The Volga Boatmen (and their Vessels)

[Elem]

I think we are all aware of how much of the BoS was fought and won on the River Volga itself. All of the Soviets supplys had to come across that narrow stretch of water and had it not been for the men and machines that kept this link open then the outcome of the battle would have been quite different. Currently we don't seem to have any river traffic and I hope this is only because it's early access. My question is, how much of the river traffic is going to be modelled in the final release? The Stukas had a target rich environment (Well depicted in the film Enemy at the Gates) and this really needs to be a key part of the sim itself. I hope the following from Wiki and the pictures I have included give the Devs some incentive to do justice to this aspect of the BoS.
 

"At the start of the Battle of Stalingrad, and before the Wehrmacht reached the city itself, the Luftwaffe had rendered the River Volga, vital for bringing supplies into the city, unusable to Soviet shipping.^[9] Between 25 and 31 July 1942, 32 Soviet ships were sunk, with another nine crippled.

However, the Russians put up a valiant defence. During the Battle of Stalingrad, one indomitable tug "Krasnoflotets" crossed the river towing barges of men, food and ammunition, constantly under the fire of the German guns. The tug made many journeys until it was too damaged to continue. One hospital ship was struck by German artillery 11 times.

The Stalingrad epic for "Gasitel" began on July 27, 1942, when the enemy set fire to the oil tankers near Erzovka. The courageous crew risking their lives saved the oil tankers and took the barges with oil to Shadrinsk backwater. In the midst of the battle of Stalingrad, "Gasitel" was used at river crossings. The vessel had received numerous holes, the team repaired them on their own, without going into the backwater. The crew had to constantly pump out the water that came through the holes in the ship . These were all the fiery days of navigation in 1942. For his bravery the steamer captain Peter Vasilievich Vorobiev was awarded the Order of the Red Banner. In mid-October riddled with bullets "Gasitel" had sunk. One river paddler removing women and children refuges from the city was shelled and sunk. Three thousand people drowned.

The Soviets doggedly held the ferry building on September 14 with one hundred troops and a semi-operable tank. More troops were rushed in by steamer to the key river landing.

The German armies later overran the ferry landing, while the Soviets stubbornly held on to a sliver of the western riverbank of the Volga. The tug Abkhazets and others moved 7 Soviet divisions across the river to Crossing 62 to provide General Chuikov with new troops.

The Soviet navy built armed cutters, sporting T34 tank turrets. This "Volga Flotilla made the Red Army's greatest victory possible, keeping open supply lines to the troops fighting for their lives in the ruins of Stalingrad. Gunboats armed with 76 mm (3 in) anti-aircraft guns fought off German Stuka attacks throughout the siege, and those with tank turrets hove close to the riverbanks to provide fire support for the troops ashore. Every night, they ferried reinforcements and ammunition across the river, and brought back the wounded to safety.^[10][11]

"About the role of the sailors of the fleet and their exploits", wrote Vasily Chuikov, the Soviet commander in Stalingrad, "I would say briefly that had it not been for them the 62nd Army might have perished without ammunition and rations, and could not have carried out its task."^[10][11] The Germans surrendered in the winter of 1943 and the Volga was once again open to steamers after the removal of war wreckage."

 

[BlackSix]

My question is, how much of the river traffic is going to be modelled in the final release? The Stukas had a target rich environment (Well depicted in the film Enemy at the Gates) and this really needs to be a key part of the sim itself. I hope the following from Wiki and the pictures I have included give the Devs some incentive to do justice to this aspect of the BoS.

We'll start with "Operation Uranus" - Soviet counterattack and finish with liberation of Stalingrad. You'll see winter map only.

[Elem]

So no river traffic at all?

[BlackSix]

No, as you can see in the Early access all the rivers are covered with ice.

Some sources say that river traffic continued until the end of November, but we can't do that.

[MarcoRossolini]

Was it just at Leningrad where they were driving vehicles along the ice or was that done at Stalingrad as well?

[Elem]

Yes it would appear so....

 

http://ww2db.com/battle_spec.php?battle_id=3

 

"As the weather became colder, the Volga River froze over, and the Soviets were now able to supply the small Soviet contingent in the city with trucks".

[FokkerH]

And expansions?, when?

[BlackSix]

Freezing-over began approximately 10-13 November on the River Volga. Commander of the 138th Division Lyudnikov writes about using river armored boats on November 19th. Maybe they even used until the end of November - beginning of December. After the river froze communication was on the ice as in Leningrad.

All the rivers in the game already frozen.

[1./JG42Nephris]

I guess no chance for rowboats then ....

[BlackSix]

I guess no chance for rowboats then ....

We refused almost immediately from this element.

We've time to make only air and ground battles since the focus has shifted on them after November 19th.

[Brano]

Icebreaker would be lovely   When speaking about ground units,what about horses in general?For towing artilery pieces or even sleighs in winter.It was allready done for RoF (horse artillery) and it looks and animates very nicely.

[senseispcc]

The weeks before the Volga was frozen solid where terible for the Soviet defenders of Stalingrad, they could not get supplies over this vital link to the rest of the front!

I also regret the absolute refusal of an autumn map of the same region but I understand that the German offensive with the overwhelming Lufwaffen and epic resistance of the Soviet did so little in the air to stop the German advance has little interest in a air game how should be so unbalanced it could be of no interest for the Soviet Player.

Maybe later with nearly the same airplanes a Kursk map?!

Edited May 1, 2014 by senseispcc

[Rama]

I also regret the absolute refusal of an autumn map of the same region but I understand that the German offensive with the overwhelming Lufwaffen and epic resistance of the Soviet did so little in the air to stop the German advance has little interest in a air game how should be so unbalanced it could be of no interest for the Soviet Player.

It's a refusal for this release.

You don't know what are the plans for after the release (and nobody does), since there was no communication about.

[SCG_Space_Ghost]

We'll start with "Operation Uranus" - Soviet counterattack and finish with liberation of Stalingrad. You'll see winter map only.

 

Weeeeelp... That was a waste of 100USD...

 

We refused almost immediately from this element.

We've time to make only air and ground battles since the focus has shifted on them after November 19th.

 

 

So maybe you guys shouldn't tote the game as a historical companion to the BoS? If you're seeking to remove HISTORICAL aspects of the theatre you're developing, save us all the time and rename the project "Dog Fight Arcade: Warbirds Over Russia" because I can see pretty quickly how all of this is going to turn out... I should have known better from all of the rhetoric about making a "game."

Yes it would appear so....

 

http://ww2db.com/battle_spec.php?battle_id=3

 

"As the weather became colder, the Volga River froze over, and the Soviets were now able to supply the small Soviet contingent in the city with trucks".

 

There's a problem with that... That historical precedent isn't modeled in the game. (And likely never will be... This is not meant to be a representation of the BoS in simulator form... It's pretty obviously catered towards those who require instant gratification...)

Edited May 1, 2014 by JG77_Falke

[ShamrockOneFive]

Weeeeelp... That was a waste of 100USD...

 

So maybe you guys shouldn't tote the game as a historical companion to the BoS? If you're seeking to remove HISTORICAL aspects of the theatre you're developing, save us all the time and rename the project "Dog Fight Arcade: Warbirds Over Russia" because I can see pretty quickly how all of this is going to turn out... I should have known better from all of the rhetoric about making a "game."

 

There's a problem with that... That historical precedent isn't modeled in the game. (And likely never will be... This is not meant to be a representation of the BoS in simulator form... It's pretty obviously catered towards those who require instant gratification...)

 

From the start the developers said that the campaign and all aspects of IL-2 Battle of Stalingrad would be setup Operation Uranus during the winter months of the battle. Focusing on a specific time period is a good idea as it allows them to focus as specifically as possible on the elements that make up that battle.

 

When the river is frozen there won't be rowboats or boats of any kind crossing the river. So not modelling boat activity across the already frozen Volga river does make sense from both a historical and simulator point of view. Should they produce a summer or autumn map depicting the lead up or initial attack on Stalingrad then would expect there to be some water based units incorporated into the game. We already know their Digital Nature engine is capable of doing that sort of thing.

[1./JG42Nephris]

My post about the rowboats was actally of pure ironic sense,as rowing on ice was just a funny imagination when I answered.

When a river got frozen, there is no ship traffic of any kind.Thats it.So why discussing about a feature that is of no interests ,even not in historical,as this game episode is settled in late december 42.

@ Falke,all your mentioned points are far off and not valid.

[SYN_Vander]

Well for a future update you can always help the devs and start to model the ships by yourselves. Here is a small SDK document I made for Rise of Flight after I added the "Drifter" ship. I think most of this will still hold for BoS:

 

https://docs.google.com/document/d/1orL2koIO0SvHnPmkPf-3PvwgMMWflFyujO-onx87DAw/edit?usp=sharing

[Brano]

Well for a future update you can always help the devs and start to model the ships by yourselves. Here is a small SDK document I made for Rise of Flight after I added the "Drifter" ship. I think most of this will still hold for BoS:

 

https://docs.google.com/document/d/1orL2koIO0SvHnPmkPf-3PvwgMMWflFyujO-onx87DAw/edit?usp=sharing

+1....and horses

[Freycinet]

Falke, I think you should gift your game to someone else. Plenty of people would be happy to get it.

[Sandhill]

+1....and horses

Yes, we all like horsies.     And they really were, of course, a crucial element of the scene, from locomotion to the soup bowl they did what the broken down internal combustion engines for which there was no fuel anyway could not.

[MarcoRossolini]

They made a good meal on Christmas day as well... Poor things...

[FlatSpinMan]

Do your due diligence before buying, Falke. If you read up on the game before purchasing you would have known they are only covering one part of the battle. No one is hiding anything. Focussing on one part of the battle doesn't make it an instant-gratification-whatever-it-was-you-said. It just means they'll be able to get the product out the door in a really short period of time. Maybe later there'll be other periods, we don't know yet.

[SCG_Space_Ghost]

My post about the rowboats was actally of pure ironic sense,as rowing on ice was just a funny imagination when I answered.

When a river got frozen, there is no ship traffic of any kind.Thats it.So why discussing about a feature that is of no interests ,even not in historical,as this game episode is settled in late december 42.

@ Falke,all your mentioned points are far off and not valid.

 

 

Yes it would appear so....

 

http://ww2db.com/battle_spec.php?battle_id=3

 

"As the weather became colder, the Volga River froze over, and the Soviets were now able to supply the small Soviet contingent in the city with trucks".

 

Sorry, but you musn't have been getting my point. Hence, I'm not entirely sure how you're a good judge of the validity of my statement...

 

Aside from that, simply stating that a point isn't valid doesn't prove its invalidity. Thanks. (Especially insofar as if you don't even understand the nature of a user's opinion...)

 

Also, Mr. Dalsgaard, were you contributing anything to the nature of the thread? No place for spam posts.

Edited May 5, 2014 by JG77_Falke

[SCG_Space_Ghost]

Do your due diligence before buying, Falke. If you read up on the game before purchasing you would have known they are only covering one part of the battle. No one is hiding anything. Focussing on one part of the battle doesn't make it an instant-gratification-whatever-it-was-you-said. It just means they'll be able to get the product out the door in a really short period of time. Maybe later there'll be other periods, we don't know yet.

 

No, but openly avoiding or outwardly neglecting historical aspects for a false sense of brevity and "gameplay" does serve to make it an instant gratification title.

Edited May 5, 2014 by Rama

[startrekmike]

No, but openly avoiding or outwardly neglecting historical aspects for a false sense of brevity and "gameplay" does serve to make it an instant gratification title.

 

Sorry if you don't agree with me, but as a moderator, you should be well aware that this is a place of opinions - not a forum for telling people to "do their due diligence" because you disagree with something they had to say. (The fine, fine line between personally attacking a forum-goer and stating an opinion. By the nature of your first sentence, I would assume the former.)

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 I don't think you are getting what is being said here, nothing is being sacrificed for those who want "instant gratification", the time frame that they indicated very early in the development of this sim dictates that there would not be any real boat traffic on the Volga, if there was, it was so minor that it is simply not worth wasting valuable development time or money into modeling it.

 

 If you think it was a waste of money, that is your business and your problem, the dev's made it very clear what we should expect in terms of a time frame and if you don't like it, why did you even buy it?

Edited May 5, 2014 by startrekmike

[FlatSpinMan]

Focussing limited resources on a small, well-defined initial target makes sense to me. If they thought they could achieve more, no doubt they would have promised more, but they obviously thought this was their limit. You seem to suggest ("avoiding, neglecting") they have some kind of agenda in deciding to limit the focus.

If BoS works, they might expand things. Let's hope they do.

[J4SCrisZeri]

Elem's point is more than interesting. I know the team's focus and the season they chose for this sim. Nonetheless I look forward for a great success of this sim, leading to more developement and new axpansions, i.e. a summer scenario, with river traffic. I've always found it a great element, filmed many times (Enemy at the gates, etc) and attacking boats on the Volga would be an interesting mission, to say the least.

[Finkeren]

Falke, I kinda understand your disappointment. It was a bit of a letdown, when it was first announced, that BoS would (initially) only cover the last couple of months of the battle. However, that announcement came in summer 2013, well before BoS was even open for prepurchase, so noone can claim, that they were mislead.

 

Your rant quite frankly seems unjustified and completely over the top. You essentially claim, that the limited time frame somehow invalidates BoS as a historical simulator, which is one of the strangest claims I've ever heard on this forum.

 

If this really makes or breaks the game for you, then that's too bad, but it's really not a concern for the devs who have been quite up front about this from a very early point.

[BraveSirRobin]

Finkeren is 100% correct.  Whether you think they should have done more does not change the fact that they're doing exactly what they said they would do.

[BlackSix]

Falke, I kinda understand your disappointment. It was a bit of a letdown, when it was first announced, that BoS would (initially) only cover the last couple of months of the battle. However, that announcement came in summer 2013, well before BoS was even open for prepurchase, so noone can claim, that they were mislead.

I want to clarify this point. We reported about this to the first time December 14, 2012 at the earliest diaries.

http://forum.il2sturmovik.com/topic/168-developer-diary/?do=findComment&comment=1694

 

4) Where exactly will be your campaign, what their timing and other details of historical interest?

 

We'll start with "Operation Uranus" - Soviet counterattack and finish with liberation of Stalingrad. Between these events you will see the surroundings of the 6th Army and the attempt of its unblocking - "Operation Winter Storm."

[LLv44_Mprhead]

Weeeeelp... That was a waste of 100USD...

 

So maybe you guys shouldn't tote the game as a historical companion to the BoS? If you're seeking to remove HISTORICAL aspects of the theatre you're developing, save us all the time and rename the project "Dog Fight Arcade: Warbirds Over Russia" because I can see pretty quickly how all of this is going to turn out... I should have known better from all of the rhetoric about making a "game."

 

There's a problem with that... That historical precedent isn't modeled in the game. (And likely never will be... This is not meant to be a representation of the BoS in simulator form... It's pretty obviously catered towards those who require instant gratification...)

 

I am failing to see your point also. How does limited time period make this "Dog Fight Arcade"?

 

 

Sorry, but you musn't have been getting my point. Hence, I'm not entirely sure how you're a good judge of the validity of my statement...

 

Aside from that, simply stating that a point isn't valid doesn't prove its invalidity. Thanks. (Especially insofar as if you don't even understand the nature of a user's opinion...)

 

Also, Mr. Dalsgaard, were you contributing anything to the nature of the thread? No place for spam posts.

 

Then you better provide some explanation/justification for your statements. At the moment you don't provide anything that supports validity of your point.

 

No, but openly avoiding or outwardly neglecting historical aspects for a false sense of brevity and "gameplay" does serve to make it an instant gratification title.

 

 

What are these historical aspects that are "openly avoided or outwardly neglected"? What do you actually mean by this?