From Moves #3 Summer of '43 A Kursk revision by Jerrold Thomas This is another "unofficial" but well thoughtout revision of an SPI game. Jerrold Thomas is a subscriber who got tangled once too often in barbed wire. On the whole Kursk is a realistic and enjoyable game. But there is one serious flaw that leads to unplayable situations and thoroughly unrealistic tactics. This article offers a brief analysis and a choice of modularized solutions. The situation referred to is the movement penalty for unoccupied enemy fortified-zone hexes. This penalty tends to give the defense a considerable advantage, which is gained through unrealistic tactics. As a result of this penalty, both Germans and Russians generally abandon the first fortified line, even if it is the only one, and station their units behind it. This prevents any opposing infantry from closing for combat, and prevents any Russian Armor from doing so on their first turn. Any armor of either side which does penetrate for attack is at the mercy of both exchanges and enemy counter-attack. This "sieve" effect, the sitting out of all but motorized units, has a devastating effect on offensive operations. It costs one Movement Point to enter a hex, two additional to enter an enemy Zone of Control, and three more to enter an enemy Fortified Zone hex, for a total of six to move across an enemy Fortified Zone hex and to close with a unit defending behind it. This is impossible for any infantry, and difficult for Russian armor, which must first move adjacent, thus broadcasting its intentions. This bonus for abandoning one's fortifications results in many unrealistic situations, including the already mentioned "sieve" effect. Another is the vulnerability of the advancing armor, because if the attacking player is to get any infantry through the fortified zone they must be very close behind the armor, thus blocking retreat routes, even then, air interdiction can prevent their movement. Another unrealistic situation is the free movement of infantry in quiet sectors. Since no one can close with them, they cannot be "tied" to their positions, as they were in actuality. This makes withdrawals much easier. I have developed, examined somewhat, and here present four different methods of dealing with this game problem. They vary in complexity and realism, and one might require some new units. I present them all, good and not-so-good, so that you can determine which would most complement the game as you conceive it. (1) Change in Movement Penalties Reduce the movennent penalty for enemy fortifications to one Movement Point per hex for Infantry only. (Reducing to 1 for all units would seem to loosen things up too much.) (2) Additional Capabilities for Air Units Allow Air units an additional capability, a sixth kind of mission, that is, Zone of Control suppression. Unit flying this type of mission would leave at the beginning of the flying player's Initial Movement Phase, and would return at the end of his Initial Movement Phase. The effect of the mission would be to neutralize the effect of an enemy Zone of Control on movement in the hex to which the mission was flown. (Alternatively, the air unit could remain in the air through the flying player's entire turn, both movement and combat phases.) (3) Infantry Movement Accrual Allow infantry only to accrue Movement Points in certain cases: a. Movement Points may only be accrued by units which are not in isolation. b. Movement Points may only be accrued by units which do not begin the accrual in an enemy Zone of Control. c. Movement Points may only be accrued when movement in a given direction is completely blocked by movement penaties, and then the Movement Points may only be accrued for movement in that direction. d. Units may use the Movement Point accrual procedure in successive turns, provided that they come within the restrictions above on each turn. Movement Points are accrued as follows: a. The units that are accruing Movement Points move one hex in the blocked direction b. The units are then turned upside down (this indicates that they have not completed this one-hex move yet, but are accruing the Movernent Points to do so). c. On the next Initial Movement Phase, the units are turned right-side up again, and the Movement Points that they lacked to make the move last turn are subtracted from the Movement Allowance before they move in this turn. d. Units accruing Movement Points have the following limitations i. they may not enter combat ii. they control only the three hexes to their rear (in the direction they moved from) Note - Beginning the accrual out of a Zone of Control means before the one hex move is made which results in the inversion, the unit must not be in an enemy Zone of Control. (4) Use of Engineer Units Designate some units as engineers and/or armored engineer units. Allow these units to ignore movement penalties for enemy fortified zones, and to negate these penalties for units with whom they are stacked. However, engineer units must attack when they move into an enemy Zone of Control, and they must be taken as the first losses in any losing attack. Each destroyed Engineer Strength Point counts one more Victory Point than other units of the same type (i.e. 2 Victory Points for eliminating each Infantry Engineer Strength Point, 4 for each Strength Point of Armored Engineers). Of these solutions, #1 is the simplest, but would still result in the Germans having a great deal of "free" infantry, as Russian regular infantry could still not close for combat. The same problem occurs with #2 and #4, in that both would put a premium on infantary units that got through the line, since they could not do it on their own. Both are realistic, #2 since air attack could and did have a fire-suppressive effect on units coming under attack, and #4 because Engineer units, which usually led the attack, particularly through obstacles, exposed themselves to proportionately greater casualties than the units that followed. Also this 'lost first" provision helps to duplicate the "inertia of attack," in that once Engineers are lost, it is more difficult to shift the attack and repenetrate the enemy fortified zone at another point. No. 3 is my own choice, in that while the restrictions stay the same, any infantry can close on its own. It does, however, involve the most complexity. Note on 2.d this means that inverted units do not affect either supply or movement across their front, but they do affect supply and movement to their rear. NB submitted by John Kula (kula@telus.net) on behalf of the Strategy Gaming Society (http://www.boardgamegeek.com/~sgs), originally collected by Andrew Webber (gbm@wwwebbers.com)