Commander, see the positive message in this. It could be seen as implicit appraisal of your campaign!
(Or, at least, it's devoid of any significant criticism)-
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.
(Or, at least, it's devoid of any significant criticism)
It is devoid of all criticism. I consider it Pang's first attempt to try to award me my deserved kudos for getting to Moscow in just 31 days!
And as per Pang's possibly correct analysis of luck - basically being about equal - we are left with only one conclusion... brilliant battle strategy! :rofl:
Thanks, Pang! :blush:
=======================================================================
Adolf Hitler: (to his adjunct) “Get that Commander666 in here… I want a word with him!”
Adjunct: “Yes SIR!” (Adjunct departs)
Commander666 appears: “Heil Hitler!”
Hitler: “Heil Hitler. Say, what’s with this mysterious radio transmission we intercepted called Post 166”.
Commander666: “Oh sir, OKW has determined it was sent from the enemy, probably with the intention of lulling our defenses into reduced states of readiness.”
Hitler: “Well, in that case, we should send them back an appropriate reply.”
Commander666: “What might that be, sir?”
Hitler: “Tell those Bolsheviks to: ^%@##?&^<>x/%%/!!!@zx=2?py!”
Commander666: “Should I send that in Enigma code… or regular?”
+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
And as per Pang's possibly correct analysis of luck - basically being about equal - we are left with only one conclusion... brilliant battle strategy! :rofl:
Thanks, Pang! :blush:
=======================================================================
Adolf Hitler: (to his adjunct) “Get that Commander666 in here… I want a word with him!”
Adjunct: “Yes SIR!” (Adjunct departs)
Commander666 appears: “Heil Hitler!”
Hitler: “Heil Hitler. Say, what’s with this mysterious radio transmission we intercepted called Post 166”.
Commander666: “Oh sir, OKW has determined it was sent from the enemy, probably with the intention of lulling our defenses into reduced states of readiness.”
Hitler: “Well, in that case, we should send them back an appropriate reply.”
Commander666: “What might that be, sir?”
Hitler: “Tell those Bolsheviks to: ^%@##?&^<>x/%%/!!!@zx=2?py!”
Commander666: “Should I send that in Enigma code… or regular?”
+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
Last edited:
It is devoid of all criticism. I consider it Pang's first attempt to try to award me my deserved kudos for getting to Moscow in just 31 days!
And as per Pang's possibly correct analysis of luck - basically being about equal - we are left with only one conclusion... brilliant battle strategy! :rofl:
Thanks, Pang! :blush:
Unfortunatly this is an exaggeration. My critique on OS stands. If you had skip OS you could have used better generals, approximatly 12 more Mot-SpArt and achieved better results. Your results might be sufficient but there is still quite some room for improvement left. As you donnot intend to start another vanilla campaign all that is of little relevance for you.
Yes, it will be for others to try to reach Moscow in better than 31 days on vanilla. I'm gonna try to do it on TRM next, but first need to appropriately modify my hopes to meet Gringo's reality. So, maybe 31 x 10 = 310 days? "No?" Well, maybe 31 x 100 = 3,100 days!
Whatever, I will certainly have more oil... and most definitely lots of OS to help me along my way.
Whatever, I will certainly have more oil... and most definitely lots of OS to help me along my way.
Last edited:
Imo reaching moscow as fast as possible is not a good goal. In your case it was necassary because of the oil. But in general a different approach might allow a lower total KIA. I am thinking of starting some variant of Barbarossa where i attack very early, reduce the red army to much less than 100 divisions and then delay taking more territory in favour of a "surprise" Sea Lion that is very soon extended to the invasion of America. This has the advantage of not being able to be surprised by a DoW of USSR during Sea Lion, taking USA as long as they are weak and getting only very little tc load from partisans in the soviet union area. But i am drifting away from topic. :blush:
My advice to capturing Moscow on TRM is be prepared to besiege it. With 8 forts and fresh units being deployed there (by event), besieging it is the best option IMO.
I, like Pang, question the use of OS if I'm honest. Even on TRM I donnot use it. I suppose it would be best used on the motorised and armoured forces as the infantry will not be able to advance very far in the 30 day period. IMO a strong Luftwaffe from the start of Barbarossa would be much better then using OS, but obviously both can be achieved.Whatever, I will certainly have more oil... and most definitely lots of OS to help me along my way.
Moscow...? You mean if I get Stalingrad. Besige that ... and Leningrad.
Yes, I have just as much faith in a very strong Luftwaffe as I do in OS, and... of course... we must not forget the strategy either. Having some units to give OS to, to be able to strategize with, and a support goal for the Lutwaffe will help too.
The future will reveal all...
Yes, I have just as much faith in a very strong Luftwaffe as I do in OS, and... of course... we must not forget the strategy either. Having some units to give OS to, to be able to strategize with, and a support goal for the Lutwaffe will help too.
The future will reveal all...
I meant for when you try TRM. But regarding this non-AAR thread, Stalingrad and Leningrad could be besieged (assuming the Sov AI will be clever enough to have enough units there in the first place).Moscow...? You mean if I get Stalingrad. Besige that ... and Leningrad.
I so so wish I had used the German Air Force from the start on the eastern front, tactical bombers have been a great help to my current offensive and in stabilising the front.
It always does!
Well, I have no reason to think (at least not yet) that I might do better or worse than you on TRM. But I do think that discussing a "Siege of Moscow" - in your current situation on TRM - is sort of a "possible project down the long long way". Actually, my knowing nothing about TRM at this time (except it will be much harder) there is only ONE thing I know for sure as regards what I would do differently than you did. While I am glad you did it, I would never call my planned AAR "Until the bitter end" - obviously because I would be copying you... but honestly because of the superstition that would invoke in me. I would always be asking, "Whose bitter end?" However, it is precisely your title (and what we are seeing there) that is creating the feeling of a fascinating epic struggle. But, somehow, in my opinion, the name is too darned prophetic. Of course, whose prophecy remains to be seen. But then we really haven't seen the GI "doughboys" either yet. So just from the viewpoint of a simple prophet analyzing the name, I keep feeling it will be you. Of course, I have no prophetic ability at all, so you may escape the prophecy that seems to exist in your title.
Agreed, but much more interesting is waiting for Pang to do it with 48 CAS!
Oops! Sorry Pang! Of course, if the front never advances (or does so only very slowly) he will have the perfect Luftwaffe. But if a blitzkrieg is possible on TRM, please give me TACs. So, we already know that I will build mostly TACs because I am a firm believer in "faith can move mountains".
EDIT: And so would be OS - if you can afford it. I am surprised that some people feel it is not worth the cost, but seem not to have tried it. Of course, no Germany can afford OS for several months. Precisely why it is stockpiled before war starts, and then used as much as possible to get as much destruction on enemy accomplished as may be possible; and that way gain every advantage later by now fighting a much weaker remaining enemy when your OS is exhausted. Anyway, to each their own.
Last edited:
And if faith alone does not suffice you can still nuke those mountains away.
Lets assume OS for one month costs 20000 supplies and 40000 oil. Buying both of them at the ratio of 1:1.1 would cost 16133.33 $. If you get 2.08 $ per icd this is 7756.41 icd. Using Assembly line or 20% gearing bonus on average would mean that 7756.41 icd equal 10.909 Mot1941-SpArt1940. Combining assembly line with good gearing bonus allows more. OS is good if you have icd and oil in abundance or if you face a crucial situation were the enemy would be superior if you donnot use OS. But in most cases simply building more useful units is the better choice.
And if faith alone does not suffice you can still nuke those mountains away.
You get a kudu! It's your first post I've read that made me burst out laughing! Well done, Pang!
But there is a flaw in the application of your correct mathematical logic. Nobody goes out and stockpiles OS with the determination that goes into setting the IC slider regarding building more useful units. In 5 years - given what I got from conquest, I easily have 40,000 supplies (or much more like 80,000 if I don't use any for Poland or France) by simply leaving my supplies accumulating daily always being mostly in the green. It is not even 1 IC probably. There is not a single useful unit I can build with 1 spare IC. The supplies accumulate easily with simply having a "green attitude" about the resource totals displaying each day. Often, there are periods when something finishes creating an IC excess but next thing can't start yet because total IC is more than I got... so then for a period of weeks or maybe a couple months supply slider might be at 5 or 10 IC extra accumulating huge daily added stockpiles - for that short time. Basically, over 5 years, it is all the "small wastages" in the game that shift into accumulating supplies if you set your focus that way. Come Barbarossa, I got 2-4 months worth of OS. I never missed building any unit on account of it.
Anyway, the cost of OS - expressed as you are doing (not worth as much as IC equivalent if it were a useful unit) is a completely different subject to "the effect of OS in battle as regards that worth". We must discriminate precisely here.
I would say that anything that can make the difference between losing a battle or winning is most worthwhile to use if you got it. Would you not use your Luftwaffe if you had it? What about the cost of your Luftwaffe as regards ICs that might be put into "more useful units"?
Finally, I am also a firm believer in, "fewer units but of best quality (subject to ability to upgrade)". Now compare your relative cost to construct any unit, upgrade it, add a brigade and maybe upgrade that also to the relative cost of adding OS for that unit. Might I make a "guesstimation" and recklessly say it is 100:1? Now go back and read what you wrote regarding what OS can do to make a unit be superior. Why would I even think about not adding OS to any mobile unit if I believe they will soon break away from the leg infantry; and will be alone crushing every resistance they might run into in the next month - if I believe I can destroy the Soviet Union in 30 days? Should I say, "Lord, I have faith in you but you do not need to part the Red Sea because I can swim anyway, and it will really make no difference since the Pharaoh and his Egyptian chariots will not catch me anyway?" Well, we know Moses didn’t do that. I wonder what would have happened if he had?
But if you have OS stockpiled (let's say by accident or due to conquest) surely you concede it might be useful? And if you don't, then you should just never use it... do whatever else instead regarding the ICs those supplies and oil represent and try reaching Moscow in 30 days. Good luck without OS.
It's late here, and I tired of this OS discussion anyway. So will say "Nite". And tomorrow starts a long work project, so suspect I will probably be away from Forum maybe a week.
When I return I hope to present what the heck General List is doing about finally getting his MOTs into Moscow.
But I'll leave Forum with this little image representing my view regarding the importance of OS. As you can see, you don't really need it, if you don't need it anyway. I wonder what happens when you take it away... but could have benefited with it?
Sorry, can not host images any more.
Last edited:
I don't like to reiterate, but discussing what goals for Barbarossa are better overall is a different story. So let's go deeper - maybe not starting Barbarossa at all would be even better option ? If You think it can't be, You might be surprised.
I'm not sure, that Commander666's assumptions about OS are correct, because it would need a lot of testing, but i can't exclude, that in such plan, in which every hour counts, even a small difference may result in a very big difference.
We can eventually agree, that in some cases Commander666 might not use OS and it's clear, that it finally wouldn't matter. Maybe the lack of details here is some kind of problem.
@Commander666
I think, that for topics like this, You can make movies, slideshow movies, or even slideshows with PowerPoint/Impress. If You additionally compress PPT files, they might be quite useful.
Stretched over 5 years it is more like 10 ic each day or 8 ic if you are very economical. As you do put ic on consumer goods in an amount that would suffice to do more than 4 lines it is obvios the icd can be utilized into more useful units.
I disagree. It is my estimation that OS gives (almost) 0 advantage in the 3 first days of the campaign. After two weeks the advantage rises towards 5% and after 30 days the relative advantage of OS peaks out at approximatly 10%. Not using OS allows to have ~12 more Mot1941-SpArt1940. How much more firepower would your attacking forces have due to this additional stack? I recall you invaded USSR with 107 divs at the sourthern spearhead. Lets assume the total number of divisions with high speed was 107(it was lower) and would be 12 more without OS. This means 11.2% more firepower before stacking penalty and approximatly 5.46% more firepower with stacking penalty applied. This is more than i estimate OS would give you and the better leaders are not even calculated in.
I consider Luftwaffe very worthwhile. The costs of getting OS is simply to high to be worthwhile under the likely circumstances. OS is some sort of last resort, that is to apply when everything else fails. It is some sort of unconventional reserve. It is my goal to prevent the existence of situations where losing battle is possible. Attacking with clearly suprior forces makes that possible.
I assume that best quality possible is used anyway. If not using OS you can have more of those units of best quality possible.
1,055.1 supply, 2,387.7 oil is what von Leeb needed in Presov for OS. That is ~ 912.164 $ or 438.54 icd. Building 1 Mot1941-SpArt1940 costs ~711 icd if using 20% gearing bonus or 20% discount due assembly line. So it is more like 19.46:1.
The relative costs of OS is the best argument you have brought against not using OS. If only giving OS to those mobile divisions the hole thing looks much better. Still you can have ~5% more units instead, therefore both scenarios are almost the same. The OS does only apply for 30 days, the more units apply for years. But this also means those units need supplies, oil and salaries for years.
Conquests give little supplies. Accidents will not happen due to careful planning. Supplies are not produced because buying them with money is cheaper. Later there comes the point in time where supplies need to be produced but this increases the costs of OS even more.
Any ambitious leader would want the resources of russia sooner or later. Attacking them earlier is more efficient.
Made the mistake to "peek at Forum during work break. I think the below is the best argument of all.
"YES", that will save all IC costs for Pang, therefore clearly making it the most efficient route to go!
Of course - once I have crushed the enemy line... or have run out.
"YES", that will save all IC costs for Pang, therefore clearly making it the most efficient route to go!
Of course - once I have crushed the enemy line... or have run out.
I made the mistake to just "peek" at Forum during a break in work. Oh well!
You probably didn't upgrade my MOT-1 to MOT-2, thereby incurring many build lines = less available IC for others things. You always have been a "master" of 'slight-of-the-hand' to get 35 MOT-2 (MOT-1941) constructed - and on the battleline - fuly ORGed by June 22, 1941 without starting with MOT-1 (MOT-1938). The magic of icd calculations!
NEXT, you seem to have taken the costs of OS for a stack of twelve units and compared it to the cost of building just 1 unit. Your math may be seriously out by a factor of 12 (plus upgrading the MOTs). As such the correct "guesstimation" is possibly 19.46 x 12 = nearly 240:1 .... with forgotten upgrading ~ 250:1 or better to support my "guesstimation" that OS is a very small fractional amount. And if I got these figures wrong (because you did a short cut I missed) it is only because math is not how I play this game; or I choose not to fully check - or read - your math anyway).
Whether the correct answer is 20:1 or 250:1 matters not. The only thing that matters is the "effects of OS to win battles", which all your icd calculations have missed. You are literally trying to change the debate to: "A few extra units is better than less units all using OS."
That is already a HUGE "non-applicable rationale" to discussing "the effects of using OS". I could get more extra units (if that was what I wanted) by not building a Kriegsmarine. Where is the logic of not having a Kriegsmarine so I can have more units for Barbarossa?
There is no logic to discussing "the effects of OS" when the attempted logic tries to turn the discusion at looking at the comparative icd costs of OS to instead build more units.
But you still flaw the "free cost" of obtaining many of the needed supplies and oil. Due to the fact of Germany stockpiling "millions" of energy which she gets for free via conquest (and later unneeded metals also) these huge excess stockpiles cannot be consumed, nor magically reversed to create fictitious icd calculations. Their only use is to bulk trade them for things you need. A very good part of the suplies component in my OS eventually used was obtained by disposing of over abundant energy and metal. And all the oil was also gotten for free. In fact, I was low on oil only because I bulk traded away thousands before Barbarossa started. Of course, you will write a long post that I could have traded for needed rares instead, so saved the costs I have to maintain my rares stockpile. Sorry, I also traded away excess rares - in the thousands. And this "debate" can go on forever - if you insist on twisting the logic from simply discussing the "effects of OS".
Much more efficient is that you never attack Russia at all - or any country. That would be true peace!
For me it is a very simple equation. Just capture Moscow in under a month using a historical start. If you succeed, I might start considering your mathematical calculations regarding OS versus the proven game map situation presented in this thread. I also advise Forum readers to read up on what the Manual says regarding Offensive Supplies. Best I know this game has not yet been "developed" so negatively to have negated its effects.
NEVER would I drop a Fallschirmjäger without OS. NEVER would I send Marines into an amphibious landing without OS – even if the target province is EMPTY when they start. And never would I try to attack Russia – trying for a blitzkrieg – without enough OS for the mobile units at start (and possibly others also).
Contrary to what Pang thinks, the secret to any successful offensive campaign is not determined just by icd calculations. There’s a lot more to it than that… something called “strategy”…. And proper use of OS is only one of the many strategy considerations. The diversity of factors is immense. Pang is trying to “isolate” one factor within a campaign to argue a point. However, by his own words, if battle will be less than 4 hours duration then OS makes little sense – but if the battles are longer it does (or might). Well Pang, you tell Forum how you can control an invasion of Russia so you always avoid battles longer than 4 hours. Simply put, this whole discussion of “isolating the effects of OS within a campaign” is quite meaningless. You can try doing the same for Luftwaffe interdiction, or ART versus SP/ART, or ARM versus MOTs, or CAV in the Pripet Marshes versus INF… or cancel going into the marshes. Clearly, a Barbarossa is a combination of hundreds of different factors combining. And I think the only “efficient” way to judge that is by looking at the results. Do you have a true blitzkrieg, or is it a stalled attempt… and a slower advance because the AI has been awarded the time to counter you effectively?
Yah, look at the results… in all your campaigns. Play enough and you will start forming your own conclusions. Or try “testing” specific things and then apply the reverse logic of how applicable the test results might be in a real campaign. Or just handle the examination directly. Gee, I failed to amphib Leningrad. Gee, I am engaged in trench warfare with the SU AI. Gee, it is 1944 and I still haven’t captured Stalingrad (no joke, but applied to TRM therefore probably unapplicable).
Or...Gee, Commander666 seems to be taking Moscow in ONE month, ONE day and ONE hour. Gee, he used some OS!
@ Mr_BOnarpte
I am coming to the realization that - inadvertently - this supposed "non mini-ARR" might become a contender with your epic 9-month long running ARR based only on page count! How did we get so quickly to Page 10 here, and poor General List is still inexorably stuck just outside Red Square!
Maybe Pang has an answer?
You probably didn't upgrade my MOT-1 to MOT-2, thereby incurring many build lines = less available IC for others things. You always have been a "master" of 'slight-of-the-hand' to get 35 MOT-2 (MOT-1941) constructed - and on the battleline - fuly ORGed by June 22, 1941 without starting with MOT-1 (MOT-1938). The magic of icd calculations!
NEXT, you seem to have taken the costs of OS for a stack of twelve units and compared it to the cost of building just 1 unit. Your math may be seriously out by a factor of 12 (plus upgrading the MOTs). As such the correct "guesstimation" is possibly 19.46 x 12 = nearly 240:1 .... with forgotten upgrading ~ 250:1 or better to support my "guesstimation" that OS is a very small fractional amount. And if I got these figures wrong (because you did a short cut I missed) it is only because math is not how I play this game; or I choose not to fully check - or read - your math anyway).
Whether the correct answer is 20:1 or 250:1 matters not. The only thing that matters is the "effects of OS to win battles", which all your icd calculations have missed. You are literally trying to change the debate to: "A few extra units is better than less units all using OS."
That is already a HUGE "non-applicable rationale" to discussing "the effects of using OS". I could get more extra units (if that was what I wanted) by not building a Kriegsmarine. Where is the logic of not having a Kriegsmarine so I can have more units for Barbarossa?
There is no logic to discussing "the effects of OS" when the attempted logic tries to turn the discusion at looking at the comparative icd costs of OS to instead build more units.
But you still flaw the "free cost" of obtaining many of the needed supplies and oil. Due to the fact of Germany stockpiling "millions" of energy which she gets for free via conquest (and later unneeded metals also) these huge excess stockpiles cannot be consumed, nor magically reversed to create fictitious icd calculations. Their only use is to bulk trade them for things you need. A very good part of the suplies component in my OS eventually used was obtained by disposing of over abundant energy and metal. And all the oil was also gotten for free. In fact, I was low on oil only because I bulk traded away thousands before Barbarossa started. Of course, you will write a long post that I could have traded for needed rares instead, so saved the costs I have to maintain my rares stockpile. Sorry, I also traded away excess rares - in the thousands. And this "debate" can go on forever - if you insist on twisting the logic from simply discussing the "effects of OS".
Much more efficient is that you never attack Russia at all - or any country. That would be true peace!
For me it is a very simple equation. Just capture Moscow in under a month using a historical start. If you succeed, I might start considering your mathematical calculations regarding OS versus the proven game map situation presented in this thread. I also advise Forum readers to read up on what the Manual says regarding Offensive Supplies. Best I know this game has not yet been "developed" so negatively to have negated its effects.
NEVER would I drop a Fallschirmjäger without OS. NEVER would I send Marines into an amphibious landing without OS – even if the target province is EMPTY when they start. And never would I try to attack Russia – trying for a blitzkrieg – without enough OS for the mobile units at start (and possibly others also).
Contrary to what Pang thinks, the secret to any successful offensive campaign is not determined just by icd calculations. There’s a lot more to it than that… something called “strategy”…. And proper use of OS is only one of the many strategy considerations. The diversity of factors is immense. Pang is trying to “isolate” one factor within a campaign to argue a point. However, by his own words, if battle will be less than 4 hours duration then OS makes little sense – but if the battles are longer it does (or might). Well Pang, you tell Forum how you can control an invasion of Russia so you always avoid battles longer than 4 hours. Simply put, this whole discussion of “isolating the effects of OS within a campaign” is quite meaningless. You can try doing the same for Luftwaffe interdiction, or ART versus SP/ART, or ARM versus MOTs, or CAV in the Pripet Marshes versus INF… or cancel going into the marshes. Clearly, a Barbarossa is a combination of hundreds of different factors combining. And I think the only “efficient” way to judge that is by looking at the results. Do you have a true blitzkrieg, or is it a stalled attempt… and a slower advance because the AI has been awarded the time to counter you effectively?
Yah, look at the results… in all your campaigns. Play enough and you will start forming your own conclusions. Or try “testing” specific things and then apply the reverse logic of how applicable the test results might be in a real campaign. Or just handle the examination directly. Gee, I failed to amphib Leningrad. Gee, I am engaged in trench warfare with the SU AI. Gee, it is 1944 and I still haven’t captured Stalingrad (no joke, but applied to TRM therefore probably unapplicable).
Or...Gee, Commander666 seems to be taking Moscow in ONE month, ONE day and ONE hour. Gee, he used some OS!
@ Mr_BOnarpte
I am coming to the realization that - inadvertently - this supposed "non mini-ARR" might become a contender with your epic 9-month long running ARR based only on page count! How did we get so quickly to Page 10 here, and poor General List is still inexorably stuck just outside Red Square!
Maybe Pang has an answer?
Last edited:
My plan implies to directly build Mot1941-SpArt1940. Both can be researched in late 1939 and having the existing Mot1938 upgraded for the france campaign is quite useful.
NEXT, you seem to have taken the costs of OS for a stack of twelve units and compared it to the cost of building just 1 unit. Your math may be seriously out by a factor of 12 (plus upgrading the MOTs). As such the correct "guesstimation" is possibly 19.46 x 12 = nearly 240:1 .... with forgotten upgrading ~ 250:1 or better to support my "guesstimation" that OS is a very small fractional amount. And if I got these figures wrong (because you did a short cut I missed) it is only because math is not how I play this game; or I choose not to fully check - or read - your math anyway).
I compared building 12 Mot1941-SpArt1940 with giving OS to them. The figures i mentioned are correct.
Yes. Due to the high costs of OS that is the real question. Why save supplies and oil if you donnot get something useful in return?
Kriegsmarine is the wrong comparison. As more land units(or a more usefull Luftwaffe?) achieve the same results as OS, this is the proper comparison.
It is very logical to compare things that have (almost) same costs and (almost) same effects.
As traded money and supplies can easily be utilized by putting less ic on the 2 ic sliders my logic does apply. It is simply substitution. I on the other hand might have a bit of a problem if and only if i manage to have them both at 0 anyway. But keeping them there for long does even exceed my stockpiles build up before munich.
Much more efficient is that you never attack Russia at all - or any country. That would be true peace!
But Stalin does not want peace. He will attack in 1942 and if i attack bulgaria and turkey Stalin might declare war much earlier. Importing resources from russia is expensive. Simply conquering the whole world is more efficient in the long run and the only real working method to ensure true peace.
The manual is poor advise, many things mentioned there donnot apply to the game. We really should discuss the given AoD 1.08.
Due to using more units my firepower would likely be the same or higher than yours. Therefore my battles will not last longer than yours. Mentioning the 4 hour limit was refering to a simple comparison of OS vs. no OS using the same amount of units. In a proper comparison this is likely to be of no relevance because the limit will apply to almost the same amount.
I think, at least partly, it's due to your, how to word this: substantial posts. You are very good at narrating and providing lengthy responses to comments from other people.
I'm the opposite, I prefer short and simple. Each to their own. Keep up this interesting non-mini AAR I'm not even sure we have to call it a non-mini AAR as panzergenerals was able to post his AAR using the TRM on the 'normal' AoD forums.
Well, with a name like "panzergenerals" he can probably do anything! Where is that? Like a page # for the many different pages that all these Forum threads entail? Or do you remember the title? Just realized "search" is working again.
Yes, I need to find a better way to respond to Pang's icd posts. Not read them?
@ Pang - you forgot to reply to the most important point I made... the last one!
Yes, I need to find a better way to respond to Pang's icd posts. Not read them?
@ Pang - you forgot to reply to the most important point I made... the last one!
Last edited:
Here is panzergenerals 'AAR': http://forum.paradoxplaza.com/forum...bring-them-on-AAR-AOD-1.07-trm-107&highlight=
Too bad he cut it short as he lost the save for it.
Too bad he cut it short as he lost the save for it.
@ Pang - you forgot to reply to the most important point I made... the last one!
If you delay updating this semi-AAR this is only your responsibility. There is no rational need for delay.