Grand Campaign question

[PanzerCro]

I finished GC 41. Should I continue with GC 42 West or East ? Which is harder ? Any advice ?

[dalfrede]

GC42E is harder, has larger armies.
GC44E and GC45E can be slogs. The Russian Hordes are brutal.

In GC42W you keep only 9 units, plus SE, lose all but 2000 in prestige.
You have to rebuild your army.

One can play both.

[goose_2]

Great Question...

Know this...everything you built up in terms of army and prestige goes away when you choose West. That First mission has you select 9 of your units and the 4 SE units you built up.

That is a steep and very difficult number to decide to take with you into 1942.

9 units (and 4 SE), because the rest get taken away to the East along with most of your prestige, leaving you with like 2000.

The great thing about West is it is a lot more dynamic and fun in playing it through. Most missions have a very unique feel where as East can feel a little monotonous in the latter years.

Do not get me wrong, I love both sides, but in terms of excitement nothing beats the first time you play a scenario.

Enjoy the tough decision.
(Oh yeah and which is harder, East is harder, much harder)

[PanzerCro]

ok thanks, it will be though call

[PeteMitchell]

I have played through GC East and then went back and had started GC42W with what I had prepared up until this diversion point end of GC41... and then I didn't finish GC42W as the battles are different from those in the East and I decided to start over the GC from 39 onwards with a different focus on these cruicial 9 units... (which I haven't done until today as I then started playing the Battlefield Europe mod).

So long story short, IMHO I think different unit preparations are required for West (few but strong up to the experience cap, incl. fighter planes and AA) than East (just more with some experience and more tanks/ATs)...

[captainjack]

The early partss of the West campaign involve small forces and and defence against multiple dispersed attackes, so you'll be doing a lot of running around with little time to resupply, so the mix of forces (and preferred heroes) is likely to be very different from what you would want in the Eastern campaign. I'd agree with PeteMitchell that during 39, 40 and 41 it pays to develop a smaller core and to be a bit more ruthless retiring units that get second-best heroes.

[Buffalohump]

I have finished out west on field Marshall and have gone about 4 scenarios in on east. I really enjoyed east up until 45 but got bored as I was playing . The scenarios felt repetitive. I love the west campaign and agree it is more dynamic. Sea Lion 45 is a real challenge. I enjoyed all of the east past Kursk. I love a good defensive battle and know I should enjoy 45 east but it really felt like replaying the same scenario over and over. I do believe some one who can win on east to the end should be able to manage west easily. I honestly believe picking your army for west to be the most agonizing thing on the west campaign for me. I become emotionally attached to pet units.

[Buffalohump]

I’m sorry I was distracted, my daughter was performing in a talent show. I meant to tell you good luck choosing and enjoy.
You should have fun either way.

[Elkarlo]

Agree with most of what is said. Thing is going west 42 is very different from what you've done up til now. Not just different or more specialized units are needed, but a different approach as well. You can't just attaxk like you've done in every scenario up til now. Which makes it interesting and sometimes frustrating.
And also when you hit west 43, there's battles where you aren't even allowed to win. Like Sicily. You would have to cheat to be able to win. by win I mean gain or regain ground