Russian Army leaders and Guards units

[richvalle]

And I don't have Broken Axis... I had to read it somewhere else.

[Hugmenot]

Mike Perryman designed Army Group South Ukraine and thus if he says Guard leaders should be able to affect RKKS leaders, it's good enough for me.

Mike Perryman also designed Broken axis but that one states otherwise. Not sure why or even the rule was submitted that way or was modified in early development.

[Poor Yorek]

Mike Perryman designed Army Group South Ukraine and thus if he says Guard leaders should be able to affect RKKS leaders, it's good enough for me.

Mike Perryman also designed Broken axis but that one states otherwise. Not sure why or even the rule was submitted that way or was modified in early development.

Sure, given the lack of any official set of rules clarifications from APL there are various options:

1. Rules actually published;
2. Rules passed on by word-of-mouth (message boards) by designers;
3. Whatever one feels like.  

[mike perryman]

Gentlemen,
      All I can say is that I have always designed and played the games that Guard leaders and commissars can influence RKKA units and leaders but not vice-versa. Make of that what you will. Thanks, Mike 

[Poor Yorek]

FWIW, I wasn't being critical of anyone.  I simply pointed out the truism that the RAW in Broken Axis is not the same what Perryman had written in an earlier reply in this thread (and reiterates above).  

Whether the difference is due to an editing blunder or development decision or gremlins is not in my competence to determine.

Outside of a game rule issue, are there any (documented) citations in the Soviet war literature regarding this matter?  I have always understood "Guards" as being an honorary designation rather than denoting a separate service (from the RKKA) and thus (lacking any other input) would have presumed that Gds & RKKA leaders would (in PG) mutually influence one another.  On the German side, certainly in the later part of the war, Waffen SS officers commanded and were commanded by Heer officers at the army & corps levels, but how that may or may not have translated down to the tactical scale may be another matter and PG seems to take this approach by generally not allowing Waffen SS and Heer leaders/units to interact.

[waynebaumber]

Being ex military man an officer is an officer when he tells you to do do something you do it if he out ranks you.  I would play for Soviet forces that both Red Army officers and Guard Officers can influence each others units when playing solo, same for US units (Marines and Army) and most other nationalities.  My only exceptions might be the SS and Wehrmacht units depending on when the scenario was and I understand co-operation was very poor between the Japanese Army and Navel Ground units. 
However if playing FtF I go with the rule-book. In the 4th edition it says "Unless noted in the game or scenarios special rules, leader may activate units of other branches of the same county's military" 

[Greyfox]

Honestly, being a soldier and an officer myself, I need to introduce the concept of "food chain." In the American army, an officer, no matter what the rank, can't just give orders and expect them to be followed. In battle, each subordinate unit is given a mission (task and purpose) to accomplish so that the the larger organization (platoon, company, battalion, regiment, brigaded, division, corp, or army) can achieve its objective(s). Orders must flow through the chain of command (the food or rating chain) to prevent a diffusion of effort. A young Lieutenant could say no or blow off a Colonels directives if the Colonel is working outside his chain of command without worrying about consequences.
We should focus on chains of command. If you have a mixed formation or battle group rules like that could make no sense (no guard officer in charge of RKKA or vice versa), unless that is characteristic of that particular army in that time period.

[waynebaumber]

"In the American army, an officer, no matter what the rank, can't just give orders and expect them to be followed."

Really! I think A British officer would expect his orders to be followed unless there were exceptional circumstances. A nice example of the cultural differences between our two nations. I take your point though about chain of command I was thinking more that in the chaos of battle men will turn to who ever offers leadership and the leader counters in PG are those guys.