Alt Version of K44 - Community Request

[Strela]

Dog Soldier,

Firstly thank you for such a complete post.

What you have written conveys a lot of the concerns I have had.

The great challenge with many of the HPS East Front titles have been the differences in mechanisation of the respective armies. The Soviet reliance on infantry regularly puts them at a disadvantage and their smaller Tank Corps vs Panzer Divisions compounds the problem.The VM _ALT riles also puts more emphasis on a ranged fight so that requires consideration too.

There are a couple of possible things I could experimant with :

- Increase breakdown ratings for German mechanised forces - the dance of death now comes at a price.
- Increase the 'authorised' size of the T-34 units but start them at their normal levels, i.e. allow them to grow over time if a Russian is careful, particularly if matched with a high replacement level
- Look at the movement costs for Russian infantry, particularly in snow
- Fix units such as 3rd Panzer which is available immediately to face off against 2nd Ukranian Front, thus forcing the infantry to face the Russians for a day on their own.
- Do not allow Stug units to breakdown into company components
- Remove all the 'trash' counters (half tracks, AT guns etc) from the German side and build their values into the line battalions


Currently we are looking at increasing the T-34 authorised strength and I have already eliminated many of the trash counters, but have currently combined them into a much smaller number of company / battalion equivalents. For example in a test we dropped 1st Pz Div down from 87 units to just under 60. I could go more radical and match Minsk / Kursk structure and get this down to about 36 units per Pz Div.

I think the main aim of the campaign game is to make it relatively easy for the pocket to form and for the drama to unfold once the relief Panzers are released.

The second aim is to make the game playable - personally the huge counter mix has always put me off this title, despite the battle being one of my all time favourites.

Please keep the feedback going - this will hopefully help VM and I to get a playable series of scenarios out for you all.

David

[bdtj1815]

Without commenting on the playability of particular scenarios and the ability to use/misuse individual units I have to agree with previous comments about the German oob. Almost without exception my research, incuding amongst many sources the recent Zetterling book, shows most of the German divisions to be way too strong in the stock scenarios and too close to (Americanism) TOE. Battered, exhausted (one German division represented in the game had been in continual contact with the enemy for 85 days before this battle began! according to its divisional history) so it is great to see a re-appraisal of this title. I must admit it was one on my next to look at list!

[Turner]

Did you look at I./PzRg 26, a unit missing in stock scenarios, and is it included in your alt scenario? It is documented with source references in Zetterling's book.

https://www.theblitz.club/message_boards...?tid=48198

[Barbarrossa]

Dog Soldiers excellent description sets out my own experience. Competent German players dont just sit there and do nothing and await to be attacked.

I can only add that my Russian Partisans were just so much dog tucker they were rounded up by a combination of Cossacks and mobile light units and utterly destroyed and just added to the German score which sometimes was a minus for the Russians.

[Marquo]

My recollection of the stock campaign is that the Axis never really has to attack; it is simply a matter of a controlled withdrwal starting asap and then retreating off the map. There is little to no incentive for the Axis palyer to stick around given the VPs. To rebalance the scenario, reassess the VPs, and force the Axis to hold onto certain hexes in the middle of the map to win.

Marquo

[Dog Soldier]

David,

Some further observations.....
and I look forward to your version of this intriguing CG. The lure of both sides having to defend and attack gives K44 high expectations from the PzC gaming community, I believe.

I can add that I do not have a problem with K44 being a game of an Axis mobile defense. That is what they should have done historically. There is a CG scenario that simulates Hitler's stand fast orders which I was never able to convince any Axis player to play.

Bottom line, even though the Axis forces should have the ability to form a mobile defense, the Russians should have the ability to bring the Axis forces to battle.

A thought about the Axis HW companies. I am not so sure they should be added back into the values of the regular line companies. Same for the fusilier companies. The German infantry companies are weaker if they can not combine back these types. The Russian player will target the HW companies as a priority with artillery. Thus the Axis infantry is subject to the same piecemeal destruction as the Russian tank Bn's are.

I could be wrong, but by the time of K44 did not the Russian infantry have a lot of 120mm mortar support for an offensive like this? There are a about a half dozen or so of these batteries with Second Ukrainian Front in the stock CG scenarios. I thought I read an article once claiming that the 120mm mortars were hated and feared by the Axis front line troops. The Russian mortar crews were were good. Maybe these units should have a B instead of D rating to make them more effective? Some balance must be achieved with these types of Russian weapons to counter the Axis HW companies. Another thought would be to make it so they can move like the 120mm mortar units in other PzC titles. Currently, in K44 these guns have to go in T mode only to move. They are then easily picked off by Axis artillery or air strikes as their five hex range requires they stay close to the front to be useful in neutralizing the Axis HW companies. The time it takes to enter travel mode, move in the deep snow, then exit travel mode and wait for setup means these units have no targets left by the time they are ready to fire.

Can you tell me if there is some increase in the defense rating of the Russian 76mm AT gun units? My experience was these units could not utilize a field of fire due to the 14 defense rating. Axis HW co's would fire from three hexes and weed out the 76mm AT gun units. Then the Axis armor would roll over the Russian infantry line since the Russian infantry has a zero AF range. All that would be left to do is send in the Axis infantry to mop up as the panzers reform for their next targets. The only way to get an AT shot was to setup on a reverse slope and hope the Axis would lead with tanks. Naturally, Axis tactics would then use their infantry or trash units to spot over the hill and still take out the Russian AT guns with indirect fire from the HW companies. I never could get these Russian AT units any good shots in before they were lost. Even though the hilly terrain looked good to set up the AT guns behind an infantry screen, the Axis HW units could fire from three hexes and disrupt the AT guns without much retaliation. Russian artillery is the answer, except there were enough Axis soft attack units with 2 or more hex ranges to get the AT before the Red artillery could drive them off.
Anyone ever have any success with these AT guns, or were they just regulated to rear area trench digging?
In fairness, the Axis AT guns are defense strength of 14 also. The Russians just had very few weapons to hit them with from range. So they tend to work well in guarding areas to keep Russian tanks away as long as they have HW companies and infantry support.

The Russian tank Bns (9 tanks each) can not combine to form rgts. in the stock game. This results in Russian tank stacks being picked apart by German Bn sized tank units (20-30 tanks each). It appears you are working on a solution to give the Red tanks a fighting chance.

I had only one Soviet tank tactic I could use in the stock game. This may have been historical. Others with more knowledge of this battle will have to comment. If the Axis left a panzer unit alone in a hex, I could mass all the Red tanks in an armor corps, around 40 - 60 T-34s (at full strength) and rush the lone panzer unit with an assault. It did not matter if the German tanks were disrupted. The T-34's could give as good as they got in this type of fight since they would have two to one superiority. Anything that dropped the Axis tank unit from B to C morale would increase the Russian chances of success.
The obvious problem was the Soviet armor had to get away after the assault. Unfortunately any T-34 units that disrupted would be picked off in the next Axis turn if there were more panzers close by since the Soviet Bns were only nine tanks at full strength. Such unlucky units would have one to three tanks left the next Russian turn or could be lost outright. It was frustrating to have to regulate the T-34's to rear area guards and hold them back until the panzer divisions attacked later in the CG. The T-34s were the only credible threat to the waves of Axis HT and flak units.

Dog Soldier

[Strela]

Well here is a further wrinkle to the discussion. As highlighted by 33Vortex, Zetterlings book shows a substantially lower tank strength, particularly in 47th Panzer Korp.

The book referred to in OP says on page 95:

Heavy German equipment in the Korsun area on 25th Jan 1944.

Heeresgruppe (?) B - 0 veh, 14 arty, 11 AT
88. Div. - 0 veh, 22 arty, 14 AT
XXXXII. Korpstruppen - 0 veh, 0 arty, 0 AT
198. Div. - 0 veh, ~36 arty, 14 AT
34. Div. - 0 veh, ~33 arty, 14 AT
VII. Korpstruppen - 23 veh, ~10 arty, 0 AT
SS-Wiking - ~20 veh, 52 arty, 12 AT (of which 7 tracked veh)
SS-Wallonien - 10 veh, 0 arty, 9 AT
57. Div. - 0 veh, 50 arty, 8 AT
72. Div. - 0 veh, 33 arty, 14 AT
389 Div. - 0 veh, 26 arty, 12 AT
XI. Korpstruppen - ~9 veh, 16 arty, 0 AT
3. PzDiv. - ~20 veh, 22 arty, 10 AT (of which 5 tracked veh)
106. Div. - 0 veh, 31 arty, 7 AT
320. Div. - 0 veh, 24 arty, 17 AT
282. Div. - 0 veh, 36 arty, 10 AT
14. PzDiv. - 15 veh, 24 arty, 15 AT
11. PzDiv. - ~25 veh, 26 arty, 11 AT (of which 5 tracked veh)
XXXXVII. Korpstruppen - ~20 veh, ~11 arty, 0 AT

Total: 142 veh (Panzer & StuG), 493 arty, 178 AT


Checking Nash he also mentions the following :

XI Korps:
- 5th SS Pz Wiking had 1 Pz Bn with 25 MkIV L48 Panzers and “a dozen or so” Pz MkIII in a tank training company. The 5th Kompanie of the Bn had 6 Stugs. The Panther Bn was forming I think.
- Assault Gun Bde 239 of the Korps assets had 17 Stugs.

XLVII Pz Korps:
- 3rd Pz had 2 Pz battalions with a probable mix of Panthers, MkIVs and Stugs….no numbers given
- 11th Pz had 2 Pz battalions in Pz Rgt 8. It had “ a dozen or so” panzers on arrival…probably mix of Panthers and MkIVs and Stugs.
- 14th Pz had 1 Pz battalion in Pz Rgt 36. Probably MkIVs and Stugs…11 of them on arrival. Its other battalion was in France refitting with Panthers.


Now lets compare what's in the campaign game -

Wiking : 1st Bn 22 MkIV, 5th company 30(!) StuG, 10 Tracked AT
Wallonien : 7 Stugs
3rd Pz : 1st Bn 26 MkV, 2nd Bn 30 MkIV, 5 Tracked AT
11th Pz : 1st Bn Not present, 2nd Bn 30 MkIV, 5 Tracked AT
14th Pz : 1st Bn 26 MkV, 2nd Bn 30 MkIV, 5 Tracked AT

42nd Korp : 0 Armour
7th Korp : 209 Bn 18 STuG, 281 Bn 18 StuG, 202 Bn 18 STuG
11th Korp : 226 Bn 18 STuG
47th Korp : 911 Bn 30 STuG, 9 Bn 30 STuG, 905 Bn 18 JgPz
PzA 1 : 261 Bn 30 STuG, 210 Bn 30 STuG

88th Inf : 0 Tracked AT
198th Inf : 4 Tracked AT
34th Inf : 5 Tracked AT
57th Inf : 0 Tracked AT
72nd Inf : 0 Tracked AT
389th Inf : 5 Tracked AT
106th Inf : 0 Tracked AT
320th Inf : 0 Tracked AT
282nd Inf : 0 Tracked AT

So in total the starting Germans have Armour of 414 vehicles vs Zetterlings 142. The tracked AT is closer, but should probably not be present in the infantry divisions. Nash mentions in the appendicies that the Russians had 5 to 1 in tanks - its not the current case...

It looks like the STuG's at Korp level (and Wiking) are way overstated as are tank strength in 3rd and 14th Panzer.

I will probably experiment with weakening these units to the above starting strengths, so that these would represent 'running' vehicles and if left alone long enough they would build up.

As far as STuG's, I think that most should be removed and single units per Korp provided.

This may now justify the inclusion of I./PzRg 26 which was sent to the sector due to the low tank strength in 47th Pz Korp...

If anyone has any further info from Zetterling (I don't have it - yet), please pass it on - particularly the starting strengths of vehicles in 3rd Pz Korp.

Thanks,

David

[Volcano Man]

Can you tell me if there is some increase in the defense rating of the Russian 76mm AT gun units? My experience was these units could not utilize a field of fire due to the 14 defense rating. Axis HW co's would fire from three hexes and weed out the 76mm AT gun units.

Just as in our 48th Pz Korps scenario we are playing, Russian 76mm AT guns have a defense of 16, not 14.

As Strela said before, the German HW units are about 1/3 (or at least 1/2) the firepower of the stock game. If anyone has played N44_Alt then they have already seen these ratings in effect.

The Russian tank Bns (9 tanks each) can not combine to form rgts. in the stock game. This results in Russian tank stacks being picked apart by German Bn sized tank units (20-30 tanks each). It appears you are working on a solution to give the Red tanks a fighting chance.

Russian T-34 tank battalions and regiments start out with a maximum cap set at their TOE level so that they can possibly regain some vehicles over time, rather than be forever relegated to 6 vehicles. Of course whether they do regain some vehicles is up to the Russian player and how they are used.

I can add that I do not have a problem with K44 being a game of an Axis mobile defense. That is what they should have done historically. There is a CG scenario that simulates Hitler's stand fast orders which I was never able to convince any Axis player to play.

Actually, I have already set this too. The Germans *do* start out fixed around the salient with gradual releases as the campaign progresses so that they cannot immediately pull back from turn 1. Also, the objectives are much higher value to influence the Germans to contest them. This part will not be changed and if people do not like it then, well, they don't have to play the scenario (they can play the stock game where nothing is fixed). The intent is to create something at least semi-historical here, and go from a situation where the Russians don't have a chance in Hades to a balanced, at least semi-historical outcome. The Germans have well enough tanks and firepower to get out of a pocket I believe, and not influencing the campaign to the point that a pocket will never form is a waste of a scenario.

Just as no Axis player would elect to play a campaign where they are fixed, it should be equally true that a Russian player never elect to play a campaign where they are not fixed. So there is no way around this other than to forcibly influence the semi-historical and have people try to "do their best" with the cards they are dealt.

[Strela]

Another link on German armoured strength from earlier work from Zetterling - reviewing the Soviet study of the battle. Available in both html and PDF.


http://www.militaryhistory.nu/critiques/critiques.html

[Strela]

Hi All,

The work continues apace....

I have just spent a day trying to find Zetterlings book on Korsun here in Singapore (I am an Aussie expat). Unfortunately with little success. Would anyone have it and be willing to provide some notes from the appendicies on tank strengths?

I am trying to source the book from the US, but in the mean time I am coming to a grinding halt.

Any help appreciated on starting equipment levels appreciated.