|
Hello Comrade. I wanted to get these reviewed yesterday, but I’m afraid it’s been a rather depressing set of days here with a HDD failure capping off this sequence. I hope this feedback is in time to benefit our makeup session, but I’m happy with our progress and glad previous feedback is helping you improve early in the program.
Beginning with your OKW game I think you played very soundly. It was very well executed on your part. When you mentioned your build, it is different with OKW than say Ostheer when you decide to choose a tier. I am concerned you tried to directly counter the scout cars and were not necessarily thinking ahead as to what you may face later on. It is important to think that one step ahead, and remember you will be dealing with snipers and flamers. Besides the puma, MechReg is not really giving you any other equity. I think Panzer Fusiliers, and RegimentalHQ may have been a better decision, if you wanted more infantry staying power, but either way it did work out, so my point being just be sure your examining what the game may look like eight minutes down the road.
I also think along the line of PzF’s you could have utilized your commander a bit more. Your build order was not the most efficient, and had a lot of overlap. Perhaps getting both HQ’s before your Schewerer and getting the CPV to cover late game, or at the very least considering you did get the Schewerer, choosing SpecOps before your Ober’s to get StG44’s would have provided you a lot of utility. As well, the two PzV’s gave you a bit of a top heavy build, excuse the presumption but probably because you were very concerned about trying to get a breakthrough.
I’m going to use this to jump ahead to a concern you bring up in your Brit replay which is pertinent here, if my line of reasoning is correct, that being: width, aggression and flanking. It may have actually been to your detriment to concern yourself too much with, sort of, fancy maneuvers like that. There were times when your team mate was down to little more than a PaK gun, StuG and a pio squad, and it may not have seemed like it, but at times, you were the only thing holding a reasonable front line. I think with the dynamic and the flow, or lack thereof in this game, you made a sound strategic decision to slug it out. It can be really tempting to flank or try to end the game in one fell swoop of tactical brilliance, but those sorts of situations can also just as easily fall on their face, as you know.
So, I would try and just… sort of calm down a little bit, hahah. I’m worried you might be trying to do too much. When you do, it is really easy to become stretched. So long as you do your bit, and support your team mate when you can, you’ll be in fine shape.
You also did really well to stave off the late game exhaustion, your attrition rate was superb, very good job keeping your units alive. I will also add though that it will often pay dividends,especially if the game went longer and became a VP thief race, to replace your infantry first. You lost a few squads at the end there and they are overall, going to provide you more utility then say your Stuka did.
Moving forward, your Brit game was pretty straight forward and fairly well executed too, I think you hit on your main stumbling blocks, and how it forced you to “go the long way” as you excellently put it haha. All I would say is, commit to it! At the fifth minute, you had a chance to break through, but only pushed one squad. I would have preferred to see a full out assault here, after all, don’t worry it is early, you can still counter attack, it might even be easier to form a rout after a failed assault‘cos your opponent might make a mistake in positioning. Same with the Sexton, commit to it! Get it early. Between the PaK’s and weapons teams, effectively half of your opponent’s army was entrenched. The Sexton, or even another mortar pit would have been brilliant to deal, again, not just the unit, and the moment itself, but also for the way he is playing. Thinking ahead, and getting in tune with their strategy and how their unit composition is being used to execute it, THAT, is what “metagaming” actually means, and I think you are improving at feeling that out and not just countering units and scenarios but really shutting down the way your opponent’s want to play.
Just to illustrate I will digress back a little bit to the MG situation. When I say approach tactical scenarios like a puzzle game, it may also pay off to approach the strategic portion in the same way. For instance, the mortars, they are obviously a problem, now, strategically perhaps an AEC could at least push them away and force them to deploy further back, but I think they could have been dealt with tactically, without a change in tech. What is our core army composition to deal with them? Infantry, ok great! Perhaps a flanking maneuver would be useful; however, you nailed it, the MG in the church is stopping the utilization of our army. So, in actuality the MG in the church is the fulcrum point of his army and must be dealt with, the mortars aren’t really much more than an annoyance in this scenario. Try for your next game to really break down, what is stopping you from doing what you want with your army, not necessarily what is doing damage, or causing you the most headache, but rather, what decisions are your opponents making that are stopping you from achieving your goals. |
0
Canada
United Kingdom
Relic Entertainment
cblanco ★ 
보드카 중대 
VonManteuffel 
Heartless Jäger 
