RE: Couple of criticisms

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: Couple of criticisms

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: Couple of criticisms

Page: << < prev 2 3 [4] 5 6 next > >>

Message

<< Older Topic Newer Topic >>

RE: Couple of criticisms - 1/25/2011 11:00:25 AM

karonagames

Posts: 4712
Joined: 7/10/2006
From: The Duchy of Cornwall, nr England
Status: offline

quote:

I'm sort of at a loss that it ended up so loose in this game especially since there are so many eastern front experts and accomplished gamers on board. So many units with no parameters ends up a boring counter shove. Like I said I have faith that you guys will try some stuff to improve things.

All I can say is that over the 225 turn campaign and roughly a 120hex front line, if poor C&C reduces units MPs by 3 per unit, then this will result in 120 less attacks and/or potentially 120 less hexes occupied, and therefore make it harder to achieve the rate of advance necessary to obtain the Turn225 objectives.

The greatest feature of this game is the way it self balances. In the short term you may not see any problems with not trying to maintain C&C but in the long term you will.

_____________________________

It's only a Game

(in reply to Smirfy)

Post #: 91

RE: Couple of criticisms - 1/25/2011 6:30:25 PM

Smirfy

Posts: 1057
Joined: 7/16/2004
Status: offline

My summer offensive went from Kiev to Lvov in 43 and knocked Roumania out of the war. There is obviously a problem that won't self balance.

(in reply to karonagames)

Post #: 92

RE: Couple of criticisms - 1/25/2011 6:38:15 PM

karonagames

Posts: 4712
Joined: 7/10/2006
From: The Duchy of Cornwall, nr England
Status: offline

AS noted previously, Berlin is being captured in 1943 against Normal AI. It has been recommended that SU players should set the AI to challenging or hard.

_____________________________

It's only a Game

(in reply to Smirfy)

Post #: 93

RE: Couple of criticisms - 1/25/2011 11:52:51 PM

Smirfy

Posts: 1057
Joined: 7/16/2004
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: BigAnorak

AS noted previously, Berlin is being captured in 1943 against Normal AI. It has been recommended that SU players should set the AI to challenging or hard.

I think we are going round in circles it is not the challenge it is the mechanics, it is how the game is operating, it is the number of redundant features.

(in reply to karonagames)

Post #: 94

RE: Couple of criticisms - 1/26/2011 1:36:44 AM

39battalion

Posts: 247
Joined: 7/27/2004
From: Adelaide, South Australia
Status: offline

This is a depressing thread.

If Smirfy is correct he deserves a medal for finding a fatal flaw.

However if he is correct it essentially means the game is broken for the Soviet player, at least against the AI.

Very sad for a game that was receiving so many early accolades.

(in reply to Smirfy)

Post #: 95

RE: Couple of criticisms - 1/26/2011 2:35:07 AM

jomni

Posts: 2827
Joined: 11/19/2007
Status: offline

The game is still fun despite this flaw if it is really a flaw.

_____________________________

My Blog
Random Wargame Name Generator

(in reply to 39battalion)

Post #: 96

RE: Couple of criticisms - 1/26/2011 2:38:26 AM

Ketza

Posts: 2227
Joined: 1/14/2007
From: Columbia, Maryland
Status: offline

I noticed a very big increase in the combat resiliency or Soviet units in my PBEM game vrs my AI games. I assumed that this came from the human factor keeping things more organized. I always try and keep my guys within command range. It never occurred to me to run things willy nilly all over the map.

(in reply to jomni)

Post #: 97

RE: Couple of criticisms - 1/26/2011 2:45:30 AM

TulliusDetritus

Posts: 5521
Joined: 4/1/2004
From: The Zone�
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: 39battalion

This is a depressing thread.

If Smirfy is correct he deserves a medal for finding a fatal flaw.

However if he is correct it essentially means the game is broken for the Soviet player, at least against the AI.

Very sad for a game that was receiving so many early accolades.

Humm, I haven't seen anyone playing PBEM (me included) complaining. Au contraire, we all are very happy

So someone captured Berlin in 1943 vs the AI?

So? I've been playing vs WitP AI since 2004. A game MUCH more complex than this one. I had a lot of fun. The recipe? Simply DO NOT SAVAGE THE AI, play historically, it's just easy

If you want to try dirty little tricks, find a human being. You will break the AI = game over = you will be unhappy

< Message edited by TulliusDetritus -- 1/26/2011 2:46:23 AM >

_____________________________

a nu cheeki breeki iv damke

(in reply to 39battalion)

Post #: 98

RE: Couple of criticisms - 1/26/2011 3:31:18 AM

madgamer2

Posts: 1235
Joined: 11/24/2004
Status: offline

[/quote]

Humm, I haven't seen anyone playing PBEM (me included) complaining. Au contraire, we all are very happy

So someone captured Berlin in 1943 vs the AI?

So? I've been playing vs WitP AI since 2004. A game MUCH more complex than this one. I had a lot of fun. The recipe? Simply DO NOT SAVAGE THE AI, play historically, it's just easy

If you want to try dirty little tricks, find a human being. You will break the AI = game over = you will be unhappy

[/quote]

I just have a hard time believing Matrix would release a game with this kind of error in C & C. I am basically checking the forum each day, reading the manual very slowly,keeping the game patched. When i finish the manual I will play the tutorial several times and the road to Leningrad several times and play with the various setup menu's and by that time I am hoping the game will have most things fixed but if this thread is CORRECT it kind of takes the wind out of my sails. I mean for the Russians to win with just rail supply and no C & C is just to horiable to contemplate. Maybe some of the players out there should try what he is doing to see if it can be done. Might be hard as we do not know if he made radical changes in the pre game settings.

Madgamer2

_____________________________

If your not part of the solution
You are part of the problem

(in reply to TulliusDetritus)

Post #: 99

RE: Couple of criticisms - 1/26/2011 3:42:04 AM

Oleg Mastruko

Posts: 4921
Joined: 10/21/2000
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Smirfy
The ability to set up a checker board defence because there is zero command and control mechanics I believe effects PBEM games as well, the abilty to move units hundred of miles without penalty also effects PBEM games I imagine.

How do you mean "without penalty"? Sometimes you can visibly see a unit losing CV value on the counter just by moving.

Hundered of miles? Of course. The game simulates one week turns.

(in reply to Smirfy)

Post #: 100

RE: Couple of criticisms - 1/26/2011 3:44:58 AM

Oleg Mastruko

Posts: 4921
Joined: 10/21/2000
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: 39battalion
This is a depressing thread.

However if he is correct it essentially means the game is broken for the Soviet player, at least against the AI.

Very sad for a game that was receiving so many early accolades.

Yea mate, keep on reading "depressing threads" and not playing the game, the rest of us have no problem enjoying it...

Besides, it is my opinion EVERY DAMN game is kinda "broken" against the AI, simply because deeply complex games like these are not meant to be played against the AI. Find a human, play a PBEM. Then come back.

(in reply to 39battalion)

Post #: 101

RE: Couple of criticisms - 1/26/2011 3:50:27 AM

Mynok

Posts: 12108
Joined: 11/30/2002
Status: offline

quote:

Find a human, play a PBEM. Then come back.

Words to live by. AI is for learning. Playing is for humans.

_____________________________

"Measure civilization by the ability of citizens to mock government with impunity" -- Unknown

(in reply to Oleg Mastruko)

Post #: 102

RE: Couple of criticisms - 1/26/2011 3:54:43 AM

Oleg Mastruko

Posts: 4921
Joined: 10/21/2000
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Mynok

quote:

Find a human, play a PBEM. Then come back.

Words to live by. AI is for learning. Playing is for humans.

Smirfy mentions what he calls "counter shove" - a funny term BTW, the high point of the whole thread LOL.

In retrospect, I cannot remember ANY GAME that I could NOT have won vs the AI using the simple counter shove, and never having to worry about supplies, support units etc. Every game I ever played vs the AI ended up in boring "counter shove" and easy victory with HQs and support units thrown accross the map.

Then, I switched to PBEM where "counter shove" equals certain death.

End of story.

(in reply to Mynok)

Post #: 103

RE: Couple of criticisms - 1/26/2011 4:36:08 AM

gradenko2k

Posts: 935
Joined: 12/27/2010
Status: offline

quote:

I think we are going round in circles it is not the challenge it is the mechanics, it is how the game is operating, it is the number of redundant features.

The point is that setting the AI to Challenging or better is going to let it put up a stiffer defense, which means you wouldn't be able to steamroll from Kiev to Lvov in a single summer campaign

(in reply to Oleg Mastruko)

Post #: 104

RE: Couple of criticisms - 1/26/2011 9:53:39 AM

Smirfy

Posts: 1057
Joined: 7/16/2004
Status: offline

Like I said but it seems to be continually ignored it is not the challenge but the operation of the game, obviously a human opponent will give you a better challenge I'm never expecting a back hand blow type counterstroke from the AI any AI. The AI as far as AIs go in WITE does a pretty good job but is this because mechanics are non existant or is this because it is good?

The game is meant to represent war in the eastern front, and war in the second world war but falls short in numerous areas, C+C being one of them. The limited loss in CV for units attached directly to Stavka and OKH without reporting to a combat headquarters is a very poor representation of the actaul case as units would progressively be less ready for combat the further back the chain they go. Not having to attach these units to combat HQ's is lazy mechanics.

The ability of infanrty units to move 100's of mile and be combat ready exerting a ZOC given that movement is meant to be simultenuos is laughable. I can just imagine what would happen to such a formation if it did that to an Armoured spearhead in WWII :D. It can do this even when not reporting to a local HQ

. Seriously that is just again lazy mechanics.

"Mr Patton sir you have just been stopped by a unit that is ten miles away which has marched over one hundred mile in perfect order"

"Which HQ is it reporting to?"

"OKW in Berlin sir"

"Where is it getting its supply?"

"Berlin sir"

"Okay better stop to let our artillery catch up to blast through this checkboard defence"

Not really having HQ's influence the game and the ability to simulate the destruction of HQ's is bizarre and seems rather a bolt on.

Like I said I like the Database, I love the Map I love the implementation of support units but C+C suspends believe.

< Message edited by Smirfy -- 1/26/2011 9:54:25 AM >

(in reply to gradenko2k)

Post #: 105

RE: Couple of criticisms - 1/26/2011 2:09:39 PM

Oleg Mastruko

Posts: 4921
Joined: 10/21/2000
Status: offline

Smirfy, in your last post you are just complaining about the turn based system and IGO UGO mechanics, not the supply system.

Yes, it is inherent to turn based system, and especially IGO UGO, that a unit will move "hundered of miles" and do many things while the opponent is unable to react. We knew WITE was going to be turn based and IGO UGO, like, YEARS in advance, and it's kinda beside the point to complain about it now.

As for the C&C complaints.... I do think most of them stem from the fact you're playing the AI, and using half a brain at that. Play a human opponent and see how EVERY little bit counts, and how HQ hieararchy makes or breaks a battle by sending reserves, supporting units etc.

Also, do you suggest a unit should starve just because it wasn't attached to a nearby HQ? I am sure there will be some food and fuel found for them even if they are currently unattached to anything near

(in reply to Smirfy)

Post #: 106

RE: Couple of criticisms - 1/26/2011 2:29:57 PM

janh

Posts: 1216
Joined: 6/12/2007
Status: offline

For the movement part, yes, the old Panzer General system of IGO UGU makes it a little more difficult to imagine that many things happen simultaneously in the 1-week turns. For a beer and prezels game, this was probably the better approach to interest many not-so-hardcore gamers. The system didn't bother me in Panzer General since the game was already "very gamey".
My impression is that if you go for WitE, you should best not have any specific expectations but be open to the new way Gary and Joe have taken in this new series. It is clearly very different from WiTP/AE in that sense, and much more of a manageable game than a hardcore simulation with the myriad of actions possible through naval, air and production micromanagement.

As for the supply and C&C discussion taking place here -- if it were not a general mechanics problem, why not add optional parameters in the game menu that to adjust them for PBEM and AI if this adds to the game experience? If it were a mechanics problem, it would probably soon show in other AARs as well?

(in reply to Oleg Mastruko)

Post #: 107

RE: Couple of criticisms - 1/26/2011 5:22:53 PM

timmyab

Posts: 2044
Joined: 12/14/2010
From: Bristol, UK
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: janh
As for the supply and C&C discussion taking place here -- if it were not a general mechanics problem, why not add optional parameters in the game menu that to adjust them for PBEM and AI if this adds to the game experience?

Interesting point I hadn't considered.It may be that C&C is never properly implemented in computer war games because it's feared that the AI couldn't begin to cope with it, which I'm certain it wouldn't.Perhaps, with almost everybody online these days, and human opponents relatively easy to find, it's time for game developers to forget about AI altogether untill someone works out how to put the "I" into it.

< Message edited by timmyab -- 1/26/2011 5:25:20 PM >

(in reply to janh)

Post #: 108

RE: Couple of criticisms - 1/26/2011 5:49:12 PM

Pford

Posts: 235
Joined: 11/10/2006
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: timmyab

I want to be able to feel the personalities of my generals on the battlefield in a very obvious way and I'm not getting that at the moment.

Agreed. The effect is there but it could be 'felt' better. If there was a way to depict the commanders on map in some way it would, imo, enhance immersion and attenuate the spreadsheet feel.

(in reply to timmyab)

Post #: 109

RE: Couple of criticisms - 1/26/2011 7:15:56 PM

madgamer2

Posts: 1235
Joined: 11/24/2004
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: timmyab

quote:

ORIGINAL: janh
As for the supply and C&C discussion taking place here -- if it were not a general mechanics problem, why not add optional parameters in the game menu that to adjust them for PBEM and AI if this adds to the game experience?

Interesting point I hadn't considered.It may be that C&C is never properly implemented in computer war games because it's feared that the AI couldn't begin to cope with it, which I'm certain it wouldn't.Perhaps, with almost everybody online these days, and human opponents relatively easy to find, it's time for game developers to forget about AI altogether until someone works out how to put the "I" into it

What you say makes sense for the multitudes who flock to PBEM games and this is the future. What about those of us who still like to play against the AI? I guess I am a simple minded old fart when it comes to computer design but is it that hard to create an AI that has to use the C&C rules. If you not in supply as a human vs. the computer you suffer the out of supply consequences. At least that is what I thought till this thread tells me you can play against the computer as a Russian and win using only Rail head Supply.
Correct me if I am wrong but it would appear that the Russian human player can ignore the C&C rules. How about no in command then no or little supply. I have seen it coming for a long time that game design is turning to PBEM as being more important than human vs. AI. I had hopes for this game as it is an East front game and There was a lot of work to create an AI that would at the highest levels at least give you a run for your money, I to am of the opinion that because of rules like the Blizzard beating the Russian with a human German and a computer Russian would be very hard, although the Blizzard rules are the same regardless of the difficulty level, Right
I can even understand a game in which the computer AI did not use C&C the same way the human has to but for a human to be able to do what has been described here in this thread makes me very sad. it should not be possible so I only hope it can be corrected.

Madgamer2

_____________________________

If your not part of the solution
You are part of the problem

(in reply to timmyab)

Post #: 110

RE: Couple of criticisms - 1/26/2011 7:24:58 PM

Smirfy

Posts: 1057
Joined: 7/16/2004
Status: offline

Nope I am not complaining about the turn system I'm complaining the lack of mechanics to simulate operations within the turn system. In this game turn system the units are accepted to move "together". Apart from units that warp out of encirclement absolutely no thought and less implementation has been incorperated into the game as I am pointing out.

Headquarters like Stavka, OKH, army groups and fronts would not have the staff nor local knowledge to direct individual divisions on operations 100's of miles away so infact they would have to forage or starve. Thats why subordinate HQs exist.

(in reply to Pford)

Post #: 111

RE: Couple of criticisms - 1/26/2011 8:02:22 PM

gradenko2k

Posts: 935
Joined: 12/27/2010
Status: offline

quote:

Agreed. The effect is there but it could be 'felt' better. If there was a way to depict the commanders on map in some way it would, imo, enhance immersion and attenuate the spreadsheet feel.

On one hand, letting us see the various individual rolls and checks would probably give us better insight on just how much of an effect a good or bad leader can have on combat.

On the other hand, that would also probably drown us in minutiae.

(in reply to Smirfy)

Post #: 112

RE: Couple of criticisms - 1/26/2011 9:49:56 PM

Oleg Mastruko

Posts: 4921
Joined: 10/21/2000
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Smirfy
Nope I am not complaining about the turn system I'm complaining the lack of mechanics to simulate operations within the turn system.

To me this translates as "I am complaining about turn based system". Do you know of any other IGO UGO game that does not have units marching many miles and "suddenly appearing" to stop you?

Their "sudden appearance" and long march are by product of the turn based IGO UGO system--- which, as I pointed out, is a feature of the game announced many months (if not years) ago.

quote:

Headquarters like Stavka, OKH, army groups and fronts would not have the staff nor local knowledge to direct individual divisions on operations 100's of miles away so infact they would have to forage or starve. Thats why subordinate HQs exist.

I highly doubt German or Sov army would have their division "starve or forage" simply because they were not officially and formally attached to some higher nearby HQ.

(in reply to Smirfy)

Post #: 113

RE: Couple of criticisms - 1/26/2011 10:25:18 PM

mavraamides

Posts: 447
Joined: 4/1/2005
Status: offline

Smirfy,

Could you post a screen shot of your position with 'show supply network' turned on (I think its the 'R' key).

If there are green tracks right up to your front, then you should have no prob with supply. But if you are 20 hexes past the green tracks in the dark grey area, then I think there could be a prob.

Please post screenie to confirm.

Thanks!

(in reply to Smirfy)

Post #: 114

RE: Couple of criticisms - 1/26/2011 10:43:10 PM

Smirfy

Posts: 1057
Joined: 7/16/2004
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Oleg Mastruko

quote:

ORIGINAL: Smirfy
Nope I am not complaining about the turn system I'm complaining the lack of mechanics to simulate operations within the turn system.

To me this translates as "I am complaining about turn based system". Do you know of any other IGO UGO game that does not have units marching many miles and "suddenly appearing" to stop you?

Their "sudden appearance" and long march are by product of the turn based IGO UGO system--- which, as I pointed out, is a feature of the game announced many months (if not years) ago.

quote:

Headquarters like Stavka, OKH, army groups and fronts would not have the staff nor local knowledge to direct individual divisions on operations 100's of miles away so infact they would have to forage or starve. Thats why subordinate HQs exist.

I highly doubt German or Sov army would have their division "starve or forage" simply because they were not officially and formally attached to some higher nearby HQ.

I honestly think you should take some time to take in what I am actually pointing out and being disatisfied that WiTE is turn based is not one of them.

Where would they get these supplies if they where not in the administrave loop? A division is 16,000 men plus equipment for crying out loud. To have a surplus like that it would have to be planned for.

(in reply to Oleg Mastruko)

Post #: 115

RE: Couple of criticisms - 1/26/2011 11:20:11 PM

Smirfy

Posts: 1057
Joined: 7/16/2004
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: GordianKnot

Smirfy,

Could you post a screen shot of your position with 'show supply network' turned on (I think its the 'R' key).

If there are green tracks right up to your front, then you should have no prob with supply. But if you are 20 hexes past the green tracks in the dark grey area, then I think there could be a prob.

Please post screenie to confirm.

Thanks!

Again I sorry I keep thinking I'm being clear but obviously I'm not. I'll try to break it down

1/ If and it seem this is the case HQ's have little or no function then what is their point. In my example game 3rd Tank Army HQ does not move and ends up 230 miles behind the lead unit of 3rd Tank Army which is unaffected by this distance. It attacks every turn, 48 times between Kiev and Lvov. Hasty attacks and planned attacks without any detriment which means we can condense the logistics of the manual down to keep your railway lines repaired. When have you heard a General of a tank army commanding from 230 miles away, when have you heard of an army headquarters being 230 miles away.

2/ There is absolutely no point to the chain of command in game except getting a few extra CV numbers out of units for PBEM games. You can run the game from Stavka if you so choose. Now I love the support unit and reserve systems great ideas but seriously guys for a �70 game you are going to put a bit more meat on the bone. I dont mean micromangement meat I mean there has to be a deeper enviroment than what presently exists. I'm slowly getting the feeling chess has a deeper enviroment and it dont cost �70. WiTE has more units but you could make the chess board bigger and add some pieces if you get my meaning

3/ The enviroment is unbelievable. Infantry units can march 100 miles and be in perfect order and stop armoured breakthroughs execising a zone of control. Lets think about that, France 1940 through the Desert and barbarossa to the destruction of Army group centre and Pattons breakout. Wait a minute that was the quickest way to a POW cage! The game turns into a WWI simulation rather WWII. If air was working and it isnt we might have interdiction as well.

< Message edited by Smirfy -- 1/26/2011 11:22:23 PM >

(in reply to mavraamides)

Post #: 116

RE: Couple of criticisms - 1/26/2011 11:29:41 PM

Flaviusx

Posts: 7750
Joined: 9/9/2009
From: Southern California
Status: offline

Smirfy, if you put everything under STAVKA, it will overload, and you'll blow a lot of leadership rolls and admin rolls. Just sayin'. Now, If you're content to shove counters around and have 25-30 mp mobile corps, then no worries, and that's probably going to work out just fine in an AI situation.

I feel most of your frustration is the inevitable consequence of disillusionment with the solo game. At some point you're going to hit this and that's the point where you should probably start hunting for a human opponent.

_____________________________

WitE Alpha Tester

(in reply to Smirfy)

Post #: 117

RE: Couple of criticisms - 1/26/2011 11:45:34 PM

LiquidSky

Posts: 2811
Joined: 6/24/2008
Status: offline

I used to play my younger sister chess, when she was learning the game, without having my queen on the board. I would win most games, even without it. Now...you can blame the game of chess and say well...there must be a problem with the rules for me to be able to win without having my queen on the board. Or you can blame the fact I am playing against my sister. HQ's do have a function, but that function doesnt have to be used by you. If you win anyways, well, hurrah!

Play against a human, leave your HQ's at home, and then come back and tell us how 'useless' they are.

(in reply to Flaviusx)

Post #: 118

RE: Couple of criticisms - 1/26/2011 11:45:45 PM

squatter

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

Smirfy makes some good points.

Does anyone really agree that a division under STAVKA command should be able to function well in the line?

Does anyone really agree that a corps should be able to function reasonably well 200 miles from its HQ?

Even in PBEM I've seen units perform important functions under the above circumstances. When your damn HQs get bounced because you forgot when you moved a combat leaving them alone next to an enemy unit, for example, and you have to continue your advance without them!!

Make penalties for being out of HQ command radius a little harsher - especially in drawing supply - and inflict harsher penalties in combat on units attached to higher level HQs.

Then I think we're all happy.

(in reply to Flaviusx)

Post #: 119

RE: Couple of criticisms - 1/26/2011 11:48:26 PM

Smirfy

Posts: 1057
Joined: 7/16/2004
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Flaviusx

Smirfy, if you put everything under STAVKA, it will overload, and you'll blow a lot of leadership rolls and admin rolls. Just sayin'. Now, If you're content to shove counters around and have 25-30 mp mobile corps, then no worries, and that's probably going to work out just fine in an AI situation.

I feel most of your frustration is the inevitable consequence of disillusionment with the solo game. At some point you're going to hit this and that's the point where you should probably start hunting for a human opponent.

Like I have said on many occiasions there is a lot to commend about this game especailly in presentation and unit detail. I have had no bad experience with the combat model so far which is also positive. The AI as far as AI's go is good. In the campaign game 41 plays quite well but I'm seriously looking for more improvement before hunting for a human opponent

(in reply to Flaviusx)

Post #: 120