Not to mention that a victory city, Shanghai, is put at risk.
My love for the underdog: Italy and USSR
-
This topic is not related to game’s mechanics but to some underlying political topics related to how the game treats some ‘minor’ countries
Italy:
we now have an independent Italy and that’s great. Three Allies (+ semi dependent China) vs Three Axis. I was looking for this since Classic!But let’s take a close look to Italian chips:
Italy has her own Infantry and tanks, but all navy and air units are German ones with Italian colors
Italy had a very decent (and very beautiful) torpedo bomber: the SM-79 (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Savoia-Marchetti_SM.79)
It also produced their own fighters
In terms of navy, they had the Littorio Class battleships.Now that AA50 granted Italy with her independence, It would have been nice her own units too :-)
USSR
The USSR was the nation that effectively defeated Germany during WW2 (even after D-Day, roughly 70% of the German army was committed to the Eastern Front, and at that time, after Stalingrad and Kursk, the tide had turned to favor the Red Army).
Nevertheless, the USSR is always the poorest allied in the game
Some times, a bogus explanation was presented for this: the USSR received a lot of material from the west. Yes, she did… they were mostly trucks.
The UK, on the other hand, received much more help from the USA… but UK is a richer country in the GameI understand that if the game’s set up were historical, it would be almost impossible for the Axis to win; hence, some modifications have to be made… but mysteriously the modification has to do with make the USSR a shadow of what it really was.
Take a look on what the USSR NO are (that will justify 5 IPC for Moscow if no allied troops are on her soil):
“The Allies, especially the United States and the United Kingdom, seemed able to meld their individual objectives into one common cause – the complete and unconditional surrender of the Axis. This was also the official position of the Soviet Union, b_ut unlike the United States and the United Kingdom, the Soviets had world communism in mid as well_” (Rule Book, 22 - emphasis added)
Stalin was certainly a butcher and the USSR a totalitarian and expansionist regime.
But, C’mon! the Western Allies only thing they had in mid was defeating the Nazi, spread democracy and save the world?
The United Kingdom was fighting for her survival, and for her empire. Meaning keeping her colonial rule around the world.
The United States was also engaged on a race to extend and assert her place as a world powerbut for the game, the evil Soviets are the only ones with a hidden agenda… :roll:
I’ll let China aside for now… I guess I’ll get a lot of bad karma with b!itch!ng about Italy and USSR alone… :-D
-
I’m also glad they added Italy and agree that they need their own line of units.
The next thing they could stand to correct would be changing the colors from light brown, dark brown, burnt brown, semi-brown, and the Green US to something else. Like have Japan go back to Cherry Red, and make China lime green.
LT
-
@LT04:
I’m also glad they added Italy and agree that they need their own line of units.
The next thing they could stand to correct would be changing the colors from light brown, dark brown, burnt brown, semi-brown, and the Green US to something else. Like have Japan go back to Cherry Red, and make China lime green.
LT
Black, grey and white for the Axis. Keep the Allies as they are.
The main Reason USSR gets such a bad deal is the unhistorical attack from Japan. If you eliminate this with the NAP, then you get a game that actually plays like WWII…
But yes, it should have a bigger starting income, otherwise Moscow will always just be a massive Axis tank magnet. -
I agree with Gallo Rojo.
The majority of italian sculpts are recycled from other axis nations and this is a lost opportunity for making Anniversary a “perfect” edition. Moreover the brown colour for Italy is a sub-optimal choiceOnly one thing I do not agree. USSR received a lot of truck, half-truck and other necessary supplies. Thanks to this supplies Soviet Industry has been able to focus on building only tanks, guns and rifles. Despite that the great majority of USSR units moved on foot and logistic was made using horses! Only Soviet Tank Armies (of wich only 5 existed) where mechanized. The remaining part of the Red Army went on fight like the Armies of the WW1, by train to the front and then on foot. German Army was more mechnized than Red Army and German were losing the War.
Having not her economy supported by USA the Red Army should have a lot of logistic problems.So, I have always thought that in A&A factors like: turn order, IPC and initial set up are related not only to the quantity but also to the quality and training of the units, to the logistic, and to the economic organization of a nation. Anniversary confirm this idea, having two different set up with different turn orders.
Suggested Topics
