-
We have updated our Community Code of Conduct. Please read through the new rules for the forum that are an integral part of Paradox Interactive’s User Agreement.
If you want a more challenging game (ie. Harder game) play the 41 scenario. However since I like playing minors the 41 scenario isn’t as much fun for me, because of the fact that your techs are pretty much set in stone at this point, as are division numbers and unit types.
Last edited:
Well, I started a game as SU, looked around, and though: I'll hit them germans in their weaker side, cut their supplies and let them die in hte winter. Funny thing how the same tricks that work in the GC cost me like 15/20 division's in one offensive. I guess it could be done, but requires more patience. Going to try tomorrow again with a more defensive approach and more time.
I noted that the Swedish Cavalry brigade is cavalry - it should be motorised infantry, since it contained 3 motorised batallion and no horsed cavalry from 1939 and onwards. And it should probably be 33 strenght, since it was 1/3 of a division, not 1/2. 
Why start in December 1941 ?
Does anyone know the rational for this scenario starting in December 1941 as opposed to June 1941 (for start of Barbarrosa)?
It would seem to me that the key operational errors made by Germany from June to December 1941 contributed to an unsuccessful campaign.
Does anyone know the rational for this scenario starting in December 1941 as opposed to June 1941 (for start of Barbarrosa)?
It would seem to me that the key operational errors made by Germany from June to December 1941 contributed to an unsuccessful campaign.
December 1941 - Checked the date? Yup, that IS Pearl Harbor date E.g. the USA entering the war
E.g. the USA entering the war
Originally posted by VultureGFF
December 1941 - Checked the date? Yup, that IS Pearl Harbor date
Yes, it was. But his point is a good one. The center of gravity for WW2 until the entry of the US was, indeed, Barbarossa. It was there that the Wehrmacht legions met their doom.
I chill to think what would have happened at Norway had the Reich had even half the men lost at Stalingrad and Kursk on hand.
In HoI, I can't remember hearing one player ever saying the AI pulled off Pearl Harbor. Heck, I personally haven't even seen Japan do anything more than sieze the Dutch Indies.
So if Pearl Harbor doesn't happen, why use it as an arbitrary starting point?
T. (Am I a pain yet?
)
Becuase it was thought that starting a scenario just after Pearl Harbour would be easier than trying to recreate the special rules needed to make Pearl Harbour happen?
Other start dates were considered but it's alot of work getting OOB's right. Good for a mod version ?
Other start dates were considered but it's alot of work getting OOB's right. Good for a mod version ?
Okay, ...now I understand.
Thanks for the explanation people. I did not realize it was based on a programming issue with the AI.
Striker
Thanks for the explanation people. I did not realize it was based on a programming issue with the AI.
Striker
the 1941 scenario is surely the most challenging scenario. so I prefer to play this instead of the others, but the U.S. AI bug has to be corrected before
Originally posted by Deserteur
the 1941 scenario is surely the most challenging scenario. so I prefer to play this instead of the others.....
Yep, I like that scenario as well
Well, the start date of the scenario also eliminates the hindsight of both pearl harbor and barbarossa. As the Soviet player you are in a very tight possition.
Nope. I believe this have something to do with DoW of Japan and Germany. It would be mixed up starting before Pearl Harbor.
russians are indeed in a tight spot in that scenario. Their armies are at like
30-40% strengh.
The problem is that the Winter Combat isnt very well modeled.
The Germans can take Lenningrad, Moscov and Stalingrad without breakign a sweat
30-40% strengh.
The problem is that the Winter Combat isnt very well modeled.
The Germans can take Lenningrad, Moscov and Stalingrad without breakign a sweat
Perhaps that will change now that Germany no longer starts with artic warfare equitment.
Regarding the 1st post, I started a game as Germany in 1941 on v hard/normal, v.101 and had my ass handed to me.
all armies that were attacking during the winter offensive are at 100%, historically the soviets were in a "tight spot".
what`s the overall opinion, is the soviet situation too dire? btw all german armies are at 45%
Last edited:
Yes but Historicly the Germans were also at the end of streched lines(which imo this doesnt represnet well) and didnt have the winter gear(guderians frozen tanks anyone) further more they didnt have allt hose bombers that they do(because they also were frozen).
So you see, the Germans have a huge advantage.
So you see, the Germans have a huge advantage.
-> "winter gear" is removed
-> winter combat has a higher modifier
-> air force in bad weather shouldn`t be allowed to fly (IMO; I hope some changes make (reduced effeiciency or something like that) it into 1.03)