What's the point of 3 extra difficulites?

[timek28]

Hello all,

I've finally beat AK on FM difficulty. While I had to load a fair amount of times to accomplish that I also found a game challanging and enjoyable in the same time.

Í've tried for experimenting sakes to start a new campaign on Manstein and Romell difficulty. To my astoundment Manstein difficulty includes British units of doubled strength right away, while Romell dificulty incorporates pitifull prestige...

I cannot see how this can be fun in any way? On Manstein right away I was attacked by 15 strenght British tank. And 14 strength British Hurricane. I took significant losses, and I'm not sure how could have I positioned my units better to avoid this.

Also I think extra difficuliy should relay on better AI or RANDOM AI attacking scritps (diversions, encirclements, airborne operations etc...) rather than torture of player with pitifull prestige or enemy units of enormous strength.

Is anyone having any fun while playing on these difficulties, or managing to win scenarios at all?

If they do how do they do it?

I found FM difficulty to be exactly the right ammount of stress that I find optimal. There where some draining battles like Gazala for example. There where some easier ones too. But I never felt like I was overwhelming enemy or that enemy overwhelmed me (as it was more or less accurate historically wise). On Manstein and Romell you are just put into completely unbalanced position from the start where you have to play a "perfect game" and avoid any (major) losses in order to advance. When I say major losses my intuition and mathematical prediction tells me anything more then 3 strength points lost per unit is a major loss. And it would be pretty hard to recover from such losses with Rommels prestige or Mansteins enemy strength. I'm sure it is doable but to what cost in terms of nerve wracking expirience.

[Tarrak]

I personally don't play the three extra difficulties levels myself as FM, or sometimes even General if i want a more laid back game, are more then enough for me. But there are people who claim Rommel still awards you way to much prestige and beat Mannstein easily and claim the game is to easy. So everyone to each own.

[timek28]

But there are people who claim Rommel still awards you way to much prestige and beat Mannstein easily and claim the game is to easy..

Yeah right In the first mission you gain around 160 prestige on Rommel. How many strength points could you replace during the combat with this much prestige? 2 maybe?? Give me a break... (not you but the ones who claim it to be easy)

Maybe it is doable, but basically 90% of your combat results should be 3,4,5-0 in your favor. And that is only possible with heavy artillery and aerial support which is not available all the time, especially with weak and slow set artillery in the beginning. Also I read figures about Africa battles and there was usually considerable losses on German side, and greater losses on British side. But ratio was rarely 1-10 like it is needed here in order to save prestige It was usually around 1-2 ratio in lost man or equipment (more or less). But correct me if I'm wrong. However I do agree the British had more accessible replacements.

Someone who beats game easily on that difficulty should put up some YouTube videos to prove how he did it, and I would congratulate him on masterful strategy. Otherwise I could think off it only as bragging over the internet, or making it up.

[Razz1]

Just use the exploits.
Easy win!

[timek28]

Just use the exploits.
Easy win!

You mean cheats?

[deducter]

I have videos of full playthroughs of GC39-43, along with some of 44East, with GC39-42 on -75% prestige and 43+ with -50% prestige. You can see these video AARs in the AAR subforum.

I don't have anything for AK though.

Edit: I don't use cheat codes, but I do stuff like exploit AI move orders, fighter traps, exploit the fact that the AI attacks an adjacent unit upon capturing a VH. Whether my tactics are exploits or not, I leave that up to the viewer to decide.

[timek28]

Deducer I watched one of your videos (actually the first one in 39). It was very interesting. Some better video quality wouldn't be bad either

What struck me the most is that you didn't buy any reinforcements for your units during the battle! This surely saves prestige enormously (as it is absolutely necessary on the difficulty you are playing). I'm still going to have to see how this works against stronger opponents from GC 40 on, as Polish units are not a equal opponent. Most of them where 5-7 strength and weak. My bet is that you are playing with just enough strength of units to get a DV. Not buying any replacements if you absolutely don't have to. Correct me if I'm wrong. This is where our play differ. I don't like under strengthened units and if I have prestige I try to refill strength points for my most important units (never over strengthening though).

Also I see you know which AI unit is where and where you can force transports and where not, so I assume this are so called exploits. I rarely move transports one hex away to enemy hexes like you do. I always form protective armor block first.

All in all nice play, but surely it is hard to do on the first play-through.

I will continue watching

[deducter]

Also I see you know which AI unit is where and where you can force transports and where not, so I assume this are so called exploits. I rarely move transports one hex away to enemy hexes like you do. I always form protective armor block first.

All in all nice play, but surely it is hard to do on the first play-through.

Oh I agree, this is impossible on a first playthrough. The game is much, much tougher the first time through, and the biggest advantage I have is spoiler knowledge. However, I sometimes can't remember, and in those cases I play it safe; you'll see me not remembering quite a bit as the years progress and content gets more complicated. I also almost never move out transports like the craziness I do in later years.

[timek28]

deducter - I understand what you say

Well, I'll watch your videos and try to make the most out of them in terms of learning strategy and techniques and trying to implement them myself. You seem to be very deep in analyzing battle mathematics as well as prestige management and unit ballance.

Lots of times I go just for the best units availabe as I don't try to optimize core too much. If I can afford panthers and tigers then I go for them, as I think best units bring best results. Of course this is possible with regular prestige (100%). With your prestige much less so.

I saw just a glimpse of your 44 video and noticed that you had only around 2 Tiger tanks (correct me if I'm wrong I didn't pay attention). I'm not sure I would have been able to get DV with the similar core as yours - lots of medium tanks, some older ones, and captured ones. But I guess that kind of core was more historically accurate. With Soviet T34-85s, KV85s and IS1s attacking I'm not sure how I would defend without Tigers 1 or 2s or at least Panthers. I'm yet to see how you managed it.

Anyways, great job for putting that much of material out there for as. Much appreciated

p.s: are you going to put GC45 videos online?

[Messmann]

By the way, what are exploits? Foreseeable AI routines, I assume? I know a few, but probably I've never heard of some before. Is there a list of them?

As to the difficulty, I've never decided to switch to Manstein or Rommel so far. I'd say when you play the DLCs at Fieldmarshall it's possible to have enough challenge at the early stages of the game.

But after a while and especially when you get all these strong units in the years 1942-43, then it becomes boring. In my case, I ended the game in 1942 after Stalingrad (25.000 Prestige Points ).

Maybe that's one of the reasons why deducter changed it in his mod.

[timek28]

@Mesermann

25000 PP at Stalingrad??? Is that GC or original game? And you were playing on FM difficulty?

If it is GC, and FM I really don't know how could you end with so many PP. I remember having around 6000 or 7000 PP before first Stalingrad battle. Good thing about GC is that there is fair amount of battles that give you prestige per turn. If used optimally player can save a lot of prestige this way (as I thought I did until I saw your number).

Also I played on colonel back then. It was good challange anyways. I don't know. Only thing that comes to my mind (if we are talking about GC and same playing conditions) is that I was using elite replacements during the missions, while you where not. Or that you didn't buy newest units but played with older ones as much as possible. Tactics wise I was having littile losses, so I cannot see that prestige descrepancy was created by strategy).

[Shrike]

It takes a lot of time and perseverance, but you'll improve your game tremendously by playing through the full DLC campaign (east) repeatedly. I did it twice at FM level and the second time I was surprised at the amount of prestige I had racked up by 1942. That quickly started to evaporate in 1944 though. It's crucial to save enough prestige for when the Tigers, Panthers and better planes become available. In fact, if you manage to upgrade all of your core without draining your prestige completely, you'll find the later years a lot easier to get through. Nothing beats overstrength King Tigers with plenty of artillery support, which in itself will allow you to save a lot of prestige if you can make sure they don't get damaged too much. At the end of 1945 even these heavyweights become challenged by the (tedious) waves of onrushing overstrength Soviet tanks, simply because replenishing their ammo becomes a challenge. I have yet to find the motivation to retry the Western path, as I got put off by the "ghost spawning" as a standard mechanic to make things challenging for the player. Feels way too much like AI cheats to me, which I enjoy even less than the dreaded "circle spawning" of old.

[timek28]

Yes repetition definatelly helps.

Too bad I get saturated by playing the same campaign more than two times. I played GC 2 times, AK 2 times and original PC 1 time. I don't think I would enjoy game playing it more than this. I tried playing AK once again on Romell and Manstain, but I quit after the first turn when I saw the odds. Actually I would enjoy game more then 2 times if there were differences in AI unit structure (more planes one time, more tanks next for example) and strategic behaviour (directions of attack, active passive role change etc...). Playing on highest difficulty just to have less ressources or to have AU with as twice as many units is not my thing. I guess most games handle hardest difficulty levels this way (FPSs for example). If everything else (except) resources stays the same what's the point? Torturing yourself with micrmanagement of losses?

WIth that being said I guess multiplayer battles are much tougher in terms of thinking and dynamic reactions and not repetitive as AI battles. So I'm looking forward to play some multiplayer games in future.

[Longasc]

I would go with 3 difficulty settings and CUSTOM which would allow you to give yourself or the AI all penalties or advantages you desire.

Some people really manage to win on FM without reloading or other tricks that make things easier, the 3 extra difficulty levels are for them.

[Messmann]

@Mesermann
I don't know. Only thing that comes to my mind (if we are talking about GC and same playing conditions) is that I was using elite replacements during the missions, while you where not. Or that you didn't buy newest units but played with older ones as much as possible. Tactics wise I was having littile losses, so I cannot see that prestige descrepancy was created by strategy).

Yes, this is part of the answer. As far as replacement is concerned. But I did have new units, although many captured tanks at times. (I am talking about the DLCs 39, 40, 41 East, 42 East.)

In general, I am convinced you could even squeeze out a few more thousand points. Even at the highest difficulty (I do not think at rommel or manstein, though). I read statements where players bought very many stukas, also fighters and bombers, especially at the beginning. This, they claimed, would lead to prestige numbers of 30.000 plus, at Stalingrad, even to 40.000. Well, maybe it's boasting, but I tend to believe them. I mean,when I take a look at the kill stats of a stuka plane, it seems to be true. Thus having stukas all around seems to be the most convenient road.

Other than that, it's probably tactics, and how much time and effort you want to invest in playing a good turn. I admit I started a great deal of turns all over, especially when I saw I rushed it, grew impatient, and when I lost an unit. So I am a little perfectionist. But on the other hand, I learned something about better movement while doing that.

To be honest, I think the AI is stupid. After a while, it is possible to exploit its weaknesses. Also, scenario design is too often lacking new events and clever surprises.

[timek28]

Ok. I cannot argue more here. Obviously some people know to play better then I do, or know something that I don't or I don't know... maybe make up numbers Be it as it is, it's interesting to hear about all the possibilities.

Game should be played for fun in my oppinion, and I see no fun in having that much prestige. So yes harder difficulty levels are then good for you. I'm fine with having to always think weather I will have enough prestige for all the equipment and replacements that I need. And FM difficulty gives me jsut that.

[Abrams]

I played the original campaign on FM but enjoy Rommel much more. I have been playing the Grand Campaign on Rommel and with help from Deducter's videos for good tactical ideas have done fine (I have now passed his videos and am completing 1945). I like playing with a more balanced and historical core. Rommel forces me to do this but without being so restrictive that it is impossible to play. Now Manstein is not my cup of tea. I don’t find it at all fun to be facing the hoards from day one in Poland. This is why it's great that they added 3 completely different bonus levels, there is something for everyone. And If you find it plenty challenging on the normal levels then just keep playing on those, it's all about what you find fun.

[brettz123]

Hello all,

I've finally beat AK on FM difficulty. While I had to load a fair amount of times to accomplish that I also found a game challanging and enjoyable in the same time.

Í've tried for experimenting sakes to start a new campaign on Manstein and Romell difficulty. To my astoundment Manstein difficulty includes British units of doubled strength right away, while Romell dificulty incorporates pitifull prestige...

I cannot see how this can be fun in any way? On Manstein right away I was attacked by 15 strenght British tank. And 14 strength British Hurricane. I took significant losses, and I'm not sure how could have I positioned my units better to avoid this.

Also I think extra difficuliy should relay on better AI or RANDOM AI attacking scritps (diversions, encirclements, airborne operations etc...) rather than torture of player with pitifull prestige or enemy units of enormous strength.

Is anyone having any fun while playing on these difficulties, or managing to win scenarios at all?

If they do how do they do it?

I found FM difficulty to be exactly the right ammount of stress that I find optimal. There where some draining battles like Gazala for example. There where some easier ones too. But I never felt like I was overwhelming enemy or that enemy overwhelmed me (as it was more or less accurate historically wise). On Manstein and Romell you are just put into completely unbalanced position from the start where you have to play a "perfect game" and avoid any (major) losses in order to advance. When I say major losses my intuition and mathematical prediction tells me anything more then 3 strength points lost per unit is a major loss. And it would be pretty hard to recover from such losses with Rommels prestige or Mansteins enemy strength. I'm sure it is doable but to what cost in terms of nerve wracking expirience.

A couple of points here.

1. I doubt anyone can do this on a first play through as the game is significantly harder on the first play through. Once you know a map you have a huge advantage.

2. I haven't seen too many people (well any actually) talk about doing Rommel or Manstein in Afrika Corps and think it was easy. Afrika Corps is a step up on difficulty in my opinion, well at least the first few scenarios.

3. 25,000 prestige at the end of 1942 isn't really that much. I am challenging myself to get 200,000 prestige by the end of 1945 on field marshall. Supposedly this has been done before. I just finished Kharkov42 with 58,228 prestige. I will start posting up in the AAR section about this tonight or tomorrow.

[Messmann]

You gotta tell us some tips then

[brettz123]

You gotta tell us some tips then

Ok, here are my tips.

1. Only buy self-propelled artillery. Don't bother with any towed. Why? Well it stop a lot of attacks on your troops. I only started doing this when the western dlcs came out so decided to try it on this play through. Normally I use 6 towed (inclding the captured polish one), 2 StuG IIIb, and 3 wurfrahmen 40.

2. Have a very strong air force. For me this means 6 Me-109, 2 Me-110, 4 Ju-87, and 2 He-111. The fighters will ensure you always have air superiority. 4 Ju-87s will really help put a stop to the heavy tanks your tanks have a hard time with. Very important 1939-1942. The Me-110 is one of the most useful planes pre 1943. Great for bombing, can finish off wounded airplanes, and has a large fuel capacity.

3. Have your entire CORE set by the end of 1941 or even the beginning of 1941. I have everything bought by Crete and then just add in some captured tanks. I like to have 1 char b1, 1 matilda, 3 KV-1, and 4 T-34s in my CORE. So everything is bought at the beginning of Crete and during Demyansk Pocket I have my last captured tank.

The reason you want your CORE early is that it will allow you to gain experience with multiple units. My personal CORE is

1 Fallschirmjaeger
1 Pioniere
1 Grenadier
1 Gebirgsjaeger
2 SE Grenadiers

15 Tanks
3 SE Tanks

4 self propelled artillery
3 wurfrahmen
2 StuG IIIb
1 towed 105
2 StuG IIIf

6 Me-109
2 Me-110
4 Ju-87
2 He-111

1 self propelled AA
1 88mm Flak

I see this as a fairly optimized CORE with only the self propelled AA and the Pz-IIIn I use as sub-optimal.

4. Never reinforce during a scenario. Just don't do it.

5. Use overstrength especially if you have 2+ stars.

6. Use artillery before you attack...... This should be a no brainer but even I don't do it sometimes.

Anyway, hope this helps.