Played it and liked it. The scenarios were rather big (as they should when it's about Kursk), in the upper limit of my taste, but the moderate number of scenarios made up for it. Everything went better than I expected, except for having most of my infantry and light vehicles massacred and having to "sell" the rest to maintain the far more important Tigers. Most of my casualties were caused by dug-in units and artillery. Mid-way I only had two pioneer squads for infantry but somehow that was enough. In a twisted way, not having to micro-manage loads of infantry made it easier for me to focus on the overall tactical progress.
The tank heavy enemy counter-attacks were not a big problem. SU-76s caused more damage and even casualties than did the T-34s, due to their slightly more powerful guns. Some of my Tigers got well over hundred kills during the campaign. Personally I'd plan the counter-attacks a bit more cunningly while making the dug-in enemies slightly easier to overcome. Just a matter of taste, wouldn't do it at the expense of historical accuracy.
As for historical accuracy, I've read that the SU-85 didn't make it in time for the battle of Kursk*. If that's confirmed, I'd replace them with some other tanks or assault guns. Luckily I didn't lose any tanks to those SU-85s, which theoretically had the most potential to damage. I've also had the impression that it was mostly if not solely the lightened KV-1S models used in Kursk, not the heavier KV-1 models. If so, I'd put in more KV-1S tanks.
*
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/SU-85
Re: Has anyone been playing the new Kursk Campaign?
Threaded Mode