East Front Guess

Discussion in 'Command Ops Series' started by ioncore, Mar 30, 2018.

  1. ioncore

    ioncore Member

    Joined:
    Jun 1, 2015
    Messages:
    357
    Likes Received:
    77
    Just wanted to share with you guys some stuff from the shelf of mine. You can try to guess what East Front battle is it.

    [​IMG]

    [​IMG]

    The interesting thing about this map is that it is not drawn in map editor at all, but rather uses our new GIS import feature which is being developed for quite a time and which I believe I've briefly mentioned before (and which hopefully will be released to the public at some point).
    This is how the input data for the map looks like in my favourite GIS editor:

    [​IMG]
     
    #1 ioncore, Mar 30, 2018
    Last edited: Mar 31, 2018
    Miquel Ramirez and Bie like this.
  2. john connor

    john connor Member

    Joined:
    Oct 22, 2014
    Messages:
    2,086
    Likes Received:
    119
    Nice to see something eastern. Thanks. But is this a project that is (still) years away from release?
     
  3. ioncore

    ioncore Member

    Joined:
    Jun 1, 2015
    Messages:
    357
    Likes Received:
    77
    Not that much. Recently we had to do one side activity, which actually relied on this exact GIS import. And, while doing that activity, it turned out, the feature is already at the pretty decent state, however needs some user-friendliness rework and improvement (mostly user interface).
     
  4. kipanderson

    kipanderson Member

    Joined:
    Oct 23, 2014
    Messages:
    111
    Likes Received:
    3
    ioncore, hi,

    well, with the road and railway line running south west along ridgeline, hill top between two dips to north and south of road may just be Prokorovka? Kursk in other words?

    Great map, still incredibly keen to see CO move east, but sadly never seems to happen.

    All the best,
    Kip.
     
  5. ioncore

    ioncore Member

    Joined:
    Jun 1, 2015
    Messages:
    357
    Likes Received:
    77
    It's the meeting engagement at Radziechow, June 23rd, 1941, second day of Barbarossa, just about 30 km deep into the Soviet soil.
    Small and manageable 1-day-long brigade-sized scenario with a lot of armor (from both sides): Kampfgruppe of 15th Panzer Regiment and forward detachments of 297th Infantry Division versing elements of Soviet 10th and 32nd Tank Divisions.
    Picture below shows destroyed Soviet BT-7 in the vicinity of Radziechow, likely from 10th Tank Division.

    [​IMG]

    Just've noticed map picture quality is awful for some reason, so here's another try:
    [​IMG]
     
    #5 ioncore, Mar 31, 2018
    Last edited: Mar 31, 2018
  6. kipanderson

    kipanderson Member

    Joined:
    Oct 23, 2014
    Messages:
    111
    Likes Received:
    3
    ioncore, hi,

    thanks.. looks great.

    Hope we see a move east one day. Thinking about it, it may, stress may, be as long ago as fifteen years that I first came across CO and never an Eastern Front setting.. ; ).
    All the best,
    Kip.
     
  7. john connor

    john connor Member

    Joined:
    Oct 22, 2014
    Messages:
    2,086
    Likes Received:
    119
    I didn't mean how long before we get the map tool, Ioncore - I meant is an EF pack still years away?

    The map looks great. Barbarossa scenario? Sounds great. Can we share it?
     
  8. ioncore

    ioncore Member

    Joined:
    Jun 1, 2015
    Messages:
    357
    Likes Received:
    77
    Ah, I see. I think EF will come again into the focus as soon as we finish the ongoing major patch. One possible option I'd vote for is to start with an EF minipack release - exactly to avoid that years-away-approch we've been following so far.
    This Barbarossa scenario I hope we could check soon (I need to review new vehicles/weapons database, and then also test it myself of course).
     
  9. john connor

    john connor Member

    Joined:
    Oct 22, 2014
    Messages:
    2,086
    Likes Received:
    119
    OK! Well that's the most exciting news we've had in a very long time.

    But meanwhile, Bradley at Bay, right?

    But even before that - this 'major patch'? I can't recall what's in that and what isn't. Some fixes for the arty situation would seem urgent to me. I mean the AI opponent seriously underusing the arty. Anyone agree?
     
  10. ioncore

    ioncore Member

    Joined:
    Jun 1, 2015
    Messages:
    357
    Likes Received:
    77
    Hm, need to doublecheck SITREP thread, I thought Dave put some patch hints over there...

    Yeah, this is of course the first one in the queue.
     
  11. Grognerd

    Grognerd Member

    Joined:
    Nov 28, 2017
    Messages:
    57
    Likes Received:
    9
    Well, can't wait for an Eastern Front pack.

    I would just suppose the orders delay would be very different between the two sides? Considering the state of the Soviet radio nets and such, would think the delay would allow for the realistic portrayal of the vast differences in operations between the two sides.
     
  12. ioncore

    ioncore Member

    Joined:
    Jun 1, 2015
    Messages:
    357
    Likes Received:
    77
    There's lot of specifics one would want to model if they want to have a truly realistic/historical EF combat model.
    Communication is one important thing, supply and logistics is another. Intel is perhaps worth to be mentioned as well (if you study German combat documents and Soviet ones you'd often be amazed how huge is the difference between their intel accuracy at the tactical and operational level). Speaking of armoured units, I'd mention recovery & maintenance as well (however it is not modelled by CmdOps engine itself, it's still quite possible to model this with initial scenario setups). Careful investigation of actual (historical) Soviet decisions and goals would also help you with setting up the historically accurate scenario objectives (as historically these were often inadequate and based on poor intel, thus forcing Soviets to attack relentlessly where defense would make much more sense).
    At least, these points are all valid for 1941-1943 (which is my primary research interest), for 1944-1945 the difference may not be so obvious, or Soviet might be even better than Germans, thanks to massive lend-lease equipment flow, Soviets' experience gains and also to Wehrmacht's very own deterioration.
    PS And this is why scenario creation is so amazing and fun, lol.
     
  13. simovitch

    simovitch Member

    Joined:
    Nov 15, 2014
    Messages:
    583
    Likes Received:
    38
    We are in one of those holding patterns as Dave get's his new server on line and is likely trying to generate a living wage by other means. Nothing compares to the COTA waiting period though as we tried to chase down the dreaded "out of sync" and other bugs. Oi, that was like almost 2 years of waiting before we could really test anything.
     
  14. john connor

    john connor Member

    Joined:
    Oct 22, 2014
    Messages:
    2,086
    Likes Received:
    119
    It is feeling like a very long pause though....
     
  15. Kurt

    Kurt Member

    Joined:
    Jan 4, 2015
    Messages:
    890
    Likes Received:
    36
  16. GoodGuy

    GoodGuy Member

    Joined:
    May 20, 2015
    Messages:
    312
    Likes Received:
    70
    Ah, the Battle of Brody. The Germans referred to it as "Tank battle of Dubno-Luzk-Brody" or "Battle of Dubno-Luzk-Riwne".
    According to Christer Bergström, in "Barbarossa – The Air Battle: July–December 1941" (2007), the German Luftwaffe destroyed 201 Russian tanks during the battle.
    According to some sources, the 8th Mech Corp alone had lost 800 tanks during the battle, but D.I. Ryabyshev, commander of the 8th Mech Corps, stated that the Corps had ~932 tanks (authorized strength 1,031) , where only 169 of them were modern medium and heavy tanks, and 763 of them obsolete light and medium tanks, around the onset of the battle, and 207 tanks left on 1st of July. That would be a tank loss of around 78%.

    http://english.battlefield.ru/battles/22-1941/84-8th-mechanized-corps1941.html (the original was translated around 2002 ?)

    Some sources insist that the 8th and 15th Mech Corps lost 85–90 %, the 9th and the 19th Mech Corps 70 % (each), and the 4th Mech Corps 60 % of their tanks.

    Looking at Ryabyshev's numbers, the 8th Mech Corps had lost 78% of its tanks, not 90%. It seems like Author Victor Kamenir stuck to Ryabshev's number in his book "Bloody Triangle: The Defeat of Soviet Armor in the Ukraine, June 1941" from 2009, he mentioned 207 remaining tanks.

    Some sources indicate that the number of remaining tanks amounted to 66 in the 9th Corps (supposedly 70% lost), 35 in the 19th Corps (supp. 70% lost) and 33 in the 22nd Corps (90%), after the battle.
    These conflicting numbers (some authors - like Glantz here and there- have a tendency to deduct the number of destroyed tanks either from the required/authorized strength, or from the number of total tanks possed by a given unit, instead of trying to research accurate actual strength numbers that considers the number of non-operational tanks - means the ones under major repairs), along with the contradicting percentages (like with the Ryabyshev-example above) provided by some authors and the censorship of the Glawit (or Glavit, the head office for literature affairs and publishing, the supreme censorship and publications board) make it hard to dig out accurate numbers.

    Except for Samisdat and Tamisdat (self-published literature, articles and documents in Warsaw Pact countries which used to be spread via various channels, but also declared to be illegal by the government institutions) sources, all Russian sources published before 1987 - the year when the censorship board in Russia had lost its jurisdiction - have to be taken with a pinch of salt, as troop and tank losses were often downplayed or manipulated.
    Not sure how the Putin administration is handling military documents, some journalists indicate that there's a tendency to cover up (extremely) high losses (suffered by Russian forces during WWII) again.

    Whatsoever, that's an interesting battle, where Popel's group managed to get in the rear of the 11th Panzer Division at Dubno, effectively cutting off the division's supply lines (completely). Most Russian units (especially the 8th Mech Corps) suffered of various miscommunications, failing radios and contradicting orders, even up to the point where the briefcase with written orders for Ryabyshev had burned during the crash landing of an aerial messenger, and where the pilot could then only state that the documents were orders, but that he did not know the content. With this chaotic setting, the Russians were unable to exploit the several German weak spots and their imprudence during the onslaught, except for Popel's bold move. But Popel did not get any response from higher echelons when asking for reinforcements and resupplies to bolster the bridgehead.

    For a realistic setting, the bad communication (which could be emulated with additional order delays, but also with an implementation of radio failures and insufficient radio ranges - question is whether the Russians mistrusted radio coms in front of the enemy, or if their lack of long range radios appeared to be the more vital factor) should be rendered in an EF installment.
     
    #16 GoodGuy, Apr 20, 2018
    Last edited: Apr 20, 2018
  17. ioncore

    ioncore Member

    Joined:
    Jun 1, 2015
    Messages:
    357
    Likes Received:
    77
    My strong belief/wish is that we shall see "Dubno Pack" (or whatever brand one'd pick for that battle) one day. However that would definitely require some changes to the engine. I'm not talking about major blow-up redesigns here (like Mounted Ops, which I believe is definitely nice to have, but not necessarily *required* for East Front), but rather about a number of small but important "featurettes" which should be simple to implement.

    As you've mentioned this, I have been working with combat documents in Russian Central Military Archive for years. There are lot of certain domains/areas which are still classified from Soviet times (<offtopic>and will remain classified for years, I think, unless some dramatic changes occur in Russia itself, which is quite unlikely imho</offtopic>) but normally (well - in most cases) you're able to find what you need. Reminds me of one particular case when the folder with Front-level loss reports was still classified, but I nevertheless managed to find all the required loss data in folders of the lower-level formations (Armies, Corps, Divisions etc) which were declassified.
     
    GoodGuy likes this.
  18. GoodGuy

    GoodGuy Member

    Joined:
    May 20, 2015
    Messages:
    312
    Likes Received:
    70
    That's not off-topic. The state, amount and accessibility of source material affects a military simulation that strives to accurately depict historic events in military history.

    Funny bit, lol. Oi, but you should not have mentioned it, now red tape will classify it again. Russian eyes are everywhere ! ;)
    The Russians like hacking :p
     
  19. ioncore

    ioncore Member

    Joined:
    Jun 1, 2015
    Messages:
    357
    Likes Received:
    77
    Lol, yeah, they are rigging this thread right now.

    Actually, there even was a procedure where you could request a declassification of the particular folder you're interested in. As far as I've heard, the response was mostly positive (meaning folder was declassified). But, being a foreigner, I didn't want to actively engage myself with Russian bureaucracy (declassification would take some months, before the board reviews your application - at least that's how I was told), moreover - as already mentioned - I usually was able to find workarounds to get the data I needed.

    Regarding the reason why some folders are still classified - they are different, and quite often have nothing to do about about the nature of the data (losses etc). For example, all the topographical maps of scale more than 1:100 000 are still classified in Russia. So if, say, the 400-pages folder happened to contain one (!) sheet of map dated 1942 (!) of 1:50 000 or 1:25 000 scale the complete (!) folder will be classified. Don't ask me why, that's how it works.
    I was told this kind of stupid classifications are declassified by the board with ease (well, just wait some months), but, again, I've never actually needed that.

    But some folders are really classified because of the data itself (normally, these are all data about accidents, prisoners' interrogations, court martials etc) or the "level" of data (like General Staff level, Front level and that kind of high-ranked things) and I'd guess you need to be a Russian citizen and possess some kind importance/trust in Russia to get these declassified. Just guessing, though.
     
  20. jimcarravallah

    Joined:
    Oct 20, 2014
    Messages:
    789
    Likes Received:
    66
    I think in some cases, maintaining the bureaucracy and the number of jobs that manages the classification process is more important than protecting the classification itself.

    Early in my career as a civilian working for the military, I watched long time technicians who were revered for their depth of knowledge of some of the arcane tasks we were responsible for addressing. If you asked the boss for help in how to address the problem, they'd tell you "go see So and So." When you asked So and So for help in resolving a problem in that area, they'd "take care of it" for you instead of telling you what to do. It became convenient because instead of addressing a problem themselves, the junior technicians would go to the "expert" to get it done.

    When I moved up a bit in the organization, and got tired of the delays that were built up as the "lone rangers" took care of issues, I started looking into resolving the problems myself, since I couldn't move on with other aspects of the job until the problems were corrected.

    It turned out a lot of that "specialized knowledge" was actually pretty simple tasks that the "skilled one" kept to themselves, because it kept them employed and paid without cutting a lot of sweat in accomplishing what they needed to do. They worked harder at protecting that "knowledge" and maintaining the job security than they'd ever work at the task itself.
     
    ioncore likes this.

Share This Page