Positioning 0-0 leaders

[plloyd1010]

Do Kommisars provide a better use ---
a) up front to keep units in foxholes and assaults
b) in the rear to get them back into the fight

Generally I say B, definitely if the Soviets are attacking. If defending, at least closer to the front, if not with the troops.

[tlangston28]

Leaders can spot. Vince Hughes was notorious in head-to-head play for sending otherwise useless leaders out ahead of the main force to get LOS for off-board artillery. Annoying but effective.

I know this...    I was frequently on the receiving end of this with Vince.   That leader would be my primary target once he was spotted.

[pixelgeek]

So I am testing this out in my Eastern Front game and the only drawback I have found is that you need to identify the troops and leaders that will be a manoeuvre force and ensure that the leader is stacked so you don't end up slowing down that force. Especially if they are in woods or other high MP terrain.

So far, having static 0-0 leaders behind their troops hasn't been a problem

[saracv3]

There are more 0-0 RKKA leaders in 1941 than anything else, but there are not enough leaders, so one doesn’t have much choice but to put them in hexes where their command and control can be maximized . In many scenarios, the Germans have one leader for every two units or even 1-1! One has to juggle leaders around the battlefield just to activate units for the RKKA. This is because of the tremendous casualties incurred by leaders in 1941-42 due to their doctrine of aggressive leadership.

Right now, I’m playing FitS #22, dated June 28, 1941,a Soviet attack is going forward w 28 ingantry, trucks and weapons units but commanded by only 6 leaders. Of these leaders, none has any morale or combat modifier. The senior leader is not directly “out front” w the attack for fear of decapitation. Thus, the Soviets have 5 leaders but at least.one must be stacked w a mortar and one w a 76.2mm artillery unit. So in fact, there are 3 leaders for 26 infantry, HMG, SMG and engineers!

I think Kommesars are gonna just go to the hotspots in the battle and find themselves running back n forth involuntary. It might just be wise to start them in the rear with the highest ranking leader. They’ll be going somewhere needed soon enough. They don’t have a choice.

[pixelgeek]

I haven't played a large scenario yet where the Soviets are in the type of condition that you mention. Fire on the Steppes is ready for me to play though so I may find myself in that position soon.

[J6A]

What was mentioned is , to me, one of the great strengths of the PG system. Having a more efficient command and control structure will make a smaller force superior to a larger one. 1941 Soviets are so hard to maneuver, as the loss of a couple of leaders often freezes an attacking force in in place, or prevents recovered units from getting back into the fight.

If you want to see the extremes of this, play Conquest of Ethiopia where tribesmen might have 3 leaders for 20 units.

[Hugmenot]

Placing a leader alone in the hex behind troops make him a more attractive target for bombardment. Easier to kill and if disrupted, all units adjacent to him will need to activate one hex at a time and cannot perform combat movement (assuming no other leader can activate them).

But leaders are very precious for the Soviets and even more so for the Ethiopians, so keeping one behind troops stacked with a combat unit (to absorb the X and 2X results) often makes sense. I try to conserve my leaders by not moving them adjacent to enemy units until the enemy units are engaged in an assault. But if the enemy units took all their opportunity fire before I move my leader and I have a higher initiative level, I may risk it and move my leader adjacent to the enemy units with the hope I will win the initiative next turn.

[saracv3]

I should correct myself in FitS #22. There were 4 leaders going forward with the 26 infantry units, not 3. The senior leader, a Lt. Colonel, was placed in a town w the mortar and 76.2mm. I see Hugemot’s point; bear in mind that the targeted leader must be seen by an enemy leader or directly by the bombarding weapon. I’ve always wondered what one does in FtF play. It’s been so long (12-14 years ago) I can’t remember. I’m assuming they would go underneath other units and the owning player would have to remember their positions. In scenarios with large formations this can be difficult.

[cjsiam]

I should correct myself in FitS #22. There were 4 leaders going forward with the 26 infantry units, not 3. The senior leader, a Lt. Colonel, was placed in a town w the mortar and 76.2mm. I see Hugemot’s point; bear in mind that the targeted leader must be seen by an enemy leader or directly by the bombarding weapon. I’ve always wondered what one does in FtF play. It’s been so long (12-14 years ago) I can’t remember. I’m assuming they would go underneath other units and the owning player would have to remember their positions. In scenarios with large formations this can be difficult.

Are there restrictions on examining enemy stacks?

I don't think so.....

[saracv3]

I think somewhere in the rules it says that the opponent can’t examine an enemy stack. But I don’t know what section that statement is found.