ORIGINAL: GiveWarAchance
I'm sure if a human was managing the Soviet side, I would have done a lot worse. But to be honest, I probably would have defended the same way the AI did in if I was the Russians except maybe I would put in more counterattacks just for fun cause I tend to attack a lot.
Hello GiveWarAchance.
AI:
It is good news that you affirm that the Artificial Intelligence of the game has a human conduct when it comes to setting a game strategy. Until now I had the opposite impression.
"Attack a lot":
I also have a tendency to attack a lot, maybe too much and too aggressive. However, I think that in this game is not a bad idea.
Really, such a conduct is not very human, although heroic. In the board game Advanced Squad Leader there is the concept of Battlefield Integrity. It is the idea that in most wargames, a side often fights on to the last counter regardless of the punishment the parent formation has taken. In reality, however, this is seldom the case. A combat formation, as a whole, will take only so much punishment before it disintegrates into a panic stricken mob. The effect is heightened if casualties have been disproportion-ately high among the leaders.
Heroes of Stalingrad does not take into account the Battlefield Integrity, so you can lose a large part of your units and keep fighting as if nothing had happened. Little human, no ?.




