Mud Movement penalties seem low

[Bacillus98]

I wanted to start a discussion about mud movement in the East Front PzC games. I am using M'41 for the basis of this discussion in particular. Rasputitsa does not pack a punch in regards in penalties. I have looked in several sources, including Osprey, Col. Seaton's book, and several scanned book pages from my local university library. Here's what I was able to dig up. Tracked vehicles were able to move about 80 km in 4 days to move to attacking positions from Mtensk to Tula for example. This was considered very "fast" by the German High Command. When compiling the averages of my sources, it comes out to anywhere from 13 km to 20 km a day. However, this was along roads only. Wheeled vehicles often fared worse, and often had to be towed to become unstuck from the quagmire. Infantry didn't fare much better. One corp averaged 14 km a day, and that was with 24 hour marching. In summary, tracked and wheeled vehicles were mainly confined to roads for both sides in the East Front. Infantry could go off road, but progress was very slow. I understand PzC calculates the average speed a unit moves in a cohesive fashion and not the individual. Translating the speeds from above, a tank or wheeled vehicle could move approx. 2 hexes on a road and infantry would move 1 hex on or off road. Assuming that as long as the MP cost isn't 0 or a negative value, a unit should be able to always move one hex. I propose a mud penalty of somewhere between 400% to 600%. This seems to be the easiest way to have units move very slowly during mud turns, as they should. I believe Volcano Man's alt version MP cost for wheeled/tracked vehicles in on and off roads situation could also be used to further achieve realistic movement rates because as it stands units move way too fast in mud, especially off road. Play or look at the Tula Scenario in M41 and you will see what I mean. What do you guys think of the suggestion?

[Glenn Saunders]

Interesting idea - and I look forward to seeing what folks have to say here. Just so we all understand though 80 km in 4 days means:

2 hexes per turn for your fastest unit
anything less than a tank will move one hex per turn.
...just so people understand what your proposing

Now for an Example
If you have a B Quality Tiger, it has 72 MPs when it has a assigned unit speed of 11 km per hour in the OOB .... and we all know a Tiger can move faster than 11km\h - but accept this value seems to work for a Tiger Unit.

The Clear terrain cost is 6 MP
if you apply a 400% - the bottom end of % request you suggest, this unit will pay 24 MPs per hex and go 3 hexes.
A similar C quality Tank will go 2 hexes

A D Quality Inf Unit only has 21MP
Clear terrain also cost 6 MP
the game currently assigns a 200% penalty in Mud for Units on foot so count = 12MPs per hex of the 21 MPs the unit has and you go ONE HEX. And you can't go any slower than one hex per turn.

Hope this helps folks undestand the implication of what your suggesting. I am not going to comment on if these as good value or not, but I would caution people who may like the sound of what your sayng to consider as well the effect on the game play. Do you really want to play a game\scn where virtually all the unit can move one hex per turn except some tanks go a bit faster.

I recall my days playesting CS Scns where the movement rates are considerable faster than PzC and we all hated any Mud Scns because the ground conditions slowed the game down so much it sucked the fun out of playing.

Unit speed in any conditions is a very tricky things to gauge and put into any game.

+++++++++++++++++++
Follow up post below
+++++++++++++++++++

Tracked vehicles were able to move about 80 km in 4 days to move to attacking positions from Mtensk to Tula for example.

OK - and I accept the above as a point of fact too. And Mud aside - here is another couple of examples of Unit speed in cross country movement also worthy of discussion.

The plan for XXX Corps in Market Garden was to punch a hole though the German line and then "Drive like hell" up the highway linking up with each AB Division along the way.

The prize of course we all know was Arnhem Bridge - 64 miles (call it 100 hexes) behind the lines. This GO LIKE HELL - up a surfaced road with the little in the way of expected oppostions was suppose to only take 3 or 4 days - that was the best cse scenario in the plan. And British tanks don't move at night. Now lets do the math!

So - if we say 3 days, 8 daylight turns per day, 100 hexes - that again comes to 3-to-4 hexes per turn on a paved road for tanks with no Mud.

Interesting???

My point here is my math works and is also supported by fact. But would it work for the game if a tank unit only went 4 hexes per turn on roads in good weather? And if yes, what would the cross country ground speed be in normal weather?

We could also do the math in France 40 - perhaps the fastest advance by any army ever. Measure the distance from the Frontier to Abberville - I make it say 300 km (its closer to 320 but whose counting). May 10th the Gemans attacked. May 20th they were at the were at the channel coast at the town of Abberville.

10 days, 300 km = 30km\d
10 turns per day on average is 3 hexes per turn for your tanks again.
ON AVERAGE road and cross country movement combined. o Mud either.

Would this speed of three hexes per turn for tanks - which are supported by fact as we can see - actually work for the game and game play?

It is a very fine line to assign these unit speeds and convert them literally for them to translate into historically correct rates of advance. I really don't have the answer here but I will look with interest at what others have to say.

.... understand the issue goes way beyond Mud and the assignd Mud penalty in the default PDT.

*** My question this:
>>> HOW SLOW is TOO SLOW when it comes to having a game that is still fun to play and still feels like it represents a historical battle?

I'd really love to hear what you guys have to say on this point.

For arguement sake, lets say the team is making a new PzC game on the Russian Front where MUD at times was a factor.

How slow dare I make the fastest units go in Mud?

Here is your chance to provide input before the game is made.

Great topic guys!

Glenn

[Marquo]

If there was ever a topic which addresses realism versus playabilty, this is it. I would love more realism - look at any pictorial account of Axis vehicles/troops manouvering in the mud - there were going nowhere. At present PzC is great fun with the mud penalty slowing the Axis down, but is it enough?

On the time scale of PzC there should be more of a movement penalty and also a combat penaly for armor. BTW, should units even be allowed to go out of the T mode in mud? There is little unit combat cohesiveness in the raspustitia, and forcing T mode would decrease combat effectiveness...but what about movement... T or non T?

Also, what hurts the Axis will help the Soviet :-) So, maybe VPs will also have to be recalibrated.

Marquo

[Ricky B]

My thoughts, shared with Glenn a month or so ago, on mud was that units off higher quality roads could move too fast in severe mud conditions. But one thing we have to deal with here, is that this is in SEVERE mud, when movement is extremely difficult. But the game only has one level of mud, and I think adding another level would be too much to ask. But in a more typical mud situation, I think a more limited movement cost is correct, more like what we currently have - although I was arguing to have it boosted a bit from the normal 200%.

I do think maybe 300% could be good for some titles - and for specific situations where really heavy mud struck a special PDT with even heavier penalties for that battle might be appropriate, but then as Glenn states above it better not be for the whole scenario - which again I think would make sense, if the mud was that bad for a long period (400+% penalty) the armies wouldn't be fighting very much at that time.

Rick

[Rev Rico]

I do think maybe 300% could be good for some titles - and for specific situations where really heavy mud struck a special PDT with even heavier penalties for that battle might be appropriate, but then as Glenn states above it better not be for the whole scenario - which again I think would make sense, if the mud was that bad for a long period (400+% penalty) the armies wouldn't be fighting very much at that time.

Rick

Probably best way.
A new PDT is what I used for my B45 Spring Awakening scn.

[Volcano Man]

IMO, the best and only thing to do here for the conditional modifier is that the Mud Condition parameter for each Movement Class should be *double* the Soft Condition's value. Currently it is not like this, it is (usually) only x1.5 more, if that. I suppose this doesn't make much sense considering that the shift from Soft to Mud should be twice (or more) as extreme, not 1.5 times as extreme -- well, logically speaking that is.

The other problem here is that the wheeled vehicles of all types (motorized, bicycle, motorcycle and even halftracks to some degree) have cross country movement values that are extremely generous. I think everyone is thinking about it the wrong way here: it is not that the fastest tank / vehicle needs to be made to go a maximum of 2 hexes per turn, it needs to be such that the entire army is reduced in speed so much that only the fastest units can achieve any real mobility and, because of all that, their advance rate is voluntarily restricted. So, would you advance if it means that the only thing you could move forward would be your tanks? This would mean that they would be moving forward alone, without any support whatsoever from wheeled vehicles, foot units and of course artillery. Some commanders might do it, but it would be extremely reckless to say the least. That alone would be causation for the user to consider moving them forward only as fast as the other units allow (one or two hexes per turn).

So my point is, the Mud Condition does not need to be magnified to 400 or 500%, the cross country values for wheeled vehicles need not be so generous and the Mud Condition should be double that of Soft Condition. All of these would combine so that the only thing doing any real movement in Mud would be tracked vehicles (albeit much slower than they currently do), and everything else would be at a snail's pace. When you have wheeled vehicles that can blitz across open country, and mud penalty very low, it compounds the issue to where the entire mechanized / motorized element of the army is barely hindered (voluntarily and involuntarily).

Oh well, just my opinion on the matter. I went through great pains to alter the cross country wheeled vehicle movement values through years of experimenting, those could certainly be used -- they are community property. :)

---

EDIT:

One thing I have to add after further thought...

Perhaps it is better to only do this "2x Soft Condition modifier for Mud Conditions" for mechanized units only, so that class: Infantry, Horse, Ski remain at the same Mud Condition values that they currently area (lets say class:Bicycle is in the mechanized category since it has wheels). I think those non mechanized classes are already hindered enough as it is, they really can't do much at the moment but move forward one hex. Increasing their conditional values even more would only ensure that they wouldn't be able to fire after moving forward on flat terrain (they already cannot fire if they cross a stream or move up hill in the mud).

If all of the above is done, then the effect would be the non mechanized forces would be able to move one hex and shoot, the motorized units (units with wheels) would be severely restricted from doing anything at all, and the tracked vehicles would be able to have moderate movement (1/3 their normal movement) so that they would basically leave everything else behind if they wanted to advance. This is the most realistic choice to me, of course it means changing both the Mud Condition values for the "mechanized units" to be 2x the Soft Value, and changing the movement values for all mechanized units to be the values that I have been using already in the _Alt.

For the sake of clarity, the conditional values would be like this:

Code:

100 100 100 100 100 100 100 100 100 100 100 100 100
150 150 200 130 200 200 150 200 150 150 100 100 100
200 200 400 150 400 400 300 400 300 300 100 100 100
150 100 200 130 200 200 150 200 150 150 100 100 100
150 100 200 130 200 200 150 200 150 150 100 100 100

And movement values for all units would be thus:

EUROPE (Eastern, Western, Southern fronts):

Code:

6   6  12   8  12  12   6  12   6   6   0   0   0
  0   0   0   0   0   0   0   0   0   0   0   0   3
  8   8  15   8  32  60  20  60  20  20   0   0   0
  8   8  15   8  32  60  20  60  20  20   0   0   0
  8   8  20  12  40  90  45  80  45  24   0   0   0
  8   8  15   8  32  60  30  60  30  24   0   0   0
10  12  30  18 146  90  45 120  45  36   0   0   0
12  12  30  18 208 120   0 180   0   0   0   0   0
16  16  40  24   0   0   0   0   0   0   0   0   0
16  16  40  24   0   0   0   0   0   0   0   0   0
  8   8  40   8  32  16   8  16   8   8   0   0   0
12  12  30  18 146  90  45 120  45  36   0   0   0
  8   8  40   8  32  16   8  16   8   8   0   0   0
18   0   0   0   0   0   0   0   0   0   0   0   0
16  16  40  24 208 120  60 180  60  54   0   0   0
  8   8  15   8  32  60  30  60  30  24   0   0   0
  8   8  15   8  32  60  30  60  30  24   0   0   0
  8   8  20  12  40  90  45  80  45  24   0   0   0
  8   8  20  12  40  90  45  80  45  24   0   0   0
  0   0   0   0   0   0   0   0   0   0   0   0   0

  6   6   6   6   6   6   6   6   6   6   0   0   0
  5   5   5   6   5   5   5   5   5   5   0   0   0
  4   4   4   6   4   4   4   4   4   4   0   0   0
  6   6  12   8  12  12   6  12   6   6   0   0   0
  6   6  20  12  52  30  30  30  30  18   0   0   0
  3   3  10   6  26  15  15  15  15   9   0   0   0
  7  -1  -1  -1  -1  -1  -1  -1  -1  -1   0   0   0
-1  -1  -1  -1  -1  -1  -1  -1  -1  -1   0   0   0
  6   6  20  12  52  30  30  30  30  18   0   0   0
  1   1   1   1   1   1   1   1   1   1   0   0   0
  1   1   1   1   1   1   1   1   1   1   0   0   0
  1   1   1   1   1   1   1   1   1   1   0   0   0
  6   6   6   6   6   6   6   6   6   6   0   0   0
  6   6  20  12  52  30  30  30  30  18   0   0   0
  9   9   9   9   9  -1  -1  -1  -1  -1   0   0  -1
20  20  20  -1  -1  -1  -1  -1  -1  -1   0   0   0
-1  -1  -1  -1  -1  -1  -1  -1  -1  -1   0   0   0

NORTH AFRICA (desert):

Code:

6   0  10   6  10  10   8   6   6   6   0   0   0
  0   0   0   0   0   0   0   0   0   0   0   0   3
  8   0  12   8  12  12  10   8   8   8   0   0   0
10   0  12  10  15  15  12  10  10  10   0   0   0
10   0  12  10  25  25  20  20  20  20   0   0   0
  8   0  10   8  15  15  12  10  10  10   0   0   0
10   0  10  10  10  30  30  30  30  30   0   0   0
20   0  20  20  20   0   0   0   0   0   0   0   0
20   0  20  20  20   0   0   0   0   0   0   0   0
30   0  30  30  30   0   0   0   0   0   0   0   0
10   0  12   8   8  10   8   8   8   8   0   0   0
  8   0  12   8  18  15  10  20  12  14   0   0   0
  8   0  15   8  10  10   8   8   8   8   0   0   0
20   0  40  40  40  40  40  40  40  40   0   0   0
  8   0   8   8   8  20  20  20  20  20   0   0   0
  6   0   6   6   6  12  12  12  12  20   0   0   0
  5   0   5   5   5  12  12  12  12  20   0   0   0
  3   0   3   3   3  10  10  10  10  15   0   0   0
  3   0   3   3   3  15  15  15  15  20   0   0   0
  0   0   0   0   0   0   0   0   0   0   0   0   0

  5   0   6   5   8   9   7   6   6   6   0   0   0
  4   0   5   5   5   7   7   5   5   5   0   0   0
  3   0   3   3   3   3   3   3   3   3   0   0   0
  6   0  10   6  10  10   8   6   6   6   0   0   0
  6   0  18  12  18  20  20  16  16  12   0   0   0
  6   0  18  12  18  20  20  16  16  12   0   0   0
  7  -1  -1  -1  -1  -1  -1  -1  -1  -1   0   0   0
-1  -1  -1  -1  -1  -1  -1  -1  -1  -1   0   0   0
  6   0  18  12  18  20  20  16  16  12   0   0   0
  0   0   0   0   0   0   0   0   0   0   0   0   0
  0   0   0   0   0   0   0   0   0   0   0   0   0
  0   0   0   0   0   0   0   0   0   0   0   0   0
  3   0   3   3   3   3   3   3   3   3   0   0   0
12   0  24  18  24  26  26  20  22  18   0   0   0
  9   0   9   9   9  -1  -1  -1  -1  -1   0   0  -1
20   0  24  -1  -1  -1  -1  -1  -1  -1   0   0   0
-1  -1  -1  -1  -1  -1  -1  -1  -1  -1   0   0   0

Voila! Problem solved (one method of many possible)! ;) (despite my best efforts, the formatting is all screwed up, but everyone should get the idea).

[Bacillus98]

Excellent stuff Volcano Man. I realize adjusting the Mud values alone would not solve the problem. I like the way in your alt scenarios that wheeled/mechanized units are encouraged to use roads as axis of advance. I wonder, since Glenn said armor units would go 3-4 hexes in good weather, is why would that be considered bad if that is realistic movement rates? It seems appropriate to the scale here. I wish the game engine differentiated the cost of MP's from behind front lines vs. behind enemy lines. Games by SSG for example, do this by having a MP penalty for hexes behind the enemy line.

[Volcano Man]

Well, there are probably 100 ways to get the desired effect, some of the possibilities are trivial, some of them are extensive. One way would be to simply increase the Mud Condition value for certain units (ie. mechanized) to the extreme until the desired effect is reached. In the next _Alt updates I will do what I described in my post, which should work well given how all the mobility values are different. We will see how that works out. :)

In regards to movement rates of units, I think the problem always comes with comparing historical movement / advance rates. You don't want to strictly limit unit speeds to historical tactical advance rates because that means limiting speed to a situation that most likely meant the reduced rate was very much due to enemy contact, or lack of enemy contact and the need to be cautious to conduct reconnaissance. For the most part a PzC commander can and should be cautious when advancing, so then the question comes down to how much of the vehicle's cross country speed plays a role in the units actual (tactical) movement rate? I think that an armored unit being allowed to move 10 km tactically in normal weather / clear terrain in two hours is not a bad thing, the presence of enemy usually make it impossible to advance at that rate. Generally speaking the speed values on the vehicles in PzC are not unrealistic, they are already much slower than their true cross country capability would allow (about 1/3rd I think), which of course takes into account *some* tactical considerations.

[Bacillus98]

One thing I wanted to add. I was reading the rules again and came across the "STORMS" section. I haven't played games where this has been issue, such as Rhzev. Reading it closely it states: During a Storm, the following effects occur:

· Movement costs are doubled.

· Visibility is reduced to one hex.

· All attack and assault values are reduced by 1/2.

Couldn't something for this be adopted for PzC games that have heavy mud conditions (mainly East front games)? A special rule could be called "Heavy Mud" or a similar variant. Would it be easy to code into a future game and be patched into existing ones? With the way PzC games seem to be getting more "chrome" in the rules, I'd glady fork over more cash for continued updates that make the game better.

[Glenn Saunders]

Couldn't something for this be adopted for PzC games that have heavy mud conditions (mainly East front games)? A special rule could be called "Heavy Mud" or a similar variant.

Why not just use the storm rules as you quoted. Set your ground to MUD and make STORMS = 100 % and you have what you want.