Afrika Korps on Rommel Difficulty

[braccada]

Hey, thanks for the high praise regarding the transports that highly depends on the terrain. Trucks are cheap and generally fast, but get severly slowed down in the desert. So in AK I try to avoid wheeled vehicles, but used the trucks in the Wehrmacht campaign. Frozen ground and mud by the way is very bad for wheeled as well.

[hurly]

And cause braccada almost never takes any losses he does not need any replacements and literally gets the most Bang for his Buck

So the Term "expensive" is very relative. The First Surrender caused by a Shot from a Halftrack makes it a bargain

[goose_2]

15 June 1941 (Watch Part 1)
Sollum and the Halfaya Pass are under attack again. The British have fielded massive reinforcement, but this time we are prepared.

By Midday I had to give up the Halfaya Pass, but by keeping the bulk of my forces back we forced the British to attack into our set defenses and waiting 88mm flak guns. Dozens of Mathilda and Cruiser tanks are left burning in the desert. Moreover a small Italian battle group outflanked the attackers near Sidi Omar and cought several truck columns of guard.

In the evening I recieved reports of strong British elements moving to outflank us trough the desert. Seems they try to use my strategies against me. Well they can certainly try...

16 June 1941 (Watch Part 2)
Sidi Azeiz is hit by a large armored battle group and I have sent in all our fighter squadrons to destroy as many tanks as possible before they reach the city. Thanks to the warning by intelligence we are fairly well prepared and I am confident we can repell that attack as well.

In the south we regained the offensive and are moving towards the Halfaya Pass only to meet another large British group of unknown composition.

17 June 1941
After heavy fighting throughout the night control is regained. The diversionary attack on Sidi Azeiz ended with the destruction of all enemy forces and in the south the enemy collapsed as well. Sidi Suleman and some Egyptian airfields are in German hands again.

I pulled this up as I did some research watching your playthrough of this mission. I kept thinking, I am going to play this differently.

You seemed determined to try and hold onto as much of the objectives as you could and not allow the enemy the chance to seize them from you.

I am curious why you did that? As I see it as a better plan to let the enemy seize objectives and take them back for prestige, but maybe you see bleeding the enemy dry in prestige as the better option.

I choose not to concentrate on that as they are at 150% prestige whereas I am at 25% so I can't really bleed them dry where as every bit of my prestige is vital for me.

Thoughts?

[braccada]

Short answer: mostly roleplaying. I enjoyed the fight for those hills and the Halfaya Pass especially with underdog aux units

Other than that I dislike to give up ground without need! So probably roleplaying again. In general I have a less optimized play style than you. I think everyone has certain implicit rules or patterns. I for example often do not go for surrounds if they do not feel "right" (e.g. put me in a bad tactical position without need), because that would break my immersion. On the other hand I do certain exploits on the AI without any second thought. So that is purly a personal preference. You could also try to break all patterns that prevent you from playing the best game possible. So withdrawl here probably ist the better option. Might prompt the AI to go into the transports all the time as well (stupid behaviour like that makes me angry at the game ). Depends on the goal those units are set on.

[goose_2]

Short answer: mostly roleplaying. I enjoyed the fight for those hills and the Halfaya Pass especially with underdog aux units

Other than that I dislike to give up ground without need! So probably roleplaying again. In general I have a less optimized play style than you. I think everyone has certain implicit rules or patterns. I for example often do not go for surrounds if they do not feel "right" (e.g. put me in a bad tactical position without need), because that would break my immersion. On the other hand I do certain exploits on the AI without any second thought. So that is purly a personal preference. You could also try to break all patterns that prevent you from playing the best game possible. So withdrawl here probably ist the better option. Might prompt the AI to go into the transports all the time as well (stupid behaviour like that makes me angry at the game ). Depends on the goal those units are set on.

Ok I see, so if I am following you, and this kind of steps into your Historical Playthrough with Lt Joker aka KeldarKatarn...you like to step into the historical mode of the Generals on the battlefield, as such you see each area as a badge of honor and not something to abandon and take back or exploit game mechanics to sort of game the system. This is why you do not deploy after the first day as I often do, especially in the latter years based on soft cap.

I play very differently then, as I used to play more or less like that. Trying not to let them take stuff over and stop them everywhere at once, but after watching Night Phoenix's success and prestige garnering by retreating regrouping and letting the enemy wear itself out running thin at your objectives, and then seizing them back for easy money I have seen the large scale advantages of these tactics, especially on Manstein.

I find the hardest to play is playing blind. It is also the most exciting, but also the most heart wrenching. The US Corps Rommel + Field Marshall is proving to be a lot more difficult than my Manstein East, or Double Rommel Afrika Korps.

Actually the most difficult was that Super Hard Difficulty level that I have stepped back from in Tatsinskaya.

Thanks for your insight.

[dalfrede]

I find the hardest to play is playing blind. It is also the most exciting, but also the most heart wrenching. The US Corps Rommel + Field Marshall is proving to be a lot more difficult than my Manstein East, or Double Rommel Afrika Korps.

I have been dabbling with the Phcas mod [US Corps]. Towed AT has the camo trait [like mines].
It gives new meaning to playing blind. Makes 'Hills' and "Enfidaville' even more interesting.
Being ambushed by a 90mm . . .

[braccada]

@goose Exactly and replaying a campaign multiple times, I think it is only natural to switch to a style that pushes the limits in some way or other. For me it is the historical path though and limiting myself.

@dalfrede that sounds "interesting" Too bad I do not have enough time to try out all those nice mods out there.

[PeteMitchell]

you like to step into the historical mode of the Generals on the battlefield, as such you see each area as a badge of honor and not something to abandon and take back or exploit game mechanics to sort of game the system.

There are several historic examples that show that a strategic retreat could have been more beneficial to the respective belligerent in a certain situation... (e.g. to move to better positions, to regroup/reform troops, to shorten the front line, to bluff the enemy, etc.)

[braccada]

Most certainly! You could roleplay that also. Probably not on Battle Axe though. The AI is quite pathetic on the offensive here as is.