Comparison of the
New WWII Rules

Conclusions

By Bill Rutherford


These games were a challenge to play, if only because, when playing three sets of rules covering the same subject matter at approximately the same scale there's a tendency to mix rules between the sets. We also found ourselves, while playing out the engagement, resisting the urge to modify the scenario as we went along.

How could the scenario be improved? During play we noticed several things. In hindsight I would have dispersed the Soviet infantry a bit and, in that event, reinforce it, too. Koppenburg noted (and I didn't notice until writing this just now) that Soviet infantry attacked from Tulumtschak. Putting the Soviet 263rd Rifle Regiments 3rd battalion there (remember - it was missing) and moving the 2nd battalion out of Korpetsch, maybe to the entrenchment north of the village or the antitank defenses north and across the stream from Korpetsch, would, in hindsight, have been a good idea. The Soviets would then have had to counterattack with infantry (something they did in the battle that we did not - even once - do in the game replays) but would've had more infantry to absorb the losses they would certainly have incurred when doing so.

It wasn't clear that there were any Soviet infantry in the entrenchment. I didn't restrict them from deploying there because, if the entrenchment were available, it seemed reasonable that they'd be used. As noted, though, they turned into a magnet that attracted Germans regardless of their importance, and this affected scenario play.

We talked and waffled about the variable fog rule extensively. In the end we decided to keep it because it allowed the potential for some fairly weird situations - much like what happened in the actual event!

We discussed, after playing out all three games, how to duplicate some of the confusion of the German attack. If we dispersed the Soviet forces (as previously noted), we considered adding a movement deviation die roll during turns with limited visibility. The German player would mark movements for each distinct formation and, if there were no landmarks (German ditch, creek, etc.) within visibility range of the formation, would cast, say 1D6, with a 1 - 2 result indicating a veer to the formations left of 300 and a 5 - 6 result indicating a veer to the formations right of 300. This would've potentially badly mis-positioned either or both of the German battalions, as they spent the first 2 - 3 turns moving in fog.

Having the Soviet player secretly mark the location of the antitank minefield in order to surprise the German player would've allowed duplication of the 1/204th Tank Battalions encounter with it. We elected not to in the interests of play balance. Try it though.

We played each scenario with the same number of players - two; one German, one Soviet. Things would've run a bit more smoothly had we an extra player on each side for the Command Decision II and Clash of Armor games. With a variable player force we also could have gone for a bit bigger scenario. As it was, our span of command was on the fine edge between the lower end of a normal Spearhead game and the upper end of a normal Command Decision II or Clash of Armor game.

By the way, please note that there are several other sets of rules on the market that also aim to recreate larger battles. Korps Commander World War 2, by Tabletop Games, Canadians in Europe, by the Canadian Wargames Group, and Rapid Fire!, by Stratagem Publications, Ltd., all come to mind. The first two are somewhat above the scale of the rules addressed herein and will have their own article a bit later. The last set takes such a different approach to game play - its designed for use with 20mm individually mounted figures, sets no specific ground or time scales, and doesn't use any command control system - that I didn't think it would quite fit in the same article.

I thank John Lewis and Doug Panzer Mudd for their help with this article - both for their ready discussion of the scenarios peculiarities - with helpful suggestions - and for their willingness to submit themselves to playing the scenario itself.

BIBLIOGRAPHY

Jentz, Thomas, ed.; Panzertruppen Vol. I; pp. 224 - 228; Schiffer Military History, Atglen, PA; 1996. - Traces development of German panzer forces up to 1942. Filled with organization tables, battle returns, and German after action reports. Very detailed. The source of this scenario. Good!
Sharp, Charles; Soviet Order of Battle World War II; George Nafziger, West Chester, OH; 1995; Volume I - The Deadly Beginning - Soviet Tank, Mechanized, Motorized Divisions and Tank Brigades of 1940 - 1942.; Volume VIII - Red Legions - Soviet Rifle Divisions Formed Before June 1941. These two volumes provided a wealth of organization information on subject organizations, as well as short histories of all such organizations in the Soviet army. Extremely useful.
Watkins, H.; Panzer Divisions of World War 2; pg. 55; Profile Pubs. Ltd., Berks., UK; date unknown. This volume provided a short history of the 22nd Panzer Division, along with its establishment while in the Crimea.

The Comparison