|
|
Post by eeeeef on Jan 13, 2021 3:18:21 GMT
Just wondering what's your favourite Army group?
|
|
|
|
Post by HangryBird on Jan 13, 2021 3:52:48 GMT
Tie between Eastern Front and North African Front, but that's not on the poll. Western Front 1939 has some design flaws and weird general placements.
|
|
|
|
Post by Ralyks on Jan 13, 2021 14:21:22 GMT
Eastern is the most realistic one, however because of that is almost fully land based and basically a right side vs left side, with the exception of Yugoslavia. I like this one but I wish the USSR was not so large to the east, making them a bit shorter while raising a bit the remaining lands econ will make the same effect, but not be such a pain to conquer. No neutral faction is a slight bummer.
Western+Central is not far from realistic, just makes the Phoney war by Britain and France be an actual engagement. Including the east (like Yugoslavia, which in 1939 still had a pro-axis leader, as the coup was on 1941) and the rest of the Balkans were not engaged yet whatsoever. German invasion of Denmark was in 1940, but that could be sped up by Germany. So this will be a slightly distorted 1939, but quite fun due to the amount of different army groups. The forever neutral Switzerland is a bit pain, but if either a German or French army group gets blocked, after a few turns (so that they build forces) I just declare war on them and there they have a new path to reach the enemy, which is something I like.
North African is a fiesta, mixing African France (which was replaced by Vichi France in 1940, loyal to Axis) with Greece Invasion (occurred in 1941). British Egypt against Italian and Nazi Libya is timeless, as it pretty much occurred throughout most of the war. This is the least fun for me, as its mostly two theaters, being these split by the big Mediterranean sea, which is a pain to cross. And it's too horizontal, which is a pain for the Axis, as they have to reach to both the edges of eastern and western side. Neutral countries are not even worth considering, as they are on abandoned northwest and northeast edges and both need to be accessed through sea.
I wish you could bribe neutral factions to join in, even if its just for a few turns. But nah, once again, the only option with them is declaring war.
|
|
|
|
Post by Thortilla on May 7, 2021 1:09:37 GMT
In 1941 I feel that a larger map is needed, for example a more extensive Finland and that the Balkans reach Turkey as a way to attack the URRS on two fronts. and the extension of the URRS seems good to me, it would even add more territory.
1939 good could it be called that or allies remain without attacking for 30 turns .... disappointing 1 incomplete UK, what about ET who likes only to see England and Wales is horrible 2 no URRS army group honestly an army group of the URRS would not be wrong but it is just my opinion also ET is not to do side change events 3 this is more personal honestly the army groups should be bigger if they were going to make that horrible map for the conquest that takes longer to pass Belgium than in The WC4 passing all of Germany, they should have done the same but in this conquest for example to put the bribes to the neutral nations: Spain can be bribed by the Axis while Switzerland by the allies and Sweden I honestly do not even know which side was in the ww2 like that that for both (although the axis is preferable)
1942 ...... well there are a hundred necessary changes: WHERE IS MONTY, please put MONTY following with the British, a cameo from Australia and India would be good. Now Germany and France would be good if they gave more territory to UK so that it can face Germany and Vichy France alone like in real life. and well I really notice this army group unnecessary
Alternative army groups: a 1941 with all of northern Europe (that is, it came from the URRS to the UK, giving a war on two fronts) although I think it would not work because the AI would stay quiet on the island and being only northern Europe They would have to make a narrow mur front but it is worth dreaming 1943 ALL EUROPE 1945/1944/1943 ASIA all siberia, japan USA western coast and india now we have a japan ready to receive everywhere xd Well, that's where my dreams really came, the game has many errors in its armies groups, but let's hope they do more or improve the ones that are already there or that they release another game because the truth is already bored me xd
|
|
|
|
Post by Joseph Stalin on May 7, 2021 8:29:27 GMT
In 1941 I feel that a larger map is needed, for example a more extensive Finland and that the Balkans reach Turkey as a way to attack the URRS on two fronts. and the extension of the URRS seems good to me, it would even add more territory. 1939 good could it be called that or allies remain without attacking for 30 turns .... disappointing 1 incomplete UK, what about ET who likes only to see England and Wales is horrible 2 no URRS army group honestly an army group of the URRS would not be wrong but it is just my opinion also ET is not to do side change events 3 this is more personal honestly the army groups should be bigger if they were going to make that horrible map for the conquest that takes longer to pass Belgium than in The WC4 passing all of Germany, they should have done the same but in this conquest for example to put the bribes to the neutral nations: Spain can be bribed by the Axis while Switzerland by the allies and Sweden I honestly do not even know which side was in the ww2 like that that for both (although the axis is preferable) 1942 ...... well there are a hundred necessary changes: WHERE IS MONTY, please put MONTY following with the British, a cameo from Australia and India would be good. Now Germany and France would be good if they gave more territory to UK so that it can face Germany and Vichy France alone like in real life. and well I really notice this army group unnecessary Alternative army groups: a 1941 with all of northern Europe (that is, it came from the URRS to the UK, giving a war on two fronts) although I think it would not work because the AI would stay quiet on the island and being only northern Europe They would have to make a narrow mur front but it is worth dreaming 1943 ALL EUROPE 1945/1944/1943 ASIA all siberia, japan USA western coast and india now we have a japan ready to receive everywhere xd Well, that's where my dreams really came, the game has many errors in its armies groups, but let's hope they do more or improve the ones that are already there or that they release another game because the truth is already bored me xd If they expanded USSR then Call of duty card would have called an insane amount of infantry |
|
|
|
Post by Józef Poniatowski on May 7, 2021 23:47:16 GMT
Honestly I wish that they had a larger map mode for all of Europe in this style. Conquests are so large now that I find them a chore to play, and I think the length of these is pretty good. I think the AI could use better decision-making as they seem to kill their own generals incredibly quickly but overall it is my favorite mode in the game. I don't favor any of the campaigns over the others, but I find the Eastern Front the most balanced (also the most boring, the AI is easiest to beat there).
|
|
|
|
Post by Joseph Stalin on May 8, 2021 13:33:10 GMT
Honestly I wish that they had a larger map mode for all of Europe in this style. Conquests are so large now that I find them a chore to play, and I think the length of these is pretty good. I think the AI could use better decision-making as they seem to kill their own generals incredibly quickly but overall it is my favorite mode in the game. I don't favor any of the campaigns over the others, but I find the Eastern Front the most balanced (also the most boring, the AI is easiest to beat there). Game really needs a wc3 like conquest with a small map with years 1939-1942december |
|
|
|
Post by HangryBird on May 8, 2021 18:20:45 GMT
In 1941 I feel that a larger map is needed, for example a more extensive Finland and that the Balkans reach Turkey as a way to attack the URRS on two fronts. and the extension of the URRS seems good to me, it would even add more territory. 1939 good could it be called that or allies remain without attacking for 30 turns .... disappointing 1 incomplete UK, what about ET who likes only to see England and Wales is horrible 2 no URRS army group honestly an army group of the URRS would not be wrong but it is just my opinion also ET is not to do side change events 3 this is more personal honestly the army groups should be bigger if they were going to make that horrible map for the conquest that takes longer to pass Belgium than in The WC4 passing all of Germany, they should have done the same but in this conquest for example to put the bribes to the neutral nations: Spain can be bribed by the Axis while Switzerland by the allies and Sweden I honestly do not even know which side was in the ww2 like that that for both (although the axis is preferable) 1942 ...... well there are a hundred necessary changes: WHERE IS MONTY, please put MONTY following with the British, a cameo from Australia and India would be good. Now Germany and France would be good if they gave more territory to UK so that it can face Germany and Vichy France alone like in real life. and well I really notice this army group unnecessary Alternative army groups: a 1941 with all of northern Europe (that is, it came from the URRS to the UK, giving a war on two fronts) although I think it would not work because the AI would stay quiet on the island and being only northern Europe They would have to make a narrow mur front but it is worth dreaming 1943 ALL EUROPE 1945/1944/1943 ASIA all siberia, japan USA western coast and india now we have a japan ready to receive everywhere xd Well, that's where my dreams really came, the game has many errors in its armies groups, but let's hope they do more or improve the ones that are already there or that they release another game because the truth is already bored me xd If they expanded USSR then Call of duty card would have called an insane amount of infantry Call of Duty card is already OP. It saves you so much economy on recruiting infantry units. |
|
|
|
Post by STILETT0 on May 8, 2021 21:10:29 GMT
Tie between Eastern Front and North African Front, but that's not on the poll. Western Front 1939 has some design flaws and weird general placements. ah, yes....how about we put LEEB in AG C, and not put Kleist in AG A |
|
|
|
Post by HangryBird on May 8, 2021 21:45:08 GMT
Tie between Eastern Front and North African Front, but that's not on the poll. Western Front 1939 has some design flaws and weird general placements. ah, yes....how about we put LEEB in AG C, and not put Kleist in AG A Well, German A cannot have too many generals or they will be too OP; 2 is good enough. Rundstedt commanded AG A in real life, so we can't get rid of him. We can't get rid of Manstein because he is an IAP. Also, getting rid of either of them will nerf German A too much. Also, Leeb commanded AG C in real life, so that makes sense. I wrote a rework proposal here that addresses the issues that I pointed out in my comment: european-war-4.boards.net/thread/14579/proposal-reworking-western-front-group |
|
|
|
Post by Thortilla on May 9, 2021 1:20:09 GMT
We take into account that most of the areas to the east would be just a wasteland with 3 or 4 cities I doubt that it would make much difference outside the Russian economy
|
|
|
|
Post by yuanzhong on May 9, 2021 12:41:30 GMT
Dutch and Belgian 1939 are still the most challenging IMO. I choose 1939.
|
|
|
|
Post by Ralyks on May 15, 2021 13:13:33 GMT
In 1941 I feel that a larger map is needed, for example a more extensive Finland and that the Balkans reach Turkey as a way to attack the URRS on two fronts. and the extension of the URRS seems good to me, it would even add more territory. 1939 good could it be called that or allies remain without attacking for 30 turns .... disappointing 1 incomplete UK, what about ET who likes only to see England and Wales is horrible 2 no URRS army group honestly an army group of the URRS would not be wrong but it is just my opinion also ET is not to do side change events 3 this is more personal honestly the army groups should be bigger if they were going to make that horrible map for the conquest that takes longer to pass Belgium than in The WC4 passing all of Germany, they should have done the same but in this conquest for example to put the bribes to the neutral nations: Spain can be bribed by the Axis while Switzerland by the allies and Sweden I honestly do not even know which side was in the ww2 like that that for both (although the axis is preferable) 1942 ...... well there are a hundred necessary changes: WHERE IS MONTY, please put MONTY following with the British, a cameo from Australia and India would be good. Now Germany and France would be good if they gave more territory to UK so that it can face Germany and Vichy France alone like in real life. and well I really notice this army group unnecessary Alternative army groups: a 1941 with all of northern Europe (that is, it came from the URRS to the UK, giving a war on two fronts) although I think it would not work because the AI would stay quiet on the island and being only northern Europe They would have to make a narrow mur front but it is worth dreaming 1943 ALL EUROPE 1945/1944/1943 ASIA all siberia, japan USA western coast and india now we have a japan ready to receive everywhere xd Well, that's where my dreams really came, the game has many errors in its armies groups, but let's hope they do more or improve the ones that are already there or that they release another game because the truth is already bored me xd Even larger? Really? Rewards for it are small and they do take already its bunch of turns... making them longer is pointless, as once the main cities (that are closer to the front) fall, the rest to fall is inevitable. Making it shorter but in those fewer territories increasing the income makes the difficulty the same but it doesn't elongate the game pointlessly.
I wish there were more... having only three (and only a single one on release) is sad, and okey, they added another mode of conquest in the last content patch, but there's just a single scenario for it. I mean, its clearly better than nothing, but I wish there was a Pacific Theatre or some Mainland Asia one.
|
|
|
|
Post by Thortilla on May 15, 2021 17:49:21 GMT
Pacific? To much water
Asian nice
but one of America endesieg? That will be nice
|
|
|
|
Post by Joseph Stalin on May 15, 2021 19:16:38 GMT
Pacific? To much water Asian nice but one of America endesieg? That will be nice Army group navy system sucks, carriers are entirely useless and you cant stack up a fleet. A single stack sub can kill or severely damage my kesselring. So a pacific army group would be very bad but conquest with a smaller map would be amazing. |
|
