Slitherine

Props to the devs for including Pavlov's House in the Stalingrad scenario! Good to see this piece of the battle being represented.

Nuts to that, I hate Sergeant Pavlov. 5 star SMG Infantry with four overstrength minions? It took an absurd amount of time to assault that victory location. And then after that was finally done, even more time and resources to prevent it from being retaken.

I think it's safe to say taking Pavlov's House in DLC 1942 really did result in more casualties than taking Paris in the stock campaign. lol

Kerensky wrote:Nuts to that, I hate Sergeant Pavlov. 5 star SMG Infantry with four overstrength minions? It took an absurd amount of time to assault that victory location. And then after that was finally done, even more time and resources to prevent it from being retaken.

I think it's safe to say taking Pavlov's House in DLC 1942 really did result in more casualties than taking Paris in the stock campaign. lol

And probably in real life too!

Nuts to that: I love this game

Kerensky wrote:Nuts to that, I hate Sergeant Pavlov. 5 star SMG Infantry with four overstrength minions? It took an absurd amount of time to assault that victory location. And then after that was finally done, even more time and resources to prevent it from being retaken.

I think it's safe to say taking Pavlov's House in DLC 1942 really did result in more casualties than taking Paris in the stock campaign. lol

I had two pioneres and a Panzer IVG lined up one hex away ready to assault Pavlov's house, backed up by two wurfrahmen and a nbwl 21cm, then Pavlov leaves his entrentment and attacks one of my pioneres. After the artillery was done, my pionere finished him off in the counter attack. Kind of anti-climatic for me.

Kaiser wrote:

Kerensky wrote:Nuts to that, I hate Sergeant Pavlov. 5 star SMG Infantry with four overstrength minions? It took an absurd amount of time to assault that victory location. And then after that was finally done, even more time and resources to prevent it from being retaken.

I think it's safe to say taking Pavlov's House in DLC 1942 really did result in more casualties than taking Paris in the stock campaign. lol

I had two pioneres and a Panzer IVG lined up one hex away ready to assault Pavlov's house, backed up by two wurfrahmen and a nbwl 21cm, then Pavlov leaves his entrentment and attacks one of my pioneres. After the artillery was done, my pionere finished him off in the counter attack. Kind of anti-climatic for me.

Same thing happened to me. I was preparing for attack with inf backed up with art and they attacked, getting wiped out in the process.

Perhaps one of those big dome-shaped turrets should be placed on the Pavlov's house hex, like the 20-strength one that pops up in the DLC 40 Dunkirk scenario, along with an angry 17 strength Sgt Pavlov and friends?

That would be overkill. It still was just a house after all.

KeldorKatarn wrote:That would be overkill. It still was just a house after all.

That's what the Germans thought too...

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pavlov's_House

Let's not get over board here. These are mostly legends. When I read stuff like "Paulus had it as a fortress on his map"... unlikely.
I am a trained infantry platoon leader and this was simply a very hard to take position. Taking a multi-story building will always cost you. If that building is overviewing a wide area and blocked on one side by a river that makes it even harder. It was probably marked on the map as an enemy strong point and it was a priority to take because it blocked advance in the near area. But it wasn't a fortress. A fortress cannot be blasted by bomber attacks or heavy artillery. This building could. The reason why the Germans didn't do that was probably because they didn't want to destroy it but to take it BECAUSE of it being a perfect position for a strongpoint controling a large area from a perfect spot. But such a spot is no more a fortress than a well entrenched infantry platoon in an optimal position.

Take the 101st Division in Bastogne. They weren't in a fortress, but they were well entrenched in very difficult terrain.

So let's stay real here. It was a very hard to take position, but no fortress like the one in Brest or something.
Neither were all SS units elite or the Maus and Tiger II a good tank, or Rommel a great General.
As a WW2 mulitary history fan one has to be careful not to confuse propaganda and soldier-talk with the reality of the situation and the facts.

Nevertheless I agree that it is very good design to put such historically relevant details on the scenario maps. Great job there!

KeldorKatarn wrote:Let's not get over board here. These are mostly legends. When I read stuff like "Paulus had it as a fortress on his map"... unlikely.
I am a trained infantry platoon leader and this was simply a very hard to take position. Taking a multi-story building will always cost you. If that building is overviewing a wide area and blocked on one side by a river that makes it even harder. It was probably marked on the map as an enemy strong point and it was a priority to take because it blocked advance in the near area. But it wasn't a fortress. A fortress cannot be blasted by bomber attacks or heavy artillery. This building could. The reason why the Germans didn't do that was probably because they didn't want to destroy it but to take it BECAUSE of it being a perfect position for a strongpoint controling a large area from a perfect spot. But such a spot is no more a fortress than a well entrenched infantry platoon in an optimal position.

Take the 101st Division in Bastogne. They weren't in a fortress, but they were well entrenched in very difficult terrain.

So let's stay real here. It was a very hard to take position, but no fortress like the one in Brest or something.
Neither were all SS units elite or the Maus and Tiger II a good tank, or Rommel a great General.
As a WW2 mulitary history fan one has to be careful not to confuse propaganda and soldier-talk with the reality of the situation and the facts.

Nevertheless I agree that it is very good design to put such historically relevant details on the scenario maps. Great job there!

We could continue to debate this, I'm sure. Although as a trained historian, I know that it is important to research something before dismissing it off hand. However, perhaps a strong-point building instead of a domed artillery thingy could have been used. I do not think there is any argument that Pavlov's House was definitely a strong-point.

The forces defending Pavlov's House blocked the entire southern wing of my city offensive for 5 days. I had to divert much of army rooting them out of their little hidy-holes. Very few fortresses have been able to do that to me.

So somewhere around 30 people (according to that wiki) blocked half of my army for 5 days. If I put it into that perspective, I would say it is tough enough.

Final thing I can say about this is, the AI should not move Pavlov from this house. He's entrentched there! Yet, he left, crossed the street and attacked my pioneres and got obliterated fairly easily. Maybe he could have had special entrentchment value as well.

Kaiser wrote:Final thing I can say about this is, the AI should not move Pavlov from this house. He's entrentched there! Yet, he left, crossed the street and attacked my pioneres and got obliterated fairly easily. Maybe he could have had special entrentchment value as well.

Maybe he was just chasing his dog!

That's pretty funny.

Naw................none of that happened. He saw they had a case of Vodka to capture. They were thirsty.