DRIVE ON FRANKFURT was intended to be a simpler-than- usual treatment of modern warfare, focussing strictly on essentials. The designer's job is to find a happy compromise between those elements which are important for simulation and those which are important for enjoyment. To this end, two central principles dominate: mobility and unit specialization. Each part of the game is designed to show how some part of the subject reflects one of these central principles.

Mobile Warfare

Modern armies, moving in motor vehicles and controlled by radio, expect to wage the most highly mobile operations inn history. Players, of course, will enjoy the uncertainty, the swift change of direction, and high tempo of such warfare.

To simulate this mobile warfare, it was necessary to intermingle movement and combat as much as possible and to link movement directly with combat power. In DRIVE ON FRANKFURT, players have great freedom to arrange movement and combat activities in any order. This is intended not only to simulate the subject, but to make the command problem as interesting as possible. Greater combat power requires greater movement expenditure, representing preparation time. Greater preparation time also gives each side a better chance to add external support. The sequence encourages the tactic of breaking through a line with some units, then exploiting with others. This is the Soviet Army's two-echelon method of attack.

Support Weapons

Besides the high mobility, a second distinguishing characteristic of modem armies is that they contain many highly specialized units: artillery, electronic warfare, helicopters, etc. The need to combine these very different functions gives modem warfare much of its feel. And it can give the game much of its enjoyment. Each unit has a special strength, but no one unit dominates.

The most important supporting arm is artillery. The accompanying article on unit organization discusses the important differences between the Soviet and NATO artillery organization and capabilities. NATO's large number of observer-trained officers, radio links and computer controlled target selection (the "Tacfire" system) make it possible for the NATO units to fire twice per turn in the game.

Also vitally important is airpower, both fixed wing and helicopter. NATO counts on its helicopters and tactical air power to counterbalance the Soviet's numerical superiority in armored vehicles. The Army's official name for its current doctrine-AirLand Battle- indicates how vital it considers air support.

The unit values and air defense rule try to strike a balance between those who view airpower as the dominating weapon and those who view planes and helicopters as cannon fodder. In this debate, I lean toward the "cannon fodder" side, at least where helicopters are concerned. As General Wavell said, "There is no place in war for delicate machinery." The simplest weapons tend to be the best. Helicopter people on each side claim the machines will kill 19 tanks for every helicopter lost, but they will not do this in the game.

The air defense table reflects the Soviets' much more powerful antihelicopter defenses, built around their excellent ZSU-23 quad barrelled gun. Soviet tactical air "strikes" represent a larger number of aircraft than NATO strikes, so their game values are higher, despite the superiority of NATO's aircraft.

It is expected that artillery and air may best be used to attack the enemy indirectly, by striking at his headquarters. One air bombardment against a headquarters can upset an entire divisions's operations, whereas it could only destroy one combat unit by direct attack.

Terrain

Another controversial question is the effect of terrafn. It has commonly been assumed that the terrain of central Germany, being fairly rough and wooded, will help the defenders. This assumption ignores the very extensive network of roads and tracks through that terrain. The game map shows a simplified version of that network. The effects of woods and rough terrain reflect the presence of many secondary roads and trails not shown. In some cases, parallel roads have been combined into one. In general, players will find terrain much less restrictive than a first glance would indicate.

It is expected that some major river bridges will be bombed and not reconstructed-such bridges do not appear on the map. Likewise, some roads through urban area have been omitted, due to the assumption of blocking rubble.

Troop Quality

A study of the unit values will show that NATO units are more powerful, man for man, weapon for weapon. Today, as in World War II, the effects of large Soviet numbers are reduced by inflexible, sometimes primitive tactics.

The amount of variation in each side's strength marker values represent national characteristics exhibited in past wars. For example, Soviet troops have often been extremely unpredictable-sometimes dying to the last man, sometimes running at the first shot.

Order of Appearance

Each side's units enter the game gradually, about one formation per turn. Even some NATO units barracked on the map do not enter play until the third or fourth turn. This delay represents the effects of Soviet Spetsnatz (special forces) troops. On the Soviet side, the delay represents the effects of NATO medium-range missiles and air interdiction.

One of the great debates about the next war concerns forward defense. NATO's basic war plan is for forward defense, based on rapid deployment with at least 48 hours warning. This is natural for politicians-especially West German politicians-although it does violate the teachings of history. NATO leaders insist their units can reach the forward positions in time to form a solid defense line. Soviet leaders believe a rapid offense can disrupt the NATO forward movement before the line is ever formed. The game assumes the truth lies somewhere in between.

Abstractions and Omissions

A game cannot include everything-it can't even include everything a designer admits is important! But games which try to include too much lose their focus and wind up not treating anything well. Tactical air power, which could easily be a game in itself, has been heavily abstracted. Chemical weapons were simply built into the unit values. Effects of medium-range missiles, desant troops, and other theater warfare weapons are slightly reflected in the scenario orders of appearance. Nuclear weapons have been treated whimsically because it is thought unlikely they would be used within the time span of the game.

Supply rules? In most game these have two functions. One is to prevent unrealistic activity levels. For example, ammunition supply rules prevent a player from shooting at every "waving" bush. The other function is to reflect the advantage of better supply on one side. This is usually true in Bulge games. Neither function is necessary in DRIVE ON FRANKFURT. The movement and combat rules already restrict the players to plausible activity levels. And neither side can be sure of having a supply advantage. NATO formations have more service support units, but they require more supply, and they will be limited to the supply stocks on hand.

Drive on Frankfurt

Wargame Rules by Jonathan Southard
Designer's Notes by Jonathan Southard
Player's Notes by C.R. McKinney
Units of Drive on Frankfurt by Jonathan Southard