If not a true "replay" then a summary that is easier to digest than clicking on each of the battle sites to see what happened. Perhaps a list of battles where units Retreated, Routed, Shattered would be useful. If there is already something like this then I haven't seen it so far.
Its already in. In Commander's Report is a tab Battles.
I agree. I've not played but one H2H game and that one went very well for the Allies, but my sense is that a careful German will simply avoid serious fighting in France, backpedaling to the Meuse, and thus while away June, July, and most of August. By the time the serious fighting begins, time is short for the Allies and the weather is beginning to turn, and there's just no way with the combat engine as it is for the Allies to make real headway. Or maybe there's some way to bring in all the bombers and break that deadlock? But I mean while playing largely within historical parameters.
The counter to this observation might be that history suggests that's exactly how it would have been had the Germans adapted that strategy. But the historical Allies managed to make headway even in bad weather and even at unimpressive paper odds. The game engine simply doesn't adequately model the engineering and artillery assets the Allies were able to bring to the fight.
Neither does it model the kinds of fluidity that can occur when somebody does mount a concentrated attack. The Germans can hardly get two hexes deep into the Allied line in the Bulge scenario, for instance.
The key to all this might be to make the combat results table bloodier, especially for whoever draws the short straw when it comes to artillery and air support. Mostly that would be the Germans...
Monty estimated that during the grind in Normandy, the Germans were losing 3 for 1. That was probably pretty accurate, and the German lines were getting threadbare as a result. Later on it was more equal for a while, as air power's effects faded with the arrival of bad weather. But even then, the Germans were getting ground down and pushed back.
Unless the combat results table is bloodier, the game will tend to deadlock. Now there's a balancing act here. Combat in which at least one side has fresh, well supplied, well supported troops and the weather is conducive to ground operations---that should be bloody for the loser and maybe for the winner if the defender had good positions to start with and anything like enough men to make a fight of it.
Once supply tails off, the fighting can become anemic. You can't shoot somebody if you don't have any more bullets.
I'm sorry but I have seen Allied players in WiTW make substantial gains. The key is to keep your CV very high in a few selected formations and you do that by managing all the tools in the supply system. This is not just about setting HQ supply priority but also about how you construct your depot network. Add in, sometimes waiting for a turn is a good idea (ie let supplies build up) and pulling units off the line and back to the rear can make a huge difference.
Also the Western Front did gridlock a few times, not least from November 44 to March 45?
In WiTW its rarely a good idea to attack 'just because you can', best to wait till you have the optimal supply situation (with this balanced against the need to make progress)
the idea of "increased MP" is a good one - we had a very interesting AAR in the german Forums, but using DC:CB. You figured one very good Situation with "staff members". What about command structure? The OKH/AG commander gives strategic Targets and the army commanders have to reach them. We had the problem that just one player was able to manage the counters. So in this special case the Army commander executed the orders of his Corps commanders which is the "wrong" way.
It will be very special and I think your way to seperate the staff branches may be easier to handle ;)
Two feature requests, UI/UX related. Maybe you'll tell me they already exist and I just don't know where to find them...
1) When in Air Recon mode, please show me the hexes which I have already conducted Air Recon missions in. Currently I end up going back and forth between F11 and F5 to do this, which is annoying.
2) Be nice to have a Range Tool to aid AB deployment and Air Attack planning. I'd like to be able to go into 'range tool' mode and select a hex. then as I move the mouse around it shows me the actual # of hexes from selected hex to the currently mouse hovered hex. It could look like the movement path mode but instead of MPs left it shows actual air range (no MPs). An enhanced version of this tool would show me the range of the a/c in a selected AB so I can see easily if they are out of range for escort or bombing.
Posts: 4314
Joined: 11/16/2005 From: UK Status: offline
WitW (from which WitE2 is being developed) has a hugely more developed air system. The air system runs as WEGO before the ground phase for most missions apart from ground support.
You don't order missions you set air directives - for example recon this area using these squadrons on these days and look for the following targets. The system then calculates and runs the missions to deliver your directive. When you set up air directives the system advises you if aircraft are not in range.
Posts: 183
Joined: 7/24/2013 From: North Carolina Status: offline
For WITE 2 I would like to request a system where users easily can extract the own sides data from the game to use for analysis.
I would also request that there was an easier way to look at specific armies to see how they are doing one by one compared to the current combat report where you get huge reports without any really good filters.
WitW (from which WitE2 is being developed) has a hugely more developed air system. The air system runs as WEGO before the ground phase for most missions apart from ground support.
It seems a bit odd to have mixed turn and WEGO in one game but must admit I haven't tried WitW as I'm more interested in the East Front.
Any chance/plan to make WEGO available as an option for land units?
I played the V for Victory and the World at War games years ago which used WEGO and found them to be very good! Love how both sides plan their moves at the same time, speeding play by mail games, and the surprises as both sides try anticipate what the other will do....
Posts: 4314
Joined: 11/16/2005 From: UK Status: offline
No - IGOUGO is at the heart of the design philosophy that underpins this current string of games.
If you want WEGO, and assuming you are not already very rich, then my advice is to win the lottery and pay morvael to develop a game from scratch. That is my plan - unfortunately despite my best efforts I never seem to buy quite the right ticket.
im sorry to post into the wrong thread but since my other two posts have been ignored for hte last few days ill post it in here anyway. I am playing the 1941-bitter end campaign (v1.08.07) as the Axis. This is my 3rd playthrough and right now im in turn 8. Since i progressed much better than the last two times i had the feeling that there were too few enemy units. So i turned off fog of war just to check and i noticed that there were 0 units in the rear areas of the enemy territory. Also the Soviets have 500! administration points available. Is this a bug? If so, should i start a new campaign or is there a fix for this problem?
Posts: 3509
Joined: 8/4/2010 From: Back in Blighty Status: offline
What I want from WiTE 2 is a game as opposed to the management/spreadsheet exercise that WiTW is. WiTW's tedious air + logistic systems put me right off playing a 2nd game of that.
I know the saying that amateurs study tactics, but professionals study logistics. Problem is that I'm an amateur gamer who plays to have fun, not a professional logistics expert or dedicated exploit finder/user and I want to stay that way. Fine to have a complex system if you must, but it needs to be kept under the hood IMHO, and ideally exploit-free although that seem to much to ask for with a complex system. Nor am I interested in planning which squadrons fly which type of missions on which days, especially as I can't then decide their targets below a level of 'bomb random enemy units in Belgium' or similar. It's not what the the commander of several million troops should be doing.
Some may well argue that the WiTW systems are more 'realistic'. They may well be correct - and I'm in no position to disagree. I just don't care. Historic wargames are always fundamentally unrealistic because the players know what happened in real life. Both player know why the battle/war was won or lost and will do their best avoid making the same key mistakes.
WiTE is the best computer game I know. I love the madness of having umpteen versions of the Mk III panzer represented and the way that the combat system treats almost every shot fired as an event to be calculated separately, but because these are things I can ignore because I (rightly) cannot influence.
If 'inappropriate' fiddling/micromanagement is to be allowed, why not allow it for something interesting like altering unit TOEs?
_____________________________
web exchange
Post: I am always fearful that when I put this game down on the table and people see the box-art they will think I am some kind of neo-Nazi
Reply: They already know you're a gamer. What other shame can possibly compare?
Totally agree with sillyFlower, make the game interesting and fun for us amateur players. Cater for both types of gamer, those that want a handsoff approach to the detail and those that enjoy looking at speadsheets for 6 hours planning a turn.
I still think allowing users to command a subset of units whilst allowing the AI to control remaining forces is a feasible approach to this issue (e.g. allow me to play only Army Group North in Grand Campaign whilst AI control rest of the German forces)
What I want from WiTE 2 is a game as opposed to the management/spreadsheet exercise that WiTW is. WiTW's tedious air + logistic systems put me right off playing a 2nd game of that
I think you are overdramatising. The air system of WitW is no more tedious in my eyes. If I want to bomb three units in three adjacent hexes two times per unit for example I have to manually select the staging base, the target units, the air units to participate in the attack plus the launch button six times in WitE. In the WitW system I select the one target unit, extend the box by one hex, select the units to participate and the number of attacks and that was it. Frankly, I think the WitE system of bombing specific units and hexes is more inconvenient. The air game in WitW doesn't take long at all and then you factor in that on the Eastern Front you don't have strategic bombing... The air system will do great in WitE2.
And I don't get the complaint about the logistics system. The logistics system of WitE is one of its biggest problems. Why can the Germans run rampant throughout Russia where one bad mistake costs you the game? Because the of logistics. Why can the Soviets from 1943 onwards snowball west if the German player screws up once? Because of logistics. Implement halfway decent logistical constraints - and the WitW system does that quite well - and the game experience will improve tremendously. The game will give you more chances to recover from mistakes as logistical constraints will slow down operation tempo.
quote:
ORIGINAL: Kharkov
I still think allowing users to command a subset of units whilst allowing the AI to control remaining forces is a feasible approach to this issue (e.g. allow me to play only Army Group North in Grand Campaign whilst AI control rest of the German forces)
Looking at how the AI is doing things I don't think you get your desired result. The AI gives a damn about efficient command&control for example, just mixing all over the place. It's one reason why you need to give it significant bonuses. Have one part on human control and you'll notice the game getting out of balance rather fast with the AI just not being able to keep up with what you are doing. Also, the AI is cheating to a certain degree.
< Message edited by SigUp -- 3/7/2016 1:49:24 PM >
Posts: 3509
Joined: 8/4/2010 From: Back in Blighty Status: offline
Sigup:
It may just be a matter of personal taste but my views are as they are and they are not unique to me. I agree about the WiTE logistics system and the need to improve, but I do not want to spend my gaming time faffing with supply dumps. I want to eat my cake without having to cook it first.
_____________________________
web exchange
Post: I am always fearful that when I put this game down on the table and people see the box-art they will think I am some kind of neo-Nazi
Reply: They already know you're a gamer. What other shame can possibly compare?
It may just be a matter of personal taste but my views are as they are and they are not unique to me. I agree about the WiTE logistics system and the need to improve, but I do not want to spend my gaming time faffing with supply dumps. I want to eat my cake without having to cook it first.
Speaking of exploits Silly check this out, not going to take long to get to Berlin when Infantry divisions have 47 MP's or Moscow for that matter.
to be honest I really just started screwing around with "things" and found this as can be seen by time stamp.
Now got to figure out which switch or bug I tripped,
Posts: 183
Joined: 7/24/2013 From: North Carolina Status: offline
quote:
ORIGINAL: SigUp
quote:
ORIGINAL: sillyflower
What I want from WiTE 2 is a game as opposed to the management/spreadsheet exercise that WiTW is. WiTW's tedious air + logistic systems put me right off playing a 2nd game of that
I think you are overdramatising. The air system of WitW is no more tedious in my eyes. If I want to bomb three units in three adjacent hexes two times per unit for example I have to manually select the staging base, the target units, the air units to participate in the attack plus the launch button six times in WitE. In the WitW system I select the one target unit, extend the box by one hex, select the units to participate and the number of attacks and that was it. Frankly, I think the WitE system of bombing specific units and hexes is more inconvenient. The air game in WitW doesn't take long at all and then you factor in that on the Eastern Front you don't have strategic bombing... The air system will do great in WitE2.
And I don't get the complaint about the logistics system. The logistics system of WitE is one of its biggest problems. Why can the Germans run rampant throughout Russia where one bad mistake costs you the game? Because the of logistics. Why can the Soviets from 1943 onwards snowball west if the German player screws up once? Because of logistics. Implement halfway decent logistical constraints - and the WitW system does that quite well - and the game experience will improve tremendously. The game will give you more chances to recover from mistakes as logistical constraints will slow down operation tempo.
quote:
ORIGINAL: Kharkov
I still think allowing users to command a subset of units whilst allowing the AI to control remaining forces is a feasible approach to this issue (e.g. allow me to play only Army Group North in Grand Campaign whilst AI control rest of the German forces)
Looking at how the AI is doing things I don't think you get your desired result. The AI gives a damn about efficient command&control for example, just mixing all over the place. It's one reason why you need to give it significant bonuses. Have one part on human control and you'll notice the game getting out of balance rather fast with the AI just not being able to keep up with what you are doing. Also, the AI is cheating to a certain degree.
I totally agree. "cooking the cake" is what I enjoy when playing these games. It's the planning process that I find enjoyable and its what makes executing the plans fun.
However, I totally agree that being allowed to influence TOE's to some extent and to allow the player to just play a specific army group would add to the game. Reducing the number of clicks needed is also fine, but don't remove the complexity.
For those that want a "simpler" game where everything is going on under the hood there are a ton of games out there to your taste already.
< Message edited by robinsa -- 3/7/2016 5:20:54 PM >
It may just be a matter of personal taste but my views are as they are and they are not unique to me. I agree about the WiTE logistics system and the need to improve, but I do not want to spend my gaming time faffing with supply dumps. I want to eat my cake without having to cook it first.
Speaking of exploits Silly check this out, not going to take long to get to Berlin when Infantry divisions have 47 MP's or Moscow for that matter.
to be honest I really just started screwing around with "things" and found this as can be seen by time stamp.
Now got to figure out which switch or bug I tripped,
Out of curiosity, why wouldn't a US Infantry Division have the same number of MPs as an Armored division? They were fully motorized.
Printable Version
All Forums >> [New Releases from Matrix Games] >> Gary Grigsby's War in the East Series >> RE: WitE 2 
RE: WitE 2 - 
RE: WitE 2 - 
and found this as can be seen by time stamp. 
New Messages
No New Messages
Hot Topic w/ New Messages
Hot Topic w/o New Messages
Locked w/ New Messages
Locked w/o New Messages
Post New Thread