Campaign Game Assessment
Posted: Fri Feb 17, 2017 2:22 am
My first CG vs what I feel a much better opponent is in my Soviet turn 13. The Axis player took Leningrad and Kharkov in August, I am on pace to lose Moscow, Stalino, and Rostov in September. My only consolation is my casualty count of 2.3M men is seems low (28.5K guns, 11.8K AFVs, 7934 planes; 6500 on the first turn). Axis losses is 152K men, 2.5K guns, 1268 AFVs, 688 planes. But a lot of population centers are obviously lost or will be before mud. Axis VP is at 214 out of possible 332.
What I cannot assess is if the game is already effectively won by the Axis. If it is otherwise still a game, I will plug on. However if I am merely a substitute for AI in a pointless activity, there is always another game to play. it is only worthwhile to play Soviets to get to the mid-game, but one has to survive Barbarossa to get to the mid-game.
My other subsequent games are in T7 as Soviet and T21 as Axis vs a different player closer to my level. I am too much a casual player with broad game playing interests and limited discretionary to aim to become top tier player in this title. I am best described as one who plays, at best up to a proficient mediocre player.
What I cannot assess is if the game is already effectively won by the Axis. If it is otherwise still a game, I will plug on. However if I am merely a substitute for AI in a pointless activity, there is always another game to play. it is only worthwhile to play Soviets to get to the mid-game, but one has to survive Barbarossa to get to the mid-game.
My other subsequent games are in T7 as Soviet and T21 as Axis vs a different player closer to my level. I am too much a casual player with broad game playing interests and limited discretionary to aim to become top tier player in this title. I am best described as one who plays, at best up to a proficient mediocre player.