Forums

i was just re-posting it about 20min ago. Were you trying then because i deleted it and re-uploaded with the new scn file.

Been downloaded 20+ times today

I just tried again and I can not get to it. The site locks up for me.

(08-20-2013, 02:22 PM)CarnageINC Wrote: [ -> ]I just tried again and I can not get to it. The site locks up for me.

try this, ive never tried these people but it said free and no sign up


http://www60.zippyshare.com/v/22848996/file.html

let me know if it works

The solution to the 34 Artillery division problem is simple: Make the Special Grouping Berlin subordinate to HQ GSFG. It will not really affect playability (the Special Grouping HQ is an army HQ, HQ GSFG is a Front HQ) and the 34 Artillery Division (a unit directly under GSFG) will now fire in support of the Special Grouping (but not the Motschützendivision 1, since this belongs to an Army subordinate to another Front, but you can of course change this after the first 24 hours and assign it to the Special Grouping as well).

The rest of my comments is about to be written up, but to appease my employer I have to work on work-related military history rather than game-related military history for the time.

(08-20-2013, 08:01 PM)JDR Dragoon Wrote: [ -> ]The solution to the 34 Artillery division problem is simple: Make the Special Grouping Berlin subordinate to HQ GSFG. It will not really affect playability (the Special Grouping HQ is an army HQ, HQ GSFG is a Front HQ) and the 34 Artillery Division (a unit directly under GSFG) will now fire in support of the Special Grouping (but not the Motschützendivision 1, since this belongs to an Army subordinate to another Front, but you can of course change this after the first 24 hours and assign it to the Special Grouping as well).

The rest of my comments is about to be written up, but to appease my employer I have to work on work-related military history rather than game-related military history for the time.

It was simple, i deleted the berlin option, took 12.2 seconds

(08-20-2013, 08:05 PM)tazaaron Wrote: [ -> ]

(08-20-2013, 08:01 PM)JDR Dragoon Wrote: [ -> ]The solution to the 34 Artillery division problem is simple: Make the Special Grouping Berlin subordinate to HQ GSFG. It will not really affect playability (the Special Grouping HQ is an army HQ, HQ GSFG is a Front HQ) and the 34 Artillery Division (a unit directly under GSFG) will now fire in support of the Special Grouping (but not the Motschützendivision 1, since this belongs to an Army subordinate to another Front, but you can of course change this after the first 24 hours and assign it to the Special Grouping as well).

The rest of my comments is about to be written up, but to appease my employer I have to work on work-related military history rather than game-related military history for the time.

It was simple, i deleted the berlin option, took 12.2 seconds

While a simpler fix, I am wondering if deletion of the Berlin option for 34th Artillery Division is best. From what I can tell, with the Trench factor now fifty percent, Berlin is a much tougher nut to crack. Unless the Pact chooses the Operation Zentrum reinforcement of an elite GDR Motorized Division, I suspect the Pact forces in place cannot take it. And if a commitment was made of a division, it is just as easy to see the Pact high command also committing the artillery.

I understand the military logic that a Soviet heavy artillery division would be used at the main front. But I think the political logic is as compelling. If the Warsaw Pact were to have attacked NATO, a key and early sign of success - and perhaps a necessary morale booster for wavering Pact allies - would have been the decisive and early conquest of Berlin. The fall of the historic and symbolic capital of Greater Germany would have immense propaganda value. Conversely, a NATO garrison stubbornly persisting in Berlin for days or even weeks would have been a propaganda disaster. The Fall of Berlin in 1945 has a mythic place in Soviet history. One can even seen unrest among generals in the Soviet Army itself if it is not made a major early objective.

Not sure if this can be done under the engine, but perhaps a way forward is to keep both options, make the command re-arrangements described above, and have a victory point cost to the Pact for NOT taking the Operation Zentrum and 34th Artillery options. This would allow the Pact to choose to ignore Berlin in the short term, at a political cost - a reasonable outcome.

Theres more factors involved in moving the 34th, it wont work right which ever way u do it, you can not change a command without an HQ unit and it wont spot for the Grens who have a HQ and if you give the 34th and HQ so it can change command then the only units that can spot for the 34th is the 34th. So in short not happening and Berlin should be tougher plus theres plenty of other units comin along you can use if you so choose.

PS. As an extra note, Nato isnt a walk over anymore, you dont want the 34th with all its modern art and rockets back in Berlin. There needed at the front.

Aaron

You could debate Berlin until the cows come home. Personally I'm not convinced the East Germans would be happy to see a Soviet Arty Div draw up alongside them and start pounding Berlin and its civillian population into the dust. I'm even less convinced that the East Germans would of been overly keen on advancing into Berlin themselves and engaging fellow Germans in what is the most vicious type of combat. And as for the Soviets, I'm sure the loss of 200,000 men last time they entered the place would weigh heavily on the minds of some of their old guard as they were young enough to remember it!

(08-21-2013, 01:48 AM)Midge Wrote: [ -> ]You could debate Berlin until the cows come home. Personally I'm not convinced the East Germans would be happy to see a Soviet Arty Div draw up alongside them and start pounding Berlin and its civillian population into the dust. I'm even less convinced that the East Germans would of been overly keen on advancing into Berlin themselves and engaging fellow Germans in what is the most vicious type of combat. And as for the Soviets, I'm sure the loss of 200,000 men last time they entered the place would weigh heavily on the minds of some of their old guard as they were young enough to remember it!

I would guess the whole war scenario itself exists mainly in an alternative reality. This alternative reality supposes that in 1989 the Pact allies were sufficiently reliable not only to shoulder their burden of an offensive war, but also loyal enough not to betray the whole scheme in advance to NATO. As others have commented, the idea of a Pact strategic surprise of the scale the scenario supposes is a best case. That being the premise, not sure we need factor in East German squeamishness over a bombardment of West Berlin - East Germans upset at that would likely already have rebelled at the very notion of the war to begin with. But you are quite right, we can debate the might-have-been stuff until the cows come home.

I suppose what I should have said is that removing the option of using the Soviet 34th Artillery near Berlin more or less consigns the Pact to not taking the city at all without diverting some later reinforcements. I doubt the Operation Zentrum GDR division can make the difference by itself. But I am glad to be proved wrong.

In Beta, how did things play out in Berlin? Could the Pact take the city with just the Zentrum forces (minus 34th Arty)? Or did they have to divert follow on troops as well?

(08-21-2013, 04:12 AM)Elxaime Wrote: [ -> ]

(08-21-2013, 01:48 AM)Midge Wrote: [ -> ]You could debate Berlin until the cows come home. Personally I'm not convinced the East Germans would be happy to see a Soviet Arty Div draw up alongside them and start pounding Berlin and its civillian population into the dust. I'm even less convinced that the East Germans would of been overly keen on advancing into Berlin themselves and engaging fellow Germans in what is the most vicious type of combat. And as for the Soviets, I'm sure the loss of 200,000 men last time they entered the place would weigh heavily on the minds of some of their old guard as they were young enough to remember it!

I would guess the whole war scenario itself exists mainly in an alternative reality. This alternative reality supposes that in 1989 the Pact allies were sufficiently reliable not only to shoulder their burden of an offensive war, but also loyal enough not to betray the whole scheme in advance to NATO. As others have commented, the idea of a Pact strategic surprise of the scale the scenario supposes is a best case. That being the premise, not sure we need factor in East German squeamishness over a bombardment of West Berlin - East Germans upset at that would likely already have rebelled at the very notion of the war to begin with. But you are quite right, we can debate the might-have-been stuff until the cows come home.

I suppose what I should have said is that removing the option of using the Soviet 34th Artillery near Berlin more or less consigns the Pact to not taking the city at all without diverting some later reinforcements. I doubt the Operation Zentrum GDR division can make the difference by itself. But I am glad to be proved wrong.

In Beta, how did things play out in Berlin? Could the Pact take the city with just the Zentrum forces (minus 34th Arty)? Or did they have to divert follow on troops as well?

In testing there was only probing of the defenses and in feedback over the years Berlin is bypassed 8 out of 10 games