It’s a point-and-shoot. Part of the appeal. Germans barely stoppable, and the Soviet body count just grows and grows. But they just keep coming…..and that changes the German commander’s view about four turns in. How In The Hell do I stop them? So you keep looking at the table twice a day.
That’s the other part of the appeal. You appreciate Heinz G’s Quandry.
Here’s an excellent link. I wish they had kept at it.
https://grognard.com/zines/sr/spi_no1.pdf
Finished off a long and torturous session with the venerable and highly rated Panzergruppe Guderian.
Getting it on the table was a lengthy process. Purchased on E-Bay eons ago. Arrived in fetid condition, probably stored in a basement in Missouri for the past 20 years. No slur on The Show Me State, as I lived there for 10 years, and had a number of games go bad in the humidity.
Game spent about 6 months in a car freshener laced garbage bag along with some really smelly Osprey Men At Arms books. Rules had to be copied since the originals were falling apart. Lucky the copier didn’t succumb.
It is a fun play, until the German player has to get involved in (I think unavoidable) attritional showdowns at or east of Smolensk.
The unknown Soviet unit strengths make it a very good solo game. The Soviets keep throwing units into hasty defensive lines, while the Germans try their best to outflank them, and wait for their infantry to appear, sew up the pockets, and get the ZOC kills. Unfortunately, the infantry units are a little late in getting on the map.
My mistake was to leave armored units to seize Smolensk, rather than push them east. Again, if I’d been more patient, the infantry would eventually have arrived. But, time is of the essence in this game.
Also, once a unit is in contact, it is committed and can only leave its opponent’s ZOC through victory or an unfavorable combat outcome. Panzer losses reduce the ability to attack at doubled strength.
So, why long and torturous? Just couldn’t bring myself to get muddy and bloody east of Smolensk once the Soviet defenses had really coalesced. Kept looking at the game table and finding beer to drink and/or chores to do.
The key to this last defensive line was using Soviet commanders – who have a command radius allowing units to use full movement – as “shepherds” to help units into action quickly. Rail movement is limited, and the German interdictions drastically reduce rail movement. So, getting everyone moving west is a Soviet priority.
The Soviets also have a limited interdiction capability. This is limited to twice a game, but given the German line of communications bottleneck, an interdiction reduce literally all German units east of Smolensk to half strength during that turn. Timing here is critical for Soviet success.
By Turn 8, it was coming down to one turn of die rolls for the Germans. Without a breakthrough, stalemate. Rolled them, and the Germans remained locked up, with only a limited reserve too weak to continue east.
A marginal victory for the Germans.
Here are Tim’s thoughts:
During Turn 2, the Germans advanced in the north and south, cleaning up Soviet delaying units in the center. The Soviets pushed reinforcements to conform with the requirement for a continuous line along the Don, as well as in the center. For the Soviets, the initial crisis has seemed to pass.
The Axis continues to develop its attacks in the north and south, while cautiously advancing in the center.
Soviet reinforcements continue to arrive, with some deploying on the south map anticipating the Axis will “turn the corner” at Rostov.
Heavy combat takes place in the north and south, with Axis units now advancing in the center,
Intense fighting continues. The Germans take Rostov and begin moving south. Soviet forces tenaciously defend in the north, but gaps are appearing in the center. Fortunately, the bulk of the Axis armor is deployed elsewhere.
As usual, we had to pick it up just when things were getting interesting. BTW, this is a 27 turn game…..
Lots of mixed opinions on this game, with the negative a little on the harsh side.
Special rules make Drive on Stalingrad different from its PGG predecessors. For the Axis player, these rules reflect the overarching goal of securing oil resources in the south, Hitler’s operational interference, and competing manpower requirements at Leningrad. For the Soviets, the rules reflect Stalin’s directives and political considerations. Failure to adhere to these special rules results in either a loss of victory points or units.
Most of the on-line discussion centers around the “Hitler Directives” rules. At the beginning of each turn, the German player roles a single die. On an “odd” result, the Directive Table is consulted. These directives involve operational priorities and troop dispositions. A directive remains in effect until it is superceded by another directive.
Hitler’s impact is also reflected in “No Retreat” orders, and the imperative to capture cities. Failure to adhere to these guidelines results in a loss of victory points.
Another Axis operational constraint is “Divisions Across The Don”. If the number of divisions exceeds those called for by the current Hitler Directive, then those divisions are removed for use on other fronts.
The Axis Commander is also limited in the number of mechanized divisions allowed on the north map. If this number is exceeded, these excess divisions are removed.
Both Soviet and Axis players must maintain “Continuous Fronts” on the South map, in which each hex must be occupied by a unit or a zone of control. If not, victory points are lost.
The Soviet player may withdraw from enemy zones of control during a turn, but loses victory points. And, the Soviet player must defend East of the Don River, or lose victory points.
Sure, these rules effect how the game is played; but they are part of the game. Without these rules, the game wouldn’t exist within any historical context. Frustrating, yes. Maybe in this regard, it can be considered a simulation. Axis and Soviet commanders were influenced by higher leadership, and these influence/interference directly effected operations.
Flawed? That’s always a matter of perspective and, even, taste. For me, its flaws are fewer than many games I’ve played.
Had a great experience with Drive On Stalingrad (DOS) this weekend over at Tim’s. Of course, there was football to view, but we were able to get several turns in after our late Friday afternoon setup and initial play-thru. As always, the first turn was brutal, so it was a quick re-set for Saturday’s action.
The basic system is taken from Panzergruppe Guderian. However, there are important differences. I’ll discuss these as the game narrative progresses.
Victory is determined by cities controlled, each of these has point value. The Axis player (yes, there are Romanians and Hungarians) automatically wins if his victory point total is three times greater than his opponent.
Each side has constraints to their initial dispositions. The Soviet player must remain on or within a ZOC of an initial defense line stretching across the northernmost of the two game maps. The Axis player cannot use all of his units during the first turn.
Here’s the initial setup. North is to the left. Only the ten or so hexes to the right are in the South map.
The Soviet player has a very limited ability to start with a defense in depth. On the other hand, the inability to leave ZOCs slows progress for the Axis player, unless a Soviet unit is eliminated or forced to withdraw two hexes. However, the CRT is relatively bloodless up to 10:1 odds, with most results requiring the choice between withdrawal or a step loss(es). Punching big holes for the second movement phase (armor/mechanized units only), takes time.
Tim concentrated his armor in the North and South, aggressively advancing in the North.
The Soviets receive 27 (!) units as reinforcements in Turn 1. A total of three can be placed in a major city, with one each in smaller cities. Eleven units can move up to 40 hexes by rail. All I could do was patch up some type of defense in the North, and start pushing reinforcements eastward as fast as possible, using every city I could.
One terrible mistake was to allow the German SS unit to cut my rail line at Voronezh. Any reinforcements coming by rail from the north had “to take the long way around.” As a result, three Soviet units were left as a “forlorn hope” to hopefully slow down an Axis infantry advance in the center.
Cranked out another couple of turns.
Axis was able to make good their deep penetration in the center, as well as develop a flanking attack northwest towards Kharkov. However, the Soviets have built up a defense to counter the panzers, as well as using the rules to “ZOC Up” Axis infantry attacks in the south.
This is the real challenge faced by the Axis Commander. Soviet units buy time through engaging German units that are unable to exploit tactical success due to the Soviet ability to retreat, perhaps with a one-step loss, but maintain zones of control that limit Axis advances. Even when there is the possibility for a “ZOC Kill”, a result of less than “2” steps, stops the Axis for an additional turn. And, in the case of Soviet units with a defense strength greater than “6”, the placement of a step reinforcement.
Will develop Axis attack towards Kharkov.
But, for now, off to PDX for Drive On Stalingrad with Tim.
Charts, Errata and a better understanding of the rules does make a difference. Shocking! Been learning and relearning this for decades.
While the actual CRT is somewhat bloodier, the Errata is crucial. I caught the wrong lettering for the entry areas, but missed the difference in setup for four Soviet units. Absolutely changes the game. These units were in the vicinity of Stalino and “V” (see previous post), but now are in the front lines directly opposite the panzer divisions. This makes a breakout just that much tougher. Here’s a link to the Errata.
Another big mistake on the first game was the assumption that the Germans could automatically withdraw from a ZOC. Oh No. Soviets can using the withdrawal chart, but the Germans cannot. This means they are “locked” in ZOCs. Makes maneuver difficult. This was a topic of some discussion in blogs, but the consensus seemed to be that the system worked just fine with this apparent limitation.
The Germans opened the new game with another attack in the center. It made limited gains, primarily due to the change in dispositions discussed above. The panzer units are not that strong, even with the doubling of combat power due to unit integrity. With the center holding, the Soviets had the luxury of shipping their reinforcements to Stalino, with local units building a defense in depth against the immediate panzer threat.
The German used both infantry and armor units to continue the attack in the center during Turn 2, causing Soviet units to pull back. Their second movement phase was used to envelope exposed Soviet divisions. The Soviets countered by minor shifts in units (their primary units were ZOC’s Up), and building a defensive line running Gorlovka-Stalino-Taganrog.
Played four turns of Rostov. Won’t discuss the rules problems….well it was really a chart problem…..enough.
Here’s an abbreviated account. Will do my customary re-set after butchering a first playing.
The Germans opened by blasting through the Soviet Center , racing eastward. The Soviets responded by holding the shoulders of the salient, and rushing reinforcements to a defensive line forming in the vicinity of Voroshilovgrad (to be referred to as “V” from here on out). The Soviets receive four randomly drawn units each of first few turns, then three. Rail movement sped the reinforcements westward despite Axis aircraft interdiction.
Both panzers and their supply units continued eastward during Turn 2, with forward elements coming into contact with the Soviets. A probing attack pushed back Soviet units defending “V”. The supply units were able to maintain their “chain” of six hexes (roads count 1/2 hex). Loss of supply halves movement and combat strength.
The Soviets continued to feed troops into the threatened area running from “V” to Rostov. Attempts to withdraw from their exposed salient west of Kharkov failed, though without loss.
During Turn 3, the full strength panzers maneuvered to envelope Soviet units, but the attacks failed to inflict any real damage. This was despite a doubling of attack strength for armor and mechanized units due to divisional integrity. Meanwhile, strong infantry units entered from the western map edge.
The Soviets continued to buildup their defenses, now extending their defensive line southeast to Rostov, itself.
The German infantry opened Turn 4 by penetrating the southern flank of the Soviets defending Kharkov. However, the eastern advanced ground to a halt waiting for reinforcements.
A challenging game. With the proper CRT and game unique charts covering disengagement of Soviet forces and weather, it should be even better. Either way, the Axis has its work cut out!
Not quite, but damn near. Eclipses, Family, Friends…..and about 4,000 auto miles.
New game on the table before I launch off again. A relative of Panzergruppe Guderian – Rostov. Part of the Army Group South quad game, also released as a single game, and then released much later in S&T,
Same untried Soviet units, but both sides can move armored/mech/cavalry units a second time during a turn. Lots of exclusive rules.
Have it set up and will start this evening. Here’s the initial deployment as prescribed by the rules.
