Recommend
6 
 Thumb up
 Hide
17 Posts

Clash of Monarchs» Forums » General

Subject: A CoM Play Issue That Must be Addressed rss

Your Tags: Add tags
Popular Tags: [View All]
Chad Marlett
United States
Plymouth
Michigan
flag msg tools
Wherever You Go, There You Are
badge
With no certain future, and no purpose other than to prevail
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
After an extensive amount of time playing CoM and digesting the rules, finding a way to fight the historical battle of Battle of Gross-Jägersdorf and defend Konigsberg eluded me.

Moving troops there is a massive waste of cards, and you can't reinforce there without moving two FD's to create a supply chain to Stettin. You can't redeploy there because Konigsberg isn't occupied by friendly forces.

The answer can be found in a convoluted way on Consimworld, although you must ignore some of the posts as even devoted players get it wrong from time to time.

You must free-move a leader to Konigsberg in 1756 - this then becomes a zero-strength force, which occupies the spot, which allows you to redeploy troops there in spring 1757.

Figuring out how to move troops to East Prussia shouldn't be a puzzle that requires a rule lawyer or archival research on Consimworld.

Unless the goal of CoM is to be grognard game ala ASL/SFB/WiF, this type of illogical nonsense needs to be cleaned up.

Solution: Since Prussia has enough leaders to spare in 1756, and there is no downside to using the free leader moves to get the leader to Konigsberg, how about a rule that just states Prussia can redeploy to Konigsberg in Spring 1757?

If not a special rule, there should at least be a play note about "the Konigsberg shuffle"

1 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Daniel Berger
United States
Littleton
Colorado
flag msg tools
designer
Jigsaw
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
I think the easiest thing to do would be to declare Konigsberg an MD for the Prussians only.
1 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
United States
flag msg tools
Avatar
djberg96 wrote:
I think the easiest thing to do would be to declare Konigsberg an MD for the Prussians only.


The rules for Poland just about break this game.

I am STILL waiting to see it fixed. When I asked about it months ago, the designer came up with TWO conflicting solutions.

COM sits on the shelf unfortunately.
1 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Scott Muldoon (silentdibs)
United States
Astoria
New York
flag msg tools
designer
badge
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
Are you playing with the revised set up, where Prussia begins 1756 and 1757 with more forces in East Prussia?
1 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Scott Muldoon (silentdibs)
United States
Astoria
New York
flag msg tools
designer
badge
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
Wilhammer wrote:
The rules for Poland just about break this game.

Poland was, for military purposes, a wasteland during this period. For most of the war, the Russians took something like 50% losses in attrition just trying to get to Prussian territory.
1 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Chad Marlett
United States
Plymouth
Michigan
flag msg tools
Wherever You Go, There You Are
badge
With no certain future, and no purpose other than to prevail
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
sdiberar wrote:
Are you playing with the revised set up, where Prussia begins 1756 and 1757 with more forces in East Prussia?


I don't see anything in the living rules or the post-publication update that refers to additional Prussians being setup in East Prussia.
 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Scott Muldoon (silentdibs)
United States
Astoria
New York
flag msg tools
designer
badge
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
Gryfon wrote:
sdiberar wrote:
Are you playing with the revised set up, where Prussia begins 1756 and 1757 with more forces in East Prussia?


I don't see anything in the living rules or the post-publication update that refers to additional Prussians being setup in East Prussia.

It's from a post on Consimworld, the living rules/playbook have not yet been updated. The Prussians get significantly beefed up in East Prussia, making that front work better from a historical vantage point. I'll see if I can find the information later today.
2 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
United States
flag msg tools
Avatar
sdiberar wrote:
Wilhammer wrote:
The rules for Poland just about break this game.

Poland was, for military purposes, a wasteland during this period. For most of the war, the Russians took something like 50% losses in attrition just trying to get to Prussian territory.



No quibble with that, but the Rules are horrible and confusing.
 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Scott Muldoon (silentdibs)
United States
Astoria
New York
flag msg tools
designer
badge
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
Here's the CSW post: http://talk.consimworld.com/WebX?14@806.ooEJfHsbhup.20@.ee6f...

And for the CSW-phobic:

Bob Kalinowski wrote:
Playbook Update Coming, Significant Prus Set Up Changes

All,

We'll have to file this one under "better late than never."

Norbert Moehring, who contributed some data to early COM development, finally wrapped his steel tooth Germanic brain around the game about a month back. He quickly observed that the Prussian set ups in 1756 and 57 seemed to be short of troops, particularly in East Prussia. Norbert cited the German General Staff as his source, and sent me the numbers. After scratching my head and digging through my sources for a week, I concluded he was right. I never caught the Prus East Prussia corps' existence under Lehwaldt in 1756, or its correct position at start of 1757. A big Mea Culpa on my forehead. A final dig in Duffy's Army of Fred, 2nd, page 246, turned up a separate confirmation of the GS strength numbers. It showed 84K Prus inf and 20K garrison troops at start of 1756. This confirmed my gaffe.

So let's fix it. Here are the net changes you'll see in the Prus set ups for '56 and '57 in the Playbook update:

Scenario changes -- only CHANGED items are listed.

1756 Prus set up:

Magdeburg -- 3 Line Cav units (vice 4), 1 Hus Cav unit (vice 2), 17 Inf SPs (vice 14)

Liegnitz -- add 1 Line Cav unit after leader names; 6 Inf SPs (vice 3).

[New] -- Konigsberg -- Lehwaldt, 1 Hus Cav unit, 6 inf SPs

[New] -- Stettin -- 3 inf SPs.

Anglo-Prussian Force Pool: Prussia -- list 21 Inf SPs (vice 36)

All other previous stuff listed remains.

1757 Prus set up: [Swap Konigsberg and Stettin forces]

Stettin: 2 Inf SPs (vice Lehwaldt command)

Konigsberg: Lehwaldt, 1 Hus Cav unit, 9 inf SPs.

I think the net result of the '56 changes is that it will likely mitigate what I am perceiving to be better than historical Austrian counter-offensives into Silesia in the face of the usual Prus moves on Saxony/Dresden. The Prus will have more strength available to defend Silesia.

The '57 changes are convenient for the Prus, but not dramatic. Instead of having to admin march sp to max the Konigsberg garrison, you'll start with all you want. Actually, probably too much; Lehwaldt's 10 sp aren't a match for the Russ when they arrive, so the Prus player will either have to evacuate some, or reinforce them to a decent army size.

So, I wish I'd caught this earlier (or Norbert had been in on the scenario plots earlier! ), but I am very happy he brought this to my attention, and we now have more accurate Prus starting line ups for '56 and '57. Danke schon, Norbert! En Avant...
2 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Chad Marlett
United States
Plymouth
Michigan
flag msg tools
Wherever You Go, There You Are
badge
With no certain future, and no purpose other than to prevail
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
The new setup would seem to help the problem.

I have to say that that is a pretty massive overhaul to the setup; I found the post on Consimworld and the designer admits it hasn't been playtested yet (March 09) and that it probably shouldn't impact the VP situation. Hmmmm.

Anyone care to solve the next puzzle - how do you supply a Russian advance on Stettin with one FD?

 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Chad Marlett
United States
Plymouth
Michigan
flag msg tools
Wherever You Go, There You Are
badge
With no certain future, and no purpose other than to prevail
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
To quote the developer from Consimworld on Russian supply:

Bob Kalinowski - Jul 8, 2009 4:52 pm (#4068 Total: 4075)

The Russians often have to have their lone FD (sorry, they don't get any others! ) tracing back to Warsawa, not the east edge. This allows their FD in Pila or Neu Stettin to let them (barely) reach for Colberg or Stettin. If they put the FD in Poznan (as they did for a lot of the war historically), or at risk in Militsch, they can reach the Silesian fortresses. Their supply line is their achilles heel, and keeping it safe, and the Russ in theater, is an acquired skill.


Per 22.4, Poland is not a client and it's fortresses can be occupied an controlled by forces allied with Saxony. Per 9.7.1 whenever a force controls an allied or enemy it becomes a CC MD, which functions as an immobile FD which must still trace supply.

So, I guess you commandeer Warsaw, which can trace the 6MP back to Vilna. You then move the sole FD to one of the mentioned spots.

How would Neu Stetting be in supply? Does this require the Russian fleet to be in Gdansk?
 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Scott Muldoon (silentdibs)
United States
Astoria
New York
flag msg tools
designer
badge
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
Chad, you broached the next topic I was going to address.

I think the sad truth is that Bob's game is all too accurate about Russian capabilities in the 7YW. My reading of Szabo jibes with his -- it's almost a miracle they got as far as Kuestrin.
 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
bob kalinowski
United States
Saint Charles
Missouri
flag msg tools
designer
badge
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
Chad,

Sorry, I'm late to this thread. Major health issues with one of my daughters.

>So, I guess you commandeer Warsaw, which can trace the 6MP back to Vilna. You then move the sole FD to one of the mentioned spots.

The Russians don't have to commandeer Warsaw -- it's already marked as a Green supply source. They don't even have to garrison the place. It is a Russian MD from the start.

My apologies on the playbook update -- sadly, this is completely out of my hands. I have been coaxing/asking/pleading with the powers that be to update it for the last four months. I forwarded all the changes in March, and we're all still waiting.


 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
John D'Angelo
United States
Michigan
flag msg tools
mbmb
It's certainly an impediment for a force to be out of supply, but it's also not the end of the world. Playing the Russians (or anyone else for that matter), there are times where you should move your force out of supply in order to take advantage of an opportunity. I've conducted Russian sieges where the beseigers are in Short Supply.
 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Steve
United States
Flagstaff
Arizona
flag msg tools
badge
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
Really, w/the Russians? -2SS and -2 no siege arty pretty much makes even the most trivial sieges impossible!

agreed on SS being a something worth doing, though. But mainly just for battles.
 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
John D'Angelo
United States
Michigan
flag msg tools
mbmb
It's difficult to siege on SS, but not impossible. If you start a siege early in the summer season, there's a decent chance to get enough +1 results to offset SS and no siege artillery. I split the Russians(if large enough, which they should be after the Rus. reiforcement event) into two forces, a smaller one to siege, led by Rumyantsev, and a larger one commanded by the Russian CIC to cover the sieging force. Rumyantsev has a 1 activation, so he's less susceptible to adverse supply check rolls.

 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
bob kalinowski
United States
Saint Charles
Missouri
flag msg tools
designer
badge
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
Just as a final FYI, the Living Rules II and Playbook update are out, and the Prus now have a corps presence in East Prussia in both the 1756 and 1757 starts.
1 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Front Page | Welcome | Contact | Privacy Policy | Terms of Service | Advertise | Support BGG | Feeds RSS
Geekdo, BoardGameGeek, the Geekdo logo, and the BoardGameGeek logo are trademarks of BoardGameGeek, LLC.