Search the Community
Showing results for tags 'ww3 wwiii nato warsaw pact'.
Found 1 result
So I'm about done on my 2nd multiplayer game for the 1948 scenario. I wanted to get other players' thoughts on this scenario on what works and what doesn't. I used to think the Allies had a huge advantage but now I'm worried the scenario is too heavily favored for the Communists. Below are my recaps along with my strategies. Would love to hear anyone else's insights Game 1 The first game I can say I didn't do much since I was learning the scenario. In that game I went on an all out attack versus the West and was annihilated. The nukes, after I went over the Rhine in force, absolutely crushed my tanks and armies, and the allied air force was so powerful that I didn't have a chance. Then, when I tried to divert into Italy, the Allied fleets were invincible and started to take 1-2 off my units per bombardment. Throw in air attacks and you can see it was a disaster. My overall strategy was to blitz open the continent and do a WWII Russian steamroller tactic. I managed to take Rome, thinking that they would surrender but instead the capital only moved to Palermo. I was chewed up and force me to resign within 3 years. Game 2 This time I decided to switch it up and play the Allies, thinking they were unbeatable. My strategy was to hold the fronts, build up units, especially tanks, and force the Commies into my areas of strength. After a year I thought It would go my way until about the middle of year 2. I saw that a Communist consolidation tactic seems extremely hard to beat. My opponent, aka Consolidation Corey, decided sit back and just load up on tech and planes. The Allies are down probably 30 units to start so they can't keep up with the tech purchases, plus unit increases. So my opponent just takes out Germany then grabs Brussels. In the East, the Chinese slowly start to take over all the cities and consolidate again. With the Russians, He proceeds to consolidate in strong defensive trenches with armies up front and rotate tanks in if an allied unit gets adjacent. Since the allies are so far behind in numbers it is suicide to get next to him. He then proceeds to spend all his money on planes, aerial warfare, and industry tech for the first year. So while i'm building up units and trying to come up to parity with the Communists he has now mitigated any Allied air superiority by having almost 15 planes by the 2nd year. Thus rending most of my carriers obsolete and used now only to destroy guerillas and weak spawning units on islands. The allies have another disadvantage in that they are so many different countries and after a few years the Russians steam ahead of the Brits and French since they have more research tech and more units to start with. So while the USA can keep up with the tech war, they are so behind in numbers, that the Soviets just buy planes and destroy the Allies biggest advantage. Still thinking that I will win, I continue to purchase as many tanks as I can to go on the offensive. That is when I start to get hit by rockets and artillery. Since he has more planes and stronger planes than me, it renders offensive aerial operations to a standstill. Soon my opponent declares war on Turkey and starts to come into the Middle East. I send over all these tanks only to watch them get chewed up and spit out by rocket and artillery attacks. Seeing the tide change, I decide to switch my tactics and start doing a Stalingrad tactic. Hold the cities with tanks, good supply, and force him to sustain huge casualties. Well that fails too as he brings in artillery and rockets my tanks, leaving them helpless, toothless and unable to fight effectively despite being the same tech level. Soon all the middle East is taken out and I decide I must buy rockets. However, its 52 in the game and his units have been killing so many of my units, despite me having more tanks and holding defensive positions, that any counterattacks are like human wave attacks that result extremely lopsided battles heavily favored against me. His troops are now led by 4 star generals who make his troops invincible Spartans despite some of his tanks at low morale. One such example was when I rocketed his level 4 tank 2 times to reduce morale and readiness, and then bring in my full strength level 4 us tank. His tank was at 4 in strength and mine was fully stocked with good morale, readiness, and hooked up to a commander. Well when I get next to him its I lose 4 he loses 2. Seems completely unrealistic and not fair. Chinese Strategy His strategy was to slowly gobble up the Nationalists. I sent some US and UK troops over early and he didn't bite. Instead he just sat in his hole in the interior with his 3-4 star Chinese troops, from beating up the demoralized and weak nationlists in the beginning. So he stayed clear of the sea and started adding elite reinforcements to get his guys to 12-14 strength. Then he shipped in a few of the Russian planes and one rocket and went to work with his artillery. Nothing could stop the Chinese. I had a level 3 American tank in a city and it was just chewed up. Summary After the novel I just wrote, my thought is the experience factor allows his generals and his troops to become 3 - 5 stars and as a result Allied forces don't hold a prayer to the Communists. With the communists having more units to start, internal lines of communication, more rockets (5), and only side with artillery makes them in my opinion have an unfair advantage. If a Communist player sits in the hole, goes to the middle of the board aka Middle East where a lot of Oil money is, buys planes, I think they are heavily favored to be an unbeatable juggernaut by 1952. Would love to hear anyone's thoughts on this scenario and how the Allies can win.