What is your favorite DLC campaign so far?

[monkspider]

Now that we have all of the eastern front DLC campaigns released, what is your favorite? I think a fair case can be made for any of them, 1939 and 40 have some clever scenarios and it is interesting to try to prevail using the earlier German equipment. 1941 represents the halocyn early days of Barbarossa while 1942 and 43 represent the climatic, decisive battles. For me, it is either 1944 or 45 because I love defensive battles and I think the expansions do a good job of nailing the hopeless feeling of Götterdämmerung as your troops futilely try to hold back the Red tide.

[7bua]

Me too love defensive maps but i think DLC 42 is the most well balanced. When i got Tiger, things became easy. I finished 44 + 45 in one week and 3 maps of 45 in just less than 4 hours. Since i dont use Stuka, i had hard time struggling with enemy armors in 40-41.

[boredatwork]

I liked 45 because it was probably the most challenging of the Eastern DLCs - the defensive battles have far fewer impassible rivers for the AI to deal with which coupled with numbers and quality means the AI is actually capable of hurting you.

[brettz123]

I liked 45 because it was probably the most challenging of the Eastern DLCs - the defensive battles have far fewer impassible rivers for the AI to deal with which coupled with numbers and quality means the AI is actually capable of hurting you.

I found 44 and 45 to be mostly a joke on the Field Marshal level. Just way too easy. I pcked 41 as my favorite but 40 and 39 were really good too. Starting in 42 I felt they started to go down hill with 43 being the last one I really liked.

[boredatwork]

I found 44 and 45 to be mostly a joke on the Field Marshal level. Just way too easy. I pcked 41 as my favorite but 40 and 39 were really good too. Starting in 42 I felt they started to go down hill with 43 being the last one I really liked.

/shrug

Without knowing what your core consisted of it's hard to tell if the fault lies with the scenarios for being a joke or with you for bringing a joke of a core to the scenario.

[brettz123]

I found 44 and 45 to be mostly a joke on the Field Marshal level. Just way too easy. I pcked 41 as my favorite but 40 and 39 were really good too. Starting in 42 I felt they started to go down hill with 43 being the last one I really liked.

/shrug

Without knowing what your core consisted of it's hard to tell if the fault lies with the scenarios for being a joke or with you for bringing a joke of a core to the scenario.

True enough! By Seelow heights my tanks were all King Tigers. I would say off the top of my head 20 Tanks (King Tigers, Panthers, and 1 Pz-IIIN just because I liked it), 7 SE tanks (mostly King Tigers but I kept a PZ-IIIL around to see what it was like to use), 6 Infantry (all heavy weapons), 7 towed artillery (all 30cm nebelwerfers), 3 wurfrahmens, 4 Hummels, 1 Puma, 7 Me-262, and 7 Fw-190 tactical bombers.

I found that by the end of 44 even the Panthers are either outmatched or simply even with the Russian tanks so I upgraded to all King Tigers eventually and found that once you did this the game wasn't hard at all. I feel that there is no happy medium with the 44 and 45 packs. The previous ones you had a lot more latitude with your CORE. I just changed the equipment file to make Manstein only add +2 to the unit size so I will see how that works. Working my way through the 39 DLC again and find it gives a more exciting game without being the grind I felt the +5 added.

[boredatwork]

Panthers are either outmatched or simply even with the Russian tanks so I upgraded to all King Tigers eventually and found that once you did this the game wasn't hard at all.

So... average Panthers are "even" with Russian tanks so you upgrade them all then complain the game is too easy

Going into 44 IIRC I had:

3 Panthers
6 PzIVHs (kept 3 until the end of 44)
1 Tiger
3 StuGs (kept 2 until the end of 44)
3 Wespe, 3 10.5cm, 1 Hummel, 2 15.0cm, 1x17.0cm, 1xwurf, 1xSu-122
2 AA HT, 1 x 88mm Flak
8 Wehr 43, 1 Wehr HW43, 3 FJ 43, 1 BE
4 Fw190, 2 Me109
2 Ju87d, 2xJu87g, 2xMe410, 1 He177
3 Recon

By Berlin I had:

10 Panthers
1 Tiger II
1 Maus (1 star)
3 Jg Panther
3-6 Wespe, 0-3 10.5cm, 1-3 Hummel, 0-1 15.0cm, 1x17.0cm, 1xwurf, 1xSu-122
3 AA HT, 1 x 8.8cm Flak, 1x12.8cm
9 Wehr 43, 1 Wehr HW43, 3 FJ 43, 1 BE
4 Ta152, 2 Me262
2 Fw190G, 2xJu87G, 2xDo335, 1 He177
3 Recon

While IIRC I had an unbroken string of DVs the first 50% of most 44/45 scenarios was reasonably challenging, absorbing the soviet attack when they can actually hurt you. The only scenarios which were overly easy were the ones like Narva which involved an impassible river which the AI just could not handle. So usually I would pull back and allow them to establish a bridgehead then I could be challenged containing it.

[brettz123]

Panthers are either outmatched or simply even with the Russian tanks so I upgraded to all King Tigers eventually and found that once you did this the game wasn't hard at all.

So... average Panthers are "even" with Russian tanks so you upgrade them all then complain the game is too easy
.

I know I'm just like that

To me the panther should really bet better than anything short of an IS. To be fair I thought it was a little too easy even with the panthers though!

Going into 44 IIRC I had:

3 Panthers
6 PzIVHs (kept 3 until the end of 44)
1 Tiger
3 StuGs (kept 2 until the end of 44)
3 Wespe, 3 10.5cm, 1 Hummel, 2 15.0cm, 1x17.0cm, 1xwurf, 1xSu-122
2 AA HT, 1 x 88mm Flak
8 Wehr 43, 1 Wehr HW43, 3 FJ 43, 1 BE
4 Fw190, 2 Me109
2 Ju87d, 2xJu87g, 2xMe410, 1 He177
3 Recon

By Berlin I had:

10 Panthers
1 Tiger II
1 Maus (1 star)
3 Jg Panther
3-6 Wespe, 0-3 10.5cm, 1-3 Hummel, 0-1 15.0cm, 1x17.0cm, 1xwurf, 1xSu-122
3 AA HT, 1 x 8.8cm Flak, 1x12.8cm
9 Wehr 43, 1 Wehr HW43, 3 FJ 43, 1 BE
4 Ta152, 2 Me262
2 Fw190G, 2xJu87G, 2xDo335, 1 He177
3 Recon

While IIRC I had an unbroken string of DVs the first 50% of most 44/45 scenarios was reasonably challenging, absorbing the soviet attack when they can actually hurt you. The only scenarios which were overly easy were the ones like Narva which involved an impassible river which the AI just could not handle. So usually I would pull back and allow them to establish a bridgehead then I could be challenged containing it.

I like your CORE it is very historical and has some good variety. What level did you play on? And did you lose any units during the course of the DLCs?

[boredatwork]

I like your CORE it is very historical and has some good variety. What level did you play on? And did you lose any units during the course of the DLCs?

Field Marshall.

As for casualties - sort of. Certainly there were some losses the first time through - maybe in 25%-33% of the scenarios I suffered 1-2 total losses - often recon units. Rather than obsessively savegame reload, usually I'd finish the scenario first to get a DV "blind." After winning I'd go back and replay it a second time before moving on which was usually sufficient to get through without loss. More often than total losses however were heavy casualties. Tanks and Infantry down to less than 5 and nail biting through the AI's turn.

*IF* the developers would implement my suggestion for allowing units to reform, with 0 experience but history and kill totals intact I would probably just play the game straight through and accept the lost experience.

[nikivdd]

DLC 1940 was IMO the most challenging to play. German tanks are weaker then their allied opponents and the use of combined arms is a necessity if you want to finish the missions favorably.
When the heavier tanks become available (Tiger,Panther) the fun is over and lots of scenario's in DLC 44-45 are a mere walkover when you use the right equipment for the right job. And with a walkover i mean if you
managed to carry over your core from DLC to DLC and built up a tank core entirely made of heavy tanks and an elite fighter-bomber force. If there would have been Su Guard Tanks, than things might have been a bit different.

[boredatwork]

When the heavier tanks become available (Tiger,Panther) the fun is over and lots of scenario's in DLC 44-45 are a mere walkover when you use the right equipment for the right job. And with a walkover i mean if you
managed to carry over your core from DLC to DLC and built up a tank core entirely made of heavy tanks and an elite fighter-bomber force.

Sooo... again asking the question - given that the developers never intended to allow you a core made up entirely of heavy tanks and that such a force results in no fun for you because it's a walkover, why do you take such a force then complain 1944/45 is too easy?

[deducter]

When the heavier tanks become available (Tiger,Panther) the fun is over and lots of scenario's in DLC 44-45 are a mere walkover when you use the right equipment for the right job. And with a walkover i mean if you
managed to carry over your core from DLC to DLC and built up a tank core entirely made of heavy tanks and an elite fighter-bomber force.

Sooo... again asking the question - given that the developers never intended to allow you a core made up entirely of heavy tanks and that such a force results in no fun for you because it's a walkover, why do you take such a force then complain 1944/45 is too easy?

We had this debate, and it got rather heated. I don't think there's any point in rehashing what the "developers intended" anymore.

The great thing about the GCs is how scalable they are. In addition to the difficulties the game comes with, a player can modify things to make them suitably challenging. This, in my opinion, is great design.

I will say this: if you think GC44/45 are too easy, try a full playthrough with my modified equipment files. My intent is clear: to make the player think carefully about the core composition, and to make it hard even on General difficulty (as long as you don't reload constantly).

[nikivdd]

Sooo... again asking the question - given that the developers never intended to allow you a core made up entirely of heavy tanks and that such a force results in no fun for you because it's a walkover, why do you take such a force then complain 1944/45 is too easy?

For DLC's betatesting's sake, i carried over my core between every DLC and also of the bond i had with the units since 1939. I wanted to play one of the higher difficulty levels but i haven't them unlocked.
One day i'll play all the DLC's with Deducter's efile, which gives every player a sweat .

[nikivdd]

We had this debate, and it got rather heated. I don't think there's any point in rehashing what the "developers intended" anymore.

The great thing about the GCs is how scalable they are. In addition to the difficulties the game comes with, a player can modify things to make them suitably challenging. This, in my opinion, is great design.

I will say this: if you think GC44/45 are too easy, try a full playthrough with my modified equipment files. My intent is clear: to make the player think carefully about the core composition, and to make it hard even on General difficulty (as long as you don't reload constantly).

From a modder's point of view. The further down the campaign tree the higher the unpredictability of the player's core composition which makes it more difficult to develop scenario's that are challenging for everybody.
This is not a critic, it is only an observation from my own experience.

[monkspider]

I am near the end of 44 using a core with four Panzer IVs, three panthers, two Tiger Is, one Tiger II, one KV-1c and four StuGs, and two Jagdpanthers. I seem to be achieving pretty good results still, getting mostly decisive victories.

[RobertCL]

I voted DLC 43 because:

* I was stopped in Barbarossa (DLC 41) finding this scenario extremely difficult, I did not like the invasion of Greece
* I was dissappointed by the street fighting maps of Stalingrad in DLC 42 + historical inaccuracy (what Italians were doing there ?) + the absence of an equivalent scenario as Rattenkrieg (the scenario created by a fan here on the forum was a good example of what I expected from this DLC)
* I loved tank battles of Prokkhorovka even if the whole DLC is sometimes repetitive
* DLC44 was perhaps too repetitive (even if I liked scenarios with Hungarian units)
* Winning in Berlin (DLC 45) while importing its core from DLC 39 seemed impossible for me even when cheating with prestige
* I never played DLC 39 and 40 but I don't like inferior German equipment of those years

However I had a lot of fun when playing DLC 41, 42, 43, 44 and 45.

The attack of trains to capture Lend Lease equipment in DLC 42 was great + many scenarios with original objectives (Ju 52 or your own trains must move to the other side of the map).
The attack of Warsaw during the uprising with super guns was extremely funny in 1945 watching the Soviets not moving any single finger despite their presence...

I liked the possibility to chose between scenarios with tanks or scenarios with a majority of infantry in 1943.

[Vaughn]

I'm torn. I don't know which to vote for. I had tons of fun with several of the early to mid-war DLCs. I loved 39, 40, and 42, about equally.

The smaller maps and engagements for the Blitzkrieg through Poland and France was a welcome change. DLC 39 and 40 is where I developed and nurtured a strong infantry and Luftwaffe core that lasted me the rest of the DLCs.

In 42 I had the opportunity to use many units I had never given much of a chance before. I had always been racing to upgrade and 42 gave me a chance to slow down and play around with stuff like the BF - 109F, Marder, PZIII, mid-war PZIVs, and some captured equipment.

I finished Berlin 45 last night and I'm doing Berlin Redux today. I want to thank the developers for making sure that the infantry core that I grew and nurtured through 39 and 40 remained useful in 44 and 45.