RE: Game Has Serious Problems

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: Game Has Serious Problems

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: Game Has Serious Problems

Page: << < prev 1 [2] 3 next > >>

Message

<< Older Topic Newer Topic >>

RE: Game Has Serious Problems - 3/15/2011 6:14:31 AM

56ajax

Posts: 1950
Joined: 12/3/2007
From: Carnegie, Australia
Status: offline

I don't think that this game could ever be broken because.....its a game!!!!! It does its best to give an historical result, but it deviates from history as soon as you move a unit. Yes, it does seem very hard playing the AXIS, but theres the challenge of the game. And remember we all play with historical hindsight, you only have to go pick up a book to see what actually happened in 1941, so when it xcomes to playing the Russians retreat straight to LG and MW etc...and as Joel said, the developers dont make mega $$$$$$ out of this and they have to pay bills like anyone else; I am amazed that they havent been more creative in their charging for support or upgrades (I would pay extra foer being able to do manual equip upgrades etc or an uptodate manual). Why do we get abusive....well here i am playing the game of my life and I see what appears like the 2000000th thread 'Great game but'...cheers

(in reply to Klydon)

Post #: 31

RE: Game Has Serious Problems - 3/15/2011 6:59:22 AM

PyleDriver

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

Well its like Julia Roberts in "Pretty Woman" when she goes to the ophra, "Oh these darn are broken" referring to the glasses. Richard Gere mearly turns them upside right...lol...I guess its how you look at things, or not try to figure it out...

_____________________________

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

(in reply to 56ajax)

Post #: 32

RE: Game Has Serious Problems - 3/15/2011 11:03:14 AM

Adnan Meshuggi

Posts: 2220
Joined: 8/2/2001
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Knavery

quote:

ORIGINAL: ool

quote:

ORIGINAL: Mehring

quote:

ORIGINAL: Klydon

Well, instead of blaming the game, perhaps look at the players. Most Russians are just not going to allow the Germans to encircle at will or even make it easy for them. Should the game make it so that can happen? Doesn't make much sense. I have been watching all the AAR's and while there is the occasional counter attack that causes the Germans to retreat, this did happen in the real campaign in several spots during the 1941 campaign.

Overall, the game may have some issues with the winter, but I don't share your opinion on the encirclement or retreats as being a fault of the game.

+2

Truly, I get more fed up with German players displacing their own poor performance onto the game than with the game's admitted problems. The fact that the Russians can effectively counter-attack in summer 1941 and the Germans likewise later in the war, is a triumph over more primitive systems which generalise all exceptions out of the game. The Germans did so well in 1941 in large part because they were experienced in a superior doctrine to that of their adversary. If you're not experienced as the German player, you shoudn't do well. Go learn how to play!

AMEN! The amount of German player "whineritis" in this forum is pathetic. Matrix changes this game much further why even bother putting it out if you lose the historical accuracy? Fully agree with Mehring, learn how to plat the game. Plenty of first person shooter games around if you want to win right out of the box without thinking or planning.

I hear this argument a lot--that it's historically accurate if A, B, or C happens, so learn how to play the game. By that logic, there can only be one outcome. So why even bother playing? It then becomes more of an exercise to replicate what the German and Soviet forces did in the war. If you've mastered that, and can't change the outcome, there's nothing left in the game for you.

+1

That is exactly what i critizise

(in reply to Knavery)

Post #: 33

RE: Game Has Serious Problems - 3/15/2011 2:11:25 PM

Mehring

Posts: 2179
Joined: 1/25/2007
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Knavery

quote:

ORIGINAL: ool

quote:

ORIGINAL: Mehring

quote:

ORIGINAL: Klydon

Well, instead of blaming the game, perhaps look at the players. Most Russians are just not going to allow the Germans to encircle at will or even make it easy for them. Should the game make it so that can happen? Doesn't make much sense. I have been watching all the AAR's and while there is the occasional counter attack that causes the Germans to retreat, this did happen in the real campaign in several spots during the 1941 campaign.

Overall, the game may have some issues with the winter, but I don't share your opinion on the encirclement or retreats as being a fault of the game.

+2

Truly, I get more fed up with German players displacing their own poor performance onto the game than with the game's admitted problems. The fact that the Russians can effectively counter-attack in summer 1941 and the Germans likewise later in the war, is a triumph over more primitive systems which generalise all exceptions out of the game. The Germans did so well in 1941 in large part because they were experienced in a superior doctrine to that of their adversary. If you're not experienced as the German player, you shoudn't do well. Go learn how to play!

AMEN! The amount of German player "whineritis" in this forum is pathetic. Matrix changes this game much further why even bother putting it out if you lose the historical accuracy? Fully agree with Mehring, learn how to plat the game. Plenty of first person shooter games around if you want to win right out of the box without thinking or planning.

I hear this argument a lot--that it's historically accurate if A, B, or C happens, so learn how to play the game. By that logic, there can only be one outcome. So why even bother playing? It then becomes more of an exercise to replicate what the German and Soviet forces did in the war. If you've mastered that, and can't change the outcome, there's nothing left in the game for you.

And where in the text you have quoted is anyone putting forward any "logic" that there can only be one outcome? Is anyone argueing that the same units should always fight at the same place and time and achieve the same results? No. It just doesn't follow from what anyone's said, does it? But this is an historical wargame and many of us feel, then, that what is possible within its parameters should bare a significant resemblance to what was historically possible. Is there a relationship between your mechanism of imposing an obviously different meaning over other people's statements and the wish to play an historical war game with fantasy values?

I personally have never attempted to replicate the historical moves since I was a kid playing board WitE, and I have never achieved a carbon copy of the real war. The point is that there are a ton of poeple out there who think the germans should be able to swan around like supermen crushing all before them, suffering no untoward consequences for their commanders poor work. I'm not saying they're all a load of nazis and german supremacists, people can like the same thing for quite different reasons. But when the game, to its credit, doesn't run according to their power fantasy, they come whinging to the forum, or to their opponent, that the game's broken. If you want some broken games, I can give you a list, but for all its faults, this isn't one of them. That WitE allows the weaker side to punish poor play (and I've made my share of mistakes) and rewards good play is excellent and historical. That it is historical does not make it an attempt to replay history. Straw Man.

_____________________________

�Old age is the most unexpected of all things that can happen to a man.�
-Leon Trotsky

(in reply to Knavery)

Post #: 34

RE: Game Has Serious Problems - 3/15/2011 2:29:21 PM

alfonso

Posts: 470
Joined: 10/22/2001
From: Palma de Mallorca
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Knavery

quote:

ORIGINAL: ool

quote:

ORIGINAL: Mehring

quote:

ORIGINAL: Klydon

Well, instead of blaming the game, perhaps look at the players. Most Russians are just not going to allow the Germans to encircle at will or even make it easy for them. Should the game make it so that can happen? Doesn't make much sense. I have been watching all the AAR's and while there is the occasional counter attack that causes the Germans to retreat, this did happen in the real campaign in several spots during the 1941 campaign.

Overall, the game may have some issues with the winter, but I don't share your opinion on the encirclement or retreats as being a fault of the game.

+2

Truly, I get more fed up with German players displacing their own poor performance onto the game than with the game's admitted problems. The fact that the Russians can effectively counter-attack in summer 1941 and the Germans likewise later in the war, is a triumph over more primitive systems which generalise all exceptions out of the game. The Germans did so well in 1941 in large part because they were experienced in a superior doctrine to that of their adversary. If you're not experienced as the German player, you shoudn't do well. Go learn how to play!

AMEN! The amount of German player "whineritis" in this forum is pathetic. Matrix changes this game much further why even bother putting it out if you lose the historical accuracy? Fully agree with Mehring, learn how to plat the game. Plenty of first person shooter games around if you want to win right out of the box without thinking or planning.

I hear this argument a lot--that it's historically accurate if A, B, or C happens, so learn how to play the game. By that logic, there can only be one outcome. So why even bother playing? It then becomes more of an exercise to replicate what the German and Soviet forces did in the war. If you've mastered that, and can't change the outcome, there's nothing left in the game for you.

History= conditions+ decisions+ other things (random factors?). When referring to historical accuracy, it is usually referred to conditions (I think that Ool was referring to that, to the accurate description of the situation at 22-Jun-1941). Some decisions are included in the game (e.g, production), but operationally the player can take his/her own decisions. Therefore, nobody has seen and nobody wishes a replication of the war.

Logically, the conditions included in the game should reflect the general consensus among East Front experts. I would say that there is some consensus now that the Axis was the weakest side. Therefore, it is to be expected that between players of similar skill/experience, the Axis will "win the war" (but not "the game") less than 50% of the time.

A problem is that what for some people is a condition, for others is a decision (e.g, German winter unpreparedness). But this has anything to do with "there's nothing in the game for you". You have the decisions (or what developers feel are decisions available). If you see the games played, there are a lots of results: Axis takes Leningrad, Axis is stopped at the Dnieper, Axis is vaporized during Blizzard, Axis preserves his army during Blizzard, Axis knocks out the Soviet Union in 1941,.... Who said you cannot change anything?

If in order to reach a desired outcome (let's say, 50% chance of reaching better than historical results for the German player, and this is only meant as an example) the decisions, no matter how good they are, are not enough in themselves, and we want a change in the conditions to that effect, there is a loss of historical accuracy, and that is what ool criticized.

(in reply to Knavery)

Post #: 35

RE: Game Has Serious Problems - 3/15/2011 3:19:13 PM

Knavery

Posts: 286
Joined: 3/11/2005
Status: offline

Hey Mehring and Alfonso,
Good responses. I understand where your coming from. It's good to know that you can sway history a little bit in the game. I own it, but am still trying to grasp hex based wargaming in general. I didn't grow up with tabletop wargames so the hex thing doesn't come easy to me what-so-ever. I also don't understand the detail of how these forces fought each other. So, I guess my argument is that unless I read a few books first, I'll lose every time. However, if there's some flexibility with what you can do assuming you understand tactics and strategy, I'm cool with that. I wasn't backing the OP so much as trying to find an answer myself that might also help the OP.

_____________________________

Windows 7 Home Premium (x64)
3.4 gigahertz AMD Phenom 965 Quad Core
NVIDIA GeForce GTX 460 1024Meg
4GB RAM

(in reply to alfonso)

Post #: 36

RE: Game Has Serious Problems - 3/15/2011 4:48:12 PM

alfonso

Posts: 470
Joined: 10/22/2001
From: Palma de Mallorca
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Knavery

Hey Mehring and Alfonso,
Good responses. I understand where your coming from. It's good to know that you can sway history a little bit in the game. I own it, but am still trying to grasp hex based wargaming in general. I didn't grow up with tabletop wargames so the hex thing doesn't come easy to me what-so-ever. I also don't understand the detail of how these forces fought each other. So, I guess my argument is that unless I read a few books first, I'll lose every time. However, if there's some flexibility with what you can do assuming you understand tactics and strategy, I'm cool with that. I wasn't backing the OP so much as trying to find an answer myself that might also help the OP.

Well, I am not a wargamer either...but I think the game tends to be won by the player who knows the rules best (and makes profit from that knowledge). History is not that useful, you can win without it. But it can certainly provide some help. For instance, from History you can learn than taking both Leningrad and Moscow is probably difficult (because Germany captured none of those cities). If you add the rule knowledge that if you take Leningrad as the Axis player you can use the Finns to some extent, you can devise a strategy consisting in diverting significant forces from the Centre to the North to make Leningrad your first and foremost objective...deviating irreversibly from History in a very interesting (and funny) way.

As the Soviet, instead of piling Army after Army in the approaches to Moscow, you can design a strategy of defending like crazy Leningrad and Ukrainia, and let (lure?) the German center forces into Moscow. It would be possible for the Winter campaign some kind of pincer movement from the North and the South and finish German Army Group Centre in one climactic and decisive battle?

The 1942 campaign may offer even greater flexibility regarding "what ifs". Turning South to the Caucasus after the initial battles, as happened historically? Turning north to try to smash the powerful Soviet forces defending Moscow?

Regarding the OP, I don't understand him. Pocketing units is a "creative process" involving
both attacker and defender...in 1942 the Soviets learnt that usually is advisable not to be encircled. In the game the Soviet players begin with that lesson well understood. I do not consider that the capability of avoiding being encircled is a serious problem with the game. And playing as a Soviet I have never been able to force the retreat of "significant" German stacks in 1941. Perhaps I am not a good Soviet player. Playing the Germans that never happened to me, but again, it has only been against the AI.

(in reply to Knavery)

Post #: 37

RE: Game Has Serious Problems - 3/15/2011 5:02:47 PM

ool

Posts: 470
Joined: 12/25/2007
From: Ottawa, Canada
Status: offline

It is extremely unlikely to be able to force significant German forces to retreat prior to the blizzard. The overwhelming German air support makes it highly unlikely. I mean some cases I've seen a few hundred fighters and almost three bombers come to the aid of a stack I attacked early on. Gave up on that idea quite quickly. Unless of course you are taking on single Co Axis force. There you have a chance but will pay dearly for a one hex retreat. It just isn't worth it.

Instead I counter maneuver to be a thorn in the side of the German advance and in some cases cause their spearheads to become isolated and out of supply. It doesn't last long but it does cause the AI to stop advancing and clear up the blockage. Time is the most valuable commodity for the Soviets. Buy as much as you can and you will inevitably make it to 43.

AS far as this thread goes it isn't the most pathetic that I've seen. I remember one angry thread where a new purchaser complained that Matrix had blown the game design because he couldn't use the Romanians right away. Obviously not a clue of what occurred historically. So he blames the game and Matrix.

As far as I am concerned as long as the facets are historically accurate, then it is up to the individual player to do what they can with it and if they don't win? Don't whine about the game being faulty. It is up to the individual to learn the game and then be creative. Not much point in buying or playing the game otherwise.

_____________________________

(in reply to alfonso)

Post #: 38

RE: Game Has Serious Problems - 3/15/2011 5:12:00 PM

jjdenver

Posts: 2247
Joined: 11/2/2007
Status: offline

To the OP - I don't think it's accurate to say that the Germans can't pocket Sovs - read the AAR's and you see pockets throughout 41/42 for the Germans vs the Reds.

However I tend to agree that the auto-success of 1:1 or better attacks by Sovs is a broken mechanic.

_____________________________

AARS:
CEAW-BJR Mod 2009:
http://www.matrixgames.com/forums/tm.asp?m=2101447
AT-WW1:
http://www.matrixgames.com/forums/tm.asp?m=1705427
AT-GPW:
http://www.matrixgames.com/forums/tm.asp?m=1649732

(in reply to Klydon)

Post #: 39

RE: Game Has Serious Problems - 3/15/2011 5:22:01 PM

Joel Billings

Posts: 32265
Joined: 9/20/2000
From: Santa Rosa, CA
Status: offline

While this isn't the first time someone has suggested the +1 Russian odds attack rule is a bad one (in fact some controversy within the design team on this one), I take exception to the notion that it is a broken mechanic. It works as designed. It may be a poorly designed game mechanic, and of course people are free to argue it's merit, but it isn't broken.

_____________________________

All understanding comes after the fact.
-- Soren Kierkegaard

(in reply to jjdenver)

Post #: 40

RE: Game Has Serious Problems - 3/15/2011 5:46:42 PM

Sabre21

Posts: 8231
Joined: 4/27/2001
From: on a mountain in Idaho
Status: offline

If any of you followed the AAR between me and Stuart when we did the Case Blue scenario for Wargamer, you will see that I was creating pockets all the way up to the beginning of mud on turn 15 of that game. It can be done.

< Message edited by Sabre21 -- 3/15/2011 5:47:01 PM >

_____________________________

(in reply to Joel Billings)

Post #: 41

RE: Game Has Serious Problems - 3/15/2011 6:01:08 PM

Mike Parker

Posts: 583
Joined: 12/30/2008
From: Houston TX
Status: offline

quote:

I apologize for the wall of text, but if someone comes in as a obvious fan of one side or the other and calling foul about the game being broken, then I think the community is not going to respond in a real positive fashion most of the time. I don't speak for the community at all, but that is my opinion and observation.

Firstly I am replying to Klydon because it was convenient to quote him.. this is addressed generally!

I didn't note the names when I was reading, and I see no reason to go back and look now. I don't know if you Klydon made any remarks about OP that made me wrinkle my forehead or not and sincerely I don't care...

But some of the commentary I would characterize as "Nasty" and the OP said nothing to deserve it. The title of this thread is not inflamatory in and of itself nor were any of the suppositions right or wrong made by OP. Just as I don't care if you were the one that made any comments.. what bothers me is that such comments were made. One can refute the OP's suppositions without resorting to ad hominem.

I also think OP overstated the points he had to make. I do believe myself that its harder to encircle in WITE than it was historically (after the first 3-4 turns). I believe that is mostly because a good Soviet player knows not to exhaust himself uselessly in counter-attacks as often happend in the real war. As for the other point.. I have not noticed the Soviets getting much at all in the way of devestating counters in '41. Its awful hard for them to get credible offensive forces together anywhere to make much of a push... unless as has been said the German sticks his neck out too far!

So to everyone here... relax just a little. We all have our feelings on the game, but when someone posts something you disagree with, post your thoughts, and with civility attack the argument.. don't ever attack the person making the argument... well unless they really are a console player complaining about the lack of explosions and animated blood/gore in WITE!

(in reply to Klydon)

Post #: 42

RE: Game Has Serious Problems - 3/15/2011 6:29:02 PM

entwood

Posts: 93
Joined: 7/22/2010
Status: offline

If one player or another seems to think the "Game Has Serious Problems",� and so posts, it seems Joel has read and considered any truth there may be in the 'complaint' along with any other feedback from other posters.� As long as this holds true, seems ok.� Based on the OP's statement,

"The two main issues I see from the game system are an inability for the Germans to create pockets after the first few turns, and an ability the game gives a good Soviet player to execute on a regular basis attacks resulting in retreat against significant German stacks"

My suggestion, to please more people, is to open the game with a few more options or preferences that could be used to adjust either side.� A very rough example, The Axis motorized units get 52 base movement points instead of 50, and whatever other parameter for this "retreats issue", and so on.

In other words, permit some game parameters to be tuned, movement, combat, weather, etc., a little bit here and there, and eliminate some hard code. In this manner, it might not be horrendous coding changes because the code could pull the 52 other other options from the preferences file instead of parameters being hard coded somewhere.� Again, this is just a rudimentary example but the two benefits I see:

1. A player could adjust or tweak a few parameters because that is what he/she feels is historically accurate or makes for a better game to that person.
2. Tweaks could also be used to benefit one side or the other in PBEM, to give an advantage or disadvantage to stronger and weaker player to help balance player skill.

just a few thoughts.�Not sure if feasible.

< Message edited by entwood -- 3/15/2011 6:40:17 PM >

(in reply to Mike Parker)

Post #: 43

RE: Game Has Serious Problems - 3/15/2011 6:34:08 PM

Redmarkus5

Posts: 4456
Joined: 12/1/2007
From: 0.00
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Carl Rugenstein

I would first want to say that this is a groundbreaking game with many positive points. At the same time though it appears to have some serious problems. The two main issues I see from the game system are an inability for the Germans to create pockets after the first few turns, and an ability the game gives a good Soviet player to execute on a regular basis attacks resulting in retreat against significant German stacks. Both issues have been discussed since the early days of the game in this forum but I've seen no changes to really address the issues. If anything the changes made seem to take the game in the wrong direction.

Don't let them shout you down, mate. You are quite correct.

_____________________________

WitE2 tester, WitW, WitP, CMMO, CM2, GTOS, GTMF, WP & WPP, TOAW4, BA2

(in reply to Rugens)

Post #: 44

RE: Game Has Serious Problems - 3/15/2011 6:47:06 PM

alfonso

Posts: 470
Joined: 10/22/2001
From: Palma de Mallorca
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: entwood

If one player or another seems to think the "Game Has Serious Problems",� and so posts, it seems Joel has read and considered any truth there may be in the 'complaint' along with any other feedback from other posters.� As long as this holds true, seems ok.� Based on the OP's statement,

"The two main issues I see from the game system are an inability for the Germans to create pockets after the first few turns, and an ability the game gives a good Soviet player to execute on a regular basis attacks resulting in retreat against significant German stacks"

My suggestion, to please more people, is to open the game with a few more options or preferences that could be used to adjust either side.� A very rough example, The Axis motorized units get 52 base movement points instead of 50, and whatever other parameter for this "retreats issue"'

In other words, permit some game parameters to be tuned, a little bit here and there, and eliminate some hard code. In this manner, it might not be horrendous coding changes because the code could pull the 52 from the preferences instead of 50 being hard coded somewhere.� Again, this is just a rudimentary example but the two benefits I see:

1. A player could adjust or tweak a few parameters because that is what he/she feels is historically accurate or makes for a better game to that person.
2. Tweaks could also be used to benefit one side or the other in PBEM, to give an advantage or disadvantage to stronger and weaker player to help balance player skill.

just a few thoughts.�Not sure if feasible.

Yes, I agree completely. I would be happy if that could be feasible.

Customizable settings: manpower multipliers, annual basic levels of national morale, CV penalties during blizzard (/4 or /3), number of snow turns inserted during blizzard, even in non-random weather...(0/1/2...)

< Message edited by alfonso -- 3/15/2011 10:27:14 PM >

(in reply to entwood)

Post #: 45

RE: Game Has Serious Problems - 3/15/2011 11:38:51 PM

Klydon

Posts: 2251
Joined: 11/28/2010
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Knavery

Hey Mehring and Alfonso,
Good responses. I understand where your coming from. It's good to know that you can sway history a little bit in the game. I own it, but am still trying to grasp hex based wargaming in general. I didn't grow up with tabletop wargames so the hex thing doesn't come easy to me what-so-ever. I also don't understand the detail of how these forces fought each other. So, I guess my argument is that unless I read a few books first, I'll lose every time. However, if there's some flexibility with what you can do assuming you understand tactics and strategy, I'm cool with that. I wasn't backing the OP so much as trying to find an answer myself that might also help the OP.

Two suggestions that may perhaps help you and other people that may be in this situation.

First, I recommend starting out small. Play the smaller scenarios to get used to the feel of the game and how things work. Trying to go for the grand campaign games right off the bat can lead to frustration and a lot of wasted time. The concepts are generally the same be it small scenario or big campaign; it is just there is more to the big campaign game.

As far as information on the campaign as a whole, you could likely spend a life time doing research and reading many books on the topic. (Someone started a thread around here someplace with book recommendations, but I don't have a link handy). For a quick digest of the campaign, I would suggest checking out Wiki. You can get an overview of the campaign, read about a particular battle, learn about some of the leaders on both sides, etc.

One other thing is to check out the War Room section on the boards here. There is a lot of good information there for both experienced and novice players for both sides.

One final note for people that want to say the game is broke because they can't do xyz or that the other side can do abc. In my job, I repair equipment. I have found over the years that customers who can't get the equipment to do what they want consider it broken when it is a case that they need to be educated on how to do what it is they want to do. IMO, this game can be like that as well. It is not really a game issue, but rather a player learning the ropes of the game. This is going to be one of those games that many will learn to play, but few will become a true master of.

(in reply to Knavery)

Post #: 46

RE: Game Has Serious Problems - 3/15/2011 11:48:32 PM

Ascended

Posts: 40
Joined: 12/5/2010
Status: offline

Carl,

Is the Soviet AI throwing itself at you in hopelessly unsupported and under supplied attacks? Because historically, the German army had that particular advantage, in that the Soviet doctrine called for these attacks and not only were they confused and poorly organized at practically every level, but often the equipment was just breaking down on the way to the front lines or running out of fuel. Equipment that did make it to the front lines fought and ran out of fuel, or broke down, before they were useful or else immediately after their first use (for those that, finally, made it into an actual battle.) And of course the battles often involved tanks being stripped of infantry and trying to fight it out on their own against superior numbers and superior combined arms tactics/organization.

In other words, the Soviets historically practically gave it to the Germans. The Germans weren't making any particularly astounding operational moves, with few exceptions. Mostly equipment was being abandoned and the men were able to escape to the strategic rear.

< Message edited by Ascended -- 3/15/2011 11:49:57 PM >

(in reply to Rugens)

Post #: 47

RE: Game Has Serious Problems - 3/16/2011 12:53:57 AM

comsolut

Posts: 484
Joined: 5/30/2004
Status: offline

Wow - my better sense says to stay out of this, on so many different levels. But can't. :)

Carl and I are involved in a PBEM game. So it is not against the AI. We are having a GREAT GAME! At least in my opinion.

And we have enjoyed a dialogue back and forth which has enhanced the game. We even bring Glantz's book into it. But one thing we developed or discussed was the ability of the Russian to pinpoint target their counterattacks. It must seems frustrating for the German Player that the Russian Player has almost perfect information about the combat strength and best HEX to attack to release a pocket. Most of the time the Generals in the back lines were desperate for information - yet it seems the Russian player can look down with an eagle eye and spot exactly where to move the requisite number of infantry attack points to relieve the encirclement.

My comment to Carl in an email was something to the point that - if all those CV's were hidden - I would be thrashing around like a fish out of water trying to find the weak spot. So in one sense it does seem to give the Soviet Player a level of information that is, I ADMIT IN MY HUMBLE OPINION, a bit elevated.

I cannot speak to the encirclement issue. I want to believe I'm just good at defending. But I agree with my German opponent that my ability to counterattack seems a bit too precise. And that coming from the Russian side.

Just my two cents - so please don't flame me.

(in reply to Ascended)

Post #: 48

RE: Game Has Serious Problems - 3/16/2011 1:01:43 AM

comsolut

Posts: 484
Joined: 5/30/2004
Status: offline

PS - I have played against three prior German opponents and Carl has been the toughest so far. He is an extremely good opponent making well considered moves. Around Turn 12 I was certain my lines were going to break and I would be forced into wholesale retreat. Only some mud and I suspect need to rest a few German Panzer groups has saved me so far.

My experience, this being my fourth PBEM GC as the Russians is - German Players are definitely getting more experienced and skilled!

(in reply to comsolut)

Post #: 49

RE: Game Has Serious Problems - 3/16/2011 1:15:33 AM

Ascended

Posts: 40
Joined: 12/5/2010
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: comsolut

the Russian player can look down with an eagle eye and spot exactly where to move the requisite number of infantry attack points to relieve the encirclement.

Well, that's not right. Information should be pretty scarce as to what strengths each German hex has.

(in reply to comsolut)

Post #: 50

RE: Game Has Serious Problems - 3/16/2011 2:00:26 AM

jomni

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

This is just one of games that are easy to get into but hard to master, especially the German side.
Once you're aware of the game mechanics, then just keep on practising.� You totally need to unlearn habbits and startegies used in other games.

Serious games like this need serious and committed players. :)

< Message edited by jomni -- 3/16/2011 2:24:31 AM >

_____________________________

My Blog
Random Wargame Name Generator

(in reply to Ascended)

Post #: 51

RE: Game Has Serious Problems - 3/16/2011 2:10:38 AM

randallw

Posts: 2057
Joined: 9/2/2010
Status: offline

'Successful attacks on significant German stacks?' Is this during blizzard or in the spring/fall 1941? I see in AARs single German divisions having to retreat, after getting mobbed by 'the hordes' but don't recall two or three divisions stacked up, and in proper supply, having to retreat ( pre blizzard ).

(in reply to jomni)

Post #: 52

RE: Game Has Serious Problems - 3/16/2011 2:24:57 AM

jomni

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

quote:

ORIGINAL: randallw

'Successful attacks on significant German stacks?'� Is this during blizzard or in the spring/fall 1941?� I see in AARs single German divisions having to retreat, after getting mobbed by 'the hordes' but don't recall two or three divisions stacked up, and in proper supply, having to retreat ( pre blizzard ).

Game mechanics state that it is better to surround the stack instead of attacking them. Did a lot of these things against AI as Soviet in Winter 41, lots of POWs.

< Message edited by jomni -- 3/16/2011 2:26:18 AM >

_____________________________

My Blog
Random Wargame Name Generator

(in reply to randallw)

Post #: 53

RE: Game Has Serious Problems - 3/16/2011 7:39:29 AM

76mm

Posts: 4688
Joined: 5/2/2004
From: Washington, DC
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: comsolut
But one thing we developed or discussed was the ability of the Russian to pinpoint target their counterattacks. It must seems frustrating for the German Player that the Russian Player has almost perfect information about the combat strength and best HEX to attack to release a pocket. Most of the time the Generals in the back lines were desperate for information - yet it seems the Russian player can look down with an eagle eye and spot exactly where to move the requisite number of infantry attack points to relieve the encirclement.

Promise not to flame you, but my experience has been very different. In my PBEM game, I attacked some German units which showed a CV of 1 (rather hopeful on my part to believe I suppose), but the actual CV was much higher. I've also had it go the other way.

(in reply to comsolut)

Post #: 54

RE: Game Has Serious Problems - 3/16/2011 8:12:57 AM

randallw

Posts: 2057
Joined: 9/2/2010
Status: offline

Were those 1's showing during mud? Mud can mess up attacks, big time.

(in reply to 76mm)

Post #: 55

RE: Game Has Serious Problems - 3/16/2011 8:25:45 AM

76mm

Posts: 4688
Joined: 5/2/2004
From: Washington, DC
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: randallw

Were those 1's showing during mud?� Mud can mess up attacks, big time.

Nope, I think about turns 11-12. In two instances I saw 1 CV units, attacked, got my butt kicked, and then after the battle saw that the CVs displayed on the counters showed 10 or 12.

(in reply to randallw)

Post #: 56

RE: Game Has Serious Problems - 3/16/2011 9:55:14 AM

jomni

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

Must be poor recon.

_____________________________

My Blog
Random Wargame Name Generator

(in reply to 76mm)

Post #: 57

RE: Game Has Serious Problems - 3/16/2011 10:08:48 AM

karonagames

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

quote:

but don't recall two or three divisions stacked up, and in proper supply, having to retreat ( pre blizzard ).

If supply don't get you, fatigue will. I had Flavio attack a stack that included SS motorised with about 12 rifle divisions and got retreated. My "THIS GAME IS BROKEN" posts have been stickied in the development forums.

_____________________________

It's only a Game

(in reply to jomni)

Post #: 58

RE: Game Has Serious Problems - 3/16/2011 10:24:46 AM

76mm

Posts: 4688
Joined: 5/2/2004
From: Washington, DC
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: jomni

Must be poor recon.

Clearly, although I had units adjacent to the German units both times. But the point is, the Sov player does not automatically know the strength of the German units.

And as a related matter, my recon planes don't seem to fly more than a couple of missions, sometimes none on some parts of the front--not sure what is going on there.

(in reply to jomni)

Post #: 59

RE: Game Has Serious Problems - 3/18/2011 3:08:47 AM

Rugens

Posts: 213
Joined: 9/23/2000
From: Hoosierland
Status: offline

Sorry for the long time between posts. Sadly work in the real world takes priority.

A couple of things to clear up and then I'll get to the issue.

I never said the game was broken. I said I felt it had some serious problems. At least to me there is a very big difference between those two statements. As I have stated in previous threads, when I purchase a title from Matrix I do not expect a finished product. They are works in progress. Paying for the game is the customer trying to keep the hard working people at Matrix fed & clothed so that they can continue to slave away making the product better such as WITP AE. I cannot imagine anyone is getting rich working on these game and still nobody does it better than Matrix.

I also apologize to several other posters that were kind enough to state their thoughts and the reasons behind them. My ranting back was meant to be only directed at the people that posted and had nothing to say other than express their disgust at being forced once more to read things they don't want to read.

To give a little background on the game comsolut and I are playing, we each have a framework we are working within. Comsolut told me right up front he likes to play the game with a very active and rugged defense. I like this becasue it should and is resulting in a game that may be a little closer to history than the average Soviet might play. He dosn't give up ground easily and counterattacks a lot. What he does not do is launch attacks that are pure suicide or defend positions to the last man which is quite understandable. On my end, as much as possible I use historical German doctrine to carry out my plans. Comsolut experieced some frustration in his earlier pbem games that those he had played against may not have understood quite how the Germans conducted warfare. I've tried to say true to historical doctrine which is actually pretty easy in this game since it rewards that kind of play as opposed to some games that reward gamy non-historical play. Beyond these frameworks neither of us (comsolut, please feel free to chime in if I am not accurately stating your feelings) cares if the game turns out as it did historically or not. We both appear to have developed strategies with significant differences from our historical sides so neither desires to repeat history.

Considering our approaches to the game it has pretty much followed the lines one would expect. His harder but non-suicidal defensive has resulted in me not getting quite as far as historical and we had been racking up reasonably respectable number of Soviet casualties (just above 2,000,000 by turn 13. The problems (IMHO) started in the 2nd phase of the campaign (September) where it shifts gears a bit. We were attempting to create additional pockets. Nothing terribly amitious in terms of size and certainly no German units were pushed way out on a limb. In fact almost never were the German units in a position that did not have friendly hexes on at least two sides and usually more. Only a few times were we outnumbered more than 10 - 1 and usually a lot less. Supplies were not bad and if either fuel or supplies were low we were able to air it in to acceptable levels. Units were generally no more fatigued that one would expect pushing through to complete a pocket. A fair number of the panzer/motorized units had just completed refitting prior to heading back to the front. Air was not over extended during the offensive phase so that there was some for defensive air and interdiction. Following are the statistics for the Soviet attacks conducted during September & October:

September (4 turns)
24 attacks in total resulting in 2 holds, 1 rout and 21 retreats

October so far
24 attacks in total resulting in 1 hold and 23 retreats

The above are only the Soviet attacks. I conducted plenty of attacks during the same period and did reasonably well. In the above attacks, in almost all situations the Soviets lost about 2-1 in men. Some were attacks against regiments in holding positions but most were against one & two division stacks. Needlest to say, in almost every attempt he was able to unisolate the pocket because of the retreat results he achieved. It's not that I find it difficult to believe the Soviets could have been successful in some attacks. It's the consistancy and degree to which they are able to be successful. As comsolut said earlier in the post, he was able to select exactly the weakest point in the pocket and break it. It appears to me that he is able to conduct the Soviet army as a precision tool as opposed to the rather lumbering/thundering/blundering herd that it was in 1941. On my end it feels much like I am fighting the 1943/44 Soviet Army (less effective tanks thank god) than their forces which existed in 1941.

(in reply to 76mm)

Post #: 60