Shoot & Scoot

[RADO]

Greg:

I suppose we shall simply have to agree to disagree on what are "historical values". It seems that you believe them to be the values that one can obtain by lining up two pieces of equipment and measuring: range, penetration, chance of a hit and armour thickness, slope etc.

I would take that as a starting point (step A), and then line up forces from known engagements and see if historical results are possible. If they are not, then I would tweak the values until the historical results were possible. I would then attribute the tweaks to intangibles that the measurements in step A were not able to account for.

My guess is that the latter is the approach used by the original game designers, which is one reason why the values don't (exactly) match the testbench numbers.

umbro

Umbro,

Actual values are the starting point for any historical simulation. There has never been a game on WW2 (land combat) created that used real values, and all that I have seen have always had a "pro German" element built into the mechanism, for reasons that I simply do not understand. CS is no exception.

Doctrine is an important element in WW2 combat. It was the German military doctrine, and not their equipment that allowed them to do as well for as long as they did. Had Soviet military doctrine been on par with Germany, I sincerely doubt that the German invasion of Russia in 1941 would have passed beyond Minsk.

Even the French had better tanks in the West that Germany had in 1940. The Soviets used their armor as infantry support, and not as a separate entity as did the Germans. It was the combined use of equipment and tactics that made the Germans formidable. Posterity tells us well what happened once the Allies adopted the equivalent.

CS is a game, as I have previously stated, and a very good one, even with all its inaccuracies and flaws.

Until someone comes out with one better, I will continue to play it.

- Greg