Can anyone tell me how close a winning strategy in a scenario could come to the actual historical decisions or, at the end of the day is this game merely an excellent strategy game with "comforting" allusions to those historical battles?
The reason I ask is that, having more than a passing interest in the WW2 battles, I wonder to what extent following the paths taken by the commanders of that time would affect the game (if that play is at all viable).
How close to historical. . .
- Tomislav Uzelac
- 2x2 Games
- Posts: 2211
- Joined: Mon Apr 04, 2011 11:24 pm
- Location: Zagreb, Croatia
Re: How close to historical. . .
Hi Morgynn!
No, it most certainly pays off to take a look at actual historical strategies. You would need relatively detailed sources, such as books by David Glantz for example, but following the historical playbook often helps.
That said, the game is not tuned in such a way to intentionally constrain you to using the exact historical strategy. Both historical and ahistorical strategies might work, depending on the scenario, as long as they make sense. In fact, in instances where the historical approach did not produce a victory (take "Gallop/Star" for example, or "Terek") you are actively challenged to come up with something new.
No, it most certainly pays off to take a look at actual historical strategies. You would need relatively detailed sources, such as books by David Glantz for example, but following the historical playbook often helps.
That said, the game is not tuned in such a way to intentionally constrain you to using the exact historical strategy. Both historical and ahistorical strategies might work, depending on the scenario, as long as they make sense. In fact, in instances where the historical approach did not produce a victory (take "Gallop/Star" for example, or "Terek") you are actively challenged to come up with something new.
Re: How close to historical. . .
Hi. . . thank you for your reply. I have David Glantz/Jonathan House book on the Battle of Kursk (would have loved a game re. that battle )
Good to know historically true strategies can help. "Learn from other's mistakes? ".
Really enjoying the game. Take care.
By the way - can you possibly recommend a wargame which might reconstruct realistically enough the Battle of Kursk?
Good to know historically true strategies can help. "Learn from other's mistakes? ".
Really enjoying the game. Take care.
By the way - can you possibly recommend a wargame which might reconstruct realistically enough the Battle of Kursk?
- Tomislav Uzelac
- 2x2 Games
- Posts: 2211
- Joined: Mon Apr 04, 2011 11:24 pm
- Location: Zagreb, Croatia
Re: How close to historical. . .
I also have that book - it's excellent, on par with the two books from Glantz I recommend to everyone on the Stalingrad Campaign. See an older post about the reading list here.
Kursk as a battle is actually not the best fit for this system, and we are in fact scratching our heads slightly as to how exactly to represent it. We may work something out eventually, but I don't have too many good ideas ATM.
Kursk as a battle is actually not the best fit for this system, and we are in fact scratching our heads slightly as to how exactly to represent it. We may work something out eventually, but I don't have too many good ideas ATM.
-
- Newcomer
- Posts: 1
- Joined: Mon Dec 26, 2011 6:41 am
Re: How close to historical. . .
Ah man kursk would be awesome. You guys should keep us updated with any ideas you may have! However much that goes against the whole idea of surprising the customer with something new..haha well at any rate, maybe a thread on topics for additions would be helpful or am I beating a dead horse?