Bromley Posted January 9, 2007 Share Posted January 9, 2007 I didn't want to hijack the Jolly/Tao AAR, but I saw a couple of posts about Leningrad being a good target for the Axis. I often skip Leningrad, or at least leave it until later, depending on where the Russian defence lines in the centre and south are and my momentum on those fronts. I link Finland via the east side of the lake, so that's not an issue. Is it usually worth the struggle to get into Leningrad? Is the idea that your supply needs time to build in the centre/south, so you might as well take out Leningrad whilst you're waiting? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Hyazinth von Strachwitz Posted January 9, 2007 Share Posted January 9, 2007 As you say: it depends much on the situation in the Mid & South area.... The link to Finnland east of the Ladoga Lake is very vulnerable, because you just need a simple Corps to go through, and then all production in Finnland/Sweden/Norway goes down to 50%. I would suggest the following: if you have good momentum on the southern front, leave Leningrad as it is... and if you have to refresh your troops and halt anyway, then use the Airfleets to take it out... its usually worth it. I usually take it out. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TaoJah Posted January 9, 2007 Share Posted January 9, 2007 I always start with it, so I get it over with. If you look at the map, it's every general's dream : undisputed port, perfect defences for the city itself AND for the surroundings, link to Finland... I don't have alot of experience in HvH so I don't know how other people do it, but unless someone can give some GOOD arguments, I'd take it every time. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lars Posted January 9, 2007 Share Posted January 9, 2007 You should make you're mind up early if you're going south or north. Takes three corps to invest the place, so that is a factor. You'll miss them. If you're a good judge of weather, perhaps the best thing to do is get all your air in range for the mud/winter/mud turns, when they can't do much else, and take it then. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Retributar Posted January 9, 2007 Share Posted January 9, 2007 Historically, according to Hoyle, the argument seems to be that going south to the Caucasus may have been the best 1st-target of the German Armed Forces, in-order to aquire those very-important Oil-Fields to keep the Axis in supply of oil/fuel products. In SC2 it seem's to me that capturing the Caucasus doesn't supply enough of an MPP bonus to make it a first and foremost prime-target!. Am i wrong in this gut-feeling???. Also the Ploesti Oil-Fields as well seem to be Mediocre in this game compared to what it really represented Historically!. So!...what does anyone else have to contribute on this subject?. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Moonslayer Posted January 9, 2007 Share Posted January 9, 2007 MPPs represent far more than just oil or even material resources in general. They represent the production power, resupply power, reserve manpower etc etc. Consequently I think the oil fields are over-represented as it is. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SeaMonkey Posted January 9, 2007 Share Posted January 9, 2007 South is the key, you'll have to get it finally to get USSR out. Usually USSR will defend with all its assets, watch your flank and if you are successful it is over for the Reds. One goal, one conclusion, the rest is a mop-up. I'd be interested, anyone ever comeback as USSR after losing Stalingrad and not Moscow, Leningrad? This is for H to H games only. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Retributar Posted January 11, 2007 Share Posted January 11, 2007 Without the Oil, your not going to be able to transport your Food, extra Fuel for equipment, Ammunition, Reinforcements...and what-ever else!. If you do, it will have to be done by foot or by horses!. So as i see it, Oilfields are Underrated!. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Liam Posted January 11, 2007 Share Posted January 11, 2007 Truth be told Stalingrad is Key. Caucasus is not. Leningrad and Moscow are also key. Historically speaking at least. Here a player will defend the Southern Mountains all out due to the fear of losing such a massive percentage of MPP production. Usually this is a great strategy for the Axis costing them the game. In WW2 it seems Oil wasn't as essential a resource due to it's availability. Romania-Russia-MiddleEast-USA... Today this is very different. All the majors had a source to draw upon.. The only one who did not, was perhaps Japan, which found it in Indonesia. Today Oil is much more sparse, Yes the MidEast-Russia and Indonesian region still have it... However the vast quantities are only in the Caucasus and MidEast Region. The Rest Dried up due to development of various Nations... North Sea, Alaska, North Africa which is sort of interconnected with MidEast politically due to The Fundamentalist Arab Government Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TaoJah Posted January 12, 2007 Share Posted January 12, 2007 I don't agree with your vision on today's oil. It's not more scarce then it was back then, it is even more available. ALOT more even. The difference between the present and the past is that now not only the army is driving oil-soaking vehicles, civilians are too. Not only the army is using oil for planes, civilians are too. If a war would break out (and I don't consider the "war on terror" a war) in the US and they REALLY needed the oil for military purposes, chances are that people won't be allowed to drive their SUVs anymore and short distance flight would be cancelled, getting more oil to the military. Not to mention the strategic oil reserve that countries have nowadays. There is not less oil now then back then. There is more. But we use more, alot more. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Liam Posted January 13, 2007 Share Posted January 13, 2007 Tao, undiscovered untapped, perhaps how many millions of horses were still used in WW2 to effectiveness vs how many are today... World changes I'm certian you're right usage has as well. Regardless MidEast wil dry up, 'evetually' Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sivodsi Posted January 13, 2007 Share Posted January 13, 2007 MidEast wil dry up, 'evetually' [sic] Probably sooner than we think. This is an excellent link, for those with patience. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TaoJah Posted January 13, 2007 Share Posted January 13, 2007 MidEast will dry up... Hmmm.. I think this would be a good time line... 2010 : higher and higher oil prices, but since we got no alternative, we got to pay big money to the oil companies. 2020 : All of a sudden ten different companies find a alternative fuel that is better for nature, but, gee, is it COSTLY ! Some of us keep paying alot of money to the oil companies, some of us pay money to the alternative fuel companies. 2030 : higher and higher alternative fuel prices, but since we got no alternative, we got to pay big money to the oil companies, euh, sorry, the alternative fuel companies. 2040 : All of a sudden ten different companies find a second alternative fuel which is better for nature, but, gee, is it COSTLY ! Some of us keep paying alot of money to the old alternative companies, some of us pay money to the new alternative fuel companies. 2050 : higher and high... Soit, you get the picture. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sivodsi Posted January 13, 2007 Share Posted January 13, 2007 very cynical! How about this: 2008 antigravity device invented which is cheap and the fuel comes from beer bottle tops. 2009 drink beer for fuel campaign wildly successful 2010 all problems in the world solved 2011 everybody lives happily ever after Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SeaMonkey Posted January 13, 2007 Share Posted January 13, 2007 Simmer, now let's all say it together Commerce is Good! Let supply and demand control the markets. Allow innovation and improvisation to flourish. Remove the government rules and regulations that hinder business and above all get off your fat asses and do something about it and stop complaining. Sitting there with lawyers that have your cajones in a lock-box ain't going to accomplish jack. I just put 10 gallons of fuel that i made in my truck, this is just a bit of the many thousands, perhaps millions, no for sure millions of gallons that I have been responsible for. The world needs something else, you can bet someone will find a way to provide it, but with all the lawyers and politicians creating multi-tiered management systems(ie regulations) to get their slice, you bet it will cost us all. That's the bottom line. You see we're all interconnected, no one gets away with jack, we all pay more or less, now or later, and the mode of payment comes in many different forms. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ChrisND Posted January 13, 2007 Share Posted January 13, 2007 I like Sivodsi's timeline Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jon_j_rambo Posted January 13, 2007 Share Posted January 13, 2007 Don't worry, the world will be just fine...then, Rapture! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts