ORIGINAL: neuromancer
ORIGINAL: sfbaytf
As for "accurately" representing the Eastern Front there are so many aspects to the conflict not modeled. The political and military interference by Hitler and Stalin isn't modeled and that had enormous impact on the conflict.
Not to mention the internal politics. This is one thing I rather liked about Decisive Campaigns Barbarossa, it did make an attempt to model the political factor of the war. Despite the obvious abstraction that is necessary - there is no way to model the full complexity of human interaction - it gave me a deeper appreciation of the kind of juggling a commander would have to do to keep everyone going in the same direction, and that some people are going to be obstructionist out of petty spite.
It would be nice to have a game that covered all the aspects at a high level of detail, but the simple truth is that writing the game engine would be a monumental if not impossible task, the complexity would be more than most people can handle, and it would probably end up taking longer to play that the actual war!
There is another side to this. In these games we - the players - want to push all the counters around and essentially control the entire war, but realistically no one person had that kind of power. Maybe modern Command and Control along with GPS and modern recon would allow one commander that level of knowledge and control, but I doubt it.
In WW2 Launching an offensive was setting all the pieces in place, and then hitting the button and hoping everyone does what they are supposed to. The exact location of units would be less than clear, commands could be confused and units would do something stupid (hold when they are supposed to move, attack when they are supposed to hold, etc.), and battles weren't able to predicted by saying "Well, my troops are attacking from 3 directions, and have a CV of 90, so with bonuses I get about a 120 CV, the defenders have about a 60 CV with their foxholes, so I should have a 2 to 1 strength advantage and should win!" Nope! Far, far less clear than that.
So while wanting increased realism, people are conveniently forgetting that our god's eye view and level of control is itself incredibly unrealistic.
It's a game folks, we can ask it to be as historically accurate as we possible in order to recreate the same sort of strategic and tactical decision making that was the situation at the time, but at the end of the day it is at best an abstract approximation. And that is the best we are going to get.
But it sounds like this game is a pretty good abstract approximation of the East Front conflict of 1941 to 1945. [:D]
That might be a game suggestion for extra hard game play, remove some of the god view, fog of war option to remove the cv (offensive and defensive) from the UI (so not visible on counters...). You would have to judge by the number of men, the equipment, fatigue... how strong your troops are compared to your target (so you would have to play more with your gut feeling and experience
). Maybe even remove the cv numbers and the ratio from the battle result screen (just hold, routed...).Maybe a team play feature will help to simulate internal politics. If you could give team members independent scores for winning battles and make them negotiate with their OKH/STAVKA player for resources, replacements and priorities... Maybe that way they would compete among themselves for the fame/glory, not only the overall war goal
And promoting/demoting team members from core to higher command positions or vice versa could help create political tension within a faction.But back to the original question. I still have to see another game that has this level of detail. So big thumbs up to the dev and production team.
