Charles22
Posts: 912
Joined: 5/17/2000
From: Dallas, Texas, USA
Status: offline
|
tow-2: Consider the following: I've had about three or four campaign battles, as Gerry, where the opponent has gone for all three objective areas at once and the rest have been the AI's all-out attempt to take only one or two of the frontline objective areas, which of course leaves one or more unnecessarily unmanned, while the others are barely holding out. I've also had numerous times where the force will divert to engage fire that is coming from an area that he's not normally attacking. I would suggest you change your setup to include five clusters of objective areas instead of four. I've also seen entire companies or larger go after my recon deep penetrations, and in some cases decimate them.
I've also seen MANY times where the enemy ISN'T on his frontline, or if he is, his main force certainly isn't. I've also seen virtually half of the enemy's forces, go from a staunch defensive posture, to suddenly attacking me, as though a deep penetration set off a trigger (I suppose I threatened one of his objective areas too much).
Frankly, with all the variety I've seen, I can't believe that you haven't seen any of it. Also, perhaps if you refused to yield any ground while on the defensive, as I do (not one objective hex must be taken [though it certainly happens at times]), there would be more excitement.
This latest battle of mine (I restarted Gerry campaign beginning in Poland after I changed the faulty ratings for the Polish 75mm AA and the rifle squad level of 19 back to 10) in 10/39 I have a visibility of 18, in a meeting engagement. Two of the objective clusters are TOGETHER in a HEAVILY wooded area. Never allowing not a single hex to be taken will be virtually impossible, but it does show that how different placing objective areas can alter things. If your strategy to deal with this is to retreat, you can forget that, because much of the map is wooded too, and I doubt it'll be any easier retaking that area, then to hold it as is. I also have an objective area well south of that, which the Poles have sent some infantry some ten hexes back to make a flanking attempt through some more woods, while sending a platoon of tanks to take those objectives, directly; obviously diverted from the force that he had intent on taking the big two clusters. Frankly, what I see he's trying to do with the infantry that's trying to go south, I've never seen him doing before. I say give the AI a chance, there's a lot more variety then you're giving it credit for and given the varying objecitve area clusters and visibility it can be quite unique.
I hate to say it, but your idea that SP1 had a better situation for AI is WAY OFF BASE. There, literally everything was predictable, including the AI ALWAYS knowing where the 88's were, without firing a round (even if behind hills, unseen). You might also recall how irritating it was that you had to buy a TON of AA guns just to try to keep your best tanks, the really expensive ones, from getting destroyed by one lousy aircraft passover, the artillery that did it if the aircraft didn't, and all those lousy track hits if none of those things did it. SP1 doesn't even compare by a long shot.
Another thing, being greatly outnumbered is common when you have a defensive mission, but then I guess an SP1 vet would know that. How has it slipped your mind?
_____________________________
|
Printable Version
Campaign battles - 
But that's why we play the game.
New Messages
No New Messages
Hot Topic w/ New Messages
Hot Topic w/o New Messages
Locked w/ New Messages
Locked w/o New Messages
Post New Thread