Hosted by

GET THE CAMPAIGN! (LOOK IN GERMANY)

Onward to Defending Berlin Campaign comment

By Jorge Gabitto

This campaign is a compilation of SSI scenarios from the campaigns “Defending the Reich” (German) and “Onward to Berlin.” The designer reversed the OTB scenarios to make the German player move first.

Unfortunately I am not impressed with this campaign. I played it at 100% and I got 9 BV and 1 V, this last one because in Kanev I forgot getting an extra bridging unit and I mishandle the one provided. It is really an easy campaign, besides there are several mistakes all throughout the campaign. Some are minor, easily solvable, but others are, in my opinion, very serious and diminish substantially the campaign value. It was really a surprise to me because I did not find the original campaigns, where the scenarios were taken from easy.

I want to say that I do not think is the designer’s fault. He has come up with a nice technical concept. The idea of reverse scenarios, one I am exploring myself - see Road to Berlin - Demo campaign. The problem is that many reverse scenarios need substantial retooling to preserve the value of the original scenario. He is not helped by the fact that some of the original scenarios are not that great to start with. , In any case the reversed scenarios are, in average, much easier than the original ones.

Good Points:

Technical idea very valuable.

A couple of scenarios have been improved with respect to the original, Zitadelle and Seelow Heights, even when I did not like the originals to start with.

Bad Points: (easy solvable)

Several hexes belong to the wrong player all throughout the campaign. When you switch sides you have to switch ownership of every hex in the map from player 1 to 2 and 2 to 1. Viipuri is an example; all the Finnish hexes belong to the Soviets. There are others, almost one in every scenario.

The “Seelow Heights” and the “Operation Konrad” scenarios are in reversed order. Seelow should be the last one.

Bad Points (Serious)

The balance in the reversed scenarios has been lost. In almost all of them, with the exception of Seelow, are much easier than they should be.

All scenarios in the campaign are completely predictable. After the third scenario you know exactly the disposition of the enemy and unfortunately it gives a tremendous advantage to the player. It is no good to know that every single victory hex is heavily fortified, but still it does not guaranty you will take them; but to know that there is nothing there, but an infantry unit makes your life too easy.

I did not remember a single AD unit in the whole campaign and the AT units where few and outdated. After the third scenario you know that there are no AD, AT or even gun units protecting the victory hexes. So you can attack without any concern for your forces security.

There are no reinforcements for the AI and too many for the player. This is one of the reasons why the scenarios are not balanced.

All the scenarios follow the same pattern, you have to fight hard for 3-5 turns and then you breeze through victory. The only concern is if you get a BV or a victory because of the distance to the victory hexes. After breaking the AI line nothing happens just a race.

Even the improved scenarios involve a play pattern I do not like at all. The AI tries to win by “flooding” your position with infantry units. In “Leningrad” and “Seelow” it is a butchery of infantry units. After that you have to attack many artillery units, without any kind of support, left hanging. I think highly unlikely this happening ever in a battlefield.

This campaign can be used to teach the game, but I doubt any average or above player will really enjoy it. I also think that due to the nature of what is wrong in the campaign changing the handicap will do much.

Home