Ex SPII player - observations so far

[MajorDisaster]

I've only just joined the forum and first of all would like to say what a great game SPWW2 is. A few years ago I had SPII and enjoyed many hours with that too and this has so much more in it - A helluva lot of work into the unit /OOB specs for a start and a Bigger Feel to the missions.
I'm toying with buying the full copy cos Im sure there's things I'm missing out on by not having the manual. A few observations that are making me hang back .. and it isnt being tight with my cash, (although thats true too )... but just what I think (very subjectively maybe) about the game.

1> A lot of the packaged scenarios seem frustratingly short on time - I know a lot of players say thats all part of it, but when you only get a Marginal victory or even a Draw after anhiliating the opposition and with your own forces still intact, but are just short of reaching that last victory hex by 2 turns .... I think you know where Im coming from. And of course it works the other way - if I'm getting a beating, why should I be let off the hook so easily and saved by the bell? It seems especially true in assault missions - I'm happy if I can get a draw on those. Of course I could do better if Im prepared to simply banzai charge at one point with everything Ive got and to hell with losses, full throttle on the gas, but that then surely it stops being a tactical game then??? You may as well get a lot of the really excellent tactics tips Ive seen posted on here and elsewhere, and put them in the waste bin - you simply dont have time to use them.

I know that some custom missions state things like "Boy, youre gonna be lucky to even survive this one... " - fair enough as the author intended them that way - The Bloody Ridge scenario for example - the Japanese cant win because they dont have enough turns to make it through the jungle map unless they never get fired on at all and pinned down anywhere. (I played it as the Americans and it was way too easy. As the Japanese I got a draw and spent most of the game hitting the R key).
I dont believe that a general assault mission, (Pegasus Bridge, Eben Emel and others excepted), would be conducted on such a time critical level as "Ok, if you dont get to the very last objective by 6 minutes you've blown it." - regardless that you dominated the battlefield and totally wasted the opposition. Or put another way - if you just wiped out all the enemy in your locality, would it really matter in the real world if you got to the furthest objective a few minutes later than planned, with your forces relatively in one piece?

You often can't plan to allow the enemy to take objectives then mount a flanking counter attack because you know you wont get enough turns to do it, not because you havent got the means to. Again, this doesnt seem to make sense tactically. (And from what Ive read this was a tactic often used by Rommel for starters... ). Or you can't try a wide flanking infantry advance manouvere for the same reason.

Ok this sounds like a major rant, but I think that a few more turns on some scenarios would add rather than take away and make them more flexible and more ways of playing them out. There are just too many where you have to race at break neck spead across the map to have any chance of winning.

2> The auto rally - does it work? I may be thick here, but I'm not sure why I have to manually R key loads of units at the start of each turn (especially after a barrage) - or am I missing the point of it? Fine, if I get supressed by OP fire, but otherwise I dont get it.....

3> How does the enemy "know" where my mortars are, hidden in woods, on a 9 hex visibility map? They never even got within 30 hexes of them at anytime or had aircraft. That wont be a first time either...

4> Some odd things on the long campaign Ive just started as the Germans. Advance mission - took the first objective and fought off the inevitable massed infantry counter attack, (with no armour support against tanks and pzrgdrs?), then took the remaining victory hexes for a Decisive victory (hooray - it's rare), but throughout the game my scout teams kept watch on some T34 and light tanks no more than 20 hexes away which sat there doing nothing - simply camped out the whole scenario. (They were ideally positioned to reinforce the AI infantry counterattack).

SS heavy infantry platoon with 2 Tigers, 5 PzrIIIJ's, 3 Stugs, a motorcycle troop COMPLETELY surround 5 russian rifle sections in the open - ie NO COVER AT ALL and they carried on fighting (tiresomely) for about 4 turns. I cant imagine that infantry in the open with no hope of escape (or crucially any cover) wouldnt have simply thrown the towel in very quickly (ok I could get it if they were Guards or Spetnatz, but they werent). Cover doesnt seem to have as much value. I know the game has emphasis on experience, but given the choice between laying in field or in a foxhole in a firefight, I know where I'd rather be.... And if I was surrounded by tanks and infantry with nowhere to hide and nothing to hit back?

I'm pretty sure I have saved games of these two if anyone wants to see them :-)

5> Infantry are just too resilient (again, especially when they have no cover, see above). They get supressed very easily so attacks grind to a halt really easily, but very hard to kill even at short ranges with a lot of firepower (see above). On the other hand, RTS's like Close Combat infantry were way too fragile so I guess it's all a bit subjective.

Sorry if a lot of this has been discussed at length before or if I really should be reading the manual, but just my thoughts so far. Otherwise, as said already, a very enjoyable game slightly clouded by the time issue (for me anyway, Im sure others beg to differ).