|
janh -> RE: Disparity Soviet Play German Play (8/18/2011 11:35:47 PM)
|
quote:
ORIGINAL: Gargoil
And I would like the Axis to have control over production as the Soviets do. But how to tie the outside world to it? Units are moving from east to west and back again. Soviet war is single front. There is no outside (don't worry about offmap Russia, just a holding area, no conflict).
Right, it is much simpler for Russia (assuming that the game-war doesn't turn out so well as in a few rare AAR's, when you could start making the point that Japan would have jumped the opportunity and also the Russians would have to redirect resources elsewhere).
Point is, that for both side the struggle in Russia is hard to take out of context as anything such as force and replacement assignments (i.e. production in game terms, and withdrawals) are dependent on the course of action. Both in Russia, as well as on other fronts, which would in a real world be mutually dependent, but no game can correctly catch that. Maybe future "War in Europe" will make a big step towards that, but still miss the interplay with the Pacific. Just beyond the scope of present possibilities.
However, arguing that the state for the Germans would only be influenced by the outcomes in other theaters is quite faulty. Assuming the war in Russia ran very well and Moscow, Leningrad and Sevastopol had fallen in 41/early 42, one could guess that perhaps more LCU or LBA forces (and replacements, supply etc) would have withdrawn from the East, perhaps to beef up efforts in Africa. Other way around, if things went a lot worse, the Germans would have adapted. Even with Hitler.
So considering one side's production and force setup (TOE, and unit formation) static, while the other's isn't, just is an asymmetry. A simple example: the Russian player can form new units, more than historical, if his losses are higher -- or less, if not. The Russian player can decide to put importance on tank formations, if it appears that tanks are dominating the battlefield in his game. Or put more importance on Infantry, Artillery, or Sappers for that matter. Depending on way the situation, the tactics and fighting of specific AARs develops -- which is awesome. What argument would there be that the German side could not adapt to changes, even with the limited resources it gets?
One thing I found surprising in any case, was that (unlike in WitP/AE) not the underdog gets the added flexibility here to cope with its vastly superior (in 44-45 terms) opponent.
Ideally I would wish to bind both sides to fixed production and unit reinforcement/withdrawal/formation schedules, or give both sides the chance to adapt -- best as an option at game start. Yet I understand that adding the level of production and TOE changes to the German side adds a lot of complexity in terms of game balancing, and therefore should be not a priority before everything else seems ironed out. So if that is the argument why this has been not attempted for now, it is probably best -- after all, what could you do with a game that allows you everything, but doesn't simulate anything right?
But long term it would seem highly desirable to give similar possibilities to both sides.
|
|
|
|
