But - how significant are the new changes

[Montana Grizz]

I realize that some of the 1.03 changes might prove significant in terms of the results of certain (perhaps all) scenario's, but doesn't it seem a little premature to draw conclusions based upon a few isolated experiences versus AI?

I don't see how one can draw a reasonable conclusion without data.

The results of a dozen attacks against a town inhabited with disrupted units is nothing like the results from a hundred attacks in terms of statistical importance.

Perhaps these changes might provide one-side or the other with some advantages here-to-fore not available to them, but will it change the over-all outcome of the contest?

Will scenario's with reported results of 124 axis - 118 allies - 42 draws become 128 axis - 200 allies and 12 draws?

I don't know and neither does anyone else.

Why don't we play a few games as a community and then draw some conclusions? Two months from now, we will know much more about the effects (if any) of the new patch.

Are the changes something that cannot be overcome by a change in tactics or are they so significant as to change the game completely?

There is a difference between 20 years of experience and 1 year of experience repeated 20 times.

I'm on no ones side; I just like the game and am willing to give this new patch a reasonable chance.

I may be playing 1.02 in a few months or enjoying the change?

Pat