Please vote: Rail conversion rule in Russia

[Peter Stauffenberg]

As mentioned in the AAR between Morris and Joerock I think we have to look into how the Germans manage to rail their infantry units quickly eastwards so they can invade further east than what was possible.

The background is that in core Russian hexes there were broad gauge rail tracks and there were standard gauge rail tracks in rest of Europe. In addition both the Russians and Germans used scorched earth where the rail tracks where blown up when they retreated. The consequence of this is that it would take time for cities inside Russia to link up to the German rail network because rail conversion took time. The rail conversion units had to work from the border and eastwards along the existing rail lines. So it would take more and more time further east you get.

Now the rule for rail use of captured cities is that they're available the turn after they're captured. That rule doesn't simulate that cities far east in Russia wouldn't get linked up until a few turns after they were captured because the standard gauge rail heads hadn't caught up yet. I therefore propose a system where the number of turns it takes until a city becomes operational is dependent upon the hex column in Russia.

[Peter Stauffenberg]

This is my proposal and I want you to vote on it.

Values in general.txt
EASTERNMOST_HEX_COLUMN_FOR_1_TURN 111
WIDTH_EACH_ZONE 8 /* Number of columns in turn 2 zone, turn 3 zone etc. */
REDUCTION_PER_YEAR_FROM_1942 1 /* Zone reduced by this number per year, but not lower than 1 */

With these values we will have the following for each Russian city:
1 turn zone: Leningrad, Pskov, Vitebsk, Minsk, Vinnitsa, Odessa
2 turn zone: Petrozavodsk, Novgorod, Kalinin, Smolensk, Gomel, Kiev, Bryansk, Dnepropetrovsk, Kherson, Sevastopol
3 turn zone: Archangel, Vologda, Yaroslav, Moscow, Vladimir, Ryazan, Tula, Orel, Kursk, Lipetsk, Voronezh, Kharkov, Stalino, Rostov, Krasnodar, Kerch
4 turn zone: Kotlas, Gorki, Saransk,. Penza, Tambov, Stalingrad, Stavropol, Batumi
5 turn zone: e. g. Molotov, Ufa
6 turn zone: e. g. Omsk

In 1942 the 2 turn zone becomes 1 turn 2, 3 turn zone becomes 2 turn zone. In 1943 the 2 and 3 turn zones become 1 turn zone, 4 turn zone becomes 2 turn zone etc.

[Peter Stauffenberg]

If you vote for option 4 I want you to propose the changed parameters like a wider turn zone (more than . Easternmost turn 1 hex column to be further east. Reduction per year of 2 instead of 1 and so on.

[Morris]

This is my proposal and I want you to vote on it.

Values in general.txt
EASTERNMOST_HEX_COLUMN_FOR_1_TURN 111
WIDTH_EACH_ZONE 8 /* Number of columns in turn 2 zone, turn 3 zone etc. */
REDUCTION_PER_YEAR_FROM_1942 1 /* Zone reduced by this number per year, but not lower than 1 */

With these values we will have the following for each Russian city:
1 turn zone: Leningrad, Pskov, Vitebsk, Minsk, Vinnitsa, Odessa
2 turn zone: Petrozavodsk, Novgorod, Kalinin, Smolensk, Gomel, Kiev, Bryansk, Dnepropetrovsk, Kherson, Sevastopol
3 turn zone: Archangel, Vologda, Yaroslav, Moscow, Vladimir, Ryazan, Tula, Orel, Kursk, Lipetsk, Voronezh, Kharkov, Stalino, Rostov, Krasnodar, Kerch
4 turn zone: Kotlas, Gorki, Saransk,. Penza, Tambov, Stalingrad, Stavropol, Batumi
5 turn zone: e. g. Molotov, Ufa
6 turn zone: e. g. Omsk


In 1942 the 2 turn zone becomes 1 turn 2, 3 turn zone becomes 2 turn zone. In 1943 the 2 and 3 turn zones become 1 turn zone, 4 turn zone becomes 2 turn zone etc.

If Axis arrive a city & pass it ,encircle it , & attack it later ,will it also suffer this ? ie : If Axis arrive Smolensk in June , & encircle it , Then attack & conquer it in Aug ( at same time Axis has arrived Moscow ) . Will Smolensk also need 2 turn to use rail ? since during the encircle time ,Axis construction troops had already fixed the rail around Smolensk .

[Peter Stauffenberg]

I was thinking of something. Should we let the turns zone be reduced by 1 each September starting with September 1941? This instead of reducing at the start of each year beginning with 1942.

The reason for this is that the invasion usually starts in the Spring and the rail conversion units would manage to convert rail lines in the Spring / Summer so the rail hubs get 8 hexes eastwards during that time. This means that e. g. Rostov will be in the 2 turns zone after September 1941 instead of the 3 turns zone. Kiev and Bryansk would be in the 1 turn zone after September 1941.

What do you think?

[Peter Stauffenberg]

To keep the rule simple we just look at the time and hex column when a core Russian city is captured to determine the number of turns before the Axis can rail to the city. If we should calculate path to other cities already captured / encircled cities etc. then we get a more complicated game the players won't understand and a risk for bugs.

So we will keep things simple. Smolensk will be in the 2 turn zone in 1941 (until September 1941 if we make the change I just proposed). It will be in the 1 turn zone in 1942.

[Peter Stauffenberg]

Please notice that Axis players will pretty normal advance into Russia will not be very affected by the rail conversion rule. You will notice it the most if you start early in 1941 and rush fast eastwards. Therefore I don't think this change will affect game play a lot for normal games, but it will make it slightly harder for the all out Germans rushing towards Omsk. They will have to do it with just armor now and not have infantry to protect the flanks.

[Morris]

Please notice that Axis players will pretty normal advance into Russia will not be very affected by the rail conversion rule. You will notice it the most if you start early in 1941 and rush fast eastwards. Therefore I don't think this change will affect game play a lot for normal games, but it will make it slightly harder for the all out Germans rushing towards Omsk. They will have to do it with just armor now and not have infantry to protect the flanks.

In return to these changes , how about delay the 8 reserve Russian GARS to Oct 1941 ?

[Morris]

I was thinking of something. Should we let the turns zone be reduced by 1 each September starting with September 1941? This instead of reducing at the start of each year beginning with 1942.

The reason for this is that the invasion usually starts in the Spring and the rail conversion units would manage to convert rail lines in the Spring / Summer so the rail hubs get 8 hexes eastwards during that time. This means that e. g. Rostov will be in the 2 turns zone after September 1941 instead of the 3 turns zone. Kiev and Bryansk would be in the 1 turn zone after September 1941.

What do you think?

If we have to do it , it sounds good .

[ncali]

Why not have the supply range be dependent on when the Germans invade? The supply range could initially be 15, then it could jump up a certain number of turns after Germany is at war with Russia. Alternatively, the supply range could increase after Germany has held a couple key cities (say Kiev, Bryansk, and Smolensk) for a certain number of turns. Looking at some WWII maps of the German invasion, these seem to be key rail cities.

[metolius]

This in an interesting idea, although I'm still a little unclear on what is being proposed.

Seems like another option would be to restrict the ability of cities to receive rail-traffic based on how damaged they are.

Since all Russian cities are 'destroyed' when captured, the initial capacity would be zero (0/10).

Instead of the rules proposed, I'd suggest that each point of city strength would allow one unit to arrive by rail. In other words, if a city was up to 3/10, three units could be transported to that location by rail, with 6/10, allowing 6 units, and 7-10 would allow seven units. Seven units is the upper limit, since that is the maximum number that could be transported to an empty city with all empty hexes around it.

[metolius]

Some interesting figures and thoughts on German logistics and rail deployments in Russia, from Hitler's Panzers East: World War II Reinterpreted by R.H. S. Stolfi:

http://militera.lib.ru/h/stolfi/11.html

Sounds like they were able to push track eastward at a good clip.

[Morris]

If this has to be changed , will this rule also work when Russia counterattack back in 1942 0r 1943 ? ie : if Russia takes back Minsk in 1943 , will Russia also need any turns to be able to rail to Minsk ? I think they should meet the same situation as Axis in 1941 , Axis had destroyed all railways hubs before they retreat . If Axis has to suffer this in 1941, Russia also need to suffer this on their way to Berlin .

[Peter Stauffenberg]

Some interesting figures and thoughts on German logistics and rail deployments in Russia, from Hitler's Panzers East: World War II Reinterpreted by R.H. S. Stolfi:

http://militera.lib.ru/h/stolfi/11.html

Sounds like they were able to push track eastward at a good clip.

Interesting article, but it just proves that what we should focus on is rail movement and not supply. The Germans used trucks to extend their supply lines from the rail heads into Soviet territory. Therefore we could defend keeping supply level 4 for German with the supply range of 20 we have now.

Transporting corps sized units was something completely different and used trains instead of trucks. Motorized units used trucks to transport units on the field, but these units have +1 movement compared to infantry. Regular infantry soldiers had to walk on foot to the front line from the rail hub.

The article mentioned that the German rail hubs started at the border and Minsk wasn't linked to the German rail network until July 20th (almost 1 month after the start of the war). That's 1.5 turns.

So we certainly have a reason to not let captured cities become operable until a certain amount of turns.

[Kragdob]

Instead of prohibition of transport at all can we increase the transport cost to newly conquered cities?

If unit were given priority it could be transported from Berlin to Moscow in 20 days - it was just a matter of cost spent to do it. In example where Rostov was captured by 1st Panzer Army and left as indefendable because of lack of infantry it was due to the fact that all priority at that time (November 1941) was put on Moscow and little logistical resources was left for other fronts.

I would propose that e.g. zone 1 has cost of rail transport increased by 1, zone 2 by 2 etc. The cost would diminish in time.

Such system would fit to overall philosophy of rail transport in the game. E.g. you can overspent huge amount of PPs to rail all German forces West in 1939 in order to attack France as early as in October. You can do it but little Players do as the risk/cost is quite high. Same with Barbarossa. You could set you objective for Rostov and spend some PPs to have sufficient infantry support but at the cost of not being able to transport troops elswhere.

I think the choice (PPs or position) are better then just a plain wall of 'you can't do it'.

[Peter Stauffenberg]

The problem with that suggestion is that in the east the Germans didn't have tracks to run the trains on until the rail tracks had been converted to standard gauge. In the west the Germans to take out trains from commercial transportation and use them for military purposes to enhance the capacity. That means you can pay PP's to transport more soldiers than you could otherwise. So in the west this is an option.

How can the Germans rail soldiers to Rostov in September 1941 if the rail hubs end in Kiev? The trains can't run further eastwards because the rail lines aren't converted yet. This is why it's a good idea to have some kind of system for rail conversion.

The system will work well for the Germans, but I'm still thinking of how to do it for the Russians.

[Morris]

.

The system will work well for the Germans, but I'm still thinking of how to do it for the Russians.

For Russian , how about 3 turn in 1942, 2 turn in 1943 , 1 turn in 1944-45 . Since it is dangerous to counterattack in 1941 ,it seems won't happen in 1941 .

[Peter Stauffenberg]

Here is a very interesting article about the topic:
http://www.feldgrau.com/dreichsbahn.html

[Morris]

Here is a very interesting article about the topic:
http://www.feldgrau.com/dreichsbahn.html

It is really a good article . but GS is a game not history book . Just make it simple to player .

[Peter Stauffenberg]

Here is some info about how the Russians restored the broad gauge rail lines when the Germans retreated:

http://www.lonesentry.com/articles/ttt0 ... lroad.html

http://www.photius.com/countries/soviet ... ar_ii.html

Here we see why the Russians managed to more quickly convert the rail lines back to broad gauge. In liberated Soviet territory the Red Army could use the civilian population to help with the effort. The Germans could only benefit from locals in territory occupied by the Russians prior to Barbarossa (Baltic states, eastern Poland etc.).

The second article also mentions that 48.800 km of 52.400 km damaged rail track was restored by the Russians in May 1945. This indicates the Russians had a very high capacity for rail repair / conversion. The article also states that the Soviets actually had to spend quite a lot of their resources into rail repair. So maybe we could indicate this by increasing the rail points spent if the Russians rail a unit outside Russia.