Please vote: Scorched earth strategy

[Peter Stauffenberg]

Currently the scorched earth strategy works only in core Russian hexes. The cities or resource will lose another 5 intrinsic strength when being captured / liberated. you lose some strength from bombardment and land attacks. Losing extra strength means it takes longer until the city / resource can give full production and the supply level provided might be lower if the city is isolated.

I will alter the rule so scorched earth won't apply on the first turn of Barbarossa because the Russians didn't have time to destroy the facilities in the city before evacuating.

Do you think we should only let scorched earth work in core Russian cities or should we also add cities in other countries?

Scorched earth works both ways (capturing a city or liberating a city). We know that Germany burnt to the ground Norwegian cities in northern Norway when they retreated from the advancing Russians. Hitler had ordered the destruction of the German cities before they fell into Allied hands, but the order was sabotaged by Speer. So scorched earth in Germany should probably not apply. I guess Russia and Germany used scorched earth in territories annexed by Russia (like the Baltic states), but want confirmation that it actually took place. I'm not sure about Finland because the Finns surrendered in 1944 before the Russians got to Helsinki.

Do we have evidence that the Germans / Russians burnt the cities in Estonia, Latvia and Lithuania as well? What about eastern Poland? Was Poland also affected by scorched earth? We can add a rule that scorched earth in Poland only works after Polish surrender because Poland didn't burn down their own cities during case white. It was Russia and Germany who would use scorched earth, not the minor power.

Did the Germans destroy cities in Romania, Bulgaria, Hungary, Finland, Yugoslavia and Greece as well when the Allies / Russians advanced?

[pzgndr]

Another way of looking at scorched earth as a game option is as a way to represent Allied logistics problems, unrelated to Axis burning cities during retreat. If players think Allied advances in 1943-45 are a little too fast then scorched earth for liberating Allied territory (eg, France) and capturing Axis teritory (eg, Italy) would help slow things down. If nothing else, it could at least handicap an Allied player versus the Axis AI and provide additional challenge.

[Cybvep]

Another way of looking at scorched earth as a game option is as a way to represent Allied logistics problems, unrelated to Axis burning cities during retreat. If players think Allied advances in 1943-45 are a little too fast then scorched earth for liberating Allied territory (eg, France) and capturing Axis teritory (eg, Italy) would help slow things down. If nothing else, it could at least handicap an Allied player versus the Axis AI and provide additional challenge.

It would be better if the number of controlled ports (with some caps which would determine the maximum effect) and their level of damage affected Allied supply levels in France and Germany.

[zechi]

I think you have to make a difference between the "scorched earth" employed in WW2.

There was "scorched earth" employed for strategical or tactical reasons as ordered by Stalin after Barbarossa or as the Germans did it in Norway. This sort of scorched earth has been employed by Allies and Axis in nearly all theaters (for example the British employed this strategy in Tobruk).

Furthermore, "scorched earth" was employed for political or symbolic reason, mostly by the Germans. Sometimes these "scorched earth" orders were sabotaged, as for example in case of Paris or by Albert Speer concerning German cities.

The most realistic solution would be of course to allow the defender of a location to decide to make use of the "scorched earth" strategy or not. However, this would make the game a little bit more complicated.

[Cybvep]

The most realistic solution would be of course to allow the defender of a location to decide to make use of the "scorched earth" strategy or not.

Bad idea. The game is too abstract to represent the decision-making process in employing such strategy realistic. You don't have to care about the post-war future in GS, there are no political and moral considerations, you don't have to care about the civilians etc. We would end up with the players always using scorched earth when they think that they are going to lose the city, which is rather easy to determine in 1939-1941 period. Do we REALLY want to see scorched earth in Poland and France in 1939/1940?

There is no point in creating features which cannot be realistically or at least semi-realistically modelled IMO.

[gchristie]

This raises interesting questions. But for General Dietrich von Choltitz, Hitler would have destroyed as much of Paris as possible before the allies entered the city. Does the fact that Hitler's plans to use scorched earth more extensively were undermined by some of those instructed to do so rule out the possibility of employing scorched earth more widely in the game? The crux of creating a game that is both historical and allows the rewriting of history, within reason, once again rears its head.

Perhaps there is a way to create a probability of scorched earth, with low probabilities in places where it did not happen much, higher in places where it did. There is likely a more elegant way to do this.

[Plaid]

Scorched earth have very slight impact on gameplay anyway. Only actual case is when you burn really big city (like Moscow, for example). Then lowered PP income will be something which can be seen.
When burning 1-2 PP cities (which are most on the map of western parts of USSR where rule used most ) all this PP shortage lies within margin of error and feature is mostly cosmetic.

Is there any reason to invest extensive work into it?

[PionUrpo]

Germans certainly wrecked up Lapland when they retreated after Finnish-Soviet Armistice in September 1944. Burnt down almost half the housing, destroyed road/rail/bridges, sowed mines etc. etc. However, it's after the Armistice hence no game effect and I doubt this would've been doable in southern Finland as most of the German troops were fighting in Lapland.

Even if Soviets had insisted on occupying the country I doubt it would've resulted on same level destruction as on rest of Eastern Front. Finnish populous/army/leaders simply weren't that gung-ho on the issue.

[PionUrpo]

Scorched earth have very slight impact on gameplay anyway. Only actual case is when you burn really big city (like Moscow, for example). Then lowered PP income will be something which can be seen.
When burning 1-2 PP cities (which are most on the map of western parts of USSR where rule used most ) all this PP shortage lies within margin of error and feature is mostly cosmetic.

Is there any reason to invest extensive work into it?

Yeah, probably not worth the hazzle when there are more pressing issues but if one has time, why not...

[Peter Stauffenberg]

Scorched earth is ALREADY in. What we are discussing is a change to the rule. What will we changed is that scorched earth will not apply on the first turn of Barbarossa.

The question was if we need to include the Baltic States and eastern Poland. Russia annexed these territories. Now only core Russian hexes are affected by scorched earth.

One effect is reduced production, but also rail cap and supply. Supermax noticed that Sevastopol didn't give him supply level 3 after his landing on Crimea. That will hamper his advance.

[JyriErik]

In Estonia the answer is no, "scorched earth" wasn't done by either side. The only cities (Tartu & Narva) which were heavily damaged occured from the battles being fought there, not from systemic destruction.

Jyri

[Kragdob]

In Poland the answer is NO, the destruction was due to fights and Soviet pillage after Germans retreated.

One effect is reduced production, but also rail cap and supply. Supermax noticed that Sevastopol didn't give him supply level 3 after his landing on Crimea. That will hamper his advance.

Shouldn't it be that ANY city gives always at least supply lvl 1?

There were any Soviet operation in Norway? Never heard of that....