Prestige wise, I'am better of with MVs..

[SchDerGrosse]

Following the advice of the fellow PZC forumites, I have recently started a Grand Campaign on FM difficulty.

Currently I'am at the beginning of the France campaign and enjoy the challenge the game provides me with.

So far I have won a DV on each map, though many times barely making it to the last objectice while taking massive losses.

If I dont count the personal challenge of going for a DV every mission there really is no incentive not to just hang back and take a few objectives, plus some additional lightly guarded locations..

Prestige wise, I'll likely to lose much more with a forced marched decisive victory than with a well prepared, caotiously played marginal victory.

Also, in the grand campaign there is like only one branching location every dlc which requires a DV instead of an MV.

Is my observation correct? If so, it is a pity that I'am not encouraged by the game to perform better..

[captainjack]

It is mostly a matter of personal challenge whether to go for MV or DV. However, some campaign paths and choices are only available if you get a DV, so check the Library for the campaign path.

I usually play on General so experience is relatively easy to come by, but at FM there is more need for elite reinforcement to preserve experience and in keeping units alive so you don't lose the experience, so balancing prestige spend on reinforcement, upgrade and overstrength takes on a bit more importance.

There are two or three threads on prestige saving tips from about a year or so back. Some are very straightforward and practical and others require a bit of careful planning and understanding how the AI works. Some of the more basic ones include whether you should buy transports for your infantry, and if so what type, and when is overstrength worthwhile? There are no hard and fast answers, of course but it will get you thinking.

[hugh2711]

but when you get into the russian campaigns you will regret every bit of prestige squandered on expensive DV's