RE: War in the East Q&A

Matrix Games Forums

Forums Register Login Photo Gallery Member List Search Calendars FAQ

My Profile Inbox Address Book My Subscription My Forums Log Out

RE: War in the East Q&A

View related threads: (in this forum | in all forums)

Logged in as: Guest

Users viewing this topic: none

Printable Version

All Forums >> [New Releases from Matrix Games] >> Gary Grigsby's War in the East Series >> RE: War in the East Q&A

Page: << < prev 17 18 [19] 20 21 next > >>

Message

<< Older Topic Newer Topic >>

RE: War in the East Q&A - 3/25/2010 1:17:45 AM

elmo3

Posts: 5820
Joined: 1/22/2002
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: doktor

Any idea how long the beta testing will last? Just trying to figure out when I have to start stockpiling food for the release :)

Very tentative release is some time in late Q2 according to Joel.

_____________________________

We don't stop playing because we grow old, we grow old because we stop playing. - George Bernard Shaw

WitE alpha/beta tester
Sanctus Reach beta tester
Desert War 1940-42 beta tester

(in reply to USSLockwood)

Post #: 541

RE: War in the East Q&A - 3/25/2010 1:49:17 AM

PyleDriver

Posts: 6152
Joined: 4/19/2006
From: Occupied Mexico aka Rio Grand Valley, S.Texas
Status: offline

I think were at late summer now...It's tough because were all working hard to get it better, not perfect, but better...Then there comes beta testing, and more people have more inputs or find quirks...

_____________________________

Jon Pyle
AWD Beta tester
WBTS Alpha tester
WitE Alpha tester
WitW Alpha tester
WitE2 Alpha tester

(in reply to elmo3)

Post #: 542

RE: War in the East Q&A - 3/25/2010 2:23:57 PM

Captain B

Posts: 386
Joined: 8/30/2009
From: Knoxville, Tennessee
Status: offline

Ah yes...late summer. August 31st would be real good....zum Geburtstag!

_____________________________

There is no problem too big that can't be solved with the proper use of high explosives

WITE Scenario Tester
WITW Beta Tester

(in reply to PyleDriver)

Post #: 543

RE: War in the East Q&A - 3/25/2010 3:29:47 PM

rome87

Posts: 29
Joined: 5/22/2008
Status: offline

Any idea on how long ai turns will take to process on average >5min possible?

< Message edited by rome87 -- 3/25/2010 3:30:39 PM >

(in reply to Captain B)

Post #: 544

RE: War in the East Q&A - 3/25/2010 3:45:04 PM

Zovs

Posts: 6668
Joined: 2/23/2009
From: United States
Status: offline

It deepens, in 1943 the Soviet AI takes a little longer as it attempts to rip up the German lines. The 1943 German AI can take as little as 1-2 minutes to complete to as long as 3-5 minutes, it's it's attacking.

Humans take far longer, especially as the Soviets and those that want to micromanage things more.

_____________________________

Beta Tester for:
Flashpoint Campaigns: Sudden Storm
War in the East 1 & 2
WarPlan & WarPlan Pacific
Valor & Victory
DG CWIE 2
SPWW2 & SPMBT scenario creator

(in reply to rome87)

Post #: 545

RE: War in the East Q&A - 3/26/2010 12:56:11 AM

zbig

Posts: 44
Joined: 3/3/2010
Status: offline

Will there be intelligence briefings in the game? For example, enemy production, morale, commander assignments etc.

(in reply to Zovs)

Post #: 546

RE: War in the East Q&A - 3/26/2010 1:22:45 AM

ComradeP

Posts: 7192
Joined: 9/17/2009
Status: offline

In his latest AAR, PyleDriver wrote:

quote:

The AI cheats in that it sees past the FoW and even into support unit locations...

Can the AI see a breakdown of the TOE of the units it can "see" through the FOW, or will it just know the units are there without knowing what their status is?

That leads me to a question that I forgot to ask the previous time: if you can get good intel on a HQ, can you see which support battalions belong to it?

Edit:

In one of PyleDriver screenshots, a 28mm AT gun is mentioned. If that's supposed to be the sPzB 41, it should be called a heavy anti-tank rifle based on comments made by, I believe, Joel in December that all units would have their historical German names translated to English. Even though the sPzB 41 is indeed basically an effective low calibre AT gun, the Germans called it a heavy AT rifle.

Will there be static heavy FlaK units/rings surrounding the on-map German cities?

< Message edited by ComradeP -- 3/26/2010 7:23:12 PM >

(in reply to zbig)

Post #: 547

RE: War in the East Q&A - 3/26/2010 9:23:49 PM

jaw

Posts: 1045
Joined: 7/24/2009
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: ComradeP

Can the AI see a breakdown of the TOE of the units it can "see" through the FOW, or will it just know the units are there without knowing what their status is?

That leads me to a question that I forgot to ask the previous time: if you can get good intel on a HQ, can you see which support battalions belong to it?

Edit:

In one of PyleDriver screenshots, a 28mm AT gun is mentioned. If that's supposed to be the sPzB 41, it should be called a heavy anti-tank rifle based on comments made by, I believe, Joel in December that all units would have their historical German names translated to English. Even though the sPzB 41 is indeed basically an effective low calibre AT gun, the Germans called it a heavy AT rifle.

Will there be static heavy FlaK units/rings surrounding the on-map German cities?

Don't quote me on this (no pun intended) but I think the AI knows where eveything is.

No, even with FOW off you can't see what's in an enemy HQ.

The 28mm ATG (sPzB 41) is classified in the game as a light anti-tank gun. This is to prevent the replacement system from using it as either an anti-tank gun or an anti-tank rifle and likewise prevent those weapons from substituting for it. I know it sounds a bit clumsy but it works.

There are static flak guns in German cities.

(in reply to ComradeP)

Post #: 548

RE: War in the East Q&A - 3/26/2010 9:28:02 PM

jaw

Posts: 1045
Joined: 7/24/2009
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: zbig

Will there be intelligence briefings in the game? For example, enemy production, morale, commander assignments etc.

Currently no, the only intel you get is from air recon or the ground combat units themselves and they basically just give you an idea what's out there and how strong it might be.

(in reply to zbig)

Post #: 549

RE: War in the East Q&A - 3/26/2010 9:52:41 PM

ComradeP

Posts: 7192
Joined: 9/17/2009
Status: offline

quote:

No, even with FOW off you can't see what's in an enemy HQ.

So you can only spot units that are physically on the map, not support battalions? How can the player attack/damage those support battalions, only by attacking the HQ or in regular combat involving those support battalions?

(in reply to jaw)

Post #: 550

RE: War in the East Q&A - 3/26/2010 10:31:00 PM

PyleDriver

Posts: 6152
Joined: 4/19/2006
From: Occupied Mexico aka Rio Grand Valley, S.Texas
Status: offline

Well you do get some intel of how many they may have if your in the "units attached mode". But those are units that are adjacent with DL (detection levels) above 5...Thats not what hurts, its after you started the battle you start see reserve divisions pour in from the other side. You start to chringe and sweat for 5 seconds...lol...A new addition I've seen is that those reserve units moving to the front could suffer air interdiction...Sweet...

_____________________________

Jon Pyle
AWD Beta tester
WBTS Alpha tester
WitE Alpha tester
WitW Alpha tester
WitE2 Alpha tester

(in reply to ComradeP)

Post #: 551

RE: War in the East Q&A - 3/27/2010 11:54:46 AM

squatter

Posts: 1033
Joined: 6/24/2006
Status: offline

First post from me here following a prolonged period of interested lurking.

Question 1: when we see an artillery unit attached to an HQ, like those German heavy howitzers, what information are we given as to what it is good at? We can clearly see the size and type of the weapons, but other than our assumed knowledge of what these weapons are good for, does the game tell us anything? Will these weapons be better than smaller caliber at reducing fortifications? Or do they just add a number to some sort of overall 'bombard' total. In either case, do we get any information as to what these values might be?

Question 2: Again, regarding HQ support units - are some support units better than others at reacting to combats? For example, might a highly mobile unit like an assault gun battalion be better suited to 'firefighting' than a footslogging security battalion, or static flak, for example.

Question 3: Do support units show a combat value of some sort?

(in reply to elmo3)

Post #: 552

RE: War in the East Q&A - 3/27/2010 2:06:27 PM

jaw

Posts: 1045
Joined: 7/24/2009
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: squatter

First post from me here following a prolonged period of interested lurking.

Question 1: when we see an artillery unit attached to an HQ, like those German heavy howitzers, what information are we given as to what it is good at? We can clearly see the size and type of the weapons, but other than our assumed knowledge of what these weapons are good for, does the game tell us anything? Will these weapons be better than smaller caliber at reducing fortifications? Or do they just add a number to some sort of overall 'bombard' total. In either case, do we get any information as to what these values might be?

Question 2: Again, regarding HQ support units - are some support units better than others at reacting to combats? For example, might a highly mobile unit like an assault gun battalion be better suited to 'firefighting' than a footslogging security battalion, or static flak, for example.

Question 3: Do support units show a combat value of some sort?

1. Combat is performed in a series of rounds beginning at long range and getting progressively closer so the present of heavy artillery increases the chance that some combat will occur at ranges beyond that of most of the other weapons. If you have the edge in long range guns you'll inflict more damage at long range. As for firepower two things influence that most, the caliber of the weapon and the rate of fire. Big guns put big holes in the ground but this is offset by lower rates of fire. The "sweat spot" tends to be the medium caliber weapons that dominate the divisional artillery suites. The really heavy stuff is great at getting in an early shot but not all that effective as combat range closes in. As for reducing fortifications, it is a question of sheer firepower so the more metal you can put on the target (all those extra artillery battalions at corps level) the better.

2. No, it is the HQ not the support unit that is doing the reacting. The support units are not physically in any particular place on the battlefield when they are committed to support a unit. The support procedure is an abstraction that assumes if a support unit is committed to a battle it automatically had to be nearby. This is why you can't destroy support units by attacking their headquarters (forcing it to re-deploy). They are not really "there".

3. Yes, but it is usually a meaningless "1".

(in reply to squatter)

Post #: 553

RE: War in the East Q&A - 3/27/2010 4:35:55 PM

jaw

Posts: 1045
Joined: 7/24/2009
Status: offline

In the latest version with FOW off you can see the type and number of units attached to an HQ but it is generic icons your seeing so for example you would know the HQ has attached artillery but not the calibers. I haven't played this version yet so I don't know if you get any of this info with FOW on.

(in reply to ComradeP)

Post #: 554

RE: War in the East Q&A - 3/27/2010 5:49:33 PM

Neal_MLC

Posts: 180
Joined: 2/2/2010
Status: offline

After reading the AARs and several other threads there is no doubt that I will be purchasing this game when it is available. My questions is how much will it cost? I have set aside$100.00 for this game. Is this a reasonable amount or could it be more?

_____________________________

no matter where you go, there you are

(in reply to jaw)

Post #: 555

RE: War in the East Q&A - 3/28/2010 12:21:11 AM

MarcA

Posts: 1181
Joined: 3/2/2005
From: England
Status: offline

When a division is broken down into regiments is there any penalty associated with it? How does it deal with combining a sub-unit which is heavily fatigues in comparison with the other sub units of the division?

(in reply to Neal_MLC)

Post #: 556

RE: War in the East Q&A - 3/28/2010 5:05:23 AM

PyleDriver

Posts: 6152
Joined: 4/19/2006
From: Occupied Mexico aka Rio Grand Valley, S.Texas
Status: offline

It sucks, the lowest mp of the division is the mp you get when combining the whole division's mp's. So if one regiment is 8 and the others is 16 they all are 8....

_____________________________

Jon Pyle
AWD Beta tester
WBTS Alpha tester
WitE Alpha tester
WitW Alpha tester
WitE2 Alpha tester

(in reply to MarcA)

Post #: 557

RE: War in the East Q&A - 3/28/2010 11:15:32 AM

squatter

Posts: 1033
Joined: 6/24/2006
Status: offline

Following up on support units...

I'm interested what strategies there are for use of support units.

Are some suited better to supporting attacks rather than supporting defences?

From what you've said about the use of heavy howitzers like the German 305mm for example, is there anything in the game that means they are better suited to static siege operations, rather than used as support for a panzer corps breakthrough? From what I understand so far, I'm not sure the game is modelling the proper roles for these specialist units.

Another example - are engineer/pioneer battalions more useful attacking prepared positions than they are in defence, or do they contribute the same combat value to both?

In Pyledrivers current AAR for example, is there any other reason that he had grouped all his heavy pieces for the seige of Sevastopol, other than that's what happened historically?

And one last question: the presence of support units doesnt slow an HQ down in the movement phase? So you could have an HQ with a bunch of ultra-heavy howitzers attached, moving nimbly through holes in the enemy line in support of fast, deep panzer army penetrations?

(in reply to PyleDriver)

Post #: 558

RE: War in the East Q&A - 3/28/2010 8:39:24 PM

jaw

Posts: 1045
Joined: 7/24/2009
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: squatter

Following up on support units...

I'm interested what strategies there are for use of support units.

Are some suited better to supporting attacks rather than supporting defences?

From what you've said about the use of heavy howitzers like the German 305mm for example, is there anything in the game that means they are better suited to static siege operations, rather than used as support for a panzer corps breakthrough? From what I understand so far, I'm not sure the game is modelling the proper roles for these specialist units.

Another example - are engineer/pioneer battalions more useful attacking prepared positions than they are in defence, or do they contribute the same combat value to both?

In Pyledrivers current AAR for example, is there any other reason that he had grouped all his heavy pieces for the seige of Sevastopol, other than that's what happened historically?

And one last question: the presence of support units doesnt slow an HQ down in the movement phase? So you could have an HQ with a bunch of ultra-heavy howitzers attached, moving nimbly through holes in the enemy line in support of fast, deep panzer army penetrations?

I think you are misunderstanding how the combat system works. All units have a combat capability based on the ACTUAL weapons they are equipped with. Some of these weapons are better in some combat situations than in others but it has to do with the combat situation itself rather than whether the unit is part of an offensive or defensive action. To use the example of combat engineers you cite above, they are equipped with short range weapons like flamethrowers and/or explosive charges. They will always be more effective fighting in dense terrain like an urban area than on the open steppe whether they are part of an attack or defense.

As for your question does lots of heavy artillery slow an HQ down the answer is no because the support units do not "physically" move with the HQ. Support units are "attached" to the HQ by which we mean they're in its chain of command but they are spread out in space and time over the entire area the HQ is controlling. You could attach heavy artillery to a panzer corps but unless it is conducting the kind of combat operations where heavy artillery is useful you are just wasting the assets.

(in reply to squatter)

Post #: 559

RE: War in the East Q&A - 3/29/2010 10:29:24 AM

ComradeP

Posts: 7192
Joined: 9/17/2009
Status: offline

As movement speed is less of an issue with 1 week turns, what's the main difference between regular (horsedrawn/towed) artillery and self-propelled artillery in game terms, either when part of a division or added as support units?

(in reply to jaw)

Post #: 560

RE: War in the East Q&A - 3/29/2010 11:00:51 AM

squatter

Posts: 1033
Joined: 6/24/2006
Status: offline

Thanks for the answers Jaw, think I'm beginning to get my head round how everything is gonna work.

A few more posers if I may:

When you say that weapons function according to how they would in the 'situation' they are in, what factors combine to create a 'situation'. Is it a just a matter of range and terrain? You seem to be saying that the 'situation' doesnt include whether the weapon in question is being used to attack or defend in this given situation. It would strike me that a quad 20mm flak cannon, for example, would be of significantly more use in a defensive situation than an offensive situation, whether in steppes or urban terrain. Pushing one of those into a position to fire in full view of the enemy can't be fun. Likewise an anti-tank gun, or even a turret-less tank destroyer are going to be more useful defending than attacking?

And sorry if this has been asked before, but are there bombardment attacks in the game? If so, are these aimed at destroying fortifications, or reducing readiness and/or increasing fatigue among enemy formations?

Thanks

(in reply to ComradeP)

Post #: 561

RE: War in the East Q&A - 3/29/2010 11:29:31 AM

elmo3

Posts: 5820
Joined: 1/22/2002
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: ComradeP

As movement speed is less of an issue with 1 week turns, what's the main difference between regular (horsedrawn/towed) artillery and self-propelled artillery in game terms, either when part of a division or added as support units?

If you are asking about variations in movement speed the the answer is that support units do not appear on the map so they have no MP's. They don't affect unit MP's either.

_____________________________

We don't stop playing because we grow old, we grow old because we stop playing. - George Bernard Shaw

WitE alpha/beta tester
Sanctus Reach beta tester
Desert War 1940-42 beta tester

(in reply to ComradeP)

Post #: 562

RE: War in the East Q&A - 3/29/2010 12:20:47 PM

ComradeP

Posts: 7192
Joined: 9/17/2009
Status: offline

quote:

Likewise an anti-tank gun, or even a turret-less tank destroyer are going to be more useful defending than attacking?

AT units are mostly nice to have for ranged fire, as soon as the engagement range shortens, the AT gun crews will be taking fire from infantry weapons and will eventually have to abandon their equipment or move it, whilst the self-propelled AT units will be far less effective because they don't have a turret, which is a serious problem in short range as they have to turn/pivot to fire and thus expose the weaker side armour to the enemy. Self-propelled units are more useful in an attack where the attacker has and can maintain the momentum than in short range defence.

quote:

If you are asking about variations in movement speed the the answer is that support units do not appear on the map so they have no MP's. They don't affect unit MP's either.

OK, so the extra mobility of the self-propelled guns doesn't make a difference in the game? That only makes me more curious as to what the difference is, possibly aside from a few points of armour protection. Does self-propelled artillery have a lesser chance of being hit by artillery? A better chance of not losing equipment when retreating?

(in reply to elmo3)

Post #: 563

RE: War in the East Q&A - 3/29/2010 1:05:49 PM

elmo3

Posts: 5820
Joined: 1/22/2002
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: ComradeP

OK, so the extra mobility of the self-propelled guns doesn't make a difference in the game? ...

All I'm saying is support units don't affect movement. Beyond that Jaw, Joel, or Pavel would have to answer you.

_____________________________

We don't stop playing because we grow old, we grow old because we stop playing. - George Bernard Shaw

WitE alpha/beta tester
Sanctus Reach beta tester
Desert War 1940-42 beta tester

(in reply to ComradeP)

Post #: 564

RE: War in the East Q&A - 3/29/2010 2:34:55 PM

jaw

Posts: 1045
Joined: 7/24/2009
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: squatter

Thanks for the answers Jaw, think I'm beginning to get my head round how everything is gonna work.

A few more posers if I may:

When you say that weapons function according to how they would in the 'situation' they are in, what factors combine to create a 'situation'. Is it a just a matter of range and terrain? You seem to be saying that the 'situation' doesnt include whether the weapon in question is being used to attack or defend in this given situation. It would strike me that a quad 20mm flak cannon, for example, would be of significantly more use in a defensive situation than an offensive situation, whether in steppes or urban terrain. Pushing one of those into a position to fire in full view of the enemy can't be fun. Likewise an anti-tank gun, or even a turret-less tank destroyer are going to be more useful defending than attacking?

And sorry if this has been asked before, but are there bombardment attacks in the game? If so, are these aimed at destroying fortifications, or reducing readiness and/or increasing fatigue among enemy formations?

Thanks

By combat situation I am referring to the kind of terrain the combat is taking place in. The longer a weapon's range, the more effective it will be in open terrain. As terrain becomes denser the advantage of long range begins to decline until in really dense terrain only raw firepower matters. The shorter the range becomes the more vulnerable the elements of a unit become to enemy fire but all elements are not equally vulnerable. Elements which by their nature would not be on the front line like divisional artillery or logistical elements are less likely to be destroyed or damaged by combat than front line elements like rifle squads. With reference to a quad 20mm flak gun, I honestly don't know where it would fall on this spectrum of vulnerability.

Whether attacking or defending the effectiveness of any weapon depends on the composition of the enemy force. Having lots of anti-tank guns is going to be of limited value if the enemy has no armor. In the game as in the real world, the line can be quite blurred between what is an offensive and what is a defensive weapon. If you read about the exploits of Erwin Rommel and the Afrika Korps you can easily come to the conclusion that there is no such thing as a defensive weapon. If it can kill you, it's an offensive weapon.

There is no separate artillery bombardment attack in WitE as there was in WIR.

(in reply to squatter)

Post #: 565

RE: War in the East Q&A - 3/29/2010 2:43:22 PM

jaw

Posts: 1045
Joined: 7/24/2009
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: ComradeP

OK, so the extra mobility of the self-propelled guns doesn't make a difference in the game? That only makes me more curious as to what the difference is, possibly aside from a few points of armour protection. Does self-propelled artillery have a lesser chance of being hit by artillery? A better chance of not losing equipment when retreating?

Armor of any sort is always more survivable than anything else in the game. Artillery, including SPAs, are less vulnerable to fire than almost anything else because of their positioning behind the front line. To be honest, I've never played a scenario where I had SPAs in a unit and it was forced to retreat. My assumption would be they are treated like any other AFV for retreat purposes which would make them far less likely of being lost in a retreat.

(in reply to ComradeP)

Post #: 566

RE: War in the East Q&A - 3/30/2010 4:35:45 PM

wodin

Posts: 10762
Joined: 4/20/2003
From: England
Status: offline

This game sounds better all the time...i havent seen a game at this level that models the equipment in such detail before. So I take it all the offensive equipment is calculated during combat? Or is it abstracted like in a SSG game? If its all taken into account then thats a dream game for me.

Is there a tactical engine working away underneath the hood when combat occurs?

_____________________________

My website

https://www.awargamersneedfulthings.co.uk/

(in reply to jaw)

Post #: 567

RE: War in the East Q&A - 3/30/2010 5:23:53 PM

elmo3

Posts: 5820
Joined: 1/22/2002
Status: offline

Yes there is a lot going on "under the hood". You can see some of it by turning up the battle reporting detail level but that can really make battles take a long time to resolve.

_____________________________

We don't stop playing because we grow old, we grow old because we stop playing. - George Bernard Shaw

WitE alpha/beta tester
Sanctus Reach beta tester
Desert War 1940-42 beta tester

(in reply to wodin)

Post #: 568

RE: War in the East Q&A - 3/30/2010 6:00:42 PM

jaw

Posts: 1045
Joined: 7/24/2009
Status: offline

When you consider the detail in the combat resolution system (down to individual weapons) WitE is practically a miniatures game at the divisional level.

(in reply to wodin)

Post #: 569

RE: War in the East Q&A - 3/30/2010 7:07:36 PM

Zovs

Posts: 6668
Joined: 2/23/2009
From: United States
Status: offline

To add on to jaw comment, you can rest safely knowing that the details of individual squads, guns, tanks and air (not to mention a whole variety of morale, fatigue, fuel, supplies, ammo, production, training, refit, leadership, damage, doctrine, weather, time, chance, elements, randomness and things such as these) are doing their part and in fact shut out those details and instead concentrate on operational warfare and be quite content with he results you see, hence realizing that the engine is working as it should as the results show.

For me the first couple of battles where the ranged artillery is firing, and squads are dying while tanks are hiding and planes are flying was enough for me to shut down that level of detail and instead concentrate on divisional, corps and army movement within the army groups/fronts and use these tools to perform operational level combat. I also like to add support units, but am finding that the AI can auto assign these just fine to attacks or defenses as well. Likewise I am lazy and rather let the AI handle the air as well.

All-in-all not doing too bad in 1944 as the Soviets (or the better side...

)

_____________________________

Beta Tester for:
Flashpoint Campaigns: Sudden Storm
War in the East 1 & 2
WarPlan & WarPlan Pacific
Valor & Victory
DG CWIE 2
SPWW2 & SPMBT scenario creator

(in reply to jaw)

Post #: 570