Is Romanian/Axis Minor national morale slightly too low? (Full Version)

All Forums >> [New Releases from Matrix Games] >> Gary Grigsby's War in the East 2



Message

Beethoven1 -> Is Romanian/Axis Minor national morale slightly too low? (10/11/2021 10:14:24 PM)

I know that they were bad and didn't fight well for the most part historically, but were they really this bad?

And yes, I can certainly understand that Romanian troops didn't hold the flanks at Stalingrad, and tbh that is understandable given that they were attacked with a large mass of Soviet tanks and they didn't have AT weapons etc.

However, in game (in particular in the StB scenario in my case, although I have seen the same sort of thing in the 1941 scenario), it seems like Romanian troops will rout just ridiculously easily. I can just attack them with infantry (not tanks against which they don't have AT weapons against), and more often than not they seem to rout. Did Romanian and other Axis minor troops really rout when Soviet infantry even just sneezed on them?

Maybe I am wrong on this - no doubt some other people know more details about the history than I, and if so and if the Axis minors can really only be accurately represented as being this bad, then I'd be happy to be corrected.

Anyway, so perhaps for balance purposes, it might be good for the national morale of Axis minors to be raised by at least a small amount across the board? Even if just 5 higher or possibly 10? But 5? I don't think they necessarily need or should have higher morale in 1941, but maybe just very slightly higher morale for Axis minors from 1942 onwards might be an improvement?

Just a thought, and again, I could be wrong and maybe this would be totally unrealistic and ruled out on those grounds.



loki100 -> RE: Is Romanian/Axis Minor national morale slightly too low? (10/11/2021 10:24:28 PM)

few observations (not a view either way), yes they rout readily, combination of a relatively low unit morale/exp (so losses escalate) and then matched to low TOE (disruptions etc) makes them vulnerable.

The good bit with the Rumanians is you have manpower to spare - since most players won't have re-enacted their horrific losses at Odessa. So they repair in a turn or so. I tend to think they need to be stacked 3 high for some security but they can do a job - and do return fairly quickly.

The Hungarians when they move to their 1943 TOEs are pretty useful, again also they recover readily. But in general I get a decent usage out of them

The mountain formations with their +5 are pretty decent in both armies, so that might be a clue to how they'd behave more widely if their NM was given a hand up.

What I find I have is say 2 Rumanian corps in the line and one picking up the routs for refit and return. By the time that has done its job there is another corps worth in need of refit. Also I find adding in the machine gun SUs into their formations seems to toughen them up.

All of which is incoherent way of saying - 'really not sure'



HardLuckYetAgain -> RE: Is Romanian/Axis Minor national morale slightly too low? (10/11/2021 10:29:03 PM)



Rumanians can't hold a thing even 1 on 1 with a Soviet Rifle Division in GC41 start. I now either put them with a German Division, stack 3 of them together in defense, or in great defense terrain, or ship them off to Soviet Garrison Duty. With Soviet Garrison Duty being the best thing for them for me. I am pretty sure this was talked about before and is WAD but not 100% sure. I just accept it and go on myself now regulating them to strawmen that catch fire easily thus I keep them out of the fire :(




HardLuckYetAgain -> RE: Is Romanian/Axis Minor national morale slightly too low? (10/11/2021 10:30:53 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: loki100

few observations (not a view either way), yes they rout readily, combination of a relatively low unit morale/exp (so losses escalate) and then matched to low TOE (disruptions etc) makes them vulnerable.

The good bit with the Rumanians is you have manpower to spare - since most players won't have re-enacted their horrific losses at Odessa. So they repair in a turn or so. I tend to think they need to be stacked 3 high for some security but they can do a job - and do return fairly quickly.

The Hungarians when they move to their 1943 TOEs are pretty useful, again also they recover readily. But in general I get a decent usage out of them

The mountain formations with their +5 are pretty decent in both armies, so that might be a clue to how they'd behave more widely if their NM was given a hand up.

What I find I have is say 2 Rumanian corps in the line and one picking up the routs for refit and return. By the time that has done its job there is another corps worth in need of refit. Also I find adding in the machine gun SUs into their formations seems to toughen them up.

All of which is incoherent way of saying - 'really not sure'


Yes, the Rumanian MTN Brigades are awesome. CAV to a lesser degree. The Divisions just disintegrate besides the Guards one.



Beethoven1 -> RE: Is Romanian/Axis Minor national morale slightly too low? (10/11/2021 10:37:15 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: loki100

But in general I get a decent usage out of them


Is that in single player like your recent AAR with Germany, or also in multiplayer?

quote:

ORIGINAL: loki100

losses escalate


If it is mostly in single player that they can be put to some sort of reasonable use, I wonder if the issue might be that in multiplayer, players target those units in particular for attacks because they know that they are weak, whereas the AI would not target Axis minor troops in particular. If so, then insofar as the losses do escalate, then this would lead to more Romanian routs in multiplayer games than single player?



DeletedUser44 -> RE: Is Romanian/Axis Minor national morale slightly too low? (10/11/2021 11:13:05 PM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: loki100

Yes, the Rumanian MTN Brigades are awesome. CAV to a lesser degree. The Divisions just disintegrate besides the Guards one.



Agree.

About the only thing the regular Rumanian divisions are good for is that they do exert ZOC and can capture vacant hexes.

However, I do feel the OP posed a good question. "Were the Romanians really this bad?"

The following is the classic example of them collapsing while protecting the flanks at Stalingrad. (but were they forced to retreat? - or simply routed at every opportunity?)

https://www.historynet.com/romanian-nightmare-stalingrad.htm

The previous narrative makes it sound like they held their ground against Soviet infantry, but were not equipped to withstand Soviet armor.

If the Romanians truly dissolved at the first sign of combat, then why were they entrusted to defend the flanks to begin with?

I am inclined to believe the OP may be on to something....



jzardos -> RE: Is Romanian/Axis Minor national morale slightly too low? (10/11/2021 11:30:35 PM)

I think the simple answer is yes. They are historical with their equipment which limits their effectiveness in combat, so giving the a ridiculously low morale is just not historical and penalizes them more than necessary.



AlbertN -> RE: Is Romanian/Axis Minor national morale slightly too low? (10/12/2021 12:40:44 AM)

I am positive Axis minors in general need some beefing up.

Presently they've pratically a 'quadruple dip'.

Low Morale + Scarce TOE (Equipment shortages) + Poor Equipment (Not just few, but also bad!) + Poor Leaders

Personally I think Italians and Romanians should have a baseline of 50 National Morale or 55. Hungarians and Slovaks 60.

TOE is what it is.
Equipment quality - values ultimately are discretional of the designers exactly as morale.
Leadership - values as well discretional, but without question the non Finland Axis minors in general had WW1 school type of leaders in general.

I'd start with an upping of national morale.
So +1 to the thread opener!




DesertedFox -> RE: Is Romanian/Axis Minor national morale slightly too low? (10/12/2021 1:36:19 AM)

A couple of points to consider.

1. The Romanians were not invested in the war against Russia as was Germany. This reflects in the mentality of the average Romanian soldier with "What am I doing here"?

2. Their equipment sucked making them Nervous Nellies especially should any Soviet armour being in the vicinity.

3. They took a beating at Odessa and thus were employed on secondary duties after that because they obviously couldn't handle front line duties.

4. And as for
quote:

ORIGINAL: Sauron_II

If the Romanians truly dissolved at the first sign of combat, then why were they entrusted to defend the flanks to begin with?



What troops would you propose that Hitler should have put on the flanks considering that there were no Germans to spare? Of course, hindsight could suggest that he pull German troops out of Stalingrad and then thrust those Romanians in the hell hole of Stalingrad. They were so short of actual fighting troops (not support troops) that Romanians were actually used (sparingly) in the push into Stalingrad.

5. There is a very good reason you don't hear about Romanian troops after the capture of Odessa until Stalingrad and I believe that is relfected accurately in game.



HardLuckYetAgain -> RE: Is Romanian/Axis Minor national morale slightly too low? (10/12/2021 1:52:43 AM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: DesertedFox

A couple of points to consider.

1. The Romanians were not invested in the war against Russia as was Germany. This reflects in the mentality of the average Romanian soldier with "What am I doing here"?

2. Their equipment sucked making them Nervous Nellies especially should any Soviet armour being in the vicinity.

3. They took a beating at Odessa and thus were employed on secondary duties after that because they obviously couldn't handle front line duties.

4. And as for
quote:

ORIGINAL: Sauron_II

If the Romanians truly dissolved at the first sign of combat, then why were they entrusted to defend the flanks to begin with?



What troops would you propose that Hitler should have put on the flanks considering that there were no Germans to spare? Of course, hindsight could suggest that he pull German troops out of Stalingrad and then thrust those Romanians in the hell hole of Stalingrad. They were so short of actual fighting troops (not support troops) that Romanians were actually used (sparingly) in the push into Stalingrad.

5. There is a very good reason you don't hear about Romanian troops after the capture of Odessa until Stalingrad and I believe that is relfected accurately in game.


Have to "concur" with DesertedFox here.



GibsonPete -> RE: Is Romanian/Axis Minor national morale slightly too low? (10/12/2021 2:04:53 AM)

IMO the Axis minors national morale should be raised. The Slovaks were praised by the Germans and the Rumanians did at Odessa and the Crimea. They had equipment issues and the Rumanian reorganization of 42 included a 3 man tank killer team in every platoon. (They were previously the platoon runners.) The Hungarians performed well when they took things seriously. The Italians, well, they are the Italians. Overall no player will place the Axis minors in the position the Germans did and expect different results.



DeletedUser44 -> RE: Is Romanian/Axis Minor national morale slightly too low? (10/12/2021 2:36:56 AM)

The Romanians were never regarded as 'crack' or elite troops by any measure. But keep in mind that they were the perfect scapegoat for any German failure in Army Group South. So, some of the overly negative press may have been as a result.

Their TOE is a significant hardship. That alone may be enough to reflect their lack-luster performances.

But, unlike their Italian contemporaries, Germany did not turn down their assistance or involvement on the eastern front.

Additionally, Manstein was able to effectively use them in his conquest of the Crimea. They also successfully participated in the Battle of Uman, as well as the Second Battle of Kharkov, to name two more, without dissolving like wet tissue paper.



DesertedFox -> RE: Is Romanian/Axis Minor national morale slightly too low? (10/12/2021 2:41:42 AM)

Here is a map of the southwest front line just before the launch of Operation Uranus.

To the south of Stalingrad, we have the 4th Romanian Army, to the north the 3rd Romanian, 8th Italain, and 2nd Hungarian armies.

Much further north at the Rzhev salient, and not on this map, is where Operation Mars is happening where the Soviets take a real beating but prevent any Germans troops from being able to be transferred to the south.

map




AlbertN -> RE: Is Romanian/Axis Minor national morale slightly too low? (10/12/2021 2:55:52 AM)

That Soviet breakthrough was made by late '42 Soviet troops and mostly with grand armoured support, which no Axis Minor nation really had adequate weapons to deal with; and by sheer force of Soviet human waves.

I do not believe anyone here is asking for Romanians to have super equipment or German alike national morale - what it is said that the present situation for the Axis minors is way excessive in the 'lows' levels.



DesertedFox -> RE: Is Romanian/Axis Minor national morale slightly too low? (10/12/2021 3:00:04 AM)

This series on youtube by TIK. It is quite amazing and well worth anyone playing this game time to watch.

TIK

A good read about Romanian troops.

ROMANIA AS AN ALLY OF NAZI GERMANY ON THE EASTERN FRONT OF WW2

Generally speaking, the Romanian troops performed to the capabilities of their officers, equipment, and personal motivation, all of which were very poor.

This is no reflection on their bravery because many times they did fight bravely even in the face of overwhelming odds.

This is about their ability to fight effectively against the Russians consistently without the heavy support of German formations.



DesertedFox -> RE: Is Romanian/Axis Minor national morale slightly too low? (10/12/2021 3:48:00 AM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: AlbertN

That Soviet breakthrough was made by late '42 Soviet troops and mostly with grand armoured support, which no Axis Minor nation really had adequate weapons to deal with; and by sheer force of Soviet human waves.

I do not believe anyone here is asking for Romanians to have super equipment or German alike national morale - what it is said that the present situation for the Axis minors is way excessive in the 'lows' levels.



I am very interested to hear your "suggested" levels of experience and morale for the Romanians then.

Given the randomness of the Russian morale at the start, I can still give a very accurate coverage of what they will have.

Romanians (non mountain/cav)have mostly a 45 for morale and experience (some above these numbers).

Russians (non NKVD/Cav/Mounain) have a LOT of mostly 35 experience (many under 40) with a trickle going up to 50, and as far as morale goes from 35 to 60, mostly at 45 or under though.

So Romanian troops are generally slightly above the Russians in morale and on par in experience.

I don't see these numbers as being out of wack as to their true resepective abilities.

Increasing Romanian numbers would make them superior to the Russians and I don't see any historical accuracy in this.






HardLuckYetAgain -> RE: Is Romanian/Axis Minor national morale slightly too low? (10/12/2021 4:10:42 AM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: DesertedFox


quote:

ORIGINAL: AlbertN

That Soviet breakthrough was made by late '42 Soviet troops and mostly with grand armoured support, which no Axis Minor nation really had adequate weapons to deal with; and by sheer force of Soviet human waves.

I do not believe anyone here is asking for Romanians to have super equipment or German alike national morale - what it is said that the present situation for the Axis minors is way excessive in the 'lows' levels.



I am very interested to hear your "suggested" levels of experience and morale for the Romanians then.

Given the randomness of the Russian morale at the start, I can still give a very accurate coverage of what they will have.

Romanians (non mountain/cav)have mostly a 45 for morale and experience (some above these numbers).

Russians (non NKVD/Cav/Mounain) have a LOT of mostly 35 experience (many under 40) with a trickle going up to 50, and as far as morale goes from 35 to 60, mostly at 45 or under though.

So Romanian troops are generally slightly above the Russians in morale and on par in experience.

I don't see these numbers as being out of wack as to their true resepective abilities.

Increasing Romanian numbers would make them superior to the Russians and I don't see any historical accuracy in this.






Rum Cav & Mountain is 65. Regular Divisions are 45, Guards Division is 60. I have some Rum Divisions in the 50's Morale & EXP already from attacking with Germans. That is how you improve them :) (I have had in another game regular Rumanians in the 60's for Morale and Exp, so I know it can be done)

[image]local://upfiles/53556/8EA82402D06D4C519A5DC2351BB9471F.jpg[/image]



HardLuckYetAgain -> RE: Is Romanian/Axis Minor national morale slightly too low? (10/12/2021 4:17:07 AM)

Remember that experience & morale will rise too based on these rules. Thus getting them in "winning" combat is key.



[image]local://upfiles/53556/A68CA2F16D6B4CD280B8D22B34195296.jpg[/image]



HardLuckYetAgain -> RE: Is Romanian/Axis Minor national morale slightly too low? (10/12/2021 4:22:21 AM)

I personally think it is a growing pain but if you work hard at it you can have some tough regular Rumanian Divisions. Getting there is the pain but well worth it if you work at it.



HardLuckYetAgain -> RE: Is Romanian/Axis Minor national morale slightly too low? (10/12/2021 4:32:20 AM)

So I concur with DesertedFox. The current morale and experience of Rumanians is where it should be and if raised you would have the potential of a 70 morale/experience regular Rumanian Division which I feel would not be accurate to history as I know it.



Jango32 -> RE: Is Romanian/Axis Minor national morale slightly too low? (10/12/2021 6:55:57 AM)

A typical Romanian infantry division in 1941 contained about 17 500 men. Its equipment included 402 LMGs, 148 MMGs, 950 horse teams, only 126 trucks and 27 light transports, 30 AT guns, 60 60mm mortars, 21 81mm mortars, 54 47-75mm artillery pieces and 16 100mm artillery pieces. The infantrymen of the division were reasonably well equipped, but the division was not very mobile and lacked heavy infantry weapons. Most critical was the lack of any decent medium to heavy artillery: each Romanian infantry division had only 16 100mm howitzers as the heaviest artillery weapon available, with the bulk of the remaining pieces being light weapons to the range of 75mm.

This lack of heavy artillery and their relative immobility severely curtailed their usefulness in 1941 and made any attack against entrenched or fortified Soviet divisions very costly (never mind successful).



loki100 -> RE: Is Romanian/Axis Minor national morale slightly too low? (10/12/2021 7:53:40 AM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: GibsonPete

IMO the Axis minors national morale should be raised. The Slovaks were praised by the Germans ...


The Slovak formations are good in game. A base NM of 55 (& remember NM is the manpower pool, how many fit 17-19 year olds are entering etc) and then the +5 for being motorised gives it a baseline of 60. Its a formation that tends to win a lot of battles - as most players team them into a German pzr corps, so its effective morale is often in the high 60s,

When if flips back to an infantry division, its still better than the Hungarians (& they are pretty useful)

quote:

ORIGINAL: Beethoven1


quote:

ORIGINAL: loki100

But in general I get a decent usage out of them


Is that in single player like your recent AAR with Germany, or also in multiplayer?

quote:

ORIGINAL: loki100

losses escalate


If it is mostly in single player that they can be put to some sort of reasonable use, I wonder if the issue might be that in multiplayer, players target those units in particular for attacks because they know that they are weak, whereas the AI would not target Axis minor troops in particular. If so, then insofar as the losses do escalate, then this would lead to more Romanian routs in multiplayer games than single player?


Both modes, I really want my current Soviet HtH opponent to generate a few turns, we're into August 42, he's basically won - in that any offensive by me is over - and I'd like to take a HtH game past the initiative change.

My experience so far is that Soviet players don't get free hits on the Rumanians but then for most of 1941 its easy to keep them out of the way. The challenge comes from 1943 onwards, where (apart from StB) my experience is purely vs AI - but then also vs the AI at 120 morale with the combat consequences of that setting



miljkovics -> RE: Is Romanian/Axis Minor national morale slightly too low? (10/12/2021 10:14:19 AM)

I personally found Romanian units useful to some degree. Beside (obvious) use for Soviet Garrison, I use them in sieges (Odessa, Sevastopol and similar) with some German units too. They can also hold front well in winter, if supplied and in forts 2/3...even better as support (stack) to under strength German units.
What I do found strangely useless are Italian units. There are far worst then Romanians in my experience so far.



DesertedFox -> RE: Is Romanian/Axis Minor national morale slightly too low? (10/12/2021 11:36:37 AM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: miljkovics

I personally found Romanian units useful to some degree. Beside (obvious) use for Soviet Garrison, I use them in sieges (Odessa, Sevastopol and similar) with some German units too. They can also hold front well in winter, if supplied and in forts 2/3...even better as support (stack) to under strength German units.
What I do found strangely useless are Italian units. There are far worst then Romanians in my experience so far.


Well what's been said of Romanian officers, equipment, motivation, and morale also goes for the Italians.

Let’s firstly look at the start of the Italians in the desert campaign in 1940.

Italian Tenth Army to invade Egypt on 8th August 190.

The British counteroffensive, Operation Compass, began on 8 December 1940. O'Connor's relatively

small force of 31,000 men, 275 tanks and 120 artillery pieces in a period of 10 weeks takes over

130,000 prisoners, 400 tanks and 1,292 guns at the cost of 500 killed and 1,373 wounded.


How motivated were those Italian troops? They had poor leaders and just as poor equipment.

Sound familiar? Did they give a damn about capturing some useless desert?

This article sums up the Italians in Russia pretty well.

The Italian Army in Russia: from Barbarossa to Stalingrad




panzer51 -> RE: Is Romanian/Axis Minor national morale slightly too low? (10/12/2021 1:14:16 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: DesertedFox


quote:

ORIGINAL: miljkovics

I personally found Romanian units useful to some degree. Beside (obvious) use for Soviet Garrison, I use them in sieges (Odessa, Sevastopol and similar) with some German units too. They can also hold front well in winter, if supplied and in forts 2/3...even better as support (stack) to under strength German units.
What I do found strangely useless are Italian units. There are far worst then Romanians in my experience so far.


Well what's been said of Romanian officers, equipment, motivation, and morale also goes for the Italians.

Let’s firstly look at the start of the Italians in the desert campaign in 1940.

Italian Tenth Army to invade Egypt on 8th August 190.

The British counteroffensive, Operation Compass, began on 8 December 1940. O'Connor's relatively

small force of 31,000 men, 275 tanks and 120 artillery pieces in a period of 10 weeks takes over

130,000 prisoners, 400 tanks and 1,292 guns at the cost of 500 killed and 1,373 wounded.


How motivated were those Italian troops? They had poor leaders and just as poor equipment.

Sound familiar? Did they give a damn about capturing some useless desert?

This article sums up the Italians in Russia pretty well.

The Italian Army in Russia: from Barbarossa to Stalingrad



Tenth Army wasn't a good representation of Italian Army



DesertedFox -> RE: Is Romanian/Axis Minor national morale slightly too low? (10/12/2021 1:24:07 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: panzer51


quote:

ORIGINAL: DesertedFox


quote:

ORIGINAL: miljkovics

I personally found Romanian units useful to some degree. Beside (obvious) use for Soviet Garrison, I use them in sieges (Odessa, Sevastopol and similar) with some German units too. They can also hold front well in winter, if supplied and in forts 2/3...even better as support (stack) to under strength German units.
What I do found strangely useless are Italian units. There are far worst then Romanians in my experience so far.


Well what's been said of Romanian officers, equipment, motivation, and morale also goes for the Italians.

Let’s firstly look at the start of the Italians in the desert campaign in 1940.

Italian Tenth Army to invade Egypt on 8th August 190.

The British counteroffensive, Operation Compass, began on 8 December 1940. O'Connor's relatively

small force of 31,000 men, 275 tanks and 120 artillery pieces in a period of 10 weeks takes over

130,000 prisoners, 400 tanks and 1,292 guns at the cost of 500 killed and 1,373 wounded.


How motivated were those Italian troops? They had poor leaders and just as poor equipment.

Sound familiar? Did they give a damn about capturing some useless desert?

This article sums up the Italians in Russia pretty well.

The Italian Army in Russia: from Barbarossa to Stalingrad



Tenth Army wasn't a good representation of Italian Army



As you have singled out the 10th army as not being a good or I guess "typical" representation of the Italian army, the 8th

army that served in Russia MUST have been a good representatin of the Italian army.



AlbertN -> RE: Is Romanian/Axis Minor national morale slightly too low? (10/12/2021 1:45:18 PM)

It is still the sum of 'Leadership', 'Quantity of Equipment' (TOE), 'Quality of Equipment', and 'NCO / Troop General Quality'.

Sure, O'Connor accomplished astonishing and unexpected results - but then again, Italians were deployed and used in WW1, with pretty much the wide majority of Infantry and far to few trucks. Lacking anti tank weapons to deal with the Matilda tank.

The British mopped up the Italians by pratically gaining local superiority many times. (Which is part of 'Leadership')
I am not here to learn or teach history. There are episodes where personnel of this or that nation fought well or fought poorly. Or at times one cannot know how well something truly fought due to insane strenght ratios.
Besides by that very link you posted about the Italian army, it underlines how the Italian troops fought well and valiantly despite the lack of equipment, the general staff being too static, etc etc - and how Alpini sent with Caucasus in mind were instead deployed into the Steppes. (@DesertFox)

I am glad at least I am not the one who opened this thread and I am not a single voice there.



Great_Ajax -> RE: Is Romanian/Axis Minor national morale slightly too low? (10/12/2021 1:55:47 PM)

Like many of the Axis minor countries, Rumania was prepared for a defensive war and not trained for the offensive. Rumania adopted the French defensive doctrine and was severely lacking in radios which meant coordinating for responsive fires and flexible offensive operations was severely underdeveloped. Its officer corps suffered extremely high casualties in the first couple of months of th war due to their belief in always leading from the front. The siege of Odessa clearly identified the weakness of the Romanians in conducting deliberate attacks and bled out numerous divisions of good quality soldiers. The losses at Odessa were so bad that numerous divisions had to be withdrawn and rebuilt in Rumania. The rebuilt divisions that were used in 1942 were built on the backs of fresh recruits and did not have the same capability as their 1941 predecessors. The severe losses around Stalingrad, made the 43-44 Rumanian Army even worse.

IMO, the current NM is okay. You could easily justify it being on par with the Soviets up through mid 42. By Uranus, the Soviets had clearly surpassed the Rumanians in infantry combined arms coordination. On top of that, a great deal of Romanians were not very enthusiastic about fighting Germany's war deep in Russia. The Rumanian mountain troops, Cavalry and motorized troops are all classified as Axis-Elite in order to give them an extra NM bonus.



Karri -> RE: Is Romanian/Axis Minor national morale slightly too low? (10/12/2021 1:59:10 PM)

Morale isn't really "morale" but rather quality&effectiveness. I haven't read that much on Rumanians in WW2, but to my understanding, their tactics were very much still stuck in WWI levels.



Denniss -> RE: Is Romanian/Axis Minor national morale slightly too low? (10/12/2021 2:16:27 PM)

Low Axis minor NM was a problem in WitE1 too unless bumped a bit by Dominic. The +5 increase to 45 (in 1941) for the Romanians made them far less brittle without getting too powerful. HUN units in WitE have 50 though.
Italians have a massive problem with just 40 NM, this is cannonfodder level



Page: [1] 2 3 4   next >   >>

Valid CSS!




Forum Software © ASPPlayground.NET Advanced Edition 2.4.5 ANSI
1.548828