Glory of Generals 3 Manstein Discussion

Uber Guderian.

Maus + Manstein could be fun. 44% + whatever the base crit chance sounds like you could be critting fairly consistently. That you have to stand still to achieve that really sucks though.

Simply the best, like alway he was except in GoG.

He does good in anything

But yeah, 160-200 crits on Maus aren't rare.

Literally so fun to use him. If I'm trying to make a tutorial I avoid playing the mission with him from the get go, but my goodness any other time I have him
It feels like playing Wc4 again with how good he is.

He is the second best general in the game after Borees, although you don't think he's that far from guderian either ...

To my knowledge, the only game where Manstein beats Guderian.

For an additional 200 medals for 7$, that's what I call a good deal.
In WC4, he costed 13$ and was worse than Guderian.

IMO the second best general in the game. Why only second? Because Eisenhower. *insert infantry being better than tanks tirade* But that's not really it. It's simply because Ike is a better general. For one thing, his is the only aura that actually does a good amount.

On Zhukov, we just don't get enough Artillery for it to be of much use. In addition, he is very replaceable with Leeb (or Badoglio) and Govorov. That being said, he is definitely the best Artillery in the game.

Manstein is by far the best general in the early game, but his value declines in later stages of the game. Why? Well, two reasons. One, you start getting heavy tanks, which makes Blitzkrieg worse as Manstein gets better, and second, he actually does less attack damage than Rommel. Even provided his PG triggers on counter, Rommel with his PL will attack significantly higher if we discount AA. Of course, on the counterattack, Manstein does a whopping 20 damage more, making him to the moon better. In addition, AA is one of the best skills on a Maus. Manstein is a very, very solid pick. Lastly, he gives the best prize.

Well, then, what are his flaws? As stated before, Blitzkrieg, which by 44 and 45 (and 41 for the Allies) be near useless. In addition, I really don't value aura on tanks too much, for one major reason: I mainly use aura to help my generals, and my tank generals really lead their own separate fronts (e.g. Rommel leading a force to the north in Return to Stalingrad, Heinrici leading my main force south). If you keep your tank generals together and value Blitzkrieg even in late game, then he is for you.

Well, I listed Zhukov's downsides, I listed Mansteins pros and cons, and I'll start on Ike's flaws. First, he has zero survivability skills. That could get to be a cash draining problem. Secondarily, we have great infantry on both sides. Lastly, two of his skills could be considered... not good. So, let's dive into this book and find out. Peas and Carrots, carrots and peas, answer come out please please please.

Now for his biggest upside: he has far and away the most useful Group Aura. Yay! Infantry generally (get it?) stay together, particularly infantry generals. In fact most often, when I have two infantry generals advancing, they are side by side. And from pictures during guides, many of you do too. Lastly, infantry is by far the most common unit.

Second, he has the massive upside of very consistent, very, very high output on both attack and counter. If you trigger CT, then he should get + frickin 50 damage! No ther infantry in the game can come near that without triggering IL on that turn. Even the +24% buff is not enough to get over this.

Third, like the unit he is on, he is marvelously versatile, with him being to attack or destroy really anything if his SF is inclined that way.

Lastly for his major upsides, he has ridiculous stars. This is great for a couple things: one, being the single best paratrooper in the game (move over Kesselring and Dowding), being a better Navy than Cunningham, and being a halfway decent (actually a pretty good) tank, though I have no idea why you would want that. Finally, they help to get achievement rewards pretty early on.

Now onto his flaws. His lack of survivability is allowed, I suppose. After all, we use Vasilevsky, or... Ushijima? with CT and no survivability skills, and they get along fine, particularly with 4 stars. He won't last as long without a replenish as Rundy, but he will still last a while.

In addition, there are a great number of existing infantry gens. And that is one of the great things about Ike: rather than make them/him less useful, he makes them and him more useful, with them providing crazy MacArthur/Rundstedt support for him, and him providing the ridiculous support for them.

Finally, he has CT and Inspiration, which some may say are not the best skills in the game. And they would be right about Inspiration. But do not insult my Crowd Tactics, especially on a IAP gen that you should keep with near full four stacks.

Inspiration is a niche job, but actually a pretty useful one. You see, with the assistance of Ike, Infantry can actually really spearhead attacks and not die. But, as we have seen with MacArthur, if they do that well, then they do tend to fall into double low morale or chaos. Well, it just so happens that nobody around Ike (or I think Ike himself, can Inspire work on the original gen?) can ever be in chaos on the start of your turn, which is useful in a spearhead, although admittedly not too much other than restoring heavily demoralized units, like a medic.

In addition, he has the... worst package, but I think the general himself can overcome that. I hope you find my arguments convincing for why he is the best.

Edit: probably should have put this in Eisenhower discussion.