[Ramm]

Originally Posted by Charles22

There are so many tanks for a number of reasons. Foremost because I find playing with a minimal amount of tanks VERY boring (the enemy is given the tank heavy option as well). Also, as I explained earlier, I am trying to create something of the feel of a force similar to a late east front german force, one which will often need mobility on the defensive to have much hope of holding, as my maps are very high (200) and somewhat narrow (130) such that the enemy is the quicker upon me, and I have more territory to cover up and down. The side benefit to this, is that you have a map so tall, that you end up a lot of times with almost 2 or 3 separate armies, instead of just 1 or 2, because even the longest ranging AFV guns in great visibility can't pretty much dominate the board by taking up basically one or two central positions.

I do have some regular infantry but I think having a dominant infantry unit is worth their extra price. How many infantry units have both "2" LMG's and a satchel charge? Or 2 LMG's and a sniper rifle? And these guys are very experienced, so you can get them to elite in no time.

8 SPAA's worthless? Truly you do not appreciate the advanatges of long standing units. It's a build for the future it is, because 100+ rated SPAA when germany is the one being air attacked, is far better than 60exp SPAA bought on the fly. Besides, even on the matter of Poland itself in a mere 7 rated visibility, these guys proved invaluable. Now that isn't the normal case, but I let my emotion get the better of me, and put them in range so close (as 7 is close) that some of them were engaged, by infantry. I usually pretty much hide them for the first battles, but will use them for distanced infantry support when enemy planes cannot be found. Though they have no armor, and that's why I am very cautious with them, they must had destroyed at least 6 tanks, and I lost only one of them. I don't think I lost a single man on the others. This was partly sue to the enemy tansk preferring to engage my AFV's though the SPAA was about. I was getting far more reliable kills with them, but it was very close range. Every unit in my army has a purpose, though it may not show up in every battle (most notably my ATG's).

37mm ATG's a waste? Well, in this battle you couldn't had been wronger. They had the most outstanding effort of the entire army this time around, and if I had towed them with the HT's they would had been more outstanding still. I placed them on my southern flank with virtually no support. They destroyed approximately 10 AFV's without losing a single man (IIRC they may not had been even fired upon)! That was the entirity of the polish southern flank attack destroyed. Somewhere along the way, I decided to throw some of the slightly more northern AFV possible support into the objective areas I was losing, because it became apparent that enough time passed they were no longer needed, but also because these aces were just begging for more. Way to go team! Defending against advances, you may not find a more valuable platoon than ATG's in cover on a flank. Perhaps half your battles in an LC is defensive, so why not have some units which excel at that? The results I posted aren't typical of these guns, but it does show what they are capable of.

88's not having targets? Surely you jest. These were the ATG type, not the AA type. Nonetheless, the AA version is very formidable anyway. Yes, you are somewhat correct, because those guns are so valuable, I could not dare risk them against a target when visibility was a mere 7, for this battle anyway. If, when campaiging, you are interested in getting units to elite status, there is no gun better for the german cause. You do recall the disadvantages germany has against the heavier French, British, and USSR tanks don't you? That's where these babies come in. I would venture to guess they're still relavent until at least 1943 for knocking out heavier armor, after that the crew can be switched to the 88pak ATG's or something. If one feels like using them for long-range anti-personnel use at times, they can work real well there too.

Airstrikes? I wasn't allowed any IIRC, but if they were available I didnt' buy any. They would had been all but useless in this battle anyway, as the visibility was very low.

I didn't whine that giving the poles extra points was unfair. The gist of any whining was directed at excessive artillery picking by the AI and how the direct fire between AFV's was workign heavily to my disadvantage this time. I have had many battles with this size of a force against the poles, and it's the first time anything this nightmarish regarding artillery came off.

Ah, but I have discovered something. This is the first very low visibility game I have played in winSPWW2 as well. I don't think it is a coincidence that my counter-battery sat so long and didn't counter a thing (and with so much to counter). I also don't think it's a coincidence that the AI would go quite out of character of pick that much artillery, though I would still consider half of 60 guns pretty heavy, but I have seen that a few times and aren't amazed by it. I think the AI figures I CANNOT counter-battery him, because the low visibility would prevent that (which I didn't realize, if true) and thereby picks artillery in droves. I don't think I will go along with any battles having visibility that low again, and that may cure this excessive amount of artillery entirely.

I can't really comment on whether or not you wasted your points because I'm not really experienced with that. I can tell you that visibility has absolutely nothing to do with off-map counter-battery fire. You CB effectiveness is determined by three things: A) exp, B) range of guns, C) a throw of the dice
Hope this helps

Andrew