It is acceptable that territory occupied only the same turm is passable. Also means that Soviet combat power is underrated, which is not fair. This is somewhat compensated by the high number of non-combat losses for Axis. Soviets should incur more losses during battles. I lost only 225.000 in that category (do not believe that I played that stellar, although I did apply a different strategy). In one source I read, Axis combat fatalities were 400.000 in 1941. There should be high non-combat-losses in winter, but not in summer. This benefits the Soviets, the Germans are loosing more manpower behind the front than on the battlefield. Or the Soviet side may have other standards for "disabled", labeling "one legged people" fully serviceable. Very detailed and not bad in itself, but I do not believe that work safety standards on the Axis side were worse then on the Soviet side. I have no idea if this is historically accurate, in my case more then half of Axis losses originated in the logistics phase, supposedly people falling from trucks or dropping crates on their feet. The Soviets are "evacuating" cities which were completely surrounded for several turns, so there is no pressure on the Soviet side to decide when to evacuate, no risk of being too late, because it always works - benefitting the Soviets The railroad building is too effective, especially in the winter (it is absurd, that converting double track is as fast as converting single track, literally double the work to do, also the small conversion units benefit from teleportation like movement), benefitting the Axis in the Grand Campaign Historical accuracy/ realism of simulation I did not play the Soviet, I presume that the AI will fare even worse on the Axis side in the grand campaign, because planning breakthroughs and encirclements should be much more difficult, than just maintaining a battle line and slowly moving backward. Which would have been bad enough historically, with the Germans loosing less material and personnel and keeping a better position on top of the Soviets getting no moral boost for regaining territory. They would have to keep a safe distance and build their strength once they notice that a breakthrough is not possible. The AI does not take this new situation into account and keeps coming all winter only to be bled dry. Then comes the spring and you can basically redo 1941 from a position farther east, capturing almost the complete map. To make matters worse Soviet units showing up are so weak, that you can basically clear the contact line every turn, pushing Soviet numbers below the Axis equivalent. When the counteroffensive starts, it is met by a line of fully powered Axis units which is basically impenetrable. Which recovers fatigue and CPP, reduces consumption of supplies and the fortification bonus nullifies the Axis defense penalty. Spoiler if you want to find your own strategy for victory NOT even try to take Moscow in 1941 and dig in after the first mud-turn (18). Interestingly in the case of Axis we both had the same change of strategy. On this sub I saw someone posting screenshots of the main campaign won for both sides in 1942. This even happens when cities could be easily integrated into the main front line, potentially benefitting from the terrain bonus. I even noticed that trivial mistakes are made, cities, even victory point locations are not occupied, so that it is sometimes possible to just move in, after a breakthrough, in extreme case there was nothing between the VP and me, but adjacent units. It does neither evacuate nor bolster the mouth of a looming encirclement (reinforce the remaining gap or put in a reserve line). In the long run the AI is not that impressive when it comes to preventing encirclements or even holding a consistant battle line. For running different scenarios (with different preconditions/allies), you should also be allowed to switch off Theatre Boxes.īoth knockout victory conditions and the Theatre Boxes are OK for increasing realism, but to run hypothetical what-if scenarios you should be allowed to turn them off.ĭeployment phase, again for taking a different approach, the possibility to completely rearrange troops to fit your personal strategy. going slower), this is not possible, because you get whacked by the knockout conditions. If someone wants to take a completely different strategic approach (mainly as Axis, e.g. You should be allowed to turn off knockout victory conditions. I do not know if someone managed to score the early 700 point knockout at turn 16 at normal difficulty, this would ruin this evaluation, because it should not be possible if this was a simulation. First, at least with the Grand Campaign I have the impression, that if you follow the historical path (as Axis try to get to Moscow), you will get the historical result, at least in 1941.
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |
AuthorWrite something about yourself. No need to be fancy, just an overview. ArchivesCategories |