Quantity vs Quality

[SeaMonkey]

Now I know that SC did allow us to explore this WW2 epitaph to a minimal depth, but do you realize with the research categories that will be available to us in SC2 that we can really dwell into the intricacies. With the ability to assign upgrades to the units we wish you'll have the choice of creating multi militia cheap low grade units on a mass scale. .....Or , take some of your highly experienced units and apply multiple tech upgrades, with a high ranking Hq in charge, and produce your "super army group" to ravage your opponents with. Which will you choose?

[Retributar]

I like that 'Rip-And-Tear-Bruno' approach [.....Or , take some of your highly experienced units and apply multiple tech upgrades, with a high ranking Hq in charge, and produce your "super army group" to ravage your opponents with.]

[ev]

Do you want enough troops to cover the whole front? Do you need to man a 1,000 mile front? Or, can you rely solely on counter attacks, and strong point defense of key cities?

The answer to this questions will depend on how supply works. This in turn will determine what happens to your troops when encircled in Stalingrad.

Large scale units could operate behind enemy lines for some limited amount of time. The amount of time varied. In North Afrika, lack of water could kill you in days. And Winter, particularly in Russia, also reduced the amount of time a unit could remain behind enemy lines. On the other hand, a unit occupying a city could hold on longer than a unit out in the open.

If the game allows units occupying cities to hold on for several turns, you could entrench your unit in key cities and use a mobile counterattacking force to repel enemy units encircling that city.

I have the feeling the new, expanded Russia will be almost unconquerable. This won't be a game of Total Annihilation. Both the Axis and Allied player will have to devise effective ways to defend such a wide front.

[Roosevelt45]

I think that a small but highly trained and motorized unit has more chance of holding a 1,000 mile front than an enormous army that's still using WW1-techniques.

So I as well would go for the 'super army group'-strategy.