bwiser wrote:Some points of improvements, which would make it even better:
- I would prefer a different air fighting model instead of the RGDs, at least like in RUS or TEAW
- more problems with managing the anarchists which would be more historical I think
- regarding the Nationalist side I cannot tell as i only had this one game with the Republic yet
Ruskolnikov wrote:The republicans currently get to use the Anarchists troops with little regard to their politics or demands - clearly a significant divergence from history
In RUS gold there is a clever use of cohesion losses to simulate troops reluctance to fight once ww1 for Russia is over. I could see something like this being used (probably in conjunction with VP changes/penalties) when republican objectives are not the preferred anarchist objectives.
Maybe at the start of the game there is an event where the republican player chooses which course they want to go - go the "co-operate with Anarchists way" and receive better anarchist troops(or cohesion) and VP penalties for not taking Zaragossa in a certain number of turns - divergence from the creates penalties (anarchists not fighting/lower cohesion, VP penalties etc)
ERISS wrote:I don't think so. Anarchists were used with little regard, even by their own side (it's some traitorous from the CNT leaders)! You rather mean that "to use the Anarchists troops with little regard to their politics" is missing a drawback.
Anarchism is "stateless socialism." ~ Michael Bakunin
Stauffenberg wrote:It's a pity Nestor Mahkno died 2 years before this brutal civil war. Any thoughts on his influence or perhaps involvement had he lived through it?
- Albert Parsons
Taillebois wrote:I think these games by AGEOD (and those by Paradox) are great for stimulating interest in history and I think more should be done to introduce them to schools. They are so different from the clickfest killer zombie games that give "wargames" a bad reputation in the press.
Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 7 guests