lwarmonger -> RE: More feedback on 1.05 (11/4/2019 9:57:31 AM)
|
So some further thoughts. Definitely think the Soviet Union needs a great deal more income during the leadup to war. Historically, Soviet Armies were huge, and right now that simply isn't reflected. That being said, there should be severe combat (and possibly movement, if possible) maluses for the first 8 months or so after the German attack, because while huge, those Soviet armies were also completely ineffective. Right now the Soviet Union is simply outnumbered from the start. The only way to catch up is to avoid combat while continuously retreating until unit density is high enough to hold a front and counterattack. Instead, Germany should be plowing its way through large numbers of soviet troops with ease... however those Soviet units can then be replaced at 50% cost, while also improving German experience. This will end up working to the Soviets advantage... but Barbarossa should be a very hard thing for Germany to win... a bit easier than Sealion, but still very difficult. We discussed North Africa above... and thus far I've had one game as axis where my tanks didn't quite push through to victory before the British Navy was able to move into the Med in force to cut supply lines (and it was time for Barbarossa anyways), and another game as allies where Germany committed to a tentative Sea Lion (failed, although the British fleet was thoroughly mauled) and a knockout blow against England in North Africa (it is a little early to say it has failed yet... but it is in the balance right now). In each case in North Africa, once the British were able to bring in reinforcements from all over and mass their airpower, all of these things achieved a kind of equality with German armor. I would say generally North Africa is reasonably balanced.
|
|
|
|