Schmart
Posts: 662
Joined: 9/13/2010 From: Canada Status: offline
|
quote:
ORIGINAL: Flaviusx The weird thing is, there are really only two combat results in WITE: hold and retreat. That's pretty thin gruel. There needs to be more sorts of results than that, imo. A hold isn't all that punishing, either. While a retreat of any kind is good (for the attacker), the game doesn't really produce pyrrhic victories until very late in the game (and only for the Axis.) City combat is notoriously cheap and easy, etc. Folks obsess over the occasional oddball results you get in WITE, but for me, what stands out is how boring the results are, the lack of diversity. This is where one of my favourite elements of the TOAW system comes in: the ability to adjust each unit's 'stance'. Minimal, normal, or aggressive, in both attack and defence. It provides more flavour to combat results, and allows pressing the attack or defence as required/wanted. Maybe add such a toggle at the lowest HQ level. It would make things more unpredictable for the attacker, not knowing how hard the opposing forces will fight. I think it would also allow for more realism to elements like fighting retreats, screening attacks, etc. IMHO, what Wite 2.0 needs is less detail to be gamed (practically/reasonably or maliciously) in a mathematical sense, but rather more operational and strategic combat elements than can be felt out and intuited by players. To me, that's what combat at these levels is about. I don't care how or why individual weapons, vehicles, or squads act in the combat engine, as long as the results are reasonably historically plausible (there's some room for improvement in Wite here). And if I did care, I'd be playing tactical level wargames. This isn't a tactical game.
|