I first became interested in an Europa treatment of the Winter War when I first saw Jeff Millefoglie's and Paul Dunigan's articles in issue 21 of The Grenadier. I've always enjoyed scenarios with interesting geography and exotic locales. So I made up some counters, pulled out maps 513, 6A, 113 and 2A, and set it up.

There are three simulation questions specific to the Winter War:

1. How should the behavior of neutral countries be modeled?

2. What advantages should be granted to the Finns to duplicate their superior abilities in the snow?

3. What kind of defense should the Mannerheim line confer to units in those hexes?

Paul Dunigan composed a Neutrality Determination Table to deal with problem #1, with an array of possible results for both Norway and Sweden. An almost identical table is contained in A. E. Goodwin's "Northern Theatre of Operation," which expands the earlier scenarios into an entire naval/ground campaign for the control of Scandinavia. The Finns' special advantages are as follows:

Millefoglie/Dunigan:

• All Finnish cavalry, jager and bike units and all rifle regiments and battalions move as ski units.
• Finnish 1-8 ski battalions may retreat before combat, are considered supported, ignore Soviet ZOCs for all purposes, and may trace an overland supply line of twice normal length during snow turns (wasn't John Wayne in that movie?!).
• Soviet attacks are modified by 1 until the end of January 1940.
• Soviet overland supply lines are limited to one hex in snow.

Goodwin:

• All Finnish units without heavy equipment move as ski units during snow.
• Finnish ski-commando battalions add 2 to the success roll during snow.
• Until the end of January 1940, Soviet attacks are modified by -1; eliminated units do not generate special replacements, and units defending against Soviet attacks may retreat before combat.
• Soviet overland supply lines are limited to one hex in snow.
• The patrol zone and interception radius of Soviet fighters is limited to adjacent hexes.

As you can see, the advantages granted the Finns are similar, but not identical, in the two versions of the 1939-40 war. Furthermore, the Finnish force pool is substantially different in the two versions. Jeff Millefoglie has the Finns start with a total of 71 Attack Factors and 79 Defense Factors, with about 38 AF and 48 DF in reinforcements. Goodwin boosts the initial forces to 81 AF and 98 DF and cuts the reinforcements to about 17 AF, many of which are conditional. Needless to say, the two scenarios play quite differently.

Now what about the Mannerheirn Line, the Finn's most vital military asset? I quote the rules verbatim:

Millefoglie:

"The Mannerheirn line is represented as five fortified hexes which allow all Finnish units defending with them to ignore retreats. There are no other combat effects or die roll modifications for a Mannerheim Line hexside, although the defending units do receive any applicable benefits for terrain, AEC, etc. Mannerheirn line hexsides are removed immediately should a Soviet ground units control the hex."

The terrain of the Mannerheim Line makes for an interesting study. Jeff Millefoglie included an altered section of map 2A with his scenario. Of the five hexes in the line, 2 are woods ( -1), one is forest (-2, motorized halved), one is swamp (-2 only in snow), and one is intermittent lake (-1 only in snow). 2A/0530 faces the Soviets across a river (no effect in snow), while 2A/0531 is across a lake. Movement and combat is prohibited, even when frozen, in the old Fire in the East rules, which were then the standard.

A rail line causeway crosses the lake, but this is only usable if the opposite shore is undefended (See the FitE rule 31A1). Units in 0530 could be overrun, but a sensible Finnish player will keep 2 supported defense factors there and the maximum ground strength the Soviets could muster initially would be 14 AF (non-artillery units quartered). Even with the cream of the Soviet artillery collected for an overrun, the maximum strength possible is only 24 AF (plus any air support, which is also halved in snow). 0531 can therefore be made invulnerable with 2 border battalions and an artillery regiment. The other Mannerheim Line hexes are more vulnerable.

Given that the Soviets could have a maximum stack of 35 AF or 2 hexes with a total of 60 AF, the bulk of the Finnish Army must be held in the other four Mannerheim hexes. 2A/0633, for example, should be defended by at least 18 DF to prevent the Soviets from getting more than 3:1. Fortunately, the coastal artillery adds 4 DF and the die roll modifier should be a -2. At 3:1 -2, the Soviets cannot take the hex so long as the defenders include a division with a cadre. There is also the possibility of an AH.

A few bad rolls will easily duplicate the estimated one million Soviet casualties.

A. E. Goodwin's "N.T.O." has a different approach:

"Hexes of the Mannerheim Line have the same effect as forts (-1 to die roll, negate AECA). In addition all attackers (except artillery and engineers) launched against fortified hexsides are halved. Mannerheim line fortifications may be destroyed only by an engineer unit in the initial phase of a turn."

Along with the Mannerheim hexsides, there are three forts in 2A/0530, 0531 and 0633 0B/ 0601). The Mannerheim Line is much stronger in this version. Once forts are built in the remaining 2 hexes, die roll modifiers for Soviet attacks will be at -4 for terrain, forts and hexsides! With this kind of modifier, even a 3:1 has a 50% chance of a AH. However, there is no immunity from retreats for the Finns. This vital point means that the Soviets must make such attacks: eventually they will roll an EX, and a Mannerheim hex will be theirs. But 3:1's won't be easy. The maximum force that the Soviets can bear against 0633, for instance, would be 43 AF, plus air support. The Finns could prevent the Soviets from getting more than a 3:1 with about 14 DF. Goodwin's Mannerheim is cheaper to defend than Millefoglie's.

There are other wrinkles as well. In "N.T.O.," a set of unofficial naval rules allows the Soviets to land troops behind the Mannerheim; or use the guns of the Baltic Fleet to bombard the line in support of the ground troops. This is not a problem for the Finns until the spring, when the ice leaves the Gulf of Finland. Even then, the Soviet battleships will have to watch out for Finnish subs and torpedo boats. Of more concern to the Finns is the change in the rules regarding frozen lake hexsides. The Scorched Earth rules state that "units may move, attack and trace supply across frozen lake hexsides that are between land hexsides." Shouldn't that be land hexes?

It is not spelled out precisely, but it appears that attacking across a frozen lake hexside has no penalty whatsoever. I'm not sure I agree with this: how would you like to be leading troops across a completely flat and open surface, an easy mark for machine guns, artillery and even mines emplaced in the ice; and with the additional hazard of several hundred feet of icy water just a few inches below your feet? While it is true that only four inches of solid ice will bear the weight of any military vehicle except a (very) heavy tank, doesn't it seem that this would be harder terrain to attack across than clear or woods?

Anyway, given the rules as written, it is now possible for the Soviets to attack from 0630 and 0631 to 0531 and even from 0629 to 0530. Arthur Goodwin extends this use of frozen lake hexsides to frozen coastal all-sea hexsides, referring to historical i nsta nces where that actually occurred. Unlike Jeff Millefoglie's scenario, the Mannerheim Line must be defended equally along its length. Goodwin's "N.T.O." is the more sophisticated of the two versions of the Winter War, with a stronger, yet more "brittle" Mannerheim Line.

How then, should it be defended?

1. Build forts ASAP in those hexes that do not already have them.

2. 2A/0533 can only be attacked from one hex, so about 24 AF of Soviets could be brought against it. Ten DF would hold this position indefinitely.

3. All the other hexes can be attacked through two hexsides, and so face attacks up to 43 AF. 17 DF in each hex would do nicely, but the Finns do not have that many troops to spare, unless they strip their other fronts to the bone. Which leads me to:

4. Keep careful count of Soviet artillery and strong divisions, and be especially aware of next turn's reinforcements. Remember that those units that appear in Leningrad can move to any part of the isthmus in the same turn.

5. Finally, be prepared to shuttle troops between Karelia and the Mannerheim Line. While Finland will fall quickly should the Mannerheim be breached ' Karelia is the easiest route for the Soviets to get behind the Mannerheim Line. Defend both!

Those readers who have read Goodwin's "Winter War" scenario in ETO #51 will have noticed that the Mannerheim rule used is the earlier, Millefoglie version. Further, the Finnish force pool has undergone yet another transformation. Having made up counters for two versions of the 1939 Finnish army, I'm not going to make up a third! Likewise, I am satisfied with the Mannerheim rule in "N.T.O." I think it is fair, and it should produce historical results. My only other complaint with the rules is the absence of any penalty for attacking across a frozen lake. Here's my own suggestion, and I invite comments:

"Attacks by units without heavy equipment across a frozen lake (or frozen coastal all sea) hexside uses the terrain modifier applicable to the defender's hex. Attacks by units with heavy equipment across a frozen lake must first be rolled on the Success Table. If the attack is a success, carry on as above. If the attack fails, the units participating in the attack immediately suffer an 'AR' result, which is implemented as if it were the result of a combat die roll. In addition to this, if a 'F*' result is rolled, one unit of the attacker's choice is eliminated, as if it were lost in combat."

There. That should satisfy the players who think that such attacks should be made possible, while making these attacks sufficiently dangerous so they won't occur too often. Note that the proposed rule doesn't apply to overruns, and that attacks in the Arctic require the expenditure of a resource point before rolling on the Success Table.

Well that's all. I would point out that "N.T.O." is an interesting and enjoyable scenario, so if you haven't tried it yet, give it a whirl. If I've misread or misinterpreted any of Arthur Goodwin's rules, my apologies.