|
terje439 -> RE: What?! Seriously?! You are back for more??? No Oloren!! (9/29/2012 8:18:28 AM)
|
quote:
ORIGINAL: Schmart
quote:
ORIGINAL: terje439
Well, never seen Yanks or Brits outside Berlin, but HAVE seen the USSR there [:D]
No, it is a good and valid point, and ofc a problem with games that deals with one single theathre. However, I am not saying that units should not withdraw at the given dates, but if say the USSR has taken Warsaw in -43, I think units should be kept in the east. And that was my initial post about this, "Unit XXX will withdraw at turn YYY unless condition ZZZ is in effect, in which case it remains"
I understand, but again, could we not also say that if the Germans occupy Lenningrad and Moscow, OKH would withdraw troops because things seem about wrapped up in Russia? Historically, the Germans did gear down a bit and start withdrawing/disbanding units in late 1941 because it looked like the Russians were close to collapse. So if the Axis capture and hold Moscow (or maybe better yet, if the Russians fall below 4 million men) meaning that the Axis are doing better than historical, then why shouldn't 3rd Panzer Army be sent to North Africa to help Rommel's drive to the Suez as a Russian collapse appears iminent? Of course the reverse is again possible: Rommel succeeds and OKH sends the Afrika Korps to the Russian Steppes...or Wacht Am Rhein succeeds in 1944, 21st British Army Group is annihilated and 1st Para Army is freed up for the east!
Also, it brings up gamey possibilities. Now the Russian player knows the Germans get to keep extra units if Warsaw falls before 1944, so he deliberately lets the Germans hold Warsaw to trigger those scheduled withdrawls... A gamey and non-historically plausible strategy.
One thing I would like to see with the scheduled withdrawls is a bit of variability, say withdraw +/- 5 turns, or something, so that players don't necessarily know exactly when a unit is schuduled to withdraw. Another idea someone brought up a while back was having holding boxes, where a player must keep XXX value CV units, or take a VP hit, or something like that. It's a good idea to spice up the withdrawl system, but it can be so situation specific and complex that it would be difficult to replicate a robust system. And then, how does an AI control it...
Personally, I've always figured that if I was doing better or worse in game, then in my mind I logically conclude that my other off map fronts are going similarly as good/bad also, so that they (psychologically) cancel out, and any pre-scripted withdrawls or other in game events are simply matched to other fronts. Example: Warsaw falls in 1943 and a couple SS Divisions are withdrawn a couple turns later? I would think "Well, damn, the Italian Front obviously had a really bad collapse and the Allies are close to crossing the Alps, and holy crap, the war is really going bad for us right now!" [:)] I guess I just roll with it and have a little historical fun with it at the same time. No biggie.
Hmm, rested and after some hours of sleep, I agree with what you are saying, but I am still on the "not a fan of scheduled withdrawals in GG games"-side [;)]
The entire problem arises as a game goes really askew from RL events. And let us be honest, the USSR does not have to follow those rules. Want an all out mechanized army? Be my guest. Want nothing but cavalry? Sure, go ahead.
Not saying that would be a CLEVER thing to do, but you can do it [;)]
But, there will always be something some people (like me) will never be happy about I suppose (like my 250 Tigers standing outside the factory not to be deployed to the worn down panzer divisions because Tigers are for heavy tank companies only [:D]).
Terje
|
|
|
|
