Jump to content

Recommended Posts

BL,

First, I think you'll notice a pleasant surprise with your next post.

Second, we had at least five or six very interesting threads on this subject on the original SC Forum. If you look it up in the search feature you might find some comments that would be useful, especially regarding rating Mannerheim and Franco as generals.

-- Those SC Forum threads would have been during 2003-04.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Originally posted by jon_j_rambo:

Asking about Finn HQ? Hmmm, could this Beginner's Luck that dude Carl Von Mannerheim kid from year's gone past?

Sure rambo ,I'm Carl Von whats his name. I came out of hiding cause your post on the mile long column was just too interesting not too!! :rolleyes:

No Rambo I'm not anyone else.Its just me beginner's luck

And thanks JJ (the real one) for that info on the SC1 forum. But without reading them yet, dont most of you feel that atleast Finland should have its own decent HQ's to start. They wouldnt have held out that long against Russia unless they had atleast a decent leader.Not great but atleast decent. But I will read the post and see what you guys have to say.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Yes BL, as this will allow the Axis to better reinforce the Finish units.

This bring's up the question of what rating Marshal Mannerheim's HQ should have. As HQ's are partially a reflection of the logistics tail of an army and partially a reflection of its leadership, I would say a 5.

Why 5? Good leadership; certainly better than the French and Italian, but limited warfighting supplies during the Winter War with Russia. This contrasts with Patton who was rated 8 in Sc1. Patton was a good general with no shortage of logistical support.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

×
×
  • Create New...