Lawrence Hung  - Nov 22, 2005 7:26 am (#11235 Total: 11275)  
Now playing Sword of Rome,Suleiman the Magnificient,Bitter Woods,
Empire of the Sun,Blue vs. Gray,Group of Soviet Forces Germany,
ASLSK,Thirty Years War,Joan of Arc,The Big Push,Fortress Berlin,
Iron Tide,Clash of Giants 	 

AAR on Group of Soviet Forces Germany

As a growing child under the Cold War, I am always fascinated by the
subject "what-if the Soviets attack us?". I played NATO against Simon's
Soviets as a remembrance of this possible initial outbreak of WW3 in
Europe. The Soviets advanced, with the 8th as vanguard, through the
central West Germany along a wide front, from Czechoslovakia mountains
to Fulda Gap and Wesser in the center, to the city of Bremen, Luneburg
Heath region, in the north. 

The British Army of the Rhine took most of the blunt, with Belgium and
Netherlands forces rushing in from behind the back to stop the pouring
in of the Soviets. The Soviets seized the initial 3 turns of air
superiority (the first turn being automatic). Coupled with the initial
NATO forces dispositions, you just couldn't imagine how bad the
situation is for the NATO commander. The initial disposition was just
like the Soviets in the wake of German's attack in WW2. This time is
just the reverse. 

The Combat Table Result is a bit less than bloody than I would have
thought. Attackers suffer almost no result unless in an exchange, losing
the same number of steps the defenders had. In an exchange result,
although the defenders have to loose one step for the full-strength
unit, and eliminate the one-stepper, the stacking rule of 2 divisions
per hex in effect limits the combat losses significantly. Other combat
results mostly call for a defender retreat result, and in a game where
ZOC is virtually non-existent, they get to withdraw everywhere,
including towards enemy line. 

You would see the slower Soviets, while unified at a movement allowance
of 6, struggle to find space for the forward ahead. The NATO forces were
able to stop the Soviet onslaught generally along the Wesser river.
Several battles ensued along the river and we saw the seesaw action
going on as a result of the retreat results and mandatory advance after
combat. 

Simon had to find another attack spur either from the north or the
south, as the center encountered a
"one-hex-forward-and-one-hex-backward" situation. In the south, however,
the Soviets were bogged down in the cityfights of Munich. The French are
the main force came to the rescue while they draw supply and
reinforcements back from Strasbourg. Munich fell after 4 turns
eventually. 

The U.S. 82nd and 101st airborne units saw the day, of course, as they
can get picked up anywhere on map to a new place, except for the
impassable and adjacent to the enemy units. So they are particularly
useful to surround the enemy from the back, if the remaining hex is the
only way for the enemy units to exit. 

Electronic warfare is also featured but the impact is less than expected
of what we had perceived. Special forces (partisan renamed) can also
dragged both sides movement by adding 1 MP cost to enter any hex within
6 hexes of the special force unit. Airpower is neatly simulated and it
is the most interesting rule in the game. Combat losses from air bombing
are much higher than the ground war. 

Our game went for 7 out of the 15 turns only as we were not able to
complete the whole campaign (there is no shorter scenario). We guess
that the Soviet would not be able to reach the Rhine or Rhur area for
the remaining of the game. Partly, I think, it is because the Soviet's
attention would get off-tracked by the victory condition of capturing a
total of 32 city hexes - neutralization of West Germany. Obviously it is
something Simon wanted to achieve! 

The counters are flimsy but they are easily punched out. The
reduced-step side has the same attack-defense-movement as on the front.
The designer said it was on purpose because modern military units
strength stay about the same because of the technology. I guess the
relatively less loss ratio in modern warfare would also have something
to do with it. The map is road-less but it is clean and functional. As
to nuke, guess what. The Soviet player gets to set aside a certain
amount of money. If he chooses to use nuke, he lost the game and gives
the money to the NATO player. Nice rules. 

Overall, it is a game for enjoyment. Certainly there are a lot of
assumptions in it. I am less comfortable by the relatively minimal
treatment on combat losses and a road-less map, when the highway system
is so sophisticated all over Europe. I am sure I would have a different
strategy next time though if I were the Soviets: To the Rhine.