Favourite Game

**Mr Grumpy** · 10-12-2010, 07:37 AM,

(10-11-2010, 10:31 AM)Gasbag Wrote: I'm probably in the minority here but I really enjoy Tobruk '41.

Well i like T41 as well, i think Ed's Alt scenario versions have given it a new lease of life.

(10-11-2010, 10:31 AM)Gasbag Wrote: ........and the Compass '40 expansion.

For the C40 expansion you are looking for a special person to play the hapless Italians, it is very easy to get depressed and give in.....

Tide1 · 10-12-2010, 10:40 AM,

I own all the titles PzC, MC. and F14. Having been the tourny meister for a few years. I like Smolensk,Kharkov and Minsk the best along with F14 I can't wait for the East Front game next :) So many games so little time :)

Gary

**Ricky B** · 10-12-2010, 12:01 PM,

(10-12-2010, 07:37 AM)Foul. Wrote:
(10-11-2010, 10:31 AM)Gasbag Wrote: ........and the Compass '40 expansion.

For the C40 expansion you are looking for a special person to play the hapless Italians, it is very easy to get depressed and give in.....

Hey I resemble that, but must object to the "hapless Italians". My Italians were going to slaughter the Brits if they launched a head on attack :cheeky:. Just need to keep those engineers safe, LOL.

Rick

SnowBlue · 10-12-2010, 01:42 PM,

I am rather interested in Tobruk but know so little about it. How is the unit scale in the main campaign? Is it one of the bigger PzC games or more on the smaller side? Is it a mobile or a grindy battle?

Gasbag · 10-12-2010, 02:58 PM,

(10-12-2010, 01:42 PM)SnowBlue Wrote: I am rather interested in Tobruk but know so little about it. How is the unit scale in the main campaign? Is it one of the bigger PzC games or more on the smaller side? Is it a mobile or a grindy battle?

I haven't tried any of the big campaign scenarios yet as I just don't have the time right now. The game has about 51 scenarios and the smallest one lasts just 3 turns. Operations Brevity, Battleaxe & Crusader are covered as well as the siege of Tobruk and the fighting leading up to it. The unit scale is smaller than EA '42 (which is more of a grinding battle).

Liebchen · 10-13-2010, 02:51 AM,

I love (and have) them all, but my all-time faves are Smolensk and Kharkov.

Assault · 10-13-2010, 06:44 AM,

Fulda Gap '85

**Mr Grumpy** · 10-13-2010, 06:57 AM,

(10-12-2010, 12:01 PM)Ricky B Wrote:
(10-12-2010, 07:37 AM)Foul. Wrote:
(10-11-2010, 10:31 AM)Gasbag Wrote: ........and the Compass '40 expansion.

For the C40 expansion you are looking for a special person to play the hapless Italians, it is very easy to get depressed and give in.....
Hey I resemble that, but must object to the "hapless Italians". My Italians were going to slaughter the Brits if they launched a head on attack :cheeky:. Just need to keep those engineers safe, LOL.

Rick

Rick you did a great job but even your endless patience was tested by their inability to hit back with one of your now famous counter strikes! :eek1:

Not for the faint hearted......;)

Gordons HQ · 10-13-2010, 07:20 PM,

I think Normandy 44 has to rate pretty high on my list I know at times it's a slog but it seems to have everything to me.
However it's so very hard to choose as all these games are great and each one is pleasantly different in some way or other.

Cheers Gordon

JDR Dragoon · 10-15-2010, 10:26 PM,

The MC series (with the possible exception of MC1)

-My main problem with the PzC series and MC1 is, that we already know how it went. This encourages scenario and OOB designers to make their creations as closely as possibly as a "mirror" of the actual results. But often the actual result was based on a tactical/operational/strategic miscalculation on behalf of one of the sides plus a large part of dumb luck, which cannot be replicated in the game, because both players are likely to know the score and what went wrong/right historically. In order to alleviate this, scenario and OOB designers are forced to "fudge" things, by giving one side dramatically higher ratings for instance, typically with regards to "Quality" in order for the scenario to play out "historically".

-All the MC games (with the exception of MC1) are pure hypotheticals. We do not know, and have no way of knowing how they would have played out. We can however make reasonably educated guesses and play a lot more fast and loose with unit deployments and make somewhat more objectic criterias upon which to base unit quality, since there is no historical result with which the scenarios/OOBs have to dovetail.