WWII-Stalingrad [QUENCHED]

[jefjef]

Yes it is VERY intense.

Chulkov arty could/should be swapped with the infantry in the same tert if you chose not to go with oddballs sug.

Great sug on Mamyev hill too. The top of the hill was a Reinforced Bunker & trench complex. I agree any attack should have to come from the other. I think I would consider coding the bunker position NOT be attackable by Artillery. Maybe it can be shown with a heavy circle or square around the deploy circle.

With the Russian air force 1/2 of the luftwaffe (which is pretty correct btw.) Is it necessary or desirable to have two HQ?

Great work!

[cairnswk]

The colors that dominate the map at the moment I don't think say much about the theme of the fighting for Stalingrad---perhaps it's is their light color in nature, perhaps it's the lack of grunge and grime usually assocated with battle, especially on like Stalingrad. Whatever it is, this map's colors remind me more of your non-war maps, than your war maps.
--Andy

I'm wondering if the current colours etc are now appropriate for this battle Andy?

[cairnswk]

Suggestion:

In all cases where arty is combined with inf in a double territ, let the arty be shielded by the inf. when being attacked by the neighbouring inf and tanks.
So that the only inf. capable of attacking arty. is the inf. in the double territ. itself.

Perhaps the same concept should be implemented for the other double troops in one terr: One inf is the prime defense against first attacks (e.g. Mamayev A) and the other can only be attacked from the first (Mamyev A attacks Mamayev B and vice versa...Mamyev B can be considered the top of the hill where mamayev A is the foot of the hill).

On the russian side there are some arty in a single terr. The ones on the left (64th art & yerem art) are ok as it is,..the one on the right (chulkov) is a bit exposed on the river side from R10... perhaps swap position with Chulkov guards ..?

it_oddball, i am now loathed to take this map down this path. While it is a good tactical sugg. the map being so crowded and all would need extra space to place that into the legend and thate is space i don't have. So i have to reject that one and keep it simple so that every troop can attack every troop as per the legend.

The Chulkov swap i can do.

Yes it is VERY intense.

Chulkov arty could/should be swapped with the infantry in the same tert if you chose not to go with oddballs sug.

Great sug on Mamyev hill too. The top of the hill was a Reinforced Bunker & trench complex. I agree any attack should have to come from the other. I think I would consider coding the bunker position NOT be attackable by Artillery. Maybe it can be shown with a heavy circle or square around the deploy circle.

With the Russian air force 1/2 of the luftwaffe (which is pretty correct btw.) Is it necessary or desirable to have two HQ?

Great work!

I think the two HQs even out each side...which was what i was looking to achieve.

[cairnswk]

Version 25.

Click image to enlarge.

[jefjef]

Russian 13th Div A & Div B are both adjacent to 6 terts & under sniper attack. How about rubble between them. I like the break that would offer & a small obstacle there fits. It very slightly relieves pressure on them and breaks a side to side sweep just slightly more. It kinda looks like City Road connects to Div B but on your arrow simulation you don't show an attack. I assume it's attackable. The more I look at it the more I really like a rubble obstacle there.

Great map. I myself like the color scheme. When I look at it I see a dark dreary battlefield.

When plane vs plane attack is it a bombard (neuralize) or a conquer? I would think neutralize.

Thank you for allowing us gamers to have some input.

[saraith]

I have a little snag with naming some of the territories on the Russian side. The Tert named 64th Artillery, for example, had both an artillery and an infantry unit in it.

this is what I have in the XML file ATM:
<territory>64th Artillery Artillery</territory>
<territory>64th Artillery Infantry</territory>

should I change it to something like

<territory>64th Artillery (Artillery)</territory>
<territory>64th Artillery (Infantry)</territory>

never mind... I like the 2nd version much better... carry on

Have a look at what I have so far here if you wish

[RjBeals]

wow cairns - i haven't followed this too close - it blows my mind really. But i really love the isometric style graphics. It "looks" really cool - but I would probably get slaughtered on this map.

[lt_oddball]

it_oddball, i am now loathed to take this map down this path. While it is a good tactical sugg. the map being so crowded and all would need extra space to place that into the legend and thate is space i don't have. So i have to reject that one and keep it simple so that every troop can attack every troop as per the legend.

The Chulkov swap i can do.

???
no need redraw the map at all.

Have another look at your spaghetti map , do you see how illogic the attack route is 1077AA R2- mamayev B (bypassing mamayev A without a shot ?) or Lazur Chemical Plant - mamayev B ??
Gorodische Fields East - AA2 arty (squeecking past the rubble through a narrow gap ?)
Makes no sense. In reality AND when facing the map overview.
And it 's the last thing that matters ...is it a WYSIWYG map ?

So how to implement my good suggestion ( ):
the double terr. that have arty + Inf is a matter of explanation text in the legend ("arty in doubl terr shielded by its infantry").
Change mamayev A, B to Mamayev Bottom, Top (and make the top an arty(in real arty spotters....)) and it's covered by the same legend text.
All other doubl. terr. (2 inf) requires you to draw a split line...this happens only thrice..and there is space for it..City and 1077AA (x2)

easypiecy

result is that it clears up the spaghetti mess a bit

[cairnswk]

Russian 13th Div A & Div B are both adjacent to 6 terts & under sniper attack. How about rubble between them. I like the break that would offer & a small obstacle there fits. It very slightly relieves pressure on them and breaks a side to side sweep just slightly more. It kinda looks like City Road connects to Div B but on your arrow simulation you don't show an attack. I assume it's attackable. The more I look at it the more I really like a rubble obstacle there.

Mmmm. I would still like to keep that area open as i beleive this was one of the main areas of fighting.

I myself like the color scheme. When I look at it I see a dark dreary battlefield.

Good, somebody is happy with that at least.

When plane vs plane attack is it a bombard (neuralize) or a conquer? I would think neutralize.

It's bombard -> neutralize, that's why it's under the bombard section in the legend.

I have a little snag with naming some of the territories on the Russian side. The Tert named 64th Artillery, for example, had both an artillery and an infantry unit in it.
this is what I have in the XML file ATM:
<territory>64th Artillery Artillery</territory>
<territory>64th Artillery Infantry</territory>
should I change it to something like
<territory>64th Artillery (Artillery)</territory>
<territory>64th Artillery (Infantry)</territory>
never mind... I like the 2nd version much better... carry on
Have a look at what I have so far here if you wish

Thanks saraith, unfortunately there are still more changes and i have solved the naming issues (i think) for you.
But please beware, there are now AA Batteries on some terts also, and those can bombard darker coloured German Tanks as per the legend.

wow cairns - i haven't followed this too close - it blows my mind really. But i really love the isometric style graphics.

Thanks Rj.

It "looks" really cool - but I would probably get slaughtered on this map.

So will everyone else until the sort out what it what.

it_oddball, i am now loathed to take this map down this path. While it is a good tactical sugg. the map being so crowded and all would need extra space to place that into the legend and thate is space i don't have. So i have to reject that one and keep it simple so that every troop can attack every troop as per the legend.
The Chulkov swap i can do.

???... no need redraw the map at all.
Have another look at your spaghetti map, do you see how illogic the attack route is 1077AA R2- mamayev B (bypassing mamayev A without a shot ?) or Lazur Chemical Plant - mamayev B ??
Gorodische Fields East - AA2 arty (squeecking past the rubble through a narrow gap ?)
Makes no sense. In reality AND when facing the map overview.
And it 's the last thing that matters ...is it a WYSIWYG map ?
So how to implement my good suggestion ( ):
the double terr. that have arty + Inf is a matter of explanation text in the legend ("arty in doubl terr shielded by its infantry").
Change mamayev A, B to Mamayev Bottom, Top (and make the top an arty(in real arty spotters....)) and it's covered by the same legend text.
All other doubl. terr. (2 inf) requires you to draw a split line...this happens only thrice..and there is space for it..City and 1077AA (x2)
easypiecy result is that it clears up the spaghetti mess a bit

OK, i am not going to try and answer that, because to start i have had to change the AA names and terts.

The 1077AA regiments were russian womens artillery units who lowered their guns to horizontal and fired on the approaching tanks, so i have repositioned them.
As stated to saraith, there is now AA Batteries in this. The majority of Artillery and AA BAtteries were predominatnly on the east bank out of range out of the German tanks, so these have been added.
Artillery on the west bank have been renamed to Art. A,B,C.
I have also done your suggestion of the top of Mamayev Hill. As for not having to redraw, well you can judge that for yourself.

So here is Version 26.

Click image to enlarge.

[cairnswk]

...
QUESTION: Are the AA units capable of assaulting the planes? May want to consider it. (I assume the AA usage is for anti aircraft units)... When plane vs plane attack is it a bombard (neuralize) or a conquer? I would vote for neutralize.

As you can see, this has all changed.

[cairnswk]

I have answered all the issues in the poll except the artillery issue. I am a little confused by the choices in that regard. Currently, according to the legend, artillery can bombard any other artillery or any of the kneeling figures. Are we trying to decide if, instead of bombarding adjacent locations, the artillery can attack them (and if successful, reinforce into them)? Or are we suggesting that the artillery can neither bombard nor attack adjacent locations?

Misinterpretation of the legend i think.
The infantry (kneeling figures) can assault not bombard those Artillery, armour, AA Batteries and other onfantry.
So we are trying to decide "the artillery can attack them (and if successful, reinforce into them)"

Just to comment on the other issues: I vote yes to sniper auto-deploy, mainly to attract players to use this special bit of gameplay (seems silly to put a feature in that no one would use, which seems to be the opinion of a lot of the other commentators). I think the two army territories should have a bonus, just to give players a little something extra to consider. But I think that they should be auto-deploy, so that they don't add too much to the pool of reinforcements that the player can throw in any direction. You might make an exception for Mameyev Hill, since you have already singled it out as something special.

So you say two territory bonuses whould autodeplay? OK. I'll keep that in mind.

[cairnswk]

...
With the Russian air force 1/2 of the luftwaffe (which is pretty correct btw.) Is it necessary or desirable to have two HQ?

Well it does help balance the russian side with the german side, and yes there was Gen Zhukov in chanrge of the Russian aircraft who i have now placed in a HQ position.

[jefjef]

...
QUESTION: Are the AA units capable of assaulting the planes? May want to consider it. (I assume the AA usage is for anti aircraft units)... When plane vs plane attack is it a bombard (neuralize) or a conquer? I would vote for neutralize.

As you can see, this has all changed.

The new AA icon I see & understand to be able to assault any armour. The german 88 was a superb anti tank weapon but could only be utilized as direct fire. The 88 was incapable of any kind of accurate ranged bombardment. It could not replace standard artillery.

I think it should only be able to assault adjacent armour terts.

And maybe dropping a couple of the AA off the map. One being next to the Russian HQ. Don't think ya want to many AA. I'd think 2 on each side of the river is more than enough. (The fewer the more effort to capture them.)

Still think a barrier between the R 13th div terts would fit very nicely.

[cairnswk]

...
QUESTION: Are the AA units capable of assaulting the planes? May want to consider it. (I assume the AA usage is for anti aircraft units)... When plane vs plane attack is it a bombard (neuralize) or a conquer? I would vote for neutralize.

As you can see, this has all changed.

The new AA icon I see & understand to be able to assault any armour. The german 88 was a superb anti tank weapon but could only be utilized as direct fire. The 88 was incapable of any kind of accurate ranged bombardment. It could not replace standard artillary.
I think it should only be able to assault adjacent armour terts.
...

In reality those are not meant to represent the Germans but rather the russian defences, Wiki tells me:
"The burden of the initial defense of the city fell on the 1077th Anti-Aircraft (AA) Regiment, a unit made up mainly of young female volunteers who had no training for engaging ground targets. Despite this, and with no support available from other Soviet units, the AA gunners stayed at their posts and took on the advancing Panzers. The German 16th Panzer Division reportedly had to fight the 1077th’s gunners "shot for shot" until all 37 AA batteries were destroyed or overrun. The German 16th Panzer Division was also shocked to find that it had been fighting female soldiers, due to Soviet manpower shortages."
That is why i have them marked as being able to attack the dark green armour only...but that will need refining to be only nieghbours.

[cairnswk]

Current Version 26.

Click image to enlarge.

[jefjef]

...
QUESTION: Are the AA units capable of assaulting the planes? May want to consider it. (I assume the AA usage is for anti aircraft units)... When plane vs plane attack is it a bombard (neuralize) or a conquer? I would vote for neutralize.

As you can see, this has all changed.

The new AA icon I see & understand to be able to assault any armour. The german 88 was a superb anti tank weapon but could only be utilized as direct fire. The 88 was incapable of any kind of accurate ranged bombardment. It could not replace standard artillary.
I think it should only be able to assault adjacent armour terts.
...

In reality those are not meant to represent the Germans but rather the russian defences, Wiki tells me:
"The burden of the initial defense of the city fell on the 1077th Anti-Aircraft (AA) Regiment, a unit made up mainly of young female volunteers who had no training for engaging ground targets. Despite this, and with no support available from other Soviet units, the AA gunners stayed at their posts and took on the advancing Panzers. The German 16th Panzer Division reportedly had to fight the 1077th’s gunners "shot for shot" until all 37 AA batteries were destroyed or overrun. The German 16th Panzer Division was also shocked to find that it had been fighting female soldiers, due to Soviet manpower shortages."
That is why i have them marked as being able to attack the dark green armour only

Sorry. My blindness did not spot the green- might wanna use a more defining color. BTW I edited my prior post. Might wanna take another look at it..

Nice map.. Gonna be a fight for sure!

[cairnswk]

...
And maybe dropping a couple of the AA off the map. One being next to the Russian HQ. Don't think ya want to many AA. I'd think 2 on each side of the river is more than enough. (The fewer the more effort to capture them.)
....

i don't understand your logic of "the fewer the more effort to capture them", sorry.
But needless to say i will drop 1 from the 62rd 3rd Div.
i would like to keep the 3 on the russian side of the river.

[jefjef]

...
And maybe dropping a couple of the AA off the map. One being next to the Russian HQ. Don't think ya want to many AA. I'd think 2 on each side of the river is more than enough. (The fewer the more effort to capture them.)
....

i don't understand your logic of "the fewer the more effort to capture them", sorry.
But needless to say i will drop 1 from the 62rd 3rd Div.
i would like to keep the 3 on the russian side of the river.

If you are having problems with planes and can't attack thru a HQ to address the issue you will need AA to take care of it. And if you control the planes you do not want the enemy to have the AA either. Fewer = greater value. Supply vs demand.

Notes:

Might wanna use a more defining color on the tanks the AA can attack. Black or a brighter green with that light outline should show up really well.

I see ya encircled the bunker (hill top) Memyev. With No room in legends for explanation you may want to "break the line" I.E. have a gap facing memyev B. (the way in.)

Not to hound ya but did ya consider rubble between R13th divisions? Gives it a nice break.

I'll stop bugging ya. It's just minor tweeks from here. Thank you for allowing inputs.

Great map.. Looking forward to it!

[cairnswk]

... If you are having problems with planes and can't attack thru a HQ to address the issue you will need AA to take care of it. And if you control the planes you do not want the enemy to have the AA either. Fewer = greater value. Supply vs demand.

OK, thanks for that. I'll stic k to 3 on the east bank as that is consistent with the Russians having the majority of their AA siutated on the East bank.

Notes:
Might wanna use a more defining color on the tanks the AA can attack. Black or a brighter green with that light outline should show up really well.

Mmm OK. i'll see what i can do.....light green used with dark border on those tanks

I see ya encircled the bunker (hill top) Memyev. With No room in legends for explanation you may want to "break the line" I.E. have a gap facing memyev B. (the way in.)

Ahhhmmm...the normal border play of CC games is that a tert inside another tert means you can only attack the inner terts from the outer tert...and i think most players understand that, which is why i chose to depict it that way, so an opening is not really needed.

Not to hound ya but did ya consider rubble between R13th divisions? Gives it a nice break.

Mmmm, you have been hounding on this one, and i have repeatedly stated that i do not want to close that up.
I would like to keep it open as it forms part of the overall defence fo the city against the tanks, and splitting up those two divisions defeats that purpose.
Div B is attackable from 4 terts in the west & north and 3 in the east.
Div A is attackable from 4 terts in the west also and 3 in the east.
Both are bombardable from a seperate sniper also, and also from the artillery each side not bordering.
Splitting them up means they can't fort each other to put up some kind of defense.
And i am sure they will change hands many times which is close to what happened in situations in the city.

[jefjef]

My apologies cairnswk.

I must of missed you addressing the R13th.

Reverse color scheme will surely make those tanks stand out.

Hope to play this soon. Thanks.

Note. With the addition of AA a couple bonus areas has additional air bombardment against them now. May want to look at how the balance may have changed in comparison.

[cairnswk]

...
Note. With the addition of AA a couple bonus areas has additional air bombardment against them now. May want to look at how the balance may have changed in comparison.

Once we get all the gameplay sorted, then the bonuses will have to be examined. Thanks.

[lt_oddball]

away for a weekend , and in come new units (and more complications)
Who asked for the AA guns in the map ?

Long time ago, I suggested something similar, but not ON the map, but a sort of general logistic terr. OFF the map.
That was dismissed.
And now they re here on the map ..on more than one location...creating confusion which tank to hit and which not..
A tank which on this map has NO PARTICULAR BETTER effect compared to the INF icon.

And the planes can already get knocked out (bombarded) by other planes.

So why the need to overcomplicate the map ?
Please leave them out... (what 's next ? demolition engineers ? antitank guns ? katjoesjas ? separate fighters, dive bombers and level bombers ? separate inf. mortars and pulled artillery ? ).

:::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::

Thanks for implementing the Mamayev change (though the circle line was superfluous..but hey,that's ok now that it's there).
I see your concern for drawing lines around the arty in all the double territories.... that is why I tell you that the circle line is not necessary.
One Explanation line in the legend is enough.

And inf shielding arty does make sense ... whereas tanks not being able to attack arty directly isn't ... in an indirect way this creates something similar, but not quite.
Like you say two wrongs make one right.... (there still is the outside attack inf that can attack the arty in a double terr. immediately without caring about the inf. in the double terr. ... not logic)

[cairnswk]

^^ oh dear. it's just hard to please some people

[lt_oddball]

Wiki tells me:
"The burden of the initial defense of the city fell on the 1077th Anti-Aircraft (AA) Regiment, a unit made up mainly of young female volunteers who had no training for engaging ground targets. Despite this, and with no support available from other Soviet units, the AA gunners stayed at their posts and took on the advancing Panzers. The German 16th Panzer Division reportedly had to fight the 1077th’s gunners "shot for shot" until all 37 AA batteries were destroyed or overrun. The German 16th Panzer Division was also shocked to find that it had been fighting female soldiers, due to Soviet manpower shortages."
That is why i have them marked as being able to attack the dark green armour only...but that will need refining to be only nieghbours.

So what does this say ?
That the 37 AA against the panzers had no particular devastating effect.
The girls didnt run away (knowing they would be raped by germans, or executed by the russians).
A (37 mm) AA gun fires rapidly, so a "shot for shot" from a tank (slower fire rate) versus this 37 mm AA gun means that within a few seconds each AAgun was silenced.
Conclusion : on a map scale this "fight" had no effect at all (stalling advance of germans over days ?).
Please take it away..

[lt_oddball]

^^ oh dear. it's just hard to please some people

I would not tell you if I didnt think it can be easily fixed..