Stalingrad

[kingwanabee]

I was playing the 4th scenario in the German campaign, Stalingrad. I had 24 turns to achieve a victory, 12 turns for a decisive victory, and a brilliant victory....well I don't even know what that is! [:)] I captured both objectives by turn 20, which is a victory, but now my campaign is over? Is the only my to proceed from here with a decisive victory or better? If that's the case, why do I have 24 turns to get a "victory"? It's weird that my campaign has ended in defeat after I captured Stalingrad in the time allowed.

[ComradeP]

You can see the victory level required to move on from a certain scenario on the campaign map. Well, an abstraction of the victory level required in the shape of a symbol or two symbols.

[Hanal]

oopps..wrong thread

[kingwanabee]

What is the point of the scenario being 24 turns long if you can only win it in 12 turns? If I get a "victory" within 24 turns, shouldn't I have an option to proceed in the campaign?

[Anguille]

It's because you're not good enough!

First time i won like you in 24 turns...second time 16 turns...i hope next time i manage to win in 12...i wasn't very far from it but the soviets made a counter-attack on turn 10, cutting off my supplies.

[kingwanabee]

ORIGINAL: Anguille

It's because you're not good enough!

LOL, yes I know I'm not good enough! I haven't won a decisive victory yet in the campaign. I just think it's a weird design decision to end the campaign after the player has won a victory. I bet if I had captured Stalingrad back in 1942, Hitler would've had my baby! [:D]

[AZKGungHo]

Oh King! Not a picture I needed in my head tonight!!![:-]

[JudgeDredd]

WOW - I opened this thread thinking it would be to mirror my own depressions at this scenario...

I think the picture speaks volumes...please be gentle with your humour!

[JudgeDredd]

That bloody AI is good at working out how best to maximise attack, defence and cutting supplies...it's killing me - it's either bloody good or I'm bloody awful - most likely both!

[Toby42]

I'm not sure that I like how the AI sacrifices quite a number of it's units in trying to cut off your supplies! It may win the game for it, but at what cost? No real General would lose that many troops on a "Suicide Mission"....

[Anguille]

Now...that hurts

[JudgeDredd]

Weeeelllll.....

If we just think about it for a wee minute - first off, it's not sacrificed anything - in fact, it seems it's been me and my play style. What the AI has done as expose my mistakes. I've been the one leaving a gap in the lines. I've been the one leaving the door open to my supply routes. The AI has taken advantage of that - so I am VERY pleased with this. It's an AI (one of the very few) that actually punishes you for making mistakes.

The manor in which it does it? I don't know...you say a real commander wouldn't do it. I'm no commander - but I am human (apparently) and I've done it.

I'm not saying it's a realistic simulation a commanders use of his forces on the battlefield. Perhaps that even depends on the commander...but I do know this...
1. In the context of a game there is actually great reward for sacrificing a unit here or there to cut supply lines because it takes enemy units away from the frontline to open those supply sources again which you desperately need
2. In the context of a game, the AI can slow the advance of the enemy units - and therefore slows the transfer of those victory points and prestige
3. In the context of a game, the AI is a challenge - probably not for everyone - we've already heard of people winning this scenario by turn 16 - but it's punishing me for my errors
4. In the context of a game - the AI seems to use it's forces to great effect - either by exploiting your errors and advancing through gaps (sometimes reinforced, sometimes not - as long as it means cuting units off from supply) or by defending in depth at the right places and does so, seemingly, at the right times.

We can all argue whether what the AI is doing is real life or not...but at the end of the day, I have a game here that can actually give me a challenge. That's refreshing. It has simple mechanics and gameplay with very little variety in units. It has air strikes, supply drops, extended supply lines - but these are all quite difficult to pull together.

I love this wee game. Best £25 I've spent on a game in some time.

[JudgeDredd]

ORIGINAL: Treale

I'm not sure that I like how the AI sacrifices quite a number of it's units in trying to cut off your supplies! It may win the game for it, but at what cost? No real General would lose that many troops on a "Suicide Mission"....

You do know I'M the Germans here - right? It's been all my mistakes. From what I've seen, the AI has made none - only exploited mine. But I am looking at this from a gaming perspective [;)]

[Anguille]

ORIGINAL: Treale

I'm not sure that I like how the AI sacrifices quite a number of it's units in trying to cut off your supplies! It may win the game for it, but at what cost? No real General would lose that many troops on a "Suicide Mission"....

The soviets did...

[ComradeP]

In the original version of the scenario, I won on turn 7. It's a difficult scenario because of the number of Soviet units and the less than stellar positioning of Axis units at the start. I pulled a trick on the AI by moving all of my mobile units to the south (using the convenient bridge across the Don in the lower left) and bulldozed my way to Stalingrad in about 3 turns when they got there. My infantry, meanwhile, destroyed many Soviet units with "backhand blows" (pulling back a bit, attacking single units over and over on my turn). It's also a scenario where the longer you wait, the less likely victory will become after the arrival of substantial Soviet reinforcements.

There are testers who used a pincer approach and won a BV, but I preferred to concentrate my forces.

For scenarios like this, thinking outside the box is essentially required for the better victory levels.

My turn 7 looked like this at the end:

[JudgeDredd]

I didn't punch through well enough, I left gaps, I was backtracking and then Soviet reinforcements came.

[jjdenver]

I won this one with a pincer approach. The southern pincer was mostly a distraction - it was the thrust from the west that hit the north part of Stalingrad first and won the scenario for me. Obviously it's a very tough scenario and I used a lot of prestige to strengthen my units in this one. Don't hold back on the prestige here - and hopefully you've saved a lot of prestige from the earlier scenarios.

[JudgeDredd]

lol - I think that may be (part) of my problem - I don't have any prestige!

[Anguille]

ORIGINAL: JudgeDredd

lol - I think that may be (part) of my problem - I don't have any prestige!

I have the same problem...i can't get under 16 turns without any prestige...impossible.

[Toby42]

I'm not advocating that the game is broken! It's the best and freshest game in quite awhile. It takes a lot of planning to put together the perfect battle plan.

If destroyed units counted towards victory conditions, then the suicide charges would make a difference. The Russians may have done this, but I think that the Germans were a little more leery of losing ten divisions to cut off a supply point!