Panzer Campaigns is a series of games covering the major campaigns of World War II. In addition to covering the historical events of these campaigns, many hypothetical and what-if situations are addressed. The game can be played alone versus the computer, or against a human opponent using Play-By-E-Mail and Network Play (over a Local Area Network or the Internet). The game is turn-based with each side moving and firing in their designated turn. Each game consists of the entire campaign plus a number of smaller battles. KORSUN ’44 VS. PRIOR PZC GAMES While Korsun ’44 has much in common with prior game in the series, there are a few points worthy of note. UNIT SCALE Korsun ’44 uses a unit scale somewhere between the PZC Games Kharkov ‘42/Smolensk ’41 (battalion) and Normandy ‘44/Tobruk ’41 (company). In general, the Soviet units are on par with previous Russian Front games in the series. However, for the Germans, a smaller unit scale was needed to cover wide gaps in the German lines that would be caused with a battalion scale. Also the smaller company unit scale gives the German greater and more historical command flexibility. It would be fair to say that the unit scale most resembles that of Bulge ’44, with battalions and companies. Korsun ’44 was a natural progression of the PZC series. Many long-time gamers will remember Jack Radey’s classic "Korsun Pocket" and its impact on the board gaming world. Some of the game’s appeal came from Radeys’ innovative approaches, but most important was the underlying historical situation. The battle for the Cherkassy Pocket, as the Germans called Korsun, was classic. The Soviet pincer attacks, and the German relief efforts, are textbook examples studied well into the late 20th century by the U.S. Army. OOB In general terms, the Soviet order of battle is based on references from Glantz, Sharp, and Radey, while the German is based on captured German records and Tessin. While the sources were not as good as those available for Normandy ’44 and Tobruk ’41, there is a surprising range of materials available, as can be seen in the bibliography. Obviously, anyone who designs a game involving the Soviets owes a great deal to Charles Sharp and his OOB books. They are, quite simply, invaluable, and one wonders why such materials are not available in such detail for other WWII combatants. For Korsun in particular, we were fortunate that David Glantz had published the Soviet Staff Study on the battle. In addition, Glantz’s transcript of a 1985 U. S. Army symposium covering Russian Front actions during the period was very helpful. Finally, we were lucky that Jack Radey revised his old Korsun Pocket OOB in issue #197 of S&T magazine. Crosschecking between these sources gave us a high level of confidence on the participating Soviet units. The German OOB was made fairly straight forward by captured microfilm records. These were compared to Tessin and secondary source materials to come up with a reliable German OOB. For Kirovograd we found a very good website that was crosschecked with other sources. Kanev was made easier by Brian Knipple’s work, but mainly Glantz’ sources, Tessin, and references to situational maps were used. Starting unit losses were more of an informed estimate. Captured German loss records for the 1st Panzer Army, throughout the battle, were found on microfilm, but there were none for the German 8th Army. The microfilm gave us a benchmark from which to start. We then relied, somewhat, on Jack Radey’s published materials to bring the 8th Army to a relatively correct loss position versus the 1st Panzer Army. We also obtained some Soviet data from an old Radey spreadsheet, which was floating around the Internet, and conversations online with David Glantz. The loss positions of the armies may certainly drive some discussion. For example, it can be strongly argued that the Feb 1 losses are too light for the Germans, especially relative to Soviet losses. However, the microfilm records and anecdotal information, such as German diary entries, indicate that we are quite accurate when replacements are considered. Since any detailed losses are mere educated guesses at this level of OOB, we opted to concentrate on assuring that the armies are historically balanced relative to one another. Our main goal was to put each army in the right position relative to its opposition, on the OOB break dates in the OOB, not to make sure the gun counts in each platoon were valid – the latter being simply impossible for this size OOB. Air OOB was made simpler by access to the Soviet Staff Study, a good website on the Luftwaffe and information from Jack Radey on German plane counts. There is no information we could find on air losses in the campaign, so we have simply made minor percentage adjustments. MAP The map was built using an overlay made from 50,000 maps of the period. We also made use of additional detail available from the Soviet Study and Radey’s game, particularly in the area of river crossings. As is usual, in a map project such as this, the names of features such as cities, towns, villages, and rivers, vary from source to source. We used the most common, or most recognized, spelling in these cases. After the Korsun map was built, we saw that it would take little effort to add the Kanev area to it, thereby enabling us to give players the opportunity to play this unique battle. After adding it, we also saw the chance to add some of the battles around Kirovograd, which led up to the initial forming of the pocket. Kirovograd and Kanev are not often the subjects of game designers, yet both are worthy of a serious wargamer’s attention. We hope you enjoy these additions to the basic Korsun game. We are also including 2 blanks scenarios that show the whole map in "Snow" and "Clear" conditions to enable you to more clearly "view" the playing area. Players can cut there own SUB_MAPS from our master game map if they wish to create their own scenarios. The procedure to make a map is outlined in the Scenario Editor HELP file – in the section under "Other Features | Creating Sub Maps". UNIT RATINGS Unit ratings for Korsun ’44 uses the same system developed for Normandy ’44 and Tobruk ’41. This means that units from these PZC games should be relatively the same compared to one another. For those interested in the details, an excerpt from the Normandy ‘44 designer’s notes, which details how this was accomplished, is appended to the bottom of this file. MORALE This is probably the most subjective area of the game. In general, we followed Jack Radey’s suggestions from the old Korsun Pocket board game, however, we made some modifications that generally reduced Soviet morale across the board. Basically the levels are A = Elite, B = Good, C = Average, D = Below Average, E = Poor, F = Abysmal MISCELLANEOUS As players get into the game, they will likely come across a number of areas that do not appear correct. Most of the time, you will find that these are correct, and the result of deliberate, and sometimes heated, decisions in the design and playtesting process. Here are but a few examples: HW for the Germans are handled the same way as in N44 and T41. These companies formed a pool of heavy weaponry for the battalion; they both fought as a group, and dispersed among the line companies. Basically these units are composed of a large number of medium and heavy mortars, medium and heavy machineguns, and infantry guns (basically small artillery pieces). To assist players is finding Heavy Weapons Units in the game, Korsun ’44 shows the Unit Window picture of all Heavy Weapons Units with a small Mortar. Players will quickly note that most of these German HW companies are rated as Indirect Fire in Korsun ‘44. This does not mean that we believe that machineguns can fire indirectly. What this does is simulate the historical effect of these machineguns, and other units, being lent out to support the other units in the battalion. By placing the HW Company behind the front line units of the company, the HW Company can "support" the rest of the battalion in game terms very much as they did in historical practice. Also because of their high assault values, these units form a good "shock/storm" company to help, when needed, to stop or create a breakthrough.