Lowlander Wrote:The partisans are very weak and will not stand up to combat with regular units, so are best employed blocking roads and movement of supplies to the front.
Therefore if the Germans guard the principal supply routes at bottlenecks ( bridges over rivers and roads through restricted terrain ) with the forces provided then the game will play out historically.
Look if this is gamey don't be afraid to comment on it as these games are pure dead brilliant, l may be 6'2'' and 16st but l don't want to offend anybody.
I am not seeing anything gamey here.
If you have partisans and you are using them to trigger Bridge diestruction in the German rear than you are doing what I intended to do here.
Partisans activity in the rear was a factor in this battle - both during and in the buiild up period. So ut is a factor in the game too.
The Bridge disctruction was not intened to be by adavcing soveit units to slow down the advance although that is OK, it was more to be reduced supply and a slowed advance to the front for reinforcements which is again what were seeing.
The proposed idea that Partisans should not trigger Bridge demolition at some sites is counter to why they were included in the first place. Just remove the Partisans, Wired Bridges and the few Security troops we have in the German Rear and you have a similar game that maybe doesn't have all the flavour of this battle that I would like to have. The campaign would play more like a scn from TOAW or that Schwerpunkt game called Russo-German War.
Partisans and Patroling was added to this game to give it a different flavour. Wired Bridges game use the desired effect. In theory it should all work fine so I don't see a problem here. But there might be one and if so, - you know what I am going to say - send me a BTL file so I can look what your looking at.
Glenn
Archived Forums
Help
Calendar
Member List
Search
){kind=link}