Barbarossa: The War in the East 1941-1945

[laisak]

Perhaps finnish troops should be better?

The initial advance of the Finnish advance was quite rapid. It halted on the outskirts of Leningrad in December 1941 mostly due to tension in the military. Finland had already regained the areas lost in the Treaty of Moscow (1940) and officials didn't want it to turn in to a foray.

The suggestion of giving Finnish ski troops a movement of 2 sounds good. Attack rate could be higher also. I'm pretty sure the Soviet production power will eventually turn the tide in their favor.

 

[Rocoteh]

The initial advance of the Finnish advance was quite rapid. It halted on the outskirts of Leningrad in December 1941 mostly due to tension in the military. Finland had already regained the areas lost in the Treaty of Moscow (1940) and officials didn't want it to turn in to a foray.

The suggestion of giving Finnish ski troops a movement of 2 sounds good. Attack rate could be higher also. I'm pretty sure the Soviet production power will eventually turn the tide in their favor.

laisak,

Yes, I agree:
Higher combat value and ski troops with
movement 2 should be added.

Rocoteh

 

[laisak]

I also suggest raising Finland's aggression level if that helps. Finnish troops were highly motivated to regain Viipuri (Vyborg) and Sortavala.

 

[Rocoteh]

I also suggest raising Finland's aggression level if that helps. Finnish troops were highly motivated to regain Viipuri (Vyborg) and Sortavala.

laisak,

Yes, I agree on that.

Rocoteh

 

[emzie]

What was the reasoning of leaving out bridges at the onset? As the Soviets, it hindered rushing reinforcements -- understandable. As the Germans however, the lack of bridges slows down the speed at which I can attack -- kinda un-blitzkrieg-like.

 

[Sarevok]

Ill get Bridges

ok, so we have some new units, lets discuss stats.

 

[Klyden]

It is true the Soviets had vast numbers of tanks at the outset of the campaign. Unfortunately, over half of them were in need of service, so on paper, it was a strong force, but in reality it was not. What is even more interesting are the Soviet estimates of the German tank force. (The Germans started the invasion with just over 3000 tanks and the Russians thought they had many times that number).

My point is that as the campaign goes along, the Russians get more and better mobile forces. The game protrays that now very well. What is missing (IMO) is an upgraded infantry unit, much like the Germans go through different infantry units as the war progresses. Guards upgrades could help represent this (including Guards Cav if you are so inclined). Probably a good start for a Guards infantry is somewhere in the 10 attack, 11 defense range. This puts it as inferior to the starting German infantry, but in parity with the later German infantry that was not nearly as strong on a per unit basis.

 

[bigmeat]

it's interesting that many later soviet tanks were bought with american money, the t-34 was even an american design!

 

[DataForge22]

Soviets should be forced to pass on the first turn to allow the Germans to move first. A Soviet player could make a strategic withdraw and the first German offensive would not be very productive. This should also help facilitate the Soviet airforce getting pounded on the ground on the first turn by the Germans.

I agree, I've been playing the soviets for a few turns (turn 4 or 5 I think) and one of the first things i did was attack the germans, take galatz (romania) and Helsinki (finland). Then with some of my frontline units i sent them back to protect them from the beginning german invasion, and then i sent some of my planes to the mid-area (think east of minsk) to moscow area so that they would be safer.

If by chance the germans were to take the whole of the soviet union, i noticed in the small area of Krasnoperekopsk, Sevastopol, and Kerch, if enough units were left, the could be stationed in Krasnoperekopsk and Kerch and keep any germans out, leaving this Soviet "Island (well semi-peninsula)" protected

 

[Sarevok]

That change is made and I saw its in game effect. The Soviets will not have the first Turn for 1.1

 

[AKauhanen]

For the first time in my Civ history I have readed every comment on the thread before commenting myself and here I go:

+The Germans had 4000 tanks (by my knowledge) at the start of the Polish war 1939.
+The Mannerheim[fortress]line was situated between the Gulf of Finland and Laatokka-lake on the Finnish side of the border. It was said to be the best fortified part of land in Europe at that time.
+Plus the eastern part of Finland is "heavy"forest with some swamps what makes defending easier.
+Even after fast withrawing from the Mannerheimline the Finnish army stopped the Russian army and got Stalin to quit the war because of high casualty rate in sending his units against Finns in swamp/river land. And because of the time delay it was costing him from going to Berlin. But it still is quite good accievement to stop the Russian army and make STALIN MAKE PEACE !!!!
+Finnish infantry was fast moving [move2] and "thundra" and forest terrain diden't slow it down [ignore extra move cost in forest and thundra]
+The Finnish military leader Mannerheim had a very very long military career in the Russian Char's army, then at the Japan-Russia war, Then at the Finnish civil war, Then at the Winter War with his offensive strategies he attacked a Ukrainian division and killed the Ukrainians and took their artillery captive so over doubling the Finnish artillery at that time. So we could say he was a great military leader with offensive tactics. [Great Leader?] Still for some reason he never ordered the Finns to enter Leningrad or to help the Germans fighting in northern Finland against the Russian Murmansk defenders.. And that brings me to an other point. There was NO Finnish forces in Northern Finland at the time the scenario begins. Only Germans. The German forces weren't multiple only one or two divisions and their mission was to take Murmansk, but because USA leasing equipment shipping there from the north and because of the cold enviroment the Germans weren't able to take Murmansk.. never. After understanding they coulden't take Murmask [Thundra decensive bonus??] they made positions there and stayed to the end of the war till the Finns betrayed the Germans with our seperate peace with Stalin and we drove the Germans out of North Finland ( the worst betrayal in Finnish history and unjust. )
+Finland was a democratic republic and still is a democratic republic we have never been in Fasism. Still it is fair to pointout that in the times of the Wars our republic changed to a authotarian republic. (=Democracy with a lot of power in the hands of central leader(s) and remained that way almost today.)
+The Russian draft infantry should be cheaply eguiped conscripts. [5.6.1]? Nothing else can describe the high casualties the Russians hade in the early stages of the war. I do admit that the Russian infantry when equipped to Western standarts could match close, but its unrealistic they could draft western quality conscipts at the early stages of the war. Ofcourse Russian must have the capasity to build the 7.9.1 Soviet Infantry and to upgrade later on the drafted [5.6.1] conscripts to [7.9.1] level.
+More delay to the Russian player to simulate the total supprise and failior of the central military leadership to act and accept the info coming from the front of a German attack plus Stalins orders not to open fire on Germans if the Germans diden't open fire first on the Russian platoon.
+The game could use beginning tech level mortars for defensive artillery. For exsample a mortar unit [0.(5).1] range 0 and later in the game truck/tractor moved mortars what could give close range support fire to motorized infantry.
+Does the game have a TOW/panzershreck infantry ?
+Why is there a mountain west of Helsinki ??????
+East Finland= Forest,swamps lakes rivers + Mannerheimfortressline on the Karelian peninsula.
+North Finland= Cold. Thundra defencive bonus ? Movement cost 2 ? Ski infantry could ignore the movement cost. (all finnish infantry at that time was ski infantry capable.
+West Finland= Grassland or farms.
+South of Finland= From Tallinna long range coastal guns could fire to Helsinki. The game lacks heavy artillery. A range 3 immobile coastal/fortress-gun could be made in cities for long range artillery fire and defence of the city. It would be permanently immobile and coulden't be moved from the city in anyway.
+The beginning speech diden't work for me, but it was very possible I put the text file someplace wrong..? It's strange to hear that your people have been nomads for centuries when you begin a ww2 game
+More Italian cities !
+Where is Oslo ???? Norway could have atleast 2 German controlled cities... Oil still wasen't found in the coastal waters of Norway at that time so it can't be included yet..
+Why would anyone build the HE-111 because the JU-88 is better in everyway ?
+Sorry for giving too many of my ideas but Finland dosen't have it's "head".. Could a city be included there ? So Finland would have her natural shape.
+Tornio and Tampere have been said before.
+The Finnish kill ratio was against Russians in WW2 was 1:18. And The Russians had a lot more tanks, airpower, artillery. (Now Finland haves the largest artillery in Europe
+The Russian fighters are unrealisticly good. The Russians had massive air losses because the low quality/ low tech of their aircraft against the Germans very high quality.
+The T-34 had a bad problem that the leader and crew had difficulties seeing out. The aiming system was electric (slow and antique) compared to the German/American/British compressed air/water, the armor alloy steel was significantly lower strenght than mix steel alloy German/American/British and the short pipe was inaccurate compared to the German early war tanks. So in my view the T-34 wasen't a good tank compared to it's early German counter parts, but they had a great stamina & speed still and relatively low cost. If other people have more info on the T-34 compared to German early war tanks please inform me I want to know.

Sorry for writing so long...

 

[No idea]

Hi
IO've found some air units which might be useful. Don't know where they could fit in though:

Polikarpov I-16, a really important Rusiian fighter at the start of the war.
http://cdgroup.org/forums/tbs/civ3/viewtopic.php?t=6794

Petlyakov Pe-2, a successful, fast light Russian bomber. I guess kinda like a Russian version of the Mosquito.
http://cdgroup.org/forums/tbs/civ3/viewtopic.php?t=6669

Finnish Brewster Buffalo, a fairly good Finnish fighter.
http://cdgroup.org/forums/tbs/civ3/viewtopic.php?t=6537

Tupolev SB Katyuska, an early Russian bomber used at the start of the war.
http://cdgroup.org/forums/tbs/civ3/viewtopic.php?t=6705

Also, I'd just like to say that in the scenario the Yak-3 should come after the Yak-9. It's strange I know but the yak-3 was one of the best fighters made by any country in the war and came in 1944 or 45. It was used by the free french squadron in Russia I think.

 

[Klyden]

Well, the only thing the Germans had that could touch a T-34 in 1941 were their 88's and pak 50 mm AT guns (but only at close range). Most of the P-III's had either a 37 mm or short 50 mm while the P-IV's had the short 75. The Chec tanks had a 47 mm that was good, but not against T-34s.

In short, even if the armor was worse than the German (doubtful considering that Soviet metallurgy was at an advance state during this time), the Germans still had few weapons that were effective against a T-34, let alone a KV. On the other hand, the 76mm the T-34 used had no issue with dealing with the German tanks.

Weaknesses of early T-34s include poor vision out of the turret, no radios at all except on the company commander tank and having the commander also act as loader for the main gun. The turret also had a overhang in the back that the Germans would attach charges to when forced to fight in close quarters. The resulting explosion often blew off the turret.

As far as producing one thing over another, that is hard to moderate in Civ3. While the Germans had both HE111 and Ju88 aircraft in production for most of the war and Ju88's were arguebly the superior aircraft, there are things beyond the scope of the game that can't be represented that affect this. The US had B25 and B26 bombers in production for much of the war when B25's were the better aircraft. It can be argued B17's were better than B24's, yet both were built. Much of this has to do with sub components as well like engines.

I have read that some of the reasons the ME109 stayed in production for so long was that it was easy to manufacture (3 109s could be made and used roughly the same amount of materials and construction time as 2 FW 190's although the FW 190 was much better) and that it was very popular with its pilots, despite its limitations. (Eric Hartmann, Germany's leading ace with over 300 kills never flew anything but a 109).

 

[Rocoteh]

It is true the Soviets had vast numbers of tanks at the outset of the campaign. Unfortunately, over half of them were in need of service, so on paper, it was a strong force, but in reality it was not. What is even more interesting are the Soviet estimates of the German tank force. (The Germans started the invasion with just over 3000 tanks and the Russians thought they had many times that number).

My point is that as the campaign goes along, the Russians get more and better mobile forces. The game protrays that now very well. What is missing (IMO) is an upgraded infantry unit, much like the Germans go through different infantry units as the war progresses. Guards upgrades could help represent this (including Guards Cav if you are so inclined). Probably a good start for a Guards infantry is somewhere in the 10 attack, 11 defense range. This puts it as inferior to the starting German infantry, but in parity with the later German infantry that was not nearly as strong on a per unit basis.

June 15 1941, 29% of the Soviet Tank-forces was in need of repairs.
I can not agree to look upon this huge tank-force as some sort
of paper-tiger. Hitler once stated he would never had launched
Barbarossa if he had known Soviet had 10 000 tanks.

German intelligence was miserable. Soviet was not.
When Germany launched its offensive at Kursk 1943,
Stalin was sitting with the attack-plans due to the
spy-rings i Germany.

"My point is that as the campaign goes along, the Russians get more and better mobile forces. The game protrays that now very well."

Klyden

I honestly does not undersstand what you mean!
What is missing?

With regard to Guards Infantry I have already said
I think they should be included.

Rocoteh

 

[Rocoteh]

AKauhanen,

Thank you for the comments and reflections.
I have had take note of them.

Just a few comments:

The German forces in North Finland consisted of:

SS Division Nord
1 Infantry Division
2 Mountain Divisions
2 Panzer Battalions
1 Assault Gun Battalion

More cities in Italy?

Despite fascist-propaganda Italys contribution
to the East front was minimal.
Italy started the war with 3 armored divisions:
Ariete, Littorio and Centauro.
During the whole war they did not manage
to add an single armored division.
Giving Italy more cities would result in an
non-historical Italian contribution to the war in the east.

Why not cities in Norway?

1941 Norway had 3 million in population.
Its only value for Germany was strategic.
Otherwise it only consumed German occupation forces
that could have been better used on the main front.
Also:
This is a conquest-win scenario.
Its hard to see the Western Allies allowing Stalin
to occupy Norway.

Rocoteh

 

[Adler17]

Two thoughts:
First I think the Russians should start with many conscript units to simulate the high losses at the very beginning.
Secondly I have doubts if it was such a good idea not to introduce naval units. In the last phse of the war the German Kriegsmarine was very usefull to bomb Russian forces near the coast. Also that´s why the Russians had big problems at the coast. Also they rescued over 2 million German refugees, despite all enemies. The biggest deed of a navy IMO. Also it was a naval combat which was the last fight between Germans and Russians:
A German transport from Hela departed shortly (10 minuts) before the surrender on May 9th and left for Kiel with some R- boats. All were full of refugees. At 17 o´clock 4 Russian speedboats neared the convoy and made clear that the Germans should surrender. The Germans gave full speed and so the Soviets fired on the lone transport (the R- boats managed to escape meanwhile, also full of refugees). The two fired torpedoes misses as well as the MG salvos of the Russians. The old German cannon on the ship opened fire on the Russians. The first salvo was a near miss on the leading boat, but the next two salvos wer full hits. The boat stopped and burned. The three other boats layed smoke. The Germans gave full speed to escape, but when the smoke was away they only saw three boats retreating. It seems to be the Russians were not very keen to fight and die in times of peace... The transport arrived a few days later Kiel without anymore problems.

Adler

 

[Adler17]

I played a bit more and so I just recognized that many Soviet troops are already conscrips.

Adler

 

[Rocoteh]

Adler17,

I respect your position on the naval aspect.
However with the current game-engine (where you can not
simulate strategic warfare) its hard to give the naval forces
that were used a relevant role.

I agree with you though 100%, that the German naval
forces had an very important role in the rescue of refugees.

Rocoteh

 

[LBPB]

I just try the firsts 10 turns of the scenario (I played as Germany).
It's already a very nice work !


BTW, 2 comments:
- The Russian planes are way too powerful in the early stage of the war, they took down my plane too easily... (maybe decrease their stats a bit )
- Why can't we capture enemy artillery ???


And, just an idea :
Would it be possible to use the Conquest Inca ability to enslave enemy, to simulate the massive captures of POW ?

 

[Rocoteh]

I just try the firsts 10 turns of the scenario (I played as Germany).
It's already a very nice work !


BTW, 2 comments:
- The Russian planes are way too powerful in the early stage of the war, they took down my plane too easily... (maybe decrease their stats a bit )
- Why can't we capture enemy artillery ???


And, just an idea :
Would it be possible to use the Conquest Inca ability to enslave enemy, to simulate the massive captures of POW ?

LBPB,

Thank you.
On Russian air:

I agree! It will be changed in version 1.1.

On captured artillery:

I think it would give Germany a to big advantage
early in the game.
(BTW: Its interesting to note that Germany after defeating
France 1940 only used a fraction of the huge numbers of
captured French tanks. The vast majority was scrapped
after removal of turrets, to be used in fortifications.)

Enslave the enemy?

A very interesting idea, to be considered!

Rocoteh