That's why I said 3 planes per 1 tank.....
The 3 planes will bomb the Panzers back to raw material and then my little and obsolete tank will round them up.....
-
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.
That's why I said 3 planes per 1 tank.....
The 3 planes will bomb the Panzers back to raw material and then my little and obsolete tank will round them up.....
Originally posted by Siegebreaker
That's why I said 3 planes per 1 tank.....
The 3 planes will bomb the Panzers back to raw material and then my little and obsolete tank will round them up.....
Only if you have fair weather. Otherwise your planes will sit around idle while your tanks are "retro-constructed".
How useful was the airforce during the ardennes offensive? Not at all.
Yeah, but how useful were tanks during the Battle of Britain?Originally posted by Winkelried
Only if you have fair weather. Otherwise your planes will sit around idle while your tanks are "retro-constructed".
How useful was the airforce during the ardennes offensive? Not at all.
Originally posted by Petrarca
Yeah, but how useful were tanks during the Battle of Britain?
I guess that depends on whether Germany or Britain wins the BoB.
Originally posted by KarlAdkins
but maybe the human player can get Belgium to fight for a week, instead of only five days.
we fought 18 days!
IIRC: the colony never got occupied as they remained under control of the government
I'd like to see Japan far more reliant on land-based air, at the expense of the NK if need be. (Although such a course would have been politically difficult IRL and maybe the game will reflect this by making it harder for Japan to ignore the navy).
Originally posted by KarlAdkins
Just for the record, little Belgium didn't just surrender.
For the record... "Little Belgium" was host of the front line of WWI, 4 years without surrendering... In fact, a lot of European Conflicts were fought in/around Belgium.
As some people stated, the new German battle tactics were a surprise to everybody. Also, the Belgian army was not fit for such a battle at that moment.
I'm still convinced that the only army capable to stop the German army (around 1940) were the Britisch...
Memoirs of Erich Raeder.
"By Hitler throwing the ball to Goering then I (Raeder) would not have to risk the remainder of our Naval forces against the might of the Royal Navy. If however the RAF were destroyed and the seabourne landings began, Hitler would be in supreme command and it would be he who got the blame for what would follow."
Simply said it was the Royal navy existance which prevented the invasion of Britain. The RAF just got the media glory. (see also the Goering-milch planned airbourne invasion of britain during dunkirk for another unlikely saviour.)
Originally posted by Wertigo
I have always loved to play Germany in WW2 games. This one won´t be an exception I presume.
I think I´ll focus on the Army and Air Force and maybe the submarines. I will probably attack east more than west... The navy isn´t really that useful on the steppes...
I would always would have liked to see the Bismark or the Graf Spree shell Lenningrad
Or perhaps raid Murmansk or Odessa... But that pesky Royal Navy and RAF tend to be in the way...
However, if germany finds a way to get into a war with Russia without getting the Allies involved... Assuming that democracies are harder to bring into war that without a good reason they cannot just willy nilly declare war on you...
That you might be able to pull it off... With Turkey's permission to use the straights of course
which might be a reason for declaration of war from the Soviets.... Hrm...However, if you played as Turkey you could almost win the war for the Axis if you out of the blue just let them use your terriory to invade the caucasses and the middle east... IT would have been harder to cause the disaster at stalingrad and Rommel might have not had to worry about supply lines if he was invading over land through Turkey.
Originally posted by Petrarca
Thank you.
But you never answered your own question!
I will probably focus on building up the Nihon Kaigun, then Army, then Air Force. However, air power is very important. But, armies are very important too, especially if I am planning on holding much territory in Asia.
But that's another thing Japan doesn't HAVE to do I myself would like to see how things transpire if Japan doesn't attack China. Depending on how advanced the diplomatic model is I'd use threats and subterfuge to get what I wanted. What fun to play the various factions off against each other, and think how relations with the USA would benefit! If you feel you must, enter a land war later, against Russia or the CW... aaah bliss.
I myself would like to see how things transpire if Japan doesn't attack China. Depending on how advanced the diplomatic model is I'd use threats and subterfuge to get what I wanted. What fun to play the various factions off against each other, and think how relations with the USA would benefit! If you feel you must, enter a land war later, against Russia or the CW... aaah bliss.
I personally am going to turn the Red Air Force into the pride of the Motherland. That and my T-34s, of course.
Armies Are Key
Battles can often be won without air support. This is apparent in Stalingrad as the Russians had to make do without major air superiority, unlike the Luftwaffe with their Stuka Divebombers and what have you. Continents are ruled not by navies, but rather armies. Sure a navy can cut off supplies from a port, but that is only if there is land forces to crush any resistance.
Airplanes may seem the best idea at first, but they eventually have to land. Navies can only take you so far. The key to victory lies within the land forces, whether it be the Wehrmacht, the Red, Army or the US Army. When the battle draws near, I would sooner trust my rifles and tanks to get the jobs done rather than bombers or destroyers. Many of you may disagree with what i have said but I have my opinions.
As for my first choice in nations, rather than Canada, I would be the Soviets or Germans to instill my armies' will. The ultimate ground battles lie within the duels of these two giants.
Battles can often be won without air support. This is apparent in Stalingrad as the Russians had to make do without major air superiority, unlike the Luftwaffe with their Stuka Divebombers and what have you. Continents are ruled not by navies, but rather armies. Sure a navy can cut off supplies from a port, but that is only if there is land forces to crush any resistance.
Airplanes may seem the best idea at first, but they eventually have to land. Navies can only take you so far. The key to victory lies within the land forces, whether it be the Wehrmacht, the Red, Army or the US Army. When the battle draws near, I would sooner trust my rifles and tanks to get the jobs done rather than bombers or destroyers. Many of you may disagree with what i have said but I have my opinions.
As for my first choice in nations, rather than Canada, I would be the Soviets or Germans to instill my armies' will. The ultimate ground battles lie within the duels of these two giants.
Re: Armies Are Key
The question is not whether to have one or not but how much emphasis to place on it. Frankly, I'm looking forward to having YAKs and T-34s operating together on something similar to American close air support. A lethal combination if I've ever heard one.
I didn't mean that you shoudln't build all units at your disposal. All i was trying to say (thoguht i may have said it wrong then) is that the army is what wins battles at the end of the day, and so should possibly be taken more seriously or put at a higher priority than those units of the naval or air force sections of the military.
And yes......your combonation of Yak-9 fighter support to ward off those pesky Stukas along with some of the best Soviet tanks of the war.....that's enough to make Hitler and the Reich beg for mercy. Though...Focke Wulfs and Tigers / Panthers may be able to counter, the battle is still to be fought. P-51 and Pershings or for the British Supermarine Spitfires along with perhaps, Shermans...these combonations shall all be tested with time...
Maybe even the resurgence of France with their Charron B1 Bis tanks coupled with Dewoitine D.520......
I seem to have repeated my self with just different names for different countries units in each place....oh well.....
Maybe even the resurgence of France with their Charron B1 Bis tanks coupled with Dewoitine D.520......
I seem to have repeated my self with just different names for different countries units in each place....oh well.....