Rasmus - I fully agree an external threat unifies, and the situation in the Soviet Union in 1941 was different than 1917. However, while not PROBABLE, it was POSSIBLE that the Soivet Union disintegrated if the Stalin Regime disolved. Wasn't that the premise of success to the German plans? Valid or not, especially with hindsight, it should be included in the game - if not, why - as the Germans, invade?
Your right it was it was the german premise that it would happen, it didnt. It isnt isnt the first time some one have been wrong and it wont be the last. Neither was it the first time some one made a decision in this case to invade based on a wrong assumption and again it wont be the last time.
Any how it is actually in the game Normal scn 290 VP and alt scn 260 VP.
The Alt victory is a step in the right direction. Taking away the auto Finnish activation if Leningrad falls would balance the chance of Soviet collapse if Moscow falls - and I'm talking maybe a 10% or chance - in 1941.
And no I don't want a Hitler assasination check every turn.....
So u dont want a Sword of Damocles hanging on one side, but u do on the other. While claiming both are plausible. From a gaming POV this makes absolutly no sense. Nor is it fair in any way. The only fair way is as it more or less is, to remove that factor from both sides. No one want to be subject to random die rolls ending the game arbitrarily at any given time.
Although I also have my doubts about a Soviet disintegration, I agree that we don't really know. We can only speculate about the probability. It would make a fun "optional rule", though. Maybe a dice roll every month, and the probability affected by the course of the campaign: e.g. once Moscow falls, the probability raised from 0.5% to 5%, and Leningrad, Rostov, etc. add another 0.5% each. Maybe troop losses would add also, say 1% for each 1M.
This rule could be implemented in a "PBEM balanced" fashion, with the Hilter assassination given similar rules...
As for the Finnish, a similar logic can be applied: Would we have known how far that could have gone if say Moscow had fallen in October 41? Some chance of them doing all, just as now, or sitting tighter than now would also be a fun optional rule. Perhaps more ideas for WitE2...
While i cant disagree in adding optional rules at all. Still see above, i cant see any one wanting to play with all of the hard work going into the game being decided by a arbitrary die roll.
I wasnt very understanding there was i, No. I dont actually think any one want actually wants a Sword of Damocles hanging over any ones head. What u in realty want is shaping a game that is flawed to a feel that is more historic. I can understand that and i agree in that the feel and balance of 1941 is off. Problem is the above becomes a strawman arguement. Instead of fixing the issues creating the cuircumstances creating the current 1941 u try a another approche to force it. Now such can work and with the knowledge that there wont be any more real balancing from Devs side it could have merit. Problem is IMO the above suggested just exchange one set of problems with another set of problems. Not really solving any thing.
As to sudden death rules. I would by far prefere such to the above, but again u here encounter problems that ppl seems to pass by with little expressed thot. I remember reading Joels suggestion to 1941 SD cities and remember almost falling off my chair. Leningrad, Kalinin and Sevastopol was the three 41 cities IIRC, but i could remember wrong. Tho german side didnt know which of the 3 cities in question was the one.
One should be aware of the way such will shape the game. Not saying every one would do so but those wanting to win with knowing those 3 cities would alter the game from now hugely.
For those wanting to win above all. The following will be true in my estimation. Since nada between Moscow and Krim has any importance now. The game would play out as following.
At leased one more pz group/corps from AGC would race to Leningrad. Making 100% sure this will fall.
Since every thing south of Moscow is irrelevant AGC would press on Moscow and just N of it, largely ignoring every thing from Tula to Stalino. Freeing up most of the inf in AGC to such a pressure. U just need to screen any thing from Smolensk and south.
Forcing SU side to defend not only Moscow cuz of facs/manpower but u now equally have to defend Kalinin. So in all Kalinin would fall.
AGS / 4th pz group would now ignore Kiev/Donbas area. Do Lvov and then shoot strait for Krim. Only russian option is to pack 1,5m man on Krim hoping, what i deem to be in vain, to be able to dig enough forts to slow /stop the axis.
Do this sound like a historic 41?
My reasoning isnt to dizz Joel, while he tries to improve stuff, but to show that when u have SD options. Set to some limited objectives. Since this is known by the attacker. It WILL inenvitably influence the way one will attack and advance, more than any other factor and no matter what else happens. Cuz they have a certain knowledge if A B and C is true then D = surrender will happen. They could care less that is actually a house of cards and 4 turns after D happened in game the whole german army would have been surrounded in Krim. They are vindicated by winning so what would happened after is of no consequence.
Problem is and we all agknowledge it is non of us in fact really know if A B and C happend if indeed D would have happend, but we do know it will influence how the game plays out. A B and C will trumph what ever else happens in the game. Russians could be at the out skirts of Berlin for all, not that any one cares. In real life u never would have the certainty of consequence of ur actions, given here. It has consequence on game play.
I by far prefere the current methode cuz there is many way to 260/290 and many ways to defend against is. If any thing, all the above mussings puts the game in a box. The thing ppl seems to hate.
< Message edited by Walloc -- 8/8/2012 4:55:56 PM >