Reposting this from the old forum at viewtopic.php?f=87&t=39219&start=40 (not sure anyone's home there!)...
Pip - I'd thought I'd add my two cents on this extension. Having read extensively on combat on the Eastern Front (like most folks here I guess) I think there are some potential major changes possible to reflect the terror, brutality and desperation of combat in the eastern theatre. It was quite different to the west in many respects.
Some things to consider:
* Many units would equate surrender with death after 1941. Russian prisoners taken in the first year of combat froze, starved or were murdered and this was used effectively as propaganda by political commissars to dissuade Russian troops from surrendering as well as kill many German prisoners. Upshot - certain units should never surrender. They will retreat if they can but not surrender.
* Some units should never break. SS and Russian political elite units would often fight to the death. These type of units would rarely surrender as SS units surrendering would usually be killed (their SS blood group tattoos gave them away too), and same for Russian commissars. In BA currently, Waffen SS units do not seem to have extra morale, but in real life they'd be used to attack and keep attacking until destroyed which was why they were so effective in counterattacks and 'fire brigade' actions. These units should be impervious to losing morale or should lose it much more slowly than other units.
* Punishment battalion troops would also be expected to advance until eliminated, as returning to their lines (certainly for the Russians) meant fire from their own side or execution by commissars. These type of units would easily break but they won't retreat.
* Wave attacks - there are many accounts of walls of Russian infantry falling upon German lines. Often plied with vodka or in fear from fire from their own commanders, these waves would keep attacking until completely destroyed. Some nice audio 'urrah' samples would be neat too when a large scale attack occurs.
* Tank riders - units should be able hitch rides on tanks as discussed previously. But this should expose them to brutal damage if the tank was fired upon and hit (similar to mortar damage maybe). If fired upon but not hit the riders should immediately dismount
* Poor C&C communication - it's easy in BA to overcome the poor comms of badly radio equipped tanks as we simply move them about as we please. Why not have some armour go "off reservation" for the non-AI side. Armour sometimes stops responding to non-AI orders as the crew is either out of contact or ignores order entirely. This would be similar to "Bogged down" or perhaps even better, the AI takes over the tank and for a period of time (1-2 turns) and you have no control of how it behaves. Waves of early Russian tanks, including T34's and KV's were destroyed through poor command and control, and the Germans often overcame terrible odds and inferior armour through excellent C&C.
* Entrenchments - Russians were experts in defense, able to turn the smallest bridgehead or position into a major problem through expert digging and hiding. In BA one of the biggest weaknesses is the inability to successfully entrench (which means say 6-12 inches deep - not a full trench but enough to not get killed as easily by direct fire when not firing). I'm not sure how many turns would be required to equate to more cover ratings, but if a unit stayed put for more than say 2 turns they should be given better cover. 5 turns should make them very difficult to see or hit. Experienced infantry got into the habit of immediately digging in wherever possible in open ground, and even in mid-winter would resort to dynamite to open holes in rock hard ice.
* Pre-prepared defensive positions (ie before the game starts) should make it much harder for direct arms fire to hit (and even see) troops in prepared positions if they are not shooting. Bunkers, trenches and so on kept troops safe from direct fire, something that BA ignores largely if troops have been identified which means armoured vehicles can blaze away to reduce units in good defences. Close assault should be required to dislodge infantry from prepared defenses, but if the entrenched troops fire back they can be hit in that turn only.
* Smoke - I think other folks have discussed. This was used extensively and was crucial for tanks withdrawing, and artillery should be able to deploy smoke with a 2 turn delay. Smoke would require the enemy to guess where units were as per suppression fire, but the smoke obviously provides no additional cover rating.
* Immobilisation - as above. This was a critical means of slowing down giants like the KV and KV2 by outgunned German AT units. Am not sure how the moral of the crew should be impacted, perhaps this could eventually be linked to whether any other friendly units are within LOS. If they aren't, the crew's moral would take a hit. If they are, the crew will fight on. Am not sure how long it would take to repair immobilised vehicles but I'd have thought repair crews would rarely come into a hot fire zone to fix an immobilised vehicle (they would come after the battle has passed or at night, taking back even knocked out tanks to repair and refit or salvage for parts). Perhaps if there are no enemy units in LOS tanks can be repaired after X turns (5?).
* Mud of course. Trucks should be useless in mud and all movement should be halved. Russian roads were mostly dirt so roads are also largely useless without additional preparation.
* Winter - houses were life or death objectives when it was -30 degrees. All houses should have much greater tactical value (some winter scenarios could make all houses key VP's), and AI should have infantry units go for houses at all times in winter scenarios. Oftentimes local actions raged around Russian villages simply because being in a house at nightfall meant units stood a decent chance of surviving the night. Being in open ground at night was a death sentence.
* Winter movement - Infantry movement over open ground was extremely slow without skis, and for armour often impossible. Ski/winter units would be cool, and in fact having some units 'winter equipped' versus not would mean they could move faster, fight better (with higher moral) and stay out in open ground. Those without would be reluctant to move or try and stay close to urban positions.
* Night fighting/flares. Units remain invisible unless flares are launched or are in an adjacent cell, or there's something burning close by.
* Burning buildings, tanks. Be good to see more realistic burning buildings. Buildings being hit by HE should have some chance of burning, which makes them impossible to enter for a number of turns. This would also impact visibility for night combat.
That's all I've got. Easiest to do I'd think would be morale/retreat mechanics changes for certain units (elite/SS, punishment battalion), add smoke (basically adds LOS barriers but no cover), immobilisation (same effect as bogged down for certain hits), and some tinkering with entrenchment/defenses rules. Winter and autumn mud would make for some interesting variations to unit choices too.
Really looking forward to this release, guys...
. That's just broken! The rules that we wanted to implement in terms of how hills worked were just too complex to actually handle all the cases and so we will be throwing them away and simplifying hills drastically. On the plus side this may well allow us to have multiple height levels without needing a Cray to work out the sight lines...
