Battle for Moscow- AAR

[Currahee]

Battle for Moscow (now in ver. 2.0) deserves to be played more than it has been; a great deal of work went into it from the designer, Briann Topp, and it plays well, each side having chances to win. In the game just finished, I won an OV over Fabio Riggi, who played a very solid game.

The designer’s notes, packaged with the scenario as downloaded from the Rugged Defense depot, are excellent. However, there are a few facts they don’t fully convey, and that is the reason for this AAR.

This scenario is practically unique, in that the German forces can succeed with limited attacks, even at a heavy shock disadvantage; at one point the German slides down to 65 shock, and then rises over several turns back to 90. Historically, I never attack at anything like 90 shock or worse, unless absolutely desperate; but in this game it can be done, due to the relatively much higher proficiency of the German units; however, they should be supplied, and readiness and supply should be somewhat elevated. This is not easy to accomplish in the Russian winter, and the only answer I found is RAIL: keep the rail lines repaired and secured, and stay close to them with your attacking formations.

The German air arm is also formidable, although I suspect the Russians will wear it down if the Germans dare to place bombers on combat support more than very occasionally. I kept them on interdiction the whole game, and the fighters on air superiority, and fought all of my air squadrons (bombers and fighters) only when readiness was over 66% (a recommended formula for minimizing air losses); and still, my squadrons were badly depleted by game end, although their proficiency remained high, and I retained air superiority.

The German must also be aware of the arrival location of late-game Russian reinforcements, as they can seriously threaten German supply rail lines, as happened in our game. As some of these are map edge arrivals, it’s not sufficient to guard just a few hexes, entire sectors have to be watched.

If Moscow falls, the battle becomes difficult for Russia, as supply and replacements are reduced, pestilence (desertion) is introduced, and some permanent victory points are awarded to the Axis. And as Fabio pointed out to me during our game, a significant number of Russian reinforcements, scheduled to arrive at Moscow, won’t arrive at all, unless and until it’s retaken.

I hope we can see this scenario played more often; I think you’ll be pleased with it.

Currahee
3-30-09

[Weasel]

Didn't he do the ROAD TO MOSCOW series too?

I will have to read up on the SHOCK you are speaking of, never noticed it before.

[Currahee]

I think the Road to Moscow series is Rob Kunz. Brian's initial inspiration, according to his designer's notes, came from a board game.

The fluctuating shock effects are not itemized in the news bulletins, but the bulletins do give a hint, because whenever the German shock gets worse, there's a message that "frigid temperatures further reduce German combat effectiveness" or something like that. You have to read the scenario dump to get the details. Likewise, fluctuations in supply level and supply radius and replacement rates are generally noted in the news bulletins, but without the specific percentages.

But the shock is bad, it's about the heaviest hammer a designer has in TOAW, and I've rarely seen it go that low for so many turns; and Fabio and I were both surprised at the amount of combat power the German Army retained. But as said, I was attacking Russian units which were generally not well dug-in (altho some were); and I was attacking with units that were rested and supplied, and had moved into the combat area by rail on the preceding turn. Of course, once the defending units are worn down, you can be a bit more casual, and attack with whatever is available.

In this game, the German needs to scan all his rail at the first of each turn; playing as we were with "no borders" and "fog of war", it's not always easy to detect a rail interruption. You have plenty of rail auto-repair points, that's not the problem; the problem is that auto repair won't work in a hex controlled by the enemy! So if at the end of your long rail, your supply has dropped off, there's a kink in your system somewhere, and you have to saddle up a small unit, and work back, and find the problem. If you're lucky, it's just an unconverted hex, and your recon unit can convert it back, and usually you can use the rail for rail movement same turn, altho it'll be next turn before it distributes supply. But if you're unlucky, it'll be a Russian regiment sitting happily on your rail, and you'll have to find a way to deal with him.

[Weasel]

I think the Road to Moscow series is Rob Kunz. Brian's initial inspiration, according to his designer's notes, came from a board game. (1)

You have to read the scenario dump to get the details. Likewise, fluctuations in supply level and supply radius and replacement rates are generally noted in the news bulletins, but without the specific percentages. (2)

In this game, the German needs to scan all his rail at the first of each turn; playing as we were with "no borders" and "fog of war", it's not always easy to detect a rail interruption. You have plenty of rail auto-repair points, that's not the problem; the problem is that auto repair won't work in a hex controlled by the enemy! So if at the end of your long rail, your supply has dropped off, there's a kink in your system somewhere, and you have to saddle up a small unit, and work back, and find the problem. If you're lucky, it's just an unconverted hex, and your recon unit can convert it back, and usually you can use the rail for rail movement same turn, altho it'll be next turn before it distributes supply. But if you're unlucky, it'll be a Russian regiment sitting happily on your rail, and you'll have to find a way to deal with him. (3)

(1)
RTM scenarios were really fun too, I picked them to play over the big Moscow one you spoke of here. As stated, my only real complaint and it isn't just the RTM scenarios, is that any army can still hit hard with 2% supply. But that is game code so moot.

(2)
Scenario dump file, is that the file you spoke to me of that causes an error code to be reported or is this the file that sits in the scenario folder (that I never check for).

(3)
Auto rail repair points, this means you don't need a repair crew to fix the rails, computer "ghost" crews do it?

Also, did you guys ever put together a game tip file for newbies like we did at SP? You know, one with all the neat little tips and tricks that one learns over the years like not using air if below 60% (I go until 50% myself but now will change) etc? If not, and I know I am asking a lot, could the veterans be asked to put one together? That is what I did and gave each vet. about 50 bonus points for helping out. I know I would appreciate such a document.

Cheers!!

[Fulcrum]

I don´t you but I have a problem with RTM (Road to Moscow) scenarios. Playing with the germans in each round ever have a unit that insists in the attack burning a lot of rounds. I tried with minimal looses and issame issue. Is really frustrating because i think that only with a good turn management can the german to do something.

[Currahee]

The "scenario dump" is a text file that allows you to see what the designer has done; it includes the scenario briefing, all the events, lists both sides' supply sources (even if unrevealed at the start of the game), and gives the full order of battle of each side. To extract it, open the editor, load the scenario you're interested in, and then from the "File" dropdown menu, select "Dump Scenario As"....you can drop the text file into the folder of your choice. It's usually too long to print, and can run hundreds of pages; but the most useful part is the front part, which runs through the events, and the list of victory hexes, and supply sources; if you print only that part, it's quite doable. From the list of events, you can piece together what causes what, and when. We don't consider it cheating to look at that, most designers try to explain the major events anyway, and it really is necessary to know where the supply sources are, to play the game competently. In a well-designed, well-documented scenario, you don't learn anything from the scenario dump that you didn't already know from the designer notes or the scenario briefing. So it's really just a way to check up on a sloppy scenario briefing. As you know, from the game screen while you're playing, you can "hide units", toggle the supply icon to show supply sources, and see both friendly and enemy supply sources; however, if there's a friendly supply source in a hex currently controlled by the enemy, it won't be shown, and this is a big issue; not in Battle for Moscow, but in certain scenarios; for example, you can't launch an amphibious assault, unless you know you'll be supplied once on the beach; so either the designer has to tell you where you'll find friendly supply sources; or, you have to check the scenario dump. Another way to tell from the editor, without using the scenario dump, is to use the "edit" menu, pick "deployment", then with the "view" menu, pick "hide units", and you can see all the supply sources for both sides, whether or not the hex is currently under control. If a hex has a supply source for each side, the dot will be all white. The only time this will not work, is if a supply source is brought into existence by the event engine itself, later in the game (as in Holland- A Bridge Too Far, with the drop zone and landing zone supply sources).

There's an even easier way to tell when you're subject to "shock effect" (assuming the designer hasn't informed you in some way, in the scenario notes, or in the recent news); in the "situation briefing", there's information on current supply levels. For example, if force supply level is 10, and if supply enhancement due to force transport asset sharing is 5, and if enemy interdiction reduces supply by zero, you should expect your effective supply capability to be 15. If it is 12, you know you are at 80% shock, because you're experienced and unexplained reduction of 20% in effective supply. That reduces your force supply level directly, and then terrain, supply radius, etc, cause further reductions on the map. The only thing that reduces supply that way is shock; each 1% of shock causes a corresponding 1% reduction in your effective supply capability.

Yes, auto rail repair is the repair the computer does for you each turn, without your having to use your rail repair units. In Battle for Moscow, rail damage % for the German is 20; that means whenever the German seizes a rail hex, there's a 20% chance it'll be damaged; but German auto rail repair is 20, which means 20 rail hexes will automatically repair each turn. I don't know if the designer intended this, but the effect is, all damaged rail auto-repairs each turn. Only exceptions are hexes under enemy control; and hexes where a bridge has been blown; that will have to be repaired by engineers.

The rail repair units may still be helpful, however: because they can repair the damaged rail hex that same turn, and you can use it immediately to move by rail; if you wait on the auto repair, it's not going to be usable until next turn.

We should probably get together a "tip sheet". It might be most helpful if it's not too detailed, but simply lists some high points, sort of like "what mental checklist does a veteran player go through when he makes a turn". I'll try to come up with one, and anyone else can as well, and we can then consolidate them.

[Currahee]

I don´t you but I have a problem with RTM (Road to Moscow) scenarios. Playing with the germans in each round ever have a unit that insists in the attack burning a lot of rounds. I tried with minimal looses and issame issue. Is really frustrating because i think that only with a good turn management can the german to do something.

I think the three biggest factors are force proficiency; shock (if any is present); and the cooperation level of the units involved in the attack. In Battle for Moscow, I rarely got, or even tried for, more than two rounds, probably because I was usually subject to some degree of shock, and often had non-cooperating units involved in the same attack. All or almost all axis units in Battle for Moscow are on "force support" (background color), so anytime you have a light grey unit (the most common) attacking with a dark grey unit (also common), or a black unit (SS), you burn a lot of rounds. This includes supporting artillery! So depending on game design, it may be hard or impossible to keep from burning rounds. This is not a game defect, so much as a designer problem; because if you want the SS to be able to participate in any attack, just put them at "free support". That would make a lot more sense, as the SS at that stage of the war never had enough units to handle the attack alone, it was always "cooperating" with Wehrmacht units. If you just did that ("free support" for the SS), then you could keep the other colors separated, in Battle for Moscow the background colors represent Army Groups, and you would have some chance to keep them together.

Of course, under the new TOAW III editor, the designer can limit the number of rounds burned per turn, but the scenarios we're talking about here were designed in the old eidtor. You could go in, though, and modify them in the new editor.

[Currahee]

I should have mentioned....in Battle for Moscow, the Germans' armored equipment gives their units a lot of staying power. On the pivotal turn when Moscow was taken, I had to hold it through the Russian turn to get credit and to invoke all the events, as the German is player #1 in that scenario. At the end of the German turn, I had only one unit in Moscow, the 35th Schuetzen Rgt of the 25th Motorized Division; it had proficiency/readiness/supply of 83/33/1. Furthermore, it was not entrenched, and had only 25 rifle sqds (of 72), and 6 SMG sqds (of 20), etc; but it had some Stugs, and it had all 32 of its halftracks! They are only armored at 1, but against the poor Russian AT assets, they are very hard to evict from the defense. Well, Fabio was not able to evict them, and the next turn, I was able to pour reinforcements into Moscow. The game then began to turn, although my shock continued to worsen for several more turns. There was a bad moment a few turns later when Fabio cut my rail lines to Moscow; but my units there were "unsupplied" for only one turn; I then reestablished a non-rail supply line, and they were "supplied", albeit at a very low supply level; and then within a couple of more turns, rail supply was reestablished. It really was a battle over the supply lines.

So although the German units look pathetic when you just look at their summarized combat power (unit attack and defense factors), they are really more potent because of their armored vehicles. My armored vehicle count actually increased during the game, and they are also more resistant to pestilence (here, frostbite!) because 100% of pestilence-attrited vehicles are eventually returned to the replacement pool (vs 50% of soft assets, such as squads).

[Weasel]

Just reading your posts up above I learned some things, like the flag colours. I new that green flags were units of the same formation and grey were not, but I didn't know that it causes more turn burn. Same as the shock check.

Funny how in the post above you state your supply was at 1% yet the unit was still able to fight. I wonder what the real supply points would be for the real 6th army near the end. Lets see, Paulus said he needed 500 tonnes and he was getting 76 tonnes at the start, and the 500 was minimum so lets say 50% supplied. That would mean that his units would be at about 15% supply, hypothetical. At the end there supply was probably 5 tonnes by air drop, or 1%.

[Currahee]

It's all scenario-specific, because the designer can set the formation cooperation level as free, force, army, or formation; and not every formation has to be set the same. "Free" is easy, they cooperate with anyone, up or down the chain. "Force" is what you see mostly in Battle for Moscow, the background color determines. With "Army", both colors (background and foreground) have to match; with "formation", color doesn't matter, the units cooperate only w/in the same formation.

Yes, fighting on 1% supply doesn't work intellectually, you have to abstract that to mean something else, like "1% of desired supply, but still at subsistence level." But even with the game engine as is, you can make supply a lot more potent, by ensuring that if one side is at 1%, the other side is healthy enough to punish them, taking into account both supply level, and proficiency. It's a balancing act. Generally the game is much improved by increasing supply levels for both sides; then if one side runs out, they really notice it, because their opponent hasn't! Most of the scenarios, especially the older ones, have both sides running on empty most of the time, so it's not that noticeable when you're low on supply.