Moscow '42 balance opinions thus far?

[ComradeP]

In time, I'll play a full campaign game as it seems that's necessary to be taken seriously, even when it comes to fairly simple mathematical calculations like replacement rates. I've tested wargames for years, and few things are more annoying than someone calling my arguments "opinions and conjecture" without offering a rebuttal or a discussion. I've wasted way too much of my time on such forum debates for other games, so I'm not going to do it again here. If it's absolutely necessary to advance to a certain point in the campaign to "discover" a problem that can be predicted before even starting it, so be it.

[Mr Grumpy]

Well that is what Brian is offering you, a chance to take a break discussing your point of view on this subject on the forum and a opportunity to prove that they are correct in a real game against an experienced tester of this title, no doubt what happens in that game will settle this debate one way or another?

[ComradeP]

Possibly, but I'm still new to the series, so if the defender indeed has some advantages, a more experienced player will presumably be able to do more with them than me.

There's also the point that he would know what I would be trying, so he can prepare for it and thus prepare a much more effective response than someone who would just be advancing with a small reserve.

I also stand by my point that you don't need to play a full campaign to observe the long term effects of replacement rates on Fixed units.

Maybe a toggle in the editor for whether a unit, when Fixed, can receive replacements would be a way to deal with the starting strengths both sides will have in the northernmost and central parts of the front when the offensives in those areas start. Currently, there's a significant gap between what both sides start the short scenarios for the central sector with, and the starting strengths they'll really have on December 13th/14th in a campaign game, where German infantry battalions will have 500-600 men or more (many might even be near full strength) and the Soviet units that started with 400 men will be (about) full strength.

The replacement rates can currently be higher than they would be with the "regular" strength recovery rate, also because it seems to work based on the full theoretical strength of the unit using the manual's explanation of the replacements system (according to, I believe, Strela) and not the losses of the unit like how the regular strength replacement system is explained in the manual, which means there's not much of a slowdown in drawing replacements as units start to approach full strength.

We end up with the peculiar situation that the replacement rates will indeed allow only a trickle of replacements to come in for active combat areas where the defender makes a stand, but an above average amount of replacements in quiet/rear areas. In 25 turns (a bit more than 3 days) worth of replacements, infantry battalions in the central sector have recovered between 100 en 200 men. Some more, some less. When they can recover undisturbed, the potential to recover losses is much greater than with the quality based system.

Mostly the German units east and south of Tula (and the units of 3. and 4. Panzergruppe that are deep in the woods) have such a low local supply value that they receive barely any replacements. The German units having a higher maximum strength than their Soviet counterparts lessens the impact of the turns when they receive no replacements (because they will still, on average, receive more on the turns when they do receive replacements). It will need to be tested, but that might also mean that the Germans don't receive less replacements than the Soviets at all (the idea behind using this rule instead of the strength recovery rule, according to the notes I believe, as the Germans would otherwise gain more replacements due to their units being of a higher quality) as soon as they pull back to at least 50 local supply hexes.

The difference in replacement rates is most pronounced for Panzer units, when the Germans start to consolidate them, as for some reason the Germans can merge units from two different Panzer battalions provided they're with the same division. That results in bigger units, and the replacement system favours bigger units.

I'm personally not looking forward to being the Soviet player that has to assault (nearly) full strength 4. and 9. Armee units in bunkers, as those assaults are going to be bloody and quite possibly pointless.

[Liquid_Sky]

I think you will find that over time, three small units will gain the same number of replacements as a unit that consists of all three of them together. (EDIT: Actually, broken down units recover at 1/4 the rate. So the math only works if 4 units combines into 1. If it is more then 4 units, it is faster to deploy them, and slower if it is less then 4)

Sometimes gaining troops can be a bad thing. Troops = vp's. If the units are going to die, then you don't want them gaining replacements.

It is possible to 'minimize' the enemy growing replacements. Shooting at them prevents it. So does moving...if you can make them move.

What I have seen in older titles is the designer usually artificially places a maximum on the units. So they can't grow to full strength. For example, instead of a 600 man battalion of three 200 man companies, the designer may have a 450 man battalion of three 150 companies...or even a 300 man battalion. If during the time frame of a campaign replacements are rare..this is probably a good idea.

[Liquid_Sky]

Just for fun here are some numbers:

Winter campaign game, 1942 Moscow.

Axis Strength:

Turn 1: 285,640 men, 6914 guns, 1450 afvs, 391 planes
Turn 2: 289,328 men, 6960 guns, 1465 afvs, 393 planes
Turn 3: 293,068 men, 7009 guns, 1477 afvs, 398 planes
Turn 4: 296,891 men, 7052 guns, 1498 afvs, 403 planes
Turn 5: 300,723 men, 7113 guns, 1511 afvs, 407 planes
Turn 6: 304,668 men, 7168 guns, 1536 afvs, 410 planes
Turn 7: 308,502 men, 7216 guns, 1555 afvs, 415 planes
Turn 8: 312,239 men, 7267 guns, 1569 afvs, 419 planes
Turn 9: 316,010 men, 7310 guns, 1583 afvs, 423 planes
Turn 10: 319,712 men, 7359 guns, 1608 afvs, 427 planes

Gain: 34072 men, 445 guns, 158 afvs, 158 planes.

Not bad for one day.

Now I know the premise is silly...let the entire german army sit still, without firing/moving. However, this is a max. How about half the army moving and gain half this amount? Would that be acceptable? What if the weather turns to storm...(10% for the second day). Now you don't have to move, and assaults/shooting is halved. You can afford to sit.

Or imagine the units sitting still for 10 turns (out of 30)...is this an acceptable replacement rate over 3 days? A month?

I notice that recovery is set to zero, and that (the units I looked at) all have a 1% replacement value. Which means they will recover replacements at a fixed rate, regardless of how 'beat up' the unit is. Doesn't this mean that the units recover replacements faster then if you set replacements to 0% and recovery to 1%? Since recovery is the percentage of actual damage to the unit?

[Dog Soldier]

FWIW, I would test ComradeP's assumptions in a PBEM game where I would play the Russians. He can then demonstrate if the Germans can hold a front with foot infantry formations alone.

What was proposed by ComradeP is a complete withdrawal of the German mobile forces at the beginning of the Campaign game. While it is possible to do this with a small portion of the mobile forces, wholesale removal from the front for R&R deep beyond the lines of fighting will result in one of two outcome in my experience.

1. The majority of Axis infantry left to fend for themselves will be destroyed.

2. The mobile forces could be pursued and harassed before complete refit to the strength levels ComradeP suggests.

Both might even be possible to some extent. However the destruction of the foot infantry formations will leave the returning mobile forces with no flank protection. This might be the best counter measure for the Soviet player. I do not agree with ComradeP that a Russian player will not notice the absence of the mobile forces from the front and adjust accordingly to the situation. To assume the Russian player would simply plod forward while the Axis player executes this type of strategy unmolested,would be a grave underestimation of the competence of many members here. One would not need to post this strategy on the forums. Competent play would quickly realize the missing mobile force and recon would quickly confirm the situation. While this action is taken to ascertain the absence of German mobile forces, the roundup of the infantry would be well under way.

A further issue would be the time it would take for the Axis mobile divisions to make their long retreat. During this movement, No rest and refit would occur. The roads to the rear would be littered with breakdowns of the panzers further weakening them.

A partial removal of the Axis mobile forces for refit at the outset of the game could be achieved. I do not think the cost of a full removal of all mobile forces as ComradeP suggests is insignificant as he assumes.

I notice that recovery is set to zero, and that (the units I looked at) all have a 1% replacement value. Which means they will recover replacements at a fixed rate, regardless of how 'beat up' the unit is. Doesn't this mean that the units recover replacements faster then if you set replacements to 0% and recovery to 1%? Since recovery is the percentage of actual damage to the unit?

Your analysis is missing the element of supply in replacements. That is why replacements are used in M42 instead of recovery.

When a unit has a Local Supply value of
x, then the replacement rate is scaled according to the following:
• When x < 20, the replacement rate is 0.
• When 20 <= x <= 50, the replacement rate is scaled by (x – 20) / 30.

Disrupted units do not receive replacements. Detached units receive only 1/4 the allowed calculation. There will be some detached units as the German forces are pushed to hold a line.

ComradeP is correct in assuming the Germans have to retreat very far to get above a VST supply value of 50% for his formations to maximize the replacement rate of 1%.

I agree your numbers are a bit silly for the first day. I seriously doubt the Germans will be able to rest even 20% of their forces during any one turn. That would be a an average over the long term where some turns would be higher (night turns) and other much lower (day turns). And to let them sit for a whole day, would not be likely.
Actual results on these assumptions are more likely to be:

Gain: 6800 men, 89 guns, 32 afvs, 32 planes.

And that is across how many units? I have not counted them. Even the full amount in your post is spread pretty thin.

I think that it safe to say German losses would be higher than the replacements. Especially if the mobile forces abandon the foot infantry at the outset.

Even the GD regiment units around Tula can have a bad day. One was vaporized in the assault below in a recent game I am involved in. Foot infantry would fair no better. Just take two or three more assaults to finish them.


Dog Soldier

[Liquid_Sky]

Hmm...considering my analysis is the *actual* numbers in game, it is pretty hard to argue supply levels. The germans are getting replacements, and they are getting a lot. Despite being on the front lines.

Probably better to ask a simple question. Knowing what you know about the Winter Offensive in Russia...should the German units be gaining (any) replacements or losing troops to winter attrition?

And if you do think the Germans should be receiving replacements (from Germany!) How many do you think it should be (average?) per day?

[Strela]

I'm going to say it again.....

If you pull out any one 'feature' of the game you will be able to find flaws in it. As Dog Soldier is trying to show you some of the comments here are both unrealistic and ignoring the other factors at play.

A lot of time was spent as a design and play testing team to get the various factors 'balanced' to give the best feel for the fighting in front of Moscow. It's both one of the hardest, yet most satisfying parts of game design to get right. This interplay is our interpretation, if you feel it's wrong the editor gives you the tools to change the various factors.

So let me make a comment or two regarding replacements. Firstly thank you Liquid Sky for your analysis (even if the plane number was wrong!). All units were receiving replacements over the period. These were not from Germany (these came much later in the form of full divisions from Western Europe), but rather the flow of men and materiel back from local hospitals and R & R. Most units if under significant threat would mobilize every able bodied man (and even the lightly wounded) to hold the line. But as pointed out this level of replacements is the absolute maximum. It would assist if players had details of the 'potential' losses on this archetypical day. In actual play testing the Germans were losing more than they were replacing. Now let me be clear, this does not mean 34K losses in a day - it meant that replacements were significantly lower due to the factors mentioned previously and losses were exceeding the actual number of replacements.

Now all that said, if you can show in actual play that we have it wrong we will look at fixing it. My first thought is that supply levels could be dropped to make it even more imperative for the Germans to withdraw or as suggested in the thread the maximums for unit could be lowered. But you have to 'actually' play the game to see if these fixes are required when all the other variables are in play.

David

[ComradeP]

I can again only stress that units in the 4. Armee sector are Fixed, and that there is supposed to be no combat there until the 13th of December, allowing them to refit. Similarly, parts of 9. Armee can also recover to full strength prior to the Soviet offensive. I haven't seen any arguments as to how the Soviets are to prevent that, or how that what I'm describing isn't actually what is happening in those sectors.

Dog Soldier: you're commenting on my strategy in somewhat absolute terms. I don't mean that I'd immediately pull back my mobile units in such a way that it leaves the infantry's flanks hanging in the breeze. Rather, I'd pull them back slowly to allow the infantry to get out. 4. Armee has 2 infantry divisions in reserve that will be near full strength or full strength by the time they activate, together with an infantry division of 4. Panzergruppe belonging to VII. Armeekorps. They can then take the place of more mobile units in the 3. and 4. Panzergruppe sectors.

The mobile units can also rotate their Krad and Pioniere battalions into the frontline and give their motorized infantry some rest. Also, because you're pulling back through woods, it might not always be necessary to keep a full battalion in a hex. ~250 men would presumably be just fine as long as they keep withdrawing so the Soviets can't assault them. Remember that the strategy is aimed towards minimizing the number of Soviet assaults, trading space so your units can recover.

It is also crucial to remember that your Panzer units can refit on almost every turn after they get to a major road. They can refit for most of a day behind the frontline, move for a turn or two when the Soviets get closer, refit again, and it will keep them out of range of a 1 hex per turn advance, all of this is with other parts of the division at the actual frontline.

The Germans also don't all have to withdraw very far to get to a supply level of (close to) 50. 3. and 4. Panzergruppe only need to withdraw to a bit beyond Klin or roughly half the distance to Ruza to get to local supply levels in the high 40's.

Reducing supply could work, but it would need to be reduced by about 20 in the 3. and 4. Panzergruppe and 4. Armee areas to have a substantial effect, which would presumably also mean the units would become low ammo (and artillery unavailable) soon and that the German player has even less incentive to limit his withdrawal to a historical rate.

Not to mention that with such low supply rates, 4. Armee would be overwhelmed by full strength Soviet units (as Soviet supply would still be the same and the Soviets also refit rapidly). Lower supply levels would make the game more challenging for the Germans, but in that case Soviet supply is still probably going to be too high to limit their later advances through supply shortages. As you can see in the January campaign start scenario, Soviet supply levels are still 60-70 in the northern part of the front and in the mid to high 40's in the bulge west of the Oka. That will mean the majority of the Soviet units will still be able to refit rapidly. Cutting Soviet supply by 20 or so wouldn't reduce the replacements gained by the units opposing 4. Armee by much, if it reduces them at all.

The gap in replacements between German and Soviet infantry is much less than it would normally be, as the Germans get an average of 8 and the Soviets an average of 6 at 50 local supply, but that still favours the Germans over time as a full strength German battalion is a tough nut to crack without substantial artillery support.

Grossdeutschland is split up in half battalions at the start, so the result posted is quite predictable: you're assaulting an at best ~180 men unit with what looks like a full stack, presumably after shelling it first.

The full strength based replacement system does create a big gap in tank reinforcements, as Soviet units tend to be (much) smaller than combined German units. A 16 max strength T-34 unit refits at about 1/4 the rate of a full 4 company German medium Panzer battalion (which is possible because the Germans can merge companies from different battalions but in the same regiment for some reason).

Here's an overview of the extent of how much 4. Armee refitted in 30 turns. 19th Panzer's armour is Detached due to being too far from its HQ, hence the minimal replacements compared to 20th Panzer.

I can again only stress that units in the 4. Armee sector are Fixed, and that there is supposed to be no combat there until the 13th of December, allowing them to refit. Similarly, parts of 9. Armee can also recover to full strength prior to the Soviet offensive. I haven't seen any arguments as to how the Soviets are to prevent that, or how that what I'm describing isn't actually what is happening in those sectors.

Dog Soldier: you're commenting on my strategy in somewhat absolute terms. I don't mean that I'd immediately pull back my mobile units in such a way that it leaves the infantry's flanks hanging in the breeze. Rather, I'd pull them back slowly to allow the infantry to get out. 4. Armee has 3 infantry divisions in reserve that will be near full strength or full strength by the time they activate. They can then take the place of more mobile units in the 3. and 4. Panzergruppe sectors.

The mobile units can also rotate their Krad and Pioniere battalions into the frontline and give their motorized infantry some rest. Also, because you're pulling back through woods, it might not always be necessary to keep a full battalion in a hex. ~250 men would presumably be just fine as long as they keep withdrawing so the Soviets can't assault them. Remember that the strategy is aimed towards minimizing the number of Soviet assaults, trading space so your units can recover.

It is also crucial to remember that your Panzer units can refit on almost every turn after they get to a major road. They can refit for most of a day behind the frontline, move for a turn or two when the Soviets get closer, refit again, and it will keep them out of range of a 1 hex per turn advance, all of this is with other parts of the division at the actual frontline.

The Germans also don't all have to withdraw very far to get to a supply level of (close to) 50. 3. and 4. Panzergruppe only need to withdraw to a bit beyond Klin or roughly half the distance to Ruza to get to local supply levels in the high 40's. Reducing supply could work, but it would need to be reduced by about 20 in the 3. and 4. Panzergruppe and 4. Armee areas to have a substantial effect, which would presumably also mean the units would become low ammo (and artillery unavailable) soon and that the German player has even less incentive to limit his withdrawal to a historical rate.

Not to mention that with such low supply rates, 4. Armee would be overwhelmed by full strength Soviet units (as Soviet supply would still be the same and the Soviets also refit rapidly). Lower supply levels would make the game more challenging for the Germans, but in that case Soviet supply is still probably going to be too high to limit their later advances through supply shortages.

As you can see in the January campaign start scenario, Soviet supply levels are still 60-70 in the northern part of the front and in the mid to high 40's in the bulge west of the Oka. That will mean the majority of the Soviet units will still be able to refit rapidly. Cutting Soviet supply by 20 or so wouldn't reduce the replacements gained by the units opposing 4. Armee by much, if it reduces them at all.

The gap in replacements between German and Soviet infantry is much less than it would normally be, as the Germans get an average of 8 and the Soviets an average of 6 at 50 local supply, but that still favours the Germans over time as a full strength German battalion is a tough nut to crack without substantial artillery support.

Grossdeutschland is split up in half battalions at the start, so the result posted is quite predictable: you're assaulting an at best ~180 men unit with what looks like a full stack, presumably after shelling it first.

The full strength based replacement system does create a big gap in tank reinforcements, as Soviet units tend to be (much) smaller than combined German units. A 16 max strength T-34 unit refits at about 1/4 the rate of a full 4 company German medium Panzer battalion (which is possible because the Germans can merge companies from different battalions but in the same regiment for some reason).

Here's an overview of the extent of how much 4. Armee refitted in 30 turns. 19th Panzer's armour is Detached due to being too far from its HQ, hence the minimal replacements compared to 20th Panzer. The motorized infantry divisions have fewer battalions, but the individual battalions have a higher max strength, hence their roughly comparable replacement rate to 9 battalion infantry divisions.

[raizer]

so you have it all figured out...now what? Will you ever play a person in any game no matter the size/scale?