DC : Warsaw To Paris

DC:BlitzkriegFullname is Decisive Campaigns : The Blitzkrieg from Warsaw to Paris. This historical wargame covers Case White, Case Yellow and Sealion. Its focus is on historical realism, good AI and graphics and ease of play. It has been published and released by Matrix Games. For more information visit the product page at Matrix Games.

PC4WAR magazine gave DC:Blitz a 8 out of 10. GamersHall.de scored it 84%. DeafGamers.com gave it their “Respectable” rating and Cyberstratege.com gave the game 7 out of 10 points. The Armchair General gave DC:Blitz an 88% score.

8 Responses to DC : Warsaw To Paris

  1. randynovotny says:

    I am really looking forward to getting DC:WTP. I am currently painting 10 mm French and Polish and German armies.

  2. francesco says:

    Not yet purchased but the game seem very interesting.Is in the list “must have”.What i want to know is if are planned other release with other front,especially the eastern front.

  3. vic says:

    In a few weeks time some more information about future plans and titles will be given! hold on.

  4. Anauso says:

    Thanks for your a great work. I advice you Like a customer :

    - The price is too low.

  5. Chris says:

    I think Decisive Campaigns has the best map graphics I have seen in a war game and that includes WitE. In the future I hope to see more small scenarios, detailed combat results listing actual losses and improved unit graphics. Currently they look like something in a comic book. I think this game engine will be a classic and look forward to future releases.

  6. MTTODD says:

    Sorry to have to ask about a unit question! but is the values of BF-109E correct ?
    It has a defence of 100 & a dogfight of 56 while for example the CURTISS HAWK P36 has a defence of 114 & dogfight of 59.
    I’am no expert but I thought the ME-109E was a better plane than the P36.
    Thoughts most appreciated.

    P.S – Have posted this on Matrix site but have had no reply. Appreciate a response.

  7. fredleander says:

    Hi, MTTODD – if statistics is anything to go by the P-36 was a better fighter than the Bf-190E. It isn’t entirely correct to use this designation as the French P-36′s, which fought the Bf-109E’s, were the Hawk 75 export version in its various configurations. More B-109′s were shot down by the French Hawks, than the other way around, you can understand this if you look at the weight and power ratings of the two aircrafts. The Hawk had a better climb rate and turn radius (very maneuverable) than the Bf-109E. The armament of the 109 might have been a little better but that didn’t help if they were not able to work up above or behind the Hawks. The French had quite a few Hawks ready in September 1939, equipped with the 1.000 hp. P&W radial engine. The 1.200 power version was introduced during the spring and summer 1940.

    The P-36 (American version, less refined) was replaced by the P-40 mainly because of production-political reasons. The Americans needed their sparse radial engines for their bombers and pressed the less powerful Allison V-12 engine into a P-36. The P-40 was also an inferior fighter to the P-36 for the same reasons as with the Bf-109. An usual admonition is that the P-40 was better because it could dive away from the P-36 (and the Zero – the Bf-109 could also dive away from the Hawk)). This is really the proof of my statement. They actually had to dive away to survive the dogfight. This can be compared with an infantry unit having to leave the battlefield. That is defeat.

    To end with the statistics. If you ask me I’d say the parameters should be even more in the favour of the P-36 (Hawk).

    Regds

    Fred

  8. Ruy Horta says:

    Sorry to have to ask about a unit question! but is the values of BF-109E correct ?
    It has a defence of 100 & a dogfight of 56 while for example the CURTISS HAWK P36 has a defence of 114 & dogfight of 59.

    I’am no expert but I thought the ME-109E was a better plane than the P36.
    Thoughts most appreciated.

    You can argue yourself to death on these finer points.

    Arguably the Hawk has an advantage in defense because it is more maneuverable, has more legs and with its radial engine can take more damage. If also has a better fighter vs fighter load out with its MG and HMG mix, especially early in the war.

    Dogfighting in general is a mixed bag, it is all about initiative and having a strong punch. The Emil has punch and speed, it has a mixed bag in terms of weaponry as the MGFF has punch, but it isn’t ideal for fighter vs fighter combat because it’s slow velocity, rate and ammo load. If it hits though, it has punch.

    More 109s were lost in the second phase because the Jagdwaffe had to fight over enemy territory. Short legs, an inline engine are a handicap. Slight damage that might get you back if you are fighting over or near the frontline will lead to a loss deep over enemy territory.

    These simplified models have to ignore so many factors, like tactics and equipment, but you can always argue the figures. 1939/40 is also a period of rapid development, so what sub types and modifications do you take into account?

    IMHO the figures seem a little too favorable for the Hawk, but you’d have to spend some time arguing before you can establish the right playing field.

Leave a Reply