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: WitE 2

 
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: WitE 2 Page: <<   < prev  23 24 [25] 26 27   next >   >>
Login
Message << Older Topic   Newer Topic >>
RE: WitE 2 - 6/21/2016 2:43:12 AM   
MechFO

 

Posts: 669
Joined: 6/1/2007
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: chaos45
The IGO/UGO is already very tough/bordering on unbalanced in the current game even with current zoc rules. If you remove the IMO limited ability for BDEs to cause Zocs the huge mobile AG in the game will easily just wipe the soviets from the board in 41/42 and if somehow a soviet player survives they can then have the advantage from 43 on against the german back line of reserve regiments. To me the critical issue is balance, and yes IMO even real life backs up that BDEs should slow enemy movement...sorry but in real life friction causes issues....Ive seen attacks bog down horribly in a complete training environment let alone in a real life situation when actual peoples lives are on the line. Its already been pointed out as well that units have some very high/bordering on unrealistic movement abilities in WITE as is after the opening blitz, so why is it ppl are arguing to make the situation even worse/more unbalanced game play wise?


The holy trinity of attack in WITE is extremely generous logistics, the ability to have nearly infinite units occupy and transit any hex on the same day it's being fought over, and extremely generous knowledge of the enemies dispositions, strength, condition and capabilities.

Fix those, and the many of the problems will go away. For WITE2 1 down, 2 to go.

(in reply to chaos45)
Post #: 721
RE: WitE 2 - 6/21/2016 3:56:10 AM   
Flaviusx


Posts: 7750
Joined: 9/9/2009
From: Southern California
Status: offline 		In principle and in isolation, Michael T is likely correct here on the merits. However, I haven't noticed these ants hurting him very badly in practice in the vanilla game due to the fact that the game is very generous towards the offensive in ways that more than make up for the impact of ants.

That may no longer be the case in WITE2. If not, then ZOC costs for ants ought to get a second look, but only in relation to the rest of the design.

_____________________________

WitE Alpha Tester

(in reply to MechFO)
Post #: 722
RE: WitE 2 - 6/21/2016 4:39:50 AM   
Michael T


Posts: 4443
Joined: 10/22/2006
From: Queensland, Australia.
Status: offline 		Nice to see you back around these parts Flavio

_____________________________


(in reply to Flaviusx)
Post #: 723
RE: WitE 2 - 6/21/2016 7:11:42 AM   
sillyflower


Posts: 3509
Joined: 8/4/2010
From: Back in Blighty
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: MechFO


quote:

ORIGINAL: sillyflower
A unit defending the Dnepr is not going to impose much if any delay on a unit on the other side going parallel to it (assuming that the moving unit moves sensibly, but will make it very difficult to cross that same river in what WiTE calls an empty hex on its flank as I hope I explained properly earlier.


Only with sufficient artillery.



Obviously the more artillery D has, the harder for A because losses will be higher. Even mortars aren't fun to face when paddling a rubber dinghy. We must remember that IRL D does not sit still for a week and D would have more arty support than the regt/brigade's nominal strength. I can't recall reading any account of a major river crossing where G were not subject to arty fire.

Even absent much arty fire, how do you get an armoured div and its support across an unbridged part of the Dnepr quickly? You can't as you can read in all combat reports



_____________________________

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?

(in reply to MechFO)
Post #: 724
WiTE2 - 6/21/2016 7:23:36 AM   
sillyflower


Posts: 3509
Joined: 8/4/2010
From: Back in Blighty
Status: offline 		deleted

< Message edited by sillyflower -- 6/21/2016 7:31:12 AM >

(in reply to MechFO)
Post #: 725
RE: WitE 2 - 6/21/2016 7:43:19 AM   
sillyflower


Posts: 3509
Joined: 8/4/2010
From: Back in Blighty
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: MechFO

This might seem counter-intuitive, but difficult terrain actually reduces the ability to exert ZOC. Less approach avenues means once can be screened/covered much more effectively. Difficult approach slows down the speed of advance and the ability to observe for artillery is extremely affected. One is basically reduced to hail mary grid attacks hoping that the maps are sufficiently accurate, but this is wasteful of ammo.



I respectfully disagree. We are (or should be) talking about delay in the round, and in reality this is about situations where the attackers are tank/motorised units. Men on foot with light weapons can get over steep hills and through forest bur everything else needs roads or adequate tracks both of which were far less common in many parts of eastern Europe than in the west today or (I guess) in the east today. Combat vehicles either can't or would use up their fuel at a disproportionate rate, and the all-important petrol bowsers and other support vehicles would not be able to follow. I totally accept your point about the defender's problems, but even 1 vehicle loss from direct enemy action, a mine or breakdown in bad terrain may bring an advance to a halt for hours. That could never happen in open terrain without any difficult obstacles.


< Message edited by sillyflower -- 6/21/2016 7:49:29 AM >

_____________________________

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?

(in reply to MechFO)
Post #: 726
RE: WitE 2 - 6/21/2016 9:08:06 AM   
Karri

 

Posts: 1137
Joined: 5/24/2006
Status: offline 		IMO the problem is that ZOC is an abstraction presenting the control that the unit might be able to exert, however the combat and units themselves are not abstracted in the same way. There is no way to make the system work by adding more rules, it will only make it more complicated and open up other issues. My main issue is not that a regiment can control the massive hex area around it, it's that it can do so all the time.In games like these you could move a thousand divisions through those hexes and supposedly the unit would always be there to offer resistance, whereas in truth the first unit would probably be enough to tie down the defenders, rest taking alternative secured routes. Units entering and controlling ZOCs should be somehow locked when movement happens in those hexes, however it would require a different kid of abstraction and come with new issues etc

Ie. something like units given a potential ZOC and "active ZOC points". So that for example a brigade could in theory control all of the area around it, but as soon as it has one or two enemy units adjactent to it all the "active ZOC points" are used and it can no longer affect other units moving near it.

(in reply to sillyflower)
Post #: 727
RE: WitE 2 - 6/21/2016 1:49:52 PM   
Manstein63


Posts: 688
Joined: 6/30/2010
Status: offline 		I have been following this rather closely so I may as well stick my oar into the debate.
Why can't a unit negate another units ZOC allowing other units to pass freely through the hex.

As an example you have a line of infantry units (for this it doesn't matter about size) each with a hex space between them (unit space unit) the enemy moves a unit adjacent to one of the infantry units in the line, negating that hexes ZOC a following unit then moves into the gap between the 2 infantry units thus negating the ZOC in that hex which then allows any subsequent unit free access through the contested hexes. It has been applied to hex based board games in the past so I see no reason why it couldn't work with WitE 2 & I think it would only require a minimum coding adjustment.

I would also like to bring up another issue to the floor. why is it that in mud turns infantry units attacking CV is based on the same divisor as a motorised / tank unit. I am not advocating that they have full attack CV but just use a different multiplier to motorised units.

Then of course there is always the elephant in the room that is unit stacking.

& don't even get me started on multiple hex attacks into a single hex

Manstein63

< Message edited by Manstein63 -- 6/21/2016 2:15:30 PM >

_____________________________

'There is not, nor aught there be, nothing so exalted on the face of god's great earth, as that prince of foods. THE MUFFIN!!!'

Frank Zappa (Muffin Man)

(in reply to Karri)
Post #: 728
RE: WitE 2 - 6/21/2016 3:30:07 PM   
HMSWarspite

 

Posts: 1401
Joined: 4/13/2002
From: Bristol, UK
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: Flaviusx

In principle and in isolation, Michael T is likely correct here on the merits. However, I haven't noticed these ants hurting him very badly in practice in the vanilla game due to the fact that the game is very generous towards the offensive in ways that more than make up for the impact of ants.

That may no longer be the case in WITE2. If not, then ZOC costs for ants ought to get a second look, but only in relation to the rest of the design.


I have yet to hear that the small unit ZoC issue is adversely affecting the game at all. All the arguments for removing it seem to be based on it being impossible for a bde to cover 30 miles (actually worse because it covers an area of 6 hexes not just a line of 3!). . Other than the MP usage pictures posted some pages ago I have yet to see someone say what effect it has on the game. Most of the commentts could be read as "it doesn't look very good, having the map covered with all these brigades"! :)

Edit due to using an iPhone 5!

< Message edited by HMSWarspite -- 6/21/2016 3:40:05 PM >

_____________________________

I have a cunning plan, My Lord

(in reply to Flaviusx)
Post #: 729
RE: WitE 2 - 6/21/2016 3:33:55 PM   
zakblood


Posts: 22687
Joined: 10/4/2012
Status: offline
quote:

ha I g the map covered with all these brigades"!


what does this mean?

abbreviation? for something, or like me just another typo?


(in reply to HMSWarspite)
Post #: 730
RE: WitE 2 - 6/21/2016 3:35:29 PM   
HMSWarspite

 

Posts: 1401
Joined: 4/13/2002
From: Bristol, UK
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: morvael

With prohibitive MP costs soft ZOC becomes hard ZOC in all but name :)

So the MP costs are totally prohibitive? So we did t have an example of a unit being able to go 6 hexes while crossing two rivers the ? Let's satay somewhere near the game!

_____________________________

I have a cunning plan, My Lord

(in reply to morvael)
Post #: 731
RE: WitE 2 - 6/21/2016 3:56:30 PM   
HMSWarspite

 

Posts: 1401
Joined: 4/13/2002
From: Bristol, UK
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: MechFO
As mentioned, I don't have a problem with allowing brigades to breakdown. This would solve your issue.



I do! Click fest, micromanagement nightmare. Also, one hex is 10 miles across, so roughly 75 sq miles. A Btn can cover maybe 1 sq mile. So we swap a debate about a unit capable of exerting control over say 5 miles of fromt in 30 for 3 units each covering 1 sq mile in 75 (or a frontage of 1 in 10 if you want to be consistent). How does this help exactly? I know they had Btns in the Torch expansion but should that small a unit force a panzer division to attack? Would it not be simpler to just attack the Bde under today's rules? Tor h gets away with it due to terrain, supply and many fewer units (you rarely see divisions in combat as a unit until late in the game.


_____________________________

I have a cunning plan, My Lord

(in reply to MechFO)
Post #: 732
RE: WitE 2 - 6/21/2016 4:02:29 PM   
HMSWarspite

 

Posts: 1401
Joined: 4/13/2002
From: Bristol, UK
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: Michael T

quote:

BTW, in all the years that Pelton has been playing the game and pointing out issues (and whatever I feel about his style of post and analysis of the desired outcomes, his detection and highlighting of game issues is very good), I don't recall him ever highlighting diffuse carpets of brigades as an issue. I haven't kept up wit the forum continuously, but he has complained about 3 deep continuous walls (divisions at the front and maybe brigades at the rear), not these 'zoc walls'.


This is completely false. Pelton has complained previously about ant carpet zoc's. And is in complete agreement with my, and others opinions that the zoc costs for ant carpets should be nil or much less.

No it not false! I said that "I do not recall...." I also pointed out that I have not read all his posts. Please read what I write and don't jump in with both feet all the time. I am quite prepared to accept my recollection is not valid but you are effectively calling me a liar. Please don't.

_____________________________

I have a cunning plan, My Lord

(in reply to Michael T)
Post #: 733
RE: WitE 2 - 6/21/2016 4:20:10 PM   
Flaviusx


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

ORIGINAL: Michael T

Nice to see you back around these parts Flavio


You'll be seeing more of me pretty soon. ;) I got drafted into the testing team. Hadn't checked my mail here for weeks, and was surprised to find an invite.

_____________________________

WitE Alpha Tester

(in reply to Michael T)
Post #: 734
RE: WitE 2 - 6/21/2016 4:24:54 PM   
Flaviusx


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

ORIGINAL: HMSWarspite

quote:

ORIGINAL: Flaviusx

In principle and in isolation, Michael T is likely correct here on the merits. However, I haven't noticed these ants hurting him very badly in practice in the vanilla game due to the fact that the game is very generous towards the offensive in ways that more than make up for the impact of ants.

That may no longer be the case in WITE2. If not, then ZOC costs for ants ought to get a second look, but only in relation to the rest of the design.


I have yet to hear that the small unit ZoC issue is adversely affecting the game at all. All the arguments for removing it seem to be based on it being impossible for a bde to cover 30 miles (actually worse because it covers an area of 6 hexes not just a line of 3!). . Other than the MP usage pictures posted some pages ago I have yet to see someone say what effect it has on the game. Most of the commentts could be read as "it doesn't look very good, having the map covered with all these brigades"! :)

Edit due to using an iPhone 5!


It's one of these micro tactical things that I've cheerfully ignored up until now for pragmatic reasons. It doesn't make much sense if you look at it on its own. I'm very much of the design for effect school, which means I'm more than willing to accept things that are on the face of it silly so long as they work in terms of the overall design.

New design calls for new solutions, and a willingness to reexamine priors, especially if said priors are fairly ridiculous in of themselves.

Basically, I'm not going to die on this hill of ant zocs if they are no longer necessary in the WITE2 context. Much has changed and is changing. So why not ZOCs?

_____________________________

WitE Alpha Tester

(in reply to HMSWarspite)
Post #: 735
RE: WitE 2 - 6/21/2016 5:04:42 PM   
HMSWarspite

 

Posts: 1401
Joined: 4/13/2002
From: Bristol, UK
Status: offline 		That is illogical. Much has changed in WitE2. The game is of the eastern front for 4 years. No one throws punches of less than a corps and yet we have got into this one issue.

My view is that it would not be justified in an otherwise perfect game for a brigade to exert significant influence on a unit passing up to 10 miles away under all circumstances. But neither would it be justified for it to never do so. In addition, the attacker has a huge advantage in knowing exactly where it is (to the hex), and if no ZOC this gives even more information as to where it isn't. There is also the Issue that in a simple rule you introduce another issue in that a stack of 3 brigades would t have ZoC, but combine them and they do (you cant combine brigades that don't match before someone says just combine them, so the confused defence is penalised very hard). No one has yet suggested a mechanism that seems sensible, capable of implementation and that doesnt introduce more issues.

I think we have got to remember this is a game with certain simplifying assumptions. People are latching on to one issue based on real life perceptions of it, without any regard for the overall game. For instance, is it realistic that even the best prepared army in defence has to make do with one or more predesignated units riding to the rescue of an attacked stack, and once the attacker is into open terrain they just have to watch for the rest of the week? Is it realistic that there is no restriction on a unit that has moved most of its movement points already combining with one that hasn't moved, to attack a hex. The second can then hop into its time machine and exploit, in effect using time that was only available before it attacked? Mechanics are needed to mitigate these effects, which since they are not real, will struggle to be real also.

We must get this back to the effect on the game. I still have not seen why attacking the brigade head on with the first unit to allow follow up units to exploit is not a valid tactic. And if you don't like the very idea of a diffuse brigade detfence, presumably a patch of 30% TOE divisions is just as bad?

The irony is, that with WITW supply rules, German offensive units may struggle for MP more often, and the use of small units to bleed than of what's left may become more significant. In which case I will change my cost benefit analysis... It may be essential to remove small unit ZoC, even with some smaller consequential negatives. I think the Devs will be on the lookout for this issue now and we probably need to wait and see. Roll on first beta AAR I say!

_____________________________

I have a cunning plan, My Lord

(in reply to Flaviusx)
Post #: 736
RE: WitE 2 - 6/21/2016 5:10:42 PM   
HMSWarspite

 

Posts: 1401
Joined: 4/13/2002
From: Bristol, UK
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: timmyab

quote:

ORIGINAL: Michael T
We should aim for stacking next. Anyone want to kick that ball...

I'd go with something like this.
Stacking points - corps = 3, division = 2, all others = 1, HQs stack for free. Soviet stacking limit = 9 points, Axis = 6 points. Stacks limited to 6 units.



I don't think it is the invention of the stacking rule that is the issue. It is the display redesign, and (I guess) the game underlying data structure that is the issue. Back to cost benefit...

_____________________________

I have a cunning plan, My Lord

(in reply to timmyab)
Post #: 737
RE: WitE 2 - 6/21/2016 5:12:31 PM   
Flaviusx


Posts: 7750
Joined: 9/9/2009
From: Southern California
Status: offline 		"The life of the law lies not in logic, but experience." Oliver Wendell Holmes, Jr.

Like I said, I'm a pragmatist. Logic is nice, but not always useful.

Anyways, and speaking bluntly, the design team is going to have at least one unapologetic Red Army fan boy. Me! I'll be there to represent its interests. If I see it having problems, you may rely on me to complain about it. There are surely better ways to keep it in the game than ant zocs.

If WITE2 can fix logistics, the silly Lvov opener, and various and sundry other issues, the Red Army will not need strong ant zocs anymore, will it? Maintaining strong ant ZOCs isn't even on my top 10 list of ACTUAL problems.

If we were talking about WITE1, I'd be on that hill dying for them not because they make sense, but because that's one of the tools the Red Army has on hand to make up for these other and frankly much larger problems. Remove the problems and the need for said tool goes away.

_____________________________

WitE Alpha Tester

(in reply to HMSWarspite)
Post #: 738
RE: WitE 2 - 6/21/2016 6:15:34 PM   
hidden007

 

Posts: 4
Joined: 6/16/2016
Status: offline 		tanx vpaulus i just copy pasted the d3drm.dll file to system/system32/in the game installed location folder i don't know do I have to copy to the folder that has the installation setup . i mean before installing the game

(in reply to Flaviusx)
Post #: 739
RE: WitE 2 - 6/21/2016 8:09:38 PM   
Northern Star


Posts: 1881
Joined: 2/17/2008
Status: offline 		Is there a way to make the Red Army fight in the south in WitE 2.0?
In my current pbem game my Soviet opponent is doing a slow and masterful retreat in the south while he reinforced Leningrad with everything possible. He is using unit zoc to avoid every kind of encirclement and if I encircle some units he breaks the encirclement with attacks of 6+ divisions.

So at the moment I'm an extended Lvov opening fangirl because it's the only way to encircle some units when playing against an experienced opponent!

How is the southern front going WitE 2.0?
Let me know...

P.S. If there is need for other testers don't forget me please... I'm ready to fight for the Dark Side!

_____________________________

War in the East alpha tester

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xPV9JWWtOQ0

(in reply to hidden007)
Post #: 740
RE: WitE 2 - 6/21/2016 8:27:28 PM   
morvael


Posts: 11762
Joined: 9/8/2006
From: Poland
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: Northern Star
I'm ready to fight for the Dark Side!


Which one?

(in reply to Northern Star)
Post #: 741
RE: WitE 2 - 6/21/2016 8:40:36 PM   
SigUp

 

Posts: 1062
Joined: 11/29/2012
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: Northern Star

Is there a way to make the Red Army fight in the south in WitE 2.0?
In my current pbem game my Soviet opponent is doing a slow and masterful retreat in the south while he reinforced Leningrad with everything possible. He is using unit zoc to avoid every kind of encirclement and if I encircle some units he breaks the encirclement with attacks of 6+ divisions.

So at the moment I'm an extended Lvov opening fangirl because it's the only way to encircle some units when playing against an experienced opponent!

How is the southern front going WitE 2.0?
Let me know...

P.S. If there is need for other testers don't forget me please... I'm ready to fight for the Dark Side!



quote:

ORIGINAL: loki100

believe me, the WiTE Lvov fantasy is off the agenda in WiTE2, there is a rather nice modelling of the differential level of combat and command capacity/readiness between the SW and Western Fronts in the opening days.

... and any German player planning to support the Ukraine campaign off the Romanian-Soviet rail net is in for a shock too.

its hard to say where things end up but at the moment both sides have real problems in the opening 20 turns. The Germans curse every Soviet counterstroke for burning off supplies etc needed to push forward. The Soviet player had better get used to defending with 4-6,000 man rifle divisions.

(in reply to Northern Star)
Post #: 742
RE: WitE 2 - 6/21/2016 9:06:30 PM   
Northern Star


Posts: 1881
Joined: 2/17/2008
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: morvael


quote:

ORIGINAL: Northern Star
I'm ready to fight for the Dark Side!


Which one?


Germany... The Germans had less resources to fight historically so it will be a great challenge... The Soviets had everything to fight.

I hope that the victory conditions will be balanced to avoid any German or Soviet advantage, and that they will favour the best players.

I still remember my early WitE alpha testing efforts to improve my Lvov pocket when many other efforts were made to limit it... It was very interesting to push as fast as I could to find the limits of WitE... This is nice to do during alpha testing, to find the weak points and improve.

_____________________________

War in the East alpha tester

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xPV9JWWtOQ0

(in reply to morvael)
Post #: 743
RE: WitE 2 - 6/21/2016 9:43:51 PM   
loki100


Posts: 10920
Joined: 10/20/2012
From: Utlima Thule
Status: offline 		just a comment on the brigade issue. MichealT's opening issue/assumption was that this is something that the Soviet player uses.

From some testing (both vs AI and in PBEM), with the axis, I'm doing a lot of defensive work with regiments, sometimes in a line, sometimes holding strongpoints with gaps. I think the reason is that salients are much more a feature of WiTE2 - and that being encircled is not so immediately fatal. The net result is a much longer front line as both sides will cling to a key hex which in WiTE you'd just abandon.

Without the zoc this is inviting disaster - and its pretty scary even with that safety net when you see a long front of strung out regiments and just hope the Soviets also have massive supply problems on that sector.

Doesn't answer any of the questions posed over the last 2 pages of this thread but it may provide a bit more context for consideration.

_____________________________


(in reply to Northern Star)
Post #: 744
RE: WitE 2 - 6/21/2016 10:03:21 PM   
Capitaine

 

Posts: 1043
Joined: 1/15/2002
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: HMSWarspite

That is illogical. Much has changed in WitE2. The game is of the eastern front for 4 years. No one throws punches of less than a corps and yet we have got into this one issue.

My view is that it would not be justified in an otherwise perfect game for a brigade to exert significant influence on a unit passing up to 10 miles away under all circumstances. But neither would it be justified for it to never do so. In addition, the attacker has a huge advantage in knowing exactly where it is (to the hex), and if no ZOC this gives even more information as to where it isn't. There is also the Issue that in a simple rule you introduce another issue in that a stack of 3 brigades would t have ZoC, but combine them and they do (you cant combine brigades that don't match before someone says just combine them, so the confused defence is penalised very hard). No one has yet suggested a mechanism that seems sensible, capable of implementation and that doesnt introduce more issues.

I think we have got to remember this is a game with certain simplifying assumptions. People are latching on to one issue based on real life perceptions of it, without any regard for the overall game. For instance, is it realistic that even the best prepared army in defence has to make do with one or more predesignated units riding to the rescue of an attacked stack, and once the attacker is into open terrain they just have to watch for the rest of the week? Is it realistic that there is no restriction on a unit that has moved most of its movement points already combining with one that hasn't moved, to attack a hex. The second can then hop into its time machine and exploit, in effect using time that was only available before it attacked? Mechanics are needed to mitigate these effects, which since they are not real, will struggle to be real also.

We must get this back to the effect on the game. I still have not seen why attacking the brigade head on with the first unit to allow follow up units to exploit is not a valid tactic. And if you don't like the very idea of a diffuse brigade detfence, presumably a patch of 30% TOE divisions is just as bad?

The irony is, that with WITW supply rules, German offensive units may struggle for MP more often, and the use of small units to bleed than of what's left may become more significant. In which case I will change my cost benefit analysis... It may be essential to remove small unit ZoC, even with some smaller consequential negatives. I think the Devs will be on the lookout for this issue now and we probably need to wait and see. Roll on first beta AAR I say!


As a casual player, I'm just going to reiterate my objection to the brigade "ants" and their zocs simply on the basis of scale: WitE should remain a division scale game, and one player (or the AI) turning it into a bde-level fest makes the game very unpleasant. Way too thick defensive lines and, as argued, unrealistic zoc effects of these ants. On the other side of the coin, playing largely with bdes makes the Soviet side confused and tedious. Make the game playable at the division scale for both sides and dissuade the players from breaking down divisions except in the most dire cases.

< Message edited by Capitaine -- 6/21/2016 10:06:06 PM >

(in reply to HMSWarspite)
Post #: 745
RE: WitE 2 - 6/21/2016 10:11:09 PM   
Michael T


Posts: 4443
Joined: 10/22/2006
From: Queensland, Australia.
Status: offline
quote:

Anyways, and speaking bluntly, the design team is going to have at least one unapologetic Red Army fan boy. Me! I'll be there to represent its interests


Every sides needs their champion, who do the Germans get?

_____________________________


(in reply to loki100)
Post #: 746
RE: WitE 2 - 6/21/2016 10:28:36 PM   
Flaviusx


Posts: 7750
Joined: 9/9/2009
From: Southern California
Status: offline 		Isn't Pelton testing?

For that matter I count you as being essentially on the panzer pusher side. If you haven't gotten an invite imo you should. You've got my vote anyways.



_____________________________

WitE Alpha Tester

(in reply to Michael T)
Post #: 747
RE: WitE 2 - 6/21/2016 10:32:14 PM   
STEF78


Posts: 2094
Joined: 2/19/2012
From: Versailles, France
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: Flaviusx
....If WITE2 can fix logistics, the silly Lvov opener...

It's done.

Lvov opening isn't doable anymore

(in reply to Flaviusx)
Post #: 748
RE: WitE 2 - 6/21/2016 10:33:16 PM   
STEF78


Posts: 2094
Joined: 2/19/2012
From: Versailles, France
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: Michael T

quote:

Anyways, and speaking bluntly, the design team is going to have at least one unapologetic Red Army fan boy. Me! I'll be there to represent its interests


Every sides needs their champion, who do the Germans get?

I played both sides in WITE and I'm testing the germans in a WITE2 PBEM

(in reply to Michael T)
Post #: 749
RE: WitE 2 - 6/21/2016 10:34:35 PM   
Flaviusx


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

ORIGINAL: STEF78


quote:

ORIGINAL: Flaviusx
....If WITE2 can fix logistics, the silly Lvov opener...

It's done.

Lvov opening isn't doable anymore


Very very happy to hear that.

It became a deal killer for me in WTIE1. One of the reasons I stopped playing. (Along with general boredom. Anything gets old after a few years.)

_____________________________

WitE Alpha Tester

(in reply to STEF78)
Post #: 750
Page:   <<   < prev  23 24 [25] 26 27   next >   >>
All Forums >> [New Releases from Matrix Games] >> Gary Grigsby's War in the East Series >> RE: WitE 2 Page: <<   < prev  23 24 [25] 26 27   next >   >>
Jump to:





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
 Reply to Message
 Post New Poll
 Submit Vote
 Delete My Own Post
 Delete My Own Thread
 Rate Posts


Forum Software © ASPPlayground.NET Advanced Edition 2.4.5 ANSI

1.047