Did the tactical part became to banal?

[Templer_12]

I like Decisive Campaigns: Barbarossa, but I wonder if not the RPG part is too dominant and in relation, the strategy/tactical part designed to banal.

For me, the strategic/tactical part should be include a bit more of Decesive Campaigns: Case Blue.

[wodin]

No not at all..I find it all gels very well indeed.

[zakblood]

unlike most testers, i spent most of my time testing without all the options and new stuff on, as i looked at what everyone else was doing and decided to do the opposite tbh, so i tested it as a standard war counter war game, making next to no choices and had plots off etc, so for me i also agree with wodin on this...

[76mm]

I'm still on the fence about Templer's point. I spend an awful lot of time reading reports and decision trees each turn. Haven't gotten far enough into a game to determine if the resulting experience is worth it.

I'm also not sure that I agree that DCB has banished micromanagement--sure, I'm not pushing around a million counters, but I'm deciding whether to award decorations to individual soldiers, refine a particular kind of Russian fuel, checking various reports and cards every turn, etc. Sometimes it sure feels like micromanagement to me.

[mantrain]

Definitely not banal, if by banal you mean trite or insignificant. this is a great game for those of us who are enamored with this theater. I cannot help but to always compare it to Wite. but that latter became work. not sure why. I think Wite has too many units. In any case this game is not banal. If it were, then you could take Moscow no problem, all your objectives actually. Try putting the setting on a difficult level and see how easy it is for the Germans to succeed in Barbarossa lor as Soviets defending. Then get back to us on if this game is trite.

[wodin]

Yes there is still lots to do and things to think about, however I prefer this varied micro management rather than pushing endless counters around. Also as I'm rubbish PP soon become scarce so I have to pick the most important decisions each turn.

ORIGINAL: 76mm

I'm still on the fence about Templer's point. I spend an awful lot of time reading reports and decision trees each turn. Haven't gotten far enough into a game to determine if the resulting experience is worth it.

I'm also not sure that I agree that DCB has banished micromanagement--sure, I'm not pushing around a million counters, but I'm deciding whether to award decorations to individual soldiers, refine a particular kind of Russian fuel, checking various reports and cards every turn, etc. Sometimes it sure feels like micromanagement to me.