by Cohen

Greetings everyone,

I am quite aware a 'Review' of a product out of print, and almost 10 years old does not really help.
It's also a game I do not own (but I'd gladly buy if it was reprinted) in assumption some 'fixes' are made.

The 'Eye' is pleased

That aspect - while surely not essential - is something I am quite fond of.
Good looking map, and mostly magnificent counters.
The German divisional icons and the variegated armour silohuettes are excellent.

I feel the latest product of the same designer - Roads to Stalingrad - suffers from having different graphics, more 'traditional' ones.
That by itself makes the Roads to Stalingrad less intrigueing.

Decision Making

Going past the aesthethics of the game - which for how relevant may be, do not affect the gameplay and the flow - the 'core aspect' that makes the game interesting is a nuanced approach to decision making, and relevant consequences.

While the approach appears standard, at least from a viewpoint of hex and counter, attack and defense factor and combat odds - one of the most antique wargaming traditions! - the bells and whistles attached to are what give the chrome to Combat.

Between the options of 'armour exploitation', Hurrah attacks, elite bonuses or the occasional use of that special Support Chit - there are interesting dynamics that can keep the game relatively interactive and not a mere match crunching.

Given, in modern wargaming the old IGO-UGO system has gradually been abandoned, compelling more player interactions in the same turn with reactions of the sort, thus while not a novelty it is nicely bundled in the game, and it flows effortlessly once one has had a few tries to the game.

Decisions though do not only stop at the Combat options...

The Germans and the Fuhrer

A pivotal aspect for the Germans - to have to deal with someone that 'hinders you'.
I believe this is the first game-serie where I see something like that represented at this level.

The concept of the retreats with extra movement are quiet representation of the skill Germans still had on the field to disengage, exfiltrate - but normally they cannot because generals would have other orders.
The seemingly necessary panzer-attacks, risking costy steps to gain in turn more replacement points?

Even a simple ditching the Romanians or not, or when to do it, is a big decision making.

The Russians and Stalin

The TO management is another decision making rich business, as well as the evaluation if to use Stavka to replace tank steps and in which measure ...
A simple factor of:
A) Do you want to use this reduced strenght tank for combat this turn?
B) Do you want to repair this reduced strenght tank next turn for free?

Between Support Use, TO prioritizing and management, the Russians have a quality life in this game spoiled by occasional interference of Stalin or a Zhukov taking over and increasing combat performance for extra losses.

So far so good but ...

The base is solid and sturdy, I presume already practiced with Liberty Roads which is a predecessor.

There are some problems though, I feel the game has not been tested adequately and while they may be intended (I hope not) there are some relatively gamey or crippling features.
I'll be technical here - who has no knowledge of the game may get lost!

Soviets not producing a Dismissal on Turn 1 will cripple the Germans. A careful planning of Soviet play can lead them to seize Minsk and crash 2 HQ, or 1 HQ and Vitbesk if that has Hatelbefel. That will leave Germans on 3 Hitler happyness, which means by the end of the German turn it will be down to 2. 1 if a Retreat against the Will happens...
Model will pop on map, and disappear the turn after once the Soviets will seize Mogilev, Vitbesk and so forth.
The Germans -could- produce a loss of 4 Hitler Happyness and cause their own T1 dismissisal but that will set the Freedom of Action to 2 already, and it will cost them both support.

Roughly German troops will simply be OOS and in bad shape anyhow, and the Germans will get no replacements on T1, and neither on T2.

This is big problem number 1 which somehow eluded testers. (or it is not a big problem)

Problem nr.2 is that one of the terrain leaders popping at CS TO on turn 2 can cause the fall of Lvov in T2, and the preparation of encirclment of half of the AGS in that zone.
The 361st division gets destroyed and then exploitation happens. If 4545 hex forest counts as clear, and full movement is applied, Lvov will be attacked.
If by fortune the Russians also hammer the 20th Hungarian Division hex they're in for a great ride.

IF both points are teamed up, during T1 the German supports drawn have been discarded in a T2 dismissal or used them to have an 'Abandon Equipment and run' business. Germans will get 2 measly supports (they can pick 1), 0 replacements, for T2...

The Germans will be facing 2 Army Groups which are already in bad shape (prolly 3 considering the Soviets can also unhinge in Turn2 center of Bessarabia front)

These are pretty much 'setup' related issues though. With my own experience in testing games I presume no Soviet player was tinkering with idea 'let's do a bit less Bagration and conquer a bit less ...'; a T2 dismissal will be much worse since all map will move of half too! Exactly as prolly a pointe to Lvov (which requires a lucky draw of a specific Support) is seen as overly dangerous play.

The 'Hurrah' attacks are problem nr.3, I feel that they are too cheap. They bundle in the effects of Armour Exploitation for a step loss (which for the Soviets is not really a problem if you can have an infantry corp attacking) and enables two armour per E to be exploiting.
That makes the Russians play bowling with Germans all over the map.
I am aware it's 44. i am aware the Russians ought to advance. Here they just tear holes asunder in the German lines -each single turn-.
A crafty Soviet player packs 4-6 tanks and some infantry units and calls for a Hurrah Attack. With utmost chances 2-4 tank can perform exploitation and obliterate another hex.
This can be easily fixed though by setting Hurrah attacks to add the E result, but 1 piece count as 1.
Alternatively the Hurrah loss must be a Tank step, and it enables to double down on tank picks ontop of adding the E.
The ratio is simple math. An INF costs half a support (considering 2 can be stacked to be flipped) - which in the grand scheme of things is negligible.
4 Tanks exploiting though are 40 combat factors, that means they can obtain a 4:1 or 5:1+ against your average single unit German infantry defender... (and 4:1 is fat chances of a 5 defending quality infantry in some forest / rough terrain!)
It's just ridiculous - how that has not been noticed that by the rules as written it's a no brainer to call for Hurrah attack anywhere 2+ full strength tanks are engaged...
I've experienced two different players - one that was more conservative with the Hurrahs and for instance the Rumanian offensive was at end of July and breached the Lvov front at the end of July ... vs a player that was Hurrah fan - that reached by turn5 the outskirts of Galati and Brest Litvosk.
Even here it's just a matter of math, Hurrah mandates 1 loss and has a thin chance of losing one more, for who replaces possibly 6-12 infantry steps a turn and another amount of tanks, for the guarantee of inflicting at least 1+ to the Germans; 1 is very rare, 2 is average, 3+ can happen especially if ENG is nailed by the defender, by who replaces 3-5 steps or so. If a 'decision' is a no brainer decision, it's broken. Hurrah attack are no brainer with 2+ tanks involved right now and it needs changing.

This is just doing combat factors math, if then we consider air or artilleries, we can see how an E2 result enabling 4 tanks may instead produce not one but two 4:1 or 5:1 attacks...

These I identify as the major problems - I'd fix them with:

A) Turn 1, German player can decide to take Hitler Anger for any Major City that is out of Supply, as if already seized by the Russians.
If the Russians do not take Mogilev or Vitbesk, German player can simply take the hits on Hitler as if he lost them, and if the places are not OOS ... without a dismissal I presume the troops can be saved, which should outdo the missed repacements?
This solution denies nothing to the Russians, except relatively gamey solutions of 'let's dodge this HQ, let's keep this city for the next turn but you are OOS' - The Russians can do a regular Turn 1 Opener.

B) The other fronts
I'd let the German move all across the map but cannot attack outside the XX15 to XX35 hex.
This enables them to adjust their frontline some. With the presumed dismissal the German units can move of half only anyhow.

C) Hurrah I already written what I feel it is a necessary change.

Difference of Game Pacing

This may be nothing to some, to others can impact a lot.
Soviets have simply much more to do.

Their turns are simply a triumphant, butchering process of slaughtering Germans. Russian attacks can see an amount of casualties inflicted per turn which are atrocious - compared to the few steps the Germans get.

Some localized counterattacks are the best the German can hope and panzers are a pain to replace (so much that I'd even up the OK Reinforcement Support to offer 1 panzer step and 1 infantry step bundled in, instead of just 2 RP, yes you get a panzer in).
Ultimately a Russian turn is much more 'heavy' in terms of gameplay, things to do, and their dynamics (more replacements, more supports, Stavka teleports, stronger units on map).

I'd add a bid system for who is to play the Soviet; where the bid is German 'Special Replacements' for Turn 1 (instead of getting 0 replacements due to Dismissal or Turn 1 - they get the 'bid').
Bid replacements work slightly different, 1 infantry step cost 1 and 1 panzer step 2. Axis minor steps cost half.
This could ease also Lvov potential problem, if a 'Bid replacement' is placed t here.

While a bid does not offset the whole game pacing - the Soviets will always have hands more full than the Germans - I feel the 'fun' experience comes through the playing the game, more so than having the final Turn 24 picture.

Rules and Support

I admit this is not immediate, but it is an important part of a game longevity.

On Hexasim there are no living rules; and to find Errata one has to scavenge this very forum here on BGG... and Errata are spead here and there.
French to English rule translation has gaps or issues - even that has not been amended.

The Vassal module (which I envision as forum of support of a product) is not only short of the material needed to play the game (which I understand the reasoning for at least in the immediate year or two after the game release); but it is short of most basic functions. From the reinforcement sheet unable to harbour the units that must arrive (they got to be fished all the times, you cannot just setup them there)... to Zhukov requiring to roll twice the 1d6 (the 2d6 function could display both dices rolled)... a function to remove all the exploitation marker or all the 'combat' marker could have been handy.

Bottom Line

The game is engaging and intrigueing, and it has smooth dynamics that let it flow and roll - especially via Vassal which allows study time and single player mode moving.
Face to face it may be very time taxing to ponder and study movement.

It has margins of improvement in general, but I'd like to see a broader and ampler scheme, a '43 start could even be very interesting, from Kursk to Sicily combined macro game? I'd be sold -- but prolly over the top as management.

An excellent product which has some margins of improvement, and the system has a very broad capability of expand itself to a division size ETO.

Source: View source