Minor map changes around Moscow

[gerones]

To increase a little russian defensive positions around Moscow in 1941 I think it would be nice to add two new important russian cities: Rzhev and Ryazan. Rzhev saw several important battles in WW2 and Ryazan was really an important industrial city at Oka river SE of Moscow. If we add Rzhev may be we should move Kalinin city 1 hex NE.

• 

[Peter Stauffenberg]

Rhzev is a minor city with only 60.000 inhabitants. If we add that city we could consider Velikie Luki, Mogilev, Vyazma and other cities too and do we really want that. Ryazan is bigger with about 525.000 inhabitants so it could be considered.

I think Plaid, who is a native Russian, should look into this and suggest changes if changes are needed. I'm not sure what we need to fix here because the Russians can place reinforcements in Tula and Kalinin in addition to Moscow to bolster the area here. The terrain is forest and swamp so the panzers will not move so fast here.

[gerones]

Vyazma and Mogilev sound like good additions. IMO the more russian cities we add the more delaying actions that the Red Army can perform to slow a bit the axis advance in 1941. We could forget about Rzhev (Kalinin is too close) and to finally add Mogilev, Vyazma and Ryazan as new russian cities. My main concern about this question is that the russians can defend more effectively adding the cities mentioned. Futhermore, may be it would be good to come back again to the following question:

1. Supply range
a. Keep at 15 / 30 in 1941 and increase to 20 / 40 in January 1942 (as now)
b. Keep at 15 / 30 in 1941 and increase to 20 /40 after the first October 1941 turn --> SHOULD WE TRY THIS ONE?
c. Remove the limit at 15 / 30 for 1941 and increase it to 20 / 40 as before we made the change

The reason behind b is that by October the rail conversion units would have caught up with the front line and thus the supply range could be lengthened. This means the Germans would be able to make operation Typhoon late in 1941 if they want to. They will have supply level 4 along their historical line and can more easily repair and retreat in the area the Russians make a counter attack.

AAR from Ronnie vs Sean is showing us that may be it would be good to try with the b. option that was asked before to vote. I think that one of the reasons why Ronnie has arrived so early to Moscow is because he has had 4 supply level all the time. So IMO we should consider to implement option b. both from a historical (german supply issues in the real war) and from a more balanced 1941 campaign in Russia points of view.

[rkr1958]

Vyazma and Mogilev sound like good additions. IMO the more russian cities we add the more delaying actions that the Red Army can perform to slow a bit the axis advance in 1941. We could forget about Rzhev (Kalinin is too close) and to finally add Mogilev, Vyazma and Ryazan as new russian cities. My main concern about this question is that the russians can defend more effectively adding the cities mentioned. Futhermore, may be it would be good to come back again to the following question:

1. Supply range
a. Keep at 15 / 30 in 1941 and increase to 20 / 40 in January 1942 (as now)
b. Keep at 15 / 30 in 1941 and increase to 20 /40 after the first October 1941 turn --> SHOULD WE TRY THIS ONE?
c. Remove the limit at 15 / 30 for 1941 and increase it to 20 / 40 as before we made the change

The reason behind b is that by October the rail conversion units would have caught up with the front line and thus the supply range could be lengthened. This means the Germans would be able to make operation Typhoon late in 1941 if they want to. They will have supply level 4 along their historical line and can more easily repair and retreat in the area the Russians make a counter attack.

AAR from Ronnie vs Sean is showing us that may be it would be good to try with the b. option that was asked before to vote. I think that one of the reasons why Ronnie has arrived so early to Moscow is because he has had 4 supply level all the time. So IMO we should consider to implement option b. both from a historical (german supply issues in the real war) and from a more balanced 1941 campaign in Russia points of view.

Personally I think we've got things fairly close with respect to Russia. Before we consider voting please take a look and feel free to comment on the lengthy analysis that I presented in my AAR: viewtopic.php?p=278304#278304

Also, Dan if you want to take a peek at this post in my AAR please feel free.

[Blathergut]

There didn't seem to be any particular way to slow you down or stop you. Other than placing the couple of mechs in and around Moscow, even with leaders, efficiency never went up to anything worthwhile. Whether we can mangle you a bit there now remains to be seen.

[richardsd]

I think the Axis is in an interesting position and needs to be very careful that SW doesn't really hurt!

I think that there are also a couple of options that could have slowed them down or placed pressure in other places. i don;t think there is enough here to justify a change yet.

[Plaid]

AAR from Ronnie vs Sean is showing <...>

Sorry, but that AAR shows only how not to play with soviets.