Top ten things I have learned.

[Von Earlmann]

The top ten things I have learned from playing the CS games:
10: German arty is devastating even tho Allies developed proximity shells.
9:German supply is awesome thus disproving Bradley's theory.
8:German engineers are almost invincible.
7: German armor is the best ever.
6:German engineers ARE invincible
5:German armor outnumbers or is equal to any Allied numbers.
4:Most stock scenarios have more German armor than they ever had at any one place at any time........esp Tigers.
3:German engineers ARE REALLY invincible
2:German units are not only better they are almost always at full strength.
1:The number one thing I have learned from playing the CS games is the Germans actually won the war but in the interest of fair play they decided to surrender just to even things out.(thus actually creating a balance)

This is not an actual poll but you can vote.....even tho it won't count......:-)

VE

[Warhorse]

LOL!!! Good one, so true...

[Herr Straße Laufer]

I think that sums it up.

I also like when a scenario designer puts in the late war German infantry, with anti armor capabilities, that supplement all those German engineers.

And, puts in those Tigers and Panthers too!



HSL

[Big Ivan]

Amen Earl!

Between '39 and '41 I would accept full strength German units with some lower strength salt and peppered in. After that its problematical for any full strength. The Germans were feeling the man power pinch by then!

As for Tigers and Panthers lets see and I'm guessing here; ~5000 Panthers built and ~1700 Tigers built versus 50,000 Sherman's and 55,000 T34's. OK do the math a better than 11-1 for the Allies in advantage at least!

Another problem I have is in stock scenarios with greater than 11 visibility there should be 10 to 20 airstrikes for the Allies especially in '44. Remember the Luftwaffe was trying to guard Germany and not the Wehrmacht.

Finally take the total amount of German engineers in a scenario divide by 3 or 4 and round fractions up and that should be your German combat engineers in the scenario. Combat Engineers were very specialized and most of the time were used in repair of the infrastructure so divisional transport could get up to battle.

Ivan the Big

[PawelM]

I agree with all the statements above. The allied advantage in general was unquestioned. The same concerns the unit stregnth.

I cannot possibly speak for every scenario, but there would be situations when in local battles in the area size corresponding to CS scale this advantage was not always scaled to the overall ratio between the armies. I would take a chance that not too many designer would feel it worth an effort to design a scenario depicting a battle where the ratio was indeed 11:1 as propably it would not be too popular in the H2H section. So I think the designe trying create historical scenario would most likely choose a battle where the forces where in a relative balance to make it attractive for H2H play. For instance, I do not see to many players interested to command Romanian Cavarly division with scarce AT equipment smashed by 5th Soviet Tank Army during Operation Uranus :) Not my idea of balanced and fun to play scenario :)

On the other hand fictional scenarios have their own right and I think the designer creates them purely with fun and balance in mind so are different story.

Therefore based I am not surprised that not too many scenarios in DB reflect the overall imbalance quoted above...

All that said, I agree with the points on the strength ans amazing capabilities of some German units.

[Von Earlmann]

I agree with all the statements above. The allied advantage in general was unquestioned. The same concerns the unit stregnth.

I cannot possibly speak for every scenario, but there would be situations when in local battles in the area size corresponding to CS scale this advantage was not always scaled to the overall ratio between the armies. I would take a chance that not too many designer would feel it worth an effort to design a scenario depicting a battle where the ratio was indeed 11:1 as propably it would not be too popular in the H2H section. So I think the designe trying create historical scenario would most likely choose a battle where the forces where in a relative balance to make it attractive for H2H play. For instance, I do not see to many players interested to command Romanian Cavarly division with scarce AT equipment smashed by 5th Soviet Tank Army during Operation Uranus :) Not my idea of balanced and fun to play scenario :)

On the other hand fictional scenarios have their own right and I think the designer creates them purely with fun and balance in mind so are different story.

Therefore based I am not surprised that not too many scenarios in DB reflect the overall imbalance quoted above...

All that said, I agree with the points on the strength ans amazing capabilities of some German units.

Your absolutely right on balance..........in most of my Kursk scenarios I only gave the Russians about a third to a half of the actual infantry and AT assets they had..........otherwise no one would play them.......as it is I have had a few complaints that the Russians are too strong...can you imagine how the actual German combat soldier must have felt at times?

VE

[PawelM]

I agree with all the statements above. The allied advantage in general was unquestioned. The same concerns the unit stregnth.

I cannot possibly speak for every scenario, but there would be situations when in local battles in the area size corresponding to CS scale this advantage was not always scaled to the overall ratio between the armies. I would take a chance that not too many designer would feel it worth an effort to design a scenario depicting a battle where the ratio was indeed 11:1 as propably it would not be too popular in the H2H section. So I think the designe trying create historical scenario would most likely choose a battle where the forces where in a relative balance to make it attractive for H2H play. For instance, I do not see to many players interested to command Romanian Cavarly division with scarce AT equipment smashed by 5th Soviet Tank Army during Operation Uranus :) Not my idea of balanced and fun to play scenario :)

On the other hand fictional scenarios have their own right and I think the designer creates them purely with fun and balance in mind so are different story.

Therefore based I am not surprised that not too many scenarios in DB reflect the overall imbalance quoted above...

All that said, I agree with the points on the strength ans amazing capabilities of some German units.

Your absolutely right on balance..........in most of my Kursk scenarios I only gave the Russians about a third to a half of the actual infantry and AT assets they had..........otherwise no one would play them.......as it is I have had a few complaints that the Russians are too strong...can you imagine how the actual German combat soldier must have felt at times?

VE

Yes I can. I have been just reading a book compiling some "unusual situations" (as author describs it) as experienced by german Gen. Erhard Raus in the eastern front. This touches on some surprising situations :)

I liked especially one of them, which occured when XI Corps was pulling back heavily beaten after Zitadelle towards Kharkov and Donets. Germans set up defesive position along a section of Donets river. They set up artillery and where waiting for Soviet attempts to cross the river.... Couple red army night attempts to built a bridge ruined by german artillery to start with , but then a surprise...... T-34s on the german Bank of the river but no bridge! Amphibina tanks?!

Only after repulsing the tank attack german engineers examined the river section to find that Russian simply driven t-34s into the river until it was enough to put logs on their tops (just under the water level) for more tanks to go over them :) It was something which never crossed germans minds before ....

I think thisis a good example of the german shock as well as how huger resources Allies had :)

BTW, can we add possibility of using t-34 for bridge building in CS

[Herr Straße Laufer]

On the other hand fictional scenarios have their own right and I think the designer creates them purely with fun and balance in mind so are different story.

LOL! Watch out, the "historical only" designers will be after you?

I'm surprised that the discussion has not turned to where trees, roads, and hills are located, that give advantage to the German side.

I've personally never had a problem with a fictional or historically based scenario that is balanced and fun to play.
Balance is not always achieved by having more equal number of units?



HSL

[PawelM]

Balance is not always achieved by having more equal number of units?

Very true, but for high strength ratio it is certainly more difficult to make up for the difference. I think one might have to do something Earl mentioned already, i.e. reduce one sides strength when other means (of giving both sides equal chance of achieving victory conditions-not neccessarily defeating opposition units) do not suffice

[Von Earlmann]

On the other hand fictional scenarios have their own right and I think the designer creates them purely with fun and balance in mind so are different story.

LOL! Watch out, the "historical only" designers will be after you?

I'm surprised that the discussion has not turned to where trees, roads, and hills are located, that give advantage to the German side.

I've personally never had a problem with a fictional or historically based scenario that is balanced and fun to play.
Balance is not always achieved by having more equal number of units?



HSL

It's not the trees and roads that are important....it's....wait for it...........the......HALFTRACKS :-)

VE