ComradeP -> RE: Turn 4 (12/31/2010 1:50:26 PM)
|
I've been pondering, and I see the following strategic problems currently: 1) Due to the terrain that heavily favours the defender, getting to Leningrad in a timely fashion is probably impossible. An entire Panzer group has been held by 4 divisions in swamps/rough terrain for 2 turns as the terrain gives super CV modifiers to the Soviets. notenome might call that a victory, I'd call it being defeated by the system as it doesn't feel right that any kind of attacks through swamps with mobile units will essentially fail (this means, for example, that the historical drive to Tikhvin is a pipe dream). The choice now is whether to keep advancing with my Panzers, knowing that it might very well be impossible to take Leningrad, or to move my Panzers to AGC and just let my infantry push the front forward a bit. The AGN area is currently the main area where a historical advance isn't likely due to the terrain, if cleverly used. The modifiers the Soviets get in swamps are just too awesome (and also, in my opinion, too effective). They're also extremely random it seems. In one deliberate attack, modified CV was 8 times as high as the initial value, in another modified CV was half the initial value for no clear reason at all. Even after the lengthy debates about CV's on the tester forums, the "under the hood" functioning of the system remains something of a mystery. As I don't like to gamble, and certainly don't like situations that seem to depend solely on luck, the "move the Panzers to AGC" option sounds very enticing. There just doesn't seem much of a reason to keep pushing with mobile units in the AGN area. 2) Due to the limited advances in the AGC area, the Dnepr's probably fortified. How much of a problem this will be remains to be seen. It was a deliberate choice to commit fewer forces to AGC, and thus far I don't mind, but getting across the Dnepr will be tricky. 3) There's probably a huge concentration of troops in the Kiev area by now, so a northern hook will probably be needed to encourage them to go. That's one of the reason why I'm storming through the Pripyat marshes. As the Soviets, it's difficult to grasp the limitations imposed on the Axis, but in some ways they're pretty impressive. The reduction of engagement distances in difficult terrain really changed the nature of the campaign, making swamps real fortresses even when held by seriously understrength Soviet forces. The main problem is the lack of Axis force multipliers. Their initial CV's usually won't raise much to get to the modified CV, air power isn't always effective and the Axis support units are often too small to make a real difference. I was expecting mobile hasty attacks to fail in swamps, but I wasn't expecting deliberate attacks by infantry to fail at this rate.
|
|
|
|