Taranovka Feb 13th

[jonboy211]

Hi all, a long time lurker here. I'm loving the game, seems very much like the first Achtung Panzer except the tactical map movement has been overhauled.

I'm wondering how others are handling the third Operation Star campaign (player ir Russian, 5 rounds). I can fend off the Germans in the east and west but I lose on points... do the Russians have to go on the offensive in first the East and then the West to grab the large dots on the map?

Cheers.

Jon

[henri51]

I think that is the campaign I am playing in my AAR "Another AAR".

"Going on the offensive" for the Soviets may be dangerous, since their objective is to stop the Germans from breaking their isolation and joining up, which means that it is the Germans who are on the offensive. In my AAR (which is not yet finished), I adopted the strategy of preparing defensively, and going on the offensive when I have local superiority.

Note that winning or losing on every move may be misleading because I think (I could be wrong) that the victory conditions posted after each move correspond to the whole campaign, and depends both on casualties inflicted and suffered as well as on the number of "squares" controlled. So it may be that grabbing weakly defended squares, especially on the last move (which I haven't reached yet) could mean the difference between victory and defeat.

Henri

[Shadrach]

I have to admit, even after playing AP since Kharkov, I have very little grasp of the complexities of the operational map... sometimes I have no idea what's going on there at all [&:] [8|]

Like Henri says, there are other ways of scoring than capturing objective points. But the biggest gains are gotten by taking the "large dots", aka major objectives. Given that this is a blocking operation for the Russians, to stop german forces joing up, going on the offensive seems very illogical and not really sure why the scenario is designed with two major objectives both in the hands of the Germans at the start.

Will have to try it for myself I guess.

[jonboy211]

ORIGINAL: stian

Given that this is a blocking operation for the Russians, to stop german forces joing up, going on the offensive seems very illogical and not really sure why the scenario is designed with two major objectives both in the hands of the Germans at the start.

My point exactly! I've lost this twice even though I've come out better in terms of losses. I'm now trying the 10 turn campaign as the Russians. I also find the tactical map confusing, you can capture locations during the live action phase but then find yourself back where you started so it's hard to push the defending Germans back without annihilating every one of them.

[Redmarkus5]

I agree that the operational map needs improvements, but it has already taken some big steps forward since the first AP game. Note that the number of units per square has increased greatly.

What I would really liked to see would have been a more traditional operational map (like WitE, for example) that generates the real time 3D battles we see in AP. It seems like developers in general either get the 3D engine wrong or they get the operational level wrong - they rarely get both right.

Also, I would prefer hexes to squares. The use of squares makes some movements very counter-intuitive.

[jonboy211]

Hi it's me again,

Having being beaten on the short Taranovka campaign I've played the longer 10turn one as the Russians, again you have to attack to get the best locations and it pits your poor 45mm AT and Mathilda's against Tigers! The only way I've knocked out any Tigers is to have infantry mob them at night and hope that one of the other tanks kills them with friendly fire. Other than than I can only knock the tracks off.

Hmmm... another crushing defeat on points.

Does anyone know if the additional DLC campaigns are more balanced?

[Redmarkus5]

ORIGINAL: jonboy211

Hi it's me again,

Having being beaten on the short Taranovka campaign I've played the longer 10turn one as the Russians, again you have to attack to get the best locations and it pits your poor 45mm AT and Mathilda's against Tigers! The only way I've knocked out any Tigers is to have infantry mob them at night and hope that one of the other tanks kills them with friendly fire. Other than than I can only knock the tracks off.

Hmmm... another crushing defeat on points.

Does anyone know if the additional DLC campaigns are more balanced?

My impression is that the devs have tried hard to provide an experience that has more historical reality than 'game balance'. Personally, I like that. In some battles I smash through and engage the enemy's artillery lines, but in others my unprotected infantry are overrun by heavy tanks. In several, I get to deploy medium tanks and infantry against a similar mix.

But I never know for sure which is going to happen and every replay is unique as long as you try different operational options.