, and I will certainly carry that feature over to EP14, but for the time being I didn't feel it was vital given the rationale above.

Re: Russian 10th Army arrival, they did arrive that way as far as my research showed. The 10th Army was forming during the period, and it was done rather hastily and as an emergency to cover for the sudden disappearance of the 2nd Army -- which was not something that they expected to happen as you can probably imagine. Also, not only was it very difficult to determine what was actually there on what day (I don't think the Russians knew it themselves from time to time), all research pointed to the fact that units were arriving as they were able to, with or without their HQs. A battalion might arrive one day, and the rest of the brigade the next. It was by no means an organized assembly.

---------------

All I can say is that the effects on the Russian Army that you describe are 100% intentional. You mention that on paper they are strong, but in practice they are often not so. This is exactly the effect I wanted to achieve, so I am glad to hear it -- the Russian Army was indeed a strong force on paper but in practice it was clumsy and prone to being defeated in detail. Have you tried playing either East Prussian campaign or the full Tannenberg battle against a human? Or better yet, have you tried the Lodz campaign as the Germans against a human?

The fact is that just the slightest change to the Russians will turn them into a monster that in no way plays historical because it wouldn't portray them BOTH with very drastic strengths and weaknesses.  I know this because the Russian forces evolved very heavily during the year+ of testing, from an initial point of being an unstoppable juggernaut to something less effective but still impossible for the small German forces to deal with, to what it is now where a small and very capable German force is now able to actually fight back and inflict defeat on a vastly numerically superior force.

By the look of the EP14 campaign results, it is slight pro German with the likely result apparently being a German minor victory (if we just go by the numbers). I am relieved to see this because I was actually concerned that the Germans could not win it. It should certainly be difficult for the Russians to win and a minor victory means that Draw and CP Minor Defeat are within range, so I don't see a problem there. I don't think it would be fair to portray the East Prussian campaign in a frame of reference where a Draw or Minor Russian Victory is the most likely result. So, what we end up with is a situation where it is very difficult for the Germans to reproduce a Major Victory (that is their challenge) and difficult for the Russians to achieve a Minor Victory (their challenge) and very difficult for them to achieve a Major Victory - which both Major Victory results must clearly depend on quite a bit of luck and quite a bit of blundering by the other side.

Beyond all that I don't really know what to say. I appreciate the fact that you decided to deeply analyze EP14, but I do think that you may not be looking at the full game design oriented picture when making these in depth dissections. If it was completely broken then I would be inclined to make a wide range of changes but, honestly, I wouldn't have put it out there if I felt it was broken.  Besides me being totally against changing the Russian OOB, I am constantly tweaking the scenarios to be more balanced so if there are any suggestions as to VP levels in a certain scenario then I am always all ears. Also if enough people think that the -10% decline in Russian supplies is too harsh on the September 1st and is not needed, then I wouldn't be against cutting that out.  So, in other words, what I am really interested in hearing about is Scenario X is impossible to win with Side Y and I suggest a VP level adjustment of +/-Z points, or that the OOB has a bug in it. ;)