The following report was sent in by a French Europa Association member some time ago. Unfortunately, I do not have a record of his name.

Do these two games mirror a normal course of events for Scorched Earth? Do they resemble games you've played? I'd like to hear your opinion. Rick

I have never finished a game of Scorched Earth, and I have played it only a couple of times. One game lasted until Sep I 1941, and the second only as far as Aug II 1941. Both games followed approximately the same losses pattern, but were quite different in their operations.

Losses in Jun II 41 of the two games were respectively about 240 and 200 for the Soviets, and under 10 attack factors (AFs) for the Axis. Thereafter, the Soviets lost about 100 AFs per turn and the Axis between 10 and 20.

The first game was two-player and I played the Soviet side. The regular turn of Jun II saw the elimination of a huge number of isolated Russian units, and they reappeared in the form of plenty of partisans.

Not knowing what to do with them, I decided to spread them and try to keep them away from the Germans until the god of CRTs made them more effective. This decision proved immensely rewarding. The German player greatly overreacted and more than half of his infantry in Jul I were diverted to surround and destroy a half dozen partisans and as many dummies. He thus gave me nearly for free a full turn to organize and retreat what was left of the border forces. I thus built a double 5-point strong line running from Lake Peipus to the Pripet, which at the cost of what I then considered tremendous losses (after a while, you get accustomed to calling the loss of 100 AFs in a turn "reasonable losses," but it takes some getting used to, especially for one like me who mostly plays in the desert!) practically halted the German Army until September.

A major crisis erupted in September, but since we were approaching the end of good weather, the overall situation wasn't critical strategically.

Meanwhile, the southern front lay quite dormant. Nearly all the infantry of Army Group South had been engaged in the antipartisan operations on Jul I, so my opponent was loathe to send his panzers unsupported into the Ukraine. I retreated nearly everything I could behind the Dnepr, which I also began to fortify, leaving only a minimal rearguard to slow the advance of the German infantry.

In Kiev I put a big stack with an NKVD regiment well in sight on top of the stack. The Dnepr line was quite lightly manned (there was only one line), but right behind were six mech corps which were stuffed with artillery and static AA to make them taller and more impressive. Finally, I left a strong garrison around Odessa.

History repeated itself as the Romanian Army was sent against Odessa. The troops in the Odessa Military District had all (except the armor) been earmarked for the defense of Odessa, and had conducted a fighting withdrawal to the city during which they managed to take out a couple of Romanian divisions and commensurate support units.

The ensuing fighting around Odessa proved quite bloody, but the city did not fall. By September, a couple of German infantry corps were being diverted to provide some muscle to the assault forces. Meanwhile, Odessa had received an NKVD regiment to ensure the city would not fall in vain.

In the Arctic, all operations had virtually stopped after the Germans had spent two resource points to no avail. In Finland, the Leningrad Military District forces launched a limited offensive that was quickly stopped. Its main effect was to let the Germans send more divisions to southern Finland.

The situation at the end of Sep I 41 turn was thus one of quite limited German advances. The front ran approximately from Leningrad to Smolensk and afterwards followed the Dnepr.

On the other hand, the German Army was practically intact. Especially, all panzer divisions were at full strength.

The Red Army had suffered very high losses, but most of the armor had been saved (in fact, only the units in the special military districts had suffered). All available winterized units were concentrated behind the front around Moskva.

I felt rather confident about a winter offensive, but my forces were in drastic need of rest and regrouping. Under the Fire in the East victory conditions, it was most likely to end up a Soviet victory, yet I feel that the real strategic situation was much more balanced.

Second Game

My second game was somewhat different. We were six players, two teams of three, but neither team had an overall commander. I was in charge of the northern Soviet sector.

I was determined to see whether or not Finland would fall before a sustained 1941 Soviet thrust. I managed to convince my partners that such a victory in Finland would free enough forces to warrant the effort. Accordingly, the Leningrad MD abandoned its responsibility on the main western front to Western Front and only assumed defense of the narrow corridor north of Lake Peipus.

My plan was to deceive the Finnish front commander into thinking that I would make a Big Push along the coast straight towards Helsinki. So I set up all my forces in a convincing manner in the vicinity of Viipuri.

The real plan was to grab all siege artillery in the Soviet Union and whatever other artillery I could get, and send them with the infantry of the Leningrad MD along the coast. This would force the Finns to commit most of their strongest forces against them. Meanwhile, I carefully selected the initial placement of my mechanized forces to make them appear to be stationed right behind the main front ready to exploit a highly hypothetical breakthrough, but also enabling them to swing around the first lake barrier on their first turn of operations, assuming no Finnish unit stood in their path.

My little deception worked perfectly well and I had the satisfaction of contemplating the bewildered face of the Finnish C-in-C when he saw his flank threatened by two mechanized corps. No words can adequately describe such a state of bliss...

Yet Finland was no walkover, especially since German units began to reinforce the Finns. I had a tough time reducing 1B:0207 and there was some vicious fighting around 5B:4605. I had a mech corps reduced to cadre strength there.

An interesting development was the introduction of a large air force into the area. Arguing that it was useless to fritter away the VVS against the Luftwaffe while the VVS was still weak, I borrowed it to use against Finland. Operating mainly out of Leningrad, Viipuri, and a couple of permanent airfields built on the southern coast, by July I virtually the whole Soviet air force was engaged on the northern front. Needless to say, it greatly helped the coastal offensive.

The Finnish front commander soon began to beg for more and more German aircraft. He got quite a lot of them, but few enough to grant the valiant antifascist pilots a fair fight. The end result was a slackening of the offensive on the other fronts, while protracted and bloody air fighting took place in the Finnish skies.

Finally the Soviet forces broke through the Finnish lines on Aug I, cutting the supply of nearly all Axis forces in the Arctic (except the units close to Petsamo). Of the three all-important Finnish cities, only Helsinki remained in Axis hands. On Aug II, Axis units ran hell bent for leather towards Helsinki to man the final defensive line around the city.

There ended our game. I feel confident that I could have broken through and taken Helsinki sometime in September, thus putting Finland out of the war, and reducing the necessary Soviet commitment on the Arctic front to a handful of units around Murmansk. This would be just in time, too, as the Germans were closing in on Leningrad, and defensive reinforcements were sorely needed there.

The situation on the other fronts by then wasn't very good either. The southern commander had conducted a forward defense, exacting a serious toll from the Romanians, but in the process he had retained most of his initial forces (especially his mech corps), which were sorely needed further north.

On Aug II, the Germans from Army Group South launched a general offensive and shattered his MLR. Had we played the Soviet Aug II turn, it would have been a free-for-all, a situation quite similar to the 1943 race for the Dnepr in reverse.

Meanwhile, on the Central Front, the situation was degrading from turn to turn. A threat to Leningrad from the south was developing and the Soviet line grew thinner and thinner each turn despite the absorption of the largest part of the reinforcements.

Few reserves existed, this being largely due to the lack of an overall commander. We kept bickering for every single unit, and every single point of rail cap.

What saved us communists was that a similar situation existed within the German team. I have already pointed out what it meant to the use of the Luftwaffe. But there was also quite a wastage of resource points, and they kept snatching armor from each other.

The resulting chaos and absence of precise strategic Axis planning seriously slowed the pace of their advance.

As to the potential developments of the campaign, I can but make guesses. A key issue was whether Finland could be reduced before the situation became critical around Leningrad. It had become extremely urgent to send reinforcements to the Central Front, and to relieve it from the duty of defending Leningrad. Given that the Germans had barely advanced beyond Smolensk by the end of August, I don't see how they could have taken Moskva in 1941. On the other hand, they benefitted from their slow advance in that they had practically no supply problems.

The fall of Finland was doubly urgent, since I had used most of the winterized units to hold the line along the railway in the Arctic. These units were needed for the winter counteroffensive. Putting them in Finland seemed a reasonable decision. Up there, they ran extremely low risks of being destroyed. They were very close to a rail line, thus allowing them to be quickly redeployed if and when the need arose. Finally, their special winterized ability was put to use in the Arctic. Nevertheless, their placement on this front could only be temporary. Suitable replacements were scarce, and they would soon be badly needed elsewhere.

Conclusion

As a conclusion, I feel the Soviets are strongly favored in the Fire in the East scenario. I quite cannot see how the Germans could possibly reach their objectives before the onset of winter (it reminds me of the Invasion of Spain scenario: the Germans can't be stopped, but they have an awful time meeting their timetable).

I can't say for the campaign. Maybe the Germans are favored. In all the games I've played and witnessed and heard of, German losses were negligible. On the other hand, the Red Army paid heavily in blood. I feel quite pessimistic about the Spring 1942 Campaign. But again, since I've never played this far, my opinion has little factual basis.