Some questions about France '40

[jonnymacbrown]

"The historical result is known."
This is a true statement.

"There is no possible way to force the french and british player(s) to play as stupidly as they historically did."

You've never played against me.

"In addition, there is no way to simulate the lack of intelligence and the command paralysis this induced in the allied high command."

Yes there is: Very low command ratings for French higher command. French units will be able to put up a good fight but will have difficulty re-ordering.

"The PzC allied player will know EXACTLY which axis units he is in contact with at the start of each turn, where they are and likely also have an idea about their approximate status."

This isn't completely true either. The German variable reinforcement schedule and strategic options scenario makes this much more difficult to discern.

"Hence the french in particular has to short-changed in order to reach a situation where the axis can actually win (and the germans get a boost to their morale to boot). If you based the morale of the french units on how they actually conducted themselves in combat during the campaign, the level of training they had received (and for the reserve units: how well that training had been maintained and how onerous the tasks they were meant to accomplish were) the axis would not stand a chance."

This is what I'm talking about: rigging a game so that certain historical results may be achieved. I don't think that's the way to go. I'm saying that within the historical set-up the inherent weaknesses of the French strategic position will insure their defeat no matter what you do as French provided the French high command has very low command ratings.

jonny :smoke::whis: