RE: Cities, Is there a problem?

Matrix Games Forums

Forums Register Login Photo Gallery Member List Search Calendars FAQ

My Profile Inbox Address Book My Subscription My Forums Log Out

RE: Cities, Is there a problem?

View related threads: (in this forum | in all forums)

Logged in as: Guest

Users viewing this topic: none

Printable Version

All Forums >> [New Releases from Matrix Games] >> Gary Grigsby's War in the East Series >> RE: Cities, Is there a problem?

Page: << < prev 1 [2]

Message

<< Older Topic Newer Topic >>

RE: Cities, Is there a problem? - 10/19/2011 12:50:57 PM

Flaviusx

Posts: 7750
Joined: 9/9/2009
From: Southern California
Status: offline

The Germans can't avoid Stalingrad?

So far as 41 goes, the Germans, if they know what they are doing, can take Leningrad every time. Every. Single. Time. So they're certainly avoiding mistakes there. The Lvov opening, if you believe this was actually possible (I do not) could be classified as avoiding a mistake.

German players know the blizzard is terrible and can act on that foreknowledge in ways their historical counterparts cannot, and do things to significantly diminish the impact of it.

Germans get to avoid their historical logistical problems in this game in various ways. Eventually, so do the Soviets, when they are on the offensive. Logistics in this game are very forgiving for the side attacking.

The Germans in this game have ways of optimizing their play; not the same ones as the Soviets, obviously, but they have their own grab bag of tricks. What's come to pass as "standard" 1941 play for Germans isn't historical at all, actually. The game deviates from history in a pretty big way from turn 1.

_____________________________

WitE Alpha Tester

(in reply to Empire101)

Post #: 31

RE: Cities, Is there a problem? - 10/19/2011 1:28:12 PM

76mm

Posts: 4688
Joined: 5/2/2004
From: Washington, DC
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Lava
If you want to be constructive, give me some examples of mistakes the Axis made in '41 which he can avoid? As per your original statement.

I'm sorry if I wasn't clear, but I was not talking about Axis mistakes in 1941, I was talking about during the course of the war. Do you think the Sovs should be required to repeat their mistakes in 1941, but the Germans free to avoid their mistakes in 1942 and after? That's the point...

Sorry for the response, but you have to admit the Germans made some pretty major blunders during the war other than the ones you mentioned (I didn't realize you were only referring to 1941).

(in reply to *Lava*)

Post #: 32

RE: Cities, Is there a problem? - 10/19/2011 2:01:27 PM

wosung

Posts: 692
Joined: 7/18/2005
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Lava
If you want to be constructive, give me some examples of mistakes the Axis made in '41 which he can avoid? As per your original statement.

For example the single biggest "mistake" either side made in the whole war:

The German player right from the start knows exactly that this campagin won't be over in two to three months.

Regards

(in reply to *Lava*)

Post #: 33

RE: Cities, Is there a problem? - 10/22/2011 8:56:06 AM

Redmarkus5

Posts: 4456
Joined: 12/1/2007
From: 0.00
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: CarnageINC

A VP system like the�SSG series would work best.� You get so many VPs holding these cities this long and then they increase as time goes by.� Something has to be done to make population centers worth holding, otherwise a nations people will feel worthless and overall moral will plummet as it should but doesn't as things stand now.

And there must be a reason why real life armies aim for the enemy's cities and real life defenders try to hold them, right? Something to do with infrastructure, power grids, warehouses, petrol storage, housing, heating and food maybe? :)

_____________________________

WitE2 tester, WitW, WitP, CMMO, CM2, GTOS, GTMF, WP & WPP, TOAW4, BA2

(in reply to CarnageINC)

Post #: 34