New Campaign Game for Rzhev '42 Gold

[Green]

Regarding Budapest, of course I plan to put names there (and I'm updating the OoB), if you have a list I would gladly accept it.

PS: if you like it you can check my other Grand Campaign Variants (Kharkov 42, Korsun 44, Alamein 42, Anzio 44):
Alamein for example has 280 changes to GC. Korsun has so many I decided not to log them all but just group them.

Bests.

I will put a list together in the next couple of days and send it to you. Regarding your other variants, I have actually been spending some time looking at Kharkov '42. 

One problem (not specific to your variant) is the inherent 'hindsight' problem associated with simulating this campaign. There is little incentive for a Soviet player to recreate the initial historical offensive. He knows the ultimate fate that awaits and he also knows that taking and holding Kharkov is unrealistic. Variable Victory point objectives like those used in Panzer Battles would go a long way to solving this but in their absence I did come up with a house rule to try to recreate this effect. I set up a spreadsheet to record additional 'bonus' Soviet VP's for captured objectives associated with their historical offensive. The longer they held these the more points they accumulated. These points were not lost once a objective was lost. Gives the Soviets a reason to hold them as long as possible and a reason for the Axis to try to prevent this. But I am trying to come up with a more elegant solution as keeping track of these points is a nuisance. Perhaps someone has already come up with something better?  

With your variant, I think the use of the Alternative Direct/Indirect Fire rules also tends to discourage the Soviet player from aggressive action. These rules make it desirable for the Soviets to avoid creating high density stacks. They should be charging forward en masse and assaulting but with these rules they need to advance carefully and wait for their artillery to do enough damage before daring to combine into larger stacks and assault. And even then they need to be cautious due to the Delayed Disruption Reporting rule. While I definitely think this rule should stay, it seems a little too much when combined with the Alternative Fire rules. I wonder if the Alternative Air Strike Resolution rule may be enough, without the  Alternative Direct/Indirect Fire rules, to provide an incentive for the Soviets to stay dispersed where possible. An advantage of this approach would be that it  encourages widespread attacks across the entire front, rather than discouraging it, since there will not be enough air power to deal with every Soviet attack. Of course, for most of the scenario the Soviets are defending, not attacking but the requirement for being dispersed still hurts them more than it does the Germans. Or so it seems to me. It may be simply a reflection on my style of play, so it would be interesting to hear how you see it.  

That is the only feedback I have, apart from saying that I think you have done a really excellent job!