Changing the course of the war - outside the scope of SP?

Changing the course of the war - outside the scope of SP? (Full Version)

All Forums >> [Current Games From Matrix.] >> [World War II] >> Steel Panthers World At War & Mega Campaigns

Message

Einar Fridgeirs -> Changing the course of the war - outside the scope of SP? (1/29/2006 12:06:33 AM)
As we know, the long WWII campaign takes your forces through the entire war, but follows the historical course. Even if you thoroughly trounce the enemy at locations where in history you would have been supposed to lose, you still wind up fighting him in other locations that, if you were to judge by history you shouldn´t be supposed to be at... I haven´t played any of the Megacampaigns so they might be diffrent, but I was just wondering how people´s feelings on this are. SP is a tactical level wargame, and I was just curious whether you feel that this is all good and proper, that success and failure at the tactical level is always trumped by happenings at the grander strategic level, by decisions made outside the scope of SP? Although it´s easy to say that overall victory or defeat were inevitable due to non-frontline elements such as economics, supply, geography etc.....should or shouldn´t SP be able to adress the issue of a tactical engagement changing the course of history? Is a company or battalion commander, no matter how brilliant his leadership may be unable to affect the course of the war? Is he simply doing the best while the real key events take place in loftier places, where government men make logistical decision that REALLY matter? And which SP:WaW engagements do you think would have changed the outcome of the war? Normandy comes first to mind, of course, and definently if Germany had been able to secure Moscow before being stopped by the winter(they were SO close), but what do you think? Should SP be able to allow you to take certain strategic decisions? Or just stick to doing what your superiors tell you and fight your battles to the best of your abilities....

Zap -> RE: Changing the course of the war - outside the scope of SP? (1/29/2006 12:31:35 AM)
Interesting points of view. But I think the war would have ended with an allied victory eventually. Even if, the axis powers had won more tactical battles. The only situation that would have changed the war results (IMO) would have been the fall of Russia. Germany would not have conquered the world but this would have forced the allies to fight on many more years. The world would have had to accept the empire of Germany which would have included Russia. As far as the game, I don't think that different historical results was in the scope of the design. Since there won't be any changes in the design of the game(its run its course) we have to enjoy the game in all its slendor. And wait for a newly designed game sometime in the future to accomplish what you are seeking.

Afrika Korps -> RE: Changing the course of the war - outside the scope of SP? (1/29/2006 12:35:11 AM)
I look at it like this: The Axis might have lost the war, but they did not lose every tactical battle. Thus (playing as the Axis) in my sector I might win, but everyone else around my sector is losing. Therefore, regardless of how I do, I still have to retreat to avoid becoming cut off in a pocket and destroyed. I "win" every battle, but my side loses everything else overall. History continues unchanged. [:'(]

KG Erwin -> RE: Changing the course of the war - outside the scope of SP? (1/29/2006 12:35:39 AM)
Influencing the outcome of the war is way beyond the scope of SPWaW. That was never its intent. You are a small part of a much bigger war, with the optimum command level of controlling a reinforced battalion. Within the Mega Campaigns or the game-generated long campaigns, your missions are assigned to you and you do your best to accomplish them. You gain satisfaction from leading and nurturing your men and giving them better equipment as the war progresses. The immersion level goes as deep as you want it to be. At this level, what more could you want? Einar, I played a whole long campaign as a US Marine battalion commander. At the end of it, my troops were top-notch soldiers, but suddenly the war was over. No fanfares, no victory parades. This is what to expect. It is an anti-climax. You can only look back at your accomplishments, and then think about going home. What better reward can a combat soldier expect? You survive, and you get to go home and reunite with your loved ones. This is what it 's really about, isn't it? (Note: I hope I didn't come off as sounding harsh. The above is just my personal opinion.)

Page: [1]

Forum Software © ASPPlayground.NET Advanced Edition 2.4.5 ANSI

0.8588867