Sean Chick
United States
Hammond
Louisiana
-
Destruction of Army Group Center is a magazine wargame on Operation Bagration, which is perhaps the most humiliating defeat ever suffered by a German army, except perhaps the 1806 Jena Campaign. Gaming such a campaign can be difficult to simulate, but veteran designer Ty Bomba has pulled it off, arguably surpassing the old SPI classic Destruction of Army Group Center.
Gameplay (70/70): Destruction of Army Group Center uses the classic format of hex and counter, but at the scale of Russian armies and German corps, keeping the unit density low. Every turn is a week of battle. Each turn starts with the Soviet player receiving replacements and reinforcements, engaging in combat, moving, and then engaging in more combat, followed by movement. The Germans repaet the same, although they'll fight few battles. The units, with a few exceptions, all have a movement factor of seven.
Southeastern Area of Operations
Combat is not based on odds calculations, but instead upon the margin between attacker and defender. In general, the CRT is friendly to the attacker, while terrain, rather than doubling or tripling the defender, merely adds more to their combat strength. The result is an attack heavy system in which the Soviets usually have free reign until their supplies run out. Until then, the only real Soviet disadvantage lies in the hits they take in battle. These can be brutal, as German units are better at absorbing damage. Otherwise, the advantages lie with the commies.
That is pretty much the game in a nutshell. The system is tight and simulates the campaign with little fuss. The fight, move, fight, and move sequence makes achieving an exploitation a real possibility, negating perfect defense strategies and rewarding well thought moves. For instance, a local German counterattack may work, but it is possible that such units could be pursuing a fool’s errand as the Soviets can double move, and therefore pull off large pockets. Indeed, the relatively bloodless CRT practically implores you to encircle your enemy rather than overpower him. The game is more about maneuver, and the Germans in particular have to careful as they try to stem the tide.
Accessibility (6/10): Here is where the game presents the most issues. It is not that Bomba is bad rules writer, but rather that he over explains everything, making a simple game a bit harder to grasp at first. Bomba needs to take some cues from Zucker and the folks at Columbia, who are the masters of rules writing. Still, the game is simple enough that problems will not be too overwhelming. However, this is not a good introductory wargame.
Components (7/10): The map won’t win any awards but it is hardly an eye sore. Pieces are large, a bit dull, but easy to read. In short this is a solid effort, and commendable for Decision Games, a company whose component quality has been lacking until recently.
Slice of the Map
Historical Quality (10/10): Bomba did an excellent job here, as the chrome included is light, but actually effects the operational situation. Soviet mechanized cavalry are particularly quick, while partisans can slow down the Germans, and the Soviet logistics will collapse as the campaign wears on. Best of all, the game is imbalanced. Yes, I like the fact that the Soviet’s are favored, because honestly that was just how dire the situation was for the hapless men of Army Group Center and North. However, it does not make for a good game, but here Bomba comes to the rescue with three excellent variants. One tests a Soviet push from the south, which was what Hitler and his generals expected. The other gives the Germans 5th Panzer Army, while another provides them with more desperately needed replacement points. All told these make the game much more evenly marched. Best of all, they are within the realm of historical possibility, and thus allow players to explore other possibilities.
Overall (93/100): Destruction of Army Group Center is a gem of a game. The rules are fast yet history is well served. The varied start up possibilities are a godsend and the chrome is just right. This is my third favorite magazine game, right behind When Eagles Fight and Proud Monster: The Barbarossa Campaign. For that reason I really want to see this scale and system applied to other World War II battles, especially those that could be particularly difficult to simulate, such as the Ruhr Pocket, final Russian offensives, and the fall of France.
-
-
Nice! One of my favorites as well.
Ooo! Fall of France. Begins daydream...
-
Derek Green
United States
Lexington
Kentucky
-
I know that you've been waiting on a game like this for a long time!
-
Mike Smith
United Kingdom
Wigton
Cumbria
-
Some comments on this seem to suggest that it is relatively balanced in the historical scenario, which puzzles me because it seemed very tilted to the Soviets in my 3 plays. I think the key to really killing the Axis is to use your air primarily for interdiction if they try to withdraw intact. The Germans are done for if they run because of this, and done for if they try to stand in the defense line instead.
-
4.1 Rules
United States
Rutland
Vermont
Drop the dice and step away from the table!
Move along, nothing to see here!
-
Over on the CSW forum for DoAGC the discussion centers around how unbalanced this games is:
http://talk.consimworld.com/WebX?14@332.Pp0RcEfJYNN.16885947...
-
Robert Wilson
Canada
Riverview
New Brunswick
-
Well Im assuming a game called " the destruction of AGC" would involve the Germans getting, err Destroyed
Unless the game is unbalanced to the Germans
-
Sean Chick
United States
Hammond
Louisiana
-
Mantuanwar wrote: Some comments on this seem to suggest that it is relatively balanced in the historical scenario, which puzzles me because it seemed very tilted to the Soviets in my 3 plays. I think the key to really killing the Axis is to use your air primarily for interdiction if they try to withdraw intact. The Germans are done for if they run because of this, and done for if they try to stand in the defense line instead.
I'd say I was pretty clear about the historical scenario being hard for Germans. The historical scenario is wildly imbalanced, which I think is apt. What saves this as a game is the variants for replacements and 5th Panzer Army. It then still favors the Soviets, but not by that much.
-
Mike Smith
United Kingdom
Wigton
Cumbria
-
Robert, it is possible to balance a game that involves one side getting creamed - its just a matter of the right victory condtions.
-
Robert Wilson
Canada
Riverview
New Brunswick
-
I agree
look at Games on Arnhem , or France 1940.
Knowing at the beginning that you are going to get a pasting isnt fun, unless as you stated there are Victory Conditions that work for both parties
( see Im not sarcastic all the time  )
-
Mike Smith
United Kingdom
Wigton
Cumbria
-
This is my attempt to balance up the historical scenario and make it run more in keeping with the actual campaign. I have played it once using these rules and twice with the original rules. The historical scenario as it stands is too pro-Soviet. In the real campaign Army Group Centre was destroyed, but Army Group North held the defense line for a while and then fought a largely successful withdrawl and delaying action. In the game this is not possible for two reasons: Soviet ZOC infiltration and the Air Interdiction rules. Hence the changes.
Destruction of Army Group Centre
The 6th Guards Army should setup in 3301 (its true historical position)not 3002 .
8.3. Not all Soviet units can move directly from enemy ZOC to enemy ZOC. Only Cav/Mech, Tank and Guards (Mechanised) may do so. This does apply on Turn 1.
11.19 and 12.5. When a Fortified Locality is stacked with another unit in a non-city hex the stack may convert a DR to a DL1. In this case the step loss must come from the other unit not the Fortified Locality, and the Fortified locality would survive.
12.7 Shock armies only receive the bonus during the Soviet Pre-Movement Combat Phase.
13.3 When rolling for interdiction subtract the die roll from the unit’s movement allowance, rather than treat the roll as the German move.
-
Mike Smith
United Kingdom
Wigton
Cumbria
-
Apologies Sean, I was not suggesting that your comments suggested the Historical scenario was balanced. I meant the early comments on Consimworld, including those of the designer. When I first posted here I had not read the more recent Consimworld discussion of the balance issues.
-
Sean Chick
United States
Hammond
Louisiana
-
Mantuanwar wrote: Apologies Sean, I was not suggesting that your comments suggested the Historical scenario was balanced. I meant the early comments on Consimworld, including those of the designer. When I first posted here I had not read the more recent Consimworld discussion of the balance issues.
No problem Mike and thanks for the historical variant. It should help make Army Group North stand up better, something I missed in my review.
-
|
|
Posted Tue Nov 29, 2011 5:01 am
