Jump to content


  • Content Count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

About Henri

  • Rank
    Senior Member


  • Location
    Quebec City, Canada
  • Interests
  1. Despite not having played a CM game since Afrika, I managed to get a major victory in the tutorial by using "bound and overwatch" movement and the "hunt" command. I lost no tanks but lost 18 soldiers. My big mistake was sending a single infantry squad on the right flank that got caught in the open crossing between two hedges. Without an overwatching squad to cover them, they were pinned and wiped out before the tanks on the road could intervene. Another mistake was the delay introduced when I did not realize that MGs and mortars have to be deployed before they can be used, and must have a LOS to the target, so it was halfway through the game before they could get into action. I might have been a bit lucky in spotting the AT gun and neutralizing it before it could do much harm. My tanks did get hit a number of times (I suspect by grenades), but none were immobilized or destroyed. The game plays smoothly using Bootcamp on my quadcore 3 GHz Mac Pro with a x1900 graphics card, and should play even better on my I7 quand Imac at home with a HD5750 graphics card. Henri
  2. Downloaded the demo in 4 minutes from Gamershell, started the demo, checked the manual and observed that the demo seems to be made only for old CM hands. I haven't played CM for years (Africa was the last version I played. That was before I left the Battlefront forums for good years ago because there were too many vociferous opponents of maneuver warfare - but that is another story...),and I have no idea what to do. I couldn't even figure out how to place my units. The manual has a bunch of tutorials that start a new player from scratch, but these are not available in the demo. These should be in the demo to attract new CM players to the game. I probably would get the full game so I could level up with the tutorials, but the game is not yet available... Oh well, it looks nice anyway, and I will probably figure it out eventually... Henri
  3. I don't see paratroopers in the tech tree. After a while they appeared as a choice in my list of available units. But I have no idea which techs are required before I can buy them. I spent an hour trying to get various units into air transports before the paratroopers appeared, because I didn't know there were specific units for air transport since they were not in the tech tree. So what techs are required for paratroopers? Why are they not in the tech tree? Why re they not in the manual? The manual implies that any ground troops can be loaded into air transports, which is not the case in my game. Henri
  4. LOL...well, it seems that I need to sharpen up my play since two players one of whom is the programmer managed to take Moscow in this scenario. Back to the drawing board... Henri
  5. Hubert, as I pointed out in another thread, it is clear to me that the problem is not with the 39 scenario but with the 41 scenario, which is insanely biased in favor of the Russians. Henri
  6. Correction. There is no way you could win But I'm sure others can </font>
  7. Convinced that the 1941 Barbarossa scenario is impossible to win for the Germans, I decided to bite the bullet. I made a half-dozen German units 5-start elite units, added the Manstein HQ for the Germans, and added 3 or 4 German units to the production chain, plus a couple of subs. Here is what happened. The Germans took Leningrad just before Winter 1942, and Moscow and Stalingrad fell in 1942, he Soviet HQ was now in Sverdlosk. Massive German support allowed the Germans to finally break through Al Alamein in 1942, and Alexandria and the rest of the Middle East fell n 1943, with Tunisia and algeria remaining untouched. The Germans were hampered by having to divert units to fight partisans near Leningrad and Minsk (more on this later). In the meantime, a fierce battle took place in the Atlantic, where both sides took horrendous losses. The long time for Germans subs and ships to get repairs in port (2 turns to get there, one turn to repair sometimes one turn to upgrade then two turns to get back to convoy lanes) forced the Germans to invest more heavily than it was worth in the Atlantic war, whereas the British can get a new ship in the battle in one move, or a repaired one in 3 moves. On the move that the Russians surrendered in July 1943, the Americans hit Africa with a massive invasion and the British invaded France and Belgium with 12 units! Had the Russians not surrendered yet, the Germans would have been hard put to face the invasion on the European mainland, but with Russia knocked out, a massive transfer of units back to the West spelled doom for the invaders. When the Germans failed to defend the Caucasus, the Russians put partisans in all 3 Caucasus cities (!!), and the Germans had to divert a half-dozen units there to take them out. In Africa the Italians got control of the Med thanks to massive investment in the Navy, and a combined force of German and Italian units managed to stop the Americans in North Africa and slowly push them back. There is NO way that The Germans could approach this kind of victory with the forces available in the scenario. If the Germans garrisoned every conquered city, they would have no units left to fight. Partisans appear almost every move in Yugoslavia, the Minsk and Leningrad areas, and in the Caucasus, and any ungarrisoned city there risks seeing a Russian unit appear in it, requiring the diversion of 3 or more German units to take them out. The ability of theBritish to mount a 12-unit invasion of Europe in 1943 is surprising given the German suppression of Lend-Lease, and I wonder whether the 10-20 MPP penalty for sub conrol of the sea lanes is large enough - without lend-lease, the British could not have mounted even a puny army to face the Germans, much less a major invasion of Europe. The 300 MPP cost of Manstein and other HQs ensure that these units will never be used in the scenario. The Germans can't afford a whole years worth of MPPs for a single HQ. The same goes for elites: a 5-star elite will require a unit to sit still for 5 turns, which the Germans can't afford. In practice even with the ridiculously beefed up scenario that I played, the Germans can do almost nothing from November to April, when air power is grounded every turn, movement is almost nil and Russians are beefing up with a number of MPPs almost equal to that of the Germans. The war is far from over with the fall of Moscow, when the Russians simply move the Capital to Stalingrad.; the Russians shold suffer a massive drop in readiness and morale if Moscow falls. In the unlikely case where Moscow would fall in the original scenario (the Germans are unlikely to make it anywhere near Rostov as discussed in another thread), they will simply have longer lines and more battered units to restore with insufficient points. In sum the main problem with the Germans is the inability to do more than one operation per move with a unit, with the result that over half of their units are inactive during any move. For a ground unit that has taken losses, one move is required to take replacements, one move per elite replacement, then another move to move back to the front line. This ensures that the front line moves like molasses, and the Blitzkrieng becomes a Molasseskrieg... What my game suggests is that there may be a balance between the huge advantage that I gave the Germans and the assured victory that the scenario gives the Russians, where the Germans have at least the historical chance to win (Manstein claimed that the Germans could have won if they had not pulled out of the battle of Kursk early and if they had not split their Southern army to go after the Caucasus - doubtful perhaps, but it was a close thing...).How much that balance should be changed is far from obvious. Despite the huge German advantage, this game became tense when the simultaneous invasion of Africa and Europe by the Allies coincided with the Russian surrender. The German units in the West at that time were no match for the invaders, and only a massive transfer of Germans from the Eastern Front saved the Germans. Henri
  8. How do you make them elite? I can give units not yet on map up to five experience, but I don't see any way to make them elite. also I don't see any way to modify units that are on-map when the scenrio begins. What did I miss? Henri
  9. The bottom line is that if the Germans wan t to upgrade units, they have to be out of action for too long, and as a result, I have never upgraded a unit higher than level 12. With the Russians having MPPs coming in at a rate almost as high as the Germans in 1941, I don't see how the Germans can get anywhere near the historical high water mark, not to mention winning. I would like to hear from anyone who has won this 1941 Barbarossa scenario with the Germans at ANY difficulty level. If not I would like to hear from the programmers about making the Russians less powerful. One solution might be to give the Germans level 13 elite units at the beginning of the scenario, thus giving them the edge that they had historically. But I don't know if even this would be enough. Henri
  10. I think this scenario is unbalanced. For example, if one takes the time to upgrade units then to make them elite, the war will be over before they are ready. It would be better if they could repair and upgrade at the same time. For example, say a unit is reduced in strength: it takes a move to repair it to 10 (which is not always possible), another move to upgrade it, then from one to five moves to make it elite 10-15. That can be seven moves, which is half the war. Assuming one could start doing this aftet the first Barbarossa move, the Russian winter would be here and any chance for victory would be out the door. The same goes for subs: if a sub is beaten up, it takes a couple of moves to get it to port, a move to repair, another move to upgrade, and one to five moves to get elite replacements by which time lend lease has made the Russians unbeatable. There must be a simple solution to balance the scenario better. Henri
  11. I am getting clobbered as the Germans in the Barbarossa scenario even with a -50% setting.How do I make it easier, in particular how do I make the Russians get fewer MPPs? The manual description of difficulty settings are for the original game and do not correspond to the settings in WaW, and the added pdf file says nothing about difficuoty settings. Exactly what do the -50% and -100% settings do in difficulty settings? Despite putting a high priority in submarines and reaching leve 2 subs, the Russians are getting over 300 Mpps per move, and there is no way that I can even approach the German achievements in 1941 and 1942. In 1941, the most I can do is take Odessa, Bryansk , Kiev and Odessa, and in 1942 I can get nowhere near Stalingrad nor Even Rostov. I need the Russians to get fewer MPPs. How do I do that with the Editor? I read the instructions for the editor, but it is unclear how to do that simple adjustment. Henri
  12. One problem is that it takes a whole move to reinforce a unit. Let us say a tank unit is down to a strength of 9 after a battle: to bring it to max elite strength, one has to waste a move to bring it to 10, two more moves to bring it to 12, than another move to catch up to the front line before it can fight again. I would guess that the prblem is the same with the 39 campaign. By that time, the war is already half over!...It seems to me that units should be able to reinforce and move on the same turn (perhaps at the cost of losing one of its two attacks for instance. Or else perhaps make the time per move shorter, like maybe one week or 2? In this particular scenario, I find it too costly in time to stop to upgrade my units, so I just bring them up to 10 and send them back into battle - I feel I can't afford the time to make them elite. Is it possible to change the time with the editor? Henri
  13. I'm an experienced wargamer going back to Afrika Korps, The Russian Canmpaign, Third Reich, and most computer wargames includingt GGs WaW, and this campaign is really fun but... As the Germans, I find it extremely difficult to maintain an advantage. I did not even get close to Moscow after taking Smolensk but conquered Leningrad in early 1942. But Sevastopol and all other Southern cities except Kiev and Odessa are still in Russian hands in Summer 1942. I have broken through El Alamein, but I do not have enough power to take Alexandria, having lost the Afrika Korps. With the arrival of the Siberia reinforcements and US entry into the war, it looks like my chances of winning are about nil. My advanced submarines are wiped out from half an ocean away as son as they step outside the port, so my effect on blocking lend-lease are much less than the MPPs I lose building the subs.Whats the point of paying 100 Mpps for a sub when all it does before sinking is to block 14 MPPs from reaching Russia (who has over 300 each turn anyway)? I am playing at beginner level, without fog of war and without research, thinking that this would make it easier to grasp game and to find the best strategy. I noticed that throughout the game so far, the Russian MPPs are about equal to that of the Germans (about 300 vs about 325), so the Russians don't seem to have much problem replacing their losses. One big problem is that from November 1941, when snow and mud are not hampering the Germans, it is raining so the Germans are without air support - from November 41 to July 42, the Germans were practically paralyzed except for taking Leningrad and breaking though El alamein (fat good that will do...). Any suggestions on adjusting parameters to give the Germans a reasonable chance of winning (i.e. taking either Moscow or Stalingrad before Summer 1942 ). Or am I missing something?... Stumped, Henri
  • Create New...