In hybrid AI Poland scenario, Polish infantry units are incorrectly showed as mountain infantry units.

Also, there's no fog of war in referred scenario.

Does the scenario editor allows for editing earlier than 1989 Cold War scenarios or even for late ww2 ones (Germany 1945 for instance)?

Installed the game successfully in a Surface Pro 7 but when launching it, the menus are not showed properly since windows and buttons are too tiny and barely can be read. The zooms in the game itself aren't working well either.

Agree, for the most part, with all assertions made in this thread. Particularly, it's likely that a railway bridge in Kherson (and the railway between that city and Armiansk) was still being built when Barbarossa started and therefore wasn't open to traffic yet. Also, if some bridge structures were ...

Last thing I researched is that there was a rail bridge under construction since 1939 but was stopped because of the start of Barbarossa. This also proves that there was a railway between Kherson and Crimea in construction or in project. Furthermore, Germans built a railway bridge in Kherson during ...

Checked some sources. Conclusion that can be drawn is that it's really not clear if there was a railroad (and a rail bridge over the Dnieper) or not. A Ukrainian website says that the rail bridge (Antonovsky railbridge) was constructed Iin 1954. But it just could refer to a rebuilt existing bridge ...

Rail bridge near Kherson over the Dnieper river as it's shown in War in the East 2 map was built in the 1950's. There wasn't direct rail connection between Kherson and Crimea during WW2.

Rail bridge near Kherson over the Dnieper river as it's shown in War in the East 2 map was built in the 1950's. There wasn't direct rail connection between Kherson and Crimea during WW2.

It feels like an already good combat system present in the DC series has been further improved in this game.

Is there hotkeys?

<t> All countries in WW2 had a territorial army. E.g. Italy had the so called "Corpo Territoriale". These units WEREN'T corps sized units despite the name. What I mean is that garrison duties cannot be assumed by operational and campaign units. In the case of Italian army, a possible landing in ...

<t> This reminds me of the never ending discussions we used to have within Commander Europe At War community.<br/>
<br/>
I haven't had the chance of dipping into the depths of the game but early amphibious and/or airborne operations simply shouldn't be possible.<br/>
<br/>
Or at least, if ...

Massive encirclements are possible because a truly massive and unrealistic use of paratrooper units. This also happened in SC War in Europe. It's unrealistic and it wouldn't happen at all in real life.

Landings in Denmark shouldn't be that easy. They didn’t occur in real life for a reason.

The paratrooper units being so decisive in getting France surrender simply should not happen. It' just wrong. Paratroopers weren't that strong in real war.

I don't think Russian planes suck that bad as for justifying such a different PP's cost.

In CEAW, a paratrooper unit could easily take a capital and this way won a game. Many CEAW fellows complained about this &#291;amey thing.

Many discussions occurred and finally some changes were made (as increasing substantially losses when dropped directly into a city).

<t> Germans admittedly had oil issues during the war but not to the extent of running out of oil by 1941. <br/>
<br/>
And if you have to be extremely careful about oil right from 1939, then we are not accurately representing history: doubt that Germans were extremely worried about oil during all ...

Also we have to consider terrain. Compare the plains of Normandy beaches to the highly mountainous terrain of Greece.

<r>
<QUOTE><s>[quote]</s>ORIGINAL: Harrybanana<br/>
Sveint, imho, it is unhistorical. Not because historically Italy did not invade the Peloponnese; I mean the whole point of a game like this is to use strategies different from the ones that were used historically. No it is unhistorical because ...