christof139
Posts: 980
Joined: 12/7/2006 Status: offline
|
The amount of troops, the immense sizes that Armies can grow to and the very high number of casualties is USUALLY very unrealistic in the game. sometimes you suffer thousands of casualties and the other side suffers none or just a few hundred. Usually didn't and but very, very rarely occurred that way. I find it more interesting if main armies are near the actual sizes they were in the war, with secondary armies with smaller numbers of troops also present. This would make it easier and less time consuming to play HW's. Armies with 200,000 troops each on the field are a bit too much IMHO, and battles of that size even in the Nappy Wars only occurred infrequently: Borodnio, Leipzig and not many others. In the ACW there was not any battle where 100,000 men per side were engaged. I now have to load FoF on my SATA2 dirve and compooter with the 4GB 667MHz DDR2 RAM and see how HW's go. Would be neat if there was a maximum number of troops that could be available for each side in all Theaters for each year of the war. That would somewhat hamstring the CSA in 1864 and 1865, so some leeway would be necessary. I believe that the CSA employed near the maximum number of troops during the war that it may have actually had the capability to deploy, and even the USA was strapped to deploy the number of troops that it did. Chris
_____________________________
'What is more amazing, is that amongst all those approaching enemies there is not one named Gisgo.' Hannibal Barcid (or Barca) to Gisgo, a Greek staff officer, Cannae. That's the CSS North Carolina BB-55 Boris Badanov, looking for Natasha Goodenov
|