RE: Lvov Pocket exploit - Q for developers

RE: Lvov Pocket exploit - Q for developers (Full Version)

All Forums >> [New Releases from Matrix Games] >> Gary Grigsby's War in the East Series

Message

Schmart -> RE: Lvov Pocket exploit - Q for developers (9/19/2011 6:57:31 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: janh And in return force the German player by some rules to be trapped in a Stalingrad pocket? And maybe ensure that the Panzergroups can't be send to a different Army Group that they did not perform the 41 storm with? Sure, and why stop there? Don't allow the Soviets to defend with a carpet or checkerboard, because that too is un-historical (other than in July 1943). Don't forget the Russians must attack, attack, attack in the summer of 1941 and cannot retreat, because that is what happened historically (how many Russian players play out THAT part of the historical campaign? I never do...). We could go on and on forever... The point is that this is a game. Not a re-enactment. The game becomes un-historical the moment the Axis player moves his first unit on T1. Nerf the Lvov pocket, and everything else un-historical should also be nerfed. The Russian player can't do anything to prevent a Lvov pocket? No sh*t! Show me an IGOUGO game where the second player can prevent anything that happens on T1... [sm=innocent0009.gif]

sveint -> RE: Lvov Pocket exploit - Q for developers (9/19/2011 7:03:04 PM)
What is really needed is a scenario with a free setup turn for each side.

Q-Ball -> RE: Lvov Pocket exploit - Q for developers (9/19/2011 7:28:34 PM)
The problem with free setups and other more "realistic" ways to prevent the Germans from forming a big pocket, is that they aren't that realistic politically. The problem is that Stalin expected a forward, aggressive defense. If I had a free Soviet set-up, I would NOT set my guys up offensively, but very defensively. Given enough freedom, I would leave the bare minimum along the border, and set everyone up to make a stand along the old Stalin line, or further back. Do you think Comrade Stalin would have been OK with that strategy? Having played Soviets myself, I personally don't have a problem with the Lvov pocket. It's the last freebie the Germans get. Chalk it up to "Hold Fast' order.

Flaviusx -> RE: Lvov Pocket exploit - Q for developers (9/19/2011 7:33:55 PM)
Q-ball, I don't recall the hold fast order resulting in two dozen divisions pocketed in the first 3 days of Barbarossa and an early activation of the Romanians... But I agree that a free set up isn't the answer. Or even a freeish one. I'm more inclined towards this special surprise turn/reaction move idea as a long term solution.

Helpless -> RE: Lvov Pocket exploit - Q for developers (9/19/2011 8:08:03 PM)
quote: The problem with free setups and other more "realistic" ways to prevent the Germans from forming a big pocket, is that they aren't that realistic politically. The problem is that Stalin expected a forward, aggressive defense. If I had a free Soviet set-up, I would NOT set my guys up offensively, but very defensively. Given enough freedom, I would leave the bare minimum along the border, and set everyone up to make a stand along the old Stalin line, or further back. Do you think Comrade Stalin would have been OK with that strategy? Having played Soviets myself, I personally don't have a problem with the Lvov pocket. It's the last freebie the Germans get. Chalk it up to "Hold Fast' order. You are greatly simplifying the situation. In fact the choice was (which is also very doubtful if there was a choice at all) between very bad and very very very bad. The scenario you are trying to play without forward offensive is the one which would end much worse than it was in reality. But realistically it was just impossible... and not due to the political reasons.

janh -> RE: Lvov Pocket exploit - Q for developers (9/19/2011 8:46:55 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Helpless You are greatly simplifying the situation. In fact the choice was (which is also very doubtful if there was a choice at all) between very bad and very very very bad. The scenario you are trying to play without forward offensive is the one which would end much worse than it was in reality. But realistically it was just impossible... and not due to the political reasons. Just out of curiosity, why do you think it was impossible? I think the fact that the Germans can rearrange their Army Groups a bit for the opening does add to the value of the game. I would also go as far as to bet that if there was a game variant to be chosen at game start in which the Soviet player could reposition his forces, within some limits (perhaps in a zone within 10 hex of the border, or anything reasonable), and the German player would get some extra recon for the 1st turn to mimic the German preparations, that would even add further to the replayability and value. Just throwing out ideas...

janh -> RE: Lvov Pocket exploit - Q for developers (9/19/2011 9:02:40 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Schmart Sure, and why stop there? Don't allow the Soviets to defend with a carpet or checkerboard, because that too is un-historical (other than in July 1943). Don't forget the Russians must attack, attack, attack in the summer of 1941 and cannot retreat, because that is what happened historically (how many Russian players play out THAT part of the historical campaign? I never do...). We could go on and on forever... The point is that this is a game. Not a re-enactment. The game becomes un-historical the moment the Axis player moves his first unit on T1. Nerf the Lvov pocket, and everything else un-historical should also be nerfed. The Russian player can't do anything to prevent a Lvov pocket? No sh*t! Show me an IGOUGO game where the second player can prevent anything that happens on T1... Obviously I failed to be sarcastic. I just wanted to drive your arguments a bit further and show that it really doesn't make sense to force any player to replay historical mistakes -- unless you want ultimately just watch the War as an interactive movie without many choices on your comp. You could add in a load of "force this or that mistake" policies and rules, fix ToEs, allow Soviet only to build historically built units at the historical dates, and attach them only to their original Fronts etc. etc. But why would you want to design a game that aims at allowing you to chance history in that way? In fact I think the argument with the Lvov pocket is valid, and is simply just due to the I-Go-U-Go system, and cannot be purely attributed to alternative German strategies. Things like the latter possibility is lastly why many people plays games -- to check out alternatives. I suppose most people want a good strategy game like this to be accurate in terms of physics, logistics, etc -- anything that was a real given (and could not have been changed even by Hitler or Stalin), yet allow freedom of decision for the rest. I.e. for a good simulation you'd want to be sure that the model is accurate, for example that your tank can't cross the bridge because of size or weight, but not just because someone decided at that time it wasn't deemed sensible to try (and all world already knows if he had tried it could have made all the difference). The Lvov pocket is artificial in the sense that the Soviet side cannot react -- something like a meeting engagement or try to block the spearheads isn't possible, and surely on a time-scale of 1 week the Russians would have reacted and thrown in the kitchen sink to prevent this pocket. The Soviet side has already been trimmed by cutting armaments and the 2:1 rule etc etc, and obviously these changes will have to show their effect first before claiming that the Lvov pocket is a big deal (aside from these units being canned unrealistically early, meaning just a couple weeks early). It doesn't seem to be a game breaker to me, though, and does have only limited side effects (less likely big pockets will be formed in the south etc); and this is a feature that occurs also in later game stages, simply to the sequential movement system. I suppose it is best to live with it, or look for simple solutions like adjusting the MPs of Soviet up, or Germans down, for the 1st turn down south.

Klydon -> RE: Lvov Pocket exploit - Q for developers (9/19/2011 9:33:43 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: janh The Lvov pocket is artificial in the sense that the Soviet side cannot react -- something like a meeting engagement or try to block the spearheads isn't possible, and surely on a time-scale of 1 week the Russians would have reacted and thrown in the kitchen sink to prevent this pocket. The Soviet side has already been trimmed by cutting armaments and the 2:1 rule etc etc, and obviously these changes will have to show their effect first before claiming that the Lvov pocket is a big deal (aside from these units being canned unrealistically early, meaning just a couple weeks early). It doesn't seem to be a game breaker to me, though, and does have only limited side effects (less likely big pockets will be formed in the south etc); and this is a feature that occurs also in later game stages, simply to the sequential movement system. I suppose it is best to live with it, or look for simple solutions like adjusting the MPs of Soviet up, or Germans down, for the 1st turn down south. Sorry, not buying the "Soviet side cannot react" point specificially for the south. The fact is that Minsk is a further drive from the border than the Rumanian border, but everyone seems to be just fine with how things are going in the center and the massacre of the border Western MD armies. Part of the reason is because that is what happen in the real campaign, so in a sense, it "feels" right. The drive for the Rumanian border is a shorter distance and over less terrain (PG2 must cross a couple of rivers and go through forests to get to Minsk). The big heartburn is that it didn't happen historically and that makes it feel "gamey" when the fact is no one knows for sure what would have happen if the Germans had committed more armor on the opening offensive rather than just the 4 panzer divisions normally available on the first turn to PG1.

janh -> RE: Lvov Pocket exploit - Q for developers (9/19/2011 10:15:35 PM)
Argument taken, and makes sense. Probably the same reason that later in the game neither side complains about similar situations. As I said, I don't oppose the Lvov pocket, though after all the cuts the Soviet side had to accept in 1.05, undoing it likely wouldn't hurt. And if it leads to more pocketing in the South, or one large pocket similar to the Kiev one later, you would be right in the sense that it would even "feel" more historic. Anyway, (in a very unlikely) perhaps the devs will alllow for the possibility to mod the turn-length some day, which would address all these issues as well.

LiquidSky -> RE: Lvov Pocket exploit - Q for developers (9/20/2011 6:02:38 AM)
The real problem is a lot of these russian units are not set up in the correct spot. I have no doubt that the developers spent massive amounts of resources to accurately place them where they should be on June 22; trouble is, that is not where they were when they made contact with the Germans. The russian's south front reacted to the invading army. It did not sit like a bunch of pylons for the Germans to drive tanks around. The other problem is the perfect knowledge of troop deployment in the south. This is even worse then hindsight as it extends over the 4 days of the first turn. I see no problem with the Germans wanting to send more armour to the south, or even having some of these units start in Rumania (where they could have). What I do have issue with is the Russians sitting and doing nothing while Germans drive around them. Perhaps having an initial setup turn would be a good idea. Make it blind, and allow the Germans certain historical limits on placement of units, and make the Russians set up in the hexes they start in, or any hex closer to the front line. This would represent the unknown reaction of the Russian divisions, and would add some excitement to the start of the game.

Helpless -> RE: Lvov Pocket exploit - Q for developers (9/20/2011 6:54:06 AM)
quote: The real problem is a lot of these russian units are not set up in the correct spot. I have no doubt that the developers spent massive amounts of resources to accurately place them where they should be on June 22; trouble is, that is not where they were when they made contact with the Germans. Most of the units are set to the places they were during the contact with German units, but of cause it is not enough to produce historical engagements.

Helpless -> RE: Lvov Pocket exploit - Q for developers (9/20/2011 7:08:25 AM)
quote: Just out of curiosity, why do you think it was impossible? .. I was commenting more the proposed "retreat to Stalin line" strategy, which would be more suicidal then what was in reality. Having different placement was possible, but in the realities of spring-summer 1941 the outcome wouldn't be much better. The subject is worth of several books. But the main factors are the difference of mobility (at least 3 times) and the difference in the general state of (non-mobilized) Red Army and Wehrmacht (on its peak). Old concrete boxes with frontal facing wouldn't change much here. As they didn't at any place during WW2.

76mm -> RE: Lvov Pocket exploit - Q for developers (9/20/2011 9:00:59 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Schmart The Russian player can't do anything to prevent a Lvov pocket? No sh*t! Show me an IGOUGO game where the second player can prevent anything that happens on T1... Thanks for the insightful comment... The point is that it is, in my view, bad game design to allow the first side to move a "freebie" which has a signficant effect on game play and which the second player can do nothing about. The Lvov pocket is different from pockets formed later in the game not because it is not "historical" but because the Germans know exactly what they are up against and can repeat the maneuver every game. That said, I think that the game makes it too easy for the Sovs to conduct coordinated withdrawals in the opening weeks. In reality, I suspect that the Sov commanders were confused, out of contact with superior headquarters, receiving contractory orders, afraid that their commissars would arrest them if they retreated, had no idea where the Germans were, etc. None of that is reflected in the game, to telling effect. In the past I suggested a way to deal with this: by having some kind of "command paralysis" penalty with effects similar to interdiction...divisions or even entire armies could lose a random amount of movement per turn, or maybe lose the ability to move altogether. The chance of command paralysis could be affected by initiative, political ratings, etc., maybe some commanders would get shot for trying to retreat... While all of this would be frustrating for the Sov players, IMHO it would be much more realistic IMO than the current system.

karonagames -> RE: Lvov Pocket exploit - Q for developers (9/20/2011 9:58:00 AM)
While the first turn Lvov mega-pocket looks spectacular, the new air supply rules could mean it is of less long term value to the Axis. My approach to pockets has been to be sure I could eliminate them in one turn so as not to delay the eastward movement of the infantry, and if the pocket is not eliminated, use the minimum of force to clean it up. The Lvov "mega-pocket" can take 3-4 turns to clear up and ties down 6th and 17th armies, now, if the Soviets get air supply in there, this could take even longer. How many AARs have we seen where the Axis players who have used the Lvov gambit have gone on to achieve better than historical results across the whole front before the blizzard hits? Personally I have never used it, and in the 2 published AARs, one vs. the AI and one PBEM against Trey, I formed 2 separate pockets in the south, one small one around Lvov on turn 1 and a much larger one on turn 4-5 in front of Zhitomir (sp) which probably did as much damage as the "mega-pocket" gambit, but crucially allowed the infantry to get further east to support an earlier capture of Kiev. In both cases, I did achieve better than historical results before the blizzard hit, and this was without HQ Buildup, until it became available about T16 of my game the Trey, and helped me get Rostov and Moscow. As noted elsewhere, the Axis has to significantly weaken AGC to pull off the Lvov Gambit, and this too will have medium to longer term consequences. The strategy is not an exploit, it is a choice, and like every choice it has it's consequences.

Jakerson -> RE: Lvov Pocket exploit - Q for developers (9/20/2011 10:23:34 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Q-Ball The problem with free setups and other more "realistic" ways to prevent the Germans from forming a big pocket, is that they aren't that realistic politically. The problem is that Stalin expected a forward, aggressive defense. If I had a free Soviet set-up, I would NOT set my guys up offensively, but very defensively. Given enough freedom, I would leave the bare minimum along the border, and set everyone up to make a stand along the old Stalin line, or further back. Do you think Comrade Stalin would have been OK with that strategy? Having played Soviets myself, I personally don't have a problem with the Lvov pocket. It's the last freebie the Germans get. Chalk it up to "Hold Fast' order. Yeah but even more than that Hitler demanded Germans to fight for every inch of the territory to last man. If this kind of Stalin rule is demanded from Soviet side there is plenty of more evidence that Hitler intervened a lot more demanding fight to the last man. Hitler was 5 times larger nuisance to Germany Generals than Stalin was for the Soviet Generals. Hitler constant interentions led to destruction of 6th army in Stalingrad, destruction almost whole army group North and whole army group center during operation Bagration, German troops were decimated by Battleship guns at Normandy as Hitler did not allow Rommel to pull Germany troops to form up defensive line out of naval artillery range. Way too many German players do tactical pull backs to shorter lines and avoid pocketing. In historically from political reasons Hitler would have never allowed this kind of maneuvers. What Stalin caused maybe one pocket and destruction of tank divisions in counter attack but after 41 Stalin did not do bad interventions anymore.

Empire101 -> RE: Lvov Pocket exploit - Q for developers (9/20/2011 11:04:43 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: gradenko_2000 I don't see the point in holding off your purchase of this great game on the basis of a single opening move that might not even mean all the much in the long-term outcome of a match. It would be like not buying War in the Pacific just because the Japanese can redirect the Kido Butai to Manila instead of Pearl Harbor. +1

Empire101 -> RE: Lvov Pocket exploit - Q for developers (9/20/2011 11:07:00 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: sveint What is really needed is a scenario with a free setup turn for each side. Double +1 [:)]

Klydon -> RE: Lvov Pocket exploit - Q for developers (9/20/2011 1:34:50 PM)
Actually, Stalin was actively involved with decisions (some of them quite bad) after 1941. You just don't hear a lot about them. There were issues with the Russian counteroffensive around Stalingrad where Stalin was meddling. Zhukov was able to sometimes blunt these stupid decisions; in part because of the disasters during the late winter and spring of 1941 where Stalin's decisions to attack were foolish and resulted in the loss of a lot of Russian troops. While not as disastorious as many of Hitler's decisions, there is no question that Stalin's military decisions caused the Red Army tons of needless casualties after 1941.

Empire101 -> RE: Lvov Pocket exploit - Q for developers (9/20/2011 1:49:54 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: LiquidSky Perhaps having an initial setup turn would be a good idea. Make it blind, and allow the Germans certain historical limits on placement of units, and make the Russians set up in the hexes they start in, or any hex closer to the front line. This would represent the unknown reaction of the Russian divisions, and would add some excitement to the start of the game. This is a great idea +1[8D]

Peltonx -> RE: Lvov Pocket exploit - Q for developers (9/20/2011 2:10:42 PM)
Why the never ending baby sitting for the Russians? Every time a German player does something good it gets hit with the nerf bat? There is 100% nothing unhistorical about the Lvov move. Just play the dam AI if you want to fight a ignorant German, lol. Stop the unending cring every time a German player does something smart and that the Russian players are just plain to stupid to counter. Whats not historicail is the way way way over rated russian rail system, commander ratings, the Hill Billy tactics of running east the first 6 turns. Fix that stupid crap that 100% nonhistorical before thinking about nerfing something that 'could" have been easly historical. Lol, get off the bandwagon of nerfing the German side to junk over things that are clearly withen the realm of a smart German player. Try thinking instead of just cring a river all the time. Also by the game, before bitching about it. Pelton

76mm -> RE: Lvov Pocket exploit - Q for developers (9/20/2011 3:39:38 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Pelton Stop the unending cring every time a German player does something smart and that the Russian players are just plain to stupid to counter. Yup, you're right, I'm just too stupid to figure out how to counter a German move on Turn 1! Would love to be enlightened! And I don't consider the Lvov Gambit an exploit, just annoying and not particularly good game design (opening move requires more variablity).

Peltonx -> RE: Lvov Pocket exploit - Q for developers (9/20/2011 3:44:55 PM)
quote: Whenever a German player makes a mistake and the Russian player makes him pay its called great game play. Whenever a Russian player makes a mistake and the German player makes him pay its called exploiting and the rules must be changed to help the russian play for his poor tactics. One less person to possibly add to my friends list [8D] Dam list is getting big [X(] Pelton

Empire101 -> RE: Lvov Pocket exploit - Q for developers (9/20/2011 5:05:41 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Pelton Why the never ending baby sitting for the Russians? Every time a German player does something good it gets hit with the nerf bat? There is 100% nothing unhistorical about the Lvov move. Just play the dam AI if you want to fight a ignorant German, lol. Stop the unending cring every time a German player does something smart and that the Russian players are just plain to stupid to counter. Whats not historicail is the way way way over rated russian rail system, commander ratings, the Hill Billy tactics of running east the first 6 turns. Fix that stupid crap that 100% nonhistorical before thinking about nerfing something that 'could" have been easly historical. Lol, get off the bandwagon of nerfing the German side to junk over things that are clearly withen the realm of a smart German player. Try thinking instead of just cring a river all the time. Also by the game, before bitching about it. Pelton I hope this was'nt aimed at my previous post ( Post 49 ), as I'm certainly NOT a Russian Baby Sitter, and I certainly agree with what you are saying.

pompack -> RE: Lvov Pocket exploit - Q for developers (9/20/2011 5:05:52 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Pelton quote: Whenever a German player makes a mistake and the Russian player makes him pay its called great game play. Whenever a Russian player makes a mistake and the German player makes him pay its called exploiting and the rules must be changed to help the russian play for his poor tactics. One less person to possibly add to my friends list [8D] Dam list is getting big [X(] Pelton Pelton I am honestly confused about this post [&:] Isn't that your own quote and arn't people agreeing with it in the other thread?

Empire101 -> RE: Lvov Pocket exploit - Q for developers (9/20/2011 5:06:58 PM)
Yep, it sure confused me[:'(]

Flaviusx -> RE: Lvov Pocket exploit - Q for developers (9/20/2011 6:13:51 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: BigAnorak While the first turn Lvov mega-pocket looks spectacular, the new air supply rules could mean it is of less long term value to the Axis. This relies entirely on the Luftwaffe ignoring the place. If the Axis player knows his business, the place will be crawling with CAP and turn air resupply efforts into a turkey shoot. That being said, I've seen a number of AAR where indeed the Soviet is getting supplies through. Mostly because this is new, I expect that Axis players will quickly adjust and shut down this airhead possibility. I myself have managed to a bit of this in the Bialystock salient. Not sure what happened to the Luftwaffe, but it didn't intercept.

saintsup -> RE: Lvov Pocket exploit - Q for developers (9/20/2011 6:18:03 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Empire101 quote: ORIGINAL: sveint What is really needed is a scenario with a free setup turn for each side. Double +1 [:)] Triple +1 if coupled to some randomness in C&C/movment capacity of Soviets during the first few turns. I'm very tired of repeating ad nauseam the 'optimal' first turn for Axis

Baelfiin -> RE: Lvov Pocket exploit - Q for developers (9/20/2011 9:42:50 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: BigAnorak While the first turn Lvov mega-pocket looks spectacular, the new air supply rules could mean it is of less long term value to the Axis. My approach to pockets has been to be sure I could eliminate them in one turn so as not to delay the eastward movement of the infantry, and if the pocket is not eliminated, use the minimum of force to clean it up. The Lvov "mega-pocket" can take 3-4 turns to clear up and ties down 6th and 17th armies, now, if the Soviets get air supply in there, this could take even longer. How many AARs have we seen where the Axis players who have used the Lvov gambit have gone on to achieve better than historical results across the whole front before the blizzard hits? Personally I have never used it, and in the 2 published AARs, one vs. the AI and one PBEM against Trey, I formed 2 separate pockets in the south, one small one around Lvov on turn 1 and a much larger one on turn 4-5 in front of Zhitomir (sp) which probably did as much damage as the "mega-pocket" gambit, but crucially allowed the infantry to get further east to support an earlier capture of Kiev. In both cases, I did achieve better than historical results before the blizzard hit, and this was without HQ Buildup, until it became available about T16 of my game the Trey, and helped me get Rostov and Moscow. As noted elsewhere, the Axis has to significantly weaken AGC to pull off the Lvov Gambit, and this too will have medium to longer term consequences. The strategy is not an exploit, it is a choice, and like every choice it has it's consequences. Not really going to be able to air supply the Lvov Pocket in the second and later turns of the game You will be able to get some supply, but not enough to make a major differance. The cost in bombers is pretty high. You may have enough for 4 or 5 infantry divs for ac ouple of turns, but by that time the russians lines are going to be rolling back and unescorted supply flights get butchered.

Klydon -> RE: Lvov Pocket exploit - Q for developers (9/20/2011 9:46:07 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Flaviusx quote: ORIGINAL: BigAnorak While the first turn Lvov mega-pocket looks spectacular, the new air supply rules could mean it is of less long term value to the Axis. This relies entirely on the Luftwaffe ignoring the place. If the Axis player knows his business, the place will be crawling with CAP and turn air resupply efforts into a turkey shoot. That being said, I've seen a number of AAR where indeed the Soviet is getting supplies through. Mostly because this is new, I expect that Axis players will quickly adjust and shut down this airhead possibility. I myself have managed to a bit of this in the Bialystock salient. Not sure what happened to the Luftwaffe, but it didn't intercept. The German needs to counter it as he can, but I don't see how this can be a good long term strategy because at some point, the air is going to get fixed and after that, I expect to see Russian planes trying this shot down in droves in the early days of the campaign. Russian players would be advised not to get used to it as a long term strategy. (Much like many German players ceased with shipping in units to Riga after they learned it would be nerfed).

Redmarkus5 -> RE: Lvov Pocket exploit - Q for developers (9/21/2011 6:42:22 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Flaviusx Asdicus, for whatever it is worth, I agree with you and would like to see this changed. My own view is that at a minimum Southwest Front ought not be subject to the same surprise attack turns rules that apply to the rest of the Red Army. (This would give them full movement.) But even that may not be enough to properly fix this. There's been some talk off and on about redoing the whole surprise turn. A couple of thoughts on this: 1. As you imply, SW Front seems to be badly handled by the game design vs. the historical situation, in which they launched major counter attacks and caused real problems for the Axis very early on. 2. A part of the 'Lvov Pocket' problem has to do with the 'unlocking' of the Romanian and German troops in the south - as if the arrival of some Panzer regiments would somehow cause all of their planning and preparations to magically time warp. 3. WiTP AE has two start options, IIRC, one of which allows you to start on December 08, after Pearl Harbor. Maybe WITE needs an option to start the Grand Campaign in week 2, with the historical successes of the first week of operations already played out and the surprise factor removed?

Page: << < prev 1 [2] 3 4 5 next > >>

Forum Software © ASPPlayground.NET Advanced Edition 2.4.5 ANSI

3.6875