Perspective and Mental Game

[Parkkicks]

Hello again,

I'm looking at how little I know of the terrain of the USSR, and how few details I know about what combat would have been like. I also enjoy and appreciate realism and detail, and the game itself.

I'm wondering... How to justify, or, what it is too; directly understand what more detail, and skill advancement, lie in adjusting my perspective of the SCALE, and REALITY, of both the game, and it's various fronts and it's components.

For example; I'm not asking about what horrible details occur in pushing 100,000 men across 20 miles of clear terrain, although I am trying to frame my mind to see plainly past combat values, and exploiting weaknesses, somehow perceived in the line, to get more details in a realistic strategy game. To clarify, it is that I am trying to strategize in mid-late game, about how to attack, and am asking for advice, in how to mentally frame this combat. For instance, do I move as many men as I can against 1 hex? Is it realistic to make small attacks? Is it more prudent to break the line and take from another front to do so, or would I rather do absolutely nothing but take advantage of CV disparities.

Another line of questioning is: How to justify and frame your mind to advancing once the soviets have reinforced their lines. What happens if Moscow is not not taken? Can the Germans sit on that gained territory forever? Have there been successes where Moscow has not been taken? What objectives would be secondary to the fortresses of Moscow and Leningrad. Could more casualties be averted by abandoning those objectives? Is falling back to shrink the area and maximize offensive forces a viable strategy? I know it is a lot to ask, but I'm not always looking for an absolutley Ideal strategy, however, these questions are the best that I could come up with, to be framed in a way that may be addressed by an expert.

Thanks,

Parker