Several Moscow 42 Questions

[76mm]

Thanks for the replies. So far I'm only playing the AI, and I've maxed out the AI play speed, so everything is kind of a blur, so I am indeed missing it...

Ricky B, after reading the more carefully, I think you're right, but the wording is rather subtle and there is another reason why we need to select targets for direct fire:

Indirect Fire:
First, each such Indirect Fire is doubled in fire value, but the cost of firing is doubled. Second, such Indirect Fire is applied against ALL units in the target hex, proportional to their strength, instead of being applied against a single target unit.

Direct Fire:
...Direct Fire and Indirect Fire of mortar or heavy weapon units is conducted under different rules. Although a target may be selected, under this rule, if the target unit is not a Hard Target, then the resulting fire is dispersed and affects the OTHER units in the target hex.

First, alternative direct fire only applies against soft targets, so if you select a hard target it won't apply. Second, use of the words "other units" instead of "all units" seems to imply that the selected target will take more casualties than the rest, but they'll still be affected, although this is not very clear.

[76mm]

I have another question for Strela: Did the Russian really use motorcycle-mounted troops during this offensive? In the winter GC, the motorcycle units are by far my most mobile units, during decent (non-storm) weather, they can zip along for 10-15 hexes along a road, and can cross open fields and forests on a one-hex-per-turn basis.

I would not have expected motorcycles to be able to operate at all in such conditions, and while I suppose they might have had some kind of spiked tires, etc, it seems like kind of a stretch. Would it make sense to either drastically decrease moto movement rates or even make them "on foot" for the duration?

[Strela]

76mm,

re. The use of motorcycle troops, the answer is I don't know. I will do two things; firstly, see if I can confirm their exact usage, they were definitely present and involved in the fighting. Secondly revist the movement rates that have been used when they are mounted. Sounds like I need to possibly reduce the on road movement rates.

Will report back.

David

[Aditia Holdem]

Stop F5'ing the Blitz Strela! =P

[76mm]

OK. I live in Moscow near one of its largest bookstores (also near Lubyanka, so I knew about the map!); the store is full of obscure WWII East Front memoirs and histories in Russian. If I get a chance I will pop in to see if they have any books about motorcycle troops and flip through the pages to see if there is anything about motoriding on the ice.

Also I don't know if the Sovs used sidecars as extensively as the Germans at this stage; sidecar motorcycles became very popular in Russia after the war, when the Sovs took BMW's plant back to Russia with them, where until recently the same machine tools were used to produce motos.

Sidecar or not, I think someone would be able to move much quicker on a horse than on a moto.

[ComradeP]

76mm, unless I'm mistaken you asked a question about what determines the chance for defensive artillery fire. Was that ever answered? I may have missed it and it's one of the things I've been wondering about.

-

I have a number of questions after rereading the manual:

-the "replacement rate based on supply instead of quality" system used in this scenario. The manual only refers to a replacement "rate". Does that mean that as long as a unit meets the conditions specified for receiving replacements (not having moved and so forth), if the rate is (at least) 1 due to local supply being 50 or higher, it will receive replacements according to the percentage chance specified for the system based on quality (so the percentage chance based on how many losses a unit has taken where higher losses=more replacements)? That is: without additional supply checks?

-Do artillery units that fire once have a lower chance of becoming unavailable than artillery units that fire twice.

-The manual mentions only a "random" chance for things like Low on Ammo units being in supply, whilst other chances are clearly specified using their formula. Is the formula a secret to prevent gaming the system too much?

[76mm]

76mm, unless I'm mistaken you asked a question about what determines the chance for defensive artillery fire. Was that ever answered? I may have missed it and it's one of the things I've been wondering about.

Nope, I don't think anyone answered. It seems pretty random, sometimes the 3th or 4th unit to move next to an enemy gets pounded.

[Dog Soldier]

A couple of questions about two alternate rules:
*****************
Alternative Direct Fire Resolution
Direct Fire and Indirect Fire of mortar or heavy weapon units is conducted under different rules. Although a target may be selected, under this rule, if the target unit is not a Hard Target, then the resulting fire is dispersed and affects the other units in the target hex, so the more soft units you have stacked in a hex the greater your losses will be, the fact you cannot target an individual soft units could be seen as more realistic.
*****************
While this rules says that a target MAY be selected, in my experience you MUST select a target. If the fire actually affects all the units in the hex, why do we need to bother to select a target? Alternative Indirect Fire works in the same way, but we don't have to select a target unit. Am I missing something?

Yes, you are missing the difference between firing on hard targets versus soft targets in the stack.

Do the following to see the reason.
Set the OR in a game where it is not the default.
Move up a mixed stack of soft and hard targets next to an enemy ATG position with an infantry unit. I used a tank stacked with a foot infantry unit for this illustration.
Turn off the menu item for 'On Map Results'.
Advance the turn and fire with the ATG unit on the tank unit. Notice that you had to select the tank unit to fire on it. The results only show the ATG firing on the tank unit. The infantry unit stacked with the tank is not affected at all.
Now, fire on the infantry unit with the ATG unit. Notice that both the infantry and tank unit are effected. However the effect on the tank unit is less than when it was the targeted unit as in the first case. This is why one has to select a target.

It matters whether you fire on a hard target or a soft target in a mixed stack. The game engine does not check to see what is in your stack, so it always asks you to select a target unit. Simple programming, nothing more.

Dog Soldier

[76mm]

I've done a little googling on the motorcycle topic; while most of the sources are frustratingly silent about how these troops were moving about in the snow, this link states explicitly that they were not only moving, but attacking, mounted on motorcycles:
Here is the Russian wikipedia link, followed by an extract from the text; I will try to translate later:
http://ru.wikipedia.org/wiki/46-%D0%B9_%...0%BB%D0%BA
*********
Во время битвы под Москвой при лютом морозе отличился 46-й мотоциклетный полк. Это подразделение воевало на северо-западном направлении. Вместе с другими воинскими частями « сорок шестой » освобождал Волоколамск [1]. Его бойцы участвовали и в разведке, и в боях совместно с лёгкими бронемашинами БА-64. Мотоциклисты проявляли чудеса отваги в схватках за каждый населённый пункт, оккупированный врагом. Немцы-то сидели в укрытиях, а нашим – приходилось под огнём противника мчаться по заснеженному бездорожью. Водителей мотоциклов выручила смекалка. Они двигались неплотным строем, а маневрировали, как бы метались, что мешало вести по ним прицельный огонь. К тому же сидевшие за их спинами автоматчики, а в колясках – пулемётчики, стреляли на ходу. Их поддерживали двигавшиеся в едином боевом порядке бронемашины БА-64. По мере продвижения фронтов на запад, искусство ведения боя с участием мотоциклистов совершенствовалось. Они прикрывали фланги наступавшей пехоты, кавалерии, инженерных подразделений, участвовали в рейдах танковых соединений, врывались в образовавшиеся бреши обороны противника. Всё это мотоциклисты совершали с большим риском и отчаянной храбростью.
**************
Sorry I don't have time to translate at the moment, but this passage says that during the battle for Moscow the motorcycle troops would attack with an SMG gunner sitting behind the driver, and a MG gunner in the sidecar, firing on the move!

Sounds rather Hollywood and difficult to believe, but so far it is all I have found. I am rather intrigued at this point, so will see what else I can find out...

[Strela]

I'm looking at the OOB in the editor at the moment, and I'm wondering why the German air units that become available in January are not listed as reinforcements, unlike their Soviet counterparts. Or: why are some scheduled reinforcements listed with their arrival dates whilst others are not?

Also: why are some units disbanded during the campaign according to the OOB editor, whilst they are not scheduled to be withdrawn?

Example: 162 Infanterie Division.

These might not be code issues, but it seems odd.

Moved from the Moscow '42 Files thread.

ComradeP. The German air is in the Air availability listing. It is the first entry. Much of the German air that supported Barbarossa (not surprisingly) had been moved to other theatres with the onset of winter.

As far as arrival dates where some are listed while other are not. This all came down to research. Many formations could have the date they entered combat determined down to the day. Trust me this is not as easy to find as it sounds. I had to crawl over a number of Russian and German websites to confirm when formations went into action. Other formations could not be narrowed down to the exact date. That said the Soviet records showed army listings every ten days so that then became the new guide for an arrival. Sorry - this was the best I could do.

As far as disband dates, this was much of a local commander decision vs a wholesale formation withdrawal. Commanders (usually Divisional) made the decision to disband a battalion due to losses and allocate the remnants as replacements to other units in the formation. The disband dates were used in two different ways in game. The first was that any officially disbanded formation was not used in any scenario that started after the disband date. Secondly, any unit that was disbanded during the campaign was setup at a lesser strength than its brethren to represent the fact it was understrength. For example, in the Grand Campaign the average German Infanterie battalion starts at 320 men (40%) while battalions that were disbanded started at 240 men (30%). With those decisions I did not want to 'force' players to remove units that were not historically. These units will be more brittle and in many cases are in sectors where they will take heavy losses (162 Infanterie is a good example) and the game will hopefully reflect their waning power due to in game losses.

Hope that clarifies your questions. The new notes function in the OB editor was great for a designer as I could put critical information in there that made it easier to remember why units had to be included / excluded in a scenario. That said I still had a massive spreadsheet that allowed me to build the whole campaign into a single OOB.

David