So Who's Tougher?

[imported_Wildman]

Marlow, you pathetic git.

Stop posting and send me a turn!

[Warmaker]

As I said before, in small games, i.e. <1000 points, an Allied player may face a little more difficulty if trying to destroy a Big Cat with his fewer resources if the German player knows how to use his stuff. On the flip side of the coin though, on larger battles the point system tips towards a competent Allied player. On these scales the Axis player can ill afford to lose his few panzers, so they better know what they're doing.

It's all a matter of how well you know your units and how you utilize them. As strong as a King Tiger is, send it straight up the middle with little or no support and you're begging to lose about 300+ points.

As for infantry, the German types are expanded well enough for CMBO. I'm curious as to why Rangers aren't included. It's not that they're a very small force compared to modern day SEALS/SAS/etc. They were frequently called upon towards the front of an offensive. I'm sure there were some British and Canadian infantry types left out, but I'm not to familiar with them.

[Abbott]

Wrong thread.

Nothing to see here, move along..

[ 05-10-2001: Message edited by: Abbott ]

[Predator]

Well, after having played quite a few different games and having taken on the Germans many many times, i'm going to have to respectfully disagree with Bastables. More often then not I think a German player can simply sit a Panther/Tiger/King Tiger upon a hill and hammer any Allied infantry he sees or destroy any Allied tanks. And as far as the infantry goes, the number of niche-filling units the Germans have, plus the ability to purchase them often as Veteran soldiers because of how much less support they come with make shte Germans a more difficult force to deal with. I do feel that a beginner player can pick up the game with the Krauts, take say a Fallschimjager Company, maybe some Fusilier SMG platoons (i'm not specifying a point value here, just sayin') and be able to take out much of the Allied infantry. I know in the game I played against Genx-87 (2000 points) that I was outnumbered 2-1 in the infantry. For me, putting together their anti-tank capabilities, powerful infantry, stronger tanks, cheap field guns, and variety that the Germans are a harder force to destroy.

[Knaust]

hey Predator..are you the old CC2 Predator?

[Predator]

Close Combat? Sorry, i've never even played one of those games so you must be thinking of a totally different person. CM is my first wargame ever.

[Vanir Ausf B]

The Germans are (in general) a bit easier to win with for the following reasons:

1. SMG infantry. BTS made a mistake having an SMG cost the same as a rifle. This makes all SMG squads terrific bang for the buck units. The Germans have them, the Allies don't. In order to compete in this area the Allies must use Airborne or Glider units. If you are playing with rules that prohibit buying your tanks and infantry from 2 different troop categories this becomes a HUGE German advantage, as the Allies must chose between SMGs and having tanks. Germans can have both.

2. German infantry formations are more flexible. Many Allied infantry formations come with a very larger number of support weapons, while most Germans are sparse. This can be an advantage for the Allies in some circumstances, but there are many times when the terrain or battle type will render some types of support weapons marginally useful. For example, on board mortars are of dubious value in a ME with a large town to fight over. But if you are the Brits you must buy a 50mm mortar with every platoon. US Glider troops are great but they come with so many support units that you can never buy very many of them. The Germans can get good infantry with or without the support weapons and tailor their force to the specific parameters of that battle.

3. Germans have better "cheap" armor. The Hetzer is dirt cheap and invulnerable to Allied 75mm frontally and even to US 76mm past about 500m. Tungsten is of no help due to the armor slope. The Mark IV is a better all purpose tank than the vanilla Sherman. The reason being that if the Allied player wants armor that can withstand the German 75, he must buy some pricey units (Jumbo, Churchill, Pershing) while the German player can get units that will withstand the Allied 75 quite cheaply (Hetzer, JPz IV). This forces the Allied player to categorize and specialize his armor units into either "infantry killers" or "tank killers". The German can buy Mark IVs knowing that they are good against infantry and will take out any Allied tanks that are frequently seen in QBs, while an Allied player buying Shermans of roughly equal cost knows that if the German player buys the commonly seen Hetzer or Jpz IV he is screwed unless he buys fewer of them so he can get a few Jacksons. But Jacksons aren't as good against infantry... This is historically accurate, of course, but knowing this doesn't make the Allied player's job any easier.

4. Cheap infantry guns. Germans have them, Allies don't. Allies can use Bofors or 105mm howitzers as substitutes, but they cost much more. In conjunction with SMG squads this brings us to "The System" used on the TH ladder. I have never used The System myself, but many people on this board have testified to its effectiveness.

Of course the Allies aren't without advantages, but they pay for them whereas the Germans get theirs more of less for free. The Allies have the .50 cal MG, but it is expensive and with only 40 ammo its cost effectiveness against infantry is not as good as the MG42 or M1919 HMG. US arty have lots of rounds and are fast, but you pay extra for both of those features. US squads are large and durable, but you pay for those extra men.

Germans are generally more flexible and cost effective (bang for the buck).

I actually play Allies more often than Germans, and I have had little trouble winning consistently with both (multiplayer on the RD ladder). The commander who plays better (or is luckier) will win 9 times out of 10 regardless of which side he plays.

I enjoy playing Allies as much as Germans because of the challenge of it. But if I were playing for money instead of for fun, and I could choose which side I played each game, I'd go with Germans every time.