Wow, I must humbly admit that the battles portrayed in this game are incredibly different. Man what a steep learning curve. I feel I am getting pretty able at ES, AOTR, and Vn. I am getting waxed pretty good still in RV. But PW is an intricately different feel and seemingly requires very adept and subtle strategies and tactics.
I am willing for more schooling, if anyone has an open game slot. There was a 1936 Manchurian border dispute that looked interesting.
But I am curious. Is it just me, or is PW a whole different ballgame than the WWII European theatre games? I would appreciate your opinions,
PF is the same. You have totally different Armies, weapons, terrain and all these equal a different
mind set of thinking. What works in Europe won't work here and then the Armies in PW are based
over a board time period and this changes your tactics too.
It's a good title, but lacks really good 2H2 battles.
When it first released it was different. It introduced new features such as para-drops, glider drops and horse soldiers. It was also much broader in scope and, as such, offered more variety than the other SB titles to date. Other than that, still same game system.
Archived Forums
Help
Calendar
Member List
Search
PacWar 
){kind=link}
