JEB Davis
Posts: 443
Joined: 12/27/2005 From: Michigan, U.T.B. Status: offline
|
quote:
ORIGINAL: Afrika Korps I usually suffer massively more casualties with C&C on, as my troops won't move in any sort of flanking motion due to where the set objective lies. Heading straight into a hail a bullets instead of say, rounding a hill in a flanking move, is not my cup of tea. I realize that in some ways it is a lot more realistic to not have every unit know everything you, as the commander, know. Still, with C&C on it sometimes really hamstrings your units ability to make "in the field" adjustments. I play with it off. Obviously I still have a lot to learn about how to play with C&C on. I'm a big fan of C&C myself, but it does take more work, i.e., setting new objective hexes, planning ahead, cursing when you don't have enough orders to go around, etc. I still like it because I think it make the game more realistic. However, many scenarios seem to have been made without taking it into consideration. For example, when there are maybe 3 AUX Inf Platoons (and you can't move them in DEPLOY mode because they are AUX), and each one has a single ATR unit mingled with it. This is a problem, since 2 of these ATRs are spread out and out of range of their platoon leader ATR. You can just tell the scenario designer in a case like this probably doesn't use C&C. With my core units, I will sometimes re-attach these types of units to an Inf Plt so they are under the Plt leader's command, but this doesn't help AUX units.
_____________________________
|