This may be the start of a more or less semi-regular column on Europa, maybe, but don't tell anyone. No promises -- understand? And now, with the bold beginning out of the way, here goes:

TEN 6 was great! I never thought that TEN would come so far so fast! Let me put in my bid for more charts, graphs, maps, and artwork--without decreasing the information content, of course!

Shelby Stanton's "Facts Behind the Counters" series continues its excellent coverage of the research behind the German OB in Scorched Earth. In TEN 6, he mentions forming HSSPF "divisions" from SS-Police regiments. I suggest that you allow this only when using the optional partisan rule. In the absence of the partisans, the German player can bypass the garrisoning rule sufficiently to build up the divisions and use them in the front line. In reality, this would not have happened, as regiments were needed to counter the partisan threat and because the HSSPFs were not front-line combat headquarters. With the partisan rule in force, then you get the correct trade-off between the abilities of the regiments and having HSSPF divisions.

Shelby gives the historical composition of the four HSSPFs, which varied from three to four regiments each. Since the rest of Scorched Earth shows generalized breakdowns, even for SS panzer divisions with their many different organizations, then we probably should generalize the HSSPF, too:

4-8 Pol XX (SS-Pol)
3x 1-8 Pol III (SS-Pol)

New SE Units: 4x 4-8 Pol XX A, B, C, GG

While we're at it, let's take a quick look at the German Army security divisions. It we can build up the SS-Police regiments, can we break down the security divisions? Yes. I originally planned a set of breakdowns for three security divisions, to provide the Germans some flexibility with their security assets, but scrubbed them when I ran out of room in the countermix. Here goes:

3-5 Sec XX
3x 1-5 Sec III

New SE Units: 9x1-5 Sec III A, A, A, B, B, B, C, C, C

Note that the HSSPF and security divisions break down into unsupported regiments--this is deliberate. The divisional unit has barely enough artillery and centralized command to rate as supported, but its assets, when broken down, are too thinly spread out for support effectiveness. Somebody could now question whether these divisions should support units stacked with them, since their self-support abilities are so limited. There's something to this argument, but it's definitely not worth adding another special rule to cover it. By the way, all this on HSSPF and security divisions is OPTIONAL.

Shelby details the reasons why we don't track the checkered history of battalions blasted in the east to the same extent we do divisions. If you're not satisfied, think of it as only a temporary irritation. In Grand Europa, you'll have control over how to get your battalions out of the replacement pool and where then to send them. Hmmm--doesn't sound that exciting to me; I can waft. If you still don't buy it, try this: The net effect of losing non-divisional formations is that other theaters, particularly the western and Italian ones, grab them when they get restored. Accordingly, starting on Jan 143, during the German initial phase of every I turn, randomly choose one German Army non-divisional unit in the replacement pool and remove it. This, of course, is OPTIONAL.

Charles Sharp's Soviet articles complement Shelby's efforts nicely. His suggestion to add a conditional reinforcement, the Podolsk Art X, at Moskva is fine (and OPTIONAL). However, I mildly disagree that the Flerov rocket artillery battalion should be withdraw from play in September. This is one valid interpretation (use it if you wish), but here is mine: Losses to this unit during the summer were sufficient, in game terms, to consider it eliminated. In other words, it goes into the replacement pool and then never gets replaced.

Conditional Reinforcement.

At Moskva: 1x 2-3-5 Art X Pod
New SE Unit: 1x 2-3-5 Art X Pod

Since I gave the Germans a free optional rule above, here's one to go along with the rocket artillery. The first time a side uses a rocket artillery unit in an attack, roll a die to determine if it achieves surprise/rocket fear. On a roll of 1-2, no effect. On a roll of 4-6, surprise/fear occurs: modify the combat die roll by +1. As long as the last rocket atiack you made achieved surprise/fear, roll for this again when you make your next rocket attack. Once you get a no effect, don't roll again for this. This rule applies to Soviet rocket artillery in Fire in the East/Scorched Earth but not German rocket artillery. (It's debatable, but the Soviet soldiers seemed not to suffer from rocket fear (or Stuka fear, for that matter) anywhere near the same as other armies.) It also applies to German nebelwerfers in Torch/War in the Desert. (It'll probably be applicable to German nebelwerfers in Second Front, too. The western Allies, particularly the U.S. Army, seems to have suffered from nebelwerferphobia, as well as 88-phobia and Tiger-phobia--but more on that some other time!) Again, this rule is OPTIONAL, and, in my opinion, probably not worthusing-- which is why I didn't put it in Scorched Earth.

Louis Rotundo's article was great. His conclusion--that the Red Army stopped the Germans, not weather or distance--is right on the money.

Some notes

1) The 100 independent tank battalions he mentions are factored into other Soviet formations in the Scorched Earth OB. And sorry, I'm not going to give an optional rule for making up and adding in 100 1-0-8 (at best) tank battalions!

2) Louis mentions that the existing DNO (militia) rifle divisions were all converted to regular army divisions in (late) September 1941. Scorched Earth handles this differently. The change referred to by Louis was mostly a paper transaction: the unit lost its DNO designation and picked up a regular army divisional number, with no reorganization or reequipping at the time. Scorched Earth tries to show the effective reorganization of the militia into regulars, via disbanding with a gain in RPs for the combat experience the surviving militia gained. Here's the history of their conversions:

Militia Unit: Became Regular Army Unit

Leningrad DNO:
1 disbanded due to losses
2 9.41: 85 RD (Rifle Division)
3 disbanded due to losses
1 Gds 9.41: 80 RD
2 Gds disbanded due to losses
3 Gds 9.41: 44 RD
4 Gds 9.41: 86 RD
5 9.41: 13 RD
6 9,41: 189 RD
7 9.41: 56 RD

Moskva DN
1 9.41: 60 RD
2 9.41: 2 RD
4 9.41: 110 RD
5 9.41:113 RD
6 9.41:160 RD
7 9.41: 29 RD
8 9.41: 8 RD
9 9.41:139 RD
13 9.41:140 RD
17 9.41:17 RD
18 9.41:18 RD
21 9.41:173 RD
2M 1.42:129 RD
3 Com 1.42:130 RD
4M 1.42:155 RD
5M 1.42:158 RD

Other DN
1 Crimean 9.41: 320 RD
1 Ivanovo 9.41: 332 RD
1 Polar 9.41:186 RD
2 Crimean 9.41: 321 RD
2 Ivanovo 3.42:49 RD
3 Crimean 9.41:172 RD
Kremenchug destroyed? or disbanded?
Odessa 9.41: 422 RD
Stalino 9.41: 383 RD
Voroshilovgrad 9.41:395 RD
Yaroslavl 9.41: 234 RD

Notes: a) Louis mentions a total of 35 militia rifle divisions, from Soviet sources, while the above list shows 37. The 35 count is as of 1 Dec. 1941, which doesn't include the 2 Ivanovo, which stayed in the rear until early 1942. This drops my count to 36, which is still one over. The Kremenchug division disappeared in September 1941, probably annihilated in the Kiev pocket. Since it wasn't around for the late September reorganization of the militia, I suspect the Soviets didn't count it in their 35 total.
b) The 7th DNO of Leningrad, listed above as reorganizing in September, doesn't appear in Scorched Earth until the Oct 141 turn. The 7th was raised in September and wasn't combat ready, in game terms, until October, hence its game appearance.

Stuart Lee's "Of ZOC's and Things"

This contains a couple of misconceptions, which leads him astray on ZOCs. The biggest is his "open terrain" argument (brigades and regiments get ZOCs in the zones A (the Arctic), F (the North African desert), and G (the Soviet deserts) because the open terrain there lets them exert control--hence they should have ZOCs elsewhere, too). Open terrain isn't the reason for ZOCs, which is fortunate, since zone A (the Arctic) is mostly poor terrain. Instead, a prime reason for giving brigades/regiments ZOCs in these zones is the extremely limited road nets there. Few players realize how road-bound WW2 forces were-including completely non-motorized forces. Not only for the supply columns, but for basic movement itself. (If you've done any extensive cross-country hiking, you'll realize what I mean. You can go much faster for the same effort on smoothed dirt roads or levelled parkland than you can over natural terrain. Even open terrain such as fields or pastures have sufficient unevenness or obstacles to slow you down significantly.) In areas with very few roads, a small force can spread its assets around sufficiently to control the roads and other important approaches over an area, while elsewhere the density of the road net requires a larger force--a division.

The other misconception is that a stack of small units is equivalent to a larger unit. That is, a stack of regiments is the same as a division, or a stack of battalions is the same as a brigade. Sorry, they're not, and that's why the Europa stacking and ZOC rules are the way they are.

Try this trick question: What's the difference between a standard infantry division (three infantry regiments, an artillery regiment, and a recon battalion) and a stack of three infantry regiments, an artillery regiment, and a recon battalion? The answer is--the divisional headquarters! The HQ controls and coordinates its divisional elements--crucial functions. Also, its elements have been trained to operate together, and usually can do so with a minimum of confusion. A stack of regiments lacks this built-in divisional advantage; hence its lesser abilities in stacking and ZOCs. (The same holds true for a stack of independent battalions versus a regiment or brigade with its HO controlling its elements.)

The net result is that I think we can dispense with Stuart's rather complicated modifications to the ZOC rule.

Deen Wood suggests that combat occurring in a hex should damage airbases there. That's historically correct, and I have fooled around with a collateral damage rule for some time, along these lines: In each attack airbases, rail lines, and ports in the defender's hex (and, if the bridge rule is used, bridges on hexsides of the defender's hex) may be damaged. Immediately after the attack is resolved, roll one die for each of the following elements that are present: rail line, airbase, port, each bridge. Modify the die roll as given on the Collateral Damage Table and then find the result there: [See the table below.]

I've hesitated to include this even as an optional rule, because it's a lot of work for not much effect. Also, it needs considerable polishing to make it easier to use.