unrealistic campaign time-frames, turn-lengths

[gwgardner]

I started my invasion of the Low Countries and France historically pretty much on time, the May 17th turn.

Historically, the campaign was over mid-late June, after the breakthrough in the Ardennes, the advance to Abbeville, the isolation of the BEF and lots of French in Belgium, then the Germans attacked south to Paris and beyond.

However, in the game, when I clicked end turn (for the May 17th turn) it was now June 1, for the Allied turn, and then my next turn is already June 14th! Historically I'd already have captured Paris.

Shouldn't the two week turn, rather than the 1 month turns for winter, have started by May 1940? If the two-week turns started in Mid May, I would have a turn on June 1, and then again on June 14th. As it is I don't get a June 1st turn for the Axis.

[gwgardner]

I think I've done fairly well in my Case Gelb invasions, but two turns in I've already done my second turn, the June 14 turn, and I'm rather far from Paris.

I think if the turns were 1 week long, or at the most two weeks, I would have a chance of making a historical outcome. As it is I'm guessing it will be late summer before I take Paris.

By the way, I'm playing beginner level. So far balance seems about right. The French and British armies were not pushovers historically, but blitz tactics and combined arms are effective in the game just like historically, to create breakthroughs. I note that neither the French or British land forces have ever attacked any of my units.

[TheBattlefield]

Welcome to the seasonal preset turns. The timings are preset via the editor and it is not yet possible to influence the time intervals in the running campaign (eg. by scripts). For a historically accurate end of the offensive in the west, an unhistorical earlier attack on the Benelux countries could not be avoided. Even with a "late" victory (July / August), the shorter time intervals in the summer of 1940 provide enough time for operations in the Balkans. I play the axis in the "difficult" preset and my fights have expanded from December to the beginning of August, especially as the French government was once moved from Paris to the west. Assuming a quick surrender to the capture of Paris, I had already moved troops for the attack on Norway and partly the Balkans. Well, the rest is history...Norway could be shopped to my surprise and the French, despite all the hopelessness, fought heroically until the end.

[gwgardner]

In my game it is now August, I'm still just outside Paris.

With the expenditure of MPPs on reinforcements, it has been impossible to purchase units for a projected Barbarossa, in June '41. The 1 month turns up to June '40, and the two-week turns in the summer of '40 will thus force back any possible start of Barbarossa to '42.

I don't object to a flagship scenario for SC3 that does not match history, but I hope in this case some rethinking/re-editing is done on the scenario to give us perhaps two-week turns in winter, one-week turns in summer and fall, and make May part of summer.

[Ason]

Yeah I hope so too.. I also didn't have enough time for barbarossa, soviets declared war on me in august 1941 when I still needed to get a pretty big force to the front from Yugoslava and Greece.
I would really want all seasons to have same turn lenghts of 1-2 weeks, but I would be fine with 2 weeks winter and 1 week rest of the year.

[TheBattlefield]

Hmm. What did you do in the meantime? Conquered Britain? Expelled the British from Africa? In my game, it's November '40 and essential parts of my future Army Group South are waiting for the order to attack against Belgrade. The armored corps are set to maximum and the future Army Groups North and Center flood slowly to their collection points. An attack on the Soviet Union is (hopefully) scheduled for April. The Italians have (after a more or less balanced naval battle with the British) barricaded themselves in Tripoli and Greece should be kept out of the fighting until further notice...

[xwormwood]

ORIGINAL: gwgardner

In my game it is now August, I'm still just outside Paris.

With the expenditure of MPPs on reinforcements, it has been impossible to purchase units for a projected Barbarossa, in June '41. The 1 month turns up to June '40, and the two-week turns in the summer of '40 will thus force back any possible start of Barbarossa to '42.

I don't object to a flagship scenario for SC3 that does not match history, but I hope in this case some rethinking/re-editing is done on the scenario to give us perhaps two-week turns in winter, one-week turns in summer and fall, and make May part of summer.

We're facing here two problems:

First:
first of: this game is about offering free choices to the player, which collides with the wish that history repeats, no matter what the player does (this is not meant as criticism, just a general observation).
Second:
in hostory the Germans gambled with their attack through the Ardennes, while luring the Allies into Belgium.
In SC it is not possbible to re-create this gamble. There is no bonus if you attack through the Ardennes, nor will any human player walk into the trap with open eyes.
The developer tried to add some morale bonus for the Germans instead (Blitzkrieg, Fall of Poland, etc.), but it is not the same. And that, what it is not the same, bugs you right now.

But you didn't gambled (the whole operations could have terribly backfired on the Germans, even though it did not).
Nor do you have a chance to gamble. The later one is something I really regret, kind of.

But the general dilemma remains. We all remember history. And if the historical outcome is different from our gaming experience, something feels wrong. But nothing is wrong, as history will always remaind different from our own actions within the game. At least to a certain level.

[Ason]

There can still be choices offered to the player and ahistorical stuff happening even if turn lenghts are shorter.
and I guess the bonus of attacking through the ardennes is the fact that you don't have to grind through the maginot line.

I think you're missing the point a little bit here though. The problem is not that the gameplay doesn't completely follow history, but the way the turn-lenghts are set up at the moment, it's very hard to do historical things
(like having the time to do certain offensives, like barbarossa or winter offensives like battle of the bulge where you can use the weather to your advantage(a lot of snow = less attacks from air)
Having less turns in autumn/winter/spring means you have less time to build up summer offensives and almost no time for winter offensives(when rivers are frozen and there's no mud offensives should be possible)
Also in my opinion the years pass by too fast. Only thing I can hope for now is that the game ends well beyond 1945.

[xwormwood]

ORIGINAL: Mrslobodan

There can still be choices offered to the player and ahistorical stuff happening even if turn lenghts are shorter.
and I guess the bonus of attacking through the ardennes is the fact that you don't have to grind through the maginot line.

I think you're missing the point a little bit here though. The problem is not that the gameplay doesn't completely follow history, but the way the turn-lenghts are set up at the moment, it's very hard to do historical things
(like having the time to do certain offensives, like barbarossa or winter offensives like battle of the bulge where you can use the weather to your advantage(a lot of snow = less attacks from air)
Having less turns in autumn/winter/spring means you have less time to build up summer offensives and almost no time for winter offensives(when rivers are frozen and there's no mud offensives should be possible)
Also in my opinion the years pass by too fast. Only thing I can hope for now is that the game ends well beyond 1945.

The bonus of attacking through the Ardennes was that it hit the Allies by surprise and enabled the Germans to cut off the Allied forces. This operation is currently impossible to recreate. It has not too much to do with avoiding a frontal attack on the maginot line.

But maybe you're right about me missing the point. After all I don't feel the pain regarding the turn length, probably because this remained unchanged compared to SC2.

[gwgardner]

ORIGINAL: Xwormwood


The bonus of attacking through the Ardennes was that it hit the Allies by surprise and enabled the Germans to cut off the Allied forces. This operation is currently impossible to recreate. It has not too much to do with avoiding a frontal attack on the maginot line.

I don't think it's impossible. The French defense at Verdun and thereabouts is weak, and armor can breakthrough. The breakthrough needs a couple of turns to completely be developed, but it seems possible to me.

In my current game I failed to move directly through the Ardennes, and went too far north, but the BEF did move into Belgium. It fled to the UK before I could hammer it.