seowhq.net

I think that enemy positions were known to both sides. Only the unit designation was faulty. Therefore 30+%.

I would also fancy a "after artillery fire change position rule".
I read this was a standard procedure for all artillery.
Exception would be encirclement.

I like to think that we are picking up a battle that has been hard fought to this point. We know the weather is poor and positions could have changed during the night but both sides are aware of the general idea of front lines and enemy trenches. A starting point a few Km apart sounds right to me. Only historical details would provide a better idea of the situation as both sides saw it.

Rough question marks that provide general idea of front line but very little about sizes or unit designations. 30% sounds a little high coming out of night time but I'm not sure how rapid the Allied advance and German withdraw was.

I'm not a fan of additional rules.
If a side wishes to have SOP's in place then go for it but don't impose them on the enemy.

I am however keen for an understanding that all movement and air operations be done in the spirit of realistic battle conditions. This is of course very subjective in this type of scenario. There were examples of tanks running around behind enemy lines attacking from the rear and I have barely a clue as to what other examples of boldness and initiative took place in these battles.

The basic concept though being to fight it like its real and not exploit SEOW and IL2 limitations and peculiarities to provide an advantage and unrealistic outcomes. This cannot be policed but we are at SEOWHQ and as long as boths sides see this in the same way we should be fine.
Large scale air attacks by AI in very poor conditions being an example of unrealistic campaigning. Dogfights in rain/snow etc. Would aircraft be sent on low level ground attack missions in very poor visibility? If someone could provide info on minimum operating conditions for aircraft in this theatre at the time it should be a good guide on what the minimum conditions for air operations were?

And yes, I realise that the result of all this is probably that additional rules are needed. Doh!

II/JG77Hawk_5 wrote:
I'm not a fan of additional rules.
If a side wishes to have SOP's in place then go for it but don't impose them on the enemy. !

I agree. Too many additional rules not enforced by the system sound great at the beginning, but something goes wrong and it eventually lead to sad and angry emoticon faces. I'm also not sure what risk of an artillery duel we actually have.

On the subject of large scale air attacks, I think the system can limit that with the time limit, number of planes, rearm times, and available air missions. I can't remember if you can limit the number of GATTACK or types of missions you can plan out of air mission total, but perhaps that's a feature for a future SEOW release.

I have no strong opinion on the amount of recon at the beginning, a lower level means that some things will probably happen later, a higher level probably means they will happen sooner....but you will attack eventually right?

Most of these conversation points I think stem more from the fear of total annihilation after one mission, so its a perfectly normal cycle to go through. We just have to get from fear and exploration to acceptance so we can start!

Yes, let's keep extra rules to a minimum. If we encounter a problem, we can discuss and it and work out a solution together.

Cheers,
4S

ok, ok, no extra rules.

I made a post about the reconnaissance before battle at Korosten in the other thread.
There is a book dedicated entirely dedicated to this topic:
Soviet Military Deception in the Second World War (Soviet (Russian) Military Theory and Practice) - David M. Glantz

On page page 286 you can see the German intelligence on 23th December 1943 and on page 287 you find the real situation that day.

The unit positions were correct the unit designation was differing in most cases.

I guess the same applies for the Soviet side.

For us this means we have recon.
In some cases the recon is correct and in some cases they arent. That´s why I think 30-70% recon would be good and reflecting history.


Another question is what are the campaign settings?
How do units move?

Hi all,

Emil has worked hard to produce a reasonably consistent technics.ini file for the campaign, and a rockets.ini file as well for the artillery barrage mode. These files will be released for all players as a "Korosten Mod". Use of this mod in game is compulsory.

In developing this mod Emil has adopted the following conventions for ground movement over the snowy mid-winter terrain:

1. tracked vehicles, default speeds (=no speed penalty)
2. all-wheel-drives, 2/3 default speed
3. on foot, 1/2 default speed
4. wheels only, 1/3 default speed

I think this is a good system.

Noting that the Kiev_AP map has no rivers or bridges and the terrain will be under snow/ice, Emil's speed conventions mean we can use Simple ground movement mode for all units. This means that objects will move independently of roads which will simplify ground planning for commanders.

How about that? If we find it doesn't work, we can always switch on more sophisticated ground modes.

Cheers,
4S

Sounds good to me!

Yes, looks good.
I guess horses and karts are included in "wheels only" group.

LW/JG10_Luny wrote:Yes, looks good.
I guess horses and karts are included in "wheels only" group.

Horsed are on foot.

Simple movement would be my favorite too!

I'm not sure about the AP version, but I remember when we flew the non AP version that some factories are not in the DB, especially around Kiev. This could lead to confusion when bombing. Perhaps it might be better to add the missing ones to the DB.

I have to caution it was a while ago since I flew it and never took a deeper look so this might be a non issue...

I'm not sure about the AP version, but I remember when we flew the non AP version that some factories are not in the DB, especially around Kiev. This could lead to confusion when bombing. Perhaps it might be better to add the missing ones to the DB.

I have to caution it was a while ago since I flew it and never took a deeper look so this might be a non issue...

Hi Petr, it isn't an issue, since we aren't using production or reinforcements for this scenario.

IV/JG7_4Shades wrote:Hi all,

Emil has worked hard to produce a reasonably consistent technics.ini file for the campaign, and a rockets.ini file as well for the artillery barrage mode. These files will be released for all players as a "Korosten Mod". Use of this mod in game is compulsory.

In developing this mod Emil has adopted the following conventions for ground movement over the snowy mid-winter terrain:

1. tracked vehicles, default speeds (=no speed penalty)
2. all-wheel-drives, 2/3 default speed
3. on foot, 1/2 default speed
4. wheels only, 1/3 default speed

Movement looks good. How about supply and transport? I know you have planned to create supply points. What about supply and transport ranges?

We discussed 800 meters at one point on Teamspeak. Any other values to consider?

Having a quick look on work pc, cant see Generals staff car in costs & also transport capacity of Kubels & jeeps are less than weight of Kompanie Kommando . I'll have a more thorough check later at home.

Fixed.

Hawk_5 noted that the bazooka units that we are using for Company Command units do not have mobile forms so it is hard to place them. I recommend just placing them as stationary bazooka units.

I will be doing the initializations, and I am sure I can tweak these to work ok.

Cheers,
4S

PS: I have put together some AM radio files for use in the campaign. Mind you, some of the musical taste from 1943 was very dubious. No wonder people went insanely aggressive.