|
Dave Ferguson -> CEAW , Pace and History (7/1/2007 12:34:01 PM)
|
In the few games I have played I have noticed something which disturbs me, the pace of operations. Early war the axis do everything faster than historical, obviously there are advantages for the player in doing this.
1. You get the pp points earlier
2. You can set up 'perfect' invasions as there is no political cost
3. Most important - you reduce the time that the allied player has to build a defence.
4. there is no weather cost - attack France in February, never mind the rain, cloud and 8 hour days!
Denmark did not have any resources that made it worth taking out the country in October 1939. It was attacked because it was the route to Norway and DOW'd at the same time as Norway. Invading Denmark without a DOW on Norway woud have set alarm bells ringing in Oslo and London.
Holland also had no military value except as a route to Belgium. A DOW on Holland before a DOW on Belgium makes no sense other than to gain an advantageous starting position v Belgium.
Historically the French mobilisation was more advanced than the german!!! but the French troops were scattered all over France, not just on the border. Plus historically the strongest French armies were those in the Maginot line and lots of them!
For game balance you can't have a historical French set up as a agressive allied player would overrun western germany.
BUT as there are no units in production attacking early gives germany an advantage in force levels that they did not have historically.
On to the med. A axis all out offensive as soon as Italy joins is a good idea as the UK is struggling to stay alive and reinforceing Egypt is difficult, did it really take 5 months for troops to get there?
What is missing here is POLITICS, there is a section on politics in the script so why not in the game
Mid war the allies scatter numerous invasions eveywhere, where did they get the shipping??
For me this game does not 'feel' good.
|
|
|
|
