Murmansk????

Murmansk???? (Full Version)

All Forums >> [New Releases from Matrix Games] >> Gary Grigsby's War in the East Series

Message

Monkeys Brain -> Murmansk???? (6/30/2009 12:16:10 AM)
One question... maybe later I will have some more... Judging by map and your notice that you will include map to 150 miles north of Leningrad. That means that Murmansk and large part of Finish front will be excluded. Not a very good idea for a game that has ambition to cover whole Russo-German war. That doesn't sound too promising, because I wonder what reference has you included in your reserach of OOB then (C. Sharp / Nafziger, Glantz, other???). You may say that Murmansk part of the front is insignificant but Fire in the East scenario for TOAW does include it and it is free scenario for TOAW. So I would expect Murmansk to be included in the game that covers Russo-German war. And to say in the start I don't think that Murmansk is so insignificant. Your game called WITP included all theathers of war in the Pacific. Hmmm... OK it's just me - and maybe it would be too complex but maybe for what if scenario it would be nice to include almost whole USSR up to Far East - with possibility of Japan attack on Vladivostok, Trans Baycal etc... So Russian player could not pull more unit's from that front. But let's forget Siberia now. Murmansk. OK, problem with Murmansk with other games was that Russian player could muster many unit's that were not part of that front. In my games of FiTE I managed to capture Murmansk through my generalship even if I had far too many distance to cover to get some of my units there by ship and foot and Russian player could get there by rail and sea more quickly. Historically that was the part of the front were actually Russian had lesser men then Finish and German because they were on defense (up to 1944). Some good what if's are in fact located there as in fact Germans stationed 160 arty batteries in Norway and enormous garrisons because they feared UK invasion there. And UK didn't invaded there because they knew that Germans had strong garrisons. But, what if Germans did in fact tried more to capture Murmansk? What if Finns and German 163. division did tried to put more pressure to capture Leningrad or link with German forces that did get to Tikhvin in November of 1941. Then Leningrad would be sealed much tighter and eventually he would be captured in 1942. Then we come to completely another topic of weapon production and OKW/OKH distribution of forces. What if Germans tried to put more efforts in war productions in winter of 1941/42? (tanks, planes, all other arms) and what if they did put more divisiosn on Eastern Front? Would that change something or not? Maybe not... Of course that I will buy this game but I just hope that it will be good and not lousier than free scenario for TOAW [8D]

Monkeys Brain -> RE: Murmansk???? (6/30/2009 12:58:57 AM)
On another thing, I did read somewhere that if Germans had captured Murmansk, Manerheim was willing to put more pressure on Leningrad itself. So basically key of taking of Leningrad was also Murmansk itself. Not to mention that all those goods that arrived via Murmans through convoys (lend lease) would not be there and would have to be shipped through Caucaus or Vladivostok

Trigger Happy -> RE: Murmansk???? (6/30/2009 8:35:00 AM)
Yeah, that's weird that murmansk isn't included.. though I can see why.

PyleDriver -> RE: Murmansk???? (6/30/2009 9:54:28 AM)
Why guys? Just cut the rail line north (if you can) end of problem...

sol_invictus -> RE: Murmansk???? (6/30/2009 2:09:07 PM)
I agree that Murmansk/Archangel were very important objectives and the Germans did make some effort toward advancing toward them with Alpine units, but like Pyle suggested, their importance can be reflected without it being actually on the map. I guess they had to draw a limit at some point and Murmansk/Archangel just didn't fit. I guess there could even be off map boxes to hold any forces assigned to those areas. I can't imagine that they will simply be ignored or that Lend Lease won't be a factor in the game.

Monkeys Brain -> RE: Murmansk???? (6/30/2009 4:03:17 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Arinvald I agree that Murmansk/Archangel were very important objectives and the Germans did make some effort toward advancing toward them with Alpine units, but like Pyle suggested, their importance can be reflected without it being actually on the map. I guess they had to draw a limit at some point and Murmansk/Archangel just didn't fit. I guess there could even be off map boxes to hold any forces assigned to those areas. I can't imagine that they will simply be ignored or that Lend Lease won't be a factor in the game. Agree. It is not a deal breaker and of course that I will buy this game first day on release. It is like cutting Australia from War in the Pacific - actually there was not any fighting there, Japanese only bombed some port etc...

PyleDriver -> RE: Murmansk???? (6/30/2009 4:31:01 PM)
No, really it would be like cutting the SW corner of Australia out...

Monkeys Brain -> RE: Murmansk???? (6/30/2009 5:34:28 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: PyleDriver No, really it would be like cutting the SW corner of Australia out... Nope. In Australia there was not fighting only in wild ahistorical situation in WITP did Japanese player invade Australia. In real life that would not be so easy. If you have numbers then back your arguments. The USSR front was purposely left out and Finish front and Murmansk as well. First was left out as in history there was not fighting (although in real life Stalin hesitated to pull units from there fearing Japan invasion and when it did pull out he immediately mobilized numbers of division to replace those he have taken - source ERICKSON "ROAD TO STALINGRAD"). Finish front did have fighting and many operations there - it was not significant compared to other fronts but... Operation Polarfuchs German offensice to capture Murmansk, few more there, then Soviet Kirkenes Petsamo operation etc...).

Cavalry Corp -> RE: Murmansk???? (7/1/2009 1:39:18 PM)
Finland - not included? thats not good ... Suggest thats corrected... Please make a map that covers everything or the whinning will never stop Cav

Joel Billings -> RE: Murmansk???? (7/1/2009 4:13:19 PM)
You'll have to keep on whining. Gary decided to leave off the northern reaches of Finland as it would have meant adding another 50 or so hex rows to the map. The map is already bigger than the WitP map, and we felt adding on the additional map area was not essential. We are assuming a stalemate on the Murmansk front. In the ideal world we'd have Murmansk, but we just couldn't see adding those extra 10,000 hexes. You can whine all you want now but the map isn't going to change. Maybe someday when we get around to War in Europe we'll consider it.

sol_invictus -> RE: Murmansk???? (7/1/2009 4:18:03 PM)
I don't think we will miss much or even notice that the Arctic Front is not included. I think the Germans will have their hands full in the more "temperate" climes.

steveh11Matrix -> RE: Murmansk???? (7/1/2009 7:06:14 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Joel Billings Maybe someday when we get around to War in Europe we'll consider it. You KNOW we're going to be bugging you for that, now! [:D] Steve

Monkeys Brain -> RE: Murmansk???? (7/1/2009 7:10:42 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Joel Billings You'll have to keep on whining. Gary decided to leave off the northern reaches of Finland as it would have meant adding another 50 or so hex rows to the map. The map is already bigger than the WitP map, and we felt adding on the additional map area was not essential. We are assuming a stalemate on the Murmansk front. In the ideal world we'd have Murmansk, but we just couldn't see adding those extra 10,000 hexes. You can whine all you want now but the map isn't going to change. Maybe someday when we get around to War in Europe we'll consider it. Nice attitude [:D][:D][:D] BTW, we or I, are not "whining" just for "whining" per se. Maybe we can agree to some degree that this is not so significant in big picture. And maybe game would need house rules so that Russian player don't ship 10 division there or German something which would be wildly ahistorical and could lead to some strange situations like enraged Finnns that doesn't want to stop it on Finish stop line when they make counteroffensive... Whatever maybe this could be done some way... with some house rules. But again must say that your excuse is lame - we have that part of the map in Fire in The East 5.0 which is FREE scenario for TOAW if I must remind you and your game is a full commercial product and just as I said this is example for cutting corners for developer. But that is just my opinion. You may disagree... Because adding that map would not mean that with house rules that would make million ant units clogging the gameplay. And when you say 10000 heyes that is not inestment in art department like buying a new Quake XXXL engine, don't think so... Whatever... Keep up the good work and of course just I said I will buy the game. But some critique will not kill you - once the game is released you will get many of that. Especially from history buffs like me who have read everything they could get their hands on - on Eastern Front. On a more positive tone - I am glad that you are doing this game and that it will eventually be released. I have played Second Front on my Amiga and had good memories on that game (that was really long time ago!). Kindest regards, Mario

Zakhal -> RE: Murmansk???? (7/1/2009 7:24:20 PM)
You could have atleast added half of east-karelia. That would have been only few more rows. North of that there was not much anyways up until murmansk. One way to add murmansk could have been to cut the map short with borders like in som toaw scenarios. EDIT: Correction east karelia might be there. The small world map is just bit blurry so I cant say it for sure.

Helpless -> RE: Murmansk???? (7/1/2009 7:44:44 PM)
quote: EDIT: Correction east karelia might be there. The small world map is just bit blurry so I cant say it for sure. The nothern most town in Karelia is Suojarvi

33Vyper -> RE: Murmansk???? (7/1/2009 7:56:29 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Joel Billings You'll have to keep on whining. Gary decided to leave off the northern reaches of Finland as it would have meant adding another 50 or so hex rows to the map. The map is already bigger than the WitP map, and we felt adding on the additional map area was not essential. We are assuming a stalemate on the Murmansk front. In the ideal world we'd have Murmansk, but we just couldn't see adding those extra 10,000 hexes. You can whine all you want now but the map isn't going to change. Maybe someday when we get around to War in Europe we'll consider it. oh god you said it....W.I.E. the motherload of all games Sooo can you have that ready for Christmas 2009 or should I plan it as an Easter present in 2010? [8D]

Jison -> RE: Murmansk???? (7/1/2009 8:35:23 PM)
I have nothing clever to add to this discussion - just that this game is a dream coming true for me, with or without Murmansk. I have waited for a long long time, so thank you guys for making this beauty! [:)] Jison

Endsieg -> RE: Murmansk???? (7/1/2009 11:42:55 PM)
someone needs to move to Murmansk, buy a house there , get a job and get a life, otherwise this game in development might just be disaster[8D]

L�tzow -> RE: Murmansk???? (7/1/2009 11:48:42 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Endsieg someone needs to move to Murmansk, buy a house there , get a job and get a life, otherwise this game in development might just be disaster[8D] Do they even have i-net in Murmansk?

Monkeys Brain -> RE: Murmansk???? (7/2/2009 12:33:22 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Endsieg someone needs to move to Murmansk, buy a house there , get a job and get a life, otherwise this game in development might just be disaster[8D] And your point is exactly what? It would be really nice how much exactly books on Eastern Front did you read in your ENTIRE life. Then I will post mine collection. We can compare.

Zakhal -> RE: Murmansk???? (7/2/2009 1:04:39 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Helpless quote: EDIT: Correction east karelia might be there. The small world map is just bit blurry so I cant say it for sure. The nothern most town in Karelia is Suojarvi Note I said "half" of it. Especially southern one where som ww2 combat was seen.

tacfire -> RE: Murmansk???? (7/2/2009 9:37:21 AM)
I am not sure how supply works in this game, but knowing Mr. Grigsby it will be important. Therefore, I think you have to consider Lend-Lease, which makes Murmansk a strategic location in my opinion. There is no need to create a map with 10,000 more hexes. There are at least 2 other options that I can think of... 1. Just draw the map hexes around the Karelia peninsula / Murmansk region - leave the rest of Northern Europe as white space - kind of like what the did on the WiTP map around Alaska. 2. Some kind of off-map city box supply source maybe? Like what they are doing for the Panama Canal in the AE Edition of WiTP. Just some ideas.

Cavalry Corp -> RE: Murmansk???? (7/2/2009 11:18:36 AM)
For certain the Germans need to be able to allocate ships , planes U boats etc to interdict it Cav

Helpless -> RE: Murmansk???? (7/2/2009 6:07:56 PM)
Murmansk is in game, not on map. Most of lend lease didn't go through Mumansk - only 22.6%

PyleDriver -> RE: Murmansk???? (7/2/2009 6:22:43 PM)
To simplify an already very complex and vast game, Gary and Joel made these decisions. Once you get the game you won't think about northern Finland. Also the game assumes the Wallies are doing things historicly. So we don't get to play with Allied bombers or U-boats...It really works out fine, your already dealing with hundreds of units as it is and it keeps the excitment up...

Capt Cliff -> RE: Murmansk???? (7/2/2009 7:05:25 PM)
A lot of suppply came in from Iran too!! There was a dedicated rail line up over the mountains and into Russia! I worked with a guy who was a locomotive engineer on that railroad during the war.

Helpless -> RE: Murmansk???? (7/2/2009 10:56:38 PM)
quote: A lot of suppply came in from Iran too!! There was a dedicated rail line up over the mountains and into Russia! I worked with a guy who was a locomotive engineer on that railroad during the war. Most of lend-lease went via Pacific - 43.8% Iran - 23.8% Atlantic (Murmansk/Arkhangelsk) - 22.6% Black Sea - 3.9% Arctic - 2.6%

PyleDriver -> RE: Murmansk???? (7/2/2009 11:03:24 PM)
Pavel (helpless) is the main man in our research and map development. I'm just a jockey and rides the horse hard...I love the guy...Btw my name is Jon...

Shupov -> RE: Murmansk???? (8/4/2009 10:03:41 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: PyleDriver Why guys? Just cut the rail line north (if you can) end of problem... Does cutting the Murmansk rail line interdict 22% of Lend Lease? That seems reasonable...

siRkid -> RE: Murmansk???? (8/4/2009 11:45:25 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: steveh11Matrix quote: ORIGINAL: Joel Billings Maybe someday when we get around to War in Europe we'll consider it. You KNOW we're going to be bugging you for that, now! [:D] Steve LOL[:D]

Page: [1]

Forum Software © ASPPlayground.NET Advanced Edition 2.4.5 ANSI

0.828125