Jump to content

Konigs

Members
  • Posts

    393
  • Joined

  • Last visited

    Never

Posts posted by Konigs

  1. Yeah had alot of French, Czech and other captured equipment. Pure hell on their suply people trying to carry parts. Alot ofunits used captured Russian trucks(American Made) and those little tractors for towing small AT weapons, etc...

    Above history pretty much how I have read about it. Pure hell in first winter, coldest in many years, supply stretched and only war materials getting through. Winter ware left on platforms fom Prussia through out Poland. No matter how Hitler thought, need sodliers to win wars. They operate weapons and capture ground.

    Getting back to bonus for Russians. Most games donot penalize them at all duringwinter. Will SC2 be the same. if theyare not penalized, do the germans after learning thehard way, at least get reduced penalties inteh following years. I mean they, learned how to fight in the winter from the Russians. IE. Ardennes(Battle of the Bulge.)

    Thanks for link Dozer, I will check it out.

  2. Does AGW dea with resources, tech advances etc, or is it more you have a Standard order of battle and must fight it out in a purely historical fashion. I read hte wargamer review and did not see any references to this type of play. I prefer games that allow for some change in strategy that could affect different outcomes, even if it still means an Axis loss. Maybe a loss in a different way, not just a historical fashion.

  3. Cool, Pull out experienced units and give elite reinforcements. They become the strike force for offensive while other units hold line. I see where it is going and I like the sound of it.

    Quetion, do the Russian forces have greater resistance to bad weather, ie they strike just as hard in winter as Germans might in summer, but mudd bad for both. This is usually how it is in most WW2 games.

  4. I agree with you pzgndr, "This isn't a bad thing, nor unrealistic." It will affect both sides equally. I just did not want it to be too fluid. Everyone has to agree, North Africa was very fluid battlefront. Much akin to sea battles, mostly decided on manuever and not so much on massed units.

    Of course this changed with the insertion of Monty and all his drawn out preparations etc.. and the Torch landings.

    I just did not want to see an Eastern front where it is a matter of who can mass some armor and then strike an area where there is no defense and may lead quick easy encirclements. You should have to punch through some static line and then us maneuver and strength to fend off counter-strikes and hopefully make your enciclements before the other side's reserves come into play.

    Mr. Dozer makes a good point. Maybe you could split units to hlep maintain a soid front, while these would free up some units to concentrate for your upcoming offensive.

    This would be realistic and could also lead to some interesting battles if you werehit where you just stripped line before launching your strike.

    Again, I'm just throwing some ideas out for thought. I am patiently waiting for SC2 like every one else.

  5. It seems the geogrphical area is going to be much bigger in SC2. Is there going to be some balance to add additional units. I believe Pzgndr said there was no way to make a solid line on the Eastern front during AAR game.

    Except for North Africa(not including EL Alamein), there was always a static defensive line at the front. Albeit a thin one for the Germans.

    Just seems like there should be some adjustments be made to the unit scales. If they are the same size(manpower etc..), they will be out of place on a larger map.

    Maybe just something to think about. I am patiently waiting just like everyone else.

×
×
  • Create New...