Soviet Rail Capacity

Gary Grigsby’s War in the East: The German-Soviet War 1941-1945 is a turn-based World War II strategy game stretching across the entire Eastern Front. Gamers can engage in an epic campaign, including division-sized battles with realistic and historical terrain, weather, orders of battle, logistics and combat results.

The critically and fan-acclaimed Eastern Front mega-game Gary Grigsby’s War in the East just got bigger and better with Gary Grigsby’s War in the East: Don to the Danube! This expansion to the award-winning War in the East comes with a wide array of later war scenarios ranging from short but intense 6 turn bouts like the Battle for Kharkov (1942) to immense 37-turn engagements taking place across multiple nations like Drama on the Danube (Summer 1944 – Spring 1945).

Moderators: Joel Billings, elmo3, Sabre21

User avatar
*Lava*
Posts: 1465
Joined: Mon Feb 09, 2004 7:44 pm

Soviet Rail Capacity

Post by *Lava* »

So, we know the Soviets have lots of rail capacity.

Is the any way the Axis player can reduce it?
User avatar
Oleg Mastruko
Posts: 4534
Joined: Sat Oct 21, 2000 8:00 am

RE: Soviet Rail Capacity

Post by Oleg Mastruko »

By bombing railyards.
User avatar
karonagames
Posts: 4701
Joined: Mon Jul 10, 2006 8:05 am
Location: The Duchy of Cornwall, nr England

RE: Soviet Rail Capacity

Post by karonagames »

Bomb railyards:

from the manual:

21.1.11. PORT AND RAIL YARD CAPACITY
Ports and railyards are treated as factories
in terms of capture, damage and repair,
but they play only a peripheral part in the
production system. The presence of a port
or railyard in the same hex as a factory with
a zero expansion rate increases the chance
that factory will expand (21.1.8). In addition,
hexes with ports will attempt to accumulate
an additional 1000 tons of supplies and fuel
in storage every turn.
Each railyard factory point will produce a
notional amount of strategic rail capacity
every turn equal to 100 minus the percentage
of damage. This amount can be modified
due to the difficulty level transportation level
modifier in the game option menu (3.3.3) and off map production modifier in non-campaign
scenarios. In addition, Soviet rail capacity is multiplied times five, with the exception of June
1941, when it is multiplied by 2.5. See section 14.2.3 for details on the production of shipping
points by port factories. Only Soviet nationality rail yards and ports can produce strategic
transportation capacity for the Soviet player, and only Axis and Axis allied nationality railyards
and ports can produce strategic transportation capacity for the Axis.
It's only a Game

kirkgregerson
Posts: 497
Joined: Wed Apr 09, 2008 2:21 pm

RE: Soviet Rail Capacity

Post by kirkgregerson »

So by that last part sounds clear that captured rail yards don't add strategic capacity. Thus, Axis captured rail yards in Soviet cities don't add any strategic capacity?
User avatar
*Lava*
Posts: 1465
Joined: Mon Feb 09, 2004 7:44 pm

RE: Soviet Rail Capacity

Post by *Lava* »

Oops..

Should have looked at the manual first. Sorry.

So let me see if I understand this. Let's say a city has a rail yard of 3. If I overrun that city the Soviets lose (3 x 100) x 2.5 which equals 750 in capacity. Correct?

The next question being does it make any sense to try to bomb rail yards?

And if not, which I suppose, what do folks concentrate on bombing? I've been attacking heavy manufacturing but given the amount of dudes the Soviets have, perhaps arms manufacturing is a better target.

I'm trying to do a bit of strategic bombing and was wondering what folks felt would be the best target to concentrate on. The immense Soviet rail system seemed at first blush to be a good one but would like to hear folks thoughts on the matter.

Thanks. [:)]
CheerfullyInsane
Posts: 199
Joined: Sun Dec 05, 2010 2:50 am
Location: Birkerod, Denmark

RE: Soviet Rail Capacity

Post by CheerfullyInsane »

ORIGINAL: Lava

Oops..

Should have looked at the manual first. Sorry.

So let me see if I understand this. Let's say a city has a rail yard of 3. If I overrun that city the Soviets lose (3 x 100) x 2.5 which equals 750 in capacity. Correct?

The next question being does it make any sense to try to bomb rail yards?

And if not, which I suppose, what do folks concentrate on bombing? I've been attacking heavy manufacturing but given the amount of dudes the Soviets have, perhaps arms manufacturing is a better target.

I'm trying to do a bit of strategic bombing and was wondering what folks felt would be the best target to concentrate on. The immense Soviet rail system seemed at first blush to be a good one but would like to hear folks thoughts on the matter.

Thanks. [:)]

Not much experience with playing the Germans, but here's my two cents.
I doubt the Luftwaffe has the bomber capacity to do any real damage through strategic bombing.
I'd much rather use the bombers for CS, and let the foot-sloggers either capture the factories, or force their evacuation.
If you have surplus bombers after moving your ground-troops. I'd first hit every enemy HQ in range.
If no HQs are kind enough to present themselves, *then* I'd hit heavy industry, followed by armament-factories.
Not sure if resources can be targeted directly, if so hit them first.
The logic being that resources are used by HI to produce supplies which in turn is used by arms-factories to produce armament-points.
So hitting at the top of the food-chain, so to speak, results in a snowball effect all through the production-line.
"Something is always wrong, Baldrick. The fact that I'm not a millionaire aristocrat with the sexual capacity of a rutting rhino is a constant niggle"
- Edmund Blackadder
Speedysteve
Posts: 15974
Joined: Tue Sep 11, 2001 8:00 am
Location: Reading, England

RE: Soviet Rail Capacity

Post by Speedysteve »

You won't find Strat bombing very effective. Mainly since the Axis don't have heavy bombers with big bombs/bombloads.
 
There's already too many targets and things for them to bomb so for me Strat bombing is near the bottom of the pile for Bomber priorities......
WitE 2 Tester
WitE Tester
BTR/BoB Tester
User avatar
cookie monster
Posts: 1690
Joined: Sun May 22, 2005 10:09 am
Location: Birmingham,England

RE: Soviet Rail Capacity

Post by cookie monster »

You can always set the transport figure lower than 100 in game options.

I was playing a HARD AI game with 80 transport level.

Rail was well tight, factory moves took priority and the new divisions were marching from the Urals!

The Soviets need a large amount of rail cap.

Just look at how much industry is at Kharkov.
Speedysteve
Posts: 15974
Joined: Tue Sep 11, 2001 8:00 am
Location: Reading, England

RE: Soviet Rail Capacity

Post by Speedysteve »

They certainly do. There's a lot of industry to move especially down south. Then there's LG, Kharkov and sometimes Moscow. I always use all of my rail every turn
WitE 2 Tester
WitE Tester
BTR/BoB Tester
User avatar
*Lava*
Posts: 1465
Joined: Mon Feb 09, 2004 7:44 pm

RE: Soviet Rail Capacity

Post by *Lava* »

Well there are times when a zone is fairly quiet in respect to fighting. Look at AGS (the Romanians) during the first few turns. I've hit Odessa and seem to have gotten some pretty good results against heavy industry. In turn 4 of my "Lava vs Lava" game I have inflicted 41% damage on the port(15) and 73% on heavy industry(3).

There are lots of resource, oil and fuel production, but those are quite far away from a GC POV.

I've followed the thinking about attacks on HQ's but in 41, there are so many Soviet HQs running around I wonder if targeting them is really worth it. Do I really want to kill an incompetent General? [:D]

I'm playing this game a little differently... a sort of 1.04 test without the 1.04 .. [8D] and am trying to keep my air force right on top of the Soviets, in close range. So I'm looking for targets and wondering if I can really make any difference.

The Germans, I believe did lots of bombing...
Speedysteve
Posts: 15974
Joined: Tue Sep 11, 2001 8:00 am
Location: Reading, England

RE: Soviet Rail Capacity

Post by Speedysteve »

Interesting. How many bombers/attacks did it take to achieve that damage?
WitE 2 Tester
WitE Tester
BTR/BoB Tester
User avatar
*Lava*
Posts: 1465
Joined: Mon Feb 09, 2004 7:44 pm

RE: Soviet Rail Capacity

Post by *Lava* »

I think it took 2 attacks on the port and 4 on heavy industry. Can't remember exactly but I think I go in with about 75 bombers and fighters against the heavy industry. A lot less on the port. I do lose a few bombers but I'm also bagging Soviet fighters. Kinda like dropping supplies. I drop as much supplies as I can every turn not just to keep folks topped up... but it also lures out the Soviets fighters.

So far I haven't had any air missions canceled due to lack of fuel.
User avatar
bcgames
Posts: 2627
Joined: Wed Jun 02, 2010 1:24 pm
Location: Bramble Rose Farm, KS

RE: Soviet Rail Capacity

Post by bcgames »

Is the current Soviet Rail Capacity realistic?

Here is why I ask. Train engines, rolling stock, and rail lines were created in the Soviet Union to support economic requirements. If so, then any withdrawal of engines, rolling stock, and/or rail lines from their economic purpose will result in an economic loss--which includes the ability to make tanks, airplanes, and rifles, feed and supply the army, navy, air forces, etc. The people still need to eat and put clothes on their backs--even in the Soviet Union--during every weekly turn. The largest requirement for train engines, rolling stock, and rail lines is the people, industry, and/or government. They need coal, iron, and shipments of goods or parts to produce/construct larger assemblies—be they tractors, tanks or airplane engines. The people, industry, and/or government need access to markets for their corn, wheat, beans, products, raw materials, etc--every week--regardless of war or peace. If the rail system is degraded via combat loss and/or the perpetual useage by the Soviet government to move and supply combat forces, then the economy will begin to grind to a halt, and the people, industry and/or government (army, navy, air forces) begin to starve, go without, etc. because of "rail system consumption" that prevents economic activity.

Given the above, is there an adequate cost levied against the Soviet player's decisions to use or NOT USE rail in WitE for military purposes? If not, what should be implemented to reflect the burden of military operations on economics and the Soviet rail capacity? If so, we're good.
Aurelian
Posts: 3914
Joined: Mon Feb 26, 2007 2:08 pm

RE: Soviet Rail Capacity

Post by Aurelian »

You're assuming that the rail capacity is both military and civilian.

Is the current Axis rail cap realistic? To use your argument "Train engines, rolling stock, and rail lines were created in Germany to support economic requirements."

"Is there an adequate cost levied against the Axis player's decision to use or NOT USE rail in WiTE for military purposes?"

"If the rail system is degraded via combat loss and/or the perpetual useage by the Axis governments to move and supply combat forces, then the economy will begin to grind to a halt, and the people, industry and/or government (army, navy, air forces) begin to starve, go without, etc. because of "rail system consumption" that prevents economic activity."

In another thread, someone wanted the Soviets to worry about feeding civilians. Well the other side has civilians too. But of course that part didn't matter.

How exactly did all those people in Occupied Europe and the Reich eat, travel, get their coal/iron/Wheaties?????
When I argued with the Empress, I always had the last word. That word was, sorry. But it was the last word.
User avatar
bcgames
Posts: 2627
Joined: Wed Jun 02, 2010 1:24 pm
Location: Bramble Rose Farm, KS

RE: Soviet Rail Capacity

Post by bcgames »

ORIGINAL: Aurelian

You're assuming that the rail capacity is both military and civilian.
I'm not assuming anything. Should I?
User avatar
bcgames
Posts: 2627
Joined: Wed Jun 02, 2010 1:24 pm
Location: Bramble Rose Farm, KS

RE: Soviet Rail Capacity

Post by bcgames »

ORIGINAL: Aurelian
Is the current Axis rail cap realistic? To use your argument "Train engines, rolling stock, and rail lines were created in Germany to support economic requirements."

"Is there an adequate cost levied against the Axis player's decision to use or NOT USE rail in WiTE for military purposes?"

"If the rail system is degraded via combat loss and/or the perpetual useage by the Axis governments to move and supply combat forces, then the economy will begin to grind to a halt, and the people, industry and/or government (army, navy, air forces) begin to starve, go without, etc. because of "rail system consumption" that prevents economic activity."
Good questions. I don't know the answers for the Axis rail cap either. Do you?
Berkut
Posts: 757
Joined: Thu May 16, 2002 7:48 am

RE: Soviet Rail Capacity

Post by Berkut »

I think it would be a mistake to project current thinking on 1940s era Nazi and Soviet governments.

The railroads of those times were most certainly seen as military assets first and foremost, even in peacetime. Which isn't to say they were not used for civilian purposes (of course they were) but once war started it was understood that they were there to support the war, not move civilians around, or move goods around for civilian consumption.

The entire economy of the USSR once war started (really even before it started in many ways) was structured around supporting the war and its needs, not providing for the needs or wants of the civilian population. If your area didn't produce Wheaties, then you didn't eat Wheaties. Have some nice Corn Flakes instead.
marty_01
Posts: 288
Joined: Thu Feb 10, 2011 2:16 pm

RE: Soviet Rail Capacity

Post by marty_01 »

Is the in-game German & Soviet rail capacity employed for movement of troops supposed to represent an excess capacity above and beyond the train engines, rolling stock and etc. that are involved with the everyday functioning of a country at war? I mean is the rail capacity supposed to be something above and beyond rail road requirements for doing all of those mundane – non-player functions like moving around supplies, fuel, ammunition, replacements, oil, iron ore, aluminum, tungsten, food for factory workers, food for the civil population, etc.

Obviously the Germans and Russians utilized rail roads to move troops about during the war. But what affect does the movement of 30-divisions by railroad have upon all the other requirements of a countries finite railroad capacity? Should the game impose some sort of effect\consequence upon a Player when the player decides to employ a large amount of rail capacity to wisk 20 or 30 divisions from Moscow to Stalino? Or was there a bunch of spare rail capacity laying around Germany or Russia that can always be tapped into -- free of consequences -- for the movement of huge numbers of troops (along with their equipment and supplies) from point-A to point-B?

We've seen this aspect of the game looked at and tweaked in the past in-order to implement some sort of consequences associated with movement of Soviet Industry. But the in-game rail capacity -- aside from potential effects for Soviet industrial evacuation -- makes one think that there is a bunch of steam engines and rolling stock waiting around doing nothing until some troops need to be moved. My hunch would be that there wasn't any "excess" rail capacity available to either the Germans or the Russians – particularly (!) in a time of war. I’d reckon if it wasn’t broke, it was being used to move supplies, ammunition, fuel, raw materials, food to keep factory workers fed and civil populations fed (Revolutions have been known to start when folks don’t get fed. As I recall, the “Let them eat cake” approach to starvation ended with a trip to the guillotine.)

The idea that some proportion of rail capacity sits around waiting to be used solely for troop movement seems off kilter. Presumably there was enough rail capacity within the Soviet Union to move 30-divisions over the course of a week – like what we now see in-game. But what is the resultant ripple affects upon the three dozen other things that rail capacity was also needed for? Why not make in-game use of large amounts of rail capacity a consequences related decision for the player rather than a freebee. Yes, you can still move 30-divisions from point A to point B at the seeming drop of a hat. But the option to do so comes with a price. Even if the consequences are as simple as Admin Point expenditures based upon rail capacity used in a given turn. Or; get more complex and impose effects upon supplies\fuel\ammunition\replacements etc that are available (or unavailable) across the front when large amounts of rail capacity is diverted toward movement of large bodies of troops.

Essential to game play – No. Worth discussing – Sure, why not? That’s what a game forum is for. Exchange ideas about the game.
User avatar
bcgames
Posts: 2627
Joined: Wed Jun 02, 2010 1:24 pm
Location: Bramble Rose Farm, KS

RE: Soviet Rail Capacity

Post by bcgames »

ORIGINAL: marty_01

Essential to game play – No. Worth discussing – Sure, why not? That’s what a game forum is for. Exchange ideas about the game.
Indeed. You post some interesting questions. It would be interesting to explore the full set of possible answers.
User avatar
Mynok
Posts: 12108
Joined: Sat Nov 30, 2002 12:12 am
Contact:

RE: Soviet Rail Capacity

Post by Mynok »


We are talking the 1940's folks. Rail was used to support industry primarily not food transport. Especially thinking of the Soviet Union, we are talking about a primarily agrarian society. Food was produced and consumed locally.
"Measure civilization by the ability of citizens to mock government with impunity" -- Unknown
Post Reply

Return to “Gary Grigsby's War in the East Series”